Loboscelidia, Westwood, 1874
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5852/ejt.2023.887.2203 |
|
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:788AE14A-0698-4C42-819C-BC2412F76FCA |
|
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8224944 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03BAC057-6E05-361A-95E1-F896FAE58977 |
|
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
|
scientific name |
Loboscelidia |
| status |
|
Key to males of Indo-Chinese Loboscelidia View in CoL View at ENA
1. M vein absent ( Fig. 3B View Fig ); Rs much less than twice as long as R ....................................................... 2
– M vein complete ( Fig. 3A View Fig ); Rs twice or more longer than R ........................................................... 3
2. Head wider than posterior width of pronotum; hindtibia with well-developed flange ....................... ...................................................................................................................... L. fulgens Kimsey, 2012 View in CoL
– Head narrower than posterior width of pronotum; hindtibia without flange ...................................... .................................................................................................... L. reducta Maa & Yoshimoto, 1961 View in CoL
3. Eye with erect setae ( Fig. 6B View Fig ); fore- and midtibiae without distinct flange ( Fig. 6A View Fig ) ....................... ..................................................................................................................................... L. cilia sp. nov.
– Eye without erect setae; fore- and midtibiae with developed flanges ( Figs 9A View Fig , 11A View Fig ) ..................... 4
4. Pronotum and legs always with scale-like setae ( Figs 5A, D View Fig , 7A, D View Fig ) .............................................. 5
– Pronotum and legs without scale-like setae ( Fig. 24D View Fig ) .................................................................... 7
5. Lower gena with cuneate setae ( Fig. 5A, D View Fig ) ....................................................... L. convexa sp. nov.
– Lower gena with scale-like setae ( Fig. 7A, D View Fig ) ................................................................................. 6
6. Scape much longer than 3.0 times as long as wide; scrobal sulcus absent ... L. asiana Kimsey, 1988 View in CoL
– Scape nearly 3.0 times as long as wide; scrobal sulcus present ( Fig. 7A View Fig ) ........... L. barbata sp. nov.
7. Cervical expansion strongly flattened in lateral view, not depressed behind ocelli; propodeum with transverse subapical carina ............................................................................................................... 8
– Cervical expansion not flattened at least curved in lateral view ( Figs 18D View Fig , 24D View Fig ); propodeum without transverse subapical carina ............................................................................................................... 9
8. Scrobal sulcus absent; foretibia without flange .................................... L. maculipennis Fouts, 1922 View in CoL
– Scrobal sulcus present; foretibia with flange, as wide as tubular part of foretibia ............................. ..................................................................................................................... L. nitidula Kimsey, 2012 View in CoL
9. Frontal projection elongate and nasiform; head nearly 3.0 times as long as wide ............................. ................................................................................................................ L. nasiformis Kimsey, 2012 View in CoL
– Frontal projection not elongate and rectangular to triangular ( Fig. 23D View Fig ); head twice or less as long as broad ........................................................................................................................................... 10
10. Tibiae without flanges ( Fig. 10A View Fig ), if narrow flanges present, it is much less than 0.2 times as wide as tubular part of tibiae ....................................................................................................................11
– Tibiae with more or less developed flanges, more than 0.3 times as wide as tubular part of fore tibia ................................................................................................................................................. 12
11. Temple as long as MOD ( Fig. 10B, D View Fig ); pronotum much longer than wide ....................................... ....................................................................................................................... L. defecta Kieffer, 1916 View in CoL
– Temple much longer than MOD; pronotum as long as or shorter than wide ...................................... ............................................................................................................. L. cinnamonea Kimsey, 2012 View in CoL
12. Scrobal sulcus absent ( Fig. 12A View Fig ) .......................................................................... L. flavipes sp. nov.
– Scrobal sulcus present ( Fig. 13A View Fig ) ................................................................................................... 13
13. Vertex behind ocelli strongly depressed ( Figs 6C View Fig , 7C View Fig , 13C View Fig , 21C View Fig , 23C View Fig ); cervical expansion strongly curved ( Figs 6D View Fig , 7D View Fig , 13A View Fig , 21D View Fig , 23D View Fig ) ........................................................................................... 14
– Vertex behind ocelli not depressed ( Figs 15C View Fig , 18B View Fig , 24D View Fig ); cervical expansion weakly curved ( Figs 15D View Fig , 18A View Fig , 24D View Fig ) ..................................................................................................................... 17
14. Frontal projection rectangular; Rs more than 3.5 times as long as R ...... L. pasohana Kimsey, 1988 View in CoL
– Frontal projection triangular ( Fig. 23B–C View Fig ); Rs less than 3.5 times as long as R ........................... 15
15. Temple longer than MOD ( Fig. 23C View Fig ); scape 3.8 times as long as wide; M straight; cu-a absent ...... .................................................................................................................................... L. vang sp. nov.
– Temple shorter than MOD; scape 2.5 times as long as wide; M curved; cu-a present ................... 16
16. Body reddish brown; Rs 2.5 times as long as R ................................ L. sarawakensis Kimsey, 1988 View in CoL
– Body brownish yellow; Rs 3.0 times as long as R ......................................... L. collaris Fouts, 1922 View in CoL
17. Scape polished, usually without longitudinal grooves ( Figs 11A View Fig , 16C View Fig , 24B View Fig ); F1 less than or twice as long as wide .................................................................................................................................... 18
– Scape rugose, with longitudinal grooves ( Figs 8B View Fig , 9A View Fig ); F1 usually more than twice as long as wide ......................................................................................................................................................... 22
18. F11 4.0 times as long as wide ( Fig. 16B View Fig ) ....................................................................................... 19
– F11 less than 3.5 times as long as wide ( Figs 4A View Fig , 11A View Fig , 24A View Fig ) ........................................................ 20
19. Scape 3.0 times as long as wide; F2 twice as long as wide; fore- and midtibial flanges as wide as tubular part; hindtibial flange twice as wide as tubular part ........................... L. kafae Kimsey, 2012 View in CoL
– Scape 2.6 times as long as wide; F2 less than twice as long as wide; fore- and midtibial flanges narrower than tubular part ( Fig. 16A View Fig ); hindtibial flange as wide as tubular part ( Fig. 16A View Fig ) ............. ................................................................................................................... L. laminata Kimsey, 2012 View in CoL
20. LOL less than 0.2 times as long as MOD ( Fig. 11C View Fig ); foretibial flange much wider than tubular part ( Fig. 11A View Fig ); hindtibial flange much wider than tubular part of hindfemur ..................... L. do sp. nov.
– LOL more than 0.3 times as long as MOD; foretibial flange less than tubular part ( Figs 4A View Fig , 24A View Fig ); hindtibial flange less than tubular part ............................................................................................ 21
21. Temple 0.8 times as long as MOD ( Fig. 4C View Fig ); F1 and F2 much less than twice as long as wide; tooth of hindtarsal claw less than 0.2 times as long as hindtarsal claw ................ L. bachmaensis sp. nov.
– Temple less than 0.3 times as long as MOD ( Fig. 24C View Fig ); F1 and F2 nearly twice as long as wide; tooth of hindtarsal claw longer than 0.4 times as long as hindtarsal claw ............ L. vietnamensis sp. nov.
22. cu-a absent or less than 0.2 times as long as R ( Fig. 19E View Fig ) ............................. L. pecki Kimsey, 2012 View in CoL
– cu-a 0.2–0.6 times as long as R ...................................................................................................... 23
23. Frontal projection triangular ........................................................................................................... 24
– Frontal projection rectangular ( Figs 8C View Fig , 9D View Fig , 15C View Fig , 18C View Fig ) ................................................................ 25
14. Fore- and midfemoral flanges less than tubular part; hindtibial flange as long as tubular part; hindtibial flange 0.6 times as wide as tubular part ...................................... L. scutellata Fouts, 1922 View in CoL
– Fore- and midfemoral flanges as wide as tubular part; hindtibial flange 0.67 times as long as tubular part; hindtibial flange twice as wide as tubular part .................................. L. laotiana Kimsey, 1988 View in CoL
25. M vein straight ................................................................................................ L. fulva Kimsey, 2012 View in CoL
– M vein curved ( Fig. 26B View Fig ) ............................................................................................................... 26
26. Body blackish brown; basal part of cervical expansion constrict ( Fig. 15C View Fig ); median tooth of tarsal claw extending half of tarsal claw ( Fig. 25K View Fig ) ..................................................... L. komedai sp. nov.
– Basal part of cervical expansion subparallel ( Figs 8C View Fig , 9D View Fig , 18C View Fig ); median tooth of tarsal claw distinctly shorter than half of tarsal claw ( Fig. 25E–F, M View Fig ) ............................................................................. 27
27. Pronotum, propleuron and forefemur with cuneate setae; Cu+M as long as A ( Fig. 9F View Fig ) ................... ............................................................................................................................... L. cuneata sp. nov.
– Pronotum, propleuron and forefemur with normal setae; Cu+M less than A ( Figs 8F View Fig , 18G View Fig ) ......... 28
28. Frontal ridge distinct; R1 less than 0.5 times as long as R ( Fig. 8F View Fig ); Rs less than 3.0 times as long as R .............................................................................................................. L. cucphuongensis sp. nov.
– Frontal ridge indistinct; R1 about as long as R ( Fig. 18G View Fig ); Rs more than 3.0 times as long as R .......................................................................................................................... L. parallela sp. nov.
Key to females of world Loboscelidia
1. Ribbon-like setae on gena and frontal projection separated ( Fig. 17D View Fig ); fore wing without A vein; all tibiae without flanges ............................................................................................ L. mediata sp. nov.
– Ribbon-like setae on gena and frontal projection not separated ( Figs 14D View Fig , 20D View Fig , 22D View Fig ); fore wing with A vein; tibiae with flanges ................................................................................................................ 2
2. Body covered with dense decumbent scale-like setae ( Fig. 22A View Fig ); eye with scale-like setae ............. ........................................................................................................................... L. squamosa sp. nov.
– Body without dense scale-like setae, if the body with scale-like setae, eye without scale-like setae ( Figs 14D View Fig , 20D View Fig ) ................................................................................................................................ 3
3. Head pear-shaped in dorsal view ( Fig. 20C View Fig ) .................................................... L. piriformis sp. nov.
– Head diamond or kite-shaped in dorsal view ( Fig. 14C View Fig ) .................................................................. 4
4. Eye with erect setae .......................................................................................................................... 5
– Eye without setae ( Fig. 14B View Fig ) ............................................................................................................ 6
5. Head, dorsal of pronotum, scutum, and mesoscutellum with dense erect or suberect normal setae; behind ocelli strongly depressed; cervical expansion convex ................... L. antennata Fouts, 1922
– Head, dorsal of pronotum, scutum, and mesoscutellum with sparse decumbent or suberect normal or cuneate setae; behind ocelli weakly depressed; cervical expansion flattened ..... L. maai (Lin, 1964) View in CoL
6. R1 vein 0.3 times as long as R vein; cu-a vein as long as R vein ...................... L. ora Kimsey, 1988 View in CoL
– R1 vein longer than half of R vein; cu-a vein much shorter than R vein ( Fig. 13E View Fig ) ........................ 7
7. F11 0.80 times as long as wide ( Fig. 14A View Fig ); POL longer than MOD; flange of hindtibia as wide as tubular part ( Fig. 14A View Fig ) ............................................................................................ L. glabra sp. nov.
– F11 2.3 times as long as wide; POL shorter than MOD; flange of hindtibia 0.8 times as wide as tubular part .............................................................................................. L. hei Yao, Liu & Xu, 2010 View in CoL
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.