Temnomastax borellii ( Giglio-Tos, 1897 )

Olivier, Renan S., Pujol-Luz, Cristiane V. A. & Graciolli, Gustavo, 2019, Review of Temnomastax Rehn & Rehn, 1942 (Orthoptera, Caelifera, Eumastacidae, Temnomastacinae), Zootaxa 4593 (1), pp. 1-78 : 32-37

Temnomastax borellii ( Giglio-Tos, 1897)

http://lsid.speciesfile.org/urn:lsid: Orthoptera .speciesfile.org:TaxonName:39960

Figures 4A , 5A , 6A , 7D , 8A , 9A , 10A , 12A , 13A , 14A , 15A , 18A , 23 , 24 and 25

Masyntes mutilata [in part] Giglio-Tos 1894: 4 (comb. Masyntes mutilata (Serv., 1838) , misidentification), 1895: 806 (misidentification), 1897: 18 (wrongly as syn. of Masyntes borellii Giglio-Tos, 1897 ).

Masyntes borellii Giglio-Tos 1897: 17 (original description); Burr 1899: 274 (identification key), 276 (redescription); 1904: 17 (catalogue); Bruner 1900: 18 (identification key), 1922: 20 (record); Rehn 1904: 676 (record); Kirby 1910: 79 (citation); Bruner 1922: 20 (discussion on synonymy of Bolívar 1916 and record).

Masyntes chapadensis Bruner 1911: 8 (original description); Bolívar 1916: 198 (syn. of Masyntes borelli Giglio-Tos, 1897 ).

Temnomastax chiquitos Rehn & Rehn 1942 syn. nov.: 13 (identification key), 16 ( Figures 17 and 19 ), 25 (original description); Descamps 1973b: 965 (description of neallotype ♂ and record), 966 (Figures 53–59); Olivier 2014: 547 (citation), 460 ( Figure 12 and identification key).

Temnomastax borellii [in part] Rehn & Rehn 1942: 13 (identification key), 16 (misidentification and Figures 16 and 18 ), 26 (discussion on synonymy of Bolívar 1916); Liebermann 1955: 333 (catalogue).

Type locality. Paraguay, San Pedro (Dr. Alfredo Borelli)— holotype ♀ .

Depository. Holotype: Museo Regionale di Scienze Naturali , Torino, Italy.

Etymology. Specific epithet after the Italian zoologist Dr. Alfredo Borelli.

Diagnosis. Small (♂  15.74 mm, ♀ = 19.44 mm). Close to T. hamus , but differs from this species by the very protruding eyes of male. Shorter male tegmina, reaching the 2 nd abdominal tergite. M diverging from R+M with angulation less than 45 degrees on tegmen. Male cercus not hook-shaped, shorter than epiproct in dorsal view and its apex strongly curved inward, but slightly prolonged. Posterior region of epiphallus W-shaped inverted and markedly trigonal in the median portion. Inner margins of LREp sinuous. Female subgenital plate rostriform, spines present.

Redescription. Male ( Figure 18A ). Brasil, Goiás, SAMA, Minaçú, 30.IX.1986 (Rocha, I.R.D. col.)\ T. borellii ( Giglio-Tos, 1897) , Olivier, R. det. 2017 [UnB]. Measurements (mm): bd 15.13, pt 1.84, tg 2.50, hf 11.03, ht 11.61.— Head: Subtriangular in frontal view ( Figure 4A ). Antennae (damaged). Fastigium (0.14 mm). Eyes very protuberant in frontal view ( Figure 4A ). Frons metallic blue. Clypeus and labrum yellow ( Figure 4A ). Mandibular joints brown. Mandibles yellow with blue maculae laterally. Thorax: Pronotum: Slightly sellate, posterior region of pronotal disk slightly curved upward in lateral view ( Figure 6A ). Pronotal disk with blue maculae and yellow spots; posterior margin centrally fissured ( Figure 6a ). Thoracic sternites metallic blue. Wings: Brachypterous (tg / hf 0.23). Tegmina elliptical; reaching the proximal region of the 2 nd abdominal tergite (1.4x the pronotum length); Ra simple (without bifurcation), reaching the apex; M simple, sinuous in the ¼ distal, reaching the apex; 1Cu fused to M in the media-distal region; 1A well marked, 2A weakly marked, and 3A reduced ( Figure 7D ). Membranous wings with two lobes when extended (remigium + one anal lobe), the remigium larger than the anal lobe; Sc-cell present, formed by the bifurcation and subsequent fusion of Sc; M diverging from R+M in the proximal region with angulation less than 45 degrees; i absent; 1A present, 2A reduced, and 3A–5A vestigial. 1a present ( Figure 7d ). Legs (Right/Left): Ventral face of protibiae with 8/7 outer spines and 6/7 inner spines. PrTm1 with approximately 2.0x the length of PrTm2.Ventral face of mesotibiae with 7/7 outer spines and 7/7 inner spines. MsTm1 with approximately 1.5x the length of MsTm2. Dorsal face of metatibiae with 23/23 inner spines and 21/21 outer spines. MtTm1 with approximately 2.5x the length of MtTm2. Abdomen: Posterior-ventral regions of the 9 th and 10 th abdominal tergites as in the Figure 8A . Epiproct trigonal with lateral margins uniformly convergent, apex acute ( Figure 9a ). Cerci not exceeding the length of the epiproct in dorsal view ( Figures 8a and 23 —detail); robust at the base and compressed medio-apically; medially curved inward and slightly prolonged ( Figure 9A ). First abdominal sternite bluish, the others yellow. Membranous distal area of subgenital plate trigonal; a central carina distinct, two lateral carinae incomplete and close to the central carina. Posterior margin of subgenital plate moderately projected backward in lateral view ( Figure 8A ). Apex of abdomen subcircular in axial view. Phallic complex: Epiphallus: Posterior region with inverted W-shape; more sclerotized median portion markedly trigonal in dorsal view; inner margins of LREp sinuous; angles between LPjEp and sclerotized branches of posterior region almost straight in dorsal view ( Figure 10A ); LPjEp larger than in T. hamus ; posterior region without upward curvature in lateral view ( Figure 10a ). Endophallus: Outer margin in the anterior region of endophallic plate bilobed, apex of these lobes markedly separated from each other; inner arc circular; branches slightly convergent and tips parallel in ventral view ( Figure 12A ); broad ventral curvature in the ¾ posterior in lateral view ( Figure 12a ); spermatophore sac as in Figure 12a ; ejaculatory sac narrower in the proximal region than in the distal region, slightly projected forward ( Figure 12a ).

Female ( Figure 18A ). Brasil, Mato Grosso, Poconé, Pantanal A1, Conj. 17, Arm.D, 16°19.927’S / 56°30.236’W, 123 m, 31.III–02.IV.2012 (Biota de Orthoptera do Brasil col.)\Doação UFV–UFMS, SISBIOTA Brasil, Biota de Orthoptera do Brasil \ T. borellii ( Giglio-Tos, 1897) , Olivier, R. det. 2017 [ZUFMSORT00190]. Measurements (mm): bd 19.44, pt 2.08, tg 2.68, hf 12.91, ht 13.22.— Head: Antennae (2.48 mm). Fastigium (0.24 mm). Eyes less protruding than in male ( Figures 4A and 5A ). Thorax: Brachypterous (tg / hf 0.21). Tegmina reaching the median region of the 2 nd abdominal tergite (1.3x the pronotum length). Ventral face of protibiae with 7/7 outer spines and 6/ 7 inner spines. PrTm1 with approximately 2.0x the length of PrTm2. Ventral face of mesotibiae with 7/6 outer spines and 6/7 inner spines. MsTm1 with approximately 1.5x the length of MsTm2. Dorsal face of metatibiae with 23/23 inner spines and 24/24 outer spines. MtTm1 with approximately 3.0x the length of MtTm2. Abdomen: Posterior-ventral regions of the 8 th abdominal tergite smooth ( Figure 13A ). Epiproct as in the Figure 14A . Length of paraprocts subequal to the epiproct ( Figure 14A ). Cerci reaching the distal ⅓ of epiproct. Subgenital plate: Lateral regions not covered by the ventral portions of the 8 th abdominal tergite ( Figure 15A ); posterior-lateral regions not exceeding the length of the 8 th abdominal tergite in lateral view ( Figure 13A ); posterior margin rostriform in ventral view, spines present, but not visible in ventral view; surface entirely smooth ( Figure 15A ). Ovipositor as in the Figure 13A . Other characters as in male.

Sexual dimorphism. hf ♀ / hf ♂ 1.17.

Measurements (mm). ♂ (n=5). bd 14.84–17.60 (15.74), pr 1.84–2.23 (1.98), tg 2.50–3.30 (2.89), hf 10.54– 12.79 (11.21), ht 11.22–13.29 (11.87); ♀ (n=3). bd 19.44–20.37 (19.53), pr 2.08–2.27 (2.16), tg 2.68–2.89 (2.82), hf 12.91–13.88 (13.20), ht 13.22–14.88 (13.98).

T. borellii (holotype ♀). bd 20.00, pr 3.00, tg 3.50, hf 15.00, ht? ( Giglio-Tos 1897);

T. chiquitos (holotype ♀). bd 20.00, pr 2.75, tg 3.00, hf 14.70, ht? ( Rehn & Rehn 1942);

T. chiquitos (neallotype ♂). bd?, pr 2.10, tg 3.00, hf 11.20, ht? (Descamps 1973b);

T. chapadensis (lectotype ♂). bd 14.00, pr 2.00, tg 2.70, hf 10.50, ht? ( Bruner 1911);

T. chapadensis (paralectotype ♀). bd 20.00, pr 2.30, tg 2.15, hf 12.5, ht? ( Bruner 1911).

Intraspecific variation. The female subgenital plate may have slight variation in the angulation of the lateral portions of the posterior margin, but the general shape is always rostriform.

Material examined. Brazil: Goiás state: 1 ♂ — Brasil, Goiás, SAMA, Minaçú, 30.IX.1986 (Rocha, I.R.D. col.)\ T. borellii ( Giglio-Tos, 1897) , Olivier, R. det. 2017 [UnB] ; Mato Grosso state: Lectotype ♂ (Photography)— Type Masyntes chapadensis Bruner (handwritten on white paper)\Chapada\April\A.N.S.P. Ex Carn. Mus. Bruner Cln.\ LECTOTYPE Renan Olivier det. 2017 (printed on red paper)\ Temnomastax borellii ( Giglio-Tos, 1897) , Olivier, R. det. 2017 [ ANSP] ; 1 Paralectotype ♀ (Photography)— Type Masyntes chapadensis Bruner (handwritten on white paper) \Chapada\April\A.N.S.P. Ex Carn. Mus. Bruner Cln.\ PARALECTOTYPE Renan Olivier det. 2017 (printed on red paper)\ Temnomastax borellii ( Giglio-Tos, 1897) , Olivier, R. det. 2 0 17 [ ANSP] ; 1 Paralectotype ♂ (Photography)— Masyntes chapadensis Bruner (handwritten on white paper)\ Chapada, near Cuyabá, Matto Grosso, Brazil \ April \ Carn. Mus. Acc. 2966\ PARALECTOTYPE (printed on red paper)\ Temnomastax borellii ( Giglio-Tos, 1897) , Olivier, R. det. 2017 [ MNCN _ Ent 146856] ; 1 ♀ — Brasil, Mato Grosso, Poconé, Pantanal A1, Conj. 17 , Arm.D , 16°19.927’S / 56°30.236’W, 123 m, 31.III–02.IV.2012 (Biota de Orthoptera do Brasil col.)\Doação UFV-UFMS, SISBIOTA Brasil, Biota de Orthoptera do Brasil\ T. borellii ( Giglio-Tos, 1897) , Olivier, R. det. 2017 [ZUFMSORT00190] ; 1 ♂ — Brasil, Mato Grosso, Poconé, Pantanal A2, Conj. 26, Arm. A, 16°26.854’S / 56°24.751’W, 130 m, 30.III–01.IV.2012 (Biota de Orthoptera do Brasil col.)\Doação UFV-UFMS, SISBIOTA Brasil, Biota de Orthoptera do Brasil\ T. borellii ( Giglio-Tos, 1897) , Olivier, R. det. 2017 [ZUFMSORT00191] ; 1 ♀ — Brasil, Mato Grosso, Poconé, Pantanal A2, Conj. 23 , Arm. B, 16°26.879’S / 56°24.730’W, 124 m, 30.III–01.IV.2012 (Biota de Orthoptera do Brasil col.)\Doação UFV-UFMS, SISBIOTA Brasil, Biota de Orthoptera do Brasil\ T. borellii ( Giglio-Tos, 1897) , Olivier, R. det. 2017 [ZUFMSORT00192] ; 3 ♂ and 1 ♀ — Brasil, Mato Grosso, Poconé , 16°19’20”S / 56°32’45”W, 125 m, 15.XI.2915 (Aranda, R. col.)\ T. borellii ( Giglio-Tos, 1897) , Olivier, R. det. 2017 [ZUFMSORT00354–357] ; Mato Grosso do Sul state: 2 ♂ — Brasil, Mato Grosso do Sul, Corumbá, Instituto Homem Pantaneiro , 18°05’25”S / 57°28’28”W, 100 m, 30.XI.2015 (Aranda, R. col.)\ T. borellii ( Giglio-Tos, 1897) , Olivier, R. det. 2 0 17 [ZUFMSORT00465, 466] ; 1 ♂ (Photography)— Brasil, Mato Grosso do Sul, Alcinópolis-Costa Rica , Parque Estadual Nascentes do Taquari , Base do Cuitelo , 430 m, IX.2015 (Rudi Laps).

Paraguay: Dep. San Pedro del Ycuamandiyú: Holotype ♀ (Photography)— E. Giglio-Tos (?)\ Masyntes borellii Giglio-Tos , Holotype, C.S. Carbonell det. 1966 (printed on red paper) [MRSNT].

Distribution. Species distributed along the regions southeastern of Bolivia, central-north of Paraguay, southwest, south and southeast of Mato Grosso, Goiás, and north and west of Mato Grosso do Sul, at altitudes ranging from 123 m to 650 m ( Figure 24 ). Previous records: Bolivia: Santa Cruz de la Sierra: Província de Sara; Brazil: Mato Grosso: Chapada dos Guimarães, Poconé; Mato Grosso do Sul: Corumbá; Paraguay: San Pedro.

Remarks. Taxonomy: Based on general morphological analysis using the photographs of the type specimens of M. borellii and M. chapadensis and also specimens collected in the states of Mato Grosso do Sul and Mato Grosso, we conclude that T. chiquitos is synonymous with T. borellii , as well as M. chapadensis , which was previously synonymized by Bolivar (1916); body measurements, color patterns, shape of male and female pronotum, tegmina and subgenital plate, and shape of male epiproct are compatible.

Bruner (1922) studied two males, which he provisionally identified as belonging to M. borellii . Both specimens are from Bolivia, one collected in the Province of Chiquitos and the other in R. Japacani (Yapacani in the native language). The two specimens received temporary names by Bruner (1922), the first one from Pr. Chiquitos called ‘ Masyntes fuscipennis ’ and the second from Japacani called ‘ Masyntes steinbachi ’; however, the names were not published together as formal descriptions, which therefore invalidates both names. Bruner presented some measurements of these specimens, as follows: M. fuscipennis —bd 23 mm and tg 7.5–8 mm; M. steinbachi —bd 22 mm and tg 3.5 mm. Unfortunately, these specimens could not be carefully studied here; therefore, it is not possible to determine the exact species to which they belong, but both must actually belong to Temnomastax and based on their measurements and in the potential geographic distribution predicted in Olivier & Aranda (2017), M. fuscipennis probably be a T. tigris , and M. steinbachi , although not agreeing with the body length of the specimens studied here, probably be a T. hamus or even a T. borellii . Both specimens belong to the Entomological Collection at the ANSP and are labeled as follows: M. fuscipennis —‘Pr. Chiquitos, Bolivia, 300 m, Steinbach\ April 1909 \Carn. Mus. Acc. 5229’; and M. steinbachi —‘R. Japacani, E. Bolivia, J. Steinbach\ Feb. 1915 \Carn. Mus. Acc. 5573’.

Designation of type specimens: When M. chapadensis was described, Bruner (1911) did not designate any specimen as holotype. For this reason, the syntypes studied here are designated as follows: one lectotype male labeled ‘ Masyntes chapadensis Bruner. Type\Chapada\April\A.N.S.P. Ex Carn. Mus. Bruner Cln.’ and one paralectotype female labeled with the same data. Both belong to the Entomology Collection at The Academy of Natural Sciences of Drexel University, Philadelphia, and one paralectotype male labeled ‘ Masyntes chapadensis Bruner \Chapada, near Cuyabá, Matto Grosso, Brazil \April\Carn. Mus. Acc. 2966\MNCN_Ent146856’ ( Figure 25 ) belongs to the Entomological Collection of The Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales, Madrid. All specimens are well preserved. Other specimen(s) belonging to type-series of M. chapadensis , but not studied here, should be considered as paralectotype (s).

Morphology: Drawings of the female subgenital plate were previously published by Rehn & Rehn (1942) and Descamps (1973b). However, in both publications, the structures identified as belonging to T. borellii are markedly different. In Rehn & Rehn (1942), Figure 16 shows posterior margin definitely rostriform, as well as Figure 17 , in which the specimen was identified as T. chiquitos . Despite small differences, both belong to T. borellii . On the other hand, Figure 67 in Descamps (1973b) was drawn on the basis of a female from Chapada do Guimarães, even showing a very distinct posterior margin—broadly rounded; nonetheless, it was identified as T. borellii . Figures 64 (male cercus) and 67 (female subgenital plate) presented by Descamps (1973b) in fact belong to T. descampsi sp. nov. It is likely that the misidentifications in relation to these two species ( T. borellii and T. descampsi sp. nov.) occurred as a result of an error of association between sexes made by Rehn & Rehn (1942), which can be observed in Figure 10 (male terminalia of “ T. borellii ” (currently T. descampsi sp. nov.)) and Figures 16 and 18 (female subgenital plate of T. borellii ). Although Rehn & Rehn (1942) have apparently erred, it is a curious error because James A.G. Rehn correctly identified a couple of M. borellii specimens from Chapada dos Guimarães in 1904, additionally giving a small description of the male. Still, in 1942, Rehn & Rehn listed five specimens they thought were T. borellii , and the first two were males. However, based on the measurements presented with this list, the second male was probably the one they used for the illustrations ( Figure 10 in their work), essentially because all measurements had high values compatible with T. descampsi sp. nov..

Occurrence: Species syntopic (occurs in the same place) to T. latens in Minaçú (Goiás) and sympatric (occurs in the same region) with T. descampsi sp. nov. in the Chapada dos Guimarães region (Mato Grosso).

Figures

FIGURE 4. Head of males and females in frontal view. A—Temnomastax borellii (Giglio-Tos, 1897); B—Temnomastax hamus Rehn & Rehn, 1942; C—Temnomastax latens Rehn & Rehn, 1942; D—Temnomastax monnei Olivier sp. nov.; E— Temnomastax descampsi Olivier sp. nov.; F—Temnomastax otavioi Olivier sp. nov.; G—Temnomastax ricardoi Descamps, 1973; H—Temnomastax tigris (Burr,1899). Scale bar = 2 mm (Female E—MNHN-EO-CAELIF 4052, photo by Simon Poulain, CNRS-MNHN).

FIGURE 5. Head of males and females in lateral view. Black spot = absence of vision plane. A—Temnomastax borellii (Giglio-Tos, 1897); B—Temnomastax hamus Rehn & Rehn, 1942; C—Temnomastax latens Rehn & Rehn, 1942; D— Temnomastax monnei Olivier sp. nov.; E—Temnomastax descampsi Olivier sp. nov.; F—Temnomastax otavioi Olivier sp. nov.; G—Temnomastax ricardoi Descamps, 1973; H—Temnomastax tigris (Burr, 1899). Scale bar = 2 mm.

FIGURE 6. Pronotum of males and females in lateral (uppercase letters) and dorsal (lowercase letters) views. Black spots = absence of vision plane. A—Temnomastax borellii (Giglio-Tos, 1897); B—Temnomastax hamus Rehn & Rehn, 1942; C— Temnomastax latens Rehn & Rehn, 1942; D—Temnomastax monnei Olivier sp. nov.; E—Temnomastax descampsi Olivier sp. nov.; F—Temnomastax otavioi Olivier sp. nov.; G—Temnomastax ricardoi Descamps, 1973; H—Temnomastax tigris (Burr,1899). Scale bar = 1 mm.

FIGURE 7. Tegmen (uppercase letters) and membranous wings (lowercase letters) of males of Temnomastax Rehn & Rehn, 1942. A—Temnomastax latens Rehn & Rehn, 1942; B—Temnomastax hamus Rehn & Rehn, 1942; C—Temnomastax ricardoi Descamps, 1973; D—Temnomastax borellii (Giglio-Tos, 1897); E—Temnomastax tigris (Burr, 1899), specimen from Bodoquena region; F—Temnomastax descampsi Olivier sp. nov.; G—Temnomastax otavioi Olivier sp. nov. Ra—anterior radius; Rp—posterior radius; Sc-cell—formed by the division and posterior union of the subcosta (Sc). Apostropheintraspecific variation. Scale bar = 2 mm.

FIGURE 8. Abdominal apex of males in lateral (uppercase letters) and dorsal (lowercase letters) views. A—Temnomastax borellii (Giglio-Tos, 1897); B—Temnomastax hamus Rehn & Rehn, 1942; C—Temnomastax latens Rehn & Rehn, 1942; D— Temnomastax monnei Olivier sp. nov.; E—Temnomastax descampsi Olivier sp. nov.; F—Temnomastax otavioi Olivier sp. nov.; G—Temnomastax ricardoi Descamps, 1973; H—Temnomastax tigris (Burr, 1899). Scale bar = 2 mm.

FIGURE 9. Cercus of male (A–G) and female (H) of Temnomastax Rehn & Rehn, 1942. Columns from left to right show dorsal view, external lateral view, ventral view, and internal lateral view. Black spots = absence of vision plane. A— Temnomastax borellii (Giglio-Tos, 1897); B and H—Temnomastax hamus Rehn & Rehn, 1942; C—Temnomastax latens Rehn & Rehn, 1942; D—Temnomastax descampsi Olivier sp. nov.; E—Temnomastax otavioi Olivier sp. nov.; F—Temnomastax ricardoi Descamps, 1973; G—Temnomastax tigris (Burr, 1899). Scale bar = 0.5 mm.

FIGURE 10. Phallic complexes of species belonging to Latens group. Uppercase letters—dorsal view, lowercase letterslateral view. A—Temnomastax borellii (Giglio-Tos, 1897); B—Temnomastax hamus Rehn & Rehn, 1942; C—Temnomastax latens Rehn & Rehn, 1942; D—Temnomastax monnei Olivier sp. nov. Scale bar = 1 mm (for dorsal view only).

FIGURE 12. Schematic drawings of the endophallic plate in ventral view (A–I) and endophallus in lateral view (a–h). A— Temnomastax borellii (Giglio-Tos, 1897); B—Temnomastax hamus Rehn & Rehn, 1942; C—Temnomastax latens Rehn & Rehn, 1942; D—Temnomastax monnei Olivier sp. nov.; E—Temnomastax descampsi Olivier sp. nov.; F—Temnomastax otavioi Olivier sp. nov.; G—Temnomastax ricardoi Descamps, 1973; H—Temnomastax tigris (Burr, 1899). I and i— Intraspecific variation in the anterior outer margin of the endophallic plate in T. tigris; I—specimens from Corumbá region; ispecimens from Bodoquena region. Scale bar = 0.5 mm.

FIGURE 13. Abdominal apex of females in lateral view. A—Temnomastax borellii (Giglio-Tos, 1897); B—Temnomastax hamus Rehn & Rehn, 1942; C—Temnomastax latens Rehn & Rehn, 1942; D—Temnomastax monnei Olivier sp. nov.; E— Temnomastax descampsi Olivier sp. nov.; F—Temnomastax otavioi Olivier sp. nov.; G—Temnomastax ricardoi Descamps, 1973; H—Temnomastax tigris (Burr, 1899). Scale bar = 2 mm. (E—MNHN-EO-CAELIF 4052, photography by Simon Poulain, CNRS-MNHN).

FIGURE 14. Abdominal apex of females in dorsal view (cerci, paraprocts, and epiproct). A—Temnomastax borellii (Giglio- Tos, 1897); B—Temnomastax hamus Rehn & Rehn, 1942; C—Temnomastax latens Rehn & Rehn, 1942; D—Temnomastax monnei Olivier sp. nov.; E—Temnomastax descampsi Olivier sp. nov.; F—Temnomastax otavioi Olivier sp. nov.; G— Temnomastax ricardoi Descamps, 1973; H—Temnomastax tigris (Burr, 1899). Scale bar = 1 mm. (E—MNHN-EO-CAELIF 4052, photography by Simon Poulain, CNRS-MNHN).

FIGURE 15. Female subgenital plates in ventral view. A—Temnomastax borellii (Gilio-Tos, 1897); B—Temnomastax hamus Rehn & Rehn, 1942; C—Temnomastax latens Rehn & Rehn, 1942; D—Temnomastax monnei Olivier sp. nov.; E— Temnomastax descampsi sp. nov.; F—Temnomastax otavioi Olivier sp. nov.; G—Temnomastax ricardoi Descamps, 1973; H— Temnomastax tigris (Burr, 1899), specimen from Corumbá region. Scale bar = 2 mm.

FIGURE 16. A—Female of Temnomastax cf. hamus Rehn & Rehn, 1942 from Morro Agudo, São Paulo, Brazil; note the yellow macula in the ventroposterior region on lateral lobe of the pronotum. B—Couple of Temnomastax hamus Rehn & Rehn, 1942 from Campo Grande, Mato Grosso do Sul, Brazil, in captivity; note the different body dimensions between the sexes and the distinct color (yellow) on the 7 th and 8 th abdominal tergites of male and 7 th abdominal tergite of female. (Photography by Marcos Cesar Campis (A) and Lívia Cordeiro (B)).

FIGURE 17. Eggs of Temnomastax Rehn & Rehn, 1942. Photos A and B were obtained under a conventional stereomicroscope, and C was obtained under a Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM). A—egg pod; B and C—individualized egg; b, c, and c’—details of the chorionic sculptures. Arrows indicate the annular constrictions on the ¼ posterior extremities. Zoom: C (30x), c (80x), and c' (430x). Scale bars: A and B = 1 mm, b = 0.2 mm, C = 500 µm, c = 200 µm, and c’ = 50 µm. (SEM photos by Instituto Oswaldo Cruz–RJ).

FIGURE 18. Habitus of species belonging to Latens group. A—Temnomastax borellii (Giglio-Tos, 1897); B—Temnomastax hamus Rehn & Rehn, 1942; C—Temnomastax latens Rehn & Rehn, 1942; D—Holotype and Allotype of Temnomastax monnei Olivier sp. nov. Scale bar = 1cm.

FIGURE 19. Habitus of species belonging to Tigris group. A—Paratype and Allotype of Temnomastax descampsi Olivier sp. nov.; B—Paratype and Allotype of Temnomastax otavioi Olivier sp. nov.; C—Temnomastax ricardoi Descamps, 1973; D— Temnomastax tigris (Burr, 1899) from Corumbá region. Scale bar = 1 cm. (Female A—MNHN-EO-CAELIF 4052, photography by Simon Poulain, CNRS-MNHN).

FIGURE 23. Male specimen of Temnomastax borellii (Giglio-Tos, 1897) from Base do Cuitelo, Parque Estadual Nascentes do Taquari, Alcinópolis/Costa Rica, Mato Grosso do Sul state, Brazil, in September 2015. In detail, apex of abdomen. (Photography by Rudi Ricardo Laps).

FIGURE 24. Distribution map of Temnomastax borellii (Giglio-Tos, 1897) (black circle), Temnomastax monnei Olivier sp. nov. (blue triangle) and Temnomastax ricardoi Descamps, 1973 (red quadrate).

FIGURE 25. Male paralectotype of Masyntes chapadensis Bruner, 1911 (= Temnomatax borellii (Giglio-Tos, 1897)). In detail, apex of abdomen; red arrow = cercus. Scale bar = 1 cm. (Photos by Mercedes París, MNCN).