Leptobasis candelaria Alayo 1968
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5281/zenodo.194870 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6203230 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/1F53FD42-D67C-FF8C-FF19-75C6FC86FC9C |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Leptobasis candelaria Alayo 1968 |
status |
|
Leptobasis candelaria Alayo 1968 View in CoL
Figs. 1 View FIGURE 1 a, 2b, 3b, 5a, 6b, 10, 19a, 20b, 21b, 27
Leptobasis candelaria Alayo 1968a: 83 View in CoL (description: holotype 3, Candelaria View in CoL , Pinar del Río, Cuba, in IES [not examined]); 1968b: 45, 51 (illustrations of holotype 3); — Paulson 1982: 254, 260 ( Mexico, West Indies); — Davies & Tobin 1984: 77 (catalog); — González-Soriano 1993: 296; — Bridges 1994: VII.43 (catalog); — González- Soriano & Novelo-Gutiérrez 1996: 164 ( Mexico); — Flint 1996: 19 (checklist); — Steinmann 1997: 287 (catalog); — Tsuda 2000: 38 (catalog); — Förster 2001: 62 (key to species); — Trapero Quintana & Naranjo López 2003: 27 – 28 ( Cuba); — Trapero Quintana & Naranjo López 2004: 179 (in key); — González-Soriano & Novelo-Gutiérrez 2007: 129 ( Mexico); — Novelo-Gutiérrez & Gómez-Anaya 2009: 686 (record).
Specimens examined. Total 2 3, 2 Ƥ: 1 3, 1 Ƥ, Mexico, Veracruz State, stream 6.9 km E of Córdoba, by Mex. Hwy. 150, 18°53'24"N, 96°55'12"W, 12 xiii 1976, leg. R.W. & J.A. Garrison; 1 3, 1 Ƥ, Belize, Toledo District, Monkey River, 16°21'N, 88°29'W, 27 viii 1995, leg. Tineke Boomsma, All specimens deposited in RWG.
Diagnosis. The combination of metafemoral armature ( Fig. 5 View FIGURE 5 a) and convoluted, foliate cercus ( Figs. 20 View FIGURE 20 b, 21b) will distinguish males from all others except for L. guanacaste . The proximal large metafemoral spur of L. candelaria ( Fig. 5 View FIGURE 5 a) is not as long as that of L. guanacaste ( Fig. 5 View FIGURE 5 b) and the shape of the cerci differ between the two species. The ventro-basal process in L. candelaria is projected ventro-posteriorly and is visible in medio-dorsal view when the cerci are spread ( Fig. 20 View FIGURE 20 b); this structure is ventrally curved and hidden from view when the cercus is viewed medio-dorsally in L. guanacaste ( Fig. 20 View FIGURE 20 c). Females of L. candelaria and L. guanacaste are unique in having the dorsal margin of ovipositor concave in lateral view ( Figs. 19 View FIGURE 19 a, b); this structure is linear in all other species ( Figs. 19 View FIGURE 19 c–f). The female of L. candelaria differs by the unique morphology of its prothoracic hind lobe; its middle lobe is expanded with lateral margins angulate and overlying a smaller inferior margin ( Fig. 2 b). In L. guanacaste , the hind lobe is upright, of even width, and its lateral arms are deflexed ventrally diverging from the carinate propleural extension ( Fig. 2 c). Mature individuals of L. candelaria have broad mid-dorsal and humeral dark stripes and the pale postocular spots are round ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 a); in mature L. guanacaste , the dark antehumeral stripe is lacking and the postocular spots are represented by narrow pale triangles ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 b).
Dimensions. Males (n = 2): Hw 15.0–15.6; abdomen 28; total length 33–34. Females (n 2): Hw 17.2– 18.1; abdomen 26–28; total length 32–33.
Distribution. Cuba, Mexico, and Belize ( Fig. 27 View FIGURE 27 ).
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 |
|
Genus |
Leptobasis candelaria Alayo 1968
Garrison, Rosser W. & Ellenrieder, Natalia Von 2010 |
Leptobasis candelaria
Novelo-Gutierrez 2009: 686 |
Gonzalez-Soriano 2007: 129 |
Trapero 2004: 179 |
Trapero 2003: 27 |
Forster 2001: 62 |
Tsuda 2000: 38 |
Steinmann 1997: 287 |
Soriano 1996: 164 |
Flint 1996: 19 |
Gonzalez-Soriano 1993: 296 |
Davies 1984: 77 |
Paulson 1982: 254 |
Alayo 1968: 83 |