Pseudophasmatinae, Rehn, 1904

Conle, Oskar V., Hennemann, Frank H., Bellanger, Yannick, Lelong, Philippe, Jourdan, Toni & Valero, Pablo, 2020, Studies on neotropical Phasmatodea XX: A new genus and 16 new species from French Guiana, Zootaxa 4814 (1), pp. 1-136 : 33

5.2. Pseudophasmatinae : Paraprisopodini

Comments. The genus Paraprisopus Redtenbacher, 1906 and the entire tribe Paraprisopodini consequently by no means belongs to the subfamily Prisopodinae . This is seen in the fundamentally different “Pseudophasmatinaelike” eggs (see Fig. 13 ), the large and often elongated, longitudinally convex and boat-shaped subgenital plate in ♀♀ (very small and flattened in Prisopodinae ), strongly convex and bulgy, conical to cup-shaped poculum in ♂♂ (flattened and spoon-shaped in Prisopodinae ), as well as the absence of a longitudinal median furrow on the ventral surface of the abdomen in both sexes (see Fig. 14 ) and the length ratio of the tegmina and alae in fully winged species. In Paraprisopus the tegmina are oval and less than 1/3 the length of the alae, whereas they are strongly elongated and>1/2 the length of the alae in all true Prisopodinae members. In addition, the eggs of Paraprisopus differ fundamentally from those of all other Prisopodinae but at the other hand share most basic features with those of Pseudophasmatinae . They are more or less barrel-shaped with the knob-like operculum situated at a more or less right angle on the anterior end of the chorion and the small micropylar plate placed in the central region of the dorsal egg surface. These eggs are simply dropped to the ground by ♀♀ or flicked away by an abrupt movement of the abdomen. On the contrary, eggs of Prisopus , Dinelytron and Damasippus are glued to surfaces like twigs or bark in rows and are adhesive to adjacent eggs anteriorly and posteriorly (see Fig. 15 ). Since the anterior and posterior end of the eggs are adhesive, the flat operculum is placed on the dorsal surface of the chorion very close to the large more or less bilobed micropylar plate. Consequently, Paraprisopodini is here removed from Prisopodinae and transferred to Pseudophasmatidae : Pseudophasmatinae .

A recent study on the tarsi of Prisopodinae by Büscher (2017) also revealed conspicuous differences, which support the position of Paraprisopus outside Prisopodinae as here postulated. Büscher (2017) stated: “ The Paraprisopodini bear big and roundish bilobed euplantulae, as most other known Euphasmatodea, whilst the Prisopodini bear two-bared euplantulae with a groove intersecting the entire tarsomere as an apomorphy. Additionally, the two lineages can be distinguished by the micromorphology of the pad surface. Whilst the Paraprisopodini bear nubby euplantulae with specific densities of nubs, the Prisopodini’s euplantulae are smooth without any micromorphological features.”

Differentiation. Although only including one genus, the tribe Paraprisopodini is here retained within Pseudophasmatinae , due to several significant morphological differences. Paraprisopodini clearly differs from all other Pseudophasmatinae by: the short mesonotum, that is mostly less than 1.7x longer than the pronotum; the short and transverse head, that is broader than long and has the vertex more or less distinctly elevated and/or bi-cornute; the considerably shorter and more robust antennae that at best reach half way along the abdomen; the very small eyes; the distinctively shortened, much broader and often lobed and/or deflexed legs. Furthermore, the ability to spray defensive secretions from the prothoracic glands is much less developed than in the remaining Pseudophasmatinae and the insects do not produce the characteristic odour widely known from the secretions of various Pseudophasmatinae species.

Figures

FIGURE 13. Comparison of Pseudophasmatinae-like eggs and true Prisopodinae eggs. For each species, the egg is shown in dorsal (left) and lateral (right) view. a. Pseudophasma missionum Piza, 1981; b. Pseudophasma velutinum (Redtenbacher, 1906); c. Pseudophasma phthisicum (Linnaeus, 1758); d. Paraprisopus sp. (Panama, Laguna de San Carlos); e. Paraprisopus agrion (Westwood, 1859) (n. comb.); f. Paraprisopus antillarum (Caudell, 1914) (n. comb.); g. Damasippus sp. (Brazil, Itatiaia N.P.); h. Damasippus sp. (Costa Rica, Monteverde); i. Dinelytron sp. (Brazil, Itatiaia N.P.); j. Prisopus piperinus Redtenbacher, 1906; k. Prisopus horridus (Gray, 1835).

FIGURE 14. Comparison of males of Prisopodini with Paraprisopus (Paraprisopodini). Ventral surface of the abdomen showing the distinct longitudinal furrow in true Prisopodini. a. Prisopus sacratus (Olivier, 1792); b. Dinelytron cahureli n. sp.; c. Damasippus sp. (Costa Rica, Monteverde); d. Paraprisopus agrion (Westwood, 1859) n. comb.; e. Close up picture of the longitudinal furrow in Prisopus sacratus (Olivier, 1792).

FIGURE 15. Eggs of Prisopus sacratus glued in rows. Picture by Pedro Alvaro Neves (São Paulo, Brazil).