Sampling coverage and genetic distances for the Sphingidae of Australia.

<p>Taxonomic checklist, type localities, sample size (N), geographical origin and DNA barcode variations for analysed samples; underlined names highlight taxa with no DNA barcode available from Australia. CT = Capital Territory, EM = Eastern Malesia (Wallacea + Papuan region), NSW = New South Wales, NT = Northern Territory, OW = other regions of the world, Pi. = Pacific islands, QLD = Queensland, SA = South Australia, SEA = continental Southeast Asia, VIC = Victoria, WA = Western Australia, WM = Malesia West of the Wallacean region; δA, dA, δG and dG = maximum (δ) and mean (d) intraspecific K2P distance (%) within Australia (A) and globally (G); sd = standard deviation; numbers in the first column match numbered clusters in <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0101108#pone-0101108-g002" target="_blank">Figs 2</a> and <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0101108#pone-0101108-g003" target="_blank">3</a>. The δ distances over 2% are highlighted in bold characters in cases involving at least one Confirmed Candidate Species (CCS), and in italics in cases where there is no complementary evidence available (Deep Conspecific Lineages, DCL). Species are given a null sample size in areas where they are known to occur but from where no sample was analyzed whereas empty cells mark areas where the species are considered absent in our current state of knowledge. Taxa are sorted by subfamily as follow: 1–50 = Macroglossinae, 51–55 = Smerinthinae, 56–72 = Sphinginae.</p>1<p>This species is only known to us from specimens bred or collected in the 1910’s. Previously referred as <i>M. heliophila queenslandi</i>. See Holloway (2011)</p>2<p>Previously referred as <i>M. insipida</i> Butler, 1875. See Holloway (2011)</p>3<p>A new species, <i>Coenotes arida Moulds & Melichar</i>, [2014], was described during the review of this study and does not appear in this table. Its original generic and specific identifications as <i>Synochea marmorata</i> were erroneous, and the affinity of these specimens with the genus <i>Coenotes</i> has been confirmed by morphology.</p>4<p><i>P. hausmanni</i> Eitschberger, 2001 syn. nov. (holotype sequenced) is here confirmed a synonym of <i>P. casuarinae</i>. It is neither morphologically nor genetically distinct from this species.</p>5<p><i>P. gloriosa</i> Eitschberger, 2001 syn. nov. (holotype sequenced) is here considered a synonym of <i>P. menephron</i>. It is neither morphologically nor genetically distinct. <i>P. menephron</i> represents a vast species complex in Asia and the Indo-Australian region, and a revision is needed to sort out the divisions within this complex (e.g. DNA barcodes reveal nine distinct clusters).</p>6<p><i>P. koalae</i> Eitschberger, 2001 syn. nov. (holotype sequenced) is here considered a synonym of <i>P. papuensis</i> (holotype sequenced). It is neither morphologically nor genetically distinct from this species.