Kiefferulus Goetghebuer, 1922
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5281/zenodo.5333182 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03CD87B5-3005-C046-FE89-F827D6E0FB7E |
|
treatment provided by |
Diego |
|
scientific name |
Kiefferulus Goetghebuer |
| status |
|
Kiefferulus Goetghebuer View in CoL View at ENA
( Figs. 31 View Figs , 43–47 View Figs )
Of all the taxa found in this study, Kiefferulus proved most problematic. One species whose nomenclature and identity has proved rather straightforward is Kiefferulus longilobus (Kieffer) recognised by Cranston et al. (1990) as restricted to saline coastal-subcoastal habitats in the Indian and Pacific Oceans. In our post-tsunami survey K. longilobus dominated in the highest salinities (reaching 3,900 µS. cm−1, i.e. seawater equivalent), usually involving the most recent and long-lasting tsunami-impacted sites. One coastal pool in which K. longilobus was abundant was later discovered to be subject to continuing periodic marine tidal inundation. The lowest conductivity in which the species occurred, 4,400 µS. cm−1, was at a site in which it co-occurred with the other two regional Kiefferulus species.
The taxonomy and nomenclature of other local Kiefferulus species proved problematic, with too many historic names for what evidently are few taxa. Species are separable as larvae, very easily distinguished as pupae and have distinctive male genitalia. The problem has been that species were frequently re-described under different names, their respective types were not examined and early descriptions often are inadequate for subsequent recognition. These difficulties were exacerbated by the nomenclature (including at generic level) proposed by Johannsen and Lenz in their studies of the German Sunda Expedition material ( Johannsen, 1932; Lenz, 1937). Not surprisingly, Hashimoto et al. (1981), in their study of the Chironomini from Thai rice fields, placed these and variably related species into a ‘catch-all’ genus: Chironomus . Hashimoto et al.’s rice field study was based entirely on swept, predominantly male, adult midges, neglecting the often more diagnostic immature stages.
Today, many rearings connecting larvae to pupae or pharate adults provide associated material for many species. Diagnostic features from larval, pupal and adult male genital features respectively can be reconciled. For the present study, types (of adult males) have been examined where available, and the oldest names for the three local species determined. Chironomus calligaster and Chironomus barbatitarsis described from Indian and Burmese specimens located in the Indian Museum collections by Kieffer (1911) appear to be the earliest names for the two Kiefferulus species. Unfortunately, junior synonyms for both names, also from Kieffer, attained usage even though Chaudhuri & Ghosh (1986), who recognised both names by studying type material in the National Zoological Collection of the Zoological Survey of India, described their immature stages and allocated both species correctly to Kiefferulus .
Some previous studies have placed the three local species of Kiefferulus in different genera: longilobus in ‘ Carteronica ’, barbatitarsis or its synonyms in Nilodorum and Stictotendipes and calligaster and its synonyms in Kiefferulus . In the regional catalogue ( Sublette & Sublette, 1973) the many names are scattered throughout four genera, and the two valid names were treated as unplaced. The conclusion that these three taxa ( longilobus , barbatitarsis and calligaste r) are congeneric was proposed by Cranston et al. (1990) based on comparative morphology and phylogenetic analysis, and has been confirmed by a molecular study ( Martin et al., 2007).
Kiefferulus calligaster occurs in all types of ponds surveyed in this study, ranging from highly saline to the most dilute, including peaty and non-peaty, disturbed and unimpacted. Its upper tolerance limit appears to be 12.4 mS. cm−1 for conductivity, and 2,700 ppm for dissolved solid concentration, but all records are below the maximum conductivities encountered.
Kiefferulus barbatitarsis occurs also in all types of ponds, often co-occurring with K. calligaster . At an upper tolerated salinity limit with conductivity of 18,700 µS. cm−1, it can co-occur with K. longilobus .
The regional species of Kiefferulus can be distinguished in the larval stage by the following key:
1. Posterior body without ventral tubules. Labral sclerites 3, 4 and 5 dissociated, all granular and indistinctly separated ( Fig. 43 View Figs , sc3–5) .......................................................... K. longilobus
– Posterior body with paired ventral tubules, from short to at least as long as width of segment bearing them. Labral sclerites 3, 4 and 5 recognisably distinct, 4 th sclerite complete ( Figs. 44, 45 View Figs , sc3) ................................................................................. 2
2. Cardo anteriorly formed as crenulate ridge; anterior margin of ventromental plate smooth ( Fig. 46 View Figs ). Clypeus more narrowed posteriorly and dilated anteriorly; fenestra rounded ( Fig. 44 View Figs , fen) .................................................................... K. calligaster
– Cardo anteriorly formed as weak, non-crenulate ridge; anterior margin of ventromental plate crenulate ( Fig. 47 View Figs ). Clypeus subrectangular; fenestra narrow, elongate ( Fig. 45 View Figs , arrow) .... ........................................................................ K. barbatitarsis
The larvae of Kiefferulus View in CoL are collector-gatherers found in fine sediments, especially in ponds, pools (including those in drying rivers) and in rice paddies. Kiefferulus longilobus has been reported as a nuisance (as swarming adults) around marine incursion inland waters ( Cranston et al.,1990).
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.
|
Kingdom |
|
|
Phylum |
|
|
Class |
|
|
Order |
|
|
Family |