Pararhaphe sphaeroides ( Distant, 1883 )

Stehlík, Jaroslav L. & Kment, Petr, 2011, Redescription of Pararhaphe and review of Arhaphe (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Largidae) of America north of Mexico, Zootaxa 3058, pp. 35-54 : 50-52

Pararhaphe sphaeroides ( Distant, 1883)

( Figs. 2 , 7 , 20–21 , 23 )

Japetus sphaeroides Distant, 1883: 227 , pl. XXI: Fig. 3 (description, faunistics). Holotype: [sex not indicated], “ Guatemala, San Gerónimo (Champion)” (BMNH).

Japetus sphaeroides: Lethierry & Severin (1894): 240 (catalog, distribution).

Arhaphe sphaeroides: Barber (1911): 28 (revised generic placement).

Japetus sphaeroides: Barber (1924): 227 (revised generic placement).

Japetus sphaerodes: Hussey (1929): 28 (catalog, distribution).

Japetus sphaeroides: Torre-Bueno (1942): 68 –69 (list, spelling).

Arhaphe sphaerodes [sic!]: Halstead (1972): 1 –3, 6 (key, diagnosis, distribution).

Japetus sphaeroides: Bliven (1973): 128 –129 (taxonomy).

Arhaphe sphaerodes [sic!]: Brailovsky & Marquez (1974): 102 (comparative note, distribution).

Arhaphe sphaeroides: Brailovsky (1981): 83 , 105 (taxonomy).

Pararhaphe sphaeroides: Henry (1988): 161 (nomenclature, new combination, distribution).

Type material examined. Holotype: Ƥ, “ Type [p, small white round label with red margin] // Geronimo, Guatemala, Champion [p, white label with red margin] // Japetus sphaeroides Dist. [hw, white label]” ( BMNH). The holotype is glued onto card, well-preserved; only the left hind leg is missing.

Redescription. Coloration. Entire body black, corium and clavus mostly brown. Clavus basally and on inner side dark purple; this purple coloration occupying nearly entire width of claval base, narrowing towards apex of scutellum. Membrane milky white, its posterior half with large black spot reaching the margin of membrane ( Figs. 20 , 23 ).

Structure. Head large, slightly longer than pronotum, flat between eyes, both anteriad and posteriad of eyes semicircular; anterior part of head strongly convex ( Fig. 7 ). Postclypeus more convex than anteclypeus, apex of anteclypeus slightly curved posteriad; anteclypeus not prominent, head regularly rounded in lateral view. Frons in the same level as callar portion of pronotum in lateral view. Labium reaching posterior margin of procoxae ( Fig. 7 ).

Pronotal collar only weakly apparent. Callar lobe much larger than pronotal lobe, strongly convex ( Fig. 7 ), its sculpture coriaceous with prominent parallel longitudinal furrows medially, those slightly bent outwards on their apices. Pronotal lobe flat; humeral humps large and prominent. Anterior pronotal margin slightly concave medially. Scutellum regularly convex.

Hemelytra brachypterous, very short, slightly surpassing anterior third of tergite V. Lateral corial margin nearly straight, sligtly convex near the base, slightly concave medially, and more strongly rounded in posterior part ( Fig. 23 ). Costal margin sharp with very distinct strigil in form of very small, regular denticles distributed nearly along its entire length.

Profemora medially strongly thickened and distinctly attenuated towards apex, their ventral surface with small denticle anteapically. Meso- and metafemora less thickened medially than in profemora.

Puncturation ( Fig. 23 ). Surface of head punctured, particular punctures divided by striae, these forming irregular polygons. Punctures of callar lobe fine and sparse, punctures of pronotal lobe distinct, especially laterally. Scutellum regularly punctured. Punctation of pleuron I and posterior pleural flange I hardly visible due to dense pubescence. Punctures on clavus and corium shallow, indistinct.

Pilosity. Head covered with sheer, erect, moderately long, dark, and pale setae, especially on frons and head base ( Figs. 20 , 23 ); dark setae occurring only on dorsum of head. In addition, head, and especially its ventral side, anteclypeus, and adjacent areas with pale adpressed setae (these setae longer than the common pubescence of the body). Antennae covered with pale pubescence. Pronotum covered with sheer, erect, finer pale setae and isolated black setae; this pubescence of pronotum rather sparse. Callar lobe covered also with sparse silvery pubescence, which on pronotal lobe the pubescence is more regular and the adpressed setae are longer. Scutellum with distinct sheer erect setae and silvery pubescence. Clavus and corium with sparse sheer, erect, black setae, these shorter than those on scutellum. Dorsal laterotergites and entire abdominal venter covered with very dense, regularly distributed silvery pubescence; setae being distinct and quite long. Legs with silvery pubescence, much sparser and finer than on body venter. Ventral surface of femora besides the basic pubescence with sheer, erect, finer pale setae (shorter on metafemora). Tibiae in apical half with black oblique spines.

Measurements (mm). Female (holotype): Body length 8.24; head: length 1.70, width (including eyes) 2.00, interocular width 1.24, length 1.62; lengths of antennomeres: 1—not messured (covered with glue), 2—0.81, 3— 0.49, 4—1.49; pronotum: total length 1.46, width of callar lobe 1.35, width of base of pronotal lobe 1.57; scutellum: length 0.81, width 0.65; corium: length 2.21, width 0.73, length of membrane 1.40, length of claval commisure 0.81; abdomen: width 1.51, length of tergites V—0.86, VI—0.65, VII—0.49, VIII—0.22, length of annal tube: 0.16; tarsus: length of tarsomeres I—0.76, II—0.54, III—0.54.

Differential diagnosis. See the key.

Taxonomy. Bliven (1973) synonymised high-handedly Arhaphe mexicana with Japetus sphaeroides with the following absurd comment: “The unique combination of black and orange color, wide head and linear body indeed renders this insect extraordinary in appearance. This is well shown in Distant‘s figures alongside Arhaphe cicindeloides (equals carolina ). Cuernavaca, where Halstead‘s specimens [of A. mexicana ] were collected, is but a stone‘s throw, so to speak, from Guatemalean border. In a group which displays such absence of any detectable structural differences, the small extension of dark spotting pointed out by Halstead is quite insignificant. The types were not directly compared.” Brailovsky (1981) treated A. mexicana as a valid species, without any comment on Bliven‘s (1973) opinion. We can confirm that A. mexicana is a valid species quite different from Pararhaphe sphaeroides (see photo of A. mexicana in Brailovsky (1981)).

Biology and ecology. Unknown.

Distribution. Guatemala ( Distant 1883).

Figures

FIGURE 23. Habitus of Pararhaphe sphaeroides (Distant, 1883), holotype. (Orig. J. L. Stehlík).

FIGURES 1 – 2. Female abdomen in lateral view: 1 — Arhaphe arguta (Bliven, 1956); 2 — Pararhaphe sphaeroides (Distant, 1883).

FIGURES 3 – 7. Head and pronotum in lateral view: 3 — Arhaphe arguta (Bliven, 1956); 4 — A. breviata Barber, 1924; 5 — A. cicindeloides Walker, 1873; 6 — A. mimetica Barber, 1911; 7 — Pararhaphe sphaeroides (Distant, 1883).

FIGURES 16 – 21. Habitus of body (16, 18, 20 — dorsal view; 17, 19, 21 — lateral view): 16 – 17 — A. cicindeloides Walker, 1873 (Mexico: Durango: El Salto; ƤƤ); 18 – 19 — A. mimetica Barber, 1911 (3, paralectotype, USA: Arizona: Huachuca Mts.); 20 – 21 — Pararhaphe sphaeroides (Distant, 1883) (Ƥ, holotype, Guatemala) (Photos: P. Kment).