J. Entomol. Soc. Brit. Columbia 107,December2010 25 DNA barcoding identifies the first North American records of the Eurasian moth, Eupitheciapusillata (Lepidoptera: Geometridae) JEREMY R. deWAARD* ^ LELAND M. HUMBLE' ^ and B. CHRISTIAN SCHMIDT^ ABSTRACT The first North American records ofthejuniper pug moth, Eupitheciapusillata (Denis & Schiffermiiller, 1775) (Lepidoptera: Geometridae), brought to our attention using DNA barcoding, are presented. Documentation and collection localities suggest it was introduced, established, and likely has persisted, at least in the Greater Vancouver area ofBritish Columbia since the mid-1970s. We discuss the integration ofDNA barcoding into routine biosurveillance and forest insect surveys to prevent such delay in recogni- — tion ofnon-indigenous species in this case, 34 years. Key Words: Eupithecia pusillata, Eupithecia interruptofasciata, Eupithecia niphado- philata, juniper pug moth, Juniperus, non-indigenous species, invasive species, DNA barcoding INTRODUCTION DNA barcoding ofbiological specimens and Budinoff 2005), agromyzid leafminers has demonstrated repeatedly its utility as a (Scheffer et al. 2006), tephritid fruit flies molecular diagnostic technique that merits (Armstrong and Ball 2005; Barr 2009), integration into biosurveillance programs. siricidwasps (Wilson and Schiff2010), true In contrast to other molecular tools com- bugs (Nadel et al. 2010), and numerous taxa monly employed for species identification of moths (Ball and Armstrong 2006; Si- of intercepted organisms, DNA barcoding monsen et al. 2008; Humble et al. 2009; is a generic and standardized approach that deWaard et al. 2009; Gilligan and Epstein meets international standards ofdata quality 2009; Armstrong 2010). Here we report the and transparency (Floyd et al. 2010). Sev- first North American records ofthejuniper eral studies have demonstrated the efficacy pug moth, Eupithecia pusillata (Denis & DNA of this technique for detecting non- Schiffermiiller, 1775) revealed by indigenous species and determining native barcoding. provenance, for example in leeches (Siddall MATERIALS AND METHODS While compiling a DNA barcode library (deWaard et al., submitted), the cytochrome for the Geometridae of British Columbia c oxidase subunit I (COI) sequences de- ' University ofBritish Columbia, Department ofForest Sciences, Forestry Sciences Centre, Vancouver, BC,CanadaV6T 1Z4 " Royal British Columbia Museum, Entomology, 675 Belleville Street, Victoria, BC, Canada V8W 9W2 (email:[email protected]) ^ Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Pacific Forestry Centre, 506 West Bumside Road, Victoria, BC,CanadaV8Z 1M5 (email: [email protected]) ^ Canadian Food Inspection Agency, Canadian National Collection ofInsects, Arachnids and Nematodes, K.W. Neatby Building, 960 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, ON, Canada KIA 0C6 (email: [email protected]) 26 J. Emomoi. Soc. Brit. Coiimbia 107. DtxiMBtR 2010 ri\ed from two EupitJiecia specimens were Natural Resources Canada. Canadian Eorest found to be di\ergent from known nati\e Ser\ice. Pacitlc Eorestr\ Centre. X'ictoria. Euprheciu. The two sequences were com- BC). were dissected to examine the genita- pared to a reference barcode database of lia following the methods gi\en b\ Lafon- Lepidoptera barcodes using the identifica- taine (2004). Images ofgenitalia were taken tion engine (BOLD-ID) of the Barcode of using a Leica M205C microscope equipped Life Data Systems (BOLD) (Ratnasingham with a Leica DFC4Q0 camera kit and Leica and Hebert 200"). and tentati\el\ identit'ied L.AS Montage s\stem that assembles multi- as Eupithccia pusilluhu a Eurasian species ple images in successue planes of focus not known to occur in Noah America. The into a single image with a large depth of reference barcode database for Geometridae field. The specimens were \eritled b\ com- used b\- BOLD-ID is contmualK \ahdated parison of the structure of genitalia with b\ speciahsts to ensure accurate identitlca- specimens held m the CNC (Canadian Na- tions. and is particular!) well parameterized tional Collection of Insects. Arachnids and due to a global campaign to barcode the Nematodes. Ottawa. ON), and tlgures of nearK 23,000 species of the famil\ (see piisilliiia m Skou (I'^^Sb) and Mirono\' http: www.lepbarcoding.org geometridae (2003). Related species in the E. fiiphado- index.php). The nine sequences with identi- phildta D\ar. 1^04 group (Bolte U»0) were cal and near-identical matches from Europe ruled out b\ genitalic comparison to speci- were obtained from Axel Hausmann mens in the CNC. as were other Nonh (Zoological State Collection. Munich. Ger- .American species. many) and Marko Mutanen (L'ni\ersit\ of Historical data associated with the Oulu. Oulu. Einland) and combined with specimens were compiled from specimen related North American specimens [soisu labels and Eorest Insect and Disease Sur\e\' Bolte U^'-HV). A neighbour-joining tree was (EIDS) records (\'an Sickle et al. 2001). constructed on BOLD using the K.imura-2- The single specimen from PECA. collected parameter distance method (Eig. 1 ). b\ EIDS. is uniqueU identified b>- a regis- To pursue continuation of the identit\ tration number (e.g. 6-*^-001^-01 ) that ofthe specimens, the two putatne E. pusil- links the specimen to a EIDS sampling Una specimens obtained from the RBCM form, completed at the time of sample col- (Royal British Columbia Museum. N'ictoria. lection, as well as a rearing record docu- BC) and PECA (Anhropod reference col- menting the status of laborator\ rearings. lection. Pacitlc Eorestr) Centre (PEC). These records are held on tile at PEC. RESULTS Specimens examined: - label data The host recorded was commonjuni- I (handwrinen information in italics. indi\id- per [Jiijiiperus coninmnis L.): Remarks & ual lines separated b\ comma, multiple S\mptonts state '".Attacking se\eral orna- labels separated b\ " ' ): mentals with moderate damage". The date No. -6-9-0019-01. Date 19 vii. ¥A.[D.] recorded on the specimen label is the date S.1976 c. juniper. Port. Coquirlani BC ofadult eclosion. While the Rearing Record Ac. No. PFC. 200"-02"l. indicates a second adult eclosed on S.\ii.~6 The specimen was initial1\ identitled as and was subsequenth spread, the specinten Eupirhecia imicolor (Hulst). The EIDS re- could not be found m the PECA reference cords document that this specimen was one collection. of two adults reared from tl\e lar\ae and 1 r - label data: tl\e pupae (10 indi\iduals m total) col- BC. N. \ ancou\er. 5 AUG 1986. C.S. lected b\ the B.C. Eorest Ser\ice on Mt. Guppy ROYAL BRITISH. COLUMBLA Burke. Pon Coquitlam dTM 10 53 54b MUSEUM. ENTQ^^l-125'3 . [4Q.3. -122."]. Ele\ation ^00 ft), on 15 May This specimen was identitled as J. Entomol. Soc. Brit. Columbia 107,December2010 27 BCZSM Lep22832 DE BCZSM Lep22831 MM00781 I MIV101785| Fl MM08340 I Eupitheciapusillata PFC-2007-0271 CA:BC ENT991-012573 BCZSM Lep03633 DE -\ BCZSM Lep21945 IT MM01786 MM08143 Fl PFC-2007-0259 Dun-08-073 CA: BC CNCLEP00035444 E. niphadophilata 1 UASM59396 CA:AB Dun-08-081 CGWC-1141 CGWC-1155 CA:BC E. interruptofasciata I CGWC-1202 0.01 CGWC-1205 Figure 1. Neighbour-joining tree ofEupithecia pusillata and two closely related species, E. niphadophilata andE. interruptofasciata. Tree was reconstmcted with the barcode fragment of the cytochrome oxidase I (COI) gene. Sequences shaded in grey are from two individuals col- lected in Vancouver, Canada. Abbreviations: DE - Gennany, Fl - Finland, IT - Italy, CA - Canada, BC-British Columbia, AB -Alberta. Eupithecia sp. in the collection before ten- Description: A small moth with a wing- mm tative assignment to Eupithecia intricata span of 16-22 (Mironov 2003) (Figs. taylorata Swett by JRD. 2a, 2e). Forewing narrow, mostly shades of Diagnosis: Eupithecia pusillata is most light brown with black transverse lines and similar to E. niphadophilata and particu- oblong discal spot. Hindwing pale grey- larly E. interruptofasciata, but a number of brown with weakly marked transverse lines Eupithecia species are superficially very and variable discal spot. Abdomen pale similar and identification should be based grayish brown with narrow black lateral on examination of genitalia. Compared to stripes. Male genitalia (Fig. 2d) composed E. interruptofasciata, which is structurally of broad valva with small ventral process, most similar, the male 8'"^ stemite apical heavily sclerotized sacculus, vesica with prongs are narrower, more blunt and the three horn-like comuti, simple aedeagus apical cleft is shallower; the base of the (Fig. 2c) and elongated 8"^ sternite with two stemite is also narrower overall with a shal- narrow apical processes (Fig. 2b). Female lower medial invagination. The basal half genitalia composed of elongate and scle- ofthe male vesica is armed with one spine, rotized bursa copulatrix (Fig. 2h) with small not two as in E. interruptofasciata. In the spines at base and larger spines at margin. female genitalia, the large spines on the left Ovipositor is simple with long setae (Fig. side ofthe ductus bursae do not extend be- 2f). Terminal segment ofpupal case is stout yond the mid-point of the ductus, but ex- with prominent lateral lobes and cremaster tend beyond the midpoint in both E. inter- bearing four pairs ofhook-like setae (Figs. ruptofasciata andE. niphadophilata. 2h, 2i). 28 J.Entomol. Soc.Brit. Columbia 107,December2010 Figure 2. Morphology ofEupithecia pusillata. a) male, dorsal view, b) male, 8'*' stemite, c) male, aedeagus, d) male, genital capsule e) female, dorsal view, f) female, ovipositor, g) fe- male, bursa copulatrix, h) pupa, terminal segment, dorsal view, i) pupa, terminal segment, lat- eral view. Scale bars: a, e = 5 mm; b-d, f-i = 0.5 mm. A colour version of this figure is available from Dr. Lee Humble. Distribution and Habitat: In its native E. pusillata is present in the Caucasus European range, the nominate subspecies is Mountains (Mironov 2003). In Asia, its widely distributed from southern Europe, range extends across Russia from Sahkalin its range extends to the Mediterranean from through Siberia, the Altai and Caucasus eastern Spain to mainland Greece and Ro- regions (Skou 1986). The subspecies E. mania, then extends north and west across pusillata scoriata Staudinger, 1857 has northern Ukraine into western Russia. With been recorded only from Iceland and south- the exception of Corsica, it has not been western Greenland (Mironov 2003). Mi- recorded from the islands ofthe Mediterra- ronov et al. (2008) recently described a nean. To the north it is present in the British third subspecies, E. pusillata kashniirica Isles, through central Europe, north to Mironov and Ratzel from the Himalayas. In northern Scandinavia, and into western natural settings, E. pusillata can be found in Russia across the southern Kola Peninsula heaths, forest edges, rocky cliffs, and simi- (Skou 1986; Mironov 2003; Karsholt & van lar habitats where the primary host grows. Nieukerken 2010). A disjunct population of In urban areas, it can be common in gar- J.Entomol. Soc. Brit.Columbia 107,December2010 29 dens. It is known from sea level up to ap- generally regarded as monophagous proximately 2,500 m elevation in the Sierra (Mironov 2003), although it has also been Nevada (Spain) and the Alps (Switzerland) recorded feeding on Douglas-fir, Pseu- (Weigt 1993; Mironov 2003). dotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco Life History and Notes: The following (Pinaceae) in France (Roques et al. 2006), data are based on European populations, where this North American tree is culti- and it is expected that flight times, voltin- vated. The host of the subspecies scoriata ism and larval hosts will be similar in North and kashmirica is not known, but is pre- America, should extant populations be dis- sumed to also be Jimiperus. Eupithecia covered. Univoltine, with larval stage from pusillata overwinters in the egg stage and late April to mid-June and adult flight pe- pupates in a loose web in the ground (Skou riod from mid-July to late September (Skou 1986). It is attacked by a variety ofichneu- 1986; Mironov 2003). As its common name monid and braconid species listed in Mi- implies, the primary host ofE. pusillata is ronov (2003). It is not known ifother native common juniper, Jimipenis communis L. or ornamental species ofJunipenis are suit- (Cupressaceae) (Skou 1986), of which it able hosts in British Columbia. feeds on young needles and flowers. It is DISCUSSION Eupithecia Curtis is a large genus with spread beyond the point of introduction. 1529 described species and subspecies Secondly, the locality ofthe first collection (Scoble 1999; Scoble & Hausmann 2007), (Mt. Burke), the number of individuals re- and about 160 species in North America corded (ten), and the damage observations (Powell and Opler 2009). TheNorth Ameri- in the FIDS record, all indicate that there can species were revised by McDunnough was an established E. pusillata population (1949), and the Canadian fauna was revised in BC in 1976 (but note this is the only by Bolte (1990). Eupitheciapusillata is part FIDS record of a Eupithecia on juniper ofthe niphadophilata species group, which from greater Vancouver). And lastly, the includes two Nearctic and one Palearctic 1986 collection from North Vancouver sug- species (Bolte 1990), all feeding primarily gests that the population has persisted, or it onjunipers (Skou 1986; Bolte 1990). did so for at least a decade. Subsequent Although we currently have only two surveys, initially in the Vancouver area, are specimens of Eupithecia pusillata from required to determine the contemporary North America, we can extract a great deal status ofthis species. of information from the associated data The excellent documentation of FIDS documentation. First of all, the collections that enabled inferences about the status of were made in urbanized Vancouver, BC, E. pusillata is unfortunately a relict of the suggesting the species was introduced. The past; the program ceased in 1996 after al- lack ofrecords, particularly from inland BC most 50 years ofoperation due to budgetary (which is well-surveyed for macro- cut-backs (Van Sickle et al. 2001). Pro- Lepidoptera), the Yukon Territory and grams such as this, based on surveying or Alaska, lead us to conclude that the species inventorying diversity, are simultaneously is not naturally Holarctic like some a) a tremendous resource for managers, Eupithecia (see Skou 1986, Bolte 1990). foresters and scientists, and b) reliant on Furthermore, the six Eupithecia species tremendous resources themselves particu- considered Holarctic all show at least 1% larly in terms ofhighly qualified personnel COI sequence divergence (data not shown) (e.g. Marshall et al. 1994). The present case indicative of separation in the Pleistocene. illustrates the value of these long-term, The absence ofadditional records also sug- well-documented biological surveys, but gests that there has not been substantial these programs are often hindered by the 30 J. Entomol. Soc. Brit. Columbia 107, Df.cember2010 necessity to rear immatures to allow the are certain to make species diagnosis in this DNA diagnosis of species. Just as barcod- form time- and cost-effective. Furthermore, ing makes an invaluable tool for biosurveil- most years of the FIDS program predated lance (Floyd et al. 2010), it could likewise electronic databases, so it would also be assist any regional or national biomonitor- better served by modem and online rela- BOLD ing program ofsimilar scope to FIDS. Bar- tional databases such as coding could not only identify immature (Ratnasingham and Hebert 2007). With stages (Ahrens et al. 2007) making rearing DNA barcoding in place, a resource similar nonobligatory, it could also identify the to FIDS could once again be realized, and plant meal of gut contents (Miller et al. without having to expend substantial re- 2007), identify parasitoids (Rougerie et al. sources as a cost. It would also, without in press), and trace complex food webs question, speed th—e time ofnon-indigenous (Sheppard et al. 2004; Smith et al. in press). species detection from years (34 in the Decreasing costs and increasing capabilities case ofE. pusillata) to days. of sequencing (e.g. Shokralla et al. 2010) ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We are indebted to Axel Hausmann records. Rene Alfaro, Isabel Leal and two (Zoological State Collection Munich) and anonymous reviewers provided valuable Marko Mutanen (University of Oulu) for comments on the manuscript. Funding was allowing us access to the Eurasian se- provided by a Forest Investment Account - quences. We also wish to thank Stephanie Forest Science Program Student Grant and Kirk for the specimen imaging, the staff at NSERC Graduate Scholarship (to JRD). DNA the Canadian Centre for Barcoding Molecular analyses were supported by the for their assistance with genetic analysis, Canadian Barcode of Life Network from and Sava Barudzija (Natural Resources Genome Canada through the Ontario Ge- Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Frederic- nomics Institute, NSERC (to LMH), and ton, NB) for extraction of historical FIDS other sponsors listed at www.BOLNET.ca. REFERENCES Ahrens, D., M.T. Monaghan andA.P. Vogler. 2007. DNA-basedtaxonomy forassociatingadultsand larvae in multi-species assemblages ofchafers (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolu- tion44: 436-^49. Armstrong, K.F. 2010. DNA barcoding: a new module in New Zealand's plant biosecurity diagnostic tool- box. EPPOBulletin40: 91-100. Armstrong, K.F. and S.L. Ball. 2005. DNA barcodes for biosecurity: invasive species identification. Phi- losophical Transactions ofthe Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 360: 1813-1823. Ball, S.L. and K.F. Armstrong. 2006. DNA barcodes for insect pest identification: a test case with tussock moths (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae). CanadianJournal ofForest Research 36: 337-350. Barr, N.B. 2009. Pathway analysis ofCeratitis capitata (Diptera: Tephritidae) using mitochondrial DNA. Journal ofEconomic Entomology 102: 401-411. Bolte, K.B. 1990. GuidetotheGeometridaeofCanada(Lepidoptera). VI. SubfamilyLarentinae. I. Revision ofthegenusEupithecia. Memoirsofthe Entomological SocietyofCanada 151 1-253. : deWaardrJ.R.,J.-F. Landr\', B.C. Schmidt, J. Derhousoff,J.A. McLeanand L.M. Humble. 2009. Inthedark in a large urban park: DNA barcodes illuminate cr\ptic and introduced moth species. Biodiversity and Conservation 18: 3825-3839. Floyd, R., J. Lima, J.R. deWaard, L.M. Humble and R.H. Hanner. 2010. Common goals: incorporating DNA barcoding into international protocols foridentification ofarthropodpests. Biological Invasions 12: 2947-2954. Gilligan,T.M. and M.E. Epstein. 2009. LBAM ID, Tools fordiagnosing light brown applemoth and related western U. S. leafroUers (Tortricidae: Archipini). Colorado State Univeristy, California Department of Food and Agriculture, and Center for Plant Health Science and Technology, USDA, APHIS, PPQ. J.Entomol. Soc. Brit. Columbia 107, December2010 31 [online]. Available from http://keys.lucidcentrai.org/keys/v3/LBAM/about.html [accessed 30 August 2010]. Humble, L.M.,J.R. deWaard, andM. Quinn. 2009. DelayedrecognitionoftheEuropeanpoplarshootborer, Gypsonoma aceriana (Duponchel) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) in Canada. Journal ofthe Entomological SocietyofBritishColumbia 106: 61-70. Karsholt, O. and E.J. van Nieukerken. 2010. Fauna Europaea: Geometridae. Fauna Europaea version 2.2 [online]. Availablefromhttp://www.faunaeur.org[accessed 24August2010]. Lafontaine, J.D. 2004. Noctuoidea: Noctuidae (part), Noctuinae (part - Agrotini). Pages 1-385. In The moths ofNorth America, fasc. 27.1. Editedby Hodges, R.W. Wedge Entomological Research Founda- tion, Washington, DC. Marshall, S.A., R.S. Anderson, R.E. Roughley, V. Behan-PelletierandH.V. Danks. 1994. Terrestrial arthro- pod biodiversity: planning a study and recommended sampling techniques. A brief. Bulletin ofthe Ento- mological SocietyofCanada26: Supplement. 33 pp. McDunnough, J.H. 1949. Revision ofthe North American species ofthe genus Eupithecia (Lepidoptera, Geometridae). BulletinoftheAmerican MuseumofNatural History93: 533-728. Miller, M.A., G.C. Miiller, V.D. Kravchenko, A. Junnila, K.K. Vernon, CD. Matheson and A. Hausmann. 2007. DNA-based identification ofLepidoptera larvae and plant meals from their gut content. Russian EntomologicalJournal 15:427-432. Mironov, V. 2003. Larentiinae II (Perizomini and Eupitheciini). In A. Hausmann (ed.): The Geometrid MothsofEurope4: 1-463. Mironov, V.G., A.C. Galsworthy and U. Ratzel. 2008. A survey ofthe Eupithecia fauna (Lepidoptera, Ge- ometridae) ofthe Western Himalayas: Part II. Transactions ofthe Lepidopterological Society ofJapan 59: 117-143. Nadel, R.L., B. Slippers, M.C. Scholes, S.A. Lawson, A.E. Noack, C.F. Wilcken, J.P. Bouvet and M.J. Wingfield. 2010. DNAbar-codingreveals sourceandpatternsofThaumastocorisperegriniis invasions in SouthAfricaandSouthAmerica. Biological Invasions 12: 1067-1077. Powell,J.A. andP.A. Opier. 2009. MothsofwesternNorthAmerica. UniversityofCaliforniaPress, Berke- ley, 369pp. Ratnasingham, S. and P.D.N. Hebert. 2007. BOLD: the barcode of life data system (http:// www.barcodinglife.org). MolecularEcologyNotes 7: 355-364. Roques, A., M.A. Auger-Rozenbergand S. Boivin. 2006. A lackofnativecongeners may limit colonization of introduced conifers by indigenous insects in Europe. Canadian Journal ofForest Research 36: 299- 313. Rougerie, R., M.A. Smith, J. Femandez-Triana, C. Lopez-Vaamonde, and P.D.N. Hebert. Molecularanaly- sis ofparasitoid linkages (MAPL): gut contents ofadult parasitoid wasps reveal larval host. Molecular Ecology. Inpress Scheffer, S.J., M.L. Lewis, and R.C. Joshi. 2006. DNA barcoding applied to invasive leafminers (Diptera: Agromyzidae) inthePhilippines. AnnalsoftheEntomological SocietyofAmerica99: 204—210. Scoble, M.J. (Ed) 1999. Geometrid moths ofthe world: a catalogue (Lepidoptera: Geometridae). Natural HistoryMuseum, London, UKandCSIRO Publishers, Collingwood,Australia, 1016pp. Scoble, M.J. and A. Hausmann. 2007. Online list ofvalid and available names ofthe Geometridae ofthe World [online]. Available from http://www.lepbarcoding.org/geometridae/species_checklists.php [accessed27August2010]. Sheppard, S.K., M.L. Henneman, J. Memmott and W.O. Symondson. 2004. Infiltration by alien predators intoinvertebratefood-webs inHawaii: amolecularapproach. MolecularEcology 13: 2077-2088. Shokralla, S., G.A.C. Singer and M. Hajibabaei. 2010. Direct PCR amplification and sequencing ofspeci- mens' DNAfrompreservativeethanol. Biotechniques48: 305-306. Siddall, M.E. and R.B. Budinoff. 2005. DNA-barcoding evidence for widespread introductions ofa leech fromthe SouthAmericanHelobdeUatriserialiscomplex. ConservationGenetics 6: 467^72. Simonsen, T.J., R.L. Brownand F.A.H. Sperling. 2008. Tracingan invasion: phylogeographyofCactoblas- tis cactonim (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) in the United States based on mitochondrial DNA. Annals ofthe Entomological SocietyofAmerica 101: 899-905. Skou, P. 1986. TheGeometroidMothsofNorthEurope. Scandinavian Science Press. 348p. Smith, M.A., E.S. Eveleigh, K.S. McCann, P.C. McCarthy and K.I. Van Rooyen. Barcoding a quantified foodweb: crypsis,concepts,ecologyandhypotheses. PLoS ONE. Inpress. Van Sickle, A., R.L. Fiddick and C.S. Wood. 2001. The forest insect and disease survey in the Pacific Re- gion. Journal oftheEntomological SocietyofBritishColumbia98: 169-176. Weigt, H.-J. 1993. Die Bliitenspanner Mitteleuropas (Lepidoptera, Geometridae: Eupitheciini). Teil 5. - DortmunderBeitragezurLandeskunde27: 5-108. Wilson, A.D. andN.M. Schiff. 2010. Identification ofSirexnoctilio and nativeNorth American woodwasp larvaeusingDNAbarcodes. Journal ofEntomology7: 60-79.