Bourgeoisia hypocrita (Olivier)

Deheyn, Dimitri D. & Ballantyne, Lesley A., 2009, Optical characterization and redescription of the South Pacific firefly Bourgeoisia hypocrita Olivier (Coleoptera: Lampyridae: Luciolinae), Zootaxa 2129, pp. 47-62: 51-56

publication ID

http://doi.org/ 10.5281/zenodo.188333

persistent identifier

http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DA87AE-FFCE-3B30-FF10-794FFED3273A

treatment provided by

Plazi

scientific name

Bourgeoisia hypocrita (Olivier)
status

 

Bourgeoisia hypocrita (Olivier)  

( Figs 3 View FIGURE 3 & 5 View FIGURE 5 )

Luciola hypocrita Olivier, 1888: 60   ; 1902: 80.

Bourgeoisia hypocrita (Olivier)   . Olivier, 1908: 17. McDermott, 1966: 118. Ballantyne, 1968: 124. Ballantyne & McLean, 1970: 234.

Luciola nigra McDermott, 1966: 110   (unnecessary new name for L. atra Pic   ). syn. nov.

Luciola atra Pic, 1928: 58   . syn. nov.

Type material. Holotypes. Luciola atra Pic.   Male. FIJI 18.00 S, 178.00 labelled 1. handwritten Luciola   sp. (Olivier dit); 2 handwritten Luciola atra   n s; 3 symbol; 4 printed black ink Ins. Fiji ( MNHN). Luciola hypocrita Olivier   ). Male. FIJI 18.00 S, 178.00 labelled 1. handwritten on pink paper Luciola hypocrita   ; printed Ern. Oliv.; 2 printed SPECIMEN TYPICUM ORIGINALE AUCTORIS Ern. Olivier; 3. handwritten Fidjie Ins. ( MNHN).

Other material examined. FIJI 18.00 S, 178.00 3 males (poor condition) 13 larvae, J. Brophy ( ANIC). 18.04S, 178.27E, Viti-Levu, Colo-i-suva, 22.vii. 1987, G. B. Monteith QM berleaseate 786 plantation forest, 150m litter and moss, male (QM). Viti Levu, Fiji, Nananu-I-Ra, October 2007, D. D. Deheyn, 2 females ( ANIC).

Diagnosis. Distinguished from other Luciolinae   males by the occurrence in Fiji, the dark deep greyish black dorsal colouration, the pale brown or yellow ventral colour with light organs restricted to anterolateral plaques in ventrite 6 only; females brachelytral with hind wings vestigial, elytra and pronotum coloured as for male, remainder of body paler brown or yellow; larvae (associated by label data) very deep charcoal greyblack, protergum with short paired rounded projections at posterolateral corners, thoracic terga with lateral projections and all abdominal terga except terminal with paired projections at posterolateral corners. As this is the only recorded species of firefly from Fiji the females and larvae are associated on that basis.

Description. Male ( Fig. 5 View FIGURE 5 )

Body 8.4–8.9 mm long; approximately 3.0 mm wide; width/length 3 / 1. Colour. Pronotum ( Figs 5 View FIGURE 5 C, D, E) dull deep charcoal grey; MN slightly paler grey and semitransparent; MS and elytra shiny deep grey almost black; head deep grey between eyes, antennae and palpi paler brownish grey; ventral body colour pale brown ( Fig. 5 View FIGURE 5 B) (yellow in Suva male Fig. 5 View FIGURE 5 A) except for waxy white light organs in anterolateral areas of V 6; legs with pale brown or yellow coxae and base of femora, posterior face of rest of femora mid brown, anterior face of femora mid brown in apical half, tibiae and tarsi dark brown; all tergites pale brown (yellow in Suva male).

Pronotum ( Figs 5 View FIGURE 5 C, D, E, F) 1.6–1.7 mm long; 2.5–2.8 mm wide; Width/length 1.5; 1 / 5 as long as whole body; dorsal surface lacking irregularities in posterolateral areas and longitudinal groove in lateral areas; punctation broad, shallow, dense. Anterior margin not explanate. Pronotum wider across posterior area than rest; pronotal width subequal to humeral width; anterolateral corners rounded obtuse; lateral margins in anterior half diverge posteriorly slightly; lateral margins in posterior half converge with rounded convergence (pronotum close to sub-parallel-sided); lacking indentation at mid-point, margins may be very shallowly indented at about 1 / 4 their length from posterior margin; lateral margins lacking sinuousity in either horizontal or vertical plane; lateral margins lacking indentation in lateral margin just anterior to posterolateral corner, and irregularities at corner; posterolateral corners rounded obtuse; posterolateral corners project as far as median posterior margin, separated by shallow emargination.

Hypomera closed. Median area of hypomeron not elevated vertically; anterior area of hypomeron not closely adpressed, posterior area flat closely adpressed; pronotal width/GHW 1.6.

Elytron ( Figs 5 View FIGURE 5 C, D): punctation moderately dense, irregular, punctures not well defined in outline, not linear, not as large as pronotum, nor widely and evenly spaced; apices not deflexed; epipleuron and suture extend beyond mid-point, to apex but not as ridge around apex, with neither thickened in apical half; 2 interstitial lines (1, 2) not exceeding suture; elytral carina absent; in horizontal specimen viewed from below epipleuron at base either covering or almost covering humerus, in horizontal specimen viewed from above epipleuron becoming visible at sides of elytron anterior to posterior margin of MS; epipleuron developed as lateral ridge along most of length; sutural margins approximate along most of length in closed elytra; lateral margins slightly convex sided.

Head ( Figs 5 View FIGURE 5 G, H): GHW 1.8–2.0 mm; SIW 0.2–0.3 mm; SIW/GHW 1 / 9; ASD < ASW, sockets close but not contiguous (<1 X ASW); moderately depressed between eyes; well exposed in front of pronotum, capable of scarce retraction within prothoracic cavity; eyes very close, almost contiguous in dried specimens beneath at level of posterior margin of mouthpart complex ( Fig. 5 View FIGURE 5 K); eyes above labrum close (SIW/GHW 1 / 7 – 1 / 9); frons-vertex junction not well defined, rounded, lacking median elevation; posterolateral eye excavation not strongly developed but usually at least slightly visible in resting head position ( Figs 5 View FIGURE 5 G, H); clypeolabral suture present, flexible, in head held so labrum is horizontal clypeolabral suture behind anterior eye margin; outer edges of labrum reach inner edges of closed mandibles. Mouthparts functional; apical segment of labial palpi ovoid, L>W, non-lunate, not strongly flattened, inner margin not dentate. Antennae 11 segmented; filiform; length>GHW and <twice GHW; scape elongate longer than FS 1; all flagellomeres elongate slender diminishing in length towards apex; no segments flattened, shortened, or expanded; pedicel not produced; FS 1 not shorter than pedicel. Legs with inner tarsal claw not split; lacking MFC; no femora or tibiae swollen or curved; no basitarsi expanded or excavated.

Abdomen ( Figs 5 View FIGURE 5 A, B) lacking cuticular remnants in association with aedeagal sheath; no basal ventrites with curved posterior margins nor extending anteriorly into emarginated posterior margin of anterior segment; no LO in V 7; no part of V 7 arched or swollen, muscle impressions not visible through transparent cuticle; LO present in V 6, as anterolateral plaques; area separating LO not containing muscle impressions (in Suva male fat body clearly visible beneath cuticle in V 6 and V 7). MPP present, symmetrical, apex rounded, entire, not laterally compressed, L=W, not inclined dorsally nor engulfed by T 8 apex, lacking dorsal ridge and median longitudinal trough. V 7 lacking median carina, median longitudinal trough, PLP, incurving lobes or pointed projections, median ‘dimple’, or reflexed lobes. T 7 lacking prolonged posterolateral corners. T 8 not strongly sclerotised, symmetrical, W=L, visible posterior area not narrowing abruptly, lacking prolonged posterolateral corners, median posterior emargination, median posterior projections, not inclined ventrally nor engulfing the posterior margin of V 7 nor MPP, not extending conspicuously beyond posterior margin of V 7; T 8 ventral surface lacking flanges, lateral depressed troughs, median longitudinal trough, asymmetrical projections, median posterior ridge; concealed anterolateral arms of T 8 very short, not laterally emarginated before their origins, not expanded dorsoventrally, lacking bifurcation of inner margin and ventrally directed pieces at their bases; lateral margins of T 8 not enfolding sides of V 7.

Aedeagal sheath never> 4 times as long as wide; lacking paraprocts; slightly asymmetrical in posterior area where sheath sternite emarginated on right side from point of attachment of tergite; sternite not angulate on L or R sides, not subparallel-sided, posterior margin entire, rounded, not emarginated on either side preapically; anterior half of sternite broad, apically rounded; tergite lacking lateral arms extending anteriorly at sides of sheath sternite; tergite lacking projecting pieces along posterior margin of tergite 9; anterior margin of tergite 9 lacking transverse band.

Aedeagus L/W <3 / 1; subparallel-sided (LL margins may appear to diverge posteriorly e.g., Ballantyne 1968 Fig. 163, probably consequence of immersion in alcohol for observation); LL lack lateral appendages; LL widely visible from beneath at sides of ML, LL/ML wide; LL of equal length, slightly shorter than or subequal to ML, may diverge along inner dorsal margins, or separation is subparallel (possible artifact of preparation) and separated there along almost all their length; LL apex width subequal to or wider than LL base width, LL apex width much wider than that of ML with LL apices expanded in horizontal plane; dorsal base of LL symmetrical, not excavated, all of anterior margin scarcely prolonged and broadly rounded; LL lacking lateral leaf like appendages along their outer ventral margins, outer preapical margin of LL slightly expanded and slightly enveloping the outer area; lacking projection on left LL; ML symmetrical, strongly laterally compressed, strongly arched, apex pointed on preapical ventral margin and inclined ventrally, lacking paired lateral teeth and tooth to left side; BP membranous, not very narrow, not strongly sclerotised, not hooded, not strongly emarginated along anterior margin.

Female ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 ). Brachelytral and flightless; fore wings cover base of abdomen, 5 tergites protrude beyond elytral apices; hind wings vestigial; abdomen widely expanded laterally, eggs visible through semitransparent abdominal cuticle. Pronotum lacking irregularities in posterolateral areas; punctation moderate to dense; pronotal width subequal to humeral width; lacking any indentation of lateral margin, lacking irregularities at posterolateral corner; outline similar to male. Elytral punctation not as large as pronotum, nor evenly spaced; 2 interstitial lines; elytral carina absent; elytra may be contiguous along most of length or splay sideways over more gravid abdomen; lateral epipleuron not continuing as ridge beyond anterior half; sutural ridge narrowing towards apex, evanescent just before wide apex. Head of wingless female form, (i.e., eyes much reduced over male, consequently head prolonged in front of reduced eyes with margins converging anteriorly); mouthparts well developed, probably functional. No legs or parts thereof swollen and /or curved. Lateral margins of terminal abdomen converging strongly posteriorly (maximum width across abdomen/width across anterior margin of V 7 2.5; LO in V 6 only, lacking any elevations, depressions or ridges on V 7; V 7 with posterior margin widely and shallowly emarginated; posterolateral corners moderately wide, rounded; lateral margins of V 8 converging posteriorly, median posterior margin very shallowly emarginated. T 8 with lateral margins converging gently posteriorly, posterior margin rounded.

Larva. ( Ballantyne, 1968, Figs 158–161). Probably terrestrial; dorsally charcoal grey in larger larvae, mid brown in smaller ones (instar number not determined); ventral colouration blotchy light brown; tergal plates sclerotised to margins, lateral tergal margins explanate narrowly at posterolateral corners, thickened, covering laterotergites from above; mid line extending from anterior to posterior margin of sclerotised area on each of protergum and terga 2 – 11; no median line on terminal tergum; arrangement of plates on ventral aspect of thorax and abdomen like that described ( Ballantyne & Lambkin 2000; Ballantyne & Menayah 2002); laterosternites on abdominal segments 1–8 bearing spiracles. Protergum L = or>W; lacking tubercles along anterior margin, posterolateral corners bifurcate into two slender apically rounded projections; margins of median line slightly and irregularly ridged; posterolateral corners of terga 2, 3 with single slender apically rounded projection inclined obliquely to median line; posterior margin of terga 1–3 broadly rounded, slightly produced to either side of mid line; lateral margins of terga 2, 3 irregular; posterolateral corners of terga 4–11 (abdominal segments 1–8) bifurcated into slender apically rounded projections inclining obliquely to median line; posterior margin of terga 4–11 to either side of median line like that for thoracic terga, highest point of the area produced into small rounded area; lateral margins of terminal tergum entire, lacking projections, converging slightly posteriorly, with posterolateral corners rounded, not produced, posterior margin rounded; punctures in anterior half of terga 2–11 larger than rest, paler than rest; with whitish brush of hairs from apex of tibiotarsus, enveloping the apical tarsungulus. Head of general form of Pteroptyx valida ( Ballantyne & Menayah, 2002)   , flattened, subrectangular, with well developed epicranial suture extending along either side of frontoclypeus to anterior margin which is slightly and narrowly medially emarginated; mandibles lacking inner teeth.

FIJI

University of the South Pacific

MNHN

Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle

ANIC

Australian National Insect Collection

ASW

Culture Collection of Algae at the University of Vienna

MFC

Matsushima Fungus Collection

Kingdom

Animalia

Genus

Bourgeoisia

Loc

Bourgeoisia hypocrita (Olivier)

Deheyn, Dimitri D. & Ballantyne, Lesley A. 2009
2009
Loc

Bourgeoisia hypocrita

Ballantyne 1970: 234
Ballantyne 1968: 124
McDermott 1966: 118
1966
Loc

Luciola nigra

McDermott 1966: 110
1966