Ectoedemia ingloria Puplesis, 1988 (Figs 73–76, 185–197) Ectoedemia ingloria Puplesis, 1988: 280, 281. Ectoedemia ingloria Puplesis, in Puplesis 1994: 200. Ectoedemia rosiphila Puplesis, in Puplesis et al. 1992: 55–57 (syn. nov.) Ectoedemia rosiphila Puplesis, in Puplesis 1994: 201, 202. Material examined. 2 ♂ (holotype and paratype): Tajikistan, 30 km N Dushanbe, Varzob Canyon, Kondara, el- evation ca. 1200 m, 7.vii–20.viii.1986, R. Puplesis, genitalia slide nos AN457 (holotype), AN427 (paratype) (ZIN, also see Remarks); 1 ♂: same locality as holotype, 1.vii.1991, R. Puplesis and A. Diškus, genitalia slide no. AN426 (ZIN); 1 ♂: Tajikistan, 30 km N Gissar, Hanaka, 1100 m, 23.vii.1990, R. Puplesis, genitalia slide no. AN425 (ZIN); 1 ♂: Tajikistan, 60 km N Dushanbe, env. Ziddi, 2000 m, 24.vii.1990, R. Puplesis, genitalia slide no. AN424 (ZIN); 1 ♂ (holotype of Ectoedemia rosiphila Puplesis), Kazakhstan, Talasskiy Alatau, Tyan Shan, 90 km E Chimkent, Aksu Dzhabagly (Zhabagly) Reserve, 1300 m, larva on Rosa fedtschenkoana Regel, 20.viii.1987, ex. pupa i.1988 (indoors), R. Puplesis, genitalia slide AN466 (ZIN, also see Remarks). Diagnosis. This species belongs to the Ectoedemia angulifasciella species group. Externally, the combination of some brown special scales along the costa on male forewing underside (Figs 75, 76) and absence of hair pencil on upper side of male hindwing (Fig. 74) distinguishes E. ingloria from other representatives of the group. In the male genitalia, E. ingloria is most similar to E. insignata which also possesses larger spines on the phallus apically, a wide pseuduncus, a pointed apical process of valva and inconspicuous lobes of the vinculum, however, E. ingloria differs from E. insignata in the unique shape of gnathos with small caudal process on dentate plate (Fig. 186) and externally. Remarks. Forewing length 2.4–2.6 mm; wingspan 5.2–5.7 mm. Forewing with a greyish white fascia (Fig. 73); forewing underside with a row of grey-brown, special scales along costal margin (Figs 75, 76); hindwing without a hair pencil (Fig. 74). We provide the first photographic documentation of the holotype of E. ingloria (Figs 73–76, 185–191). For a full description see Puplesis 1988: 280, 281, and Puplesis 1994: 200. We have studied and provided the first photographic documentation of the holotype of E. rosiphila Puplesis (Figs 192–197) and found no external or internal differences when compared with E. ingloria; therefore, E. rosiphila is now synonymized with E. ingloria; for original description of E. rosiphila see Puplesis et al. 1992: 55–57. Bionomics. Host plants are Rosa spp., including Rosa fedtschenkoana Regel, Rosaceae (Puplesis 1994). Larvae mine in leaves in August. The initial part of the mine is a slender gallery with an interrupted line of black frass; further on the mine turns into an oval blotch with dispersed frass. Generations are unknown; it is expected only one generation per year. Distribution. Known from the mountains of Central Asia: Hissor Range, a mountain range in the western part of the Pamir-Alay system, Tajikistan (Fig. 1: Hr) and the Talasskiy Alatau in the western Tien Shan (Tyan Shan), Kazakhstan (Fig. 1: Ta) (new distribution). Remarks. We provide the first photographic documentation of the holotype E. rosiphyla Puplesis (now synonymized with E. ingloria) and report on new distribution of E. ingloria in Kazakhstan. Additionally, the holotypes and paratypes of E. ingloria and E. rosiphila, earlier deposited at LEU (=VPU) will be transferred to ZIN (see Material & Methods).

Published as part of Stonis, Jonas R., Remeikis, Andrius, Diškus, Arūnas & Navickaitė, Asta, 2020, Documenting new and little known leaf-mining Nepticulidae from middle and southwestern areas of the Asian continent, pp. 401-452 in Zootaxa 4881 (3) on pages 422-423, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4881.3.1, http://zenodo.org/record/4283789