Anopheles pseudopunctipennis, Theobald, 1901

Harbach, Ralph E. & Wilkerson, Richard C., 2023, The insupportable validity of mosquito subspecies (Diptera: Culicidae) and their exclusion from culicid classification, Zootaxa 5303 (1), pp. 1-184 : 60-61

Anopheles pseudopunctipennis sensu lato in Ecuador and Colombia

Two varieties of An. pseudopunctipennis were described from Ecuador by Leví Castillo, both currently subspecies of pseudopunctipennis . Anopheles pseudopunctipennis levicastilloi Levi Castillo, 1944 , type locality: Guayas Province, and An. pseudopunctipennis rivadeneirai Leví Castillo, 1945 , type locality: Cited as having been found in the provinces of Carchi, Imbabura, Pichincha, Cotopaxi, Tungurahua, Chimborazo, Cañar, Azuay and Loja. An adequately detailed map of collection records for the two varieties is in Leví Castillo (1945). The following is a brief summary [paraphrased translation of selected text from Spanish] from that publication.

In Ecuador, there are two varieties in the Pseudopunctipennis Complex, completely different from each other; one coastal, An. pseudopunctipennis var. levicastilloi , and one montane, An. pseudopunctipennis var. rivadeneirai . The former is relatively small, wing length about 4 mm, the latter is the largest anopheline in Ecuador, wing length about 5 mm. The eggs of the two varieties are the best way to recognize them. Coastal levicastilloi eggs are more characteristic [of the genus Anopheles ], boat-shaped with floats that give the appearance of a wasp nest [no collar is mentioned or apparent in the illustration]. The montane rivadeneirai egg is boat-shaped with the appearance of a grain of wheat, dorsocentrally concave with rounded ends, but lacks floats. Instead of floats there are many vacuoles filled with an unknown substance. Female. Wing vein R 2 in levicastilloi has a median pale spot, in rivadeneirai vein R 2 is completely dark. Coastal levicastilloi is not involved in malaria transmission while the montane rivadeneirai is the principal vector of malaria in the warm valleys of the Ecuadorian Andes.

This distinction of lowland and highland Ecuadorian subspecies (as varieties) was also noted by Pinault & Hunter (2011), who collected Anopheles extensively in both ecological/altitudinal areas. They found An. pseudopunctipennis sensu lato in both lowland and montane areas but did not recognize or mention the two varieties of Leví Castillo. They described, however, finding pseudopunctipennis at very different altitudes and in different climates.

In a comprehensive study of Anopheles in western Colombia using COI barcode sequence, this lowlandhighland distribution of An. pseudopunctipennis sensu lato was also reported by Ahumada et al. (2016). They found highly supported groups representing northwestern and southern Pacific coastal populations, but only referred to them as “s.l.” and did not compare their sequences with sequences from the type locality of An. pseudopunctipennis in Granada.

We believe that Leví Castillo clearly described two species that differ from An. pseudopunctipennis sensu stricto, and each other, both geographically and morphologically. Furthermore, we think that Pinault & Hunter (2011) and Ahumada et al. (2016) studied these same species in Ecuador and Colombia. Accordingly, we elevate both to species status: Anopheles (Anopheles) levicastilloi Levi-Castillo, 1944 and Anopheles (Anopheles) rivadeneirai Levi-Castillo, 1945 . Further studies are needed to clarify their overall distributions. Anopheles levicastilloi and An. rivadeneirai are both currently listed as species in the Encyclopedia of Life.