Glaucolepis aerifica Meyrick 1915
Creators: name: Stonis, Jonas R.
name: Diškus, Arūnas
name: Remeikis, Andrius
name: Gerulaitis, Virginijus
name: Karsholt, Ole
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2016
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Insecta
Lepidoptera
Nepticulidae
Glaucolepis
Glaucolepis aerifica

description: Glaucolepis aerifica (Meyrick, 1915)
(Figs 18, 27)
Nepticula aerifica Meyrick, 1915: 255.
Stigmella aerifica (Meyrick), in Davis, 1984: 18.
Glaucolepis aerifica (Meyrick, 1915), in Puplesis & Robinson 2000: 56 –57, Figs 59, 203, 204, 222.
Material examined. 1 Ƌ (lectotype, designated by Puplesis & Robinson, 2000), 1 ♀ (paralectotype), PERU, La Oroya, 12200 ft [3720 m], vii.1914, Parish, genitalia slide nos 28965 (lectotype), 28966 (paralectotype) (BMNH).
Diagnosis. This species differs from other known nepticulids by the combination of a distinct postmedian forewing fascia, wide and bilobed juxta, wide gnathos and unique morphology of the phallus. This is an outstanding species, whose taxonomic position along with other related but currently undescribed species (Stonis et al. in prep.) still remains uncertain (also see Remarks).
Male (illustrated in Puplesis & Robinson 2000: fig. 59). Forewing length: 2.7 mm; wingspan: 5.8 mm. Head: palpi pale grey; frontal tuft greyish yellow, very pale; collar indistinct (or rubbed in lectotype); scape greyish white, relatively small; antenna longer than half length of forewing; flagellum with about 37 segments, brown. After Puplesis & Robinson 2000, thorax and tegula shiny, greenish bronzey. Forewing smoothly scaled before fascia, shining greenish bronze, with golden gloss at certain angles, brown beyond fascia, with purple iridescence; fascia poorly defined, distinctly postmedian, almost subapical, silvery shining; fringe pale brown; underside of forewing brown, without spots. Hindwing brown; its fringe pale brown, without spots or androconia.
Female. Forewing before fascia dark grey-brown with golden gloss and light purple iridescence. Scaling coarser than in male. Otherwise similar to male, assuming the female is conspecific (Puplesis & Robinson 2000).
Male genitalia (illustrated in Puplesis & Robinson 2000: figs 203, 204). Capsule 410–415 µm long. Uncus band-shaped, papillated laterally. Gnathos with very wide trapezoidal caudal process and long lateral arms. Valva 220 µm long, with long pointed apical process, with curved, pointed inward-directed process at one-third (Puplesis & Robinson 2000). Transtilla with transverse bar interrupted medially, and with triangular sublateral processes. Juxta complex, with long pointed caudal lobes and transversely thickened base. Vinculum without lateral lobes; ventral plate very large, slightly but gradually narrowed, distally rounded. Phallus (illustrated in Puplesis & Robinson 2000: fig. 204) 290–295 µm long, with two rod-like sclerites fused caudally and two membranous caudal processes with numerous very fine spines; these processes are connected to the phallus wall and are not part of the vesical (Puplesis & Robinson 2000); vesica with a few pointed and rounded cornuti.
Female genitalia (illustrated in Puplesis & Robinson 2000: fig. 222). Total length about 980 µm. Abdominal tip triangular. Apophyses anteriores wide and blunt anteriorly. Apophyses posteriores long (260–265 µm) and slender, as long as apophyses posteriores. Vestibulum without sclerites. Corpus bursae with folded distal part and large, widely oval basal part densely covered with comb-like pectinations; no signa. Accessory sac wide but short; ductus spermathecae membranous, with a ring-shaped sclerite.
Bionomics. Adults fly in July. Otherwise biology unknown.
Distribution (Figs 18, 27). This species occurs on the Altiplano in the Peruvian Andes (Peru: Yauli Departamento) at altitudes about 3720 m.
Remarks. Provisionally, with no certainty, Puplesis & Robinson (2000) placed this species in to Glaucolepis Braun. The species' taxonomic position still remains unknown. The wing venation of this species was not studied by Puplesis & Robinson (2000), or by us in order to preserve the already badly damaged lectotype. The head is on a pin and shows a rubbed frontal tuft and indistinct collar; the thorax and wings are pinned separately in a gelatin capsule; the scaling of thorax and wings is well preserved; but damage to the thorax precludes repinning.
The paralectotype is slightly rubbed but more or less satisfactorily pinned. However, Puplesis & Robinson (2000) has raised some doubts about attribution of the female paralectotype to Glaucolepis aerifica (male lectotype): the darker forewing color and coarser scaling of the female paralectotype in comparison with the male holotype gives us pause in assuming that the two represent opposite sexes of the same species. Moreover, the female genitalia have no signa, atypical of Glaucolepis. If the female is not aerifica, then it might not even be a Glaucolepis. However, the distinctly postmedial fascia of the forewing (a character generally uncommon amongst nepticulids) is shared by both specimens (Puplesis & Robinson 2000).
Etymology. It is expected that the species name given by E. Meyrick is derived from Latin aeri (the sky) in reference to the distribution of the species in high altitudes.
description: Published as part of Stonis, Jonas R., Diškus, Arūnas, Remeikis, Andrius, Gerulaitis, Virginijus & Karsholt, Ole, 2016, Leaf-mining Nepticulidae (Lepidoptera) from record high altitudes: documenting an entire new fauna in the Andean páramo and puna, pp. 1-94 in Zootaxa 4181 (1) on pages 66-67, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4181.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/164243