RAGONOT (1888: 30) [nach Copyright-freiem Scan auf www.biodiversitylibrary.org]
Weil die gängige Literatur hier mehr als verwirrend ist, sollen die Ausführungen von PLANT (2016) hier vollständig zitiert werden: "LERAUT (2014) regards albidella RAGONOT, 1888 as a synonym of sareptalla HRRICH-SCHÄFFER, 1861 and states that the two taxa are confused because of an “inaccuracy” in ROESLER’s (1973) drawing of the genitalia (presumably of sareptalla), which shows an absence of a costal tooth. This statement is a little confusing, since although LERAUT says the missing tooth is costal, it is the ventral (sacculus) side of the valva which is intended. unfortunately, ROESLER does not illustrate the female genitalia of A. albidella, but in his text he is clear that in the male the bulge beyond the end of the sacculus that is present in A. albidella is found nowhere else in Ancylosis. Regrettably, however, this last statement is inaccurate; a ventral tooth is present on the valva of sareptalla, but this ranges in size from small to minuscule and unless a slide is made of the genitalia, with adequate compression, can easily be overlooked. An indication of the range of variation in the size of this tooth is given in fig. 14b - d, and it is plain that the variation is not huge. However, a single male example from Beloslav [near Varna], 1, 7.vI.1956, leg. KARNOSCHITZKY, in coll. NMNHS, genitalia slide number NMNHS/CWP-002 (fig. 14a), exhibits a large tooth on the valva that is of similar dimensions to that illustrated by Roesler (Pl. 63 fig. 131). Additionally, there are subtle differences in the form of the transtilla, the culcita (central tooth in sareptalla but absent in albidella) and the shape of the vinculum that are not artefacts of slide preparation. These differences, in combination, seem to be beyond the range of variation expected in sareptalla."
LERAUT (2014) sieht in Ancylosis albidella RAGONOT, 1888 ein reines Synonym zu Ancylosis sareptalla (HERRICH-SCHÄFFER, 1861). PLANT (2016) kann das nicht nachvollziehen und schließt: "Ancylosis albidella (RAGONOT, 1888) is reinstated here as a valid species. It should be added that the female is apparently unknown; there is clearly scope for further investigation and clarification." In seiner Checkliste heißt es daher: "Ancylosis albidella (RAGONOT, 1888) stat. rev. bona sp."
BIDZILYA et al. (2019: 445-446) beschäftigen sich noch einmal sehr ausführlich mit diesem Taxon; sie kommen zum Schluss: "The conspecificity of the specimen from Bulgaria mentioned by Plant with A. albidella remains rather questionable. We suggest that A. albidella is most likely a synonym of A. sareptalla. However, we hesitate to support this synonymy initially proposed by Leraut (2014) until additional material from the type locality of A. albidella become available.
Die Art - so sie überhaupt Berechtigung hat - ist zwar weit verbreitet (Turkmenistan, Bulgarien, Ungarn, Slowakei, Spanien, Portugal), wurde aber nur extrem selten gefunden. PLANT (2016) meldet den Erstnachweis für Bulgarien (ein Männchen bei Beloslav (nahe Varna) und führt aus: "This appears to be only the fourth european locality for the taxon, which is otherwise known only from West Turkmenistan. It was added to the fauna of Spain by ASSELBERGS (1999) and SLAMKA (2010) mentions single specimens in Slovakia and Hungary, whilst CORLEY has also caught it in Portugal “from Carrapateira in the far south-west 20 years ago” (pers. comm., 17.XII.2014).
(Autor: Erwin Rennwald)