Volume 26 – 2022 doi: 10.24193/entomolrom.26
An overview of the Romanian Gelechiidae (Lepidoptera) summarizing the current knowledge in an updated and annotated checklist Zoltán Kovács1 & Sándor Kovács2 1str. Câmpul Mare nr. 133, RO–530240, Miercurea Ciuc, România 2str. Oltului nr. 57 bloc 6 sc. A ap. 6, RO–520027 Sfântu Gheorghe, România e-mail: kovkopp@gmail.com, skovacssandor@gmail.com article no.: ER26202201 doi: 10.24193/entomolrom.26.1 Summary: This study of the Romanian Gelechiidae fauna deals with 317 species placed in 80 genera arranged in two different lists. The main list comprises 293 species in 78 genera currently accepted for the Romanian fauna, including 286 named and 7 other so far unidentified and probably undescribed species. 269 species (almost 92 %) were identified from examined material, the other 24 are derived from the literature. 30 species are recorded for the first time for the Romanian fauna: Aproaerema cinctelloides (Nel & Varenne, 2012), A. suecicella (Wolff, 1958), A. semicostella (Staudinger, 1871), Dactylotula kinkerella (Snellen, 1876), Bryotropha patockai Elsner & Karsholt, 2003, Aristotelia decoratella (Staudinger, 1879), Psamathocrita argentella Pierce & Metcalfe, 1942, Ptocheuusa paupella (Zeller, 1847), Metzneria diffusella Englert, 1974, Monochroa tekovella Kosorín, 2020, Athrips aquila Junnilainen, 2010, Chionodes ignorantella (Herrich-Schäffer, 1854), Gelechia senticetella (Staudinger, 1859), G. dujardini Huemer, 1991, Scrobipalpa acuta Povolný, 2001, S. selectella (Caradja, 1920), S. gallicella (Constant, 1885), S. nitentella (Fuchs, 1902), S. monochromella (Constant, 1895), S. thymelaeae (Amsel, 1939), Scrobipalpula tussilaginis (Stainton, 1867), Ephysteris deserticolella (Staudinger, 1871), Lutilabria lutilabrella (Mann, 1857), Caryocolum amaurella (Hering, 1924), C. petryi (Hofmann, 1899), C. pullatella (Tengström, 1848), C. blandulella (Tutt, 1887), Teleiopsis laetitiae Schmid, 2011, Xenolechia aethiops (Humphreys & Westwood, 1845) and Stenolechiodes pseudogemmellus Elsner, 1996. There are 6 other new additions, their records were overlooked and not included in the checklists: Apodia martinii Petry, 1911, Monochroa conspersella (Herrich-Schäffer, 1854), Ptycerata cryptoxena (Gozmány, 1952), Scrobipalpa salicorniae (Hering, 1889), Lutilabria prolata Junnilainen & Nupponen, 2010 and Agonochaetia terrestrella (Zeller, 1872). Additionally, 78 first records for the different regions of Romania are provided. The previously unknown females of Aproaerema incognitana (Gozmány, 1957) and A. semicostella (Staudinger, 1871) are described. A misinterpretation is shown in the literature concerning Bryotropha azovica Bidzilya, 1996. This species is currently known only from Ukraine (type locality) and Romania, all other records of B. azovica sensu Karsholt & Rutten, 2005 from Turkey, Cyprus, Greece, Bulgaria and North Macedonia are based on misidentifications and represent a different, as yet unnamed, species. An annotation is given for all listed taxa summarizing the current knowledge: the general distribution, the first Romanian record, the regional distribution and a concise enumeration of recent collecting sites based on both material examined and literature. Detailed data are given only for the first Romanian records or those of the regions of the country, and in the case of a few rarely recorded species. The habitats and collecting methods are mentioned, but concise data referring to the biology are only exceptionally given. The 23 species for which no material could be found for examination are treated as in need of confirmation. In a second list are treated 24 species and 2 genera mentioned earlier from Romania, but currently deleted from the checklist, out of this 8 species and 1 genus are now deleted: Aproaerema larseniella (Gozmány, 1957), Helcystogramma albinervis (Gerasimov, 1929), the genus Pectinophora Busck, 1917 including P. gossypiella (Saunders, 1844), Bryotropha plebejella (Zeller, 1847), Ptycerata furfurella (Staudinger, 1871), Oxypteryx nigritella (Zeller, 1847), Chionodes nebulosella (Heinemann, 1870) and Scrobipalpa salinella (Zeller, 1847). Replacing the Gelechiidae in the latest Romanian checklist (Rákosy & Goia 2021) with this list is recommended. Key words: Romania, Gelechiidae, faunistic overview, annotated checklist, first records, deleted species	[details, abstract]	[pdf]
Critical revision of the presence of Dicerca furcata (Coleoptera: Buprestidae) in Romania Adrian Ruicănescu1, Zonga Biró2, Kinga Gergely2, Paula-Apollónia Ferencz2, Emese Mezei-Szép2, Mónika Pál2 & Lujza Keresztes2u 1Institute of Biological Research - Branch of INCDSB, Republicii 48, 400015, Cluj-Napoca Romania 2Hungarian Department of Biology and Ecology, Centre of Systems Biology, Biodiversity and Bioresources, Babeș-Bolyai University, Clinicilor 5-7, Cluj-Napoca, Romania e-mail: adrian.ruicanescu@icbcluj.ro, keresztes2012@gmail.com article no.: ER26202202 doi: 10.24193/entomolrom.26.2 Summary: The first specimen of Dicerca furcata has been found and collected in a birch rare forest in the Harghita county area. This specimen is the first one found after the year 2000. A short description, and a comparison with the close looking species D. alni are given. The paper is supplemented with information on the biology, ecology and distribution. Key words: Dicerca furcata, certain presence, critical revision, Romania	[details, abstract]	[pdf]
Circadian changes in the hindgut bacterial composition of the American cockroaches, Periplanata americana (Dictyoptera, Blattodea) Abiodun Oladipupo Joda1, Kehinde Olutoyin Ademolu2, Blessing Adebola Adelabu3, Olufunmilayo Adebimpe Olalonye2 1Department of Crop Production, Olabisi Onabanjo University, Ago-Iwoye, Nigeria 2Department of Pure and Applied Zoology, Federal University of Agriculture, Abeokuta, Nigeria 3Department of Microbiology, Chrisland University, Abeokuta, Nigeria e-mail: kennyademolu@yahoo.com article no.: ER26202203 doi: 10.24193/entomolrom.26.3 Summary: The gut of American cockroaches, Periplanata americana hosts numerous symbionts that help in digestion and synthesis of many substances. The hindgut of cockroaches is unique in that it harbors higher number of microbes than other parts of the insect’s gut. Unlike gut enzymes activities, little is known about the daily pattern of the gut microbiota. Newly emerged adult American cockroaches collected from student hostel were used for this study. The hindgut microbial composition was examined at four periods of the day (6am, 12pm, 6pm and 12am) using Pour Plate Methods. The results showed that highest colony forming units (cfu) of the hindgut were recorded at 6:00pm (19.28 × 106 cfu/ml) followed by 6:00am (13.85 × 106 cfu/ml) while 12:00pm (3.02 × 106 cfu/ml) had the least. Also, a total of five (5) different bacteria (Klebsiella sp., Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Citrobacter sp. and Escherichia coli) were isolated from the hindgut of the cockroaches. The most predominant of these bacterial isolates from the hindgut were Klebsiella sp. and Staphylococcus aureus while the least isolated organism was Citrobacter sp. Hence, there was circadian variation in the microbial composition of the hindgut of Periplaneta americana. Key words: Periplaneta americana, circadian, hindgut, microbiota	[details, abstract]	[pdf]
Comparative effect of Sweet Orange (Citrus sinensis) peel, Bitter Leaf (Vernonia amygdalina), Figwort (Scrophularia californica), Pawpaw Leaf (Carica papaya) powder and synthetic insecticide on the control of dried plantain chip pest Tribolium castaneum (Red flour beetle) Abiodun Oladipupo Joda1, Esther Olamide Ogundeji2, Kehinde Olutoyin Ademolu3, Solomon Oladimeji Olagunju2 1Department of Crop Production, Olabisi Onabanjo University, Ago-Iwoye, Nigeria 2Department of Crop Production, College of Agricultural Sciences, Olabisi Onabanjo University, Yewa Campus, Ayetoro, Nigeria 3Department of Pure and Applied Zoology, Federal University of Agriculture, Abeokuta, Nigeria e-mail: abijod@gmail.com, kennyademolu@yahoo.com article no.: ER26202204 doi: 10.24193/entomolrom.26.4 Summary: This research work was conducted to determine the comparative effect of Sweet Orange (Citrus sinensis) peel, Bitter Leaf (Vernonia amygdalina), Figwort (Scrophularia californica), Pawpaw Leaf (Carica papaya) powder and synthetic insecticide on the control of dried plantain chip (Tribolium castaneum). Leaves of V. amygdalina, S. californica, C. papaya and C. sinensis were used. Each of the four plant powders at two different concentrations (5g and 10g) were used to compare with the effectiveness of synthetic and those without treatment (control) for the period of 28th days in a completely randomized design (CRD). The result revealed that increase in live insect was evident in zero treatment followed by those dried chip treated with C. papaya at 5% conc. whereas least value was recorded for those chip applied with synthetic and S. californica slightly follows. However, the value obtained for dead insect was highest in those chips with synthetic in which S. californica follows whereas least value was recorded for zero treatment and C. papaya at 10% conc. The value recorded for damaged done by T. castaneum on the chip was highest at C. sinesis at 10g application. The lowest value was recorded for control and synthetic while plant extract S. californica follows. However, the weight of chip left was highest in botanical applied with S. californica when compared with other botanical and the synthetic. It is therefore recommended that the botanical Figwort (S. californica) with either 5 or 10% concentration used in this study can serves as a good substitute to the synthetic insecticide for chips storage since its fumigant activities can penetrate the crevices made by the pests on chips to affect the hiding stages. Key words: Tribolium castaneum, plantain chip pest, Figwort, synthetic insecticide	[details, abstract]	[pdf]
Doubts about the validity of the species name Hipparchia hermione (Linnaeus, 1764) (Lepidoptera: Satyrinae), it being associated with the two species Hipparchia alcyone ([Denis & Schiffermüller], 1775) and H. genava (Fruhstorfer, 1908) following the designation of a lectotype by Kudrna (1977) - Second part – David Jutzeler1 1Rainstrasse 4, 8307 Effretikon, Switzerland e-mail: david.jutzeler@bluewin.ch article no.: ER26202205 doi: 10.24193/entomolrom.26.5 Preface: 25 years ago, my friend Guido Volpe (Castel Volturno, Campania) asked me for help to identify the Grayling species occurring in his region. In summer 1998, I started several rearing experiments with batches of ova from Italy to check their identity with the help of the larval stages. Guido Volpe procured the females for oviposition on different sites in the mountains of Lazio, Campania and Calabria and sent the obtained ova by mail to Switzerland. The question arose soon, which one of the two smaller Grayling species was indigenous to this region, Hipparchia genava or alcyone. In his study “Contribution à l’étude des Satyrinae de France”, Patrice Leraut (1990) elevated to species rank the taxon genava Fruhstorfer (1908) occurring in the Valais, claiming that its distribution area extends across the whole Italy to eastern Sicily. I hoped to confirm this assertion, being based mainly on the rods of the Jullien organ, also in the larval stages. For this purpose, I was forced to examine rearing series from the entire area inhabited by populations of the two smaller Grayling species. During the period 1998 to 2006, I investigated them with series from 8 European countries in total (see Jutzeler et al. 2005, map p. 152), by rearing them always from the ovum. In fact, the two smaller species alcyone and genava produced caterpillars of different appearance. The imagines that emerged under rearing conditions were retained to search them for characters being typical of each of the two species. The results from all these rearing experiments were recorded in the study on H. fagi and genava (Volpe and Jutzeler, 2001 – genava still named there alcyone) and in 3 studies being dedicated to alcyone and genava (Jutzeler et al., 2002, 2005, 2006). Already in those days, I didn’t use the name of “hermione Linnaeus, 1764” favoured by Kudrna (1977) to rename H. alcyone D. & S. In my eyes, it referred to two different species. Moreover, Kudrna’s lectotype designation did not conform to the rules of ICZN according to Higgins and Riley (1978) and I had detected during my investigations that this name was applied to designate the taxon fagi since 1775 until the mid-20th century and that it was often used in reality to designate unknowingly also the similar species genava. The synonymy of Papilio hermione Linnaeus, 1764 with P. fagi Scopoli, 1763 has been irrevocably established recently by Russell and Vane-Wright (2022). In the first part of “Doubts about the validity”, I posited the recognition of the specific rank of Hipparchia genava. Since the beginning of my research program on the Grayling complex, I tackled this question under various aspects. Of central importance was the determination of the characteristics of wings using reared imagines of the three Grayling species resulting from the numerous rearing series of Hipparchia alcyone, genava and fagi. The most important variations found among caterpillars and imagines are presented once again in this part of the study. Furthermore, the evaluation of preparations housed in the collections of the Zoological Museum Amsterdam (since 2011 housed in the Naturalis Biodiversity Centre Leiden) and other museums being figured on the 9 synoptical plates together with their genital armatures, was of primary importance for the present article. Thereby, the accuracy of Leraut’s (1990) diagnosis could be confirmed in the main, but with the limitation that the number of rods of the Jullien organ of alcyone and genava can also be beyond the range indicated by Leraut. Thus, the rods do not compellingly lead to a correct identification of every individual. As a new character of male genitalia, the strongly curved inferior edge of the male genital armature of H. alcyone should be noted. Accompanied by Peter Russell, I verified also Fruhstorfer’s (1908a) type material of H. genava housed at the British Museum of Natural History in London (BMNH). Contrary to all of the ever-voiced findings by Kudrna, all the individuals of the type series in London accorded perfectly with genava from the Valais using the wing characteristics. The variability of the wing design of H. genava (and fagi) is additionally illustrated with the figures reproduced from plate 73 of Verity’s 5th volume “Satyridae” (1953) of his work “Farfalle Diurne d’Italia”. The occurrence of Grayling species in some selected actual and historical distributional areas was furthermore checked by using material in collections. Accordingly, the Palatinate region was populated only by alcyone. Proofs that genava existed in this region do not seem to exist. Of the two small Grayling species in Alsace, Hipparchia genava still occurs in the Alsatian Jura (Haut-Rhin) whereas H. alcyone formerly populated, until the 1960s, some sites in the northern part of the Vosges (Bas-Rhin). In the Jura Mountains of Basel and Solothurn, only H. genava occurs, whereas alcyone and fagi are completely absent from those areas. In Liguria, H. fagi and genava are widespread whereas only 4 specimens representing alcyone could be detected from this region being collected in 1973 near Celle Ligure (Savona). I supported the inquiries in the field by Tristan Lafranchis and colleagues in the region of the contact areas of H. genava and alcyone in south-eastern France. Accordingly, Duponchel (1832-35) diagnosed correctly the occurrence of H. alcyone in the surroundings of Marseille. Individuals of H. alcyone from this region were described by Fruhstorfer as ssp. sogdiana, whereas Varin (1962) referred ssp. sogdiana erroneously to the “altitudinal form” corresponding with H. genava, considering the true alcyone from mount Faron near Toulon (Var) as “under-race faronica” of ssp. sogdiana (sensu genava).	[details, abstract]	[pdf]
First record of Scythris sinensis (Felder & Rogenhofer, 1875) (Lepidoptera, Scythrididae) in Romania Florin Mihai Pop1, Alexandru Aurel Ștefan-Fotin2, Eugenia Petrescu3, Mihai Zachi4, Elena-Gabriela Negrea5, Tudor Lupu6 1Romanian Lepidopterological Society, str. Republicii 48, RO–400015, Cluj-Napoca, Romania 2Bld. Gheorghe Șincai nr. 2 bl. 4 sc. 2 et. 7, ap. 58, RO–040311, sector 4, București, Romania 3Administrația Parcul Natural Văcărești, str. Uioara nr. 3 bl. M2 parter, RO–041012, sector 4, București, Romania 4Str. Maior Alexandru Câmpeanu nr. 25, RO–011235, sector 1, București, Romania 5Str. Garoafelor nr. 22, RO–505200, Făgăraș, Romania 6Sat. Pasărea str. București nr. 643, RO–917102, Frumușani, Romania e-mail: mihaipopbioeco@gmail.com, fotinmania@yahoo.com, petrescu_eugenia@yahoo.com, mihai.zachi.urb@gmail.com, gabinegrea59@yahoo.com, tudor.dlupu@gmail.com article no.: ER26202206 doi: 10.24193/entomolrom.26.6 Summary: Scythris sinensis (Felder and Rogenhofer, 1875) is reported for the first time from Romania. This species is present in four historical provinces of Romania: Transylvania, Banat, Oltenia and Muntenia. Key words: Lepidoptera, Scythrididae, new record, distribution, Romania	[details, abstract]	[pdf]