Nemuus Gustafsson & Bush

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: 207-208

publication ID

https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4313.1.1

publication LSID

lsid:zoobank.org:pub:A5Fdfba5-F992-44A8-84C2-1756C943C19B

persistent identifier

http://treatment.plazi.org/id/832187E9-FF44-FF0C-FF74-60FCFDCAFAAE

treatment provided by

Plazi

scientific name

Nemuus Gustafsson & Bush
status

new genus

Nemuus Gustafsson & Bush  , new genus

Type species. Nemuus imperator  new species

Diagnosis. Nemuus  n. gen. ( Figs 338–353View FIGURES 338 – 339View FIGURES 340 – 345View FIGURES 346 – 347View FIGURES 348 – 353) and Corvonirmus  ( Figs 319–326View FIGURES 319 – 320View FIGURES 321 – 326) share the following characters: head broad, short, with wide, rounded temples; as3 absent; antennae sexually dimorphic; at least sternal plates IV –VI in both sexes with accessory sts; ads comparatively long; preocular nodi median to eye, and eye protruding. However, these two genera can be separated by the following characters: female subgenital plate flares to cross-piece or lateral submarginal extensions in Corvonirmus  ( Fig. 326View FIGURES 321 – 326), but does not reach vulval margin in Nemuus  ( Figs 345View FIGURES 340 – 345, 353View FIGURES 348 – 353), and the posterior margin of the subgenital plate is deeply indented medianly in Nemuus  , which is never the case in Corvonirmus  ; tergopleural plates reach ventral surface of abdomen, and are not reduced medianly in Nemuus  ( Figs 338–339View FIGURES 338 – 339, 346–347View FIGURES 346 – 347), whereas in Corvonirmus  ( Figs 319–320View FIGURES 319 – 320) the tergopleural plates do not reach lateral margins of abdomen, and are generally much reduced in size; marginal carina interrupted medianly and dorsal preantennal suture present in Nemuus  ( Figs 340View FIGURES 340 – 345, 348View FIGURES 348 – 353), but marginal carina complete and dorsal preantennal suture absent in Corvonirmus  ( Fig. 321View FIGURES 321 – 326); female tergopleurites IX+X and XI fused in Nemuus  ( Figs 339View FIGURES 338 – 339, 347View FIGURES 346 – 347) but not in Corvonirmus  ( Fig. 320View FIGURES 319 – 320); for differences in abdominal chaetotaxy, see Table 2. Male genitalia of the two species of Nemuus  are dissimilar, and adequate comparions with those of Corvonirmus  cannot presently be made.

Nemuus  is superficially similar to Melibrueelia  (see Valim & Palma 2015 figs 1, 2). Both genera have comparatively broad heads with short preantennal areas, medianly interrupted marginal carinae, and sexually dimorphic antennae. However, there is no premarginal carina in Nemuus  ( Figs 340View FIGURES 340 – 345, 348View FIGURES 348 – 353) as there is in Melibrueelia  , and in Melibrueelia  the female subgenital plate reaches the vulval margin and flares into a broad cross-piece there, but does not do so in Nemuus  ( Figs 345View FIGURES 340 – 345, 353View FIGURES 348 – 353). Furthermore, the male genitalia of the two genera are very different. The proximal mesomere in Melibrueelia  is narrow, but wide in Nemuus  ( Figs 343View FIGURES 340 – 345, 351View FIGURES 348 – 353). In both genera the mesosomal lobes are fused distally, and the gonopore is ventral, but in Melibrueelia  the distal mesosome is small and triangular and is proportionally much larger and more complicated in Nemuus  ( Figs 342–344View FIGURES 340 – 345, 350–352View FIGURES 348 – 353).

Description. Both sexes. Head rectangular to slightly pentagonal ( Figs 340View FIGURES 340 – 345, 348View FIGURES 348 – 353). Marginal carina widely interrupted medianly on dorsal side, from just posterior to dsms; premarginal carina absent. Frons hyaline. Ventral carinae not continuous with marginal carina. Ventral anterior plate present, crescent-shaped. Dorsal preantennal suture continuous with hyaline margin, reaching ads, but does not separate dorsal anterior plate from main head plate entirely. Head setae as in Figs 340View FIGURES 340 – 345, 348View FIGURES 348 – 353; as3 absent. Coni small. Antennae sexually dimorphic, with male scapes much larger than those of females. Postocular nodi large, elongated, and curling around the eye to almost meet the posterior margin of the preocular nodi dorsally, and fused with preocular nodi ventrally. Eyes protruding. Temporal carinae not visible; mts  3 only macrosetae. Gular plate triangular.

Prothorax ( Figs 338–339View FIGURES 338 – 339, 346–347View FIGURES 346 – 347) trapezoidal, widening posteriorly. ppss near postero-lateral corner, but median to spiracle opening. Proepimera slender, curling around coxae II. Pterothorax rounded pentagonal; lateral margins moderately divergent; posterior margin convergent to a rounded median point; mms moderately separated medianly. Meso- and metasterna not fused; 1 seta on postero-lateral corner on each side of each plate. Metepisterna with median ends typically slightly widened, blunt. Leg chaetotaxy as in Fig. 25View FIGURES 25 except fI-p2, fI-v4 absent.

Abdomen ( Figs 338–339View FIGURES 338 – 339, 346–347View FIGURES 346 – 347) broadly oval in both sexes. Tergopleurites rectangular to slightly triangular; tergopleurites II –IX+X in male and tergopleurites II –VIII in female moderately divided medianly. Tergopleurites IX+X and XI partially fused in females. Male genital opening associated with small tergopleural plate. Sternal plates rectangular, wide. Abdominal chaetotaxy as in Table 2. Accessory sts present on at least segments III –VI in both sexes. Males with 2–3 aps  on most segments. Pleural incrassations slight. Re-entrant heads small. Male subgenital plate triangular with sinuous lateral margins, reaching distal end of abdomen. Female submarginal plate triangular, with deep median indentation in posterior end; plate does not approach vulval margin ( Figs 345View FIGURES 340 – 345, 353View FIGURES 348 – 353). Vulval margin ( Figs 345View FIGURES 340 – 345, 353View FIGURES 348 – 353) with few slender vms, numerous thorn-like vss. vos follow lateral margins of subgenital plate; distal vos approaching or situated median to vss.

Male genitalia ( Figs 342–344View FIGURES 340 – 345, 350–352View FIGURES 348 – 353) different markedly between the two species. Basal apodeme ( Figs 342View FIGURES 340 – 345, 350View FIGURES 348 – 353) rectangular. Proximal mesosome ( Figs 343View FIGURES 340 – 345, 351View FIGURES 348 – 353) rectangular. Gonopore open distally, associated with distinct, species-specific thickenings laterally and anteriorly. Mesosomal lobes elongated and large, extending far posterior to gonopores. Distal parts of lobes thickened; 2 ames microsetae on each side submarginally or marginally anterior to gonopore; 2 pmes microsetae on each sidemarginally or submarginally distal to gonopore. Parameres ( Figs 344View FIGURES 340 – 345, 352View FIGURES 348 – 353) differing between species; pst1 sensillus, central; pst2 microseta, submarginal or central.

Host distribution. Known only from members of the host genus Artamus Vieillot, 1816  ( Artamidae  ). In addition to the two species described below, we have seen females belonging to this genus from Artamus leucorhynchus leucopygialis Gould, 1842  (unpub. data).

Geographical range. Known from Thailand, the Philippines, and New Guinea.

Etymology. The genus name is derived from Japanese “ nemui ”, for “sleepy”, referring to the the post- and preocular nodi almost completely enclosing the middle of the eye, giving the appearance that members of this genus are about to close their eyes ( Figs 340View FIGURES 340 – 345, 348View FIGURES 348 – 353). Gender: masculine.

Remarks. Nemuus  was not represented in the phylogeny of Bush et al. (2016), and based on morphology, no other genus treated here appears to be very closely related to Nemuus  . However, it shows some similarities with Corvonirmus  (see above) and Melibrueelia  .

Included species

* Nemuus hoedhri  new species * Nemuus imperator  new species