Plutonium Cavanna, 1881
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4825.1.1 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:F230F199-1C94-4E2E-9CE4-5F56212C015F |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4455411 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DE092D-FFE5-D71D-FF13-FC872E14DA53 |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Plutonium Cavanna, 1881 |
status |
|
(!) Plutonium Cavanna, 1881 View in CoL View at ENA
Type species. Plutonium zwierleini Cavanna, 1881 View in CoL (by monotypy).
Diagnosis. LBS 2–20 with spiracles (figs 5 EG in Bonato et al. 2017). Coxopleuron lacks spine at the place of corresponding process. Prefemur and femur of the ultimate legs lacking spines; pretarsus much longer than tarsal articles taken together and “expanding ventrally in a sclerotized ridge” ( Bonato et al. 2017: 11) i.e. blade-like.
Number of species. 1.
Remarks. Treated as a genus in Di et al. (2010: 51), Edgecombe & Bonato (2011: 395), Bonato et al. (2017: 1); not included in Vahtera et al. (2012a). The most recent morphological account on Plutonium — Bonato et al. (2017) —lacks information on structure of maxillae 2.
As for possible non-monophyly of Plutonium , we agree with Di et al. (2010: 55) who wrote: ”In Plutoniumidae , the morphological analyses … retrieved Theatops as a paraphyletic group, i.e., Plutonium is nested within Theatops ... A three-genus classification … would increase paraphyly rather than lessen it ... We do not place Plutonium in synonymy under Theatops , which would eliminate non-monophyletic taxa from Plutoniumidae …”. That suggestion was confirmed partially by Bonato et al. (2017: 17), who noted that their molecular data did “not decisively favour any of the two alternative hypotheses: (1) Plutonium and Theatops represent two separate lineages, which is consistent with a previous hypothesis elaborated on morphological similarities ( Shelley, 1997) and in agreement with current taxonomy, (2) Plutonium is a derived lineage within Theatops , which is supported also by previous cladistic analyses on morpho-anatomical data”. Because of its unique segmental distribution of the spiracles, we think that Plutonium should be kept as a genus at the moment.
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.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |