, Pyralidae s . l . , Spilomelinae ) in Iran : first record for the country and first host plant report on water fern ( Azolla filiculoides Lam . , Azollaceae )

During a survey at the Rice Research Institute of Iran (RRII, Rasht, Guilan) for potential biocontrol agents of water fern, Azolla filiculoides Lam. (Pteridophyta: Azollaceae), larvae of Diasemiopsis ramburialis (Duponchel) (Pyralidae s. l., Spilomelinae) were discovered feeding on water fern. Larvae were found to cause serious feeding damage on leaves of water fern in the laboratory. The biology, life cycle, and the morphology of all stages of this species are described and illustrated for the first time. This is also the first record of this cosmopolitan species in Iran. We report water fern as a host for Diasemiopsis ramburialis; until now the host plant of D. ramburialis was unknown.

Diasemiopsis was described by Munroe (1957) with Hydrocampa ramburialis Duponchel, 1833 as type species. Only one other species, D. leodocusalis (Walker, 1859), described from the United States of America, is currently assigned to this genus (Nuss et al. 2015). The full synonymy of D. ramburialis is given by Nuss et al. (2015).
Azolla filiculoides Lam. (Azollaceae) is considered a major aquatic weed in several countries (Zimmerman 1985). It is a small-leafed floating aquatic fern native to the tropics, subtropics, and warm temperate regions of Africa, Asia, and the Americas (Costa et al. 2009). It is one of the world's fastest growing aquatic macrophytes, with a doubling time of only 2-5 days in biomass (Zimmerman 1985;Taghi-Ganjiet al. 2005). Some species of Azolla provide various benefits such as a source of organic nitrogen, soil improvement and nutrient availability, weed suppression, and as food for livestock, chicken, ducks and fishes (Anonymous 1987;Ferentinos et al. 2002). However, some of them, A. pinnata (R. Br.) and A. filiculoides in particular (e.g. Barreto et al. 2000), are considered major weeds in South Africa, Europe, and New Zealand (Hill 2003;Bodle 2008;Sadeghi et al. 2013) and A. filiculoides is an alien species in Iran (JICA 2005;Delnavaz and Azimi 2009).
In Iran, this weed invades rice fields and aquatic natural habitats, such as the Anzali (Delnavaz and Azimi 2009;Sadeghi et al. 2013) and Amir-kelayeh wetlands (Fig. 2) of the Guilan province. These wetlands have ecological importance for breeding, wintering, and survival of many species of birds, fish, and microorganisms (Khoshechin 1993;Naddafi et al. 2005;Charkhabi and Sakizadeh 2006;Moradinasab et al. 2012). Infestations of A. filiculoides reduce the quality of the water used for agricultural and human use, and simplify local aquatic food webs (Hill 1998). Control options for the water fern in Iran are limited because mechanical methods are impractical and there are no registered herbicides for aquatic ecosystems. This situation stimulated the use of biological control as a sustainable strategy for the long term management of A. filiculoides (Richerson and Grigarick 1967;McConnachie et al. 2003). Stenopelmus rufinasus Gyllenhal (Coleoptera: Curculionidae), a weevil native to the USA, had a huge impact on A. filiculoides as a biological control agent. This weevil controlled water fern in Africa, USA, and other regions (Hill et al. 2008; Partt However, the identification of other active herbivores on Azolla as biotic resistance factors and competitor species with the main biological control agent was found to be desirable because other species may have negative or positive effects on the establishment of the main biological control agent. We conducted surveys in rice fields for two years due to a lack of information on local herbivores attacking A. filiculoides in Iran. The specific objective of this paper is to report the life history of D. ramburialis attacking A. filiculoides in Iran.

Material and methods
Rearing: Laboratory colonies were established by collecting larvae from water fern located on waterways and experimental rice fields at the Rice Research Institute of Iran (RRII) (N37°12'22.2", E049°38'40.7", 80 masl) from September to November 2013 and 2014.
Larvae were kept in 14 cm diameter petri dishes filled with water fern and 100 cc of distilled water. Petri dishes of the same size were used to cover the dishes to provide more space for larvae and newly emerged adults. Water was changed every 4 days and water fern was added if needed. The petri dishes were changed every 10 days to prevent the growth of fungi and bacteria.
Upon emergence, a pair, a male and female, were released into 14 cm covered petri dishes. To provide more space for the moths, we set up three 6 cm petri dishes each filled with 10 cc of distilled water and 5 g of water fern. The 6 cm petri dishes were changed daily and placed in an incubator until egg hatching. The incubator was set at 25-27 °C and 16: 8h (L: D) photoperiod. Thereafter, first or second instar larvae were placed in 6 cm petri dishes provided with 10 cc of water and 5 g of water fern in groups of one, two, and three individuals in each dish. Since the lar- vae had wandering habits, each 6 cm petri dish was placed in a 14 cm covered petri dish. The 6 cm petri dishes were changed every three days and water fern was added if necessary. Moth colonies were inspected daily and all activities, including egg hatching, larval feeding period, pupation, and emergence of adults were recorded.
Identification: Twenty adults were used for preliminary identification based on wing venation and other morphological characters. Dissection of both male and female genitalia (Figs 7-9), were made following Landry (2003) and Lee and Brown (2009). Dissections were conducted at the RRII laboratory and sent to B. Landry for final determination. The specimens were identified as Diasemiopsis ramburialis (Duponchel, 1834).
Field observations: During 2013 and 2014, feeding damage observations by D. ramburialis on water fern and other potential host plants were conducted in the waterways and experimental rice fields located at RRII.

Discussion
In northern regions of Iran, aquatic ecosystems such as stagnant waters, ponds, ditches, canals or paddy fields may be covered seasonally by Azolla (Delnavaz and Azimi 2009;Sadeghi et al. 2013) in association with other floating aquatic plants including  During the present study we investigated the activity of D. ramburialis on Azolla in rice fields. In Iran, D. ramburialis adults start their activity in July but they are most active in rice fields from September to late October. In these areas, this is almost the end of harvesting time and the end of the summer. The temperature gets slightly cooler and fields become half-dried, which eases harvesting. The reasons for the increase in the activity of adults in rice fields at the end of the summer, when water fern is getting dry due to water stress, are not clear. Water depth could be a restricting factor for the activity of D. ramburialis. It is possible that pupae are sensitive to high water depth and are not able to survive under submerged conditions in rice fields during the cultivation season. In addition, culturing operations in rice fields disturb the water fern layer constantly and destroy pupae. However, after harvesting, since water fern remains undisturbed and fields become dry, D. ramburialis can increase its populations.
On the other hand, rice fields are an anthropogenic agricultural ecosystem in which thermal conditions can differ significantly from those of natural aquatic habitats. Discharge of heated water, artificial mixing of thermal strata, impoundment, diversion, regulation of water level and flow, and canopy opening in riparian zones, through harvest or grazing, severely modify the thermal environment for aquatic species (Ward and Stanford 1982). Therefore, in wetlands without the disturbance of agricultural processes and chemical compounds D. ramburialis could behave differently.
Our study is the first to record a host plant for D. ramburialis and the genus Diasemiopsis because the host plant of the North American D. leodocusalis is still unknown. However, there are other Spilomelinae, such as the salvinia stem borer Samea multiplicalis (Guenée), that feed on several Salviniaceae and Azolla. This moth has been known as a potential biocontrol agent for Salvinia molesta DS Mitchell (Pelli et al. 2008). In host range tests Knopf and Habeck (1976) stated that this moth has three main host plants in Florida (USA): Azolla caroliniana, Pistia stratiotes, and Salvinia rotundifolia. However, this moth has not been reported on these host plants from Iran or the Palaearctic and African regions. Although we briefly studied the biology of D. ramburialis as a probable biotic resistance factor for water fern, many other important biological aspects such as life span in natural habitats, population growth parameters, host range, and host preference remain unclear. Also, we could not find any specific parasitoid or predator for this moth although there are many generalist predators and parasitoids active in rice fields (Ooi and Shepard 1994;Shepard et al. 1987) that could affect D. ramburialis.

Conclusion
Environmental conditions of northern regions of Iran, in addition to agricultural activity, put native living organisms under various kinds of stress and shape them into trying to adapt to different conditions. However, in comparison to the long period of adaptation of native species, some exotic organisms such as water fern have adapted themselves to local conditions in a shorter period of time and have become dominant in some areas (Delnavaz and Azimi 2009;Sadeghi et al. 2013). This invasion puts native plants under pressure and the insects that feed on native plants either have to use new plants as a food resource or die of hunger. Despite a rich fauna of aquatic and semi-aquatic insects, water fern biotic resistance factors in Iran are still poorly known. We started our surveys on water fern biotic resistance factors in Iran's northern region rice fields in 2013 and this is the first report of our results. More studies are under way to uncover important facts on the biotic resistance factors of this non-native invasive weed in northern regions of Iran.

Introduction
The genus Dichrorampha Guenée, 1845 comprises 142 species as listed in the Online World Catalogue of the Tortricidae (Gilligan et al. 2014). Most known representatives occur in the Holarctic region, but this tendency may change; a plethora of new species from the Neotropics have been described during last few years (e.g., Razowski 2011, Razowski andBecker 2012). The complicated taxonomy of the genus is reflected in the extended synonymy (a total of 89 synonyms is listed in the Catalogue). Many Dichrorampha species have a limited distribution and may be restricted to particular mountain ranges, i.e. endemism is a common phenomenon within the genus, and one can expect larger numbers of undescribed relict and endemic taxa in high mountain massifs. In this context discovery of a new species from the vast Great Caucasus Mountains range was not surprising. More than 30 species are known from Caucasus (Danilevsky andKuznetzov 1968, Esartiya 1988), 13 of them are endemics for this region. More unexpected was the discovery of Dichrorampha pentheriana  in the vicinity of Sofia, in the small but relatively high (2290 m) Vitosha Mountains. Twenty-three Dichrorampha spp. are reported for Bulgaria, one of them (D. rilana Drenowsky, 1909) endemic for the highest Bulgarian mountains (including Vitosha). The larvae of most Dichrorampha spp. feed on different Asteraceae, mainly two genera: Achillea and Tanacetum (Danilevsky and Kuznetzov 1968). They are internal feeders in root tissues.
Two nicely patterned female Dichrorampha were swept from Achillea lingulata Waldst. & Kit. (Asteraceae) in the summer of 2012 in Vitosha Mountains, Bulgaria. Dissection of the genitalia of the female did not provide a reliable identification; additional male specimens were needed but at the time of dissection the season was already over. Collecting of males was postponed to the year 2014, which unfortunately had a very cold and rainy summer; only a single worn female came from the three excursions. Eventually, in June 2015, two males as well as two females were swept from a mountain meadow with numerous flowering A. lingulata. The unmistakable genitalia of the dissected male clearly demonstrated that this odd looking Dichrorampha is D. pentheriana , until now known only from the type series.
An unknown Dichrorampha was discovered in 2014 during an entomological expedition in the Great Caucasus Mountains, Georgia. The two moths were captured in late afternoon flying around tufts of Achillea sp. growing on the rocks alongside a mountain road. Subsequent sweeping of the same (and other) Achillea species did not provide more material, and an approaching thunderstorm suspended any further efforts to collect additional specimens; the locality was not visited again. The specimens collected have identical wing patterns and are of similar size, which in combination with their synchrony and syntopy suggest that they are conspecific. The habitus, wing pattern and genital characters of both male and female moths show unquestionable affiliation to the genus Dichrorampha, but do not match any known species in this genus.
The purpose of the paper is to illustrate and provide additional data and a redescription for the little known Dichrorampha pentheriana and to describe D. sakartvelana sp. n.

Dichrorampha pentheriana
grey-brown with beige terminal line. Underside pale grey with paler terminal line. Cilia paler than those of the forewing. Abdomen dark grey.
Male genitalia (Figs 7-9): In agreement with the preparation of the genitalia of the lectotype as well as the description by Razowski (1971). The shape of valva and phallus depends on the pressure of the coverslip. For example, the cavity at the proximal part of cucullus looks deeper or shallower depending on the pressure applied. The same is valid for the phallus: the large triangular terminal process in natural condition is pointed laterally at right (Figs 8,9), but under a coverslip it is ventrally oriented (Fig. 7).
Female genitalia (Fig. 10): In agreement with the preparation of the genitalia of the female paralectotype and the description by Razowski (1971).
Diagnosis. The wing pattern of D. pentheriana resembles that of D. distinctana (Herrich-Schäffer, 1851) but is easily distinguished by lacking the costal fold. The male genitalia are   distinctive and do not show obvious affinities to other species of the genus. The shape of the valva is relatively similar to those of some forms of D. plumbana (Scopoli, 1763), but the phallus is strikingly different. The female genitalia are less characteristic, with antrum (sclerotised posterior part of ductus bursae) similar to some extent to those of D. bugnionana (Duponchel, 1843).
Biology. The species is on the wing from mid June to late July. The larval host plant in all likelihood is Achillea lingulata Waldst. & Kit., considering the fact that many Dichrorampha feed on Achillea and all specimens were swept during the florescence period of A. lingulata from its stems or surrounding grass vegetation. Other Achillea spp. and also other Asteraceae growing in the vicinity were searched for D. pentheriana without a positive result, so D. pentheriana is likely to be monophagous. The habitat is a subalpine meadow at an altitude of ca. 2000 m (Fig. 14).
Remarks.  described D. pentheriana from three specimens (2 males, 1 female) collected in Zljeb Mountains, Montenegro, at an elevation of 1700 m, preserved in NHMW. Obraztsov (1953) did not examine the type series and erroneously claimed that it consists of only two males. Danilevsky and Kuznetzov (1968) also did not examine the specimens and similarly gave wrong information about the specimens of the type series: three males and one female. Razowski (1971) dissected a male and female syntype, designated the male as lectotype, and provided descriptions and illustrations of male and female genitalia for the first time. The subtle differences in the genitalia of the Bulgarian specimens compared to those of the type series are likely due to normal variation and/or deformation by pressure of the coverslip.
No colour illustrations of the adult can be found in literature with the exception of those in Razowski (2003) (paralectotype male; the photograph is apparently altered digitally and shows some differences with the original appearance of the specimen). The lectotype ( Fig. 1) is illustrated here for comparison with some of the Bulgarian specimens. As seen in the figure, the moths from Vitosha demonstrate two differences with the types: a more contrasting forewing pattern, especially in females and the presence of pale terminal line on the hindwings. Description. Adult (Figs 5-6). Sexual dimorphism subtle. Head: Frons and vertex covered with brown-grey scales. Palpus labialis with whitish basal and brown-grey distal segment; the second segment with whitish base and brown tuft at the distal end. Antennae covered with dark grey scales. Thorax: Nota, patagia and tegulae uniformly grey, thorax underside (including coxae) whitish, legs brown. Forewings comparatively wide, in male with costal fold with 1/5 of the length of the costal edge. Forewing length male 8.65, female 8.90 mm, wingspan in set specimens 18.5-19 mm. The specimens are worn, but preserved areas on the forewing upperside have pale greenish-grey overlaying scales which apparently do not form an obvious pattern. No markings are visible with the exception of five pairs of faint distal costal strigulae (pairs 5-9 sensu Baixeras, 2002). Three black terminal dots are present. Underside uniformly brown. Cilia creamy with pale brown margin. Hindwings with pale brown upperside and whitish underside. Cilia whitish. Abdomen covered with pale grey scales.
Male genitalia (Figs 11-12): Tegumen bearing a small lobe as uncus. Valva broad basally with wide basal cavity. Costal edge slightly convex. Sacculus nearly parallel to costal edge, indistinctly concave, ending with nearly straight angle. Ventral incision elongated, trapezoidal. Neck of valva slender, more than two times narrower than the basal part of valva and relatively long, 3/4 of its length. Cucullus with large dorsal lobe, densely covered with long setae, and a small rectangular ventral prominence. Phallus slender, ca. 3/5 of the length of valva, bent ventrally in the basal part, with membranous area extending at first on right, then on dorsal side. A large triangular prominence pointed dorsally at the right side of the tip is present. Circa 20 sockets of deciduous cornuti are counted.
Female genitalia (Fig. 13): Papillae anales wide. Apophyses posteriores equal in length to the apophyses anteriores, the latter look naturally deformed. Sterigma sclerotised, slightly asymmetrical, trapezoidal, with two incisions on the posterior margin of the postostial part. Ostium wide. Subgenital plate trapezoidal with distinctly sclerotised lateroposterior margins and rounded posterior angles. Antrum with the length of the membranous part of ductus bursae, well sclerotised, remarkably wide, nearly symmetrical, wineglass shaped and enveloped in a thin cuticular membrane visible after staining. The proximal sclerotisation of ductus bursae is barely discernible only under higher magnification. Ductus seminalis emerging at the middle of the membranous ductus bursae. Corpus bursae ovoid. A single moderately sized signum is present.
Diagnosis. The new species is characterized externally by uniformly coloured forewings (though the specimens are not fresh) and large size. The male genitalia resemble some species of the "section petiverellae" (sensu Danilevsky and Kuznetzov 1968), which apparently are closely related to D. sakartvelana sp. n. D. flavidorsana Knaggs, 1867 and D. filipjevi (Danilevsky, 1948) have similarly shaped valva, but the apical prominence of the phallus is pointed ventrally, and the ventral process of the cucullus is much larger in D. filipjevi. D. petiverella (Linnaeus, 1758) and D. proxima (Danilevsky, 1948) are also similar in general, but they have two distinct processes of the cucullus. Female genitalia do not demonstrate clear affinities to any Palaearctic Dichrorampha.
Preimaginal stages. Unknown. Biology. The moths were collected at the end of July, but their condition presumes that they are on the wing earlier. The larval host plant is most probably Achillea sp. above which the moths were flying (plant material was not preserved and an exact identification is thus not possible). The habitat (Fig. 15) is a subalpine meadow at an elevation of ca. 2300 m with denuded rocks where the host plant grows.
Distribution. Known from the type locality only. Etymology. The name of the species is an adjective, derived from the autonym for Georgia, Sakartvelo, and the specific ending for Tortricidae -ana.

Introduction
The Carpenter-Moths (Lepidoptera, Cossidae) in Mongolia are relatively well known compared to their fauna in most other countries. Several articles (Daniel 1965(Daniel , 1969(Daniel , 1970(Daniel , 1973Yakovlev , 2015a treating the systematics and distribution of Mongolian Cossidae were published. It was established that the Cossidae fauna of Mongolia is distinct (Yakovlev and Dubatolov 2013;Yakovlev 2015b). In total, 23 species were reliably recorded; in addition, two species, Acossus viktor  and Cossus shmakovi , were recorded from the border regions of Russia (the Republic of Tuva, the Tes-Khem River valley), so they are likely present in Mongolia as well.

Material and methods
The adult Cossidae were collected using the combined light lamp Phillips−250 W mounted above a fabric screen, battery light traps with the lamp Philips TL 8W/05 and chloroform as the killing agent.

New species for Mongolian fauna
Acossus terebrus (Denis & Schiffermüller, 1776) (Figs 1A, 2) -widely distributed transpalaearctic species (Daniel 1956;Yakovlev 2007Yakovlev , 2011a, rather rare in most of the localities, for the first time reliably recorded in the Mongolian fauna. This discovery was expected as A. terebrus is reliably known from the neighboring regions of Russia (the Republic of Altai, Tuva, Buryatia, Irkutsk and Chita regions) and China (Inner Mongolia Province) (Hua et al. 1990).  Yakovlev, 2004 (Figs 1B, 2) The genus Gobibatyr Yakovlev, 2004 was established for Cossus colossus Staudinger, 1887. Gobibatyr colossus (Staudinger, 1887) was reported from several localities in the Ili River valley in southeast Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan (the Naryn River valley) and extreme southwest of Mongolia (the Bayan-Gol River valley (right tributary of Bulgan-Gol River) in Hovd Aimak) (Yakovlev , 2015a. The second species of this genus is G. ustyuzhanini Yakovlev, 2004, described from southwestern Mongolia (type locality − S Mongolia, Gobi-Altai Aimak, 30 km S Biger) . Later the distribution of G. ustyuzhanini in Mongolia was specified (Yakovlev 2015a). In addition to the discoveries in Mongolia, this species (given as Cossus colossus) was indicated (without specification of exact localities) for Qinghai, Gansu, and Ningxia Chinese Provinces (Hua et al. 1990). It was found that the larvae of G. ustyuzhanini Yakovlev, 2004 feed on the underground parts of Nitraria schoberi L. (Zygophyllaceae) (Yakovlev 2011b). The same paper gives the description of the eggs and pupae (based on exuvia). During the Russian expedition to Mongolia, М. Bush (Moscow) collected a series (3 males, 1 female) of G. ustyuzhanini in the northeast of Bayan-Ulegej Aimak in Mongolia on the southern bank of Achit-Nuur Lake. The exact data on the label are the following: Mongolia, Bayan-Ulegej Aimak, 65 km NW of Ulegej, S bank of Achit-Nuur lake, 49°25'52.16''N;90°30'19.01''E, 1440 m, Bush M. legit. (coll. R.V. Yakovlev, Barnaul, Russia).

New records Gobibatyr ustyuzhanini
Remarks. The Mongolian Altai is a significant frontier in the distribution of insects. This conclusion is based on the distribution of Orthoptera (Sergeev 1986), Coleoptera (Kryzhanovskij 2002), Papilionoidea (Yakovlev 2011), and Cossidae (Yakovlev 2015b). The discovery of G. ustyuzhanini significantly extends the range of the genus Gobibatyr. All the previously known discoveries of G. ustyuzhanini were located on the south (Dzhungarian) macroslope of the Mongolian Altai, in Dzungarian and Zaaltayskaya Gobi on the territory of Hovd, Gobi-Altai and South Gobi Aimaks of Mongolia (Hovd Aimak, Janatin Dolon, 40 km N Somon Manchan, SW bank of Khar-Us nuur Lake; Hovd Aimak, Bodonchijn-Gol basin, Hundijn-Gol River valley; Hovd Aimak, 10  Somon, Talyn Bulay) (Yakovlev 2015a). It was previously believed that the Mongolian Altai is a barrier to the dispersal of G. ustyuzhanini to the north, preventing its penetration to the Great Lakes Valley (Yakovlev and Dubatolov 2013;Yakovlev 2015b). Yakovlev, 2007 (Fig. 2) The species was described from the material from Russia, Altai Rep., Ongudai. It was recorded in several localities of northwestern Mongolia on the territory of Chovsgol and Bayan-Ulegei Aimaks (Yakovlev 2015a), first reliably recorded in Hovd Aimak.

Conclusion
At present 24 Cossidae species from 13 genera have been reliably recorded in Mongolia. The distribution of the genus Gobibatyr  has been significantly extended (the northern border of the habitat has been shifted by 450 kilometers). Despite numerous past efforts focused on the study of the Mongolian Cossidae, it appears that much can still be discovered, especially in the southeast of the country, from where little material is known.

Introduction
According to a recent revision (van Oorschot and Coutsis 2014), the genus Melitaea Fabricius, 1807, comprises some 98 species of phenotypically similar, medium sized nymphaline butterflies that occur throughout most of the Palaearctic Region and beyond. Adults are invariably orangebrown on the upper surface, with a series of black lines and other markings; several Melitaea species are notoriously difficult to separate using wing morphology due to their similarity in appearance (Jugovic and Koren 2014).
In this paper, we consider the common and widespread butterflies Melitaea phoebe (Denis & Schiffermüller, 1775) and M. ornata Christoph, 1893; the latter was not fully recognised as a species distinct from M. phoebe until 2005 (see below). We also confirm, not for the first time, that M. punica Oberthür, 1876, historically considered a subspecies of M. phoebe, is restricted in distribution to Africa north of the Sahara; the specificity of M. punica was confirmed by Tóth and Varga (2011). Some fundamental confusion has encompassed the use of names relating to these three phenotypically similar Melitaea species in the western Palaearctic. We believe that confusion, for which the present authors must take some responsibility (with others!), arose as a direct result of the realisation that a second phoebe-like taxon occurred in Europe, before the extent of the range of M. ornata was fully understood. Before that was established, some other names were briefly used in the literature (e.g. emipunica [by Russell et al. 2005] and ogygia [by Varga et al. 2005]).
As recognised here, the western Palaearctic Region extends from the Iberian Peninsula and Africa north of the Sahara in the west to the Ural Mountains and Kazakhstan in the east (approxi-mately 60º East), and from the North Cape of Norway in the north to the Middle East, including Iran and Iraq, in the south (approximately 30º North). We recognise that a number of names relate to Melitaea taxa east of the Urals, and where these apply or may apply to the taxa considered in this paper, they are also included.

Background
A detailed analysis of the Palaearctic forms and varieties associated with Melitaea Fabricius, 1807, was made by Higgins (1941Higgins ( , 1944Higgins ( [errata], 1955). He recognised M. phoebe as a distinct species (Higgins 1941: 325-343, plate 14, figs 1-12; plate 15, fig. 8) with three subspecies: nominotypical phoebe (throughout the region except the Iberian Peninsula and North Africa), occitanica Staudinger, 1871 (Iberian Peninsula) and punica (North Africa). Considering what was available to Higgins at that time, he provided what remains a generally accurate assessment of the division of M. phoebe sensu lato. Higgins provided (1941: 325-343) an annotated list of 74 named forms, mostly originating from the western Palaearctic, and many described individual variations, seasonal forms and aberrations. He later added (Higgins 1955: 118) five additional synonyms for M. phoebe.
So where did it all go so wrong? Modern confusion seems to stem from Hesselbarth et al. (1995Hesselbarth et al. ( : 1030, who mistakenly (see Appendix: Note 3), used the complex name: 'M. (phoebe) punica telona' for those phoebe-like butterflies from Turkey which were not, in their opinionand undoubtedly correctly -M. phoebe sensu stricto. Understandably, their work was used as an anchor for subsequent papers on the region; for example, Çalişkan and Bozaci (2015) described a male aberration of what they considered to be M. phoebe from the province of Adana, Turkey, placing the name ornata as a synonym of "M. punica telona". They referenced Hesselbarth et al. (1995), from where their use of the combination 'punica telona' presumably originated. With several researchers working in different parts of Western Europe and the Russian Federation, it is perhaps understandable that this spurious use of the name punica became so widely used (see Appendix: Note 3).
M. ornata was first recognised as a species separate from M. phoebe simultaneously by Varga et al. (2005), from Hungarian specimens, under the specific name M. ogygia Fruhstorfer, 1908 [TL: Island of Poros, Peleponnese, Greece] and by Russell et al. (2005), from specimens reared from a female from Montagna Longa, Palermo district, Sicily, under the name M. emipunica Verity, 1919 [TL: Palermo district, Sicily, Italy]. The presently known eastern limit of the distribution of the invariably univoltine species M. ornata may coincide with the eastern limit of our interpretation of the western Palaearctic (see above), although a recent publication by Korb et al. (2015) recorded M. ornata from Middle Asia (Kyrghyz Mts., Transili Alatau Mts. and Kungey Ala-Too Mts.). Previously, Korb (2011: 178) reported this same material as M. phoebe saturata but following molecular analysis of the preserved specimens by Korb et al. (2015) their identity was reassessed as M. ornata. We note that larvae from this area are yet to be observed and believe further research is required to confirm their identity.
Placement of M. ornata and some associated Russian taxa as synonyms of M. phoebe by van Oorschot and Coutsis (2014: 60) compounded the confusion referred to above. In the expectation of resolving some long-standing matters of nomenclature and distribution, we present an alphabeti cal list of names associated with Melitaea phoebe species-group taxa and place each as a synonym of M. phoebe Notes 1 & 6 , M. ornata Notes 2 & 6 , or M. punica Notes 3 & 6 . These actions are explained and supported by detailed notes (see the Appendix). The present authors do not recognise any subspecific divisions of M. ornata or M. punica; however, M. phoebe s.s. occurs in two distinct subspecies based on larval colour and distribution: M. phoebe phoebe Note 4 and M. phoebe occitanica Note 5 , with which some names will be synonymised.

Distribution of Melitaea phoebe, M. punica, and M. ornata within the western Palaearctic, as currently known and understood
Distribution of M. phoebe phoebe and M. phoebe occitanica in the western Palaearctic is presented in Note 1. However, it is considered important to clarify some details as to where, so far as is currently known, M. phoebe has been recorded as being present in the literature but is not in fact present: (1) M. phoebe has been recorded from Lésvos and Chíos (Gaskin and Littler 1986) but it is M. ornata which is present there (Russell and Pateman 2013c); in fact it is almost certain that all reports of M. phoebe from the Aegean Islands should be regarded as M. ornata Pamperis 2011, 2012). (2) In Greece M. phoebe has not been confirmed as occurring south of Mt. Vardousia, Fokida (Lafranchis pers. obs., ex Pamperis pers. comm.), and is absent from the Peleponnese (Lafranchis 2007).  Table 1). phoebe is also known to occur -Croatia (Koren and Štih 2013), Romania (Rákosy and Varga 2001;Székely 2008), Bulgaria (Kolev 2015), and Slovakia (Zitnan pers. comm.). The report by Jakšić (2011: 46-47) of M. ornata from Serbia is considered to be dubious; it is not otherwise known from there, and M. phoebe is widespread throughout that country. In the east, both species occur in Lebanon and Israel (M. phoebe occurs in northern coastal district only; Benyamini, pers. comm.), Turkey (Hesselbarth et al. 1995), the Caucasus (Tshikolovets and Nekrutenko 2012: 293-295;Tikhonov and Russell 2015), the Russian Federation (Russell and Kuznetsov 2012), Syria (but see above), northeast Iraq and northern and western Iran (Tshikolovets et al. 2014). Eisenstein (2000: 190, fig. 234) figured a larva in Israel with a red-brown head feeding on Centaurea iberica (Spreng) (M. ornata: see also Russell et al. 2007).

Those European regions in which both
The authors see no evidence to support subdivision of M. ornata into five subspecies (Tshikolovets 2011: 498-499); previous gaps in the known distribution of this species are rapidly being filled, making recognition of subspecies on a geographical basis increasingly difficult to support. Also, the diverse variety of host-plants used by M. ornata is more likely to be dependent on which Asteraceae species are available for use by larvae in any particular locality, rather than any evolutionary preference resulting in development of subspecies. The differing ability of closely related species to metabolise apparently suitable host-plants is also significant (Tóth et al. 2015); however, it is of interest to note that different host-plants were being used by M. ornata on the adjacent eastern Aegean Islands of Lésvos and Chíos, where adult butterflies were almost identical (Russell and Pamperis 2011;Russell and Pateman 2013c).
Despite use of the name punica by various authors for populations of M. ornata in a number of different countries, Melitaea punica is entirely confined to North Africa, where it is restricted to Morocco and Algeria; there have been no reports from Tunisia (see Appendix: Note 3).

Synonymic list
Melitaea phoebe abbas Gross & Ebert, 1975  The colourful adults were illustrated by Higgins (1941: pl. 14, fig. 10), Gorbunov and Kosterin (2007: 2: 84, figs 197, 198) and van Oorschot and Coutsis (2014: pl. 12: figs 20, 21 & pl. 13: figs 2, 3). M. ornata contrasts with the less colourful M. phoebe flying at the same localities in the southern Ural Mountains (present authors, pers. obs.). Tshikolovets (2011: 498) and Tshikolovets et al. (2014: 319) recognised ornata as a distinct species. The fact that van Oorschot and Coutsis (2014: 60) placed ornata as a synonym of nominotypical phoebe is in part what prompted the present paper. The first author has reared many hundreds of specimens of both phoebe and ornata from many localities in Europe and both authors have seen adults of the two species (sympatric but not synchronic) flying in the Urals. There can be no doubt whatever that Melitaea phoebe and Melitaea ornata (=telona: see Note 91) are distinct species, with different early stages, voltinism (M. ornata is invariably single brooded M. phoebe often double or triple brooded) and they often have different host-plants.
Recognition of ornata as a distinct species paved the way for the realisation that what had recently been referred to as "emipunica" (Russell et al. 2005), "ogygia" (Varga et al. 2005) and "telona" (Kuznetsov and Stradomsky, 2010) all represented the same species (i.e. ornata).
More recently, Tóth and Varga (2011) and van Oorschot and Coutsis (2014: 66) separated punica from phoebe on the basis of differences in the male genitalia, and this was followed by Tshikolovets (2011: 497). Collectively, the published literature during the last two decades has created substantial confusion which, insofar as it affects M. punica, is clarified here: Melitaea punica is confined to North Africa; it occurs from the Atlantic coast of Morocco throughout the Atlas and Rif Mountains to eastern Algeria but apparently not into Tunisia (Tennent 1996: 52). The larva is very similar to that of M. phoebe occitanica (Note 5) (Russell et al. 2006: figs 1-4 & 6); however, punica butterflies in North Africa are quite different in appearance to phoebe occitanica in Spain (cf. Higgins 1941: pl. 14, figs 6 & 11; Russell et al. 2006: figs 8-26;Tolman and Lewington 2008: 203).

Note 4. Melitaea phoebe phoebe:
The body of the final instar larva of M. phoebe phoebe is black, including the head carapace, with black or orange tubercles and white spots spaced around each segment; these spots usually coalesce on each side to form an often prominent lateral white line (see Table 1 fig. 9). Its distribution ranges from the Ural Mountains to c. 60º N., through the Caucasus, south to Iraq, Iran and Lebanon, reaching its southern limit in northern Israel (Benyamini pers. comm.), westwards through Turkey, the Balkans, Hungary, Austria, southern Germany and the alpine and sub-alpine regions of France, Switzerland and Italy.
Some of the name bearing types originate from the eastern Palaearctic. For the sake of completeness these have been included. They are synonymised with nominotypical phoebe due to the fact that Kosterin (see Korshunov and Gorbunov 1995) described a final instar larva of M. phoebe from near Zabaikalye (southeastern Russia) as follows: "white with fine black reticulate ornament, so that looks grey; this ornament fuses into a black line along the back and a more diffuse line on either side (between 2nd and 3rd row of false spines from beneath); a white stripe (without ornament) goes through 2nd row beneath false spine row. Thoracic legs and ventral prolegs yellowish-grey; head greyish-black, set with tiny black hairs". This description precisely matches that of the final instar larvae of the European populations of nominotypical phoebe. Adult butterflies are very variable, and we are unable to separate populations of phoebe s.s. in western Europe to the Urals into distinct races (subspecies).
Note 5. Melitaea phoebe occitanica Staudinger, 1871 [TL: Andalusia, Spain]: the Type Locality of this subspecies was given originally by Staudinger as "It" (= Italy?) but it is now generally accepted that this was an error (recte 'Iberia' : Higgins 1941: 336);Verity (1928: 163) limited the Type Locality to Barcelona, Spain, and this was accepted by van Oorschot and Coutsis (2014: 60). Previously, however, Fruhstorfer (1916: 82 (A) (2): 1) was of the opinion that the source of the occitanica phenotype was Andalusia and Higgins (1941: 336) considered that this should stand, based on the original description by Staudinger, who did not specify a 'Type' but labelled the series upon which the description was based with the word 'original' (Higgins 1941: 336). The body of the final instar larva of M. phoebe occitanica is black, including the head, with obscure white spots on the body, black tubercles dorsally and a row of orange tubercles with orange hairs laterally, which form an obvious orange lateral line (Lafranchis 2000: 388, fig.;Maravalhas 2003: 281, fig.;Russell et al. 2007: 159, fig. 13; Lafranchis et al. 2015: 464-467, figs), in contrast to the white lateral line of nominotypical phoebe (see Table 1, and Note 4).
This subspecies has also been separated from nominotypical phoebe using the results of enzyme electrophoresis by Pelz (1995: 57), who was of the opinion that genetic differences were sufficiently signi ficant for occitanica to be considered as a "semispecies". This subspecies is distributed from the Iberian Peninsula eastwards through France and peninsular Italy as far south as northern Calabria (Russell pers. obs.); it has also been found in Istria, Croatia (Russell and Pateman 2013a: 47, fig. 6). Tshikolovets (2011: 496) suggested that the distribution of this subspecies included northern Greece, the southern and eastern parts of the Balkans, western Turkey and Ukraine. The present authors do not agree and consider that these areas are occupied by nominotypical phoebe; larvae from Romania, for example, are clearly of the 'white lateral stripe form' associated with nominotypical phoebe (Russell et al. 2007: 159, fig. 13). Where the two subspecies meet, for example in Var, France and Istria, Croatia, the larvae can be intermediate in form, as one might expect (Russell and Pateman 2013: 47, figs 8, 9). The colourful adult has been illustrated by many authors, inclu ding Higgins (1941: pl. 14, fig. 11), Manley and Allcard (1970: plate 10, figs 1-7) and Lewington in Tolman and Lewington (1997: plate 50).
Note 6. The species phoebe, punica, ornata: despite a series of articles (e.g. Russell et al. 2005Russell et al. , 2006Russell et al. , 2007, Tolman and Lewington (2008: 202-203)  Note 7. abbas Gross & Ebert, 1975: 44, fig. 61: synonym of Melitaea ornata. Tshikolovets et al. (2014: 320, map) gave this taxon subspecific status of M. ornata and stated that it was found in west and south Iran. Their figures (Plate LX: figs 7, 8, 10, 11 & 12) depicted specimens which appear to have spatulate antennae and black arched submarginal underside hindwing markings not touching the intervening veins, both features typical of M. ornata (see Table 1). Subsequently, van Oorschot and Coutsis (2014) (Korb et al. 2015). The latter was based on molecular analysis of the preserved specimens and we Note that Korb et al. (2015: 142) considered that M. phoebe was not present in the Kyrghyz Mountains. The flight period was given (Korb 2011: 158) as May-July, at elevations between 500 and 2000 m; we consider that July is likely to be beyond the flight time of M. ornata and that larvae would be in diapause by the end of June. So far as we are aware, larvae of the Melitaea populations in this region have not been reported; our synonymy is thus tentative, pending further data.
Note 14. almana Gaede, 1930: 208: probable synonym of Melitaea ornata. This name, attributed to Rebel, appears to have been first published by Gaede under M. phoebe (in Seitz, Supplement). Neither Higgins (1941: 339) nor the present authors were successful in their efforts to find an original Rebel reference, and as a result it is provisionally treated as a Gaede manuscript name. Gaede stated that it was a pale race from Asia Minor similar to M. telona (i.e. ornata). Hesselbarth et al. (1995Hesselbarth et al. ( : 1031 referred to Graves (1925: 101), who stated that this form came from Elma Dagh, Syria. They suggested that it may have been a misspelling of amanica Rebel (see Note 16) and synonymised it with Melitaea punica telona (i.e. ornata), although it is Noted that Gaede treated both names separately. Not mentioned by van Oorschot and Coutsis (2014) Higgins (1941: 339) suggested that it was 'proceeding to occitanica Staudinger' but only because of its brighter colouring, which is typical of both Alpine and Spanish specimens. See also monilata (Note 53).
Note 18. baccata Delahaye, 1909: 10: aberration of phoebe occitanica. The supplement in which this name was published was not available to Higgins (1941: 339), but was kindly supplied to the authors by Eric Drouet. The name refers to an aberrant female specimen which was taken in August at Saint-Barthélemy, Maine-et-Loire in west-central France and thus outside the known ranges of both nominotypical phoebe and M. ornata. Not mentioned by any recent author.
Note 26. confusa Joannis, 1908: 45: synonym of phoebe occitanica. An aberrant ♂ form in which the upperside forewings are more reddish with the black markings reduced, the transverse black lines in the discal region are nearly obliterated and the hindwings are dark basally. The underside forewings have similar markings but the hindwings are yellowish white with enlarged dark markings. Higgins (1941: 339) attributed this name to Oberthür but with Joannis' reference, and he did not correct this in his errata (Higgins 1944 Verity (1928: 163) was of the opinion that occitanica Staudinger (see Note 5) should be placed as a synonym of corythallia Esper, on the basis that he believed the specimens representing corythallia originated from the Iberian Peninsula. Higgins (1941: 336) disagreed with this course of action and showed that Verity's assumption was incorrect, as Esper ([1781]: 67), stated that they were the original specimens of Geoffroy's Papilio cinxia var. B, which were from France (Higgins 1941: 336). Whether the origin of the specimens of corythallia were from France or Spain is unimportant because the same subspecies of M. phoebe (i.e. occitanica) occurs in both countries. Hesselbarth et al. (1995Hesselbarth et al. ( : 1028 and van Oorschot and Coutsis (2014: 60), synonymised this name with M. phoebe. Although the name corythallia predates occitanica, type material of the former appears to be lost (Hesselbarth et al. 1995(Hesselbarth et al. : 1028 and the name occitanica has been used extensively by authors in referring to phoebe populations from the Iberian Peninsula. The present authors have followed this course of action. Note 28. crassenigra Verity, 1928: 162: synonym of phoebe occitanica. An occitanica form with heavy discal spotting from southwest France (Higgins 1941: 339).
Note 29. deleta Verity, 1919: 184: aberration of (presumably) phoebe occitanica. Aberrant female of form tusca (see Note 96) with almost all the black markings obliterated (Higgins 1941: 339). Larvae reared from populations of M. phoebe from peninsular Italy have, so far as the authors are aware, all been of the occitanica form (see Note 5).
Note 30. dorae Graves, 1925: 100: synonym of Melitaea ornata. Graves (1925: 103-106) gave a two page description of this form, and a table of "Index of Nigrescence of M. phoebe races (upperside)", which demonstrated that it was paler than either telona or ogygia. Higgins (1941: 339) paraphrased this description as "small and pale, with the black markings fine and partly obsolete"; this is typical of phenotypes in xerothermic biotopes. Hesselbarth et al. (1995Hesselbarth et al. ( : 1031 Russell et al. (2005) when the species was first identified as being distinct from M. phoebe by the red-brown head colour of the stage L4 to the final instar larvae, reared from a female taken at Montagna Longa, within the Type Locality (i.e. Sicily). This was afforded subspecific status by Tshikolovets (2011), with a distribution given as SE France (Var), Sicily and S Italy (Calabria, Basilicata, Campania). It was synonymised with M. telona (i.e. ornata) by van Oorschot and Coutsis (2014: 63). Brief use of emipunica by Russell et al. (2005) and of ogygia by Varga et al. (2005) was before the wide distribution of M. ornata was fully appreciated, and was (in part) the cause of ensuing confusion.
Note 33. enoch Higgins, 1941: 337: synonym of Melitaea ornata. Figured by Higgins (1941: plate 14, fig.  4), who gave other locations for this form: Arwas and Achal Tekke, 2000 m, July, and Jablonowka from the same region (Transcaspia). He placed it with M. phoebe occitanica but suggested that this placement was due to the colour contrast of the wings being similar to, but not quite so strongly marked as, those of 'Spanish occitanica'. Higgins further noted a slight difference in male genitalia and suggested the possibility that enoch should be ranked as a subspecies of M. phoebe. Tshikolovets et al. (2014:  Note 34. estrela Higgins, 1941: 337: phoebe occitanica. Said by Higgins (1941: 337) to be: "very bright … labelled estrela Romei, but I cannot trace a reference to a description, and do not know whether the name was ever published validly …"; the present authors have also failed to find a published reference by Romei, and place the name as a nomen nudum.
Note 35. fasciata Galvagni, 1934: 2: an aberration of nominotypical phoebe. This extreme abe rration has the upper surface of the wings almost black with the forewing discal macules radially elongated into a fascia. The specimen was taken on 6.viii.1933 near Vienna; its origin places it with nominotypical phoebe. The name has been used by a number of authors to describe specimens in which the black markings coalesce to form fasciae; for example Wiltshire (1946: 26;plate 3, fig. d) used it to describe a specimen of M. phoebe from Shiraz, Fars, SW Iran, suggesting it was similar to "mod. or ssp. telona" (= ornata).
Note 41. guevara Fruhstorfer, 1917: 19: synonym of phoebe occitanica. A lightly marked form from Spain with pale yellow ground colour, markings reduced on both wing surfaces (Higgins 1941: 340). It was synonymised by van Oorschot and Coutsis (2014: 61) with M. phoebe; its origin suggests it is synonymous with phoebe occitanica (see also Note 19).
Note 42. gurtleri Joukl, 1908: 97: status uncertain. This name was based on a single aberrant specimen, with a bright orange ground colour on the upper surface of the wings and underside wing bases that were said to be very dark. This sounds like M. ornata rather than M. phoebe, but the presence of M. ornata, although reported from Croatia (Koren and Štih 2013) has yet to be confirmed there. M. phoebe is certainly present further north than the Plitvice Lakes [TL], in Istria (Russell and Pateman 2013a, b). Overlooked by van Oorschot and Coutsis (2014).
Note 48. malvida Gaede, 1930, in Seitz (Supplement: 207, fig. 13d): presumed synonym of nominotypical phoebe. Gaede attributed this name to Fruhstorfer, but without a date; unable to find an original Fruhstorfer reference, Higgins (1941: 340) attributed it to Seitz (we have also failed to find any original Fruhstorfer reference, but we note that the Melitaea section of Seitz' Palaearctic supplement was by Gaede, not Seitz). Gaede noted that malvida had pointed forewings, suggesting a form of phoebe rather than of ornata and suggested an association with form narenta (see Note 55). He also illustrated (in Seitz 1930, Supplement: plate Neptis-Argynnis, fig. d: 5) the upperside, which is not helpful for identification. Although Tóth et al. (2014: 752, fig. 1, map) indicated the presence of M. ornata in Bosnia, no locality in Bosnia was given in their specimen list (Tóth et al. 2014: 751, table 1); the present authors are not aware of any modern records of ornata from Bosnia, and a TL of Bosnia suggests synonymy with nominotypical phoebe. Thurner (1964: 34), using the name malvinda Fruhstorfer (presumably a misspelling of malvida), suggested this form was also found in the Republic of Macedonia (formerly Yugoslavia).
Note 50. melanina Bonaparte, 1831 (125): 159: aberration of phoebe occitanica. This male aberration had the discal ground colour of the underside of the hindwings and the submarginal lunules black. It was taken in July at Subiaco, which is only 400 m above sea level, thus it was almost certainly a specimen from a second brood, ruling out M. ornata. Not mentioned by any modern authors.
Note 52. minor Wheeler, 1903: 84: an aberration of nominotypical phoebe based on size, specimens having less than 38 mm wingspan. This was an infra-subspecific name, with no status under The Code, but for the record, the name is preoccupied by Melitaea arcesia minor Elwes, 1899 (Higgins 1941: 341). Higgins (1941: 341) suggested, and the present authors concur, that the authority was probably Wheeler as there is no reference given for Frey in Wheeler's book.
Note 57. nigrogygia Verity, 1939: (17): synonym of phoebe occitanica. There has been some confusion related to this taxon. The TL was clearly stated by Verity (1939: (17); 1938: plate III, figs 12 and 14) to be Abbazia, Istria. At that time Istria was part of Italy but after World War 2 it became part of Croatia and the name was changed to Opatija. Higgins (1955: 118) gave the TL as "St. Dionisio, Macedonia at 800 m., gen.  Higgins (1955: 118). Russell and Pateman (2013a, b) reared a brood of M. phoebe from eggs laid by a female "nigrogygia" taken within 20 kilometres of Opatija; the larvae had black heads throughout their lives and most had an orange lateral stripe, clearly associating the taxon nigrogygia with M. phoebe occitanica, with which it is synonymised here. A study of Verity's actual specimens may provide further enlightenment.
Note 59. ogygia Fruhstorfer, 1907: 310: synonym of Melitaea ornata. Recognised as a distinct species by Lafranchis (2007aLafranchis ( , b, 2008 but considered a subspecies of M. ornata by Tshikolovets (2011), with a distribution of 'S. and C. Greece (including Peleponnese and W. Aegean Is.); probably S.-W. Bulgaria and European Turkey'. M. ornata appears to be widespread in Bulgaria (Kolev 2015, pers. comm.). Hesselbarth et al. (1995Hesselbarth et al. ( : 1031Hesselbarth et al. ( -1033 listed over 150 locations for this species (as 'punica telona'), all of which were in Asian Turkey. So far as the authors are aware M. ornata has not been recorded from the Greek region of Thrace, adjacent to European Turkey (Pamperis 2009: 433). The name ogygia was placed as a subspecies of M. ornata by Tshikolovets (2011: 498), as a synonym of M. punica telona (i.e. ornata) by Hesselbarth et al. (1995Hesselbarth et al. ( : 1030, and as a synonym of M. telona (i.e. ornata) by van Oorschot and Coutsis (2014: 63). Russell et al. (2007: 159, figs 16, 17) demonstrated that the larvae had red-brown heads and thus ogygia is placed as a synonym of M. ornata. The TL was given by Hesselbarth et al. (1995Hesselbarth et al. ( : 1031 as 'Poros, Meerenge von Salamis'; the Straits of Salamis do not exist near Poros Island, nor does it feature on any of the original specimen labels (Russell and Pamperis 2011: 143). Holotype identified by Bernardi and de Lesse (1951: 140).
Note 65. parva Caradja, 1895: 47: probable synonym of nominotypical phoebe. A small, brightly marked variety of the first generation (Higgins 1941: 341). A larva from Transylvania, Romania, having typical characters (black head with white lateral stripe) of nominotypical phoebe was figured by Russell et al. (2007: 159, fig. 14). Székely (2008: 175-176) included reports (unconfirmed by larval head colour) by T. Hácz of M. punica telona (= ornata) from Transylvania and North-Dobrudja in Romania; however, these records were reported later by Hácz (2012: 73) as M. phoebe. Not mentioned by van Oorschot and Coutsis (2014). Since both this and the previous entry are infrasubspecific, they are not covered by The Code.
Note 78. rubrofasciata Gušić, 1922: 95: probably a synonym of nominotypical phoebe: Higgins (1941: 342) Noted this as a small form with a deficiency of black pattern on the discal area of the wings. However, the name seems to indicate the presence of some red colour on the wings. Although Koren and Štih (2013) recorded M. ornata from five localities in Croatia, one of which was near Zagreb, the identity of the species has been questioned (Koren pers. comm.) The first author visited two of the locations concerned in May 2015 and considered that the biotope was unsuited to M. ornata. Podsused (the TL) is on the banks of the River Sava at c. 125 m above sea level and appeared on recent inspection to be encompassed by industrial buildings (Russell pers. obs.); it would seem unlikely that either species would be extant currently in that locality.
Note 80. saturata Staudinger, 1892: 323: synonym of nominotypical phoebe. A large brightly coloured form resembling many mountain forms of phoebe (Higgins 1941: 342). It occurs in the eastern Palaearctic and, since the presently known eastern limit of the distribution of M. ornata is Kazakhstan, southeast of the Ural Mountains, placement with nominotypical phoebe seems appropriate. Synonymised with M. phoebe by van Oorschot and Coutsis (2014: 60). Korb (2011: 158) identified Melitaea specimens from N Tian-Shan as M. phoebe saturata. The TL of saturata is Mongolia, some 2500 km northeast from Tian-Shan. Korb et al. (2015: 142-143, Col. pl. VI, figs 3 and 4), who then considered that M. phoebe was absent from Tian-Shan, reassessed this population as M. ornata; we consider saturata a synonym of M. phoebe phoebe.
Note 81. seminigra Delahaye, 1909: 10: aberration of phoebe occitanica. This aberrant female specimen, with almost black forewing uppersides, was taken in June at Pignerolles, Maine et Loire in west central France and thus outside the ranges of both nominotypical phoebe and M. ornata. Higgins (1941: 342) stated that he did not view the original publication and thus could make no comment on this name. It has not been mentioned by any recent author.
Note 83. sibina Alphéraky, 1881: 400, Tabl. XIV fig.13: status unclear (distinct species/synonym of nominotypical phoebe). This taxon is distributed mainly outside the western Palaearctic, with a western distribution limit in the Republic of Kazakhstan (Tshikolovets 2003: 328). Originally described as a variety of M.
phoebe, it was given species status by Higgins (1941: 349, plate 15: figs 5, 6, 11 and 12) and this has been followed by some recent authors (for example : Tshikolovets 2003: Tshikolovets : 328-329, 2005van Oorschot and Coutsis 2014: 65-66). It does not appear to be directly associated with any of the three taxa dealt with in this paper. We note that Tóth andVarga (2011) andTóth et al. (2014) were unable to separate it from M. phoebe using molecular or morphometric procedures.
Note 84. sterlineata Turati, 1920: 223, Tav. II, figs 10-12: synonym of phoebe occitanica. Although placed by Turati as an aberration of phoebina (= ornata, see Note 64), the specimens were taken by GC Krüger, at 800 m altitude, in September 1909; it must therefore represent a second or even third generation form, which precludes it from being ornata, which is univoltine.
Note 85. streltzovi Kolesnichenko & Yakovlev, 2004: 103: synonym of nominotypical phoebe. Distributed along the south-western slopes of the Mongolian Altai. All specimens taken in the first part of July, flying in mesophilous grasslands and river valleys. The figures (Kolesnichenko and Yakovlev 2004: figs 10, 11 on plates V and VI) show both sexes are heavily marked with a pale background on the upper surfaces of both fore-and hindwings. The club shaped antenna and the arcuate submarginal markings appearing to reach the intervening veins (see Table 1), suggest association with M. phoebe rather than M. ornata. Synonymised with M. phoebe using van Oorschot and Coutsis (2014: 61) Note 86. subcorythallia Verity, 1928: 162: synonym of phoebe occitanica. "The second generation of France" (Higgins 1941: 342).
Note 88. subtusca Verity, 1952: 349: synonym of phoebe occitanica. Verity (1952: 349) referred this form from southeast France to tusca from central Italy (see Note 96), and it is placed with phoebe occitanica as a result. M. ornata from Var, France occurs in a very different phenotype from the form of phoebe occitanica occurring in central Italy (Verity 1951: plate 44, figs 1-16), the former being much darker in colour and having triangular submarginal lunules (Russell et al. 2007: 162 fig. 52). Overlooked by van Oorschot and Coutsis (2014).
Note 90. tatara Krulikovsky, 1891: 236: status uncertain (possibly a hybrid). Spelt tartara (sic) by Higgins (1941: 342) but subsequently corrected (Higgins 1944: 46). The origin of this name refers to Tatastan, a Russian Province in which Casan, the TL, is located. Although Krulikovsky placed it under M. phoebe, M. ornata was not at that time established as a species. Higgins (1941: 342) (1897: 321), restated his suspicion that tatara was a hybrid. It is noted that hybrids have been recorded between M. ornata and M. phoebe by Bálint and Ilonczai (2001: 217) in Hungary and by Russell et al. (2014: 140, figs 7-9) in Slovenia; since both species probably occur in this area to the west of the Urals in the Russian Federation, a hybrid origin remains a possibility.
Note 91. telona Fruhstorfer, 1907: 310: synonym of Melitaea ornata (but see below). The holotype and allotype were examined by Bernardi and de Lesse (1951: 140). This name was placed as a subspecies of M. ornata by Tshikolovets (2011: 499) and by Tshikolovets and Nekrutenko (2012: 295). This is the name used by a number of authors for what is now known to be M. ornata, including the first author (Russell 2008;Russell and Pateman 2011), prior to our present understanding of the range of M. ornata, which led to the recognition that ornata and telona were conspecific. Russell et al. (2007: 159, fig. 15) demonstrated that the larva of telona from its TL has a red-brown head; larvae of ornata from Volgograd region, Russia, are similarly coloured and also has a red-brown head (Russell and Kuznetsov 2012: figs 1-3), suggesting synonymy with M. ornata. However, recent molecular analysis by Tóth et al. (2014) apparently suggests that telona may represent a species distinct from ornata; only two samples of telona from Lebanon, the origin of the 'voucher specimen' used as an example of telona by Wahlberg and Zimmermann (2000) for their mtDNA sequencing, were included in their analysis. Until this is resolved, it is considered prudent to retain telona as a synonym of M. ornata. Rather confusingly, van Oorschot and Coutsis (2014: 63) considered telona a distinct species and placed ornata as a synonym of M. phoebe.
Note 92. totila Stauder, 1914: 373: synonym (provisional) of Melitaea ornata. The first author visited Monte Cocuzzo, the TL, on a number of occasions but, in spite of the presence of a known host-plant (Centaurea deusta Ten.: Russell and Pateman 2011) only discovered one worn ♀ at ca. 1200 m, which unfortunately died prior to ovipositing. It appeared from its hindwing markings and spatulate antenna to be M. ornata. Also, a single ♂ was taken on Monte Mancuso, Calabria, some 24 km to the south, which from an examination of genitalia and external morphology, was almost certainly M. ornata. This form is therefore provisionally placed with M. ornata.
Note 93. tremulae Piller & Mitterpacher, 1783: 69, Taf. 4: figs 1 and 2: synonym (provisional) of nominotypical phoebe. The TL of Croatia, from where there have been no substantiated reports of M. ornata, strongly suggests association with phoebe phoebe. Hesselbarth et al. (1995Hesselbarth et al. ( : 1028 synonymised this name with M. phoebe phoebe. Not mentioned by any more recent authors. Note 94. tungana Seitz, 1909: 216: synonym (provisional) of nominotypical phoebe. The specimens were described by Seitz (1909: 216) as very melanic but the specimens examined by Higgins (1941: 342) showed that this character was variable in the Sayan Mountains (the TL) and suggested that many of these specimens were close to monilata Verity (see Note 53) and other Alpine forms (see Higgins 1941: 334). The form tungana has a distribution in the eastern Palaearctic and outside the presently recorded distribution of M. ornata, the authors provisionally place tungana with M. phoebe. Overlooked by van Oorschot and Coutsis (2014).
Sebastião", a south-Brazilian coastal island, was chosen by his supervisor Prof. Paul Müller, who had visited the island for herpetological studies in 1964, 1965, and 1967. Lepidoptera, collected by him for Prof. de Lattin, had not previously been evaluated. Marc Meyer had to prepare the material as a first step. He then identified the specimens very carefully as can be seen by the fact that he consulted well-known specialists of South American Lepidoptera (Keith Brown, Olaf Mielke, and Heinz Ebert) in cases where he was not certain. Altogether, 95 butterflies from the island of 335 square km were treated in detail with respect to their differences from the mainland populations.
At the same time the treatise laid the foundation for his lifelong interest in the biogeography of islands. In excursions to Madeira, to the Azores, and the Canaries and in publications (1991,1993,1995,1997), with co-authors (1990,1997,1998), he later on became concerned with the Lepidoptera of the Macaronesian isles and collected extensive material from there. It was his intention to write a thesis in that field. However, the chances to do so were not only much limited by his professional duties but also by his obvious honourable awareness that he had not studied for a doctorate.
After the probationary period at the technical lyceums Michel-Lucius in Luxembourg and Mathias Adams in Pétange in 1981, he obtained and held the position of Curator for Entomology at the Museum for Natural History in Luxembourg until his retirement owing to illness after 28 years of service in 2013. Building reconstruction was carried out where his office had been during the time of his employment and a new building of the Museum was opened in 1996. Little space, however, existed for the collections in his charge in a compact installation within the museum itself. A larger part is out-housed to a warehouse in Kehlen near Capellen in SW Luxembourg and which had to be visited by him in his work. It was his main task to register the fauna of Luxembourg, especially the Lepidoptera. His work is documented by regular publications mainly from the working group for invertebrate research (1981,1983,1985,1986,1987,1988,1989,1990,1991,1992,1993), partly together with co-authors (1979,1984) -see below. His commitment in mapping European invertebrates can be seen from the publication "Atlas Provisoire des Insects du Grand-Duché de Luxembourg", published together with A. Pelles in 1981.
Being multilingual, Marc was the ideal person for the position of the General Secretary of the "European Invertebrate Survey" (EIS), a position he held for 12 years. The task made it necessary for him to travel regularly to other countries, e.g. to the European Parliament in Strasbourg. It involved furthermore the organization of congresses.
Much new information was obtained on the distribution and systematics of Lepidoptera of Mongolia during expeditions by entomologists and botanists from the Altai State University (Barnaul, Russia) starting in 1999. These studies were concentrated in the territory of West Mongolia, primarily in the Mongolian Altai Mountains (aimaks Bayan-Ulegei, Khovd and Gobi-Altai). During the expedition of 2015 in the ranges of Dzun-Dzhargalant-Khairkhan, a large series of Alucita helena Ustjuzhanin, 1993 of the family Alucitidae (Lepidoptera) was collected. This species is a new family record for Mongolia. The "many-plumed moths" of the world include 216 species (van Nieukerken et al. 2011).

Material and methods
Adult Alucitidae were collected using a combination of a Philips−250 W lamp mounted above a fabric screen and battery-powered light traps using TL 8W/05 lamps. Chloroform was used as a killing agent. The collected material is deposited in the private collection of the first and second authors.  Alucita helena Ustjuzhanin, 1993: 83. Type locality: Russia, Altai Republic, Ongudai District, village of Inya.

Best wishes for the future. You deserve it for all you have put into life.
Eric Classey, on the occasion of Pam Gilbert's retirement, 1992

Early years
Pamela Gilbert was born at Queen Charlotte's Maternity Hospital, Hammersmith, London, on 14th December 1932, the daughter of Albert Edward Gilbert and Ellen Isabella Gilbert (née Clark). At this time the family were living at 121 Cromwell Road SW7 -only a few hundred metres west of the Natural History Museum, where she later spent all her working life. Today 121 Cromwell Rd looks an imposing address, given that her father is described on the birth certificate as a "general labourer". Pam later recalled her father as a taxi driver; her mother, who died at a relatively young age, had employment as a cook and housekeeper.
By the outbreak of WWII the family were living in the Ladbroke Grove area, near Paddington railway station. They survived the blitz of 1940 but, with the continuing bombing raids, like so many other London children, the following year Pam was 'evacuated' -in her case to Nailsworth, Gloucestershire, a country town about 40 km NE of Bristol. Many evacuees endured a miserable existence, away from family and friends, but Pam remembered this as a happy time -she was placed in the care of a kind family, other children from her part of London were around, she attended a good junior school, and it was her first experience of country living. But by 1944 there was concern regarding her secondary education and she was moved, with many other evacuees, to a special school in the Oxford area.
By the end of the war Pam had rejoined her family, who had moved at some point to the Bounds Green area of North London. Pam completed her secondary education at Trinity County Grammar School, Wood Green, gaining School Certificate qualifications in English (Language and Literature), French, Mathematics, Biology, History, Geography, Shorthand and Typewriting, passing with distinction in French, Biology and Geography, and then gained, at Higher Level, a qualification in Botany.

Entomology at the Natural History Museum
Noting her aptitude for biology, a school careers adviser suggested she try for a post at the Natural History Museum in South Kensington. Apparently, Pam had never heard of the place! But thus encouraged, she applied to become an "Assistant (Scientific)" at what was then officially known as the British Museum (Natural History). So it came to pass that on 1 st October 1951, eleven weeks before her 19 th birthday, Pam Gilbert started work in the Setting Room -a service unit for the Museum's Department of Entomology that also acted as a training section for new assistants. The Setting Room at that time was managed by S.J. ('Dick') Turpin, also responsible for discipline(!) amongst the junior staff. Duties included learning how to prepare specimens for the collections, slide making, printing labels, looking after and administering departmental stores, packing parcels of insects for the post, and 'Saturday Duty' -a rota requiring two assistants each Saturday to run the Entomology Department enquiry desk, and deliver internal mail throughout the museum as a whole.
New staff spent months, sometimes years in the Setting Room before, typically, being allocated to one of the several taxon-based sections into which the department was divided. In 1954 Pam was assigned to the Diptera Section which, at that time, notably included Paul Freeman, Harold Oldroyd, Peter Mattingly and Ralph Coe but, for various reasons, she was not very happy there. In the following year she was offered the chance of a transfer to one of the Museum's earth science libraries, but declined due to her lack of relevant background. But Pam's direct association with the dipterists was anyway short-lived, as she successfully transferred to the Entomology Library in 1956 "at her own request" (Freeman, memorandum, 9 th June 1969). At that time the departmental libraries of the Museum were still under the direct control of the Keepers, the heads of the scientific departments -the Keeper of Entomology in 1956 being W.E. China, successor to the long-serving N.D. Riley.

The Entomology Library
The Department of Entomology  did not take responsibility for the purchase and control of purely entomological publications and library material until 1937. By this time Clarence ('Charlie') Wood was in charge of the Entomology Library, with Bernard Clifton a part-time attendant. At the outbreak of WWII the library was dispersed to How Caple Court, near Ross-on-Wye, and Wray Castle, Ambleside.
In 1946 Bernard Clifton returned from war service and, due to Wood's ill health, gradually took over, by 1949 effectively becoming the Entomology librarian. In February 1952, on final completion of the long delayed Entomology Building (only about half of it had been completed before WWII), the main part of the insect library was relocated on the third floor. Pam Gilbert was appointed Assistant Librarian on 1 st October 1956, as the second member of staff, replacing Wood on his retirement.
At the time of her first employment at the Museum, Pam was still living near Bounds Green, but she later moved to the Paddington area, and thus much closer to her work. To become better fitted for her new role, Pam took the First Professional Examination of the Library Association (now 'CILIP'), and then attended their course for Associate status -but did not sit the ALA exam because of a change to full-time attendance as a requirement. Her LA studies were carried out, at least in part, at the North Western Polytechnic in Kentish Town -historically, part of what is now London Metropolitan University. In addition to French, Pam had some German, Russian and Turkish.
In 1974, on Clifton's retirement, Pam became the entomology Librarian. By this time she had been promoted, first to the rank of Senior Scientific Assistant (1960), then Experimental Officer (1 st December 1970). Pam remained as head of the Entomology Library until 1991, when she became full-time Deputy Head of the Museum's Department of Library Services, with the grade of Principal Scientific Officer.
By the late 1960s the Entomology Library, which occupied about a quarter of a floor of the Entomology building, was almost literally bursting at the seams. Fortunately there was a plan. By 1972 the Museum's new ornithology building at Tring had been completed, and the very substantial NHM bird collection which at that time occupied much of the three lower floors of Entomology was relocated. In return, up from Tring came the Rothschild Lepidoptera and various other insect collections -but there was still a net gain of space at South Kensington. The adjacent Diptera collections and staff were moved from the 3 rd to the 1 st floor, allowing the library literally to double in extent. Into this space were packed dozens of new book cases.
So close to his own retirement, Bernard Clifton showed little interest in this development and, perhaps somewhat ungallantly, left all the arrangements to Pam. With little other assistance, Pam set about reorganising the entire library, moving nearly all of the many tons of books herself. A positive outcome was that, as a result, Pam had a wonderful grasp of where all the various volumes and serials were to be found, as she had first allocated all of the spaces, and then moved everything onto the shelves herself.
During her tenure Pam demonstrated not only first-rate librarianship but also, because of her earlier training in entomology alongside professional taxonomists, an excellent understanding of the needs and issues affecting systematic entomology, as it was practised during that period. This, plus her sunny disposition and remarkable patience, meant that she was soon much in demand from staff and visitors alike, gaining a reputation amongst entomologists as "an entomologists' librarian". Pam's special ability was wonderfully recalled at the time of her retirement by the late Vic Eastop who, lamenting, wrote "who will now tell me the author and date of "the small brown (before it was rebound) book with a picture of an aphid gall near the back, that before the library was extended, used to be on the second or third shelf down, in either the fourth or fifth row of book cases to the left of the door as you went in (or perhaps it was as you came out)"?" Pam really could make sense of such enquiries! Pam also took a great interest in preserving manuscripts and other historical material, difficult "stuff" that entomologists seem able to generate in profusion. Under her guidance and leadership, the Entomology Library was one of the happier and more effective 'engine rooms' of the Museum. It was also a social connection, especially for smokers. Smoking was necessarily strictly forbidden throughout the entomology building, but 'les fumeurs' were allowed to indulge on the roof of the adjacent zoology 'Spirit Building', reached from a door very close to the library. Pam, a moderate smoker herself, often joined these alfresco gatherings, where many things, including museum gossip of course, were discussed.

The Department of Library Services
In 1975 all the Museum's subject libraries were brought together administratively into the Department of Library Services, headed by Librarian Maldwyn Jones ('Mal') Rowlands . Pam also served under the two subsequent head librarians, A.P. ('Tony') Harvey, and then Rex E.R. Banks. It was during Rex's tenure (1988)(1989)(1990)(1991)(1992)(1993)(1994)(1995)(1996) that Pam was promoted, initially part-time, to Deputy Librarian. Pam's working relationship with Rex evolved into a lasting friendship. Well into retirement they used to meet at least once a year for a pub lunch in Westerham, Kent, a small town half way between their respective homes -and this only ceased as Pam's lack of mobility due to arthritis worsened to the point where walking even a short distance had become just too painful to bear.
A key feature of the period when Pam was Deputy was the introduction of a large scale photocopying service that benefited an international research community. Before the era of the internet and electronic scanning, the only means of making available the content of antiquarian books and difficult to locate scientific journals and books to researchers who could not travel to specialist libraries, was to produce photocopies, sent by post. The Natural History Museum library during the 1980s and early 90s processed many thousands of such photocopy requests, with individual orders often listing hundreds of references. This major logistical challenge to library staff, checking and locating often obscure references, collating large orders and posting parcels to all parts of the world, was calmly managed by Pam. Many natural history books and papers published during this time fully acknowledge the important contribution of this photocopy service. In the late 1980s Pam was also instrumental in recognising that the library would need to adopt computer technology and, together with Rex Banks, they organised the scanning and transcription of hundreds of thousands of library catalogue cards into the first library database. This provided the foundation of the current on-line library catalogue which now benefits thousands of users every day via the internet.
Although the Natural History Museum, its libraries and their users were the core of Pam's professional life, it would be wrong to give the impression that her work was limited entirely to South Kensington. At various times Pam acted as Secretary to the ASLIB Biological Group, attended ASLIB conferences, and was a member of the Standing Conference of National and University Libraries (now the Society of College, National and University Libraries). Her involvement with various joint NHM, Hill House and Nokomis facsimile projects took her to Singapore and Australia, and she also visited Japan. Even so, there is no doubt that her focus was always very much in the Cromwell Road. Group

Publications
A group of entomologists with whom Pam developed particular rapport were members of the European lepidopterological union, Societas Europaea Lepidopterologica (SEL), a new society founded in Bonn in 1977. Starting the following year, Pam made 13 major contributions to SEL journals. These were annual bibliographical lists (sometimes with supplements) of publications on Lepidoptera that had appeared in Europe, or were relevant to the European fauna. In all cases Pam acted as editor, but also as a contributor. All were published under the rubric 'Bibliography of Palaearctic Lepidoptera', but in four different "series": The first two (1978,1979), for which Pam formally appeared as author, were published as papers in the Society's main journal, Nota Lepidopterologica. But from 1982, when the third part appeared, covering 1979-80, these bibliographies became the subject of a separate, more cheaply produced SEL serial -which had its formal title changed twice during Pam's involvement. In all these subsequent publications Pam was formally both Editor and one of the collective contributors. The seven annual parts published 1982-1988 appeared as Bibliographia Europaea Lepidopterologica, part 10 (in 1989) as Bibliographica Palaearctica Lepidopterologica, and the last three parts (1990)(1991)(1992) as the eponymous Bibliography of Palaearctic Lepidoptera. These 13 bibliographic contributions under Pam's editorship amounted in total to 792 pages, listing approximately 10,000 references, and undoubtedly did much to foster and strengthen the nascent society. On reaching retirement, Pam stepped down as editor, and the series then underwent another metamorphosis, to become the Index of Publications on European Lepidoptera (which first appeared in 1995, for the years 1991-1992, numbered as part 14). Harald Schreiber has given a historical account of Pam's important contribution to the Society (Societas Europaea Lepidopterologica (SEL) News -Nachrichten -Nouvelles (43): pp. 10,15,16,2007). Pam was elected an Honorary Member of SEL in 1988.
Pam also co-authored a valuable source book for general entomology (Gilbert andHamilton 1983, updated 1990), and a key work on manuscripts held in the library of the Natural History Museum London (Harvey, Gilbert and Martin 1996). However, remarkably, she is best known for her very first publication -A Compendium of the Biographical Literature on Deceased Entomologists (1978) and its continuation 30 years later, the companion volume A Source Book for Biographical Literature on Entomologists (2007).
What was initially "The biographical index of entomologists" was the subject of a publication proposal dated 29 th June 1973 by David Ragge, then Deputy Keeper of Entomology at the NHM, at which time the book was expected to have 6500 entries and 14000 references. To commence your publication career at over 40 years of age with something so ambitious is surely most unusual -and fraught with academic danger. Such works, almost all 'data' and very little interpretation, are always subject to errors and omissions -and when first published, the work received various criticisms. Some were speculative. Thus Harold Oldroyd (Journal of Natural History 13(1): 122, 1979) wondered why two dipterists of interest to him, J.M.R. Surcouf and Gertrude Ricardo, were missing. Pam's 2007 volume has entries for both -but these were not written until many years after the original Compendium appeared! John Clark states that the Source Book includes over 8000 entomologists and 21,500 citations (Archives of Natural History 37: 181, 2010). The sheer scale of this undertaking is reflected in a personal letter to Pam from Michael Ruijsenaars of Backhuys Publishers, dated 27 th November 2007: "With every new book we publish, I always have a sense of gladness … but … with your work, this feeling is considerably more poignant, in the knowledge of the enormous amount of work and time that you have lavished on this production." A genuine and rather amusing source of error in the Compendium concerned the fact that, as Klaus Sattler recalls, "Pam did not [then] appreciate that Eastern European countries in particular often published eulogies to commemorate birthdays or retirements. Pam might have noticed that a surprising number of entomologists had 'died' on their 60 th birthday … I myself knew four people who survived their 'death' by a good many years!" But in the total scheme of things such errors are mere peccadilloes. That these works remain so tremendously useful and so widely used, as Klaus observes, is testimony to their author's remarkable vision, tenacity and ability.

Retirement
Pam officially retired from the museum on 13th December 1992. Earlier that year she had been honoured in the Queen's Birthday Honours list with an OBE (Officer of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire), announced in the London Gazette on 12 th June. Some years earlier Pam had moved south of the river to the Croydon area, good for commuting by rail. But after retirement she relocated even further south, to Warlingham, a leafy, outer London suburb set amongst the North Downs. By this time she had learned to drive, and would set out in her little car soon after 5 am to make the 25 km journey to South Kensington. Arriving by 6.30 she became very well-known to museum security staff. This remarkable strategy for someone supposedly in retirement enabled her to produce several more publications, some of them very substantial (see Bibliography).
Due to her increasing mobility problems, as the years passed, Pam's visits to Cromwell Road became less frequent. Her general health started to deteriorate, but she was still absolutely determined to pursue her bibliographical endeavours. In the end only the car made this possible, reducing painful walking to an absolute minimum. Although her last recorded publication appeared in 2012, she continued working to the very end, most notably transcribing the correspondence of the 18 th century silversmith and entomologist Dru Drury. Pam died shortly before her 83 rd birthday, on 8 th December 2015, at Redhill, Surrey.

Memories and Reflections
At the time of her retirement, Laurence Mound, then Keeper of Entomology, wrote of Pam: "To me you have always epitomised the Natural History Museum -outstanding scholarship, worn lightly and with unfailing courtesy and humour, but with clarity of purpose and determination. Sharing your career has given me much inspiration, enlightenment -and sheer pleasure". Memoranda in the Museum's archives from the period of her first establishment as Entomology Librarian, notably by Turpin, Clifton, China, Riley and Freeman, reveal that Pam was always regarded in the same positive light by her colleagues.
Thus, in support of her promotion from Senior Scientific Assistant to Experimental Officer (for an insight into the structure of UK civil service science at that period, see Science 124(3222): 567-571, 1956), Paul Freeman wrote to the Museum Director on 9 th June 1969: "Miss Gilbert is an educated, intelligent woman, well up to E.O. standard, conscientious in her work and has been a great asset to the smooth running of the Library … She is particularly noted for the helpful way in which she will go to endless trouble to assist enquirers, regardless of their rank and has shown considerable skill at times in handling what could be difficult cases". Proof that Pam never lost this skill comes from a recent email by one of those many "enquirers", the extraordinary Australian lepidopterist and publisher Bernard d'Abrera: "Thank you for the most important item of news regarding the passing of our great mutual colleague, Pamela Gilbert OBE. What a magnificent person she was, both professionally and socially. I never once saw her lose her temper or be ungracious to anyone. I've seen her provoked Retirement: Pam at home [Photograph: Noleen Glavish] beyond human endurance, and every time there was this gentle smile, followed by that famous deep baritone chuckle. The sparkling eyes and the challenging look which made the offender feel gently but firmly corrected -I was one of them on several occasions when I pushed my luck a little too far. She never once denied me any assistance that I might have sought, and was always on hand to guide and help through several of my seemingly outrageous projects." [Bernard d'Abrera, in litt., 2016.] And it was through the d'Abrera connection that Pam first met Noleen Glavish, when she travelled to Melbourne for the launch of the Hill House Banks/Cook Portfolio (Gilbert, ed., 1990). As Noleen recalls, "Pam and I became instant friends when we met. She stayed at my house during that visit. I later visited London three times during the following four years and stayed with Pam -and we dug out the Bauer Collection. But as time went on my relationship with Pam was not so much business but a friendship, and I always visited her and often stayed at her house after Nokomis published the Ferdinand Bauer Collection prints in 1994. We used to sit for hours far into the night talking about all manner of things. If I hadn't met Pam I wouldn't be publishing todayshe was the driving force that got me to publish the Bauer Collection and it moved on from there. So I owe her a great deal." Cindy Cogan, who worked in the Entomology Library at the end of the 1960s, recalls Pam thus: "I had been working on the Coleoptera Section for three years and I had to go to the Library to sort out a map reference. Pam passed by and just asked if I had found what I was looking for and we started to chat. I commented that I was a bit fed up with my current job and later, due to Pam's recommendation, I was offered a post in the Entomology Library. She was my boss for two years, and taught me everything I needed to know to enable me to survive the everyday functioning of a specialist library. She created a happy atmosphere and we worked together as a team. Pam was very generous and at Christmas she would take me out for a meal. She had a great sense of humour and we were always laughing, and she could always see the funny side of the absurd. During the dreaded 'book checks' she was often to be seen up the ladders, sharing all the work, and never made me feel that I was only her assistant. Whenever I came back from leave, I found that most of my everyday work had been kept up-to-date and I was not greeted by a desk piled so high that I didn't know where to start. Pam was also a great cook, and when we organised leaving parties it was always great fun, as she made the best sausage rolls I've ever tasted! I'm so glad that I knew Pam and shared part of my life with her." Cakes were also a speciality -so much so that Krystyna Plater recently referred to these works of culinary art as "Pamtastic!" Indeed, Pam Gilbert was a truly fantastic colleague, one of the very best, and her passing is mourned not only by numerous present and previous museum staff, but literally thousands of visitors to the museum who had need, reason or desire to access the Museum's entomological library, or better understand the literature of natural history.

Introduction
The genus Spiniphallellus was described and its members diagnosed by Bidzilya and Karsholt (2008) and it was placed in Anomologinae, one of the subfamilies of Gelechiidae. The genus was established for three species collected from mountainous and desert areas of Palaearctic Asia: S. desertus Bidzilya & Karsholt, 2008 (Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan), S. stonisi Bidzilya & Karsholt, 2008 (Kazakhstan), and S. fuscescens Bidzilya & Karsholt, 2008 (Turkey). Later on, Šumpich and Skyva (2012) reported S. desertus from European Russia. Here a new species of the genus, viz. S. chrysotosella sp. n. is described. All these species have specific structures of the genital organs which are typical for the Anomologinae, such as a reduced gnathos, a relatively short valva closely connected to the tegumen, a short tegumen and a well-developed transtilla lobe (Piskunov 1975: 857;Povolný 1979: 44). The new species was recorded for the first time with one specimen from Turkey, Anatolia 01.v.1996 during a sunny day around 10 a.m. It was caught by netting Jasminum fruticans L., 1753 (Oleaceae) vegatation on a small dry, rocky hill area. This specimen remained undetermined for several years until three additional specimens were found from Caucasus (Georgia, Gremi) 23-25.v.2011 (Fig. 4). The habitat was again a dry rocky slope with plenty of Jasminum fruticans. The specimens were found resting on the leaves of Jasminum around 10 a.m. on a bright warm sunny day.
At the end of April, 2013, two additional specimens were found on Jasminum fruticans vegetation on the Rupite volcanic hill area near the town of Petrich in SW Bulgaria, Blagoevgrad district. The weather was unusually hot, over 30 degrees Celsius still at dusk. The specimens were attracted by artificial light during the first dark hours.
Zdenko Tokár proposed that the specimens should belong to the genus Spiniphallellus and the study of the known species of the genus justified the description of the new species, here named as Spiniphallellus chrysotosella sp. n. 2 strongly hirsute, apex sharp, weakly pointed inwards; transtilla lobe relatively long, digitate, apically with some fine setae; posterior margin of vinculum medially with broad rounded indentation, laterally formed as sub-triangular plate, distally covered with fine setae; saccus broad, rounded; basal half of phallus almost round, distal part relatively slender, tapered apically; ankylosed by strongly sclerotized and tightly attached anellus.
Diagnosis. Externally the new species is characterized by its forewing with gold shiny markings, which are absent in other close relatives. The species differs from S. fuscescens Bidzilya & Karsholt, 2008 by its longer and slenderer valva, longer transtilla lobe and by the form of its vinculum; from S. stonisi it differs by its broader uncus, slenderer valva and by distinctive transtilla lobes, lacking in S. stonisi; and from S. desertus it differs by its slenderer valva, narrower shape of the transtilla, and more rounded saccus.
Female genitalia. Unknown. Distribution. Bulgaria, Georgia, and Turkey. Biology. Early stages are still unknown although Jasminum fruticans seems to be the most probable host plant. The imago is mostly day active. Flight period begins at the end of April or beginning of May. S. chrysotosella has probably been overlooked due to its small size and because it is apparently diurnal and might not be usually attracted to lights.
Etymology. The species name is derived from its golden shiny forewing markings, which are absent from other related taxa. Remarks. Spiniphallellus was originally named based on the characteristic thorn or spine laterally in the medial part of the phallus. This process, however, is actually a strongly sclerotized part of the anellus, tightly fused to the phallus. The phallus is very difficult to remove during dissection without breaking the juxta-anellus complex.
The DNA barcode (sample ID MM24244) shows a very clear difference to all other moths in BOLD (www.barcodinglife.org). The nearest species is Diasemia grammalis Doubleday, 1848, which is an exotic Crambiinae moth differing by 8.16%. This barcode difference is so large that its placement is not considered meaningful. No other species of Spiniphallellus has been barcoded so far.