Cnephasia facetana Kennel, 1901

Alipanah, Helen, 2019, An overview of the tribe Cnephasiini (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae: Tortricinae) of Iran with description of a new species, Zootaxa 4661 (3), pp. 501-521 : 505-506

12. Cnephasia facetana Kennel, 1901

Material examined. Zanjân Prov.: 1 ♂ 4 ♀♀, Sohrein Vlg. to Dagâhi Vlg. Rd., 6 km to Dagâhi Vlg., N 36˚53΄03.8̎ E 048˚28΄08.3̎, 4084 m, 4.vi.2012, Âlipanâh, Falsafi leg. ( GS: HA-2082, HA-2085), 1 ♀, Zanjân- Âbbar Rd. , 40 km NE Zanjân, N 36˚44΄07.8̎, E 048˚47΄34.2̎, 1706 m, 5.vi.2012, Âlipanâh, Falsafi leg. ( GS: HA-2199) .

Diagnosis. The female genitalia of C. facetana resemble those of C. tianshanica owing to the presence of a twist at the middle part of the colliculum. These two species also have a similar shape of the ostium bursae and posterior end of the sterigma. However, the male genitalia clearly distinguish them. Cnephasia facetana is closely related to C. grandis superficially, with a delicately rounded forewing apex (compared to the pointed apex of C. grandis ), and a paler forewing (grayer in C. grandis ) as the main external differences between these two. The two species are also very similar in male genitalia with the exception of the sacculus, which is weakly developed and simple in C. grandis and broadened before the end and more sclerotized than in C. facetana ( Razowski 1965) . As shown in Figure 4 , there is a very small triangular sclerotized process at the end of sacculus in C. facetana ( Figs. 4E, F ) that is missing in C. grandis ( Fig. 5E ). The females of the two were previously unknown, both of which are described herein. In spite of the similarity in the male genitalia, the two have remarkably dissimilar female genitalia. However, C. facetana should still be considered a close relative of C. grandis .

Description of the female. Head ( Figs. 4B, C ): Vertex with smooth, dirty-cream scales; frons with nearly smooth, dirty-cream and scattered brown scales; labial palpus sinuate with third segment pointed anterad, dirtycream admixed with light brown laterally, cream at remaining parts, with length more than twice the horizontal diameter of compound eye (n = 4), second segment longest; antennae ringed with yellowish-cream and brown scales, cilia sparse, shorter than that of male.

Thorax: Grayish-cream admixed with dark brown scales dorsally. Forewing ( Fig. 4A ) elongate, finely rounded apically, slightly arched outwards at costa and dorsum, with length of 8.40 – 9.50 mm (= 8.92 mm ± 0.48, n = 4); upperside yellowish-brown with scattered, sometimes indistinct small brown spots, mostly at distal half and costal margin, cilia concolorous with wing, with a median light brown band; underside slightly darker at median parts. Hindwing with upper- and underside grayish-yellow, cilia paler than the wing with a median light brown band.

Abdomen: Yellowish-cream admixed with brown scales. Female genitalia ( Figs. 4D, G ) with papillae anales large, distinctly widening medially; ostium bursae glass-shaped, elongate, surrounded with setae; posterior margin of sterigma medially concave, lateral parts slightly curved posterad, with long setae at posterior end slightly beyond the ostium bursae; apophyses anteriores slightly shorter than apophyses posteriores; antrum cup-shaped, small, mostly membranous; colliculum long, 2.28 times length of ductus bursae (n = 2), twisted medially, moderately sclerotized, sometimes weakly sclerotized towards ductus bursae beyond the twisted area ( Figs. 4D, G ), at posterior end with few weakly expressed transverse folds or sometimes a constriction with more sclerotized internal wall ( Fig. 4D ); ductus bursae relatively short, with width two-thirds of the width of colliculum (n = 2); ductus seminalis emerging from slightly beyond the intersection of ductus bursae and corpus bursae ( Fig. 4D ); corpus bursae ovoid, signum moderate.

Distribution. Jordan Valley (type locality), Mesopotamia; Iran: Fars, Shapur (modern-day Bandar-e Emam Khomeyni, Khuzestan Province, southwestern Iran) ( Razowski 1965).

Remarks. Cnephasia facetana was described by Kennel (1901) based on a single male collected in Palestine ( Jordan Valley); the female has remained undescribed. During this study, four females were found in the HMIM collection from the same locality as males that match C. facetana . Because the males and females are superficially similar, the females are considered to be conspecific with C. facetana .

Comments. As revealed in this study, forewing pattern of the male is more distinguishable than that of the female, with larger and darker brown spots.

Figures

FIGURE 4. Cnephasia facetana Kennel. A) Adult female, upperside, B, C) Head of the female in frontal (B) and lateral (C) views, D) Female genitalia, E) Male genitalia, F) Male genitalia, end of sacculus (arrows in E and F indicate the tiny triangular sclerotized process at the end of sacculus), G) Female genitalia, ostial area and colliculum, ventral view.

FIGURE 5. Cnephasia grandis Osthelder. A) Adult female, upperside, B, C) Head of the female in frontal (B) and lateral (C) views, D) Female genitalia, E) Male genitalia, F) Female genitalia, ostial area and colliculum, ventral view.