Heliozela hammoniella Sorhagen, 1885: 338.|
Type locality: Germany, Hamburg
Type: Destroyed in the Zoological Museum of Hamburg in 1943 by bombs and fire (Horn et al. 1990).
Synonyms, misspellings, wrong determinations, etc.:|
Tinagma betulae Stainton, 1890: 264. Type locality: England. Junior subjective synonym.
The species has been recorded from the British Isles and France throughout central Europe to Scandinavia, the Baltic states and European Russia. Furthermore, the species has been found in Romania (Karsholt & Nieukerken 2013, see also Skala 1944 and Vicol 1996). There are no records outside Europe so far (Mutanen et al. 2007).
The specific distinctiveness of H. hammoniella from Heliozela resplendella (Stainton, 1851) has often been doubted. The only differentiating character seemed to be the foodplant of the larva (Betula for H. hammoniella, Alnus for H. resplendella). Mutanen et al. (2007) however were able to show that there are also slight differences in the male and female genitalia, as well as minute differences in the wing markings between the to taxa. The differences in wing markings are not diagnostic however. In the male genitalia, differences are found in the fultura inferior, which surrounds the phallus. In H. resplendella, it bears 8-10 comparatively small teeth, which are not bent nor hook-like at the tip. In H. hammoniella, there are 10 larger teeth, many of them being hook-like at the end. In the female genitalia, both species can be distinguished by the absolute length of the apophyses anteriores and posteriores. In H. resplendella, the apophyses anteriores have a length of 0.993 ± 0.03 mm (0.841 ± 0.029 mm in H. hammoniella), whereas the apophyses posteriores measure 1.659 ± 0.044 mm in H. resplendella and 1.46 ± 0.061 mm in H. hammoniella (all values following Mutanen et al. 2007).
Horn, W., I. Kahle, G. Friese & R. Gaedike 1990. Collectiones entomologicae 2. – Berlin, Akademie der Landwirtschaftswissenschaften der DDR: 223–257.
Karsholt, O. & E. J. van Nieukerken 2013. Heliozelidae. In - Karsholt, O. & E. J. van Nieukerken (eds.). Lepidoptera, Moths. – Fauna Europaea version 2.6.2, http://fauna.naturkundemuseum-berlin.de/ [online 28 July 2015].
Mutanen, M., J. Itämies & L. Kaila 2007. Heliozela resplendella (Stainton, 1851) and H. hammoniella Sorhagen, 1885: two valid species distinguishable in the genitalia of both sexes and life histories (Heliozelidae). Nota lepidopterologica 30 (1): 79-92.
Skala, H. 1944. Minen aus Westrussland. Zeitschrift der Wiener Entomologischen Gesellschaft 29: 150-152
Sorhagen, L. 1885: Nachtrag zu den Microlepidopteren der Hamburger Torfmoore. – Entomologische Nachrichten 11 (22): 337–343.
Vicol, V. 1996. Contributions à la connaissance des Microlepidoptères de Roumanie. Travaux du Muséum d´Histoire Naturelle "Grigore Antipa" 36: 239-249.
Kurz Michael: 2015.07.30