Cryptops (Trigonocryptops) Verhoeff, 1906
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4825.1.1 |
|
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:F230F199-1C94-4E2E-9CE4-5F56212C015F |
|
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4455403 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DE092D-FFE1-D719-FF13-FE572F39D9C4 |
|
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
|
scientific name |
Cryptops (Trigonocryptops) Verhoeff, 1906 |
| status |
|
(!) Cryptops (Trigonocryptops) Verhoeff, 1906 View in CoL
Figs 26, 28, 32 View FIGURES 26–32
Synonyms. Paratrigonocryptops Demange, 1963
Type species. Cryptops gigas Kraepelin, 1903 View in CoL (by subsequent designation of Attems, 1930).
Diagnosis. Clypeus with setose plate(s) delimited by sutures ( Fig. 26 View FIGURES 26–32 , fig. 21 in Schileyko et al. 2018). Pretarsus of maxillae 2 apically pointed, with a ventral projection (as in C. (T.) hephaestus Ázara & Ferreira, 2013 see their fig. 6C) or without it (as in adult (Rc 7502) of C. (T.) sarasini furcatus ( Ribaut, 1923)). Dorsal brush of maxilla 2 as long as or slightly longer than the corresponding pretarsus. Anterior margin of forcipular coxosternite bilobed, in most species with long enlarged marginal setae ( Fig. 26 View FIGURES 26–32 ); tarsungula long, overlapping each other by at least 1/3 of their length when adducted. Sternites ( Fig. 32 View FIGURES 26–32 ) with well-developed transverse thickening between coxae of legs; at least some anterior sternites with endosternites bordered by trigonal sutures, the configurations of these sutures may vary (see Schileyko et al. 2018). Anterior corners of the endosternite of some anterior sternites with lateral projections ( Fig. 32 View FIGURES 26–32 ).
Number of species. 29 ( Schileyko et al. 2018).
Remarks. Treated as a subgenus in Edgecombe & Bonato (2011: 393), Murienne et al. (2011: 62), Ázara & Ferreira (2013: 432), Voigtländer & Reip (2013: 220), Bonato et al. 2016, Lewis (2016a: 575), Schileyko & Stoev (2016: 266), Schileyko et al. (2018: 567).
Cryptops (Paratrigonocryptops) was synonymised to C. (Trigonocryptops) by Lewis (2005). Schileyko & Stoev (2016) considered the similarity between Cryptops (Trigonocryptops) and the nominate subgenus; they reconsidered the recent concept of the former, suggesting that (p. 267) “only species having anterior sternites with complete trigonal sutures and clypeus with setose plate(s) should be assigned to Trigonocryptops ”. Thus “ Cryptops (Trigonocryptops) iporangensis ” Ázara & Ferreira, 2013 should be Cryptops (C.) iporangensis as it has no sternal trigonal sutures. As for Cryptops (Trigonocryptops) similis described by Machado (1953) for four specimens from Southern Spain, it has sternal trigonal sutures that are typical for this subgenus, but there is no information on presence of clypeal setose plate(s) (see pp 85–87) and the corresponding figure III(2) is inadequate. Voigtländer & Reip (2013: 220) mentioned another specimen of Cryptops (T.) similis from Southern Spain but gave no information on the two diagnostic characters of this subgenus (see above). Thus inclusion of Cryptops (T.) similis in Trigonocryptops should be questionable at the moment.
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.