Coletinia tinauti Molero-Baltanás, Gaju-Ricart & Bach de Roca, 1997

Molero-Baltanás, Rafael, Gaju-Ricart, Miquel, Fišer, Žiga, Bach de Roca, Carmen & Mendes, Luís F., 2022, Three new species of European Coletinia Wygodzinsky (Zygentoma, Nicoletiidae), with additional records and an updated identification key, European Journal of Taxonomy 798 (1), pp. 127-161 : 152-153

Coletinia tinauti Molero-Baltanás, Gaju-Ricart & Bach de Roca, 1997

Coletinia tinauti Molero-Baltanás, Gaju-Ricart & Bach de Roca, 1997: 97–104 , figs 1–4.

Coletinia tinauti – Molero et al. 2013: 49–52 , figs 1b, 6b, 9b, 153–163.

Material examined

SPAIN • 14 ♂♂, 8 ♀♀; Jaén Province , Cueva de la Morciguilla ; 24 Dec. 2013; GEV leg.; UCO Ref. Z2507 .

Variability remarks

The abundant material belonging to this species collected at one locality (22 specimens) allows to assess the variability of C. tinauti . This sample comes from a cave about 35 km distance from the type locality of the species, and the insects collected completely fit the original description. Some specimens of this sample have been dissected and examined, concluding that most of their characters are proven to be constant inside the population, such as the shape of the urosternite VIII of males or the number of divisions of the ovipositor. Nevertheless, the variability of some characters proves to be wider than previously known for this species (see Table 1). For example, the shape of the hind margin of the urotergite X in males proves to be variable, since in some specimens it is folded in its median part or is more convex dorsally but more straight ventrally; this agrees with the variability detected for this character in C. maggi by Gilgado & Ortuño (2015), although this variability is not detected in C. tinauti for females.

The terminal filaments of this species present few pegs with blunt apex (at most 5 but usually 4 or less in each cercus). The paracercus has only, as usual, short, pigmented spines. The formula of the paracercus of the holotype is P1 (1[1 d]) +P2 (1[0]); in this specimen the paracercus is broken and only

the first division is preserved. The illustration presented by Molero-Baltanás et al. (1997) in the original description corresponds in fact to a cercus.

Variability of the paracercus in other male specimens examined: the first division of the cercus bears in some specimens (as the holotype) one thin acute and small dorsal spine; in other specimens this spine is absent. The second division shows 3 more robust and short dorsal spines (the third longer than the preceding ones) inserted on alternate rings of setae. If the dorsal spine on P1 is absent, these spines are present on the first, third and fifth rings of setae; if the dorsal spine on P1 is present, the modified spines are inserted on the second, fourth and sixth rings of setae. So, the formula can be P1 (1[0]) +P2 (1[1d] +2[0]+ 3[1d] +4[0]+ 5[1d]) or P1 (1[1d])+P2 (1[0]+ 2[1d] +3[0] +4[1d] +5[0] +6[1d]). All these spines are acute but clearly different (shorter, more robust, and pigmented) to the unmodified setae of the dorsal side of the paracercus of females.

In cerci, the inner-dorsal spines are more robust than the inner-ventral ones and usually show blunt apex, except those in the C3, and can be considered as pegs, but there is some variability (for example, in the holotype there is only one peg in the first ring of C2, see Fig. 1C ). The remaining spines are thinner and frequently acute but always shortened compared with setae in similar position in females. The formula of the left cercus of the holotype (shown in Fig. 3 ) is: C1 (1[1id +1iv]) +C2 (1[1 id +1iv] +2[1id])+C3 (1[1id + 1iv]+ 2[1id]); the right cercus is drawn by Molero et al. (1997: fig. 3.6), except for the second ring of setae of C3, which is damaged (in the caption it is incorrectly indicated as paracercus) and its formula is C1 (1[1 id +1 iv])+C2 (1[1 id + 1iv]+ 2[1id]) +C3 (1[1id +1iv]).

Variability of the cercus in other male specimens examined: the limit between the second and the third division of the cercus has a more distal position in most of the remaining specimens observed, so the spines of the first and second ring of setae of C 3 in the holotype correspond in these additional specimens to the third and fourth ring of setae of C2. But the arrangement of pegs is similar, with some exceptions:

– The pegs of C1 are absent in some specimens; in this case, the apex of the spine of the third ring of setae of the C2 is blunt.

– Some spines inserted on inner-ventral position can be absent or reduced to thin usual setae (not modified).

Considering this variability, the formula of cerci of most specimens of C. tinauti where the division between C2 and C3 is placed beyond the fourth ring of setae is: C1(1[0–1 id +0–1iv]) + C2(1[1 id +0– 1iv] + 2[1 id +0–1iv] +3[1 id + 0–1iv] + 4 [0–1 id + 0–1iv]). The maximum number of blunt pegs in C2 is 4.

Figures

Fig. 1. Characters of taxonomic interest in Coletinia Wygodzinsky, 1980.A–C. Coletinia tinauti Molero, Gaju & Bach, 1997, holotype. A. Micrographs of a pedicellar apophysis. B. Urotergite X. C. Basal part of the left cercus. Abbreviations: C1, C2 and C3 = first, second and third divisions of the cercus (the limit between the first and the second is better in focus); D = disc of the urotergite; id = spines or pegs inserted inner dorsal position; the first id spine in the C2 has blunt apex and can be considered as a peg; iL = inner length of the apophysis; iv = spines inserted in inner ventral position; Ms = marginal setae; oL = outer length of the apophysis; P = pedicel; Ss = submarginal setae.

Fig. 3. Coletinia dalmatica Molero-Baltanás, Fišer, Bach de Roca & Gaju-Ricart sp. nov. Holotype, ♂ (MNCN_Ent 283558). A. Mandible. B. Maxilla and maxillary palp. C. Labial palps and anterior part of the labium. D. Thoracic nota. E. First leg, excluding apical tarsomeres. F. Femur, tibia, tarsal articles and praetarsus of the third leg. Scale bars: A, C, F = 0.1 mm; B, D–E = 0.2 mm.