Campsurus latipennis (Walker),

Molineri, Carlos & Salles, Frederico F., 2017, Review of selected species of Campsurus Eaton 1868 (Ephemeroptera: Polymitarcyidae), with description of eleven new species and a key to male imagos of the genus, Zootaxa 4300 (3), pp. 301-354: 303-307

publication ID

https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4300.3.1

publication LSID

lsid:zoobank.org:pub:554D8B46-D396-42FA-9604-6DA9DFA3EFE7

persistent identifier

http://treatment.plazi.org/id/0386A43A-EF75-A230-8B85-FA62FAB3FA75

treatment provided by

Plazi

scientific name

Campsurus latipennis (Walker)
status

 

Campsurus latipennis (Walker) 

( Figs. 1–24View FIGURES 1 – 12View FIGURES 13 – 24, 163View FIGURES 163 – 166)

Palingenia latipennis Walker, 1853: 554  ; Hagen, 1861: 304.

Campsurus latipennis  ; Kimmins, 1960: 313 (male); Domínguez et al. 2006: 572.

Type material. Photographs of the lectotype male subimago and lectoallotype alate female (both pinned), in the British Museum , from " Para, 49–I " ( Kimmins 1960: 313). 

Additional material. BRAZIL: 200 ♂ i from Espírito Santo, Linhares, Lagoa Nova, S 19° 25' 7.2" – W 40° 9' 26.4", 17 m, 12.ix.2009, light-trap, Salles F. leg. ( CZNC); 3 ♂ i, 1♀ msi, alate 7 ♀ and 3 last instar ♂ nymphal cuticles from Espírito Santo, Linhares, Palminhas, Rio Doce, 9–10.ix.2014, Salles F. leg. (IBN); and 6 ♂ i (wings on slide IBN527CM) from Tocantins (TO), Ilha Bananal, rio Araguaia , (approx. S 5° 24' / W 48° 37'), 10.xi.1953, AA Pesle col. (IBN).GoogleMaps 

Male imago. Length (mm): body, 9.8–17.3; fore wing, 8.4–13.5; hind wing, 4.3–6.5; cerci, 22.0–35.0; fore leg, 4.2–5.5. General coloration whitish with well-defined gray markings. Head yellowish white, almost completely shaded with black dorsally ( Fig. 163View FIGURES 163 – 166). Antennae whitish translucent, shaded with gray. Thorax ( Fig. 163View FIGURES 163 – 166). Pronotum translucent, anterior portion almost completely shaded with gray, darker at medial line, pronotal hump (ph in Fig. 163View FIGURES 163 – 166) translucent; posterior pronotal portion translucent, shaded with black on margins; prosternum with area between coxae gray. Mesonotum yellowish, almost completely shaded with gray except for unpigmented anteronotal projection (ap), and blackish medioparapsidal suture (mps in Fig. 163View FIGURES 163 – 166) and area between posterolateral protuberances ( PSP in Fig. 163View FIGURES 163 – 166); pleura yellowish except PLsS (superior pleural suture) blackish and sternum shaded black on area between anterior furcasternal protuberances; metanotum, shaded medially with gray, metasternum with submedian black subcircular mark. Legs: fore legs whitish, almost completely shaded with gray; fore coxa with two dark-grayish marks; middle and hind legs yellowish translucent. Wings. Membrane hyaline except base and fore margin purplish gray; fore wings with veins C, Sc and R1 purplish gray, lighter toward apex; other longitudinal and cross veins shaded slightly with gray except from MP2 toward base; hind wing with base and subcostal veins purplish grayish. Abdomen ( Fig. 163View FIGURES 163 – 166) translucent whitish shaded with gray on terga as in Fig. 163View FIGURES 163 – 166, slightly paler medial line present on some terga; abdominal sterna pale without shading, except remnants of gill insertions and apical third of sterna VII –VIII shaded light grayish. Genitalia ( Figs. 1–6, 9–12View FIGURES 1 – 12): sternum IX with grayish medial triangle and blackish hind margin, with blunt medial projection ( Figs. 1View FIGURES 1 – 12 mp) and microsculptured with fine, long and simple microtrichiae ( Fig. 10View FIGURES 1 – 12); pedestal bases well separated from each other ( Figs. 1, 3, 9View FIGURES 1 – 12), pedestals yellowish white, with outer apical corner projected forming relatively short and blunt parastylus (ps in Fig. 2View FIGURES 1 – 12); forceps whitish; penes whitish except dorsal sclerotized margin yellowish, base of penes (bp in Figs. 1, 9View FIGURES 1 – 12) large and subquadrangular, main lobe of penes (ml in Figs. 1, 9View FIGURES 1 – 12) subconical with subapically indented dorsal margin (in lateral view, arrows in Figs. 4–5View FIGURES 1 – 12), apical portion twisted, secondary lobe of penes (sl in Figs. 1, 9View FIGURES 1 – 12) small, membranous and subcylindrical. Caudal filament translucent whitish.

Alate female. Length (mm): body, 11.0–16.5; fore wing, 12.5–16.0; hind wing, 5.3–6.5; cerci, 3.8–4.5; fore leg, 1.4–1.5. General aspect and color pattern similar to male imago. Abdominal sternum VIII with anteromedian paired sockets, sockets fused with each other medially, shallow ( Figs. 7–8View FIGURES 1 – 12).

Egg. Length, 320–335 µm; maximum width, 235–250 µm. Ovoid outline, bowl-shaped, as usual for Campsurinae; no polar cap present.

Nymphal cuticle (last instar, male). Length (mm): body, 13.5–14.5; cerci, 9.0–10.0; terminal filament, 7.0. Head with frons almost completely covered with short and long setae (setal alveoli marked as dots in Fig. 13View FIGURES 13 – 24), straight anterior margin with row of long setae, two anterolateral blunt tubercles at base on antennae (larger apical one and smaller one, t in Fig. 13View FIGURES 13 – 24), anterior half of gena protruded and covered with long, strong setae, posterior half of gena bare, except for small area before eye also covered with long, strong setae (not shown in Fig. 13View FIGURES 13 – 24); inner margin of compound eye without row of setae. Pedicel 1.4× length of scape, dorsally covered with two groups of long strong setae (one group near base and another group on distal half), in-between group of slightly shorter and much thinner setae present; scape dorsally with short and strong setae; flagellum (apical portion broken off and lost) with submedian short seta on each segment. Mandibular tusk relatively long and slender, apex strongly curved inward ( Fig. 16View FIGURES 13 – 24); exposed area 0.5× length of head capsule; basal U-row of filtering setae present (fs in Figs. 14– 15View FIGURES 13 – 24); dorsal surface with numerous very long, strong setae; outer margin covered with long setae and 25–30 strong blade-like spines (increasing in size distally, bls in Fig. 16View FIGURES 13 – 24); inner margin with 10 small tubercles (subequal in size, except basal one slightly larger, t in Fig. 16View FIGURES 13 – 24), some of them alternating with short strong setae (ss in Fig. 16View FIGURES 13 – 24), tubercles and setae ordered in slightly curved row (in occlusal view, Fig. 14View FIGURES 13 – 24); ventral surface almost without setae. Maxilla (apparently hard to see in described exuviae) with small ventral gill. Thorax. Posterolateral corner of pronotum and propleura without strong setae; metasternum with few long setae. Legs. Fore legs with coxa and trochanter bare; dorsal surface of femur with outer submarginal row of long setae on distal third (arrows on Fig. 17View FIGURES 13 – 24), near base of outer margin with rounded projection covered by long, weak setae (rp in Fig. 17View FIGURES 13 – 24); base of femur and part of inner margin with row of marginal long, strong setae (st in Fig. 17View FIGURES 13 – 24); ventrally long U-row of filtering setae (fs in Fig. 18View FIGURES 13 – 24); tibia-tarsus wide, with margins subparallel, dorsal surface almost completely covered with short spines and long setae ( Fig. 17View FIGURES 13 – 24), ventral surface with 2 rows of filtering setae: basal W-shaped transversal row extending along ventral surface and hind margin (wr in Fig. 18View FIGURES 13 – 24), and double longitudinal row along anterior margin (ar in Fig. 18View FIGURES 13 – 24); apex of tibia-tarsus rounded, slightly projected (projection ca. 1/4 length of claw); tarsal claw slightly curved and with row of about 18 triangular denticles ( Fig. 19View FIGURES 13 – 24). Middle leg with coxa and trochanter with strong setae; dorsal surface of femur covered with many long setae forming mediolongitudinal group, anterior group along margin, and subdistal transversal group, hind margin bordered by much longer setae ( Fig. 20View FIGURES 13 – 24), ventral surface bare; tibia with anterior margin distally projected and with crown of strong spines (cs in Fig. 20View FIGURES 13 – 24), posterior margin completely covered with very long setae, anterior margin basally bare, distal half densely covered with thick yellowish setae; tarsus with long setae on hind margin and relatively shorter setae on apical third of fore margin; tarsal claw long and slender, slightly curved, with row of 16 denticles increasing in size distally ( Fig. 21View FIGURES 13 – 24). Hind leg ( Fig. 22View FIGURES 13 – 24) similar to middle leg, except as follows: femur with dense row of short setae on anterior margin, anterior margin of tibia with similar dense row of setae; crown of spines on tibia absent, and tarsal claw with row of 27–30 small denticles ( Fig. 23View FIGURES 13 – 24). Abdomen. Lateral margins of all segments with row of long setae. Terga IV –VII with mediolongitudinal row of setae. Sterna without setae. Gills. Abdominal gill I bilobed, dorsal lamella almost 3× width of ventral lamella, ventral lamella 2/3× length of anterior portion. Cercus 0.7× length of body, covered with setae dorsally and ventrally, except distal half bare. Terminal filament 0.5× length of body, thinner than cercus, covered with long scattered setae completely. Paraproct with distal sublateral spine (arrow in Fig. 24View FIGURES 13 – 24).

Distribution ( Fig. 178View FIGURES 178). Brazil (Pará orig. New records: Espírito Santo and Tocantins).

Diagnosis. Campsurus latipennis  can be distinguished from all other species of the genus by the following combination of characters. In the adult: 1) posterior margin of male abdominal sternum IX convex and subtriangular, medially rounded ( Figs. 1, 3, 9View FIGURES 1 – 12), surface covered with microtrichiae ( Fig. 10View FIGURES 1 – 12); 2) pedestal bases well separated from each other, pedestals subquadrate with outer-posterior margin projected forming a short parastylus ( Figs. 2, 11View FIGURES 1 – 12); 3) penes separated and diverging slightly distally, each arm formed by a large and twisted sclerotized lobe, and a small ventral membranous lobe ( Figs. 1, 3, 4–6, 9, 12View FIGURES 1 – 12), in lateral view the main lobe presents a subapical indentation (arrows in Figs. 4–5View FIGURES 1 – 12); 4) medium to large size (length of male fore wings 8.4–13.5 mm); 5) female sternum VIII with anteromedian paired sockets, sockets fused with each other medially, shallow ( Figs. 7– 8View FIGURES 1 – 12); 6) egg without polar cap. In the nymph: 1) with small paired tubercles at base of each antennae (t in Fig. 13View FIGURES 13 – 24), scape and pedicel with setae; 2) pre-ocular group of setae not mounted on a tubercle; 3) mandibular tusks with apex strongly curved inwards ( Fig. 16View FIGURES 13 – 24), inner margin with ten tubercles of subequal size except the basal one slightly larger (t in Fig. 16View FIGURES 13 – 24), outer margin with 25–30 strong marginal blade-like spines and long setae ( Fig. 16View FIGURES 13 – 24), 10 tubercles on inner margin; 4) fore femur wide (max. width 1/2 of max. length), fore tibiae with parallel margins (rectangular in form) ( Figs. 17–18View FIGURES 13 – 24); 5) tarsal claws with one row of denticles (18 on fore claw, 16 on middle claw, 27–30 on hind claw) ( Figs. 19, 21, 23View FIGURES 13 – 24).

Discussion. Some mistakes appear in the use of the name C. latipennis  . Walker (1853) described it based on male subimagos from Pará; the genitalia were later illustrated by Kimmins (1960: 313, Fig. 62View FIGURES 60 – 67). Eaton (1883: Plate V, Fig. 8View FIGURES 1 – 12 c) worked with imagos, obviously from a different species, collected in the same expedition by Wallace and Bates. The genitalia of the lectotype are damaged and could not be studied, but Kimmins’ (1960) figure 62 can be used to identify the species. Eaton’s (1883) imagos were not studied by us, but from his figures we identify them as C. essequibo Traver (1947)  , treated below. Other authors also treated C. essequibo  under the misidentification of C. latipennis  ; please see the former species’ section, below, for further discussion.

Campsurus latipennis  is very similar to Campsurus salobra  sp. nov. and C. evanidus Needham & Murphy 1924  , but it can be separated from them because the hind margin of the styliger is medially projected but rounded (acute and triangular in C. evanidus  ), the pedestal presents a slightly thinner and longer parastylus (thin but short in C. salobra  , short and basally wide in C. evanidus  ) and the penes present an apically twisted primary lobe and a well-developed secondary lobe (apex not twisted in the others, secondary lobe absent or reduced in C. evanidus  ). Also, the penes of C. latipennis  and C. evanidus  , in lateral view, show an indented dorsal margin, with marked subapical concave area (arrow in Figs. 4–5View FIGURES 1 – 12) (smoothly convex in C. salobra  sp. nov.). Campsurus cuspidatus Eaton (1871)  and C. vulturorum  share the distomedial projection of the hind margin of sternum IX, thus probably forming a monophyletic group. The absence of a polar cap on the egg is an autapomorphy of C. latipennis  . Among the species of Campsurus  , only C. evanidus  presents a very small polar cap (Emmerich & Molineri 2011).

PSP

Parasitic Seed Plants

Kingdom

Animalia

Phylum

Arthropoda

Class

Insecta

Order

Ephemeroptera

Family

Polymitarcyidae

Genus

Campsurus

Loc

Campsurus latipennis (Walker)

Molineri, Carlos & Salles, Frederico F. 2017
2017
Loc

Campsurus latipennis

Dominguez 2006: 572
Kimmins 1960: 313
1960
Loc

Palingenia latipennis

Hagen 1861: 304
Walker 1853: 554
1853