Cteipolia Staudinger, 1896

Volynkin, Anton V., Dûda, Juozas, Saldaitis, Aidas, Benedek, Balázs, Titov, Sergey V., Kalashian, Mark, Matov, Alexey Yu, Gorbunov, Pavel Yu. & Tóth, Balázs, 2024, On the taxonomy of the genus Cteipolia Staudinger (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae: Noctuinae) with descriptions of two new species from Transcaucasia and Central Asia, Ecologica Montenegrina 77, pp. 146-160 : 148

Genus Cteipolia Staudinger, 1896

Cteïpolia Staudinger, 1896 , Deutsche entomologische Zeitschrift Iris, 9: 191.

Type species: Cteïpolia sacelli Staudinger, 1896 , by monotypy.

Notes. (1) The genus name was originally spelled with the letter ï, and this spelling has subsequently been used by Ronkay et al. (1995, 2014) and Gordeeva et al. (2023). However, according to the ICZN (1999) Article 11.2, a scientific name must have been spelled only in the 26 letters of the classic Latin alphabet, which does not include ï. Thus, following the ICZN (1999) Articles 27 and 32.5.2, the letter ï must be amended to i and the correct spelling of the genus name is Cteipolia . (2) In the Introduction chapter of their paper, Gordeeva et al. (2023) state “the close affinity of Cteipolia with the genera of the Agrochola-Conistra clade of Xyleninae” while in the Results chapter of the same work, the authors indicate “the proper taxonomic position of the genus in the tribe Xylenina Guenée, 1837 , subtribe Conistrina Beck, 1996 ”. According to the current Noctuidae systematics, the ‘ Agrochola-Conistra generic complex’ (sensu Ronkay et al. (2001)) belongs to the subtribe Xylenina Guenée of the tribe Xylenini Guenée ( Lafontaine & Schmidt 2010; Fibiger et al. 2011; Keegan et al. 2021) while the name Conistrina is a junior synonym of Xylenina . Thus, the correct placement of genus Cteipolia is in the subtribe Xylenina , tribe Xylenini , subfamily Noctuinae . (3) Fibiger et al. (2010) and Gordeeva et al. (2023) erroneously attributed the authorship of C. murina to Eduard Eversmann. For the correct authorship, see Titov et al. (2024). (4) Male genitalia of Cteipolia are very uniform within species-groups and in most cases display no reliable interspecific differences, which makes the species delimitation problematic. Unlike in males, female genitalia are diagnostic in their signum, antrum and apophysis structures. Males of similar species have somewhat differently ciliate antennae and this fact, along with the uniform male genitalia, allows to assume that, similar to some other Noctuinae genera such as Euxoa Hübner, [1821] , Agrotis Ochsenheimer, 1816 , certain species-groups of Xestia Hübner, 1818 (Noctuini), the tribe Episemini Guenée, 1852 , etc., the pre-copulatory isolation mechanisms (species-specific pheromones) in Cteipolia are stronger than the genitalia “lock- and-key” barrier ( Mikkola 2008).

Diagnosis. The genus is described in details by Ronkay et al. (1995). Species of the genus are relatively small and characteristically looking moths with forewing having almost parallel margins, which is markedly narrower than in similarly small Dasypolia species. The male genitalia of Cteipolia are characterised by the following characters. (1) The distal section of the valva is narrow (narrower than in Dasypolia ). (2) The editum is short and narrow and bearing only a proximal setose tubercle-like ampulla whereas in Dasypolia it is extended distally and bears a digitus-like distal ampulla protruding beyond the ventral margin of the valva. (3) The phallus has ribbon-like carinae protruding into the basal section of the vesica, which are invaginated in the phallus tube in the resting condition, whereas the phallus of Dasypolia bears a heavily sclerotised and dentate carinal plate. (4) The vesica is simple, tubular and membranous whereas in Dasypolia , it has one or two diverticula and may also bear clusters of minute graniculi. Compared to Dasypolia s. str., the female genitalia of Cteipolia have an elongate, telescopic ovipositor with long apophyses posteriores (vs. short and conical ovipositor in Dasypolia s. str.), a membranous ductus bursae with a well-developed antrum (whereas in Dasypolia s. str. most of the ductus bursae is sclerotised and dorso-ventrally flattened), and a corpus bursae bearing one or two signa, which are absent in Dasypolia s. str.

Distribution. The genus is distributed from eastern Turkey and Armenia in the west, through Central Asia and southern Ural Mountains to South Siberia (Transbaikalia) and Pakistani Himalaya in the east and south, respectively ( Ronkay et al. 1995, 2014; Gordeeva et al. 2023).

Bionomics. Adults of both sexes fly in October; females overwinter and are active in March– April. A male of an unidentified Cteipolia species was observed on 8 March 2021 flying in the day time during a thaw in the Russian part of the Altai Mountains ( Titov et al. 2024). Although Gordeeva et al. (2023) stated that ‘all representatives of the genus are mountain species’, at least two of them, viz. C. isotima Püngeler, 1914 and C. murina (Ménétriés, 1848) are found to occur in flat landscapes with sandy soils in the Balkhash-Alakol Basin in Southeast Kazakhstan and Irgiz River valley in West Kazakhstan, respectively ( Titov et al. 2024). Nevertheless, the majority of species are found in rocky steppe habitats in hilly or mountain landscapes at the altitudes ranging from 480–2400m a. s. l. The early stages are unknown except for C. amissa Gordeev, Gordeeva, G. Ronkay & L. Ronkay, 2023 , the eggs, larvae and pupa of which are illustrated by Gordeeva et al. (2023). In the laboratory conditions, the authors fed the larvae on the leaves of the genus Salix (S. Gordeev, pers. comm., also see: Gordeeva et al. (2023): plate 37, figs 4–7) but the food plant in nature remains unknown and may be different. However, in the majority of places of Cteipolia occurrence, if not all, willow thickets have been observed by the authors of the present paper. The larva of C. amissa is free-living (see: Gordeeva et al. (2023): plate 37, figs 4–7), what was the reason for raising the status of Cteipolia to genus level and transferring it into from the subtribe Antitypina into Xylenina (in contrast, larvae of Dasypolia are endophagous and tunnel the stems or rhizomes of their host plants).