Halipeurus vincesmithi Palma, new species

(Figs 8, 34, 41–42, 49, 58)

TYPE HOST: Oceanodroma matsudairae N. Kuroda, 1922 .

TYPE LOCALITY: Hahajima Island, Bonin Islands, Japan.

HOLOTYPE: 3 in NSMJ.

DIAGNOSIS: Male: habitus as in Fig. 41; clypeal signature as in Fig. 8; terminalia (ventral view) as in Fig. 34; genitalia as in Fig. 58. Female: habitus as in Fig. 42; clypeal signature as for male; terminalia (ventral view) as in Fig. 49.

Measurements of both sexes as in Table 1.

ETYMOLOGY: The species epithet is a noun in the genitive case honouring Vincent S. Smith, for his outstanding contribution to the phylogeny of Phthiraptera, and for his assistance with molecular data for this paper. MATERIAL EXAMINED

Types

Holotype 3 and allotype Ƥ, Hahajima I., Bonin Is, Tokyo Prefecture, Japan, 30 Mar. 2004, M. Tsurumi (NSMJ).

DISCUSSION: Halipeurus vincesmithi has closer morphological affinities with H. raphanus, H. pelagicus, H. pelagodromae and H. nesofregettae than with all other species of Halipeurus . Those affinities are not surprising considering that its host, Oceanodroma matsudairae, and all the hosts of the four species mentioned above belong to the storm petrel family Hydrobatidae . Halipeurus vincesmithi is easily distinguished from H. pelagicus, H. pelagodromae and H. nesofregettae by its much greater length and width in both sexes (Table 1), by robust male antennae, by unique male genitalia (compare Fig. 58 with Figs 59, 63), and by the chaetotaxy of the ventral terminalia in both sexes (compare Fig. 34 with Figs 32, 33, 35 for males, and Fig. 49 with Figs 47, 48, 50 for females). Further, males of H. vincesmithi can be separated from males of H. raphanus by the shape of the clypeal signature, ventral terminalia and genitalia (compare Figs 8, 34, 58 with Figs 10, 36, 60 respectively), while females can be distinguished by the shape of the clypeal signature (compare Fig. 8 with 17), and the length of the terminal pair of peg-like setae in addition to the shape plus chaetotaxy of the subgenital plate (compare Fig. 49 with 52).