“Manoba” major Hampson comb. n.

Nola major Hampson, 1891, Illust. typical Specimens lepid. Heterocera Colln Br. Mus., 8: 48.

Nolaformosana Wileman & West, 1929, Ann. Mag. nat. Hist. (10), 3: 190, *praeocc.

Meganola major sspp. caesiopennis Inoue & takasago Inoue, 1982: 666.

Diagnosis and taxonomic note

The forewing facies is similar to that of gilletti, but with the punctate fasciae much more clearly defined, and with blackish medial and subbasal shallowly triangular patches on the costa.

The hindwings grade distinctly greyer towards the margin, and there is a grey discal mark.

The antennae are very strongly bipectinate.

The male genitalia resemble somewhat those of M. brunellus Hampson (see above) in having a rather robust uncus, narrow, slightly curved valves and a relatively basal harpe.

The aedeagus is slender, rather bulbous basally and with a long, narrow vesica that terminates in a single, large cornutus.

The species has been placed erroneously as a synonym of the lithosiine arctiid Lyclene distributa Walker (see Inoue et al. (1982).

Geographical range

Indian Subregion, Taiwan, Ryukyu Is., Burma, Singapore, Borneo, ?Java (see below), Vanuatu, New Caledonia (Holloway, 1979).

Habitat preference

Unusual for the genus, this species has been taken uniquely on the coast near mangrove in Brunei.

Biology

The host records for Nola distributa in Java noted by Piepers & Snellen (1904) may apply to major. One of these, Terminalia (Combretaceae), was recorded for major in India (unpublished IIE records).

Taxonomic Note

László et al. (2010) also placed M. suffusata and M. major in Meganola, indicating in their description of a new genus, Inouenola László, Ronkay & Witt, that they were treating Manoba Walker in a more restricted sense, referring to a very compact phyletic unit where the valve is always gradually tapering, rather than only slightly so, and apically rounded or pointed. The harpe is thinner than in Meganola and situated more basally. The vinculum is always medium long and broad, usually V-shaped. On these criteria, except for the tapering of the valve, the male genitalia of suffusata and major are much closer to Manoba than they are to the diversity of structure illustrated for most Meganola species by László et al. (2010). Indeed, this diversity, together with the more restrained diversity illustrated for various “Meganola” species in Part 18, supports the assertion made in that Part that Meganola was probably paraphyletic. A further distinction between Manoba and a loosely defined, paraphyletic Meganola is that the former has the hindwing venation from M2 to CuA2 reduced to three veins, rather than having M3 and CuA1 stalked. On these grounds, the slightly broader concept of Manoba applied in Part 18 is retained here.

Genitalia: