Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T03:47:52.176Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

MORPHOLOGY OF THE FEMALE TERMINALIA IN LEPIDOPTERA, AND ITS TAXONOMIC SIGNIFICANCE

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

Akira Mutuura
Akira Mutuura
Affiliation:
Entomology Research Institute, Canada Department of Agriculture, Ottawa
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In the phylogenetic classification of the Lepidoptera, the position of the genital opening and its modifications help to clarify the relationship of the Zeugloptera to the lepidopterous suborders. Three different systems of the suborder classification of the Lepidoptera, into Homoneura and Heteroneura (Tillyard, Imms, etc.), Monotrysia and Ditrysia (Borner), and Dacnonypha, Monotrysia, and Ditrysia (Hinton), are not supported by evidence obtained in the study of the female genitalia.The development of the female terminalia is closely associated with the mode of oviposition. Several types of female terminalia are found in the primitive Lepidoptera (Hepialidae, Neopseustidae, Tischeriidae, Lyonetiidae, Agathiphagidae, Tineidae, Nepticulidae, and Eriocraniidae). They are divided into four categories: hepialid type — the eggs are dropped randomly; typical lepidopterous type — the eggs are laid on the surface of food plants; eriocraniid type — the eggs are laid inside the food plants; tineid type — the eggs are laid in crevices of food. Each of the types is derivable from the types occurring in Neopseustidae, Tischeriidae, Agathiphagidae, and Eriocraniidae, respectively. These types are still far removed from the type of female terminalia in Micropterygidae of the Zeugloptera.The modes of egg-laying as well as the morphological characters of the female genitalia must be taken into consideration in suborder classification of the Lepidoptera.A genealogical tree based on the female terminalia suggests four main branches: hepialid branch — includes Neopseustidae and Prototheoridae; typical lepidopterous branch — includes all Ditrysia and Nepticulidae; tineid branch — includes only Tineidae; eriocraniid branch — includes Incurvariidae, Prodoxidae, Adelidae, and Heliozelidae.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 104 , Issue 7 , July 1972 , pp. 1055 - 1071
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1972

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Börner, C., 1939. Die Grundlagen meines Lepidopterensystem. Verh. VII int. Kengs. Ent. 1938 (2). P. 1372–1424.Google Scholar
Busck, A. 1931. On the female genitalia of the Microlepidoptera and their importance in the classification and determination of these moths. Bull. Brooklyn ent. Soc. 26: 199–216.Google Scholar
Chapman, T. A. 1916. Micropteryx entitled to ordinal rank; order Zeugloptera. Trans. ent. Soc. Lond. 1916; 310–314.Google Scholar
Common, I. F. B. 1970. The insects of Australia (Lepidoptera). Melbourne University Press.Google Scholar
Dumbleton, L. T. 1952. A new genus of seed-infesting micropterygid moth. Pacif. Sci. 6(1): 117–129.Google Scholar
Forbes, W. 1923. The Lepidoptera of New York and neighboring states. Ithaca, New York. 729 p.Google Scholar
Hinton, E. E. 1946. On the homology and nemenclature of the setae of lepidopterous larvae, with some notes on the phylogeny of the Lepidoptera. Trans. R. ent. Soc. Lond. 97: 1–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Imms, A. D. 1930. A general textbook of entomology. London, 2nd ed.Google Scholar
Issiki, S. 1931. On the morphology and systematics of the Micropterygidae of Japan and Formosa. proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. (1931 ): 999–1039.Google Scholar
Issiki, S. 1953. Micropterygidae of Japan. Bull. Naniwa Univ. (B) 3: 133–140.Google Scholar
Issiki, S. and Stringer, H.. 1932. On new oriental genera and species of the Hepialoidea (Lepidoptera Homoneura). 1. Descriptions af new genera and species. Stylops 1: 71–80.Google Scholar
Janse, A. 1942. The moths of South Africa IV, 1. Jagate. p. 1–78.Google Scholar
Klots, A. B. 1956, 1970. Taxonomist's glossary of genitalia in insects (Lepidoptera). Copenhagen. p. 97–111 (1956); p. 115–130 (1970).Google Scholar
Kristensen, N. P. 1967. Erection of a new family in the Lepidoptera suborder dacnonypha. Ent. Meddr 35: 341–345.Google Scholar
Mutuura, A. 1971. A new genus of homoneurous moth and the description of a new species (Lepidoptera: Neopseustidae). Can. Ent. 103: 1129–1136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
petersen, W. 1900. Beiträge zur Morphologie der Lepidopteren. Mem. Acad. imp. Sci. St.-Petersbourg 9(6) : 1–142.Google Scholar
philpott, A. 1923. The genitalia of Sabatinca and allied genera (Lepidoptera Homeneura), with some observations on the same structures in the Mecoptera. Trans. ent. Soc. Lond. (1923): 347–366.Google Scholar
philpott, A. 1927 a. The genitalia of the Mnesarchaeidae. New Zealand Ins. Trans. Pros. 57: 710–715.Google Scholar
philpott, A. 1927 b. Notes on the female genitalia in the Micropterygoidea. Trans. ent. Soc. Lond. 75: 319–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
philpott, A. 1928. On the systematic position of Anomoses (Lepidoptera Homoneura). Trans. ent. Soc. Lond. 76: 93–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierce, F. N. and Metcalfe, J. W.. 1935. The genitalia of tineid families of the Lepidoptera of the British Islands. Warmington. p. 1–116 plus Pl. 1–68.Google Scholar
Richards, O. W. and Davies, R. G.. 1957. A. D. Imms. A general textbook of entomology. London. 9th ed.Google Scholar
Stekol'nikov, A. A. 1967. Functional morphology of the copulatory apparatus in the primitive Lepidoptera and general evolutionary trends in the genitalia of the Lepidoptera. Ént. Obozr. 3: 400–409.Google Scholar
Tillyard, P. T. 1919. On the morphology and systematic position of the family Micropterygidae). Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W. 44: 95–136.Google Scholar
Tillyard, P. T. 1923 a. On the larva and pupa of the genus Sabatinca (order Lepidoptera, family Micropterygidae). Trans. ent. Soc. Lond. 1923: 437–453.Google Scholar
Tillyard, P. T. 1923 b. On the mouth-parts of Micropterygidae (Order Lepidoptera). Trans. ent. Soc. Lond. 1923: 181–206.Google Scholar
Turner, A. J. 1921. Observations on the structure of some Australian Lepidoptera Homoneura including the diagnosis of two new families. Trans. ent. Soc. Lond. 1921: 592–603.Google Scholar
Viette, P. 1947. Revision du Catalogue des Lépidoptères Homoneures. Première note. Ravue fr. Ent. 14: (1) 24.Google Scholar