Corethrella (Corethrella) peruviana Lane, 1942
treatment provided by
|Corethrella (Corethrella) peruviana Lane|
Corethrella peruviana Lane 1939a:110 . Type locality: Iquitos , [Loreto], Peru. Holotype ♀ (DEFS).
Corethrella juquiana Lane 1939a:109 . Type locality: Poço Grande, Juquiá, São Paulo, Brazil. Holotype ♀ (DEFS). Lane 1939b:388. New synonym.
Lutzomiops juquiana: Lane 1953:99 . Lane and Aitken 1956:539.
Corethrella similans Lane and Aitken 1956:537 . Type locality: United States Naval Station , Tucker
Valley , Chaguaramas, Trinidad and Tobago. Holotype ♀ ( DEFS). New synonym.
DIAGNOSIS: Male and female adults: only extant species of Corethrella in the New World with a uniformly
pigmented wing (Figs. 62A, 67K), thorax uniformly dark brown contrasting with a pale halter, the midfemur
with darker pigmentation at its base, and hind leg femur and tibia uniformly pigmented ( Fig. 42D).
DESCRIPTION: Male adult. Descriptive statistics: see Tables 2–5. Head: Outline in anterior view laterally elongate (as in Fig. 7G). Four large setae on frons between ventromedial area of ommatida (as in Fig. 16D). Antenna uniformly brown; pedicel with at least one distinctive, more elongate, stout, dorsal or dorsolateral seta; flagellomeres as in Fig. 20D, sensilla coeloconica (as in Fig. 15I) distributed as in Table 1; flagellomere 13 with well-developed apical bifurcation. Palpus brown; segment 3 of slightly swollen at or near midlength. Thorax (as in Figs. 36C, 42D): uniformly brown. Posterior portion of dorsocentral row with 2 elongate setae situated somewhat lateral to one another. Prescutal suture short, not extending more than half way to dorsocentral row of setae. Anterior anepisternum divided diagonally by sinuous suture, dorsal portion about equal to ventral portion. Ventral portion of posterior anepisternum triangular, uniformly brown, with anterodorsal margin thick. Wing (Fig. 62A): Apex of R 2 slightly basal to apex of M 1. Plain, without pattern of pigmented veins and/or scales; veins (other than costa and wing margin) with well-developed scales. Halter pale. Legs (as in Fig. 42D): nearly uniformly pigmented light brown, with very base of forefemur, broader base of midfemur more darkly pigmented; in some specimens tarsi with poorly defined bands. Femora, tibiae and at least some tarsomeres with broad scales (also some in patch of whip-like setae on posterior portion of hind tibia). Midleg with thick, subapical setae on each of at least tarsomeres 1–3. Apices of fore-, midleg fifth tarsomeres bilobed in dorsoventral view, with claws subapical (Fig. 75E). Elongate claw of foreleg shorter than that of midleg, both longer than those of hind leg (Fig. 75E). Each claw without inner tooth. Anterior claws of each leg without a basal prong. Foreleg claws unequal. Midleg claws unequal. Foreleg third tarsomere longer than fourth tarsomere. Empodia slender. Abdomen (Fig. 77B): Segment 1–9 uniformly medium brown. Genitalia (Fig. 86C): Gonocoxite uniformly light brown or pale, strongly tapering; anteromedial area with distinctively elongate spicules; with well-defined dorsal row of setae, with 2–3 basal setae of row stout, enlarged and bent subapically, 2–3 more posterior setae slender, with row restricted to dorsal portion of gonocoxite. With two dorsomedial stout setae, tapering from base, equal in size or with anterior one thicker than other, bases joined by sclerotized plate. Gonostylus (in retracted position) straight, thick, of more or less equal thickness for basal half, apical half more slender, rounded apically; one elongate, thick subbasal seta, situated posteroventrally; apical seta slender, elongate, simple. Aedeagus squat, somewhat triangular, tapering gradually to apex, pointed apically, with lateral margins fused at apex.
Female adult. Descriptive statistics: see Tables 6–11. As for male, with following differences. Head: Coronal suture elongate, extending ventrally past ommatida ( Fig. 16D). Antennal flagellomeres as in Fig. 27C, sensilla coeloconica distributed as in Table 1. Clypeus ( Fig. 17T) squarish. Mandible with small, pointed teeth. Palpus as in Fig. 33V. Wing (Fig. 67K). Legs: Apices of fore-, midleg fifth tarsomeres undivided, with claws situated slightly subapically to apically. Claws of each leg equal to those of others; equal on each leg, simple (without inner teeth). Abdomen: uniformly light brown.
Immatures. Unknown (but see below).
DISTRIBUTION AND BIONOMICS: Corethrella peruviana is known from Costa Rica to Trinidad and Tobago and Guyana, south to Peru and and southeastern Brazil (São Paulo) (Fig. 134) at altitudes ranging from 0– 269 m. Specimens have been collected using light, frog-call and Malaise traps and have been reared from ground pools in Trinidad and Tobago. The serrate mandibles of the female adults and their attraction to frog calls suggest that they feed on frog blood in nature. There are only a few specimens which were collected with the frog-call trap in Costa Rica (using Hyla gratiosa ) and in one location, 5 km NE Tárcoles, Costa Rica on 2-IX-1993, a light trap brought in males and females of C. peruviana but the accompanying frog-call trap did not. At La Selva Biological Station in Costa Rica, on March 2, 2004, only one female adult C. peruviana was present in four combined samples with a total of 422 Corethrella . A few more specimens were present in some very large samples (not counted) collected at the same place and date. This suggests that the call of Hyla gratiosa was only slightly attractive to the females of this species. Some adult female C. peruviana were collected using calls of Physalaemus pustulosus (Cope) , Dendropsophus microcephalus (Cope) , and Hyla gratiosa at Gamboa, Panama as well as at La Selva, Costa Rica using the whine of Physalaemus pustulosus (collected and observed by X. Bernal). Two females were collected in Guyana (G. Bourne) with the call of Bufo typhonius (Linnaeus) (out of a total of 34 Corethrella collected). The specimens from the Belkin “Mosquitoes of Middle America” project are identified in Table 12.
TAXONOMIC DISCUSSION: Males and females were associated through the shared presence of a common pigmentation pattern and were collected together at the same place and time at two localities in Costa Rica (light trap and frog-call traps running concurrently) and in single locations in each of French Guiana (light traps) and Peru (Malaise trap). They were also reared together in Trinidad and Tobago (immature stages not seen).
The male specimens from 5 km NE Tárcoles, Costa Rica differed from the other specimens in having the two dorsomedial setae nearly equal in size. Other males had the anterior seta distinctly thicker. I was unable to discover any further differences and think it best to consider this as intraspecific variation.
Lane (1939a) provided further collecting information than is presently associated with the holotype of C. juquiana ; the specific site was “Poco Grande” and the date, 14-XI-1938. Lane (1939b) subsequently designated an allotype and paratypes that cannot be considered as valid type material. The type material of C. peruviana included a female paratype which I could not locate. Lane and Aitken (1956) designated three female paratypes for C. similans , of which I was able to examine only two (the specimen from Arena Forest was not found).
Lane and Aitken (1956) noted in their description of C. similans that it was very similar to L. juquiana but that the tarsi were banded and the halter pale in C. similans and the tarsi unicolorous and halter “blackish” in C. juquiana . I could not confirm these differences between the types, nor find differences in pigmentation patterns in the other material I examined. The legs of at least some C. peruviana have some darkened scales but in a poorly defined pattern. The type of C. juquiana was quite rubbed and it is impossible to say if there were darkened scales originally. Lane (1953) distinguished C. peruviana and C. juquiana in his key on the basis of whether the scutum was brown or blackish, respectively. These differences were almost certainly due to differences in preservation of the pinned specimens. As considered here, the types of C. peruviana , C. juquiana and C. similans are not distinguishable and I have therefore considered the latter two to be synonyms of C. peruviana .
Lane and Aitken (1956) described the larva and pupa of this species, as members of L. juquiana . They noted that the adults reared had dark halters, which would exclude them from C. peruviana , but I was unable to examine their original material to confirm an identification. Further to this, some of the specimens of C. peruviana from Trinidad and Tobago which I examined here (from the Belkin “Mosquitoes of Middle America” project) were reared from immatures but I did not examine the larvae and pupae (likely in the USNM).
The holotypes of all three species considered here were removed from their pins and slide-mounted. The female holotype of C. peruviana was missing one wing and flagellomeres 8–13. The female holotype of C. juquiana was missing its abdomen and both hind legs. The female holotype of C. similans was missing its left antenna. The holotype of C. similans was in a pinning box with its name but didn’t have a specific label identifying it as such; I therefore added a holotype label with its name. Two paratypes of C. similans were slidemounted but a third (USNM) was in such poor condition, with only one wing, two tarsomeres, and part of the thorax and head, that it was left on the pin.
Hribar and Grogan (2005) noted the presence of C. wirthi on the Florida Keys (Florida, USA) but one of their two specimens was misidentified and is very similar to that of C. peruviana . However, the specimen was in only moderate condition and therefore not included in the current concept of the species. It is deposited in the FSCA.
MATERIAL EXAMINED: Holotype, adult female on microscope slide, labeled “ Corethrella peruviana Lane, 1939 , halotype, Iquitos, Peru, Mar-April, 1931, RC Shannon, 1081, 101-994” ( DEFS) . Holotype, adult
female on microscope slide, labeled “ Corethrella juquiana Lane , 38, Holotype, S. Paulo, Juquiá, J. Lane col., S85 T795, Corethrella peruviana Lane Det. A. Borkent ” ( DEFS). Holotype, adult female on microscope slide, labeled “ HOLOTYPE Corethrella similans Lane and Aitken, 1956 , HOLOTIPO, Trinidad (B.W.I.) (T.H.G. Aitken) 20-X-55, Tucker Valley , U.S. Navy Base, S681 T6805, Corethrella peruviana Lane Det. A. Borkent ” ( DEFS) ; 3 ♀ paratypes, labeled as for holotype of C. similans (1 on slide in DEFS, 1 on slide and 1 on pin in USNM). Other material : 4 ♀, from type locality of C. similans but 2 from 27-X-1955, others 1-XI- 1955, 9-XI-1955 ( USNM) ; 1 ♀, 1 km. s. de Laguna a la par de Rio San Jan , Costa Rica, 20–30 m, 23-VII-2004 ( INBC) ; 3 ♂, 5 km NE Tárcoles , Costa Rica, 20 m, 17-VIII-1993 ( CNCI) ; 3 ♂, 5 ♀, 5 km NE Tárcoles , Costa Rica, 20 m, 2-IX-1993 (2 ♂, 4 ♀ to CNCI, 1 ♂, 1 ♀ to INBC) ; 1 ♀, 3 km E. Cahuita , Costa Rica, 0 m, 28-X- 1993 ( CNCI) ; 2 ♂, 4 ♀, 3 km E. Cahuita , Costa Rica, 0 m, 29-X-1993 ( CNCI) ; 2 ♂, 4 ♀, 3 km E. Cahuita , Costa Rica, 0 m, 30-X-1993 (2 ♂, 3 ♀, CNCI; 1 ♀, INMA) ; 2 ♀, La Selva Biological Station , Puerto Viejo de la Sarapiqui, Heredia, Costa Rica, 40 m, 7-V-1989 ( INBC) ; 1 ♀, from previous locality but 1-III-2004 ( CNCI) ; 10 ♀, from previous locality but 2-III-2004 ( CNCI) ; 1 ♀, as for previous locality but 14-VI-2005 ( CNCI) ; 7 ♀, 9°07.0'N, 79°41.9'W, Canal Area , Gamboa, Panama, 27 m, 25-VI-2003, 12-VII-2003, 17-VIII-2003, 18-VIII- 2003, (2 ♀, XBCP; 5 ♀ CNCI) GoogleMaps ; 3 ♂, 13 km NE Monteria , Cordoba, Colombia, 10 m, 5–6-X-1969 ( USNM) ; 1 ♂, 10 km E Puerto Boyaca, Boyaca, 170 m, Colombia, 25-XI-1970 ( USNM) ; 1 ♀, Pompeya , Napo R., Pastaza, Ecuador, 14–22-V-1965, L. Pena ( CNCI) ; 1 ♂, 2 ♀, Iquitos , Loreto, Peru, Quisto Cocha, 8–10-II-1984 ( CNCI) ; 1 ♀, CEIBA Biological Center , 06°29 N, 58° 13 W, Guyana, 20-III-2006 ( CNCI) GoogleMaps ; 1 ♀, 5 km SE Cayenne, Guyane , French Guiana, 5 m, 31-I-1-II-1965 ( USNM) ; 2 ♂, 1 ♀, 5 km SE Cayenne, Guyane , French Guiana, 5 m, 2–3-II-1965 ( USNM) ; 1 ♂, 1 ♀, 5 km SE Cayenne, Guyane , French Guiana, 5 m, 3–4-II-1965 ( USNM) ; 1 ♀, La Fortune Estate, Vega de Oropouche , Trinidad and Tobago, 12-X-1960 ( USNM) ; 1 ♂, Nariva Swamp , Trinidad and Tobago, 2–7-III-1962 ( USNM) ; 1 ♀, Nariva , “Bush Bush Forest “, Trinidad and Tobago, 1 m, 31-I-1964 ( USNM) ; 1 ♂, as previous locality but 14-VIII-1964 ( USNM) ; 1 ♀, as previous locality but 18-I- 1965 ( USNM) ; 1 ♂, St. Andrew , “Turure Forest “, Eastern Main Rd. S of 26 milepost, Trinidad and Tobago, 30 m, 7-I-1965 ( USNM) ; 1 ♂, as previous locality but 6-VIII-1966 ( USNM) ; 1 ♂, 1 ♀, as previous locality but 17-IX-1966 ( USNM) ; 1 ♀, St. George , “Agua Santa“, 30 m, Trinidad and Tobago, 15-VII-1965 ( USNM) ; 1 ♂, Juquiá , São Paulo ( DEFS) ; 2 ♀, Guana River Pump Stations, Instituto de Pesquisas e Experimentacao Agropecuarias do Norte , near Belem, Para, Brazil, 30 m, 29–30-IX-1970 ( USNM) .
DERIVATION OF SPECIFIC EPITHET: The name peruviana clearly refers to the country from which the holotype was collected.
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.
Corethrella (Corethrella) peruviana Lane
|Published, First 2008|
|Lane, J. & Aitken, T. H. G. 1956: 537|
|Lane, J. 1953: 98|
Lutzomiops juquiana: Lane 1953:99
|Lane, J. & Aitken, T. H. G. 1956: 539|
|Lane, J. 1953: 99|
Corethrella (Lutzomiops) peruviana: Lane 1942:130
|Lane, J. 1942: 130|
Corethrella (Lutzomiops) juquiana:
|Lane, J. 1942: 131|
Corethrella peruviana Lane 1939a:110
|Lane, J. 1939: 110|
|Lane, J. 1939: 109|
|Lane, J. 1939: 388|