Bizarrifrons Eichler, 1938

Bush, Sarah E., 2017, Morphological revision of the hyperdiverse Brueelia - complex (Insecta: Phthiraptera: Ischnocera: Philopteridae) with new taxa, checklists and generic key, Zootaxa 4313 (1), pp. 1-443 : 285-286

publication ID	https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4313.1.1
publication LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:pub:A5Fdfba5-F992-44A8-84C2-1756C943C19B
DOI	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3510550
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/832187E9-FE96-FEDE-FF74-61D4FC88F856
treatment provided by	Plazi
scientific name	Bizarrifrons Eichler, 1938
status

Treatment

Docophorus Nitzsch, 1818: 289 (in partim). Nirmus Nitzsch, 1818: 291 (in partim). Bizarrifrons Eichler, 1938: 226 .

Type species. Nirmus magus Nitzsch [in Giebel], 1866: 367, by original designation.

Diagnosis. Biarrifrons ( Fig. 477–478 View FIGURES 477 – 478 ) is separated from all other genera treated here except Manuodicola n. gen. ( Figs 453–454 View FIGURES 453 – 456 , 459–460 View FIGURES 459 – 462 ) by the asymmetrical frons. As in Manucodicola ( Figs 451–462 View FIGURES 451 – 452 View FIGURES 453 – 456 View FIGURES 459 – 462 ), the dorsal anterior plate is connected from the main head plate, the premarginal carina is absent, the ventral carinae extend farther anterior than the marginal carinae, and the female subgenital plate does not flare into cross-piece. For differences between these two genera, see Manucodicola .

Description. Both sexes. Head roughly bulb-shaped ( Fig. 477 View FIGURES 477 – 478 ). Preantennal area more or less asymmetrical. Marginal carina widely interrupted medianly. Premarginal carina absent. Hyaline margin suspended from anterior ends of ventral carinae; continuous with dorsal preantennal suture; suture reaches posterior to ads, not medianly continuous posterior to dorsal anterior plate. Ventral anterior plate present. Ventral carinae extend anterior to marginal carinae. Head setae as in Fig. 477 View FIGURES 477 – 478 ; as3 absent. Coni often long. Antennae monomorphic. Temporal carinae not visible; mts 3 only macrosetae. Gular plate pentagonal.

Prothorax rectangular ( Fig. 477 View FIGURES 477 – 478 ); ppss on postero-lateral corners. Proepimera hook-shaped. Pterothorax pentagonal; lateral margins divergent; posterior margin convergent to median point; mms narrowly separated medianly. Meso- and metasterna not fused; 1 seta on postero-lateral corner on each side of each plate. Metepisterna slender; median end often pointed or hook-shaped. Leg chaetotaxy as in Fig. 25 View FIGURES 25 , except fI-p2 absent.

Abdomen relatively broad, oval ( Fig. 477 View FIGURES 477 – 478 ), chaetotaxy as in Table 2. Tergopleurites rectangular or triangular; tergopleurites II–IX+X in male and tergopleurites II–VIII in female moderately separated medianly. Sternal plates rounded trapezoidal, medianly continuous, not approaching pleurites. Pleural incrassations moderate to broad. Ventral section of tergopleurites moderate. Re-entrant heads prominent. Male subgenital plate goblet-shaped; lateral margins often concave; reaches posterior margin of abdomen. Female subgenital plate triangular; lateral margins concave; approaches or reaches vulval margin but does not flare. Vulval margin (not illustrated) with slender vms, thorn-like vss; vos follow lateral margins of subgenital plate; distal vos approaching or median to vss.

Basal apodeme ( Fig. 478 View FIGURES 477 – 478 ) roughly rectangular, rounded anteriorly. On ventral side a transversal sclerite near distal margin of basal apodeme (not shown). Proximal mesosome broadly quadratic; overlapping basal apodeme. Gonopore ( Fig. 478 View FIGURES 477 – 478 ) small, terminal. Mesosomal lobes large, longer than wide, thickened distally, not fused distal to gonopore; 2 ames microsetae submedianly on each side anterior to gonopore; 2 pmes microsetae laterally on each side on margins of lobes. Parameral heads ( Fig. 478 View FIGURES 477 – 478 ) folded medianly across proximal mesosome, roughly rectangular. Parameral blades moderate, elongated, may curl medianly; pst1 sensilla, rarely microsetae and if microsetae shorter than pst2, central; pst2 micrsetae, central.

Host distribution. The genus Bizarrifrons Eichler, 1938 , is known only from the New World passerine family Icteridae . It is largely restricted to the tropical genera Psarocolius Wagler, 1827 , Cacicus Lacepede, 1799 , and Quiscalus Vieillot, 1816 (see Jaramillo & Burke 1999). The two species groups proposed by Valim & Palma (2012) parasitise different genera of hosts, with the magus -group parasitising the genera Psarocolius and Quiscalus , and the picturata -group parasitising the genus Cacicus . In the phylogeny of Lanyon & Omland (1999), Cacicus is closely related to Psarocolius , and Quiscalus is more closely related to New World blackbirds ( Agelaius Vieillot, 1816 ) and other genera, indicating that if these Bizarrifrons species-groups are monophyletic, they are not structured by host phylogeny.

Geographical range. Neotropical, with some species reaching as far North as Mexico.

Remarks. Eichler (1938) originally included all species of Brueelia described from the Icteridae in Bizarrifrons . Later, Carriker & Díaz-Ungría (1961: 44) pointed out that there is no resemblance between the species treated as Bizarrifrons by most subsequent authors (e.g. Hopkins & Clay 1952: 50) and the “ ornatissima - group” of Brueelia s. str. that infest Icteridae (see Cicchino & Castro 1996). Notably, both of these groups have analogous pigmentation patterns, which may have influenced Eichler’s taxonomic decisions.

Carriker & Díaz-Ungría (1961: 44) mentioned Bizarrifrons and Sturnidoecus as very similar, and regarded them as closest relatives to each other. The phylogeny of Bush et al. (2016), suggests that Sturnidoecus may be more closely related to Olivinirmus and Guimaraesiella than to Bizarrifrons ; however, these placements were not strongly supported.

Bizarrifrons was recently reviewed by Valim & Palma (2012), who provided a key to the genus and a thorough redescription of the type species. We therefore do not redescribe the genus here, nor do we provide complete illustrations. We have illustrated the male of an unidentified species of Bizarrifrons from Psarocolius bifasciatus yuracares (d’Orbigny & Lafresnaye, 1838) View in CoL , which may be Bi. maculatus ( Rudow, 1869) ( Figs 477–478 View FIGURES 477 – 478 ). Considering that Valim & Palma (2012) regarded Bi. maculatus as a nomen dubium View in CoL , we do not identify the male illustrated here as that species until a more thorough review has been undertaken.