Ceroputo mimicus (McKenzie) McKenzie, 2011
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5281/zenodo.207286 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5689359 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03F987FC-FFAA-FF9F-FF25-9ADCE287A6E9 |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Ceroputo mimicus (McKenzie) |
status |
comb. nov. |
Ceroputo mimicus (McKenzie) comb. nov.
Puto mimicus McKenzie, 1967: 352 View in CoL .
The original collection of this species was on Encelia frutescens (Asteraceae) View in CoL in Imperial County and on Petalonyx thurberi (Loasaceae) View in CoL from Riverside County, both in California, U.S.A. We also have seen specimens in the USNM from Travertine Rock, Imperial County, California, on Hymenoclea salsola (Asteraceae) , and from Thermal, Riverside County, California, on Ambrosia psilostachya (Asteraceae) View in CoL . Williams and Granara de Willink (1992) commented on this species and decided that it might not belong to the genus Puto View in CoL . Character states that seem to exclude this species from Puto View in CoL are: the campaniform sensilla on the trochanters are always two in number on each surface, the antennal intersegmental sensilla are tiny and present only between segments VI and VII, the tubular ducts on the frons are absent, and quinquelocular pores are present on the venter. Character states that it shares with species of Puto View in CoL are the possession of a pair of minute basal spurs on each claw. Despite some conflicting evidence, we conclude that this species does not belong to Puto View in CoL and transfer it to Ceroputo .
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 |
|
Genus |
Ceroputo mimicus (McKenzie)
Han, Sarah I. 2011 |
Puto mimicus
McKenzie 1967: 352 |