Megacraspedus andreneli Varenne & Nel, 2014

Huemer, Peter & Karsholt, Ole, 2018, Revision of the genus Megacraspedus Zeller, 1839, a challenging taxonomic tightrope of species delimitation (Lepidoptera, Gelechiidae), ZooKeys 800, pp. 1-278 : 89-90

Megacraspedus andreneli Varenne & Nel, 2014

Megacraspedus andreneli Varenne & Nel, 2014: 61, figs 7-9.

Examined material.

Holotype ♂, France, Alpes-Maritimes, Saint-Sauveur-sur-Tinée, Lac Nègre, Parc national du Mercantour, 10 août 2013, 2450 m Th. Varenne leg., genitalia slide JN n°27182 (RCTV) [photographs examined]. Paratype. France. 1 ♂, Alpes-Maritimes, Valdeblore, Col de Veillos, 2250 m, 20.vii.2010, leg. A. Nel, genitalia slide 24592 J. Nel (TLMF).

Redescription.

Adult. Male (Figure 69). Wingspan 12-12.5 mm. Segment 2 of labial palpus with long scale brush, brownish mottled with white on inner and upper surface; segment 3 shorter than segment 2, white with black tip. Antenna dark brown, indistinctly ringed lighter. Head cream-white; thorax and tegula as forewing. Forewing cream coloured, slightly mottled with yellow- or brown-tipped scales; basal part of costa blackish brown; a black dot in fold at ½ and one at end of cell; fringes light grey with some black-tipped scales. Hindwing grey with light grey fringes.

Female. Unknown.

Variation. The forewings of the paratype are darker than those of the holotype, probably because the latter is more worn.

Male genitalia (Figure 203). Uncus moderately small, 1.25 times length of maximum basal width, sub-ovate, gradually tapered from base to rounded apical edge; gnathos hook massive, stout, slightly longer than uncus, strongly sclerotised, subapically widened, with abruptly tapered and weakly curved apex; anterior margin of tegumen with moderately shallow excavation, with short and medially converged sclerotised ridges in anteriomedial third; pedunculi small, rounded; valva moderately long and slender, weakly curved, digitate, apex rounded, extending to about middle of uncus; saccular area covered with some microtrichia, without separated sacculus; posterior margin of vinculum emarginated, indistinct lateral humps, vincular sclerites sub-ovate; saccus sub-triangular, apically pointed, ratio maximum width to length approximately 0.85, posterior margin arched, with indistinct medial emargination, medial part smooth, without sclerotised ridge, lateral sclerites short, approximately 0.7 times length of maximum width of saccus; phallus with bulbous coecum, distal two-thirds about half width of coecum, weakly curved, digitate, apically rounded, with sclerotised longitudinal ridge.

Female genitalia. Unknown.

Diagnosis.

Megacraspedus andreneli is a rather uncharacteristic species. It can be confused with several other species having two black dots in the forewing, e.g., M. binotella and M. barcodiellus sp. n. (flagellum distinctly ringed black and white), and M. lanceolellus (costa white). The male genitalia are similar to those of M. bilineatella (Figure 202) but differ in the subapically widened gnathos hook, the more slender and curved valva, the shorter saccus and several subtle characters.

Molecular data.

BIN BOLD:ADG6163 (n = 1), BIN BOLD:ACS0692 (n = 1). Genetically variable species. The intraspecific divergence of the barcode region is large and reflected by 2 BINs with 4.3% divergence, based on a single specimen of each cluster. The minimum distance to the nearest congeneric neighbour Megacraspedus tokari sp. n. is 11.2% (p-dist).

Distribution.

France (Dep. Alpes Maritimes).

Biology.

Host plant and early stages are unknown. The few type specimens were collected in July and August at altitudes between 2250 and 2450 m.

Remarks.

Megacraspedus andreneli was described from two males collected at two localities in the Alpes Maritimes ( Varenne and Nel 2014). The observed intraspecific barcode divergence is not supported by obvious diagnostic characters in morphology from the original figures, except for the forewing colour of the holotype and paratype. We therefore accept for the time being that both specimens are conspecific. The description of male genitalia is based on a re-mounted slide. Some characters such as the posterior margin of the vinculum or the vincular sclerites were damaged before re-mounting and thus it was not possible to describe them accurately.