Flavifronthosia flavifrontella ( Strand, 1912 ), 2025

Flavifronthosia flavifrontella ( Strand, 1912) View in CoL , comb. n.

( Figs 86, 87 View Figures 76–88 , 146 View Figures 146–149 , 171 View Figures 169–173 )

Phryganopsis flavifrontella Strand, 1912 View in CoL , Archiv für Naturgeschichte, (A) 78 (9): 94 (Type locality: [ Equatorial Guinea] “ Alen ”).

Type material examined. Holotype (by monotypy) ( Fig. 87 View Figures 76–88 ): female without abdomen and head, blue label “ Alén ” / blue label “Span. Guinea | Alcu Benitogbt [Benitogebiet] | 16–31 X [19]06 | G. Tessmann S. G” / “Phryganop- | sis flavi- | frontella ♂ | m. | Strand det.” / reddish label “Type” / “3697” / “Genitalia not | in abdomen | det. D.S. Fletcher 1954.” ( MfN).

Additional material examined. GABON: a series of specimens of both sexes, 430m, Mikongo (Rougier), Monts de Cristal (Secondary Forest), 0˚29'47''N, 11˚10'42''E, 28.vii.–12.viii.2019, MV , actinic & LepiLED light traps, Albert, J.-L., Aristophanous, M., Bie Mba, J., Dérozier, V., Moretto, P. leg. ( ANHRT) .

Remarks. (1) There is a contradiction between the collecting dates of the holotype cited in the original description (“15. X. 06”) and on the label (“16–31. X. 06”). However, the external morphology of the specimen labelled as “Type” matches the original description very well therefore its identity is doubtless and the contradiction in dates can be explained by the erroneous citation in the original description. (2) The size of the holotype specimen and its forewing shape suggest that it is in fact a female. In the original description, Strand (1912) identified its sex as male, which is also indicated on the original label supplementing the specimen. However, the moth has only proximal segments of its abdomen remaining, which, along with D.S. Fletcher’s note “Genitalia not in abdomen” and the fact that Strand did not mention the abdomen in the description, allows an assumption to be made that the specimen was originally lacking its abdomen and Strand’s identification of its sex was erroneous. (3) Besides the abdomen, the holotype also lacks its head, which was, however, described by Strand (1912) and subsequently Birket-Smith (1965), who also examined the holotype, therefore it is possible to assume that the head was lost at a later date. (4) Birket-Smith (1965) based his treatment of the taxon on the specimens available then, which were most similar to the type lacking the abdomen. However, the “ Archithosia flavifrontella ” sensu Birket-Smith (1965) is largely different externally from the holotype of Phryganopsis flavifrontella and is clearly not conspecific to its holotype but belongs to the Acanthosia species described above as A. pervolgata sp. n. The current treatment of flavifrontella is based on specimens from Gabon clearly conspecific to the holotype.

Distribution. The species is currently known from continental Equatorial Guinea (type locality) and Gabon (new country record).