Re-examining the rare and the lost: a review of fossil Tortricidae (Lepidoptera) Author Heikkilä, Maria Author Brown, John W. Author Baixeras, Joaquin Author Mey, Wolfram Author Kozlov, Mikhail V. text Zootaxa 2018 2018-03-13 4394 1 41 60 journal article 26761 10.11646/zootaxa.4394.1.2 96807e95-89bd-4f9c-8e64-dd44cf0ca98a 1175-5326 3066097 6AEE9169-0FC2-4728-A690-52FFA1707FC0 Tortricibaltia diakonoffi Skalski, 1992 Excavation locality and depository: Skalski (1992) reported the FMNH Chicago as the depository of this fossil ( Holotype : LEP.SUCC.49 NHMC/AWS/ Baltic Region (Baltic Amber, Prussian Fm.)/Lutetian, Middle Eocene). However, it was not found in the inventory by the FMNH entomology collection manager Crystal Maier and MH. The re-assessment is based on information in Skalski (1992) . Published illustrations: Skalski 1992: 140 , figs 1–5 (photographs and drawings). Condition: According to Skalski (1992) , this amber fossil is 10 × 13 × 3 mm and mounted on a microscope slide. It is a male moth with the head, thorax (with legs), one pair of wings and the abdomen preserved. The forewing length is 5.0 mm. Comments: Tortricibaltia diakonoffi was first mentioned in Skalski (1976) without a description; hence, it was originally a nomen nudum . Skalski (1992) subsequently validated the taxon with a description. The wing venation is typical of Tortricidae , and the genitalia have a slender uncus and elongate valvae, consistent with its assignment to Tortricidae . By mistake, Tortricibaltia diakonoffi was placed under Olethreutinae in Sohn et al. (2012) (Prof. J.-C. Sohn, pers. comm.). Subsequently, in the divergence time analysis by Fagua et al. (2017) this fossil was used to give a minimum age to Olethreutinae. To support this placement, Fagua et al . (2017) mention “the presence of forewing veins M-stem and stem of R4+5”. Although these authors acknowledge that this is a plesiomorphic trait among extant Tortricidae , they mention that it is found almost exclusively in Olethreutinae. However, in the absence of other characters, we consider the evidence weak. In addition, the presence of a well developed CuP is somewhat troublesome. According to Horak (2006: 25) , in Olethreutinae the cubitus posterior (CuP) is present with very few exceptions near the wing margin but never as a fully developed vein. In its reduced form, it is usually present, although it is absent altogether in Cochylini ( Horak 1998: 199 ) . Because the reported characters of the fossil do not include apomorphies or character combinations that would unambiguously place it reliably in any of the tortricid subfamilies or tribes, we find its use it as a calibration point to give a minimum age to Olethreutinae unfounded. Regardless of its tribal and/or subfamilial assignment, this fossil appears to be a tortricid.