Dinelytron Gray, 1835

Heleodoro, Raphael Aquino & Rafael, Jose Albertino, 2020, Review of the genus Dinelytron Gray (Prisopodidae: Prisopodinae: Prisopodini), with a phylogenetic analysis of the genera of the Prisopodini, including the description of a new genus, Zoologischer Anzeiger 285, pp. 37-80 : 40-43

Dinelytron Gray, 1835

Figs. 8A, B ; 11A-B ; 14A-B ; 17A ; 20A-B ; 23A ; 26A, C .

Type species: D. grylloides Gray, 1835 by subsequent designation of Kirby (1904).

Dinelytron Gray,1835: 27 ; Westwood 1859: 163 (British Museum list); Kirby 1904: 408 (synonyms of former Orthoptera); Redtenbacher 1906: 150 (taxonomy); Bradley & Galil 1977: 202 (taxonomic arrangement); Zompro 2004: 309 (phylogeny); Rafael & Heleodoro 2017 (Brazilian catalog); Brock et al. 2019 (world catalog).

Diagnosis. Head opaque, dorsally flattened ( Figs. 8A-B ; 11A-B ; 14B and 48C, E ). Scape and pedicel dorsally black, flagellum brown or grayish ( Figs. 8B ; 14B ; 20B and 48E ). Male anterior femur trapezoidal, slender, having anterior and posterior margins straight; at least 3.5 times longer than wide (8B; 11B). Mesobasisternum with medial circular sclerite ( Fig. 49F ). Male genitalia with dorsal lobe conspicuously separated from ventral lobe; basal pouches forming single pouch; dorsal left sclerite sclerotized, broad, falciform; internal sclerite present ( Figs. 4 ; 5 ; 10 ; 13 ; 16 ; 19; 22; 25 and 50H).

Description _. General coloration variable, with different tones of brown, green and gray. Head. Opaque, dorsally flattened ( Figs. 8A-B ; 11A-B ; 14B ; 48C, E ). Frons with triangular sulcus ( Figs. 8C ; 11D ; 14C ; 17B ; 20C and 23B ). Clypeus anvil-shaped; labrum shaped as “inverted U” ( Figs. 8C ; 11D ; 14C ; 17B ; 20C and 23B ). Compound eye globose, with spots or stripes. Antenna with setae, as long as or surpassing metanotum; scape and pedicel dorsally black; flagellum dorsally brown or grayish ( Figs. 8B ; 14B ; 20B ; 48E ). Maxillary and labial palpi with setae.

Thorax. Pronotum opaque, longer than wide with carina or sulcus; proscutum quadrangular ( Figs. 8A-B ; 11A-B ; 14A-B ; 17A ; 20A-B ; 23A ; 26C ; 48I-J ). Mesonotum opaque, longer than wide, with longitudinal medial carina; mesoscutum rectangular, longer than wide; scutellum triangular or cordiform ( Figs. 8A-B ; 11A-B ; 14A-B ; 17A ; 20A-B ; 23A ; 26C and 48I-J ). Metanotum shiny, smooth, as long as wide. Median segment approximately 1.8 times longer than metanotum. Probasisternum trapezoidal, with apical margin wider than basal margin ( Fig. 49C ). Mesobasisternum rectangular, longer than wide, with medial circular sclerite at median third ( Fig. 49F ).

Legs. All legs with black spot at level of femuro-tibial articulation. Anterior femur at least 3.5 times longer than wide, with setae at anterior and posterior margins (8B; 11B; 49H). First tarsomere 1.5 times longer than second tarsomere. Mid and posterior leg dorsally and ventrally with setae. Mid leg shorter than remaining legs. Posterior femur ventrally with undulations or spines, better observed posterolaterally.

Wings. Tegmina elongated, with rounded apex, reaching tergum 7; shoulder pads inconspicuous ( Fig. 8A ; 14A ; 17A ; 20C ; 26A ; 49O ). Subcostal and radial vein close to each other, seeming fused. Number of ramifications of medial vein shifting from two to four. Posterior wing with distal half of costal area concolor with tegmina; anal area entirely hyaline or whitish, without spots ( Figs. 8A ; 14A ; 17A ; 20C ; 26A ; 49O ).

Abdomen. Elongated, slender, widening at tergum 7 towards apex ( Figs. 9A ; 12A and 15A) Vomer “V” shaped, wide at base and narrowing towards apex ( Figs. 9B ; 12C; 15C; 18B; 21B; 24B and 26B). Thorn pads semi-ellipsoid, with three to six spines ( Figs. 9B ; 12C; 15C; 18B; 21B and 24B). Subgenital plate not reaching tergum 10.

Genitalia. Mostly membranous, conspicuously subdivided in dorsal and ventral lobe, both connected by membrane ( Figs. 5 ; 16 and 50H, K-L). Dorsal lobe with small rigid spiny sensilla; dorsalmost wall of the dorsal lobe positioned next to basal pouch ( Figs. 4 ; 5 ; 10 ; 13 ; 16 ; 19; 22; 25 and 50H). Left posterior process covered by small spines, generally inconspicuous. Right posterior process inconspicuous. Basal pouches forming a single pouch, external to dorsal lobe, sclerotized ( Figs. 4 ; 5 ; 10 ; 13 ; 16 ; 19; 22; 25 and 50H). Dorsal left sclerite, pigmented, falciform, at base conspicuously connected to basal pouch; completely inserted into the genitalia, positioned between dorsal and ventral lobes; always directed from right margin towards left margin ( Figs. 4 ; 5 ; 10 ; 13 ; 16 ; 19; 22; 25 and 50H). Internal sclerite present, heavily sclerotized, except in Di. leukommatos sp. nov. and Di. trimaculatus sp. nov., positioned next to basal pouch ( Figs. 4 ; 5 ; 10 ; 13 ; 16 ; 19; 22; 25 and 50H). Ventral lobe with several small digitiform projections; posteriorly with subdivided flagellum in lower and upper lobules.

Female. Similar to male, but differing in following aspects: body more robust, longer and wider. Anterior femur as long as wide ( Fig. 6A ). Abdomen narrowing from abdominal segment 7 towards apex ( Fig. 6B-C ). Subgenital plate elongated, ellipsoid or rectangular, reaching tergum 10 ( Fig. 6D ).

Examined female material.

Dinelytron sp.1: “RNVP 01”, “Linhares-ES [Espírito Santo], Brasil, 17.iii.2009, Col. J.S. Santos” ( RNV) ( Fig. 3B ).

Dinelytron sp. 2: “UFAMP 01” “ Brasil, AM [Amazonas], Mao [Manaus], Reserva Ducke, v.1985, N. Hamada Col.” ( UFAM).

Dinelytron sp. 3: “INPAP 01”, “BR [ Brazil], RN [Rio Grande do Norte], Natal, Parque dos Coqueiros, 12.viii.2012 ” ( INPA ).

Dinelytron sp. 4: “CEIOC 7641”, “Itatiaia, E. do Rio [state of Rio de Janeiro], Brasil, 22.1.1927 ”/“Itatiaya [Itatiaia, state of Rio de Janeiro], 700m, Brasil, 8.xii.1951, W. Zikan Col.”/“Floresta da Tijuca, Guanabara [Rio de Janeiro], Brasil, 22.xi.1961 ” (2 \ MNRJ lost in the burning)/“UFVP01”, “Viçosa, D. D. Alvim Col., x.1946 ”/“UFVP 02”, “Viçosa, MG [Minas Gerais], 22.ii.1997, Lobo. A. P. Col.” (2 \ UFV) ( Fig. 3A ).

Dinelytron sp. 5: “UFVP 03”, “Viçosa, MG, Brasil, 10.xii.1982, Fiuza & Martins col.”/“UFVP 04”, “Viçosa, MG, Brasil, Recanto das Cigarras, 24.iii.1992, Fiuza col.” (2 \ UFV).

Dinelytron sp. 6: “UFVP 05”, “ xi.2011, UFV, Viçosa, MG, Brasil ” ( UFV).

Dinelytron sp. 7: “UFVP 06”, “Viçosa, MG, Brasil, 19.x.1983, P. S. Fiuza F. col.” ( UFV).

Dinelytron sp. 8: “UFVP 07”, “Viçosa, MG, Brasil, 3.x.1983, J. Leis col.”/: “UFVP 08”, “ Brasil, MG, Viçosa, iv.2007, col. Gomes S.M.S.”/: “UFVP 09”, “Flona Goytacazes, Linhares, ES, 19 25 0 56.3ʺS, 40 04 0 12.6ʺW, 08-10.xi.2010, Ar. Luminosa [light trap], Fiuza, David, J. Luis, Camilo cols” (3 \ UFV).

Dinelytron sp. 9: “CEIOC 7650”, “Itatiaia, E. do Rio, Brasil, J. F. Zikan col”, “ 29.xi.1929 ”/“CEIOC 7648”, “Itatiaia, E. do Rio, Brasil, J. F. Zikan col”, “ 8.i.1935 ”/“CEIOC 7649”, “Itatiaia, E. do Rio, Brasil, J. F. Zikan col”, “ 14.xii.1946 ”/“CEIOC 7647”, “Itatiaia, E. do Rio, Brasil, J.F. Zikan col”, “ 19.xi.1944 ”/“CEIOC 7644”, “Itatiaia, E. do Rio, Brasil, J. F. Zikan col”, “ 5.xii.1945 ”/“CEIOC 7643”, “Itatiaia, E. do Rio., Brasil, J. F. Zikan col., 1.x,1948” (6 \ CEIOC)/ “ZMUH-AS-20090805-019”, “ Dinelytron grylloides Gray \, Jos. Redtenbacher determ. 1899, public. 1906-08. Bestimm. Verz. Nr. 388”, “ Espírito Santo ( Brasil), J. Michaelis vend., 22.iv.1898 ”/ “ZMUH-AS-20090805-017”, “ Dinelytron grylloides Gray \, Jos. Redtenbacher determ. 1899, public. 1906-08. Bestimm. Verz. Nr. 382”, “ Rio de Janeiro ”/“PHA 157, Zoologischer Museum Hamburg”, “ Brasilien [ Brazil] Itatiaia, 700m, 6.xii.1926 ”,/“PHA 156, Zoologischer Museum Hamburg”, “ Brasilien, Itatiaia 700m, eing. 1928”, (4 \ ZMUH - examined by photo).

Remarks. Females could not be associated with males due to three reasons: 1) all of the Dinelytron species analyzed were mainly distinguished by the male terminalia and genitalia; 2) diagnostic external morphological characters of the males (e.g. shape of the labrum and clypeus) were not found in the females, even when both sexes were collected in the same area; 3) in some cases, more than one female species were collected at the same location (e.g. Rio de Janeiro, Itatiaia). A safer association can only be achieved through rearing from eggs and molecular analyses.

Species included:

Dinelytron agrion (note: although it is below demonstrated that it does not belong to Dinelytron , it is not going to be transferred to another genus in the present work).

Dinelytron betinho sp. nov.

Dinelytron grylloides type-species.

Dinelytron hipponax incertae sedis.

Dinelytron leukommatos sp. nov.

Dinelytron museunacional sp. nov.

Dinelytron ramusculus sp. nov.

D. shuckardi incertae sedis.

Dinelytron trimaculatus sp. nov.

Dinelytron unilineatus comb. nov.

Figures

Fig. 8. Dinelytronbetinho sp.nov._holotype.A)habitus,dorsal view;B)idem,lateral view; C) head,frontal view; D) scheme of clypeus-labrum from figure C;E) tegmina,dorsal view.

Fig. 11. Dinelytron grylloides _ A) habitus, dorsal view; B) idem, lateral view; C) head, frontal view; D) scheme of clypeus-labrum from figure C; E) tegmina, dorsal view.

Fig. 14. Dinelytron leukommatos sp. nov. _ holotype. A) habitus, dorsal view; B) head, antenna, and pronotum, dorsal view; C) head, frontal view; D) scheme of clypeuslabrum from figure C; E) tegmina, dorsal view.

Fig.17. Dinelytron museunacional sp. nov. _ holotype. A) habitus, dorsal view; B) head, frontal view; C) scheme of clypeus-labrum from figure B; D) tegmina, dorsal view. Note: all the type material was lost during the burning of the MNRJ.

Fig. 20. Dinelytron ramusculus sp. nov. _ holotype. A) habitus, dorsal view; B) idem, lateral view; C) head, frontal view; D) scheme of clypeus-labrum from figure C. Note: the paratype was lost during the burning of the MNRJ.

Fig. 23. Dinelytron trimaculatus sp. nov. _ holotype. A) habitus, dorsal view; B) head, frontal view; C) scheme of clypeus-labrum from figure B; D) mid femur, posterior view; E) scheme of Figure D.

Fig. 26. Dinelytron unilineatus comb. nov. _. A) habitus of lectotype (pres. desig.), dorsal view; B) vomer of lectotype, ventral view; C) habitus of paralectotype, lateral view.

Fig. 48. Illustration of phylogenetic characters. A) head and antenna of Paraprisopus merismus (Westwood, 1859) lateral view; B) head of Prisopus sp., lateral view; C) head of Dinelytron ramusculus sp. nov., lateral view; D) head of Damasippus spatulatus Piza,1937; E) head, antenna and pronotum of Dinelytron leukommatos, dorsolateral view; F) head and antenna of Prisopoides brunnescens sp. nov., dorsal view; G) pro- and mesoscutum of Prisopus biolleyi Carl, 1913, dorsal view; H) Pro- and mesoscutum of Damasippus discoidalis Redtenbacher,1906, dorsal view; I) pro- and mesonotum of Dinelytron museunacional sp. nov., dorsal view; J) mesothorax of Dinelytron ramusculus sp. nov., lateral view; K) head, pro- and mesothorax of Prisopus cornutus Gray, 1835, lateral view; L) pro- and mesothorax of Prisopoides villosipes comb. nov., lateral view.

Fig. 49. Illustration of phylogenetic characters. A) sterna 1-4 of Paraprisopus merismus (Westwood,1859), ventral view; B) metasternum-sternum 4, of Prisopoides attrobrunneus sp. nov., ventral view; C) probasisternum of Dinelytron betinho sp. nov., ventral view; D) Probasisternum of Prisopus horridus (Gray,1835), ventral view; E) pro- and mesobasisternum of Paraprisopus merismus, ventral view; F) mesobasisternum of Dinelytron leukommatos sp. nov.m ventral view; G) anterior femur of Damasippus discoidalis Redtenbacher,1906, dorsal view; H) anterior femur of Dinelytron sp., dorsal view; I) anterior femur of Prisopoides brunnescens sp. nov., anterior femur; J) anterior femur of Prisopus sp., dorsal view; K) posterior femur of Prisopoides villosipes comb. nov., posterior view; L) posterior femur of Prisopus sp., posterior view; M) tegmina and posterior wing of Dinelytron agrion Westwood, 1859, dorsal view; N) tegmina and posterior wing of Damasippus discoidalis, dorsal view; O) tegmina and posterior wing of Dinelytron museunacional sp. nov., dorsal view; P) heavytesselated posterior wing of Prisopus bioleyi Carl, 1913, dorsal view; Q) light-tesselated posterior wing of Prisopus minimus Chopard, 1911, dorsal view.

Fig. 4. Male genitalia of Dinelytron betinho sp. nov. _ holotype attached to subgenital plate. A) dorsal view; B) right dorsolateral view; C) right lateral view; D) left lateral view.

Fig. 5. Scheme of the male genitalia of Dinelytron betinho sp. nov. _ holotype. A) dorsal view; B) ventral view; C) right lateral view; D) left lateral view.

Fig. 10. Dinelytron betinho sp. nov. _ genitalia. A) dorsal view; B) scheme of figure A; C) scheme of ventral view.

Fig. 13. Dinelytron grylloides _ genitalia. A) dorsal view; B) scheme of figure A; C) scheme of ventral view.

Fig. 16. Dinelytron leukommatos sp. nov. _ genitalia. A) dorsal view; B) scheme of figure A; C) right lateral view; D) scheme of figure C.

Fig. 9. Dinelytron betinho sp. nov. _ abdominal structures. A) terga 8-10 and cercus, dorsal view; B) sterna 7-9 (subgenital plate); C) vomer and cercus, ventral view.

Fig. 6. Unidentified females of Dinelytron Gray, 1835 A) habitus, dorsal view; B) idem C) terga 7-10, dorsal view; D) apex of abdomen, ventral view.

Fig. 3. Damasippus discoidalis Redtenbacher, 1906 _. A) genitalia in dorsal view B) scheme of figure B.