Amphicnemis smedleyi, Laidlaw, 1926
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5281/zenodo.3571116 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5193634 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03B487FF-FFB8-FFD3-FF10-B927FA4AACCE |
treatment provided by |
Jeremy |
scientific name |
Amphicnemis smedleyi |
status |
|
Amphicnemis smedleyi View in CoL LAIDLAW.
1915. RIS, Tijdschr. Ent. 58, p. 13 14. - ♀ Simaioer id. ( louisae View in CoL ).
1926. LAIDLAW, J. Mal. Br. Roy. As. Soc. 4, p. 232 fig. 3 (apps. ♂). — ♂♀ Siberoet & Pagai Ids. ( louisae View in CoL smedleyi View in CoL ).
Material studied: - 2 ♂ (ad, crushed), 2 ♀ (one ad., one juv.), Siberoet Id., Sept. 1924, C. Boden KLOSS & N. SMEDLEY, ex coll. F. F. LAIDLAW .
These specimens differ from wallacei (= louisae LAID.) in a number of characters, which I have enumerated in the key to the species. The ♂ is easily distinguished from wallacei by the different shape of the superior anal appendages and by the absence of a prothoracic spine. The ♀ has been described at length by Ris. This species is obviously most closely related to gracilis , KRUGER, and kuiperi , LIEFT., two species in which the prothoracic spine is either also reduced, or absent altogether. Apart from the differences found in the sculpturing of the hinder lobe of the prothorax, the ♂ of smedleyi may be distinguished from that of kuiperi by the presence of a black streak to the outer surface of all femora; it differs further from kuiperi in the shape of the superior anal appendages, which bear a very close resemblance to those of gracilis , being in fact practically identical with those of that species (pl. 16 fig. 2 View Fig ). On comparing smedleyi with gracilis , these species proved to resemble each other very closely, and I could find no other distinctive features than those mentioned already in the key to the species. Granting the characters of the prothorax to be constant, there should be no difficulty in separating them; but it is doubtful if these differences are of specific significance. In view of the rarity of these extremely delicate species in collections, it seems worth recording the observed differences even on the small series available. Personally I am of opinion that smedleyi is only a subspecies of the Sumatran gracilis , KRUGER.
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 |
|
Genus |
Amphicnemis smedleyi
M. A. Lieftinck 1940 |
smedleyi
Laidlaw 1926 |
louisae
Laidlaw 1913 |
louisae
Laidlaw 1913 |