Epimetopus sp. 1

Fikáček, Martin, Barclay, Maxwell V. L., Perkins, Philip D. & Sw, London, 2011, Two new species of the Epimetopus mendeli species group and notes on its adult and larval morphology (Coleoptera: Hydrophiloidea: Epimetopidae), Acta Entomologica Musei Nationalis Pragae 51 (2), pp. 477-504 : 499

Epimetopus sp. 1

Larval material examined. 5 first instar larvae ( MZUSP): BRAZIL: SÃO PAULO: Campos do Jordão (Bosque da Galharada), 5.x.1993, lgt. expedition MZUSP, rearing number 9 (9A and 9B respectively).

Adult material examined. 3 ♀♀ ( MZUSP): same label data as the larvae (the larvae were reared from the egg cases carried by these specimens).

Comparative notes. The larvae of this species correspond with those of E. mendeli sp. nov. in the morphology of the head, head appendages, thorax and abdomen (including the presence of two pairs of long projections at the end of the abdomen) as well as in the general pattern on the head chaetotaxy including the presence of scale-like setae (however, the larvae were examined only on temporary slides without any previous treatment). Stemmata are clearly seen on these specimens: they are aggregated in two groups, anterior and posterior one, divided from each other by a space; the anterior group is larger than the posterior, but each seem to be composed of three original stemmata. Ventral papillae of the abdominal segment 10 are absent.

Identification. The adult specimens from whose egg cases the larvae were reared fit the diagnosis of the E. mendeli species group by the characters (1), (2) and (4) mentioned above. Male genitalia were not examined as all available specimens are females. The larvae examined by us are the same as those upon which ARCHANGELSKY (1997) based his description of E. trogoides (Sharp, 1875) [even though the rearing number is not mentioned by ARCHANGELSKY (1997), we suppose that the description cannot concern the syntopically occurring Epimetopus sp. 2 (see below) as only one larva in poor condition is available for that species]. Hence, even though the precise identification of the larva described by ARCHANGELSKY (1997) and reexamined by us remains unspecified (pending the examination of males), the identification of the larva as E. trogoides by ARCHANGELSKY (1997) must be considered incorrect – the larva probably belongs to the E. mendeli group.