Alucita adriendenisi

Landry & Landry, 2004

Alucita adriendenisi is a small ( ) described from North America in 2004. The was described by Bernard Landry and Jean-François Landry from specimens collected on Manitoulin Island, Ontario. It belongs to a family characterized by divided into multiple feather-like plumes. The species is distinguished from other North Alucita by specific morphological features detailed in the original description.

Pronunciation

How to pronounce Alucita adriendenisi: /əˈluːsɪtə ædriːˈɛndɛnɪsi/

These audio files are automatically generated. While they are not always 100% accurate, they are a good starting point.

Identification

Distinguished from Alucita montana and Alucita lalannei by morphological features described and illustrated in Landry & Landry (2004). The specific and characteristics separate it from other North . length of 6.5–8 mm provides a size reference, though overlap with exists.

Distribution

North America: from northwestern Quebec and New York west to Alberta and the Northwest Territories; disjunct southern in West Virginia, Arizona, and western Texas. locality: Manitoulin Island, Ontario, Canada.

Diet

feed on flowers of Lonicera dioica (Caprifoliaceae). This association is based on a single larval record from Michigan.

Host Associations

  • Lonicera dioica - larval Based on single record from Michigan; feed on flowers

Similar Taxa

  • Alucita montanaOverlapping distribution in western North America; distinguished by morphological features and larval (Symphoricarpos spp. vs. Lonicera dioica)
  • Alucita lalanneiOverlapping distribution in Ontario, Manitoba, and Alberta; distinguished by morphological features; unknown
  • Alucita hexadactylaSimilar structure; does not occur in North America (European )

More Details

Taxonomic history

Described as new in 2004. Previously confused with or overlooked among North Alucita material. The specific epithet honors Adrien Denys, though the original description does not explicitly state this etymology.

Data limitations

Most biological information is based on the original description. , , and detailed remain undocumented. The record derives from a single larval collection in Michigan.

Tags

Sources and further reading