Dracopoloma castanea ( Aurivillius, 1901 ), 2025
publication ID |
https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5627.3.6 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:6BE99BAF-975E-48DC-83E8-F6E9CC59802B |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15326436 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/B4318794-EB61-FFA4-98D5-FCF2FDEC6CA3 |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Dracopoloma castanea ( Aurivillius, 1901 ) |
status |
comb. nov. |
Dracopoloma castanea ( Aurivillius, 1901) comb. nov.
( Figs 9–12 View FIGURES 9–16 , 19 View FIGURES 17–20 , 23 View FIGURES 21–24 )
Poloma castanea Aurivillius, 1901: 12 . Type locality: [ South Africa] “ Natal ”.
Poloma castanea — Gaede 1927: 296, pl. 44, fig. b; Pinhey 1975: 129, pl. 27, fig. 559; Vári et al. 2002: 150; Kitching & Rougerie et al. 2018: suppl. material 1; Krüger 2020: 138.
Type material examined: Holotype ♂ ( NHRS): “Typus [black border; red card] // Natal // Poloma castanea / Type Aur. [handwritten] // NHRS-SRAH / 000001501”.
Other material examined (8♂♂ 1♀): BOTSWANA: [no data], 1892 (1♂ MfN) ; ESWATINI: Swaziland , 18.x.1903, leg. R. Crawshay (1♂ NHMUK) ; SOUTH AFRICA: Gauteng: Johannesburg , leg. J. Hyde (1♂ NHMUK) ; Kwazulu-Natal: Glencoe , i.1915 (1♂ OUMNH) ; Newcastle , leg. Donovan (1♂ NHMUK) ; Mpumalanga: Belfast , xi.1913, leg. A.G. Cook (1♂ NHMUK) ; Piet Retief [=Mkhondo], 11.x.1903, leg. R. Crawshay (1♂ NHMUK) ; same data but 16.x.1903 (1♀ NHMUK) ; same data but 10.ix.1903, leg. Mrs W. Mercer (1♂ NHMUK) .
Diagnosis. Forewing length: male: 25–27 mm, female: 28 mm. The forewing costal region of D. castanea is typically darkened ( Fig. 10 View FIGURES 9–16 ) but in some individuals this area is heavily irrorated with silvery-white scales ( Fig. 11 View FIGURES 9–16 ), and it is possible that it is this latter variant that is referred to by Pinhey (1975) as the “elegant” and “possibly distinct” taxon. Dracopoloma castanea and D. nigromaculata can readily be separated based on the ground colour which is a ferruginous brown in the former and grey in the latter. On the forewing, they both share the basal spot along the anal margin and similar postmedial and submarginal fasciae although D. castanea possesses a larger discal spot and the costal margin is also slightly concave. Spots are present distad of the submarginal fascia but they are indistinctly marked in D. castanea and only present in spaces CUA1, M3 and R5 whereas in D. nigromaculata , there are three dark brown, well-defined lunular markings from the costa to vein R5. Despite the differences in the habitus, the differences in the male genitalia are more subtle: in D. castanea , the medial emargination of the fused lateral processes of the uncus is shallower with a wider cleft ( Fig. 19 View FIGURES 17–20 ) compared with D. nigromaculata ( Fig. 20 View FIGURES 17–20 ), and the phallus is considerably longer (as long as or longer than the valve) in the former compared to the latter (shorter than the sacculus).
Foodplants. Unknown.
Distribution. Associated with the Drakensberg montane grasslands and forests, as well as the Highveld grasslands ecoregions, D. castanea is distributed at higher elevations in Eswatini and South Africa ( Fig. 23 View FIGURES 21–24 ). Based on habitat, the single late 19 th Century record from Botswana is somewhat doubtful; Pinhey (1975) listed the country within the distribution of the species (having incorrectly stated that this taxon was described from Botswana) but he had only examined specimens from Natal.
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |
Dracopoloma castanea ( Aurivillius, 1901 )
Takano, Hitoshi & Morgan, Lauren E. 2025 |
Poloma castanea
Kruger, M. 2020: 138 |
Vari, L. & Kroon, D. M. & Kruger, M. 2002: 150 |
Pinhey, E. C. G. 1975: 129 |
Gaede, M. 1927: 296 |
Poloma castanea
Aurivillius, C. 1901: 12 |