> Warum hat man dafür einen neuen Topf aufgemacht, wo doch
> Phyllonorycter eh eine Riesengattung ist??
Dazu lässt sich einiges hier nachlesen:
EFROVÁ, H. & V. SKUHRAVY (2000): The larval morphology of Cameraria ohridella Deschka & Dimić compared with the genus Phyllonorycter Hübner (Lepidoptera, Gracillariidae). Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis 48 (4): 23-30.
The genera Cameraria and Phyllonorycter can be easily distinguished according to their genitalia morphology, to the pupa and to the shape of the mine (Deschka & Dimić, 1896); Opler & Davis, 1981, etc.). There exists also clear differences in the caterpillar morphology. In Phyllonorycter distinct differences exist between the sap-feeding and the tissue-feeding instars (usually 4th and 5th). The tissue-feeding instars show massive functional mandibles, four lateral stemmata are situated at an irregular quadrangle, thoracic legs are well developed showing the coxal and the next three segments, the ventral and the anal prolegs protrude with crochets in irregular or regular circle (Figs 15-17). The spinning instars of Cameraria ohridella remain still comparatively flat due to the different character of the mine. Their mouthparts are complete, but the mandibles are small and situated laterally being obviously not functional. The lateral stemmata form one group. Prothoracic legs are reduced consisting of only one segment with the little rudimentary claw, ventral and anal propegs are flat, anal prolegs showing singule transverse band of crochets (Figs 12-14). the sclerotized plates are wider in Cameraria ohridella and they become enlarged during the development. These areas are limited in both dorsal and ventral segment parts in Phyllonorycter spp., and they are less distinct in tissue-feeding instars, until they nearly disappear. The setae are longer in Phyllonorycter spp. in their mean and they become longer in their development. They do not become situated laterally in Phyllonorycter spp. in that distinct way seen in Cameraria ohridella in the last instars. The coxal setae on prothoracic legs in Phyllonorycter spp. are distinct and three subventral setae (SV1-3) on 3rd-5th abdominal segment are still present (Figs 10, 11). The coxal setae in thoracic legs of Cameraria ohridella are reduced and only two subventral setae are present on the 3rd-5th abdominal segmant. The seta SD2 is distinctly shorter or indistinct in the abdominal segments of the genus Phyllonorycter [...]
Aus meiner laienhaften Sicht fiel mir beim Auseinanderpopeln von C. ohridella-Minen ihre völlig andere Struktur im Vergleich zu Phyllonorycter-Minen auf.