List of Entomological Publications (Autobibliographie)
Ulrich PAUKSTADT & Laela Hayati PAUKSTADT


(Summary)


BACK Publications


Paukstadt, U. & Paukstadt, L. H. (2003): Kritische Anmerkungen zur Statusänderung bei Antheraea (A.) myanmarensis U. Paukstadt, L. H. Paukstadt & Brosch, 1998 (Lepidoptera: Saturniidae). - Beiträge zur Kenntnis der wilden Seidenspinner (Wilhelmshaven), 1 (1): pp. 6-12; 2 b/w-figs.


Critical comments on the change of the status of Antheraea (A.) myanmarensis PAUKSTADT, PAUKSTADT & BROSCH, 1998 (Lepidoptera: Saturniidae). -

Summary: In this contribution to knowledge the Southeast Asian wild silkmoths (Lepidoptera: Saturniidae) the status of Antheraea (A.) myanmarensis PAUKSTADT, PAUKSTADT & BROSCH, 1998 is discussed. Naumann (2001) considered myanmarensis being a junior synonym of Antheraea (A.) gschwandneri NIEPELT, 1918. No taxonomic changes are proposed in this contribution although we believe that myanmarensis from Myanmar and Thailand being distinct from gschwandneri, which was originally described from Sumatera, Indonesia. The geographic range of myanmarensis as presently defined by us, is considered being restricted to the Asian mainland, while the range of gschwandneri sensu stricto is considered being restricted to Sumatera. No reliable records of any specimens similar to one of the morphs from Sumatera or Myanmar were known to us from Peninsular Malaysia southeast off the Isthmus of Kra.
Naumann (2001) lowered the name myanmarensis into synonymy to gschwandneri because his studies revealed that both names are conspecific. Following the citation by Naumann (2001): ".... In all known morphological details myanmarensis syn. nov. is absolutely identical with gschwandneri so that I herewith change the status of that taxon into synonymy. ......". The authors believed that the comparisons of myanmarensis and gschwandneri by Naumann (2001) were lacking scientific thoroughness because neither the male genitalia structures of both populations were compared (not mentioned in the publication), nor the female adults (the female adult of gschwandneri sensu stricto remains unknown thus far). Male adults of the populations from Sumatera were either never dissected or results, if any, not published by Naumann (2001). Though the appropriate female of gschwandneri sensu stricto from Sumatera in fact remains unknown thus far, this fact was not mentioned by Naumann (2001). Furthermore the authors believed that comparisons by Naumann (2001) were carried out with considerable too small numbers of specimens from each distribution area, although there were no details in his studies presented.
Naumannís (2001) statement "absolutely identical in all known morphological details" might suggests that large series of male specimens were before him and the ranges of variability were carefully compared, particularly the female adults of both locations, too. We do particularly not understand that the author has not observed any distinct details during his studies. We herewith pointing out that specimens of gschwandneri sensu stricto and myanmarensis are not identical in all known morphological details. The following differences in myanmarensis from Myanmar and Thailand (n = 14 males and 2 females) in coll. L. H. Paukstadt (Wilhelmshaven) and gschwandneri sensu stricto from Sumatera (n = 2 males) figured in Naumann (2001): col.-pl. 1, fig. 3, and Nässig, Lampe & Kager (1996): col.-pl. 2, fig. 7 were observed. Both taxa are distinct in the shapes of the male forewing ocelli, which are more or less circular in gschwandneri sensu stricto and more or less oval or irregular oval in myanmarensis; in the shapes of forewing apices, which are clearly pointed and with much more convex curved costa than in myanmarensis; in the shapes of the outer margin of hindwings, which is much more convex curved than in myanmarensis; in the shapes of forewings, of which the outer margin and the inner margin are rectangular in myanmarensis, but obtuse-angled in gschwandneri sensu stricto. Because the female of gschwandneri sensu stricto (Sumatera) is unknown thus far, we are unable to compare.
Since the preimaginal instars of the populations from Myanmar/Thailand and Sumatera, as well as the female of the populations from Sumatera remain unknown, we presently do not intend to re-instated myanmarensis in any rank besides the closely related gschwandneri sensu stricto. Further studies and comparisons particularly on the unknown female of gschwandneri sensu stricto from the island of Sumatera and the preimaginals of both populations are considered necessary instead of hasty or preliminary taxonomy.