Naupactus xanthographus (Germar, 1824)
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.1080/00222933.2017.1346715 |
|
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:051587DD-37C2-4216-AA61-0E563BB44D64 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/3C7887C4-7578-CE1F-53CE-FB6BA8D0B253 |
|
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
|
scientific name |
Naupactus xanthographus |
| status |
|
Naupactus xanthographus View in CoL species group
Description
Species medium sized (females 10 – 16 mm; males 8 – 11.5 mm), brown or greyish, with similar pattern of white and/or yellow stripes along pronotum and elytra ( Figures 1 View Figure 1 , 2 View Figure 2 ). Disc of pronotum with pair of lateral light stripes or a single stripe along midline; elytra often with white stripes along suture, anterior half of 5° interval and along 7 – 8° intervals, the latter obliquely curved towards intervals 4 – 5° on posterior half or almost confluent near suture. Vestiture consisting of moderately sparse round-oval scales and short, fine and recumbent setae; venter denuded along midline. Rostrum 1 – 1.25× as long as wide at apex; lateral carinae usually strong, squamose or denuded, subparallel or slightly convergent towards forehead; setae forming semi circles on each side of anterior half of median sulcus. Forehead 1.25 – 1.45× as wide as rostrum at apex. Eyes round, convex. Antennae slender, setose; scape usually reaching anterior margin of pronotum; funicular article 2, 1.5 – 2× as long as article1; articles 3 – 7, 2.5 – 3× as long as wide at apex; club 2.5 – 3.25× as long as wide. Pronotum subcylindrical, wider than long in female and about as long as wide in male. Elytra oval or navicular, 1.36 – 1.70× (females) and 1.55 – 2.05× (males) as long as wide; apical margin thickened; humeri indistinct; apex with one distinct tubercle on each side, at level 3 – 4° intervals; punctures of striae of variable size, with a short, fine seta on bottom; intervals flat about 2 – 4× as wide as punctures. Metathoracic wings reduced. Scutellum sparsely setose or squamose. Legs long; front coxae not separated from each other, lacking denticles; front femora 2.50 – 3.35× as long as wide, and 1.1 – 1.5× as wide as hind femora; front tibia with large, acute mucro and about 7 – 10 denticles on inner margin; middle tibiae with small mucro and usually with minute denticles; hind tibiae usually without mucro and denticles (except males of N. xanthographus ); corbel of hind tibiae well-developed or lacking (= metatibial apex simple); dorsal comb about as long as distal comb. Ventrite 5 slightly shorter than ventrite 2 in females, 1 – 2× as long as ventrite 2 in males.
Female genitalia
Sternite VIII subrhomboidal, with V-shaped sclerotization near base and apical tuft of long setae; spiculum ventral about 2.5 – 3× as long as VIII sternite. Ovipositor about ¾ to slightly shorter than abdomen, with or without rows of 3 – 5 long setae on distal third, near coxites, on external side of baculi; coxites slightly sclerotized; styli usually welldeveloped, laterodorsally directed. Spermatheca subcylindrical, either with very short nodulus ( xanthographus type, Figure 3e – h View Figure 3 ) or with long, tubular nodulus ( dissimulator type, Figure 3i, j View Figure 3 ); spermathecal duct thin, not spiral form, sclerotized, 2 – 6× as long as spermatheca.
Male genitalia
Penis longer than abdomen, slightly expanded towards apex; apex with distinct cuticular striation, either subacute ( Figure 4e, i, k View Figure 4 ) or arrow-shaped ( Figure 4a, c, g View Figure 4 ); ostium of variable size (1 to 5× as long as wide); penis apodemes usually shorter than body of penis; endophallus with distinct spiny area, and with or without sclerites consisted on a pyriform central piece and two winged-like lateral pieces ( Figure 4j, l View Figure 4 ).
Remarks
Within the species group under study we distinguished two different subgroups, one including N. xanthographus , N. dissimilis , N. navicularis and N. mimicus ( Figure 1a – i View Figure 1 ), and the other, N. dissimulator and the new species N. marvaldiae ( Figure 2a – d View Figure 2 ). In the former, the pronotum and the elytra are more elongate, the front femora are slender and slightly wider than the hind femora, the corbel of the hind tibiae is welldeveloped and squamose; the ovipositor lacks long setae on the distal third; the spermatheca has short nodulus and the penis lacks conspicuous sclerites in the endophallus ( Figure 3e – h View Figure 3 ). In the second subgroup the pronotum and the elytra are shorter; the front femora is very widened compared to the hind femora; the corbel of the hind tibiae lacking; the ovipositor has 3 – 5 long setae on the distal third; the spermatheca is larger compared with the size of the abdomen than in the other subgroup, and has tubular long nodulus; and the penis bears typical sclerites in the endophallus ( Figures 3 View Figure 3 (d, i, j), 4(j, l).
Key to species of the N. xanthographus View in CoL species group
1. Pronotum lacking white stripe along midline, usually smooth. Corbel of hind tibiae welldeveloped, squamose. Front femora slightly wider than hind femora (WF1/WF3 1.10 – 1.30). Nodulus of spermatheca short to indistinct ( Figure 3e – h View Figure 3 ). Apex of penis usually arrow-shaped ( Figure 4a, c, g View Figure 4 ) ........................................................................................ 2
1 ʹ. Pronotum with white stripe along midline, disc rugose (with confluent punctures). Corbel of hind tibiae lacking. Front femora distinctly wider than hind femora (WF1/ WF3 1.35 – 1.50). Nodulus of spermatheca tubular, long ( Figure 3i, j View Figure 3 ). Apex of penis not arrow-shaped ( Figure 4e, i, k View Figure 4 )................................................................................................. 5
2. Vestiture brown with pinkish iridescence. Sides of pronotum almost straight. Elytra very acute at apex and very thin in lateral view. Antennal scape not reaching hind margin of pronotum. Ventrite 5 of males slightly longer than ventrite 2, not bent at apex. Apex of penis subacute, slightly asymmetrical.................................................. N. navicularis View in CoL ( Figure 1f View Figure 1 )
2 ʹ. Vestiture brown or grey. Sides of pronotum curved. Elytra neither acute at apex nor very thin in lateral view. Antennal scape reaching hind margin of pronotum. Ventrite 5 of males 1.50 – 2× as long as ventrite 2, apex slightly bent. Apex of penis arrow-shaped (with two lateral points) ( Figure 4a, c, g View Figure 4 )......................................................................................................................... 3
3. Elytra with white stripe along suture very distinct and lacking yellow stripes on anterior third of 5° interval and along 7 – 8° intervals. Pronotum slightly rugose. Intervals of elytra about 2× as wide as punctures of striae. Denticles of front tibiae large. Corbel of hind tibiae slender. Ostium of penis about 3 – 4× as long as wide ( Figure 4g View Figure 4 )................................................. ............................................... N. mimicus View in CoL ( Figure 1g – i View Figure 1 )
3 ʹ. Elytra with vanished white stripe along suture and yellow stripes on anterior third of 5° interval and along 7-8° intervals. Pronotum smooth to finely punctate. Intervals of elytra about 3 – 5× as wide as punctures of striae. Denticles of front tibiae small. Corbel of hind tibiae broad. Ostium of penis 1 – 2× as long as wide............................. 4
4. Maximum width of pronotum near base (females). Elytra navicular, strongly widened relative to pronotum (WE/WP about 1.50×) and abruptly narrowed near apex; apical tubercles large. Males with row of denticles on inner margin of hind tibiae, the distal one very large. Apex of penis slightly pronounced beyond lateral points; ostium about as long as wide ( Figure 4a View Figure 4 )........................................................ N. xanthographus View in CoL ( Figure 1a – c View Figure 1 )
4 ʹ. Maximum width of pronotum near middle (females). Elytra oval, slightly widened relative to pronotum (WE/WP about 1.30×) and uniformly curved on sides; apical tubercles small to indistinct. Males without denticles on hind tibiae. Apex of penis distinctly pronounced beyond lateral points; ostium about twice as long as wide ( Figure 4c View Figure 4 ) ....................................... ..................................................................................................................................... N. dissimilis View in CoL ( Figure 1d, e View Figure 1 )
5. Elytra moderately long relative to width in females (LE/WE 1.50 – 1-60×), moderately narrowed near apex; disc flat; apical tubercles distinct only in females; white stripe along suture distinct, particularly in males; lateral white stripes ascending towards 4 – 5° intervals near distal third. Pronotum of males convex, about as wide as maximum width of elytra. Front femora less than 1.5× as wide as hind femora (WF1/WF3 1.35 – 1.45×). Ventrite 5 of males longer than ventrite 2. Aedeagal apex subacute, with waved sides ( Figure 4i View Figure 4 ). .............................................................................................................................. N. dissimulator View in CoL ( Figure 2a, b View Figure 2 ) 5 ʹ. Elytra very short relative to width in females (LE/WE 1.36 – 1.45), strongly narrowed near apex; disc slightly convex; apical tubercles distinct in both sexes; white stripe along suture indistinct; lateral white stripes ascending towards 2 – 3° intervals (almost confluent on disc). Pronotum of males flat, slightly narrower than maximum width of elytra. Front femora more than 1.5× as wide as hind femora (WF1/WF3 1.51 – 1.56). Ventrite 5 of males about as long as ventrite 2. Aedeagal apex without waved sides ( Figure 4k View Figure 4 ) ......................... .................................................................................................................. N. marvaldiae n. sp. ( Figure 2c, d View Figure 2 )
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.