Neboiss, 1977 : 43 Oxyethira columba ( Neboiss, 1977 ) Wells 1981 : 106 Oxyethira (Trichoglene) columba ( Neboiss, 1977 ) Kelley 1984 : 436 Olah & Johanson, 2010 : 33 Oxyethira elora Olah & Johanson, 2010 Oxyethira columba (Neboiss) Oxyethira columba Oxyethira columba O. columba Oxyethira columba Oxyethira elora Oxyethira elora Oxyethira columba New synonyms in the Australian micro-caddisfly fauna (Trichoptera: Hydroptilidae) Wells, Alice Zootaxa 2012 3177 66 68 7W72P Neboiss Neboiss [151,630,151,176] Insecta Hydroptilidae Oxyethira Animalia Trichoptera 1 67 Arthropoda species columba Trichoglene     Trichoglene columba  Neboiss, 1977: 43    Oxyethira columba( Neboiss, 1977);  Wells 1981: 106  Oxyethira (Trichoglene) columba( Neboiss, 1977);  Kelley 1984: 436  Oxyethira elora  Olah & Johanson, 2010: 33; syn. nov. The holotypeof  Oxyethira elora Olah & Johanson, 2010, is from Tasmania, as are a number of specimens Olah and Johanson designated as paratypes; another paratypeis from Carnarvon Gorge in central Queensland. Upon examination of the holotype, it was found to be indistinguishable from that of  Oxyethira columba(Neboiss)with which it is here synonymised.  Oxyethira columbais widespread and often abundant in Tasmania and on mainland Australia, where it occurs from Fleurieu Peninsula and Kangaroo Island in South Australiathrough the Grampians of Victoria to the east and northeast in streams on both sides of the Dividing Range to just north of Townsville in northern Queensland. Males of  Oxyethira columbashow some variability in proportions of genitalic structures. However, in a morphometric study on various genitalic structures of  O. columbaundertaken some years ago, Wells (unpublished data) was unable to demonstrate any significant difference in their proportions, or, using multivariate analysis, between populations, thus postulating that they all represent a discrete species. Much of the apparent variability appears to be attributable to the degree to which the genitalia are cleared and relaxed, and the magnification and angle at which the specimens are viewed. The major differences between  Oxyethira columbaand  Oxyethira eloraas illustrated and described by Olah and Johanson (2010)are the shapes of segment IX, the spine on the aedeagus and the dorso-apical processes (but the first is close to that illustrated by Wells (1981), and the perception of the latter two depends upon the angle at which the structures are viewed). However, examination of the holotypeof  Oxyethira eloraitself shows that it conforms to  Oxyethira columbain all respects.