Epilampra opaca Walker, 1868

Evangelista, Dominic A., Chan, Kimberly, Kaplan, Kayla L., Wilson, Megan M. & Ware, Jessica L., 2015, The Blattodeas. s. (Insecta, Dictyoptera) of the Guiana Shield, ZooKeys 475, pp. 37-87 : 42-44

publication ID

https://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.475.7877

publication LSID

lsid:zoobank.org:pub:C4ACAF17-E887-406A-AF7C-6D0155E7F392

persistent identifier

https://treatment.plazi.org/id/38447DFD-B65D-A661-E898-C1F58D0C5B64

treatment provided by

ZooKeys by Pensoft

scientific name

Epilampra opaca Walker, 1868
status

 

Taxon classification Animalia Blattodea Blaberidae

Epilampra opaca Walker, 1868 View in CoL

Materials.

Adult ♂ Figure 3B.

Voucher number: DECBA1845.

GenBank accession number: KF155125.

Collection locale. CEIBA Biological Station, Madewini, Guyana.

GPS: 6°29'N, 58°13'W.

Date: 18 - August - 2012.

Collectors. Dominic A. Evangelista and William R. Kuhn.

Adult ♀

Voucher number: DECBA1847.

GenBank accession number: KF155124.

Collection locale. CEIBA Biological Station, Madewini, Guyana.

GPS: 6°29"N, 58°13"W.

Date: 5 - August - 2011.

Collectors. Dominic A. Evangelista, Ian Biazzo, Manpreet K. Kohli, Melissa Sanchez-Herrera, Nicole Sroczinski and Jessica L. Ware.

Collection/ecological information.

The adult male (DECBA1845) was collected at a light trap. Adult female (DECBA1847) was collected by hand in the leaf litter by a small pond. Most late instar individuals of this species were also collected at the edge of this pond and some were collected in pitfall traps baited with beer. Early instar individuals of this species were collected from within bromeliads.

Genetic information.

The two adult specimens reported here, as well as three juvenile individuals (Voucher and accession numbers: DEDSM0141 - KF155097, DECBA1706 - KF155089, DECBA0205 - KF155088) have identical COI barcodes and are sister to each other on the tree. However, other individuals (similar to Epilampra opaca ) included in the analysis (Voucher and accession numbers: DECBA0214 - KF155018, DECBA0216 - KF155017, DECBA0606 - KF155013, DECBA1101 - KF155016, DECBA0605 - KF155012, DECBA0608 - KF155015) are more genetically diverse and are only supported as monophyletic by 63% bootstrap support.

Morphological identification.

There is a great deal of intraspecific variation in the morphology of this species. Early instar nymphs are difficult to associate to later instar nymphs, all of which are entirely unrecognizable from the adults (Figure 3 A–C). Furthermore, there is variation within instars, where some later instar nymphs will appear to have a medially divided subgenital plate and others do not. This trait was not found to correlate with genetic differences ( Evangelista et al. 2014).

The external morphology of this species provides little assistance in its identification, as most descriptions of it emphasize coloration that is both subtle and variable. However, the allometry of our specimens (Table 2) agree with those of Bruijning (1959). A definitive identification was made by comparison of genital morphology using Roth (1970b), particularly in the shape of the prepuce.

Known geographic distribution.

Venezuela (unverified), Guyana, Suriname, French Guiana and Brazil

History and synonymy. Walker (1868) first described both Epilampra opaca Walker, 1868 and Epilampra substrigata Walker, 1868. Hebard (1926) noted that Epilampra opaca Walker, 1868 has a highly variable morphology and may be synonymous with a few other Epilampra (e.g. Epilampra conferta Walker, 1868 syn. stigmosa Giglio-Tos, 1898, Epilampra maculicollis (Serville, 1838)). This variability is evident in the work published by Roth (1970b), which shows a great deal of variation in the genital morphology, in particular for L2d. Although it is not clear if anyone before Roth (1970b) examined the genitalia of these two species, both Shelford (1910) and Princis (1963) considered them to be synonyms. Roth’s (1970b) photos show that, although each species is intraspecifically variable, both are distinct and separable by the shape of L2d and the prepuce. Roth himself acknowledged this and considered the species as being separate. Although we have not examined any Epilampra substrigata Walker, 1868, we agree with Roth’s interpretation of the morphology and follow from his precedence in considering these separate (see Roth 1970b for the opinions of Princis and Gurney on the status of these two species).

Kingdom

Animalia

Phylum

Arthropoda

Class

Insecta

Order

Blattodea

Family

Blaberidae

Genus

Epilampra