Family TORTRICIDAE

tortricidae

Museums

Museum list

Regional Maps

Family TORTRICIDAE

Introduction

The Tortricidae are a large and economically important family, with over 5000 described species worldwide and a large number still remain to be recorded. They are a monophyletic and homogenous group, treated as a separate superfamily Tortricoidea. After a period of divergent subfamily and tribal classifications a consensus is now being reached (Razowski 1987, 1989; Horak & Brown 1991; Horak in press), with strong arguments for the monophyly of two of the three subfamilies, the Olethreutinae and Chlidanotinae, while the Tortricinae, as presently delimited, are assumed to be paraphyletic, comprising ancestral as well as derived groups. Due to their economic importance, especially in forestry and horticulture, tortricids are fairly well studied world-wde and much of their tribal classification is supported by uniquely derived characters.

Befitting an economically important group a vast literature is available, Tortricid Pests (van der Geest & Evenhuis 1991) provides review of many aspects of totricid research, including treatments of tortricid morphology (Horak 1991) and systematics (Horak & Brown 1991), with extensive references to primary literature. The Lepidoptera volumes of the Handbook of Zoology will contain a more condensed and updated review (Horak in press). Locally comprehensive studies are available for most faunal regions, referred to in the above reviews. Obraztsov, Diakonoff, Razowski and Kuznetsov provided in numerous publications the framework for present classification of the Palaearctic and Oriental fauna. Major contributions to the classification of the New World tortricids are by Heinrich (1923, 1926) for the Olethreutinae and by Powell (1964, 1986) for the Tortricinae, and several papers by R.L. Brown, J.W. Brown and Razowski.

Meyrick revised the Australian tortricids in 1881 (Meyrick 1881a, 1881b), and again 30 years later (Meyrick 1910d{} (Tortricinae), 1911 (Olethreutinae)). The Tortricinae were included the Lepidopterorum Catalogus by Meyrick (1912g). Turner described numerous new taxa, especially in two late papers (Turner 1945a, 1946b) but did not greatly modify the taxonomic framework established for Meyrick, Lower and Lucas also described a number of tortricids.

Common's (1958c) brief outline of the generic classification of the Australian Tortricinae is based on genitalia studies and incorporates taxonomic insights from the Palaearctic and Oriental faunas.

This was followed by brief generic reviews of Epiphyas Turner (Common 1961) and Merophyas Common (Common 1964b), and by comprehensive revisions of the Arotrophora group together with the Polyorthini (as Cnephasiini) (Common 1963a) and the Australian Tortricini, Schoenotenini, and Chlidanotini (1965b). The first recent overview of the entire family in an Australian context, with illustrations and biological notes, is found in Common (1970b), updated in Moths of Australia (Common 1990){}. The genus Epitymbia Meyrick was revised by Horak & Common (1985).

Diakonoff's (1973) revision of the South Asiatic Olethreutini provides the generic framework for the Australian Ollethreutini which are derived from the Oriental fauna. A few Australian species were included in this work.

McQuillan's (1992) checklist of the Tasmanian tortricid moths gives information on habitat and food plants.

The Australian tortricid fauna comprises two obvious elements with a very different history. The large majority of the Tortricinae has undergone considerable evolution in Australia with many endemic genera, probably arising from ancestors with Gondwanan relationships. A sizeable group of these, among them the Epitymbiini, have larvae which feed on myrtaceous leaf litter. Most Olethreutinae, on the other hand, are derived from the Oriental fauna, with a much lower level of generic endemism.

Much of the information on which the tortricid checklist is based has not yet been published, but is reflected in the lay-out of the ANIC collection. I.F.B. Common has tentatively arranged the Tortricinae into genera and species groups where no genus is available, based on genitalia studies, and the illustrations for an eventual revision are far advanced. A generic revision of the Olethreutinae by M. Horak has progressed to the manuscript stage for the Olethreutini and to a good understanding of the genera concerned for the Ancylini. The taxonomy of the very numerous and sexually dimorphic Eucosmini, which in Australia have greatly radiated on their myrtaceous host plants, is still totally confused. Eucosmini were often assigned either to 'Spilonota' or 'Acroclita', according to presence or absence of antennal notch, but the genitalia show that the notch can be present or absent in closely related species. Correct association of males and females in many cases will require careful studies based on a comprehensive material. To underline the poor state of knowledge in the Eucosmini we have tentatively referred the large number of species of the Holocola/Neohermenias complex to the Australian genus Holocola Meyrick, though clearly several genera are involved. This simply means that they will all have to be looked at if any group in this vicinity is studied. Numerous taxa will doubtlessly turn out to be synonyms as the strongly dimorphic sexes, in coloration as well as structure, become correctly associated. F. Komai, with the support of M. Horak, is far advanced in a study of the Australian Grapholitini, and the checklist is based on preliminary conclusions from this work.