Philogenia gaiae, Vilela & Guillermo-Ferreira & Encalada & Cordero-Rivera, 2019

Vilela, Diogo Silva, Guillermo-Ferreira, Rhainer, Encalada, Andrea C. & Cordero-Rivera, Adolfo, 2019, Philogenia gaiae sp. nov. (Zygoptera: Philogeniidae) and description of the female of P. macuma Dunkle, 1986, two species from the Ecuadorean lowland rainforest, Zootaxa 4683 (3), pp. 412-420 : 413-419

publication ID	https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4683.3.5
publication LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:pub:2031FAC2-D64B-4315-B4D7-DEB69D80C095
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D95F87C6-FF9A-FFD4-4BF1-FC6C508668BD
treatment provided by	Plazi
scientific name	Philogenia gaiae
status	sp. nov.

Treatment

Philogenia gaiae sp. nov. Vilela & Cordero-Rivera

( Figs. 1 View FIGURE 1 , 2 View FIGURE 2 , 3 View FIGURE 3 a−c, 5a−e and 6a−b)

Holotype. ♂ ( ECOEVO, ACR 00636, in copula with ACR 00635), Ecuador, Orellana, Tiputini Biodiversity Station (-0.6349, -76.1501, 241 m asl), 13.xii.2012, A. Cordero-Rivera & M. Sánchez-Herrera leg. GoogleMaps

Paratypes. 6 ♂♂ ( ECOEVO, ACR00477, ACR00501, ACR00579, ACR00580, ACR00582, ACR00624) , 1 ♀ ( ECOEVO, ACR 00581), locality data same as for holotype, except for ACR 00477 collected in 04.xii.2012; ACR 00501 collected in 05.xii.2012; ACR00579, ACR00580, ACR00581 and ACR00582 collected in 09.xii.2012, ACR 00624 collected in 12.xii.2012 GoogleMaps ; 3♂♂ and 1♀ ( RWG), same locality as other paratypes, except for GoogleMaps : 1♂ (-0.6378, -76.1486) and 1♀ (-0.6256, -76.1494) collected in 11.i.2009, 1♂ (-0.63, -76.1525) collected in 12.i.2009 and 1♂ (-0.635, -76.15) collected in 16.i.2009 all by R.W. Garrison & N. von Ellenrieder leg; 2♂♂ and 1♀ ( CSCA), same locality as other paratypes, except for GoogleMaps : 1♂ (-0.6383, -76.1491) collected in 16.i.2009, 1♀ (-0.6383, -76.1491) col- lected in 18.i.2009 and 1♂ (-0.635, -76.15) collected in 16.i.2009 all by R.W. Garrison & N. von Ellenrieder leg; 2♂♂ ( NVE), same locality as other paratypes, except for GoogleMaps : 1♂ (-0.6378, -76.1486) collected in 11.i.2009 and 1♂ (-0.6369, -76.1457) collected in 14.i.2009 all by R.W. Garrison & N. von Ellenrieder leg; 1♂ ( USFQ), same local- ity as other paratypes, except for (-0.6358, -76.1503) collected in 10.i.2009 by R.W. Garrison & N. von Ellenrieder leg. GoogleMaps

Allotype. ♀ ( ECOEVO, ACR 00635, in copula with ACR 00636), Ecuador, Orellana, Tiputini Biodiversity Sta- tion (-0.6349, -76.1501, 241 m asl), 13.xii.2012, A. Cordero-Rivera & M. Sanchez-Herrera leg. GoogleMaps

Etymology. Named gaiae (noun in the genitive case) after the daughter of ACR, Gaia Cordero Santolamazza, a dragonfly enthusiast, who has suffered her father’s long absences while sampling odonates around the world.

Description of holotype. Head ( Figs. 1 View FIGURE 1 a−b). Dark brown with labrum, mandibular base and basal half of genae greenish, antennal socket pale, lighter brown tinge between base of antennae and lateral ocelli, postocular area pale, rear of head pale. Frons slightly rounded. Postocular lobes at the level of hind margin of compound eyes.

Thorax ( Fig. 1a View FIGURE 1 ). Prothorax dark brown with yellowish laterodorsal stripes each extending up to 1/2 of mese- pisternum; posterior prothoracic lobe rounded. Pterothorax dark brown except for black antehumeral stripe, mesin- fraepisternum black, first 1/3 of metepisternum, upper half of metepimeron and venter pale. Coxae and internal surface of legs yellowish, external surfaces and armature dark brown.

Wings ( Fig. 1c View FIGURE 1 ). Hyaline. Pt dark brown surmounting four cells in FW and six cells in HW. Px = 27 in FW, 24 in HW.

Abdomen ( Fig. 1a View FIGURE 1 ). S1 and S2 dark brown, S1 with a pale rounded spot laterally; S2 with a thin slightly oblique pale stripe laterally; S3 with basal ¾ brown becoming darker apically; S4−S5 with basal half brown becoming darker posteriorly; S6−S8 black; S9−10 black with dorsal white pruinosity.

Genital ligula ( Figs. 2 View FIGURE 2 a−d). In lateral view with paired long flagella on the distal segment with a coiled confor- mity, apex of each flagellum covered with numerous spines. First segment covered with small bristles and one row of several hairs.

Anal appendages ( Figs. 3 View FIGURE 3 a−c). Cerci in lateral view extending ventrally at approximately its basal half, extend- ing as long as width of appendage; its dorsal portion covered with a compliment of strong teeth gradually growing in size basally to broad apical portion; in dorsal view, cerci curved medially and of uniform width but expanding at apex. In lateral view, basal portion of paraprocts with dense tuft of hairs; apical portion roundly curved mediodor- sally terminating in a club-like structure; in dorsal view, paraprocts terminating as an acute arrow-like structure.

Measurements. FW = 33.8; HW = 34.3; abdomen = 41; total = 52.3.

Variations in paratypes. Paratype males do not vary in cerci morphology. Slight differences were observed in the amount of abdominal pruinosity, probably related to the age and/or postmortem differences. Male paratypes var- ied in size as follows: FW = 28.3−34, HW = 29.2−35, abdomen = 36−41.2, total = 45−52. Venation among paratypes varied as follows: Pt surmounting 4−5 cells in FW and 5−6 cells in HW; Px in FW 24−28, in HW 22−26.

Allotype. Head ( Figs. 5 View FIGURE 5 a−d). Uniformly dark brown except for base of the antennae light brown; genae with a greenish tinge; labrum with greenish contours.

Thorax ( Figs. 5 View FIGURE 5 a−b, d−e). Prothorax brown, similar to the holotype except with paler coloration; in dorsal view, posterior lobe rounded with a lateral pointed process; in lateral view, posterior lobe curved upwards. Intersternite ( Fig. 5e View FIGURE 5 ) with an irregular contour on anterior portion; dorsal portion nearly quadrate; a notable cleft medially at level of setifer; setifer ovaloid, narrow, tuft of hairs decreasing in size ventrally. Coxae brown, internal surface of legs pale, armature brown.

Wings ( Fig. 6b View FIGURE 6 ). Hyaline (HW with a small rip on apical C). Pt dark brown surmounting four cells in both FW and HW. Px = 27 in FW, 24 in HW.

Abdomen ( Figs. 5a View FIGURE 5 , 6a View FIGURE 6 ). Similar to the holotype, only with paler coloration and lacking pruinosity on the tip of abdomen. Genital valves dark brown, surpassing S10 for a distance slightly shorter than segment, with a pronounced process above base of styli (both missing). Ovipositor mostly red, serrulate at apical 1/3. Cerci black, conical with dense pruinosity.

Measurements. FW = 32.6; HW = 33.4; abdomen = 36.5; total = 47. Female paratype: FW = 30.2; HW = 30.7; abdomen = 33.1; total = 41.8

Differential diagnosis. Male P. gaiae and P. minteri can be easily confounded in the field due to similar col- oration, as is the case for many members of the genus. However, P. gaiae differs from P. minteri by comparison of the paraproct in lateral and dorsal views ( Figs. 3 View FIGURE 3 a−f). Bick & Bick (1988) defined the paraprocts of P. minteri as “broad and deformed looking”, a unique trait in the helena group. Species of this group usually have paraprocts with an acute apex (except for P. compressa , minteri and gaiae ), which canbe straight, as in P. raphaella ( Fig. 4 View FIGURE 4 a−b) or curved dorsally at apex, as in P. macuma ( Figs. 4 View FIGURE 4 c−d). Apex of paraprocts of P. gaiae is broad and is similar to that of P. minteri , however, in P. gaiae the paraprocts are roundly curved mediodorsally ending in a club-like structure and in P. minteri the paraprocts are truncated and “deformed-looking” (sensu Dunkle 1986). In dorsal view ( Fig. 3c, f View FIGURE 3 ) paraprocts of P. gaiae terminate in an acute arrow-like structure, whereas in P. minteri the paraprocts are broader and rounded apically. The cerci, however, appear to be the same in both species, although slightly larger in P. gaiae .

The female of P. gaiae is similar to the female of P. macuma ( Figs. 5 View FIGURE 5 a−j; Figs. 6 View FIGURE 6 a−d). Differences between the two occur in the intersternites, ovipositor valve shape and dorsal view of the posterior lobe of prothorax. In P. macuma , the anterior portion of intersternite is straight ( Fig. 5f View FIGURE 5 ), differing from the anterior irregular configuration of P. gaiae ( Fig. 5e View FIGURE 5 ). Furthermore, the medial cleft is more pronounced and the setifer is broader in P. macuma . Use of the sclerotized intersternite as a diagnostic character should be used with caution since it can be invisible in young females, broken in mature females or vary individually. In dorsal view, the posterior lobe of the prothorax of P. gaiae is almost identical to the female of P. macuma , except in P. gaiae the lateral projections are slightly longer ( Figs. 5d, h View FIGURE 5 for a comparison). The posterior lobe of females of both species are also similar to P. minteri . We were unable to examine any female from this species, however, by the illustration present in Dunkle (1986, Figs. 3−4 View FIGURE 3 View FIGURE 4 ) the female of P. minteri also possess lateral projections on the posterior lobe. Additionally, the tips of the genital valves in P. gaiae are almost straight, surpassing S10 for a distance slightly longer than the segment, whereas in P. macuma the tips of the genital valves form a concave angulation and the ovipositor surpasses S10 for a distance subequal to the segment length ( Figs. 6a, c View FIGURE 6 ). However, it is worth mentioning that ovipositor length may vary individually and given the paucity of females available for this study, this trait should be considered with caution.

Habitat and ecology. As is typical for the genus, P. gaiae where found along mostly shaded trails in the un- derstory of the forest ( Fig. 7 View FIGURE 7 ). We never found individuals near the streams, but we noted that some forest spots were preferred over others. Both sexes fly very low (20−50 cm from the ground vegetation) and fast, and usually the only visible part is the whitish pruinescence at the end of the abdomen. Rosser Garrison and Natalia von El- lenrieder (pers. comm.) also found specimens deep within the forest understory, usually one at a time. They were unable to follow individuals that were disturbed and, despite their best efforts, were only able capture about half of all specimens they saw