Udamopyga percita ( Lopes, 1938 )

Santos, Josenilson Rodrigues Dos & Mello-Patiu, Cátia Antunes De, 2018, Review of the Brazilian species of Udamopyga Hall, 1938 (Diptera: Sarcophagidae), with the description of a new species and a key to males and females, Zootaxa 4508 (1), pp. 1-27 : 15-17

publication ID

https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4508.1.1

publication LSID

lsid:zoobank.org:pub:77343F9E-8441-45C6-A8D1-2DB33C72D3E8

DOI

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5957353

persistent identifier

https://treatment.plazi.org/id/981F8794-FF83-B221-EAC5-FB40AE33AD06

treatment provided by

Plazi

scientific name

Udamopyga percita ( Lopes, 1938 )
status

 

Udamopyga percita ( Lopes, 1938) View in CoL

( Figs 1–3 View FIGURES 1–6 , 32–36 View FIGURES 32–36 , 49 View FIGURES 46–51 , 55 View FIGURES 52–57 )

Sarcophaga percita Lopes, 1938: 344 View in CoL –345. Type locality: Brazil, Rio de Janeiro.

Udamopyga percita: Lopes (1940: 941–942) View in CoL .

References. Lopes (1940; placement in Udamopyga View in CoL and revision); Dodge (1965; key); Lopes (1969a; catalog); Lopes (1969b; biological notes); Lopes (1973; biological notes); Lopes (1982; diagnosis of 1st larval instar); Lopes (1988; key); Pape (1996; catalog); Mello-Patiu et al. (2009; checklist); Mulieri et al. (2010; key and biological notes); Mulieri et al. (2011; biological notes); Patitucci et al. (2011a; geographic notes); Vairo et al. (2011; key to Brazilian species of forensic importance); Beuter et al. (2012; species of forensic importance); Mello-Patiu et al. (2014; key to genera and list of species from Argentina); Mulieri et al. (2015a; comparative morphology); Mulieri et al. (2015b; sex-biased patterns of saprophagous Calyptratae); Patitucci et al. (2015; inventory of saprophagous Calyptratae in Buenos Aires); Buenaventura & Pape (2018; sarcophagine phylogeny).

Type-material examined. HOLOTYPE ♂: “ Rio de Janeiro / H. Souza Lopes [printed on white paper, black frame]” // [ EX] “ Ins. O. Cruz [Instituto Oswaldo Cruz] / N. 10120 [permanent microscope slide; printed on white paper, black frame]” // [ EX] “ Ins. O. Cruz [Instituto Oswaldo Cruz] / cult. [culture] N. 2 [printed on white paper, black frame]” // “ Holotype [printed on red paper, black frame]” // “ Sarcophaga View in CoL / percita View in CoL n. sp. / Holotypus / 2.38 [ii.1938] Det. H.S. Lopes [handwritten on white paper, black frame]” // “ MNRJ / 2297 [printed vertically on white paper]” ( MNRJ) [holotype in good condition; terminalia previously on microscope slide, but since removed from Canada balsam and now in glycerin in a plastic microvial; puparium pinned with specimen].

PARATYPES, 3 ♂♂, 1 ♀: same data as holotype ( MNRJ) [paratypes in good condition with terminalia on microscope slides labeled N. 10121 (♂), N. 10123 (♂), N. 10124 (♂), and N. 10119 (♀)] .

Additional material examined. Brazil: 1 ♂, Bahia, Feira de Santana , 28–29.xii.2010, T. Monteiro leg. ( MNRJ) ; 1 ♂, Espírito Santo, Guarapari , 22.i.1973, H.S. Lopes leg. ( MNRJ) ; 1 ♀, Espírito Santo, Guarapari , culture 1103, 11.ii.1973, H.S. Lopes leg. ( MNRJ) ; 2 ♀♀, Espírito Santo, Guarapari , culture 1124, i.1974, H.S. Lopes leg. ( MNRJ) ; 1 ♂, Espírito Santo, Guarapari , 21.i.1974, H.S. Lopes leg. ( MNRJ) ; 1 ♂, Espírito Santo, Guarapari , 13.i.1975, H.S. Lopes leg. ( MNRJ) ; 4 ♂♂, Espírito Santo, Linhares , xi.1972, P.C. Elias leg. ( MNRJ) ; 1 ♂, Mato Grosso do Sul, Campo Grande , i.1953, Amancio da Silva leg. ( MNRJ) ; 1 ♂, Mato Grosso do Sul, Reserva Biológica Universidade Federal do Mato Grosso do Sul, 23.x.2013, R. Toma leg. ( MNRJ) ; 5 ♂♂, Rio de Janeiro, Arraial do Cabo , v.1963, P. Jurberg & H. Rezende leg. ( MNRJ) ; 1 ♂, Rio de Janeiro, Cabo Frio , i.1962, J. Jurberg leg. ( MNRJ) ; 1 ♂, Rio de Janeiro, Cabo Frio , iv.1962, J. Jurberg leg. ( MNRJ) ; 1 ♂, Rio de Janeiro, Grajaú , v.1950, H.S. Lopes leg. ( MNRJ) ; 1 ♂, Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre , 1954, P. Cabral leg. ( MNRJ) ; 1 ♂, Rio Grande do Sul, Santa Maria , 2.xii.1978, H.S. Lopes leg. ( MNRJ) .

Diagnosis. Male cercus with a tuft of long setae on cercal base ( Figs 33–34 View FIGURES 32–36 , 49 View FIGURES 46–51 ); vesica formed of two dark and sclerotized lobes with a convex, membranous and well-delimited central area, and with inner ventral margin as two double projections each consisting of two long, microtrichiose filaments ( Figs 1–3 View FIGURES 1–6 , 35–36 View FIGURES 32–36 , 49 View FIGURES 46–51 ); juxta formed of two well-individualized lobes with latero-posterior flaps ( Figs 1–3 View FIGURES 1–6 , 35–36 View FIGURES 32–36 , 49 View FIGURES 46–51 ). Female T6 convex along midline, without a longitudinal crease ( Fig. 55 View FIGURES 52–57 ); ST5 wider than long; ST7 about 3x as long as ST6 and with concave area near middle; ST8 poorly sclerotized; epiproct membranous, without setae.

Redescription. Differs from U. squamata sp. nov. as follows:

Male (n = 23). Length: 10–13 mm; slightly golden pruinosity can be present on ocellar triangle; frons about 0.28x head width at level of ocellar triangle; 7–9 well-developed frontal setae reaching apex of pedicel; gena and genal groove with golden pruinosity; ST5 with apically-rounded arms and a short window; base of arms with a swollen area with numerous spiniform setae, apex of arms with long setae ( Figs 32 View FIGURES 32–36 , 49 View FIGURES 46–51 ); cerci fused along their whole length; cercal prong with truncate apex (posterior view) and with a small, anterior apical projection (lateral view) ( Figs 33–34 View FIGURES 32–36 ); surstylus boomerang-like with setae along anterior margin ( Figs 33 View FIGURES 32–36 , 49 View FIGURES 46–51 ); pregonite similar in length to postgonite, with base 3x as broad as median region ( Fig. 35 View FIGURES 32–36 ); postgonite almost straight with sharp apex and a long seta near apex ( Fig. 35 View FIGURES 32–36 ); hypandrium slightly longer than phallapodeme ( Fig. 35 View FIGURES 32–36 ); postgonal apodeme clavate ( Fig. 35 View FIGURES 32–36 ); vesica with blackish and sclerotized lobes with a central, convex, membranous and welldelimited area; inner ventral margin of vesica as two long, double projections, i.e., each composed of two filaments, both covered with microtrichia ( Figs 1–3 View FIGURES 1–6 , 35–36 View FIGURES 32–36 , 49 View FIGURES 46–51 ); juxta formed of two lobes with rounded lateroposterior flaps ( Figs 1, 3 View FIGURES 1–6 , 35–36 View FIGURES 32–36 , 49 View FIGURES 46–51 ); median stylus with spinose ornamentation in apical half ( Fig. 36 View FIGURES 32–36 ); lateral stylus slightly longer than median stylus, with a lateral row of spines ( Fig. 36 View FIGURES 32–36 ).

Female (n = 4). Length: 9–12 mm; frons about 0.31x head width at level of ocellar triangle; 5–7 welldeveloped frontal setae; T5 with about 16–18 marginal setae; ST4 with two pairs of long setae; ST5 wider than long; terminalia yellowish-brown; T6 convex along midline, without a longitudinal crease ( Fig. 55 View FIGURES 52–57 ); ST7 about 3x as long as ST6, with a concave area near middle; ST8 membranous and not very distinct; vaginal plate weakly sclerotized ( Lopes 1940: figs 31–32).

Distribution. Argentina (Buenos Aires, Catamarca, Santiago del Estero, Tucumán); Brazil (Bahia *, Espírito Santo, Mato Grosso do Sul *, Minas Gerais, Paraná, Rio de Janeiro, Rio Grande do Sul *, São Paulo).

Remarks. Udamopyga percita is morphologically similar to U. provecta and U. setigena . In males of these three species the cercus has a sharp-pointed, anteriorly curved apex ( Figs 33 View FIGURES 32–36 , 37 View FIGURES 37–40 , 42 View FIGURES 41–45 , 49–51 View FIGURES 46–51 ) and the vesica is formed of conspicuously rounded lobes ( Figs 1–6 View FIGURES 1–6 , 35–36 View FIGURES 32–36 , 39–40 View FIGURES 37–40 , 44–45 View FIGURES 41–45 , 49–51 View FIGURES 46–51 ); in females T6 is convex along the midline and without a longitudinal crease ( Figs 55–57 View FIGURES 52–57 ). Males of Udamopyga percita and U. provecta also share juxtal lobes with lateral projections ( Figs 1 View FIGURES 1–6 , 35 View FIGURES 32–36 , 39 View FIGURES 37–40 , 49–50 View FIGURES 46–51 ) and vesica with a central membranous area ( Figs 1–3 View FIGURES 1–6 , 35 View FIGURES 32–36 , 39 View FIGURES 37–40 , 49–50 View FIGURES 46–51 ), while in U. setigena the juxtal lobes lack lateral projections ( Figs 4 View FIGURES 1–6 , 44 View FIGURES 41–45 ) and the vesica has striated ornamentation and no membranous central area ( Figs 4 View FIGURES 1–6 , 44 View FIGURES 41–45 , 51 View FIGURES 46–51 ). Udamopyga percita can be differentiated from U. provecta by the well-delimited membranous central area of the vesica and the rounded latero-posterior flaps of the juxtal lobes ( Figs 1, 3 View FIGURES 1–6 , 35 View FIGURES 32–36 , 49 View FIGURES 46–51 ), whereas in U. provecta the vesica has a cracked-looking integument, without a welldelimited central area, and the juxtal lobes have latero-anterior membranous projections ( Figs 39 View FIGURES 37–40 , 50 View FIGURES 46–51 ).

EX

The Culture Collection of Extremophilic Fungi

MNRJ

Museu Nacional/Universidade Federal de Rio de Janeiro

Kingdom

Animalia

Phylum

Arthropoda

Class

Insecta

Order

Diptera

Family

Sarcophagidae

Genus

Udamopyga

Loc

Udamopyga percita ( Lopes, 1938 )

Santos, Josenilson Rodrigues Dos & Mello-Patiu, Cátia Antunes De 2018
2018
Loc

Sarcophaga percita

Lopes, H. S. 1938: 344
1938
GBIF Dataset (for parent article) Darwin Core Archive (for parent article) View in SIBiLS Plain XML RDF