Commented checklist of European Gelechiidae (Lepidoptera)

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

The checklist of European Gelechiidae covers 865 species, belonging to 109 genera, with three species records which require confirmation. Further, it is the first checklist to include a complete coverage of proved synonyms of species and at generic level. The following taxonomic changes are introduced: Pseudosophronia constanti (Nel, 1998) syn. nov. of Pseudosophronia exustellus (Zeller, 1847), Metzneria expositoi Vives, 2001 syn. nov. of Metzneria aestivella (Zeller, 1839); Sophronia ascalis Gozmány, 1951 syn. nov. of Sophronia grandii Hering, 1933, Aproaerema incognitana (Gozmány, 1957) comb. nov., Aproaerema cinctelloides (Nel & Varenne, 2012) comb. nov., Aproaerema azosterella (Herrich-Schäffer, 1854) comb. nov., Aproaerema montanata (Gozmány, 1957) comb. nov., Aproaerema cincticulella (Bruand, 1851) comb. nov., Aproaerema buvati (Nel, 1995) comb. nov., Aproaerema linella (Chrétien, 1904) comb. nov., Aproaerema captivella (Herrich-Schäffer, 1854) comb. nov., Aproaerema semicostella (Staudinger, 1871) comb. nov., Aproaerema steppicola (Junnilainen, 2010) comb. nov., Aproaerema cottienella (Nel, 2012) comb. nov., Ptocheuusa cinerella (Chrétien, 1908) comb. nov., Pragmatodes melagonella (Constant, 1895) comb. nov., Pragmatodes albagonella (Varenne & Nel, 2010) comb. nov., Pragmatodes parvulata (Gozmány, 1953) comb. nov., Oxypteryx nigromaculella (Millière, 1872) comb. nov., Oxypteryx wilkella (Linnaeus, 1758) comb. nov., Oxypteryx ochricapilla (Rebel, 1903) comb. nov., Oxypteryx superbella (Zeller, 1839) comb. nov., Oxypteryx mirusella (Huemer & Karsholt, 2013) comb. nov., Oxypteryx baldizzonei (Karsholt & Huemer, 2013) comb. nov., Oxypteryx occidentella (Huemer & Karsholt, 2011) comb. nov., Oxypteryx libertinella (Zeller, 1872) comb. nov., Oxypteryx gemerensis (Elsner, 2013) comb. nov., Oxypteryx deserta (Piskunov, 1990) comb. nov., Oxypteryx unicolorella (Duponchel, 1843) comb. nov., Oxypteryx nigritella (Zeller, 1847) comb. nov., Oxypteryx plumbella (Heinemann, 1870) comb. nov., Oxypteryx isostacta (Meyrick, 1926) comb. nov., Oxypteryx helotella (Staudinger, 1859) comb. nov., Oxypteryx parahelotella (Nel, 1995) comb. nov., Oxypteryx graecatella (Šumpich & Skyva, 2012) comb. nov.; Aproaerema genistae (Walsingham, 1908) comb. rev., Aproaerema thaumalea (Walsingham, 1905) comb. rev.; Dichomeris neatodes Meyrick, 1923 sp. rev.; Caryocolum horoscopa (Meyrick, 1926) stat. rev.; Ivanauskiella occitanica (Nel & Varenne, 2013) sp. rev.; Apodia martinii Petry, 1911 sp. rev.; Caulastrocecis cryptoxena (Gozmány, 1952) sp. rev. Following Article 23.9.2 ICZN we propose Caryocolum blandella (Douglas, 1852) (Gelechia) nom. protectum and Caryocolum signatella (Eversmann, 1844) (Lita) nom. oblitum.

Related collections

Most cited references 54

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Allopatry as a Gordian Knot for Taxonomists: Patterns of DNA Barcode Divergence in Arctic-Alpine Lepidoptera

Marko Mutanen, Axel Hausmann, Paul Hebert … (2012)

Many cold adapted species occur in both montane settings and in the subarctic. Their disjunct distributions create taxonomic complexity because there is no standardized method to establish whether their allopatric populations represent single or different species. This study employs DNA barcoding to gain new perspectives on the levels and patterns of sequence divergence among populations of 122 arctic-alpine species of Lepidoptera from the Alps, Fennoscandia and North America. It reveals intraspecific variability in the barcode region ranging from 0.00–10.08%. Eleven supposedly different species pairs or groups show close genetic similarity, suggesting possible synonymy in many cases. However, a total of 33 species show evidence of cryptic diversity as evidenced by the presence of lineages with over 2% maximum barcode divergence in Europe, in North America or between the two continents. Our study also reveals cases where taxonomic names have been used inconsistently between regions and exposes misidentifications. Overall, DNA barcodes have great potential to both increase taxonomic resolution and to make decisions concerning the taxonomic status of allopatric populations more objective.

0 comments Cited 46 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Delineating Species with DNA Barcodes: A Case of Taxon Dependent Method Performance in Moths

Mari Kekkonen, Marko Mutanen, Lauri Kaila … (2015)

The accelerating loss of biodiversity has created a need for more effective ways to discover species. Novel algorithmic approaches for analyzing sequence data combined with rapidly expanding DNA barcode libraries provide a potential solution. While several analytical methods are available for the delineation of operational taxonomic units (OTUs), few studies have compared their performance. This study compares the performance of one morphology-based and four DNA-based (BIN, parsimony networks, ABGD, GMYC) methods on two groups of gelechioid moths. It examines 92 species of Finnish Gelechiinae and 103 species of Australian Elachistinae which were delineated by traditional taxonomy. The results reveal a striking difference in performance between the two taxa with all four DNA-based methods. OTU counts in the Elachistinae showed a wider range and a relatively low (ca. 65%) OTU match with reference species while OTU counts were more congruent and performance was higher (ca. 90%) in the Gelechiinae. Performance rose when only monophyletic species were compared, but the taxon-dependence remained. None of the DNA-based methods produced a correct match with non-monophyletic species, but singletons were handled well. A simulated test of morphospecies-grouping performed very poorly in revealing taxon diversity in these small, dull-colored moths. Despite the strong performance of analyses based on DNA barcodes, species delineated using single-locus mtDNA data are best viewed as OTUs that require validation by subsequent integrative taxonomic work.

0 comments Cited 41 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

DNA barcoding as a screening tool for cryptic diversity: an example from Caryocolum, with description of a new species (Lepidoptera, Gelechiidae)

Peter Huemer, Ole Karsholt, Marko Mutanen (2014)

Abstract We explore the potential value of DNA barcode divergence for species delimitation in the genus Caryocolum Gregor & Povolný, 1954 (Lepidoptera, Gelechiidae), based on data from 44 European species (including 4 subspecies). Low intraspecific divergence of the DNA barcodes of the mtCOI (cytochrome c oxidase 1) gene and/or distinct barcode gaps to the nearest neighbor support species status for all examined nominal taxa. However, in 8 taxa we observed deep splits with a maximum intraspecific barcode divergence beyond a threshold of 3%, thus indicating possible cryptic diversity. The taxonomy of these taxa has to be re-assessed in the future. We investigated one such deep split in Caryocolum amaurella (Hering, 1924) and found it in congruence with yet unrecognized diagnostic morphological characters and specific host-plants. The integrative species delineation leads to the description of Caryocolum crypticum sp. n. from northern Italy, Switzerland and Greece. The new species and the hitherto intermixed closest relative C. amaurella are described in detail and adults and genitalia of both species are illustrated and a lectotype of C. amaurella is designated; a diagnostic comparison of the closely related C. iranicum Huemer, 1989, is added.