Paracophus Chopard, 1947 nov. sensu

http://lsid.speciesfile.org/urn:lsid: Orthoptera .speciesfile.org:TaxonName:28340

Diagnosis. Eyes not reduced (as wide as half of scapus) and normally pigmented (Fig. 3, 5). Pronotum subquadrate, little broader than long, anterior and posterior margins weakly concave, side margins broadly convex with anterior portion wider than mid-portion, lower parts of lateral lobes separated from disk by a shallow curved impression (Fig. 7A, E, I). Male tegmina mostly covering by pronotal disc, thickened, very short and broad, covering the weakly sclerotized mesonotum, their distal margins gently convex, outer and inner angles rounded, inner margins slightly overlapping; venation indistinct; stridulatory file present and functional (Fig. 7A, E, I). Female tegmina reduced to minute oval lateral rudiments, often hidden under the edge of pronotum. Legs relatively short and stout, hind tibia with four dorsal spurs on each margin; all tarsi slender and elongated, first tarsomere armed dorsally and as long as a third of its respective tibiae (Fig. 3A, 5A). Abdominal tergites unspecialized (glandular apparatus present); male epiproctus subtriangular, as wide as long, with straight margins and rounded apex (Fig. 3B, 5D). Cerci slender and barely longer than the hind femur (Fig.3, 5). Ovipositor slightly decurved, three-fourths as long as the hind femur, apex dorsally rounded and distally sharp (Fig. 3E). Male genitalia: tubuliform and elongate; ectophallic fold membranous; pseudepiphallic median lophi with a medial notch and, on the posterior lateral borders, with a spine-shaped projection that curves upward in lateral view; pseudepiphallic paramere with three projections, one ventrally and two posteriorly; endophallic apodeme moderately sclerotized, with cartilaginous appearance and connected to endophallic sclerite which is well sclerotized; ectophallic apodeme slim, curved in lateral view and parallel one branch with the other (Fig. 4, 6).

Taxa included: Paracophus subapterus Chopard, 1947 (Type species), P. velazquezi n. sp. and P. victoriensis n. sp.

Comments. In the original description of the genus, two species were described Paracophus apterus Chopard, 1947 and P. subapterus . Chopard (1947) described Paracophus, comparing it with Cophus, but differentiating them mainly by the armament of the hind tibia. Subsequently, Hubbell (1972) published a complete review of the genus, expanding the morphological diagnostic characteristics, describing six additional species, and dividing them into two species groups, according to the morphology derived from their adaptations for cave life. Hubbell, differs from Chopard, arguing that Paracophus does not belong to the same group of Cophus, and suggest Paracophus may be more related to Tohila and Trigonidomimus (currently in Pentacentrinae). Finally, Desutter (1987, 1990) places the genus in the Luzarae group ( Luzarinae: Luzarini).

Since Hubbell’s review, no new species or records have been added for Paracophus, and its status has not been reviewed. With additional specimens studied in the present contribution, it is suggested to include this genus in the tribe Otteiini of the subfamily Phalangopsinae, supporting Chopard’s initial opinion, in which it is established that Paracophus and Cophus belong to the same group. It is necessary to divide this genus into three additional genera: Hubbellcophus n. gen., Venegascophus n. gen. and Hortacophus n. gen., described later in this paper.

Key to Paracophus species

1. Lower edges of lateral lobes moderately expanded laterally (Fig. 7A, E); paired glandular openings in intersegmental membranes behind tergites present from the fourth to seventh or fourth to fifth segments. The median lophi notch is moderately narrow and deep, pseudepiphallic parameres well-divided into two or three processes (Fig. 7 B-D, 7F-H)................ 2

– Lower edges of lateral lobes notably expanded to the sides (Fig. 7I), paired glandular openings in intersegmental membranes behind tergites present from the fourth to sixth segment. Median lophi notch very narrow and shallow (Fig. 7K), pseudepiphallic parameres slightly divided (Fig. 7K, L)........................................................ P. subapterus

2. Tergal glands between the fourth to seventh segments (Fig. 3B). Pseudepiphallic median lophi with a U-shaped notch (Fig. 7B); pseudepiphallic parameters divided into three rounded processes (Fig. 7C); lateral lophi in lateral view, with two spines: one longer dorsally, and another shorter apically (Fig. 7D)......................................... P. velazquezi n. sp.

– Tergal glands between the fourth and fifth abdominal tergites (Fig. 3D). Pseudepiphallic median lophi with a V-shaped notch (Fig. 3F); pseudepiphallic parameres divided into two processes, one rounded and another hook-shaped (Fig. 3G); lateral lophi in lateral view with only one long dorsal spine at the apex (Fig. 3H).............................. P. victoriensis n. sp.