Cataloipus
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4189.1.1 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:3C3C1242-82BC-4C73-B95E-0232F9603BA4 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6057320 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03FD87C1-FB47-FFB1-C4FC-F8ABFECAD14B |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Cataloipus |
status |
|
Cataloipus sp.
http://lsid.speciesfile.org/urn:lsid: Orthoptera .speciesfile.org:TaxonName:47624 Figure 34 View FIGURE 34
Material examined. ETHIOPIA: SNNPR, Bench Maji, Dembi Forest (1260 m), 14.IV.2015, R.P.W.H. Felix (3Ƌ, 1♀, RFPC), B. Massa (1Ƌ, BMPC) ; Bench Maji , Sheko Forest (1340 m), 16.IV.2015, B. Massa (1♀) ( BMPC) .
Habitat. The material was collected in tall grass and herb vegetations along a forest edge ( Figure 2 View FIGURE 2 c).
Remarks. Until now we could not identify our material with certainty. Specimens from Dembi Forest were checked with type material in the NHML of Cataloipus abyssinicus Uvarov, 1921 ( Abyssinia , Atbara (nowadays Sudan), Ƌ holotype, NHM) and C. fuscocoeruleipes Sjöstedt, 1923 ( Sudan (nowadays South Sudan), Nile, ‘between Bor and Shambe’ , 1Ƌ syntype, NHML) .
Both C. abyssinicus and C. fuscocoeruleipes , as well as our material, have blue hind tibiae with a more or less clearly indicated white ring at the base of the tibia. The three taxa also share a large and wide, boat-shaped subgenital plate, with broadly expanded edges.
In comparison to C. abyssinicus the prosternal tubercle in our specimens is directed more backwards and has a much more pointed apex. In abyssinicus the apex of the prosternal tubercle is more broadly rounded and less directed backwards. Furthermore, the colour of our specimens does not fit the description of the holotype of abyssinicus , and the type specimen itself: both the lights and the darks are too brownish, instead of green-yellow and blue-grey respectively. On the other hand, Uvarov probably described abyssinicus from museum material, so colour descriptions are not really usable in species identification. The tegmen of our specimens are too short for fuscocoeruleipes , since in that species they pass the hind-knees, while in our material, and in abyssinicus , they just reach the hind knees. Compared to abyssinicus and fuscocoeruleipes our material has spotted tegmen, while both abyssinicus and fuscocoeruleipes have nearly unspotted tegmen. The prosternal tubercle fits pretty well on that of fuscocoeruleipes .
Further study is necessary to identify our material. It could belong to one of both species mentioned above, and show interspecific variation. Another possibility could be that, after proper examination of larger series of Cataloipus from Sudan, South Sudan and Ethiopia, both taxa may be found to exhibit more intraspecific variation and should be synonymized (Rowell et al. in press). In the latter case our specimens could belong to Cataloipus abyssinicus .
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 |