Anavilhanas, Camisão & Dietrich, 2022
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.5200.4.7 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:5BF3B688-07BD-43F2-8911-979185CAA4FF |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7277512 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D64D114D-FFC4-FF84-FF1B-3BA9FC91FDE4 |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Anavilhanas |
status |
gen. nov. |
Anavilhanas View in CoL gen. nov.
( Figure 1 View FIGURE 1 )
Type-species: Scaphytopius (Tumeus) rubidus DeLong, 1980 View in CoL
Coloration: Body white to stramineous dorsally and ventrally. Crown, pronotum and mesonotum heavily marked with symmetrical brown and orange spots and maculae. Forewing translucent, with diffuse brown and ochraceous markings and more or less well delimited round white spots, veins light brown.
External morphology: Head with anterior margin somewhat produced anteriorly in dorsal view; transocular width slightly greater than pronotum width; crown between eyes less twice eye width; coronal suture extended to midlength of crown; crown surface with fine longitudinal striations, distinctly depressed anteromedially; frontal region concave in lateral view; transition from crown to face angled; anterior margin of head shagreen; lateral frontal sutures evenly divergent dorsad of antennal pits, reaching ocelli; ocellus medium sized, very close to eyes, slightly ventrad of anterior margin of head; eye with mesal margin with very slight emargination adjacent to antennal base. Antennal ledge absent. Clypellar suture complete. Clypellus widening apically, following natural curve of gena, flat in lateral view. Gena slightly concave laterally below eye, not visible behind eye in dorsal view; single fine erect seta close to lateral frontal suture present. Lorum wider than clypellus near base, apex nearly reaching lower margin of face; maxillary sensillum closely adjacent to lorum slightly beyond midlength. Frontoclypeus shagreen, more than two times longer than wide, relatively flat in lateral view.
Pronotum sparsely punctate, without transverse striations, lateral margin very short with indistinct carina. Scutellum not elevated, exposed part of mesonotum and scutellum together approximately as long as pronotum.
Forewing rounded apically; macropterous; Costal margin with 3 extra reflexed veinlets basad of outer anteapical cell; inner apical cell closed; outer anteapical cell somewhat constricted near middle, divided by 2-3 extra r-m crossveins; inner anteapical cell closed; clavus with crossvein between A1 and claval suture and crossvein between claval veins, appendix narrow, restricted to anal margin. Hind wing venation complete, with R2+3 and M4+5 separate and connected by crossvein.
Profemur with AM1 seta distinct and situated near ventral margin, intercalary row with 9 fine pale setae, AV1 resembling intercalary setae, basal setae very small, stout, poorly developed. Protibia cylindrical, rows AD and PD with 1 and 4 macrosetae, respectively. Mesofemur row AV setae very small and poorly visible except enlarged preapical seta. Hind femora, tibiae and tarsi missing from only available specimen.
Male genitalia: Pygofer incised past mid-length; with vertical irregular row of macrosetae on distal third; without processes. Segment X moderately long, sclerotized laterally. Valve short, subtriangular, anterior margin transverse. Subgenital plate subtriangular, lateral margin evenly convex in ventral view with short angulate apical projection, longer than wide, with sparse, fine setae; macrosetae absent. Connective articulated to aedeagus, anterior arms somewhat divergent, without processes, stem shorter than arms. Style preapical lobe broad and only slightly prominent; apophysis distad of preapical lobe robust, shorter than rest of style, indistinctly denticulate, apex curved slightly mesad. Aedeagus with two pairs of apical processes; gonoduct uniform, gonopore apical on dorsal surface between processes. Phragma membranous, without setae.
Female genitalia: Female unknown.
Etymology: The name, a feminine noun, is based on the type locality of the type species, near the Anavilhanas archipelago on the Rio Negro.
Notes: The new genus is similar to some genera of the tribe Bahitini , such as Frequenamia DeLong, 1947 and Perubahita Linnavuori & DeLong, 1978 which have a similar color pattern, the crown somewhat produced anteriorly, the transition of crown to face angled, and the aedeagus with apical processes. However, the new genus can be distinguished by its more slender body, the forewing with inner anteapical cell closed, and particularly the absence of macrosetae on the subgenital plates of the male genitalia. In overall body form, coloration, wing venation and leg chaetotaxy, the new genus is also similar to Yungasia Linnavuori, 1959 (tribe Athysanini ), but differs in having a distinct preapical depression on the crown, in lacking false veins in the forewing brachial cell, in lacking teeth or processes on the male pygofer, and in lacking macrosetae on the male subgenital plates. It is here included in Bahitini based on the preapically depressed crown, presence of extra reflexed veins on the forewing costal margin and distal processes of the aedeagus. This genus was not included in the recent phylogenomic analysis of Deltocephalinae ( Cao et al. 2022) but the phylogeny indicates that Bahitini belongs to a larger lineage also comprising the endemic New World tribes Pendarini , Scaphytopiini and most endemic New World genera of Athysanini and Scaphoideini .
The new genus is described based on a single male specimen originally described by DeLong (1980) and incorrectly placed in Scaphytopius (Tumeus) . It differs from Scaphytopius in having the gena emarginate below the eye and not extended behind the eye in dorsal view. The holotype is missing its hind legs and the tip of the right forewing. Most of the abdomen and parts of the genital capsule and genitalia are missing from the genitalia vial attached to the holotype specimen and the connective is broken into two halves along the stem.Nevertheless, DeLong’s holotype is sufficiently preserved and different enough from previously known Neotropical Deltocephalinae to justify its placement in a new genus. It is redescribed below.
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 |
|
SubFamily |
Deltocephalinae |