Cryptochironomus Kieffer
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5281/zenodo.189776 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6220720 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03AA946E-FFF5-E06E-13D0-F984FA35FC2A |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Cryptochironomus Kieffer |
status |
|
Key to Nearctic males of Cryptochironomus Kieffer View in CoL
1. Anal point broad and flat ............................................................................................................................................. 2
- Anal point narrow ........................................................................................................................................................ 3
2. Mesal apical margin of gonostylus emarginate .................................... C. scimitarus View in CoL Townes (Townes 1945 fig. 110).
- Mesal apical margin of gonostylus straight or nearly straight ..................... C. sorex View in CoL Townes (Townes 1945 fig. 109)
3. Mesal apical margin of gonostylus emarginate ................................... C. argus View in CoL Roback (Roback 1957: 106, fig. 557).
- Mesal apical margin of gonostylus not emarginate .................................................................................................... 4
4. Gonostylus about 4.0 times as long as wide, AR about 3.7, Wing length 3.1–3.4 mm .................................................. ................................................................................................................... C. blarina View in CoL Townes (Townes 1945 fig. 112).
- Gonostylus 2.0–3.7 times as long as wide; when AR higher than 3.6, Wing length higher than 3.4 mm or lower than 3.1 mm ........................................................................................................................................................................ 5
5. Gonostylus widened towards apex; frontal tubercles present; AR 3.5–5.1; LR1 1.12–1.39 (1.5 in Townes), 9–24 sen- silla chaeticae on p2 ....................................................................................................................................................... 6
- Gonostylus not distinctly widened towards apex; frontal tubercles mostly absent, when present AR 2.5–3.8, LR1
1.45–2.02 and mostly 1–6 sensilla chaeticae on p2; when AR higher than 3.5, LR1 higher than 1.59 ......................... 7 6. AR 4.35–5.12, LR1 1.12–1.21, gonostylus strongly widened towards apex .................................................................. ............................................. C. stylifera (Johannsen) View in CoL ( Fig. 2 View FIGURES 2 A, B; Townes 1945 fig. 114 as C. psittacinus (Meigen) View in CoL .
- AR 3.54–4.03, LR1 1.23–1.39, gonostylus slightly widened towards apex.................................................................... .............................................................................................................. C. digitatus (Malloch) View in CoL ( Townes 1945, fig 113)
7. LR1 1.31–1.67, frontal tubercles absent ....................................................................................................................... 8
- LR1 1.45–2.02, when lower than 1.7 frontal tubercles present................................................................................... 10
8. Wing length 4.99–5.78 mm; LR1 1.48–1.67 ................................................. C. eminentia View in CoL Mason (Mason 1985 fig. 3)
- Wing length 2.30–4.75 mm; LR1 1.31–1.55 ................................................................................................................ 9
9. Wing length 3.01–4.75 mm, AR 2.64–3.40, LR1 1.34–1.55 ............... C. ramus View in CoL Mason ( Fig. 4 View FIGURE 4 A; Mason 1985 fig. 4)
- Wing length 2.30–2.80, AR 2.52–2.82, LR1 1.31–1.45 ............................................................................ C. ramus View in CoL var.
10. Wing length 1.8 mm, gonostylus only about twice as long as wide, frontal tubercles present ...................................... .......................................................................................... C. parafulvus View in CoL Beck et Beck (Beck and Beck1964 Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 A).
- Wing length 1.9–5.6 mm, gonostylus at least 2.5 times as long as wide, frontal tubercles present or absent ........... 11
11. Gonostylus about 2.8–3.2 times as long as wide, anal point slightly spatulate apically, frontal tubercles absent ........ .......................................................................................................... C. ponderosus ( Sublette) (Sublette 1964 View in CoL fig. 56).
- Gonostylus about 2.2–2.7 times as long as wide, anal point tapering parallel-sided or slightly spatulate, frontal tuber- cles present or absent ................................................................................................................................................. 12
12. Frontal tubercles absent; wing length 2.5–5.6 mm ......................................................................................................... ......................................................................... C. curryi View in CoL Mason (Mason 1985 fig. 2; Darby 1962 fig. 49 as C. fulvus View in CoL )
- Frontal tubercles present; wing length 1.9–3.2 mm or 5.1–5.3 mm .......................................................................... 13
13. Wing length 5.1–5.3 mm; AR 2.5–2.6 ................................................................. C. conus View in CoL Mason (Mason 1985 fig. 1)
- Wing length 1.8–3.2 mm; AR 2.5–3.4........................................................................................................................ 14
14. LR1 1.56–1.73, mean 1.64; anal point slightly spatulate apically ...................................... C. imitans View in CoL sp. n. ( Fig. 4 View FIGURE 4 C).
- LR1 1.60–2.02, mean 1.78 ( Sublette 1964: 132), anal point parallel-sided .................................................................... ......................................................................................................... C. fulvus (Johannsen) View in CoL ( Sublette 1964 fig. 72–75).
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.