Aleurodicus, Douglas
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5281/zenodo.158856 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5657196 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/FD3C627A-FFB3-FF91-FF40-FED1FAB2FA36 |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Aleurodicus |
status |
|
ALEURODICUS Douglas View in CoL View at ENA
Aleurodicus Douglas, 1892: 32 View in CoL . Type species Aleurodicus anonae Morgan, 1892: 32 View in CoL , by subsequent designation by Quaintance, 1908: 8. [Synonymised with A. cocois View in CoL ( Curtis, 1846: 284–285) by Mound & Halsey, 1978: 228.]
DIAGNOSIS AND COMMENTS. As interpreted here, Aleurodicus comprises species with the following combination of characters: 4 pairs of large subdorsal abdominal compound pores, evenly spaced and usually each with an axial process extending well beyond the pore mouth, the anteriormost pair located on segment III (but lateral to median part of segment II, see Fig. A); most species also additionally with one or two much smaller abdominal pairs posterior to the other four; two pairs of cicatrices present on thoracic area (scars of thirdinstar compound pores, fig. A); 12 pairs of submarginal setae present (including the nominal caudal pair); submedian cephalothoracic setae present — some species with cephalic and three thoracic pairs, all similar to submarginal setae, others with cephalic pair wanting, and the dispersus / flavus / coccolobae assemblage possess only meso and metathoracic pairs of submedian setae which are also much smaller than submarginal setae; submargin and/or dorsal disc usually punctuated by pores of several types; lingula always protrudes beyond vasiform orifice, its four subapical setae on the protruding part.
Species with the above characters, but whose puparial margins are usually substantially deflexed, the submargin punctuated by a broad band of crowded simple pores of only the widerimmed type (Fig. 68), and whose compound pore axial processes are usually directed mesally when slidemounted, are currently placed in the genus Lecanoideus Quaintance & Baker , but a separate genus may not be justified ( Martin & Watson, 1998). No member of the Lecanoideus assemblage has yet been seen in Belize, but Aleurodicus inversus (here described from Belize) is somewhat intermediate in form. However, Caballero (1992) recorded L. giganteus (Quaintance & Baker) , the type species of Lecanoideus , from nearby Honduras and L. mirabilis (Cockerell) was described from Mexico, which borders Belize.
Quaintance & Baker (1913) distinguished Lecanoideus mirabilis from L. giganteus through the shape of the puparia, and the relative positions of the cephalic compound pores. The highly variable degree of marginal deflexion when members of this group are slidemounted affects the puparial outline and, hence, the perceived distance of compound pores from the apparent puparial margin. Examination of type material of both species (USNM) revealed no differences considered to be of specific significance (Steve Nakahara, pers. comm.), and L. giganteus ( Quaintance & Baker, 1913) is therefore here regarded as a junior synonym of L. mirabilis ( Cockerell, 1898) syn. n.
With the revised generic definitions proposed here, Aleurodicus bondari Costa Lima (1928), known from Brazil and Colombia, is here transferred to Aleuronudus comb. nov.
Key to Aleurodicus View in CoL species in Belize — puparia
Note that the pair of posterior abdominal spiracles (ventral) can be mistaken for small postvasiform orifice compound pores (dorsal). Figure 3 is a good example, being without any small compound pores, but with the spiracles clearly visible in a similar position.
1 A pair of small compound pores present on each of abdominal segments VII & VIII (Figs A, 1, 6–12, 64, 69–70, 73, 75)............................................................................. 3
Without small compound pores on abdominal segments VII & VIII ( Figs 2–3, 55, 63) ....................................................................................................................................... 2
2 Submarginal pore band continuous posterior to vasiform orifice, but such pores absent from median part of abdominal segment VII between pockets and segment VI/VII division (Fig. 63)................................................................................ dispersus Russell View in CoL
Submarginal pore band interrupted posterior to lingula ( Figs 2, 55), but a few such pores present on median part of abdominal segment VII between pockets and segment VI/VII division ........................................................ coccolobae Quaintance & Baker View in CoL
3 Outer submargin with a very distinct, mostlyregular, row of 8shaped pores, each less than a porelength from its adjacent neighbours ( Fig. 11). Dorsal disc with transverse “chains” of septate pores across most segments (Fig. 79) ................. vinculus View in CoL sp. nov.
Outer submargin may possess doublerimmed pores (Figs 69–70, 72–74), but these are less robust and, hence, less distinct at lower magnifications. Dorsal disc without septate pores in distinct transverse “chains”...................................................................... 4
4 Doublerimmed pores (Figs 70, 72, 74) present in submargin, and sometimes also subdorsum .....................................................................................................................5
Doublerimmed pores absent ...................................................................................... 9
5 Septate doublerimmed pores present in subdorsum, mesal to abdominal compound pores, as well as in submargin ( Figs 5, 72) ......................................... inversus View in CoL sp. nov.
Doublerimmed pores, with or without septa, present only in submargin ................... 6
6 Doublerimmed pores septate and exceptionally large ( Fig. 7), each 30–35 µ m long, unevenly spaced and aligned, and particularly irregular on cephalothorax (Fig. 74, to left). Dorsal disc septate pores also unusually large, each up to 15 µ m long (Fig. 74, to right). Lingula tongueshaped and usually overlapping puparial margin in slidemounted specimens ( Fig. 7) ............................................................ maritimus Hempel View in CoL
Doublerimmed pores each usually less than 25 µ m long, often more evenly spaced and aligned. Dorsal disc septate pores each much smaller than 15 µ m. Lingula may or may not overlap puparial margin ................................................................................. 7
7 Anterior 4 pairs of abdominal compound pores exceptionally large, each up to 80 µ m in diameter ( Fig. 6). Doublerimmed pores septate and situated within a narrow submarginal band of crowded widerimmed pores (Fig. 73). Lingula narrowly acuminate ................................................................................................. magnificus View in CoL Costa Lima
Anterior 4 pairs of abdominal compound pores much smaller, not attaining 50 µ m in diameter. Doublerimmed pores not enclosed within a crowded submarginal band of widerimmed pores. Lingula apically rounded or slightly truncate .............................. 8
8 A cluster of bright pores present on each side of abdominal segment VII, anterior to small compound pores (Fig. 69). Doublerimmed pores septate and numerous, set close to puparial margin ( Figs 1, 69); submargin with only sparse widerimmed pores (Fig. 69). Lingula slightly truncate apically, not overlapping puparial margin ........................................................................................... araujoi Sampson & Drews View in CoL
Without a cluster of bright pores on each side of abdominal segment VII. Doublerimmed pores not septate, each with only a faint notch in inner rim, sparse, poorly defined and widely spaced, most alternating with submarginal setal bases, lining mesal boundary of submarginal band of crowded widerimmed pores (Fig. 70). Lingula tongueshaped, usually overlapping puparial margin in slidemounted specimens ( Fig. 4) ........................................................................................................... dugesii Cockerell View in CoL
9 A submarginal band of crowded widerimmed pores present, its mesal boundary extending at least halfway towards compound pores ( Figs 8, 10, 12, 64, 66, 77–78) .................................................................................................................................... 10
Without a submarginal band of crowded widerimmed pores; dorsal pores all minute and very sparse, a few bright pores loosely clustered in vicinity of compound pores (Fig. 75) ......................................................................................... pauciporus View in CoL sp. nov.
10 Lingula rounded apically (Figs A, 10, 64). Operculum surface finely spinulose but otherwise smooth............................................................................... pulvinatus (Maskell) View in CoL
Lingula acute apically ( Figs 8, 12, 58, 66). Operculum surface distinctly rugose or corrugate (Figs 58, 66) .................................................................................................... 11
11 Inner boundary of submarginal zone of widerimmed pores forming mesallydirected lobes ( Fig. 12), the pore band interrupted immediately posterior to lingular apex ........ ............................................................................................... rugioperculatus View in CoL sp. nov.
Inner boundary of submarginal pore band concentric with curvature of puparial margin, not lobulate, the band not interrupted posterior to vasiform orifice ( Figs 8, 66) .... .............................................................................................................. niveus View in CoL sp. nov.
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 |
Aleurodicus
John H. Martin 2004 |
Aleurodicus
Mound 1978: 228 |
Quaintance 1908: 8 |
Douglas 1892: 32 |
Morgan 1892: 32 |