Rhumosa, Hugel & Desutter-Grandcolas, 2018
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4425.3.5 |
|
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:F11D82EC-084C-4575-8AE1-104139D6AAEF |
|
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5960002 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/22711315-BB27-FFA8-FF56-FDDABFA8FBAD |
|
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
|
scientific name |
Rhumosa |
| status |
gen. nov. |
Genus Rhumosa View in CoL n. gen.
Type species. Rhumosa bolognei n. gen., n. sp, here designated.
Distribution. Central America, Caribbean, Lesser Antilles.
Diagnosis. Rhumosa n. gen. is characterized by: head with no sexual dimorphism ( Fig. 1 – 20 View FIGURES 1–20 ; unlike in Licodia Walker, 1869 ), narrow, with subparallel genae in front wiew; pronotum not fully covering the mesonotum ( Fig. 3, 7, 11, 15, 19 View FIGURES 1–20 ; pronotum extended in Apotetamenus Brunner von Wattenwyl, 1888 ); foretibia with 2 dorsal outer subapical spurs ( Fig. 21, 25, 29, 33, 37 View FIGURES 21–40 ; typically 1 in Lutosa , Neolutosa Gorochov, 2001 , Hydrolutos Issa & Jaffe, 1999 ); male X th abdominal tergite lobes dorso-ventrally oriented ( Fig. 44, 49, 54, 59, 64 View FIGURES 41–65 ; as in Neolutosa ; mediolaterally oriented in Lutosa ), contact of the two lobes forming a long vertical suture below the hooks ( Fig. 44, 49, 54, 59, 64 View FIGURES 41–65 ; as in Neolutosa ; only very small contact in Lutosa ), lobes without hooks at the apices ( Fig. 44, 49, 54, 59, 64 View FIGURES 41–65 ; as in Lutosa ; hooks at the apices in Neolutosa ); membraneous area between male X th tergite and epiproct very reduced or absent ( Fig. 44, 49, 54, 59, 64 View FIGURES 41–65 ; as in Neolutosa ; usually extended in Lutosa ); paraprocts reduced, with a small spine at median end ( Fig. 69, 73, 77, 81, 85 View FIGURES 66–85 ; paraprocts very complex in Neolutosa and most Lutosa ); epiproct triangular at the basis, contacting distal margins of X th tergite lobes ( Fig. 44, 49, 54, 59, 64 View FIGURES 41–65 ; as in Neolutosa ; different in Lutosa ); male subgenital plate with a distinct ventral carina ( Fig. 45, 50, 55, 60, 65 View FIGURES 41–65 ; even in EtOH preserved specimens; dry Lutosa specimens with median membraneous area on SGP can superficially appear as having a carina; Lutosa and Neolutosa without median carina), distal lateral angle of plate border not armed (often armed with processes in Lutosa ), distal border of plate with two spines between styli ( Fig. 45, 50, 55, 60, 65 View FIGURES 41–65 ; unlike Lutosa and Neolutosa ). Epiphallic apodemes much developed, turned inwards posteriorly ( Fig. 66, 70, 74, 78, 82 View FIGURES 66–85 ). Female subgenital plate triangular, without emargination (87, 89, 91, 93, 95; not triangular with deep emargination in Neolutosa ).
Description. Superficially similar to Lutosa Walker, 1869 (c.f. diagnosis). Body size average for the subfamily. Body laterally flattened; shiny, without conspicuous setae. Male and females with no sexual dimorphism except in the genital area.
Color. General coloration shiny brown, tarsi and anterior ventral angle of pronotum lighter in all species ( Fig. 96 – 100 View FIGURES 96–100 ).
Head. Head in front view much higher than wide, as wide in ocular area as in mandibular area, genae subparallel ( Fig. 1, 5, 9, 13, 17 View FIGURES 1–20 ). Fastigium verticis as wide ( Fig. 8 View FIGURES 1–20 ) or wider ( Fig. 16 View FIGURES 1–20 ) as scapus; compressed between lateral ocelli; ending variable, pointing ( Fig. 4 View FIGURES 1–20 ), or broadly rounded ( Fig. 16 View FIGURES 1–20 ). Fastigium frontis contacting the fastigium verticis in a narrow point ( Fig. 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 View FIGURES 1–20 ). Ocelli well distinct ( Fig. 1, 5, 9, 13, 17 View FIGURES 1–20 ). Carinae lateralis externa not distinct; carinae lateralis interna distinct in sideview ( Fig. 3, 7, 11, 15, 19 View FIGURES 1–20 ). Scapus non armed.
Thorax. Pronotum not fully covering mesonotum, lateral lobes angulose between ventral and posterior borders, but without projection ( Fig. 3, 7, 11, 15, 19 View FIGURES 1–20 ). Anterior margin more or less straight in dorsal view ( Fig. 2, 6, 10, 14, 18 View FIGURES 1–20 ). Wings. Absent. Legs. Fore coxa with one median antero lateral spine (e.g. Fig. 1, 19 View FIGURES 1–20 ). Fore femora non-armed. Fore tibia ( Fig. 21, 25, 29, 33, 37 View FIGURES 21–40 ): with 1 – 2 dorsal inner subapical spurs (in addition to 1 dorsal inner apical spur); with 2 dorsal outer subapical spurs (in addition to 1 dorsal outer apical spur); with 4 ventral inner subapical spurs (in addition to 1 ventral inner apical spur); with 4 ventral outer subapical spurs (in addition to 1 ventral outer apical spur); with one oval tympanic aperture on each side. Mid femora non-armed. Mid tibia ( Fig. 22, 26, 30, 34, 38 View FIGURES 21–40 ): with 2 dorsal anterior subapical spurs (in addition to 1 dorsal anterior apical spur); with 3 dorsal posterior subapical spurs (in addition to 1 dorsal posterior subapical spurs); with 4 ventral inner subapical spurs (in addition to 1 ventral inner apical spur); with 3 ventral outer subapical spurs (in addition to 1 ventral outer apical spur). Hind femora ( Fig. 23, 27, 31, 35, 39 View FIGURES 21–40 ): outer genicular lobe with one ventral spine more or less conspicuous; inner genicular lobe with 1 apical spine; external surface with 11 – 14 chevron ridges. Hind tibia ( Fig. 24a, 28a, 32a, 36a, 40a View FIGURES 21–40 ): with 1 minute ventral subapical spur after the middle; with 11 – 14 dorsal outer subapical spines; with 10 – 13 dorsal inner subapical spines. Abdomen. Laterally flattened. Without conspicuous stridulatory pegs.
Male. X th abdominal tergite ( Fig. 44, 49, 54, 59, 64 View FIGURES 41–65 ): forming two vertical trapezoid lobes (hardly visible in dorsal view, Fig. 42, 47, 52, 57, 62 View FIGURES 41–65 ); lobes dorso-ventrally oriented; with one minute median dorsal/proximal hook on each lobe ( Fig. 44, 49, 54, 59, 64 View FIGURES 41–65 ); contact of the two lobes forming a long vertical suture below the hooks ( Fig. 44, 49, 54, 59, 64 View FIGURES 41–65 ). Epiproct more or less visible in dorsal view ( Fig. 42, 47, 52, 57, 62 View FIGURES 41–65 ); anterior part triangle shaped, posterior margin variable ( Fig. 44, 49, 54, 59, 64 View FIGURES 41–65 ); directly nested between lobes of X th abdominal tergite, without membranous area separating them. Paraprocts ( Fig. 69, 73, 77, 81, 85 View FIGURES 66–85 ) very small, with a minute sclerotized median projection; hidden under epiproct ( Fig. 44, 59, 64 View FIGURES 41–65 ) or hardly visible ( Fig. 49, 54 View FIGURES 41–65 ). Subgenital plate ( Fig. 43, 48, 53, 58, 63 View FIGURES 41–65 ): broadly rounded or more angulose in ventral view, with a median proximal membranous area; with a distinct ventral carina ( Fig. 45, 50, 55, 60, 65 View FIGURES 41–65 ); with small styli; distal border of plate not armed on lateral angles (more lateral to styli insertion); distal border of plate with two spines between styli ( Fig. 45, 50, 55, 60, 65 View FIGURES 41–65 ). Epiphallic apodemes much developed, turned inwards posteriorly ( Fig. 66, 70, 74, 78, 82 View FIGURES 66–85 ).
Female. Subgenital plate (87, 89, 91, 93, 95): triangular, without emargination. Ovipositor ( Fig. 86, 88, 90, 92, 94 View FIGURES 86–95 ): ventral valves straight in the proximal quarter, and regularly up curved distally.
Derivatio nominis. This genus is named after the French word for rum, all species of the genus displaying the color of dark rum, and coming from a major rum-producing region. All species described in the present article are named after a rum produced near their respective type locality. We wish to emphasise that this is intended in the spirit of honouring local expertise in rum production, and the flavour of local rums, not the people after whom these rums are named (some of whom, paradoxically, may have been unsavoury characters).
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.