Brueelia cassiopeia, Gustafsson & Bush, 2021
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.1080/00222933.2020.1836280 |
|
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:6D472E90-DCD1-471F-8A9C-B260C2F2074D |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/336B879A-0C52-FFD8-FE31-F9FBFB94A690 |
|
treatment provided by |
Carolina |
|
scientific name |
Brueelia cassiopeia |
| status |
sp. nov. |
Brueelia cassiopeia sp. nov.
( Figures 13–14 View Figure 13 View Figure 14 )
Type host
Spizella passerina arizonae Coues 1872 – chipping sparrow.
Type locality
California, United States .
Other hosts
Spizella passerina passerina ( Bechstein 1798) – chipping sparrow.
Diagnosis
Brueelia cassiopeia sp. nov. is most similar to B. angustifrons ( Carriker 1902) and B. hesperides sp. nov., with which it shares the following characters: tps absent from male tergopleurite VII ( Figures 3a View Figure 3 , 5a View Figure 5 , 13a View Figure 13 ); aps present on male tergopleurites VI–VII ( Figures 3a View Figure 3 , 5a View Figure 5 , 13a View Figure 13 ); ps absent from female abdominal segment III ( Figures 3b View Figure 3 , 5b View Figure 5 , 13b View Figure 13 ). Brueelia cassiopeia is more similar to B. hesperides , with which it shares the following characters not found in B. angustifrons : ps absent from male abdominal segment III in B. cassiopeia ( Figure 13a View Figure 13 ) and B. hesperides ( Figure 5a View Figure 5 ), but present in B. angustifrons ( Figure 3a View Figure 3 ); gonopore with antero-lateral extensions in B. angustifrons ( Figure 4c View Figure 4 ), but without such extensions in the other two species ( Figures 6c View Figure 6 and 14c View Figure 14 ); rugose area present on mesosome in B. hesperides ( Figure 6c View Figure 6 ) and B. cassiopeia ( Figure 14c View Figure 14 ), but absent in B. angustifrons ( Figure 4c View Figure 4 ). Brueelia cassiopeia can be separated from B. hesperides by the following characters: ss present on male tergopleurite V in B. cassiopeia ( Figure 13a View Figure 13 ), but absent in B. hesperides ( Figure 5a View Figure 5 ); proximal mesosome rounded in B. cassiopeia ( Figure 14c View Figure 14 ), but flat in B. hesperides ( Figure 6c View Figure 6 ); parameres elongated in B. hesperides ( Figure 6d View Figure 6 ), but short in B. cassiopeia ( Figure 14d View Figure 14 ); gonopore roughly rectangular with shallowly concave posterior margin in B. cassiopeia ( Figure 14c View Figure 14 ), but broadly crescent-shaped, with deeply concave posterior margin in B. hesperides ( Figure 6c View Figure 6 ).
Description
Both sexes. Head elongated drop-shaped ( Figure 14a View Figure 14 ), lateral margins of preantennal head flat to slightly convex, in some specimens longer than illustrated, and with distal section slightly concave, frons flat to slightly concave. Marginal carina slender, deeply displaced and widened at osculum. Ventral anterior plate elongated. Head chaetotaxy as in Figure 14a View Figure 14 . Preantennal nodi slender, not bulging. Pre- and postocular nodi moderate. Marginal temporal carina with irregular median margin. Gular plate lanceolate. Thoracic and abdominal segments as in Figure 13a–b View Figure 13 . Base pigmentation pale brown; marginal and marginal temporal carinae, margins of antennal sockets, proepimera, metepisterna, and lateral margins of tergopleurites dark brown; sternal and subgenital plates and lateral section of tergopleurites medium brown. All pigmentation darker in female than in male.
Male. Thoracic and abdominal chaetotaxy as in Figure 13a View Figure 13 ; ss present on tergopleurite V; tps absent on tergopleurites II–VII; aps present on tergopleurites VI–VII; ps absent on abdominal segment III. Basal apodeme narrowing slightly anteriorly ( Figure 14b View Figure 14 ). Proximal mesosome elongated, rounded, lateral margins concave ( Figure 14c View Figure 14 ). Mesosomal lobes wide, rugose area extensive; 2 pmes sensilla on each side of gonopore. Gonopore broad, roughly rectangular, distal margin shallowly concave. Penile arms short, not reaching distal margin of mesosome. Parameres broad, not elongated, pst1–2 as in Figure 14d View Figure 14 . Measurements ex Spizella passerina arizonae (n = 2): TL = 1.40; HL = 0.35–0.36; HW = 0.24;
PRW = 0.15–0.16; PTW = 0.22–0.23; AW = 0.30–0.31. Measurements ex S. p. passerina (n = 3): TL = 1.19–1.26; HL = 0.30–0.31; HW = 0.22–0.23; PRW = 0.13–0.14; PTW = 0.20–0.21; AW = 0.27–028.
Female. Thoracic and abdominal chaetotaxy as in Figure 13b View Figure 13 ; ss absent on abdominal segment III. Lateral margins of proximal subgenital plate concave to roughly parallel ( Figure 14e View Figure 14 ), with narrow connection to cross-piece. Vulval margin gently rounded to slightly flattened medianly ( Figure 14e View Figure 14 ), with 4–5 short, slender vms and 3–4 short, thornlike vss on each side; 3–4 short, slender vos on each side of subgenital plate; distal 1 vos median to vss. Measurements ex Spizella passerina arizonae (n = 16): TL = 1.63–1.79 (1.71); HL = 0.37–0.40 (0.38); HW = 0.25–0.27 (0.26); PRW = 0.16–0.17 (0.17); PTW = 0.25–0.27 (0.26); AW = 0.3–0.38 (0.35). Measurements ex S. p. passerina (n = 6 except TL and AW where n = 5): TL = 1.53–1.73; HL = 0.36–0.38; HW = 0.25–0.26; PRW = 0.15–0.17; PTW = 0.22–0.26; AW = 0.31–0.39.
Etymology
Brueelia cassiopeia is named after Queen Cassiopeia of Ethiopia, who was considered very beautiful, an attribute that applies equally well to the host of B. cassiopeia sp. nov., as well as to the louse itself.
Material examined
Ex Spizella passerina arizonae : Holotype ♂, California [ United States], Mar. 1939, R. Meinertzhagen , 13,019 ( NHML) [marked with black border on slide] . Paratypes. 1♂, 16♀, same data as holotype ( NHML) .
Ex S. p. passerina . Paratypes. 4♀, Las Vacas , Coahuila, Mexico, 4 July 1958, C .A. Ely, CAE- 600 (PIPeR); 2♂, 1♀, Basswood Lake , Minnesota, United States, 30 June 1959, J . R. Beer ( UMSP); 1♀, same locality, 16 July 1963, J . R. Beer ( UMSP); 2♂, 2♀, same locality, 18 July 1959, J . R. Beer ( UMSP); 1♂, same locality, 22 July 1959, J . R. Beer ( UMSP).
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.