Boros István (szerk.): A Magyar Természettudományi Múzeum évkönyve 8. (Budapest 1957)
Gozmány, L.: Notes on the generic group Symmoca Hbn. (Lep. Gelechiidae)
distinct costal tooth. Gen. prep. 121. Kingi, IV. 18. Aegypten, leg. Andres. Lectoholotypus. (Fig. 4 : G). mobilella 1 Zerny 1936. The recurrent dorsal appendage is sharply bent and juxtaposed to a small chitinized costal band. Gen. prep: 118. Marokko, Cr. Atlas, Goundafa, 1200 m., 1933, VI. 21-29. leg. Zerny. Lectoholotype. (fig: 4: A) muricella Chrétien 1896. Its male genital organ differs from other related species with a similarly constructed dorsal appendage by the long, chitinized costal fold. Gen. prep. 95 : Vernét, VII. 94. coll. Chrétien, paratype. (fig. 4: F) nigromaculella Ragonot 1875 ( = tofosella Rebel 1893, gen. prep. 505, S. Portugal,'Monchique, 400-900 m, VII. 29-30, 1938. leg. Zerny; 506, Aragónia, Albarracin, 21—24. VII. 1924, leg. Zerny; 507 et 508, Lanjaron, 16. leg. S t g r. = ,ponerias Walsingham 1905, gen. prep, by Tarns, No. 7. Symmoca, made of the type). With regard to the male genital apparatus, it stands nearest to orphnella Rbl., and cedestiella Z., but they both have a much shorter costal appendage. Gen. prep: 81. ,,Hispánia, Prov. Madrid, Escorial, VIII. 1923." (fig. 3 : E). obliterata Walsingham 1905. Male genitalia distinguished by the lonely sublanceolate dorsal appendage, as also in Kautziella Rbl. Gen. prep. 134, ,,Hammam-es-Salahim, Algeria, 1904. IV. 8. leg. W 1 s g h m coll., Amse 1," topotype (fig. 3 : D). oenophila Staudinger & Wocke 1870. Its male genital organ stands nearest to that of pleostigmella Rbl., but the costal fold is differently molded, and the dorsal more deeply incised. Gen. prep. 78, ,,Hispánia, Barcelona, 25. VII. 1925" (Fig. 4 : D). orphnella Rebel 1893. Basic color exceedingly variable ; an almost white specimen is in K 1 i m e s c h's collection (gen. prep. 102, ,,Italia, Liguria, Capo di Noli, 10. VIII. 1944, leg. K 1 i m esc h"), in external appearance a typical cryptogamarum Mill. The male organ resembles that of uniformella Rbl., but its costal appendage is longer and more acute ; angustipennis Rbl. has a much smaller one, whilst that of cedestiella Z. is differently placed. Gen. prep. 124, „Pegli, VII. 1889, 1(18)3.90. vidit Wocke", designated hereby as lectoholotype (fig. 3 : G). petrogenes Walsingham 1907 ( = hispanella Rebel 1917, gen. prep. 238, „Sierra d'Espuna, 09, leg. Korb" lectoholotype). Pattern and size rather variable, as witnessed by several misidentifications. A specimen of the Berlin Museum was labelled as ,,vitiosella Z." (gen. prep. 237, ,,Murcia, ex coll. 8 1 a ud i n ge r". NB : there is no vitiosella Z. in Spain!), whilst one other from the A m se 1 Collection was thought to be ,,alhambrella Wlsghm." (gen. prep. 137, , .Sierra Alfacar, Hispánia, 26. VI. leg. Bubace k' : ). The two appendages of the male organ are almost parallel and straight, not to be mixed up with any other species. Gen. prep, made by Tains, 6. Svmmoca, made of the type (fig. 4 : B). pleostigmella Rebel 1917. Nearest to oenophila Stgr. &Wcke, but its dorsal appendage is straighter and the costal one differently formed. Gen. prep. 108, „Sierra d'Espuna, 09, leg. Korb", designated as lectoholotype (fig. 4 : E). pyrrhella Ragonot 1895 ( = zeitunella Rebel 1902, gen. prep. 113, ,,Zeitun, Staudinger, 1902", lectoholotype). Its male genital organ is unique in the two costal lobes. Gen. prep. 3.013, made by Vi et te of the holotype (fig- 4 : J).
