Tava Grishin, new genus

http://zoobank.org/ A4C0707B-1BB7-410C-9682-7ACC79306988

Type species. Phanis tavola Schaus, 1902.

Definition. A genus without apparent close relatives, although in the same clade with Phanes Godman, [1901] (type species Thracides aletes Geyer, 1832), where it was placed previously but not monophyletic with it, Cumbre Evans, 1955 (type species Phanis cumbre Schaus, 1902), Lamponia Evans, 1955 (type species Hesperia lamponia Hewitson, 1876), and Pheraeus Godman, [1900] (type species Carystus epidius Mabille, 1891) among others (Fig. 11–12). Keys to J. 23.5 in Evans (1955). Similar to many species in this group of relatives in having characteristic nearly square in many specimens, semi-hyaline spots near the bases of cells M 3 -CuA 1 and CuA 1 -CuA 2 on forewing. Differs from them by the combination of the following characters: antennae about 2/3 of costa length, nudum of 11 segments, palpi longer than wide in ventral view, 3rd segment short and conical, mid-tibiae with spines, forewing discal cell with well-developed recurrent vein, stigma V-shaped, inconspicuous, at the base of CuA 1 -CuA 2 cell along veins, wings without apical spots, rufous brown below, hindwings mostly unspotted, in some specimens with a trace of small postdiscal yellowish spots (Bell 1940). Genitalia as figured by Bell (1940: fig. 6), distinctive in the shape of harpe, rather straight, only slightly upturned and narrowing to a point, ampulla with a small tooth, penis wider than harpe, longer than valva, tegumen and uncus shorter than harpe. In DNA, a combination of the following base pairs is diagnostic: aly671.22.3:T167A, aly374.12.1:G1087C, aly2874.22.6:A1535G, aly671.22.3:A155T, aly420.67.1:A1631T.

Etymology. The name is a feminine noun in the nominative singular, derived from the beginning of the type species name.

Species included. Only the type species.

Parent taxon. Subtribe Moncina A. Warren, 2008.

Comments. We sequenced a syntype of Phanis tavola and the holotype of Phanes hoffmanni Bell, 1940. Analysis of these genomic sequences confirms the synonymy previously suggested for these two taxa (Mielke 1995). For instance, their COI barcodes differ by only one position (0.15%).