Alona cambouei de Guerne et Richard, 1893
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.3667.1.1 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:0A38BF2A-135C-4C57-B291-40C34DD54FB9 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03C287E2-4C51-2B64-D7FB-6044FD5CDC9E |
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
scientific name |
Alona cambouei de Guerne et Richard, 1893 |
status |
|
(72) Alona cambouei de Guerne et Richard, 1893 View in CoL
Indian records. Jharkhand — Gurney (1907); Maharasthra— Pandit et al. (2007), Padhye & Kotov (2010); Rajasthan — Biswas (1971), Tamil Nadu — Kudari et al. (2005); General record— Raghunathan & Suresh Kumar (2003).
Remarks. Valid species described from Madagascar ( Guerne & Richard 1893; Kotov & Ferrari 2010), which is reported from the Oriental zone ( Maiphae et al. 2008). Records have been often and easily confused with A. pulchella ( Sinev 2001c) . Although real Madagascar populations of A. cambouei were never revised, it seems that the Oriental populations are morphologically very close to the African A. cambouei and according to Sinev (2001c), the species occurs actually here and perhaps more common than pulchella . Maiphae et al. (2008, p. 41) carefully listed Thai populations as “ A. cf. cambouei ”, which is a good approach until the complete identity of the Oriental populations can be established.
Distribution. Africa, Madagascar, Iraq, Central Asia, tropical Asia ( Sinev 2001c).
Indian records. Tamil Nadu — Venkataraman (1998b), Raghunathan & Suresh Kumar (2002, 2009); General record— Raghunathan & Suresh Kumar (2003).
Remarks. Dubious record. A. cannellata was described from Burkina Faso ( Brehm 1934). Species inquirenda, may be, a member of the Coronatella monacantha -complex (Van Damme et al. 2010). Perhaps this record was confused with C. cf. monacantha .
Indian records. Maharsahtra— Rane (2002).
Remarks. Valid species described from South Africa ( Ruehe 1914), that needs redescription (Van Damme et al. 2010). It is highly unlikely that it is present in Asia (or even, outside South Africa). In external morphology (habitus, postabdomen), it looks superficially similar to A. affinis —it is possible that this record resulted from confusion.
Distribution. South Africa ( Ruehe 1914).
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.