Niphanohelea
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.5438.1.1 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:2CD64E2C-D575-463F-A8F4-390662DDC9E2 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/5875621C-FF40-29A3-FF3F-B4B7FD7A7368 |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Niphanohelea |
status |
|
- Female with hind tarsomere 5 swollen. This feature is unique in the Culicomorpha. The male of this monotypic genus is unknown and it is therefore uncertain if it is true of both sexes. This autapomorphy was originally proposed by Grogan & Wirth (1981a).
- Female wing strongly modified ( Figs. 78D–E View FIGURE 78 ). This autapomorphy was originally described by Grogan & Wirth (1981a) as “great displacement of vein R 4+5, its apical fusion with M 1, and the absence of the r-m crossvein”. They consider a vein arising near the apex of M 1 to be adventitious. As illustrated in Borkent (2004), I consider it more likely r-m has been retained but moved from a near midlength position to near the apex of the wing ( Figs. 78A–D View FIGURE 78 ). As such I interpret the veins with any loss or addition as follows: their M 1 distal to the base of the adventitious vein is actually r-m and their adventitious vein is the apical portion of M 1. The thinner, apical portion of M 1 as identified here is of similar thickness to M 2 ( Fig. 78E View FIGURE 78 ), supporting the idea that M 1 is not an “adventitious” vein. In Ceratopogonidae , M 1 and M 2 are both significantly thinner than R 3 ( Figs. 45A–J View FIGURE 45 ). As such, the basal portion of M 1 being as thick as R 3 is also unique in the family. The R 4+5 identified by Grogan & Wirth (1981a) is more recently understood to actually be R 3 ( Szadziewski 1996). The wing is discussed further under “Previous Phylogenetic Analyses”.
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.