Megaphasma denticrus ( Stål, 1875 )
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5852/ejt.2022.827.1849 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:8B6F1573-B627-4C62-94CA-DB0F1146ED2C |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6798609 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03CF87FA-8575-FF98-D43F-CBD0FA59D238 |
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
scientific name |
Megaphasma denticrus ( Stål, 1875 ) |
status |
|
Megaphasma denticrus ( Stål, 1875) View in CoL
Fig. 54 View Fig
Diapheromera denticrus Stål, 1875: 73 View in CoL .
Diapheromera armata Piza, 1973: 183 View in CoL . Syn. nov.
Diapheromera denticrus View in CoL – see Brock et al. 2022 for an extensive citation list.
Megaphasma dentricus View in CoL [sic] – Caudell 1903: 572 (misspelling of “ denticrus ”).
Megaphasma denticrus View in CoL – Rehn 1903: 329. (see Brock et al. 2022 for an extensive citation list)
Remarks
While analysing specimens at MELQ, the authors came across the holotype of Diapheromera armata Piza, 1973 ( Fig. 54 View Fig ) which was described based on that male, purportedly collected in the municipality of Lavras, state of Minas Gerais, Brazil. Piza, following traditional taxonomic practices at his time, usually considered slight phenotypic variations as enough evidence to propose a new species (see ChamorroRengifo & Braun 2010 and Crispino et al. 2020). Piza (1973) stated that a few differences mainly in body proportions separated D. armata from Megaphasma denticrus ( Stål, 1875) . His species, however, matches the morphology of M. denticrus described in the literature and observed in photographs of type material and additional specimens ( Caudell 1903; Brock et al. 2022), so it is here synonymized under Megaphasma denticrus ( Stål, 1875) . Phasmids belonging to Megaphasma and related genera occur only in North America. Therefore, we do not consider this doubtful record of M. denticrus from Brazil to be valid nor the lineage to have representatives native or introduced to South America. This record could be equivocal and explained by a simple mislabelling or, more unlikely, be explained by an actual event of introduction which is until now unconfirmed and lacks further evidence.
At least two other exotic phasmids were described as Brazilian species by Piza (1938): Dilophocephalus paradiacanthoides Piza, 1938 and Dixippus brasiliensis Piza, 1938 , both of which were later synonymized by Bragg (2001) under other names. The holotype of at least one of these species came from the zoological collection of the Museu Paulista which preceded the creation of the MZUSP ( Grola 2014) and went through several rearrangements and loss of information ( Chamorro-Rengifo & Braun 2010). The same could be true for the holotype of D. armata , leading to a mislabelling of the specimen.
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 |
Megaphasma denticrus ( Stål, 1875 )
Ghirotto, Victor Morais, Crispino, Edgar Blois, Engelking, Phillip Watzke, Neves, Pedro Alvaro Barbosa Aguiar, Góis, Júlia de & Chiquetto-Machado, Pedro Ivo 2022 |
Diapheromera denticrus
Brock et al. 2022: 78 |
Diapheromera armata
Piza S. T. 1973: 183 |
Megaphasma dentricus
Caudell A. N. 1903: 572 |
Megaphasma denticrus
Rehn J. A. 1903: 329 |
Diapheromera denticrus Stål, 1875: 73
Stal C. 1875: 73 |