Atteva gemmata
Encyclopedia
Atteva gemmata is a moth
of the Yponomeutidae family. It is endemic to Cuba
.
It is very similar to Atteva rawlinsi
from Hispaniola but half its size. In gemmata
the dots are reduced in number and connected to each other forming small, vertical, white lines.
(Walsingham, 1897) and reinstated as a valid species (Meyrick, 1914; Walsingham, 1914). However, it seems that both works were overlooked by Heppner & Duckworth (1983) and by Heppner (1984) who continued to follow Walsingham’s synonymy.
Moth
A moth is an insect closely related to the butterfly, both being of the order Lepidoptera. Moths form the majority of this order; there are thought to be 150,000 to 250,000 different species of moth , with thousands of species yet to be described...
of the Yponomeutidae family. It is endemic to Cuba
Cuba
The Republic of Cuba is an island nation in the Caribbean. The nation of Cuba consists of the main island of Cuba, the Isla de la Juventud, and several archipelagos. Havana is the largest city in Cuba and the country's capital. Santiago de Cuba is the second largest city...
.
It is very similar to Atteva rawlinsi
Atteva rawlinsi
Atteva rawlinsi is a moth of the Yponomeutidae family. It is endemic to the Dominican Republic.It is similar Atteva gemmata, but is considerably larger, with the blackish areas occupied by numerous small, white dots, not forming vertical lines....
from Hispaniola but half its size. In gemmata
the dots are reduced in number and connected to each other forming small, vertical, white lines.
Taxonomy
Both available names have been wrongly synonymised under Atteva pustulellaAtteva pustulella
Atteva pustulella is a moth of the Yponomeutidae family. It is found from Costa Rica, where it meets Atteva aurea, southwards to Uruguay and Argentina. It is also present in the Antilles. There are also several reports from Dominica, Jamaica, Haiti and Martinique.The larvae feed only on new shoots...
(Walsingham, 1897) and reinstated as a valid species (Meyrick, 1914; Walsingham, 1914). However, it seems that both works were overlooked by Heppner & Duckworth (1983) and by Heppner (1984) who continued to follow Walsingham’s synonymy.