Leptohyphes comatus Allen, 2020
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4885.1.12 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:02EFE606-0D74-4DCD-B02D-AF18061C8513 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4327877 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8A0F87F8-6F67-FFA6-FF64-068A2EA2FE92 |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Leptohyphes comatus Allen |
status |
stat. nov. |
Leptohyphes comatus Allen stat. nov. ( Figs. 1–4 View FIGURES 1–4 )
Leptohyphes comatus Allen 1967: 368 ; Molineri 2003: 63 (under L. maculatus View in CoL )
Leptohyphes sp. Illies 1965: figure 3E.
Material. Holotype nymph ( FAMU E2014 . T) from Peru: Huallaga , Station Va, 373–D, 1800 m, L. Illies col. Paratype slide from Peru, Huanuco, Huallaga , 1900 m, 321– D, J. Illies col.
Leptohyphes comatus was synonymized under L. maculatus Allen (1967) by Molineri (2003), based on some polymorphism present in the type material of both species. Allen (1967) illustrated the fore leg and a detail of tarsal claw of this species, he also mentioned figure 3E of Illies (1965) as depicting this species, but this figure is not very useful because of the size and resolution of the drawing (one may only confirm that is a Leptohyphes from that figure). In the original description, Allen (1967) reported a body size of 6–7 mm (without cerci) for L. comatus , and stated that thin and long setae cover the body and legs. These thin setae are still visible in type material. Leptohyphes maculatus is a smaller species (around 5 mm in body length) and thin setae on the body and legs are also present, but are much shorter than those of L. comatus , especially on legs.
Allen (1967) stated that fore (i.e., leading or flexor) margin of femora have a row of small spines. I could not find them in the holotype slides, only long and thin setae were visible to me on this margin ( Figs. 2–4 View FIGURES 1–4 ).
Leptohyphes comatus can be distinguished from the remaining species of the genus by the following combination of characteristics: 1) occiput pale without markings ( Fig. 1 View FIGURES 1–4 ); 2) pronotum without lateral projections ( Fig. 1 View FIGURES 1–4 ); 3) femora relatively slender (ratio length/maximum width of fore femur 2.0, and of hind femur 2.3) ( Figs. 2–4 View FIGURES 1–4 ); 4) ratio length hind femur/fore femur 1.4; 5) ratio length hind femur/hind tibia 1.0; 6) three marginal denticles and none subapical denticles on fore tarsal claw; 7) about 33 spines on outer (extensor) margin of hind femur; and fore (leading or flexor) margin of femora without spines (some problems discussed above), dorsal face without spines ( Figs. 2–4 View FIGURES 1–4 ).
T |
Tavera, Department of Geology and Geophysics |
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 |
Leptohyphes comatus Allen
Molineri, Carlos 2020 |
Leptohyphes comatus
Molineri, C. 2003: 63 |
Allen, R. K. 1967: 368 |