Rostrinirmus Złotorzycka, 1964
Bush, Sarah E., 2017, Morphological revision of the hyperdiverse Brueelia - complex (Insecta: Phthiraptera: Ischnocera: Philopteridae) with new taxa, checklists and generic key, Zootaxa 4313 (1), pp. 1-443: 263-265
treatment provided by
|Rostrinirmus Złotorzycka, 1964|
Nirmus Nitzsch, 1818: 291 (in partim).
Type species. Rostrinirmus refractoriolus Złotorzycka, 1964a: 277 [= Nirmus ruficeps Nitzsch [in Giebel], 1866: 367], by original designation.
Diagnosis. In general morphology, Rostrinirmus ( Figs 437–450View FIGURES 437 – 438View FIGURES 439 – 440View FIGURES 441 – 450) is most similar to Sturnidoecus ( Figs 377–426View FIGURES 377 – 378View FIGURES 379 – 383View FIGURES 384 – 389View FIGURES 390 – 395View FIGURES 396 – 398View FIGURES 399 – 400View FIGURES 401 – 405View FIGURES 406 – 407View FIGURES 408 – 412View FIGURES 413 – 414View FIGURES 415 – 419View FIGURES 420 – 421View FIGURES 422 – 426) and Buphagoecus n. gen. ( Figs 427–436View FIGURES 427 – 428View FIGURES 429 – 430View FIGURES 431 – 436), and was previously considered part of Sturnidoecus . Like these two genera, the dorsal anterior plate of Rostrinirmus ( Fig. 439View FIGURES 439 – 440) is completely separated from the main head plate. However, the posterior margin of the dorsal anterior plate is rounded in Rostrinirmus ( Fig. 439View FIGURES 439 – 440) and the dorsal preantennal suture does not extend towards the preantennal nodi; in Sturnidoecus (e.g. Fig. 279View FIGURES 279 – 284) and Buphagoecus ( Fig. 429View FIGURES 429 – 430) the posterior margin of the dorsal anterior plate is more or less flat and one branch of the dorsal preantennal suture extends towards the preantennal nodi. The lateral section of the marginal carina is ventrally uninterrupted in both Rostrinirmus ( Fig. 439View FIGURES 439 – 440) and Buphagoecus ( Fig. 429View FIGURES 429 – 430), but partially interrupted ( Fig. 415View FIGURES 415 – 419) or at least displaced ( Fig. 379View FIGURES 379 – 383) laterally in Sturnidoecus (e.g. Fig. 379View FIGURES 379 – 383). The pns is present in Rostrinirmus ( Fig. 439View FIGURES 439 – 440) and Sturnidoecus (e.g. Fig. 379View FIGURES 379 – 383), but absent in Buphagoecus ( Fig. 429View FIGURES 429 – 430), and as2 is absent in all Rostrinirmus , but present in Buphagoecus and most Sturnidoecus (see this genus).
Male genitalia of Rostrinirmus ( Figs 441–443, 445–450View FIGURES 441 – 450) most similar to those of Bizarrifrons ( Fig. 478View FIGURES 477 – 478) or Schizosairhynchus n. gen. ( Figs 466–468View FIGURES 465 – 469, 474–476View FIGURES 472 – 476), but unlike those of any species-group in Sturnidoecus ( Figs 384–398View FIGURES 384 – 389View FIGURES 390 – 395View FIGURES 396 – 398) and Buphagoecus ( Figs 431–436View FIGURES 431 – 436). In Rostrinirmus (e.g. Fig. 449View FIGURES 441 – 450) and Schizosairhynchus (e.g. Fig. 467View FIGURES 465 – 469) the mesosomal lobes are fused distally, and the gonopore is ventral, whereas in Bizarrifrons ( Fig. 478View FIGURES 477 – 478) the mesosomal lobes are not fused and the gonopore is terminal. The male genitalia of Schizosairhynchus and Rostrinirmus can be separated by the following characters: ventral sclerite present in Schizosairhynchus (VS in Fig. 467View FIGURES 465 – 469) but absent in Rostrinirmus ( Fig. 449View FIGURES 441 – 450); parameral heads with angular median folds in Rostrinirmus ( Fig. 450View FIGURES 441 – 450) but with widened blunt proximal ends in Schizosairhynchus (e.g. Fig. 468View FIGURES 465 – 469); rugose nodi marginal in Rostrinirmus ( Fig. 449View FIGURES 441 – 450) but submarginal in Schizosairhynchus ( Fig. 467View FIGURES 465 – 469); pmes as sublateral sensilla in Rostrinirmus ( Fig. 449View FIGURES 441 – 450) but as lateral microsetae in Schizosairhynchus ( Fig. 467View FIGURES 465 – 469); marginal thickenings of mesosomal lobes continuous distally in Schizosairhynchus ( Fig. 467View FIGURES 465 – 469) but interrupted medio-distally in Rostrinirmus ( Fig. 449View FIGURES 441 – 450). However, these two genera are best separated by the following non-genitalic characters: marginal carina interrupted laterally in Schizosairhynchus ( Fig. 465View FIGURES 465 – 469) but not in Rostrinirmus ( Fig. 439View FIGURES 439 – 440); dorsal anterior plate short with rounded posterior margin in Rostrinirmus ( Fig. 439View FIGURES 439 – 440) but long with pointed posterior margin in Schizosairhynchus ( Fig. 465View FIGURES 465 – 469); as2 absent in Rostrinirmus ( Fig. 439View FIGURES 439 – 440) but present in Schizosairhynchus ( Fig. 465View FIGURES 465 – 469); accessory sternal plates present on at least some segments in both sexes in Schizosairhynchus ( Figs 463–464View FIGURES 463 – 464), but never present in Rostrinirmus ( Figs 437–438View FIGURES 437 – 438); sternal plate II of Rostrinirmus ( Figs 437–438View FIGURES 437 – 438) not modified as in Schizosairhynchus ( Figs 463–464View FIGURES 463 – 464); ppss on medio-posterior margin of prothorax in Schizosairhynchus ( Figs 463–464View FIGURES 463 – 464), but on postero-lateral corners in Rostrinirmus ( Figs 437–438View FIGURES 437 – 438).
Description. Both sexes. Head bulb-shaped ( Fig. 439View FIGURES 439 – 440). Marginal carina interrupted only submedianly. Frons hyaline. Dorsal preantennal suture continuous with hyaline margin, reaching ads, dsms, and lateral margins of head, and separating dorsal anterior plate from main head plate posteriorly. Posterior margin of dorsal anterior plate rounded. Ventral carinae diffuse anterior to pulvinus, not clearly continuous with marginal carina. Ventral anterior plate present, broadly crescent-shaped. Head setae as in Fig. 439View FIGURES 439 – 440 ( Rostrinirmus ruficeps species group) or with setae along temporal margin as in Fig. 444View FIGURES 441 – 450 ( Ro. raji species group); as3 and as1 absent; pas spine-like; os macrosetae in Ro. ruficeps species-group ( Fig. 439View FIGURES 439 – 440) but microsetae in Ro. raji species group ( Fig. 444View FIGURES 441 – 450). Coni broad, reaching to or slightly beyond distal margin of scapes. Antennae monomorphic. Temporal carinae not visible; mts 3 only macrosetae. Gular plate spade-shaped or triangular.
Prothorax rectangular to trapezoidal, widening posteriorly ( Figs 437–438View FIGURES 437 – 438); ppss on postero-lateral corners. Proepimera hook-shaped, curling around coxae II. Pterothorax pentagonal; lateral margins divergent; posterior margin convergent to rounded median point; mms narrowly interrupted medianly. Meso- and metasterna not fused; 1 seta on postero-lateral corner on each side of each plate. Metepisterna either slender ( Rostrinirmus raji speciesgroup) or widening ( Ro. ruficeps species-group) medianly. Leg chaetotaxy as in Fig. 25View FIGURES 25, except fI-p2 absent; fII-v2, fIII-v2 absent in Ro. ruficeps but present in members of the Ro. raji species group (but see remarks under Ro. ruficeps ).
Abdomen ( Figs 437–438View FIGURES 437 – 438) oblong in female, broadly oval in male. Tergopleurites triangular in male, more rectangular in female; tergopleurites II –IX+X in male and tergopleurites II –VIII in female widely separated medianly. Sternal plates broad, rectangular, do not approach pleurites. Pleural incrassations slight. Tergopleurites barely reach ventral surface of abdomen, often absent ventrally in females. Re-entrant heads wide, blunt, short, present mainly in anterior segments of male. Male subgenital plate triangular, with irregular lateral margins, reaching posterior end of abdomen. Female subgenital plate triangular, reaching or approaching vulval margin but not flaring into cross-piece ( Fig. 440View FIGURES 439 – 440). Abdominal chaetotaxy variable between species groups ( Table 12). Vulval margin ( Fig. 440View FIGURES 439 – 440) with slender vms, thorn-like vss; vos follow lateral margins of subgenital plate; distal vos situated median to vss.
Male genitalia different between species groups ( Figs 441–443, 445–450View FIGURES 441 – 450). Basal apodeme rectangular, anterior margin flat ( Rostrinirmus ruficeps species-group, Figs 445, 448View FIGURES 441 – 450) or rounded ( Ro. raji species-group, Fig. 441View FIGURES 441 – 450). Proximal mesosome broad, flat. Gonopore small, open distally, associated with subparallel club-like thickenings in Ro. raji species-group ( Fig. 442View FIGURES 441 – 450). Rostrinirmus ruficeps ( Fig. 445View FIGURES 441 – 450) with gonopore minute, and sometimes cannot be seen. Some Ro. ruficeps with asymmetrical mesosome as in Fig. 449View FIGURES 441 – 450. Mesosomal lobes broad, fused distally; rugose nodi near distal end, more extensive medianly in Ro. raji species group ( Fig. 442View FIGURES 441 – 450) than in Ro. ruficeps species group ( Fig. 446View FIGURES 441 – 450); 2 ames microsetae sublaterally on each side anterior to gonopore; 1 pmes sensillus on each side near rugose nodi, distal to gonopore. Parameral heads ( Figs 443, 447, 450View FIGURES 441 – 450) folded, but differ between species-groups. Parameral blades broad; pst1 sensillus, central; pst2 microseta, central, near pst1.
Species-group characters. Two species-groups recognised on the basis of setae of the temporal margin of the head and abdomen and the shape of the male genitalia.
Rostrinirmus raji species-group. os microsetae ( Fig. 444View FIGURES 441 – 450). Male abdominal chaetotaxy as in Table 12; tps present on tergopleurites VII –VIII. Basal apodeme rounded anteriorly ( Fig. 441View FIGURES 441 – 450). Gonopore prominent ( Fig. 442View FIGURES 441 – 450). Mesosomal lobes with distinct nodi in distal end and large oblique rugose nodi anterior to these ( Fig. 442View FIGURES 441 – 450). Parameral heads ( Fig. 443View FIGURES 441 – 450) folded, irregularly shaped, short.
Rostrinirmus ruficeps species-group. os macrosetae ( Fig. 440View FIGURES 439 – 440). Male abdominal chaetotaxy as in Table 12; tps absent. Basal apodeme flat anteriorly ( Figs 445, 448View FIGURES 441 – 450). Gonopore not prominent ( Figs 446, 449View FIGURES 441 – 450). Mesosome symmetrical ( Fig. 446View FIGURES 441 – 450) or asymmetrical ( Fig. 449View FIGURES 441 – 450). Mesosomal lobes irregularly shaped, with small rugose nodi on posterior margin. Parameral heads with unique shape, much elongated ( Figs 447, 450View FIGURES 441 – 450).
Host distribution. Most described species and our material examined are from members of either Passeridae or Emberizidae , but described and undescribed material from a few other families, such as Pycnonotidae and Sylviidae , suggest that the host range of Rostrinirmus may be wider. Also, some of the Sturnidoecus we listed as incertae sedis may ultimately belong to Rostrinirmus . These taxonomic decisions require examination of additional material. We have tentatively included all species originally described in Rostrinirmus , but we encourage future collections from these hosts to ascertain whether this is the proper placement of these taxa.
Geographical range. Widely distributed across the Old World.
Remarks. In the original description of Rostrinirmus, Złotorzycka (1964a: 276) only mentions the rounded dorsal anterior plate, but no other characters for differentiating her new genus from Sturnidoecus . Balát (1981b: 165) added that the male genitalia had a “peculiar shape”.
Rostrinirmus raji species-group:
Rostrinirmus ruficeps species-group:
 Balát (1958) stated that Ro. buresi is close to Penenirmus [here Rostrinirmus ] ruficeps ( Nitzsch, 1866) , but did not illustrate it. Złotorzycka (1964a, 1968b, 1977, 1997) and Balát (1981b) placed Ro. buresi in Rostrinirmus , together with Ro. ruficeps and Ro. refractoriolus . Złotorzycka (1997: 217) provided some illustrations of the male genitalia, which are similar to those of other Rostrinirmus species, but unlike those of Penenirmus . We agree with this placement, rather than the treatment of Ro. buresi as Penenirmus by Price et al. (2003: 210).
 Based on the few specimens of Ro. rostratus we have been able to examine, we find them indistinguishable from Ro. buresi . Mey (1982b: 181) used differences in the shape of the body and the female subgenital plate to differentiate these two species, but the shape of the lateral sides of most sternal plates and the subgenital plate for both Ro. buresi and Ro. ruficeps are subject to individual variation, with some specimens having flat lateral margins on one side and concave margins on the other. Therefore, this character is probably not reliable, given large enough samples. The measurements given by Mey (1982b) for Ro. rostratus all fall within the ranges given by Balát (1958) for Ro. buresi . We consider the two names synonymous. It is interesting to note that the two host species, Emberiza bruniceps Brandt, 1841 and E. melanocephala Scopoli, 1769 , readily hybridise where ranges overlap ( Byers et al. 1995: 179, 182).
 Rostrinirmus refractoriolus was first synonymized under Ro. ruficeps by Machácek (1977), who noted that the material of Rostrinirmus he examined from Passer montanus and P. domesticus were indistinguishable. Złotorzycka (1964a: 277) did not have any material of Ro. ruficeps when she described Ro. refractoriolus , and did not provide any characters to differentiate the two species in her short description, only mentioning Ro. ruficeps briefly, and noting that it probably belonged to Sturnidoecus . Złotorzycka (1997: 216) later illustrated the male genitalia of Ro. refractoriolus and, despite the poor quality of the illustrations, the male genitalia are indistibguishable from those of Rostrinirmus from Passer montanus . We accept Machácek’s (1977) synonymization of these two species, based on the similarity of the male genitalia and the lack of distinguishing characters.
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.
Rostrinirmus Złotorzycka, 1964
|Bush, Sarah E. 2017|
Rostrinirmus hudeci Balát, 1981b : 166
|Balat 1981: 166|
Rostrinirmus pflegeri Balát, 1981b : 166
|Balat 1981: 166|
|Uchida 1949: 548|
|Giebel 1866: 367|
|Nitzsch 1818: 291|
|Eichler 1944: 81|
|Clay 1938: 73|
|Neumann 1906: 60|
Rostrinirmus Złotorzycka, 1964a : 276
|Zlotorzycka 1964: 276|
Rostrinirmus boevi ( Balát, 1958: 418 )
|Balat 1958: 418|
Rostrinirmus buresi ( Balát, 1958: 416 )
|Mey 1982: 181|
|Balat 1981: 165|
|Balat 1958: 416|
Rostrinirmus raji ( Ansari, 1947: 269 )
|Balat 1981: 167|
|Ansari 1947: 269|
Rostrinirmus refractoriolus Złotorzycka, 1964a : 277
|Zlotorzycka 1964: 277|