https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7510-6139
Figures
Abstract
We analyzed COI barcode sequences from 138 over-a-century old specimens of Calinaga including 36 name-bearing type specimens stored at the Natural History Museum London. These new data, combined with previously available RPS5 sequences, divide the Calinaga samples into four well-supported mitochondrial lineages that together with a novel wing-pattern analysis, support the recognition of six species (lhatso, buddha, brahma, aborica, formosana and davidis), with all other names subsumed either as subspecies or synonyms. One new taxon is described, Calinaga aborica naima Vane-Wright, ssp. n.
Citation: Todisco V, Basu DN, Prosser SWJ, Russell S, Mutanen M, Zilli A, et al. (2024) DNA barcodes from over-a-century-old type specimens shed light on the taxonomy of a group of rare butterflies (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae: Calinaginae). PLoS ONE 19(7): e0305825. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0305825
Editor: Casper J. Breuker, Oxford Brookes University, UNITED KINGDOM
Received: March 12, 2024; Accepted: May 29, 2024; Published: July 17, 2024
Copyright: © 2024 Todisco et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Data Availability: All sequences were submitted to GenBank (accessions PP595598-PP595669, see S1 Table) and BOLD system repository (dataset “DS-CALINHM”, accessible at https://dx.doi.org/10.5883/DS-CALINHM).
Funding: VT was supported by SYNTHESYS Call 4 project under the current European Commission’s FPVII European-funded Integrating Activities funding scheme (312253). Morphometry work was funded by a CSIR-UGC Research Fellowship to D.N.B., and a Ramanujan Fellowship (Dept. of Science and Technology, Govt. of India) and a research grant from NCBS to K.K. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Introduction
Natural history collections have long been used by morphologists and taxonomists to probe the evolutionary process and describe biological diversity. They are often critical when it comes to investigating the taxonomy and evolutionary history of species that today are rare or extinct, undergoing particular conservation measures, or are simply difficult or costly to sample or collect in the field [1]. Furthermore, the preservation of type specimens represents an invaluable source of information for those taxa in need of taxonomic revision. However, samples from museum specimens tend to be difficult to work with because of their age.
Recent advances in DNA methodology, notably high-throughput sequencing (HTS), are fundamentally revolutionizing the acquisition of genetic data, including information from historical specimens [2–6], making genomic sampling from museum specimens more efficient. Calinaga Moore, [1858] forms a monotypic subfamily of butterflies distributed from Indochina to Taiwan and the Himalayas. Depending on the source consulted, Calinaga is composed of anywhere from one to eleven species [7–11]. In addition, due to its unique morphological characteristics and previously uncertain position in the Nymphalidae family tree, the genus has been subject to broad scholarly curiosity [12–23].
A modern large-scale study employing molecular and morphological characters from wing pattern and genitalia of nearly all species (except C. formosana Fruhstorfer [24]) addressed some of these long-standing issues, highlighting the presence of four main lineages within Calinaga (C. aborica, C. davidis, C. lhatso and C. sudassana). However, a recent review of the genus [25] has introduced a unique taxonomic scheme for the genus, dividing it into five “superspecies” (buddha, brahma, formosana, davidis and lhatso), with extreme over-splitting of the populations into many semi-species and sub-species based on inconsistent and weak wing-pattern elements, adding new confusion to the taxonomy in this group.
Recognizing the persistent problems surrounding the taxonomic status of the named taxa within Calinaga and the species boundaries within the genus, we here re-address the issue using a novel morphological approach to wing-pattern analysis as well as mitochondrial COI barcodes, and existing Ribosomal Protein S5 gene (RPS5) data. Most of this information has been gathered from the majority of taxa available in what is believed to be the largest world collection of Calinaga butterflies (>2000 specimens), hosted at the Natural History Museum of London (NHMUK). In the process we obtained, for the first time, COI barcode sequences from many of the original +100-year-old type specimens of Calinaga. Given the taxonomic coverage in our datasets, we aimed to provide dramatic new insights into the taxonomy of Calinaga.
Materials and methods
Taxon sampling
We sampled legs from 138 Calinaga individuals stored in NHMUK for DNA analysis, including all type specimens available for sampling (N = 36). All specimens were photographed using a Canon Eos 600D with 70mm Sigma DG Macro lens at the Museum using standard photography equipment. The non-type material was initially identified by RIVW and included representatives of 15 taxa: aborica, buddha, brahma, buphonas, formosana, bedoci, gautama, cercyon, davidis, funebris, funeralis, lhatso, sudassana, senseiensis and pacifica. Samples were submitted for sequencing using the original identifications but were later re-identified according to Tshikolovets [25] subsequent to collection of genetic and re-analysis of morphological data (see paragraph 2.5) (S1 Table). A few mysterious (i.e. dubernardi Oberthür, 1920) or recently described taxa (i.e. yaonica Sugiyama, 2015; hsui Tshikolovets, 2020; songyunlangi Tshikolovets, 2020) could not be sampled.
DNA extraction
A single leg was removed from each Calinaga specimen and the extraction of mtDNA was conducted in two different laboratories, the NHMUK, and the Ecology and Genetics Research Unit (EGRU, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland). Total genomic DNA was extracted from one leg of each individual using the Qiagen columns of QIAamp DNA mini kit and DNeasy Blood & Tissue Kits (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany) in NHMUK lab and EGRU lab respectively and it was eluted in 20–50μl of Elution buffer. The eluted DNA obtained in EGRU lab was sent to the Canadian Centre for DNA Barcoding (CCDB) (University of Guelph, Guelph, Canada) for sequencing.
High-throughput and Sanger sequencing
Due to DNA degradation in the very old specimens of Calinaga in CCDB, the 658 bp COI barcode region was recovered using an HTS-based protocol [26]. In brief, for each sample, multiple short, overlapping amplicons were generated using nested, multiplex PCR. In order to associate reads with their source specimen, the amplicons were tailed with sample-specific universal molecular identifiers (UMI) before being pooled for sequencing on an Ion Torrent PGM. The short sequence reads were attributed to a sample via the UMIs, and filtered for quality and length before being assembled into a single barcode sequence. For the remaining specimens, PCR and Sanger sequencing were carried out in NHMUK lab. Briefly, the 658 bp barcode region was amplified using the primers described in Prosser et al. [26] as well as two forward and two reverse primers for Calinaga designed by VT (S1 File) and sequenced on an ABI 3730XL (Applied Biosystems capillary sequencer). The trace files were edited using CodonCode Aligner 6.0.2 (CodonCode Corporation, Dedham, Massachusetts) and all resulting mtDNA sequences were aligned using the same program. All sequences were submitted to GenBank (accessions PP595598-PP595669, see S1 Table) and BOLD system repository (dataset “DS-CALINHM”, accessible at https://dx.doi.org/10.5883/DS-CALINHM).
Data set compilation and tree reconstruction procedures
To assess the phylogeographic patterns within Calinaga, we complemented the 138 sequences obtained through this study with an additional 51 mtDNA and 24 RpS5 (ribosomal protein S5 nuclear gene) sequences from Todisco et al. [24]. Another five publicly available mtDNA sequences of Calinaga were retrieved from GenBank and added to the dataset. In addition, mtDNA sequences for six species belonging to closely related lineages of Nymphalidae (Charaxinae and Satyrinae) from Wahlberg and Wheat [20] were retrieved from GenBank and added to our dataset as outgroups (S1 Table).
All sequences were aligned using CodonCode Aligner 6.0.2. The mean p-distance between and within the main haplogroups of mtDNA sequences and its variance (bootstrap method, 500 replicates) was calculated using MEGA 11 [27] (Table 1).
The mtDNA and RpS5 sequences were concatenated and IQ-TREE 1.6.11 [28] was used to select the best fitting model of evolution by Bayesian information criterion scores (BIC) and the Maximum Likelihood (ML) analysis was carried out with the same program. Bayesian analysis was allowed to run with the same dataset in BEAST 2.7.3 [29] for 20 million generations and was repeated multiple times to check for convergence and stationarity, and the results were tested using TRACER 1.7.1 [30]. The resulting consensus tree was viewed in FigTree 1.4.4 [31].
Wing colour pattern analysis
Photos of 156 NHMUK specimens from 16 Calinaga taxa (listed in S1 Table) were quantified for FW and HW colour-pattern. Most taxa had dark background and interspersed light colour patches on both wings, therefore we chose the position of dark colour on wings to extract wing colour patterns. Wing colour patterns were extracted, aligned, and analyzed using the R package ‘patternize’ [32]. Within taxon variation in the pattern were obtained and visualized as heatmaps by summing the separate binary raster stacks of forewing and hindwing using sumRaster function [32]. Proportion of background pattern to the total wing area for each taxon was then calculated using the patArea function for both FW and HW [32], and PCA was performed on the transformed binary dataset obtained from the raster of each sample. To understand the extent of difference between mean colour patterns we used the PCs to calculate the Euclidean distances and estimated significance using randomized residual permutation procedure [33] (Table 2). Euclidean distance, relative area calculations, and heatmap visualization were calculated only for taxa for which we had at least 5 samples.
In the matrix lower and upper half represents forewing and hindwing, respectively. Significant distances are marked in bold. The significance of the distances was based on a MANOVA associated randomized residual permutation procedure.
We prepared a morphological key for Calinaga species-groups according to the findings of this study. In addition, we conducted an Elliptical Fourier transformation analysis on the wing outlines as well as a landmark-based analysis for wing venation. These analyses also showed some taxonomic information; they are included as supporting information (S2–S4 Files).
Nomenclatural acts
The electronic edition of this article conforms to the requirements of the amended International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, and hence the new names contained herein are available under that Code from the electronic edition of this article. This published work and the nomenclatural acts it contains have been registered in ZooBank, the online registration system for the ICZN. The ZooBank LSIDs (Life Science Identifiers) can be resolved and the associated information viewed through any standard web browser by appending the LSID to the prefix ""http://zoobank.org/"". The LSID for this publication is: urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:1BA7E8E9-8C85-4799-A664-9E6911DB97DF. The electronic edition of this work was published in a journal with an ISSN, and has been archived and is available from the following digital repositories: PubMed Central, LOCKSS [author to insert any additional repositories].
Results
Sequencing results
COI barcode sequences of various lengths (S1 Table) were recovered for sixty-four out seventy-one (HTS) and twelve out of sixty-eight (Sanger sequencing) samples respectively. These sequences matched well with other Calinaga barcodes in BOLD Identification System. Further confirmation of their validity was provided by phylogenetic methods and by the fact that they grouped with sequences from closely allied taxa. Failure to obtain the full-length (658 bp) barcode sequences for all samples can be attributed to amplification failure of the COI gene, in particular in Sanger sequencing method, due to DNA degradation. In addition, the identity of GenBank sequence ON437174 (C. sudassana, misidentified as C. buddha) was double-checked and corrected in our dataset (D. Lohman, pers. comm.).
Phylogenetic analysis
Our Maximum Likelihood (Fig 1) revealed four well-supported clades corresponding to: I) lhatso + brahma + buddha, II) aborica, III) formosana, and IV) davidis groups. Within the first group, three shallow subclades (Ia, Ib and Ic), even though weakly supported, consistently appeared together throughout the analyses. In the subclade Ib the C. buddha avalokita specimens sequenced in this work carry location labels of Silhet (now in Bangladesh) and Thailand (Fig 2). Both these are doubtful since Silhet does not have the elevation and habitat suitable for Calinaga, and the Thailand label lacks details. Thus, the true location of avalokita is uncertain. The specimens were collected perhaps in Meghalaya, Patkai Hills or nearby ranges, and brought to the British outpost in Silhet. Our phylogeny showed the following taxonomic incongruencies with the recent classification of Tshikolovets [25]: a) the taxon funebris appeared as part of the larger variation within the lhatso group and not as a separate lineage; b) taxa funeralis and senseiensis appeared as part of the larger variation within brahma group and not as a separate lineages; c) taxon “naima” (here described) showed unique genetic characteristics distinct from aborica, d) our only sequenced sample of the taxon pacifica appeared very close (and as a sister) to the lhatso group.
Only node support values over 50 are shown.
a) C. lhatso, C. buddha, C. formosana and C. aborica, b) C. brahma, and c) C. davidis. Locations for specimens of C. buddha avalokita are uncertain (see Results). Map generated using Simplemappr.net (in public domain, https://www.simplemappr.net/).
Our BEAST tree (S5 File) showed a similar topology to the ML tree and therefore will not be discussed further.
Colour patterns
We extracted the dark background surrounding the paler patches delineating wing patterns. In the PCA on forewing colour patterns, the first two axes showed changes in position of lighter patches (Fig 3a). In hindwing the first PC axes showed presence or absence of a particular colour pattern phenotype rather than change in spatial distribution of interspersed lighter patches, which is shown along PC2 (Fig 3b). In the morphospace, we observed a more constrained forewing colour pattern compared to variable and overlapping hindwing colour pattern across taxa. Pairwise MANOVA showed significant differences in mean colour pattern between almost all taxa pairs for both forewing and hindwing (Table 2). Intra-taxon variation was visualized as heatmaps, along with relative area of the dark background on the wings of each taxon (Fig 4). These results showed that in FW, davidis and lactoris have relatively less dark background area along with larger light patches, which is distinct from other taxa, while in hindwings, lactoris and lhatso have similar patterns.
Predicted colour pattern changes along first two PC axes are also shown. In the cartoon, positive values presenting a higher predicted presence of the specific pattern are in red and negative values presenting the absence of the pattern are in blues.
Heatmaps demonstrate the consistency of colour pattern yellow indicating consistent presence of patterns and red-dark purple gradient indicating less consistent presence. The black areas represent the lighter interspersed patches. Mean and standard deviation of relative size (proportion of the wing) of background colour pattern are also shown.
Discussion
Although many studies show the importance of combining different markers to obtain robust species-level identification [34], COI barcode sequences have proven to be sufficient in differentiating species in a wide range of organisms [35]. In this study our morphological analyses in conjunction with COI and RPS5 sequence data shed light on the long-standing problem of the systematics in genus Calinaga.
Despite evidently being a geologically old genus [24, 36, 37], Calinaga does not demonstrate nearly the same degree of species divergence and differentiation that is prevalent in other nymphalid groups of similar age. This pattern is typical of “living fossils”, ancient lineages with one or few living representatives, such as the Mexican Baronia brevicornis, the lone species in a monotypic subfamily that is sister to all other swallowtails [38]. Similarly, the limited morphological differentiation in wing pattern, combined with individual variation and clinal gradients, has been the main source of historical confusion about the systematics of Calinaga.
Taxonomic consideration
Ever since its 19th century description by Frederic Moore, there has been much taxonomic uncertainty regarding not only the higher classification of Calinaga within the butterflies, but also, as the diversity of named phenotypes included in the genus increased, the relative, species-level status of its component taxa. Ehrlich [7, 18] effectively anticipated the solution to the higher classification problem (the Calinaginae are now convincingly regarded as the sister group of the remainder of the satyroid clade, within Nymphalidae sensu lato [36, 37]), but Ehrlich was non-committal on the species diversity issue: He simply treated Calinaga as a single, polytypic species. Ever since, the number of Calinaga species to be recognised has remained very uncertain.
In his recent monographic account, Tshikolovets [25] divided Calinaga into five superspecies: buddha, brahma, formosana, davidis and lhatso–and among these, a total of 16 named species and semispecies (some with several subspecies).
At superspecies level, Tshikolovets’s classification is largely congruent with our results, but with some exceptions. We found the following groups:
I-a. Calinaga lhatso.
Under this group, Tshikolovets lists lhatso, senseiensis, pacifica, dubernardi, funebris and funeralis as valid “semi-species”. Our results show that taxa lhatso, pacifica, and funebris undoubtedly belong to this clade. The oldest name in this clade is lhatso Oberthür, 1893 and therefore we recognize this clade as Calinaga lhatso with subspecies lhatso and funebris stat. nov. Our single specimen of pacifica appeared as sister to the remaining samples in this clade and may perhaps later prove to be a “good” species; however for now we consider it part of the variation in this clade. The little-known taxon dubernardi Oberthür, 1920 (TL: “Tsekou” [Cigu, Deqin, Yunnan]), provisionally included in this group, has no surviving type material, but according to the original description it shows intermediate characteristics between lhatso and brahma; its type locality is the same as lhatso and it is possibly a form of it or a hybrid between lhatso and brahma [25]. In our phylogenetic analysis, the taxa senseiensis (one specimen) and funeralis (holotype and one paratype) did not appear to belong to this group but to brahma; however for now we maintain their position in the lhatso group as incertae sedis until further evidence to support their position becomes available. We could not sample the taxon yaonica, but morphologically it appears to belong to this group and be closely related to funeralis.
I-b. Calinaga buddha.
Our results largely support the taxonomy proposed by Tshikolovets [25] for this group, who recognized three taxa within it: buddha, avalokita and gautama. The C. buddha avalokita specimens sequenced in this work carry location labels of Silhet (now in Bangladesh) and Thailand. Both these are doubtful since Silhet does not have the elevation and habitat suitable for Calinaga, and the supposed Thailand source lacks details. Thus, the true location of avalokita is uncertain. The specimens were collected perhaps in Meghalaya, Patkai Hills or nearby ranges, and brought to the British outpost in Silhet. Even though in our results this group is not monophyletic, the samples always cluster together in a closed group. Since no geographic distinction could be inferred from our phylogeny supporting separation of these taxa at species level, we recognize Calinaga buddha with three subspecies: buddha, avalokita and gautama stat. rev. The placement of gautama as a subspecies of C. buddha is tentative and requires further taxonomic study.
I-c. Calinaga brahma.
Tshikolovets [25] recognized sudassana, nicevillei, bedoci, and distans under brahma as well as two new subspecies (nujianga and lancangjianga). Our results confirm that these taxa do indeed fall within the brahma clade. Even though DNA barcodes do not discriminate between any of these taxa, they all appear to be allopatric in distribution and potentially represent valid subspecies (Fig 2). We therefore recognize them as subspecies of brahma (but see above for taxa senseiensis and funeralis).
II. Calinaga aborica.
Todisco et al. [24] found aborica to be a distinct and well-supported separate species, which was further confirmed by a subsequent, independent analysis [36]. Tshikolovets [25] nevertheless listed aborica as a semi-species under superspecies davidis. Our results yet again support the recognition of aborica (TL: “Abor Hills” [Arunachal Pradesh, NE India]) as a separate species very distinct (>5%) from the members of the davidis group, with the geographically separated populations from Assam and N Burma (Kachin) as a separate subspecies. These populations were named “naima” by Vane-Wright in 1971 (in litt., nomen nudum) [39]. Here we formally describe this taxon for the first time (for a complete synopsis of Calinaga aborica, see S3 File).
Calinaga aborica naima Vane-Wright ssp new (Fig 5)
a,b: holotype, c–h: paratypes, all males, uppersides left, undersides right (a–d, g,h NHMUK; e,f Sukkit Collection). For additional data see S3 File.
Calinaga aborica naima Vane-Wright ssp. nov. urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:773B49ED-C54E-4D76-8E61-267F5722320C
Barcode Index Number: BOLD:ACZ3798
Diagnosis.
This new subspecies shares at least three morphological characters with typical Calinaga aborica that link the two taxa together (Clade II), while separating them from all other known Calinaga: red hairs on the thoracic dorsum restricted to the tegulae, hindwing discocellular veins m1–m2 and m2–m3 form a slight but distinct obtuse angle (ca 150–160°), and postdiscal and submarginal pale spots in hindwing cells M3, CuA1 and CuA2 uniquely arranged (Fig 6a and 6b(i); see S3 File for more information). Subspecies naima differs from the nominotypical, western subspecies in generally having a much ‘brighter’ wing-pattern–although, as with subsp. aborica, there is considerable individual variation in all pale markings. Two colour pattern features are considered diagnostic:
- In subspecies naima, on the underside, the dark ground colour is relieved by numerous yellow scales, these being dense in many areas, including the bases of hindwing cells CuA1 and CuA2. In contrast, these yellow scales in subsp. aborica are far less dense, including those at the bases of hindwing cells CuA1 and CuA2, which areas are thus far darker.
- The subtriangular, submarginal pale spot in cell M1 on the hindwing upperside varies from being slightly wider than, to about the same width as the postdiscal streak in the same cell, such that if virtual anterior and posterior tangential lines are drawn to touch these two marks, the lines do not converge before the base of the wing, being more or less parallel (Fig 6b(ii)). In subsp. aborica such virtual lines converge before the base of the wing (Fig 6a(ii)).
a) Calinaga aborica aborica (Lectotype). (i) Divergent centres of submarginal and postdiscal spots in HW cells M3, CuA1 and CuA2. (ii) Anterior and posterior tangential lines touching the main postdiscal streak and submarginal spot in HW cell M1 converge well before the base of the wing. b) Calinaga aborica naima (paratype 010243161). (i) Divergent centres of submarginal and postdiscal spots in HW cells M3, CuA1 and CuA2. (ii) Anterior and posterior tangential lines touching the main postdiscal streak and submarginal spot in HW cell M1, even if converging, do not converge before the base of the wing. Note also how, in subsp. naima, the yellow scales in HW cells 1A and 2A are more dense, and extend almost to the wing margin.
Typically in subsp. naima (Fig 5), in comparison to subsp. aborica, the pale postdiscal streaks in forewing upperside cells R5, M1 and M2 are slightly better developed (streak in cell R5 ca 3–4 mm); the pale streaks in hindwing upperside cell R1 are generally far more prominent; the distal area of hindwing upperside cells 2A and 3A are often pale yellow almost to the margin (Fig 6b, cf. Fig 6a); and on the hindwing underside, the distal triangular spot in cell R1 is always present, usually larger and less dyslegnic (i.e., having its margins more sharply defined), about 2.5–5.5 mm in length.
Forewing length (male): mean 40.96 mm [n = 17; observed range 37.6–43.1 mm, SD 1.441]; female unknown.
Material directly examined: holotype and 12 paratypes in NHMUK, London
Photographs examined: 3 paratypes in the collection of the late Prasobsuk Sukkit (courtesy of Adam Cotton, Chiang Mai) and 1 paratype, ex Sukkit collection, in the collection of Howard Grisham, Alabama. Another specimen ex Sukkit collection, a specimen from ‘Wanzewong-Ngawar’ figured by Shizuya et al. [40]; and an online image of a male from ‘Chudu Razi Hills’ [see S3 File], are not included as paratypes.
Holotype ♂.
Myanmar / Upper Burma: Seinghku Valley, 6500′, 28.5 N 97.35 E., 27.v.1926, F. Kingdon Ward. / Brit. Mus. 1926–400 / BMNH(E)#985060 / B.M. Type No. Rh. 17202 / Calinaga aborica naima Vane-Wright Holotype ♂ det. R.I. Vane-Wright 1971 / NHMUK. [See S3 File on Kingdon Ward’s localities.]
Paratypes.
Myanmar–1 ♂ / Upper Burma: Seinghku R.[iver], 28.3 N, 97.31 E, 5000′, 17.v.1926, F. Kingdon Ward [see Kingdon Ward, 1930] / NHMUK. 3♂♂ / N. Burma: Adung Valley, 6000′, 14.v.1931, Lord Cranbrook [one specimen barcoded] / NHMUK. 2♂♂ / Mairudam, N Kachin State, Burma Prasobsuk Sukkit leg. 5 May 1998 / 5.v.1998 N.E. Putao. Kachin State Myanma [sic] Sukkit & Nishimura Coll. / 1♂ / Mairudam, N Kachin State, Burma Prasobsuk Sukkit leg. 14 May 1998 / 14.v.1998 N.E. Putao. Kachin State Myanma [sic] / Sukkit & Nishimura Coll. 1♂ / Mairudam, 12.v.1998 N.E. Putao. Kachin State Myanma [sic] leg. Sukkit & Nishimura / Howard Grisham Coll.
India–3♂♂ Assam, Mishmi Hills, 1928, Percy Sladen Expn. / 2♂♂, Assam, Mishmi Hills, 2000′, 3.iii.1928, Percy Sladen Expn. / 28°0′ N. 96°0′ E / [one specimen barcoded] /, 1♂, Assam, Mishmi Hills, 4500 ft, 11.v.1928, Percy Sladen Expn. / Delei Valley [see Kingdon Ward, 1930], 28°21′ N, 96°37′ E, 4500ʹ, 11/5/28. / 2♂♂, Assam, Mishmi Hills, 10000 ft, 13.vi.1928, Percy Sladen Expn. / 28°21′ N, 96°37′ E /. [all NHMUK]
Distribution: India–Arunachal Pradesh: Mishmi Hills. Myanmar–N Kachin State: Seinghku Wang Valley, Adung Valley, Mairudam (NE Putao), Wanzewong-Ngawar (north of Putao), Chudu Razi Hills (ca 40 km east of Kawnglangphu). [For details, including estimated coordinates, see S3 File.]
Flight period and altitudinal range: records are for March–June; altitude 600–3000 m (mid-montane).
Etymology and nomenclature.
Named after the ballad ‘Naima’, originally composed and performed by saxophonist John Coltrane for his 1960 album Giant Steps. The name was chosen (and the NHMUK specimens so-labelled) in 1971, but it has not been formally established until now. The name naima has, however, appeared in the literature at least three times as a nomen nudum or manuscript name [11, 25, 39]. While it is sometimes best to avoid subsequent establishment of a nomen nudum, in this case little purpose would be served by introducing a novel alternative; Calinaga aborica naima is here established with Vane-Wright (in Todisco et al. [24]) as author, and should be dated from the publication date of this paper (ICZN [41]: glossary).
III. Calinaga formosana.
This isolated taxon from Taiwan, which was not included in the analysis of Todisco et al.’s [24], appears as a well-supported, distinct clade. We confirm its undisputed status as a valid species (see also S4 File), with no apparent sub-population structure.
IV. Calinaga davidis.
This complex includes several poorly-characterized taxa that are very difficult to differentiate objectively. Beside C. aborica which, based on our findings, is undoubtedly a separate species outside of the davidis group, Tshikolovets [25] listed three “semi-species” (davidis, cercyon and buphonas), each with four or five subspecies. While we could not sample three of the described taxa (i.e. saka, hsui and songyunlangi), we can confirm that all the others listed by Tshikolovets appear together in a large cluster without any particular distinction, many represented by geographically isolated allopatric populations that can be thought of as subspecies of a single species. However, the situation in central Sichuan, where taxa davidis, nubilosa and saka occur in part in sympatry, is particularly complex (Fig 2). We agree with the argument presented by Tshikolovets [25] that the original type locality of cercyon (“The road between Tâ-Tsien-Loû and Mou-Pin, and the neighborhood of Tâ-Tsien-Loû, Western China” [42] is incorrect, and the types probably originated from somewhere else.
We found specimens attributable to ssp. lijiangi flying together with specimens of genestieri in Northern Yunnan, sharing the same barcode (Fig 1). The taxon lijiangi, described based solely on the lighter wing coloration compared to genestieri, therefore appears to be synonymous with the latter (syn. nov.). In addition, the taxa saka and nubilosa fly sympatrically with davidis and are morphologically and genetically indistinguishable from one another. Here we synonymize these two with davidis (syn. nov.). Until further evidence is presented, here we maintain the status of the remaining taxa in the group as valid allopatric subspecies of Calinaga davidis.
We also present an illustrated, semi-natural key to the six subgroups of Calinaga detailed above (S4 File). These conclusions are further supported by our morphological analysis of wing pattern that unambiguously separates many of the recognized taxa into distinct clusters (Fig 1). Thus, we propose the following revised classification for Calinaga:
- 1) Calinaga lhatso Oberthür, 1893
- a. ssp. lhatso Oberthür, 1893
- b. ssp. funebris Oberthür, 1919
- c.? ssp. funeralis Monastyrskii and Devyatkin, 2000 incertae sedis
- d.? ssp. senseiensis Yoshino, 1997 incertae sedis
- e.? ssp. dubernardi Oberthür, 1920 incertae sedis (not examined)
- f.? ssp. yaonica Sugiyama, 2015 incertae sedis (not examined)
- g.? ssp. pacifica Mell, 1939 incertae sedis (possibly a separate species)
- 2) Calinaga buddha Moore, [1858]
- a. ssp. buddha Moore, [1858]
- b. ssp. gautama Moore, 1901
- c. ssp. avalokita Fruhstorfer, 1913
- 3) Calinaga brahma Butler, 1885
- a. ssp. brahma Butler, 1885
- b. ssp. sudassana Melvill, 1893
- c. ssp. nicevillei Oberthür, 1920
- d. ssp. bedoci Le Cerf, 1926
- e. ssp. distans Monastyrskii and Devyatkin, 2000
- f. ssp. lancangjianga Tshikolovets 2020
- g. ssp. nujianga Tshikolovets 2020
- 4) Calinaga aborica Tytler, 1915 stat. rev.
- a. ssp. aborica Tytler, 1915
- b. ssp. naima Vane-Wright, 2024 ssp. nov.
- 5) Calinaga formosana Fruhstorfer, 1908
- 6) Calinaga davidis Oberthür, 1881
- = saka Moore, 1901 syn. nov.
- = nubilosa Oberthür, 1920 syn. nov.
- a. ssp. davidis Oberthür, 1881
- b. ssp. cercyon de Nicéville, 1897
- c. ssp. lactoris Fruhstorfer, 1908
- d. ssp. fokienensis Fruhstorfer, 1914
- e. ssp. buphonas Oberthür, 1920
- f. ssp. genestieri Oberthür, 1922
- = lijiangi Tshikolovets, 2020 syn. nov.
- g. ssp. kuangtungensis Mell, 1952
- h. ssp. concolor Mell, 1952
- i. ssp. rarus Monastyrskii, 2012
- j.? ssp. hsui Tshikolovets, 2020 incertae sedis (not examined)
- k.? ssp. songyunlangi Tshikolovets, 2020 incertae sedis (not examined)
Supporting information
S1 Table. List of material examined for molecular data.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0305825.s001
(XLSX)
S2 File. DB & KK: Morphological analysis of wing patterns.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0305825.s003
(PDF)
S3 File. RIVW: Morphotaxonomy of subfamily Calinaginae, with special reference to Calinaga aborica.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0305825.s004
(PDF)
S4 File. RIVW: Illustrated, semi-natural key to the major subgroups of Calinaga.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0305825.s005
(PDF)
S5 File. BEAST tree for Calinaga of combined data (COI+RpS5).
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0305825.s006
(PDF)
Acknowledgments
RIVW is greatly indebted to past curators and former colleagues at a number of European and North American museums, with holdings of Calinaga butterflies that he was able to access in the 1970s. With respect to revived work on the genus over the past few months, RIVW wishes to thank, Robyn Crowther, Jon Earle, Niall Briggs and Charlotte Birkett at the Natural History Museum, London, for their assistance. Special thanks are due to Adam Cotton, Thailand, for his knowledge, help and insight regarding these insects. We also thank David Lohman for confirming the ID of one of his Calinaga samples on GenBank.
References
- 1. Hilton EJ, Watkins-Colwell GJ, Huber SK. 2021. The Expanding Role of Natural History Collections. Ichthyology & Herpetology. 2021;109(2):379–391.
- 2. Nazari V, Schmidt BC, Prosser S, Hebert PDN. Century-Old DNA Barcodes Reveal Phylogenetic Placement of the Extinct Jamaican Sunset Moth, Urania sloanus Cramer (Lepidoptera: Uraniidae). PLoS ONE. 2016;11(10):e0164405. pmid:27764148
- 3. Nazari V, Tarmann GM, Efetov KA. Phylogenetic position of the ‘extinct’ Fijian coconut moth, Levuana iridescens (Lepidoptera: Zygaenidae). PLoS ONE. 2019;14(12):e0225590. pmid:31805075
- 4. Todisco V, Vodă R, Prosser SWJ, Nazari V. Next generation sequencing-aided comprehensive geographic coverage sheds light on the status of rare and extinct populations of Aporia butterflies (Lepidoptera: Pieridae). Sci Rep. 2020;10: 13970. pmid:32811885
- 5. Raxworthy CJ, Smith BT. Mining museums for historical DNA: advances and challenges in museomics. Trends Ecol Evol. 2021;36(11):1049–1060. pmid:34456066
- 6. Fong JJ, Blom MP., Aowphol A, McGuire JA, Sutcharit , Soltis PS. Recent advances in museomics: revolutionizing biodiversity research. Front. Ecol Evol. 2023;11:1188172.
- 7. Ehrlich PR. The comparative morphology, phylogeny and higher classification of the butterflies (Lepidoptera: Papilionoidea). Univ Kans Sci Bull. 1958;39(8):305–370.
- 8.
Beccaloni G, Scoble M, Kitching I, Thomas S, Gaden R, Brian P, et al. The Global Lepidoptera Names Index (LepIndex). World Wide Web electronic publication. 2003. https://www.nhm.ac.uk/our-science/data/lepindex/intro.html [accessed 6th May 2024]
- 9.
Lang SY. The Nymphalidae of China (Lepidoptera, Rhopalocera). Part 1: Libytheinae, Danainae, Calinaginae, Morphinae, Heliconiinae, Nymphalinae, Charaxinae, Apaturinae, Cyrestinae, Biblidinae, Limenitinae. Pardubice: Tshikolovets Publications, 456 pp. 2012.
- 10.
Savela M. Calinaga. Tree of Life (online). 2015. https://ftp.funet.fi/index/Tree_of_life/ [accessed 6th May 2024]
- 11. Sondhi S, Karmakar T, Sondhi Y et al. Re-discovery of Calinaga aborica Tytler, 1915 (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae: Calinaginae) from Arunachal Pradesh, India. J. Threat. Taxa. 2016;8: 8618–8622.
- 12.
Moore F. In Horsfield T & Moore F, A Catalogue of the Lepidopterous Insects in the Museum of the Hon. East-India Company. Vol. I. London, WH. Allen and Co., 370 pp. [1858].
- 13.
Kirby WF. Synonymic Catalogue of Diurnal Lepidoptera. JohnVan Voorst, London, 690 pp. 1871.
- 14. Watson J. On Calinaga, the single genus of an aberrant subfamily of butterflies. Memoirs of the Literary and Philosophical Society of Manchester 43(11):1–23, 3 pls. 1899.
- 15.
Fruhstorfer H. The Indo-Australian Rhopalocera. Kernen; Stuttgart. 769 pp. 1927.
- 16. Clark AH. The interrelationships of the several groups within the butterfly superfamily Nymphaloidea. Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 49:148–149. 1947.
- 17.
Lee CL. Butterflies. Department of Entomology, Academia Sinica (Peking), Publication no. 4, 198 pp., 4 pls. 198 text figs. [in Chinese]. 1958.
- 18. Ehrlich PR. A note on the systematic position of the butterfly genus Calinaga (Nymphalidae). The Lepidopterists’ News. 1959;12:173.
- 19. Freitas AVL, Brown KS Jr. Phylogeny of the Nymphalidae (Lepidoptera: Papilionoidea). Syst Biol. 2004;53: 363–383. pmid:15503668
- 20. Wahlberg N, Wheat CW. Genomic outposts serve the phylogenomic pioneers: Designing novel nuclear markers for genomic DNA extractions of Lepidoptera. Syst. Biol. 2008;57:231–242. pmid:18398768
- 21. Peña C, Wahlberg N. Prehistorical climate change increased diversification of a group of butterflies. Biol Lett. 2008; 4: 274–278. pmid:18364308
- 22. Wahlberg N, Leneveu J, Kodandaramaiah U, Peña C, Nylin S, Freitas AVL, et al. Nymphalid butterflies diversify following near demise at the Cretaceous/Tertiary boundary. Proc. R. Soc. B: Biol Sci. 2009; 276:4295–4302. pmid:19793750
- 23. Heikkilä M, Kaila L, Mutanen M, Peña C, Wahlberg N. Cretaceous origin and repeated tertiary diversification of the redefined butterflies. Proc. R. Soc. B: Biol Sci. 2012;279:1093–1099. pmid:21920981
- 24. Todisco V, Nazari V, Cesaroni D, Sbordoni V. Preliminary molecular phylogeny and biogeography of the monobasic subfamily Calinaginae (Lepidoptera, Nymphalidae). Zoosys Evol. 2017;93(2):243–254.
- 25.
Tshikolovets V. The genus Calinaga Moore [1858] (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae, Calinaginae). Tshikolovets Publications. 159 pp. 2020.
- 26. Prosser SWJ, de Waard JR, Miller SE, Hebert PDN. DNA barcodes from century-old type specimens using next generation sequencing. Mol Ecol Res. 2016;16(2):487–497. pmid:26426290
- 27. Tamura K, Stecher G, Kumar S. MEGA11: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis Version 11. Mol Biol Evol. 2021;38(7): 022–3027. pmid:33892491
- 28. Trifinopoulos J, Nguyen L-T, von Haeseler A, Minh BQ. W-IQ-TREE: a fast online phylogenetic tool for maximum likelihood analysis. Nucl Acids Res. 2016; 44(W1):W232–W235. pmid:27084950
- 29. Suchard MA, Lemey P, Baele G, Ayres DL, Drummond AJ, Rambaut A, et al. Bayesian phylogenetic and phylodynamic data integration using BEAST 1.10. Virus Evolution. 2018; 4:vey016. pmid:29942656
- 30. Rambaut A, Drummond AJ, Baele XDG, Suchard MA. Posterior summarisation in Bayesian phylogenetics using Tracer 1.7. Syst Biol. 2018. 67:901–904. pmid:29718447
- 31.
Rambaut A. FigTree v1.4.4. Institute of Evolutionary Biology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh. 2012. http://tree.bio.ed.ac.uk/software/figtree/ (accessed on 10 December 2023).
- 32. Van Belleghem SM, Papa R, Ortiz-zuazaga H, Hendrickx F, Jiggins CD, McMillan WO, et al. Patternize: An R package for quantifying colour pattern variation. Met Ecol Evol. 2018; 9:390–398. (2023 version available from github.com/StevenVB12/patternize) pmid:29755717
- 33. Collyer ML, Sekora DJ, Adams DC. A method for analysis of phenotypic change for phenotypes described by high-dimensional data. Heredity. 2015;115:357–365. pmid:25204302
- 34. Purty RS, Chatterjee S. DNA barcoding: an effective technique in molecular taxonomy. Austin J Biomed. 2016;Eng. 3:1059.
- 35. Yeo D, Srivathsan A, Meier R. Longer is not always better: optimizing barcode length for large-scale species discovery and identification. Syst Biol. 2020;69:999–1015. pmid:32065638
- 36. Chazot N, Condamine FL, Dudaset G, Peña C, Kodandaramaiah U, Matos-Maraví P, et al. Conserved ancestral tropical niche but different continental histories explain the latitudinal diversity gradient in brush-footed butterflies. Nat Comm. 2021;12:5717. pmid:34588433
- 37. Kawahara AY, Storer C, Carvalho APS, Plotkin DM, Condamine FL, Braga MP, et al. A global phylogeny of butterflies reveals their evolutionary history, ancestral hosts and biogeographic origins. Nat Ecol Evol. 2023;7:903–913. pmid:37188966
- 38. Eisner T. Living Fossils: On Lampreys, Baronia, and the Search for Medicinals. Bioscience. 2003;53(3):265–269.
- 39.
D’Abrera B. Butterflies of the Oriental Region. Part II: Nymphalidae, Satyridae & Amathusidae. Hill House, Melbourne. 244 pp. 1985.
- 40. Shizuya H, Watanabe Y, Saito M, Soe T, Ozawa H. Basic information on butterflies of Kachin state, Myanmar (part 5). Butterflies (Teinopalpus). 2011;59:11–26.
- 41.
ICZN. International code of zoological nomenclature. London: International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. xxi+306 pp. 1999.
- 42. De Nicéville CLA. On new or little known butterflies from the Indo- and Austro-Malayan Regions. J. Asiat. Soc. Bengal, Part 2 66(3):543–577, Pl. I-IV. 1897.