Leucophlebiini Boisduval, [1875]

The analysis of the higher classification of Sphingidae using five nuclear genes by Kawahara et al. (2009: Figure 2) demonstrated that the group of genera comprising Clanis, Neoclanis, Afroclanis and Viriclanis formed a well-supported monophyletic group, for which Zolotuhin & Ryabov (2012) reinstated the tribe Leucophlebiini (but misspelling it as Leucophlebeidi (p. 60) and Leucophlebiidi (p. 196)), thereby also including Leucophlebia (while noting that this genus "was not included in analysis [sic] of Kawahara & al. (2009), therefore its connection with Clanis is still rather hypothetical"). However, Kitching & Cadiou (2000: 17), had already recognized these genera and their relatives formed a monophyletic group, but provided no supporting characters. Zolotuhin & Ryabov (2012) provided a diagnosis but none of the characters provide evidence for the monophyly of the tribe, either alone or collectively, as they are all found frequently in other groups of Sphingidae. However, the form of the free process from the valve apodeme (= "transtilla" of authors), in which the apex is expanded or spatulate and the margin bears expanded circular setal bases giving the impression of the foot of a tree-frog, is diagnostic of most genera of the tribe. Following Kitching & Cadiou (2000), the genera Clanidopsis, Leptoclanis, Malgassoclanis, Phylloxiphia, Pseudandriasa, Pseudopolyptychus and Rhadinopasa are also included in Leucophlebiini, but the monophyly of this expanded concept needs to be objectively demonstrated.