Falckia slamkaiella, Alipanah, 2025

Falckia slamkaiella sp. nov.

urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:

( Figs 1A‒F View FIGURE 1 , 2A‒N View FIGURE 2 , 3A‒R View FIGURE 3 )

Material examined. Holotype, ♂, Hormozgân Province: Bandar-e Khamir, Mardoo Isl., Mangrove forest (protected area), N 26 ˚58΄33˝, E 55 ˚40΄25˝, 3 m, 30.x.2021, Âlipanâh, Falsafi leg. (gen. prep. HA-2871, HMIM) / Paratypes: 3 ♂♂, 10 ♀♀: Hormozgân Province : 1 ♀, Bandar-e Khamir, 50 m, 26.iv.1986, Mirzâyâns , Borumand leg. (gen. prep. HA-2918, HMIM) / 1 ♀, Bandar Abbâs, Sarkhun , 16.x.1999, Seyfi leg. / 2 ♂♂, 3 ♀♀, Bandar- e Khamir, Mardoo Isl., Mangrove forest (protected area), N 26 ˚58΄33˝, E 55 ˚40΄25˝, 3 m, 30.x.2021, Âlipanâh, Falsafi leg. (gen. prep. HA-2829, HA-2886, HA-3029, HMIM) / 1 ♀, Bandar-e Khamir, Environment Ranger Sta., Mangrove forest (protected area), N 26 ˚58΄17˝, E 55 ˚37΄40˝, 15 m, 31.x.2021, Âlipanâh, Falsafi leg./ 1 ♂, Gheshm Isl., Ramkân- Gavarzin Rd., 5 km to Gavarzin , N 26 ˚48΄23˝, E 55 ˚50΄19˝, 0 m, 3.xi.2021, Âlipanâh, Falsafi leg., 2 ♀♀, Minâb , 14.x.1999, Seyfi leg. (gen. prep. HA-2901, HMIM) / 1 ♀, Minâb, Kolâhi protected mangrove swamps, N 27 ˚02΄45.7˝, E 56 ˚51΄56.4˝, 0 m, 11.xi.2022, Âlipanâh, Falsafi, Mofidi-Neyestânak leg. (gen. prep. HA-2921, HMIM) / 1 ♀, Fârur Isl. , 23.iv.2001, Ghayurfar leg. (gen. prep. HA-2890, HMIM) .

Diagnosis. Falckia slamkaiella sp. nov. is similar to F. laetanella (Lucas, 1937) ( Falck et al. 2019: 44, fig. 8) externally, except for having an almost black spot on the lower half of the forewing’s internal area just behind the antemedial cross line ( Fig. 1A‒F View FIGURE 1 ), which is missing in F. laetanella . Additionally, in F. slamkaiella the upper half of the antemedial line curves inwards, while in F. laetanella it is almost straight. Moreover, in F. slamkaiella there are scattered greyish-black scales mostly in the medial part of the internal area of the forewings, whereas in F. laetanella this area is nearly without greyish-black scales.

The male genitalia of F. slamkaiella are similar to those of F. laetanella , but there are some differences between them as follows:

1) In F. slamkaiella , the gnathos is distinctly shorter than the uncus (0.28–0.34 of the length of the uncus; n = 2) ( Fig. 3A, C View FIGURE 3 ), whereas in F. laetanella it is slightly less than half of the length of the uncus (= 0.56 of the length of the uncus; n = 1) (see Falck et al. 2019: 48, fig. 31).

2) In F. laetanella , there is a ventral elongate spiny plate on vesica, and a smaller thorn-shaped sclerotized cornutus at the distal end of the phallus dorsal to the spiny plate (see Falck et al. 2019: 48, fig. 31a), but in F. slamkaiella , the phallus has no thorn-shaped sclerotized cornutus ( Fig. 3A, B, D View FIGURE 3 ).

3) In F. laetanella , the uncus is clearly triangular with straight sides (see Falck et al. 2019: 48, fig. 31), while it is lanceolate with convex sides in F. slamkaiella ( Fig. 3A View FIGURE 3 ).

The female genitalia of these two species also differ from each other as below:

1) In all the examined females of F. slamkaiella , the ductus bursae is longer than that of F. laetanella . In F. slamkaiella the ductus bursae is nearly as long as the apophyses anteriores or slightly shorter, while in F. laetanella it is distinctly shorter than the apophyses anteriores ( Fig. 3G, J, M, N View FIGURE 3 ; see Slamka 2019: 322, fig. 143).

2) In all the examined females of F. slamkaiella , the broad projection at the posterior end of the corpus bursae is turned to the left and the ductus seminalis arises from the distal end of this projection on a conical part ( Fig. 3G, J, M, N View FIGURE 3 ). In the female genitalia of F. laetanella figured by Slamka (2019), this projection is turned to the right, but it is not clear if this is the normal situation or it happened during the slide preparation (see Slamka 2019: 322, fig. 143).

The extent of the spiny area on the surface of the corpus bursae is variable. This area in F. laetanella looks clearly smaller than that of F. slamkaiella , however this cannot be considered as a distinguishing character between these two species.

Description. Male ( Figs 1A, B View FIGURE 1 , 2A‒H View FIGURE 2 ). Head ( Fig. 2E‒H View FIGURE 2 ): with nearly smooth to slightly appressed scales on neck and vertex; frons in the examined males with upwardly directed scales towards the vertex at the upper one-third to one-fourth ( Fig. 2E, F View FIGURE 2 ), the remaining parts smooth, except the lower one-third which is normally scaleless ( Fig. 2E, F View FIGURE 2 ). Both vertex and frons covered with creamy to creamy-white scales, in some specimens, frons with light brown to light greyish-brown scales on the lateral sides next to the compound eyes and on the tip of upwardly directed scales of frons mostly at the lower side, with few scattered pale brown to brown scales at the base of antennae. The neck with broad, elongate creamy scales at the middle part, and alternating broad bands of creamy and brown scales at the back of the compound eyes ( Fig. 2E View FIGURE 2 ). Labial palpus elongate, upwardly directed, dirty-creamy, mottled with scattered pale brown to brown scales mostly on dorsal and latero-external sides, concentrated mainly at the junction of the 1 st and 2 nd segments, and proximal and distal ends of the second segment, the terminal segment in most specimens with a greater number of brown scales scattered almost at all sides. Length of the labial palpus 2.20–2.36 times the horizontal diameter of compound eye (n = 4), second segment longest; maxillary palpi long, creamy; antennae filiform, antennal scape covered with creamy to dirty-creamy scales, mottled with scattered brown scales basally towards the vertex, flagellum beyond antennal sinus ringed with creamy and light brown scales, alternatively, the antennal sinus well-developed, surrounded by mixture of raised creamy and brown scales internally ( Fig. 2F View FIGURE 2 ). Thorax: Patagia and tegula smoothly scaled, creamy with a few scattered brown scales, with a number of greyish-black to black scales at the external side towards the forewing arranged as a longitudinal narrow band extended from a little behind the junction of the forewing with thorax to the end of its junction. In some specimens the latter scales are pale and concentrated mostly behind the junction of the tegula and forewing.

Forewing ( Figs 1A, B View FIGURE 1 , 2A–D View FIGURE 2 ): relatively elongate, with obliquely rounded termen, costa slightly arched outwardly. Costal margin with a series of slightly larger, broader and more coarse pale brown scales surrounded by dark brown to blackish-brown scales on both external and internal sides, extended from slightly beyond the base to middle of the forewing, more visible on the under side ( Fig. 2A‒C View FIGURE 2 ). Length of the forewing 4.9–5.9 mm (x = 5.32 mm ± 0.42, n = 4); upper side with creamy basal area admixed with dark scales at upper half, with a dark patch at the external corner of lower half, antemedial line at lower half slightly oblique, arched inwardly at the upper half, postmedial line nearly smooth to slightly sinuate at medial part, area between the antemedial and postmedial lines greyish-creamy with a triangular black patch at internal part of the upper half, with two small black discoidal spots, sometimes in equal sizes, in some specimens unequal-sized, with the lower one being slightly larger than the upper one. The area between postmedial and marginal lines greyish-creamy, marginal line creamy, fringes greyish-dirty creamy with three longitudinal brownish lines; under side creamy at costal and internal area, greyish towards the medial area and outer margin, with signs of antemedial and postmedial lines, and clearly distinguishable costal rows of scales ( Fig. 2A‒C View FIGURE 2 ). Hindwing more or less transparent, upper side white, slightly darker towards the outer margin, fringes with a longitudinal light brown line basally; under side more or less the same as the upper side, but slightly paler at outer margin. Abdomen: Brown dorsally, dirty-creamy ventrally, distally with creamy scales at both dorsal and ventral side. The eighth abdominal tergum broader than long, slightly depressed medially at posterior margin ( Fig. 3F View FIGURE 3 ). The eighth abdominal sternum elongate, with a more sclerotized apically rounded median triangular projection at anterior margin and a wedge-shaped indentation at posterior-medial edge ( Fig. 3F View FIGURE 3 ). Culcita with a pair of lateral tufts of very long hair-like scales ( Fig. 3F View FIGURE 3 ).

Male genitalia ( Figs. 3A‒E View FIGURE 3 ). Uncus lanceolate with convex sides and pointed tip, clearly constricted at the junction with tegumen; gnathos very short, its length 0.28–0.34 of the length of uncus (n = 2), pointed apically and broadened gradually towards the base ( Fig. 3A, C View FIGURE 3 ); valva elongate, slightly broadened distally, with a rounded apex having tufts of apical long hairs directed internally, with scattered long hairs on costal margin ( Fig. 3A, E View FIGURE 3 ), sacculus developed, distinctly swollen at base, weakly sclerotized, densely covered with hairs growing longer towards the external margin ( Fig. 3A, E View FIGURE 3 ); juxta V-shaped, weakly sclerotized, latero-distally with two small knobs covered with short hairs ( Fig. 3A, C View FIGURE 3 ); saccus trapezoidal, elongate, with medially depressed anterior margin ( Fig. 3A View FIGURE 3 ); phallus robust, cylindrical, nearly straight, with an elongate tongue-shaped spiny structure, stretching two-thirds of the length of phallus, without cornutus ( Fig. 3A, B, D View FIGURE 3 ).

Female ( Figs 1C‒F View FIGURE 1 , 2I‒N View FIGURE 2 ). Head ( Fig. 2I‒N View FIGURE 2 ): as described for male, except for scales of the frons which in seven out of 10 examined females at the upper one-third to one-fourth are upwardly directed towards the vertex, while in the remaining ones the scales in this area are nearly smooth ( Fig. 2J View FIGURE 2 ) which is probably due to the removal of some scales from this part or pressure from the labial palpi. Moreover, the filiform antennae of the female have no sinus, and they are ringed creamy-brownish beyond the scape and first few segments; labial palpus creamy to dirty-creamy, mottled with scattered light brown to brown and dark brown scales concentrated mainly at the junction of the 1 st and 2 nd segments and distal and proximal ends of the second segment, the last segment with numerous pale brown to brown scales. In some specimens, brown scales of the internal side barely visible. Length of the labial palpus 1.80–2.14 times the diameter of compound eye (n = 8), second segment longest, almost 2.5 times the length of last segment and 3.5 times the length of first segment (n = 1).

Forewing ( Fig. 1C‒F View FIGURE 1 ): as described for the male, except absence of the costal scale rows which are distinguishable in male. Length of the forewing 5.2–6.1 mm (x = 5.58 mm ± 027, n = 8). Thorax: Patagia and tegula as described for the male, however in some specimens, the longitudinal narrow band at the external side of tegula towards the forewing is hardly distinguishable and just limited to some light brown scales placed a little behind the junction of the forewing. Abdomen: Externally as in male. The eighth abdominal tergum with a more sclerotized band-shaped or tear-shaped small plate arranged medially towards the posterior margin ( Fig. 3M, R View FIGURE 3 ).

Female genitalia ( Figs. 3G‒Q View FIGURE 3 ): Papillae anales sub-triangular, setose; apophyses posteriores distinctly longer than apophyses anteriores, nearly two times the length of apophyses anteriores (n = 4); ostium broad, its width almost 0.3 of the width of eighth abdominal segment (n = 4); antrum membranous, conical, relatively broad, with a pair of ovoid sclerotized spiny shields towards the lateral sides ( Fig. 3G, H, J, K, M, N, P, Q View FIGURE 3 ); ductus bursae membranous, about as long as corpus bursae, its width slightly less than the width of antrum, gradually broadened towards the corpus bursae, with a knee-shaped bend behind the widened part. Its surface bears longitudinal furrows ( Fig. 3G, J, N View FIGURE 3 ) and sometimes with wrinkles ( Fig. 3M View FIGURE 3 ); corpus bursae elongate oval, with spinulate surface, except the spineless anterior one-third ( Fig. 3M‒O View FIGURE 3 ) or anterior half ( Fig. 3G, I, J, L View FIGURE 3 ) (in ventral view). If the anterior half is spiny, the spinules conspicuously larger than if the posterior two-thirds are spinulate, posterior end of corpus bursae with a broad projection parallel to the anterior end of ductus bursae, mostly with longitudinal furrows ( Fig. 3G, M, N View FIGURE 3 ), sometimes without any furrow or wrinkle ( Fig. 3J View FIGURE 3 ); ductus seminalis arises at the dorsal surface of the latter projection at basal part.

Etymology. The newly described species is named in honor of František Slamka in recognition of his contribution in studying of the Palaearctic Pyraloidea .

Distribution. Iran.

Biology. The early stages and the host plant are unknown.

Remarks. Comparison of the examined material with the known species of Palaearctic Phycitini revealed that they were closer to Falckia than to any other genus of this tribe, both externally and in genitalia structure. The genus Falckia was described as monobasic with Laodamia laetanella Lucas, 1937 as its type species ( Slamka 2019). Falckia laetanella was tentatively placed by Falck et al.(2019) under the genus Pempelia Hübner.According to Slamka (2019), F. laetanella is morphologically distinguishable from all other European and western Palaearctic Phycitini . It is currently known from Tunisia and the Canary Islands ( Leraut 2014; Falck et al. 2019; Slamka 2019; Nuss et al. 2003 –2024). Presence of several differences between the examined material from Southern Iran and F. laetanella led to the conclusion that these specimens belonged to an undescribed species of Falckia . The species described here as new is only the second species of Falckia worldwide and the first record of the genus from Iran.