Cyanogomphus waltheri Selys, 1873

Pinto, Ângelo Parise & Almeida, Marcus Vinícius Oliveira De, 2016, A taxonomic synopsis of South American Cyanogomphini Carle with description of Cyanogomphus angelomachadoi sp. nov. from the Cerrado of Brazil (Odonata: Gomphidae), Zootaxa 4078 (1) : -

publication ID	https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4078.1.6
publication LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:pub:3D0D79C2-2583-47F4-BC01-5CF347614B44
DOI	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6077753
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/495E274C-FFD9-FF94-FF43-FDB4EA6CF835
treatment provided by	Plazi
scientific name	Cyanogomphus waltheri Selys, 1873
status

Treatment

Cyanogomphus waltheri Selys, 1873 View in CoL

LSID urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:7C774C12-B047-4CB0-9A29-5333E67F9CB8 ( Figures 2 View FIGURE 2 D, 3B, 4D, 6D–E, 7G–I, 8C–D, 9A–B, 10D, 11C, 12)

Cyanogomphus waltheri Selys, 1873: 755 View in CoL –756 (description of ♂ holotype, BRAZIL. Rio de Janeiro State: Rio de Janeiro municipality in IRSNB);— Hagen (1875 [1877]: 51, mention);— Kirby (1890: 71, mention);— Selys (1894: 173, comparison with E. demerarae View in CoL );— Williamson (1916: 167, 170, 172, pl. VIII, figs 2–5, comparison with Ebegomphus View in CoL ssp. and A. tumens View in CoL , photo of wings of ♂ from Teresópolis [likely in Rio de Janeiro State, Brazil], secondary genitalia in lateral view and caudal appendages in dorsal and lateral views probably from the same specimen cf. Belle 1980: 151);— Williamson (1918: 9, comparison with A. jessei Williamson, 1918 View in CoL and E. conchinus View in CoL );— Needham (1940: 382–384, pl. XXI, figs 27–29, description of F-0 larva by supposition, illustrations of habitus and labium in dorsal view, and dorsal margin of abdomen in lateral view, records from Santa Catarina State, Brazil);— Needham (1944: 184, taxonomic notes);— Belle (1966: 29, 31, 45, 47, 59, comparison with T. uncatus View in CoL , notes on larva, venation and distribution);— Belle (1970: 22–23, pl. IIIa, comparison with Ebegomphus View in CoL spp., mention of a second male in the IRSNB, photo of the wings of ♂ holotype);—St. Quentin (1973: 358, mention);— Belle (1980: 151–152, 155, figs 1–4, in part, notes on ♂ holotype and illustrations of synthorax, metathoracic tibia and caudal appendages, description and illustration of subgenital plate in ventral view of ♀ from Santa Catarina State, Brazil, records from Argentina, Misiones Province, and Brazil, Rio Grande do Sul State, comparison with T. uncatus View in CoL );— Jurzitza (1981: 117, record from Parque Nacional Iguazú, Misiones Province, Argentina);— Davies & Tobin (1985: 26, mention);— Watson & O’Farrell (1985: 501, mention);— Carle (1986: 307–308, classification and comparison with T. uncatus View in CoL );— Santos (1988: 267, 286, mention);— Garrison (1991: 17, mention);— Rodrigues Capítulo (1992: 58; record from Misiones Province, Argentina);— Belle (1993: 401, mention);— Belle (1994: 47, 49, comparison with C. comparabilis View in CoL );— Bridges (1994: III.13, VI.9, VII.251, VIII.18, mention);— Belle (1996: 298, 314, comparison with C. comparabilis View in CoL and Ebegomphus View in CoL spp.);— Steinmann (1997: 103–104, mention);— Garrison et al. (2006: 68 –71, 77, 79, 81, 83–84, 96–97, 328–331, 333; figs 365, 379, 370, 383, 392, 454, 474, 485, 510, 519, 585–590, illustrations of head in dorsal view, wings, metathoracic tibia and anterior and posterior hamules in lateral view of a male from São Paulo State, caudal appendages in lateral view from a male of Rio Grande do Sul State, subgenital plate from Santa Catarina State, all from Brazil);— Heckman (2006: 643 –644, 647, figs 3.2.770, 3.2.774, key, reproduction of the illustrations from Needham 1940 and Belle 1980);—von Ellenrieder & Muzón (2008: 61, record from Misiones Province, Argentina);—von Ellenrieder & Garrison (2009: 123, figs 276, 282, reproduction of illustrations of ♀ subgenital plate and caudal appendages of ♂ from Garrison et al. 2006);—Hämäläinen (2013: 30–31, fig. 2, mention and photo of habitus of a male in the field from Argentina);— Hämäläinen (2015: 158, etymology).

Material examined (7♂, 2♀). BRAZIL. [Minas Gerais] State: 1♂, [Santa Bárbara/São Gonçalo do Rio Abaixo municipalities, Unidade Ambiental] Peti [ CEMIG, 19°53’09.51”S, 43°22’15.27”W, 723 m a.s.l.], road from left margin, II.[19]88, [A.B.M. Machado leg.?] ( ABMM); 1♂, S[ão] João Del Rei municipality [21°08’09.60”S, 44°15’43.02”W, 914 m a.s.l.], IV[?].[19]61, Jandico leg. ( MNRJ); Rio de Janeiro State: 1♂, Cachoeiras de Macacu municipality, [Boca do Mato district, Represa do] Valério [22°25’05.20”S, 42°37’17”W, 236 m a.s.l.], 12.I. [20]11, N. Tangerini leg. ( DZRJ 2493); 1♀, same data but 26.XI. [20]11 ( DZRJ 2494); 1♀, same municipality but Reserva Ecológica de Guapiaçu ( REGUA), Forest Fragment (22°28’01.2”S, 42°45’14.40”W, 46 m a.s.l.), 15.II.2012, T.M.F. Kompier leg. ( DZRJ 2495); 1♂, same data but 26.IV.2012 ( DZRJ 2496); 1♂, district of Santana de Japuíba [22°33’46”S, 42°41’30”W, 27 m a.s.l.], Rio São João, 08.XII.2000, J.M. Costa, R. Garrison, A.N. Lourenço & P. Vieira leg. ( MNRJ); Rio Grande do Sul State: 1♂, S[an]to Antônio da Patrulha municipality [14°09’36”S, 56°12’00”W, 123 m a.s.l.], 26.III. [19]88, Gelson [Fiorentin] leg. ( ABMM); 1♂, without locality [very likely in southeastern Brazil], 4 h a.m., light trap, staring night, 02.XII. [19]78, [A.B.M. Machado leg.?] ( ABMM).

Type repository. Holotype ♂ by monotypy in Selys collection at Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, Brussels, Belgium ( IRSNB, not examined).

Measurements. Males (n = 7). Total length (including caudal appendages) 43.6–50.1; abdomen length (excluding caudal appendages) 32.5–37.4; head maximum width 5.9–6.6; Fw length 26.4–29.5; Hw length 25.8–28.1; Fw maximum width 5.2–6.1, in Hw 7.0–7.6; pt length 3.0– 3.4 in Fw, 3.1–3.6 in Hw; length of metathoracic femur 6.5–8.0; metathoracic tibia 4.7–5.7; length of S9+ 10 in lateral view 2.7–3.5; total length of cercus in lateral view 1.1–1.4.

Females (n = 2). Total length (including caudal appendages) 48.6–50.4; abdomen length (excluding caudal appendages) 35.8–35.9; head maximum width 6.8; Fw length 32.0–32.1; Hw length 30.9–31.6; Fw maximum width 6.2–6.4, in Hw 8.1–8.3; pt length 3.6–3.9 in Fw, 3.7–4.1 in Hw; length of metathoracic femur 7.1–7.6 metathoracic tibia 5.4–6.3; length of S9+ 10 in lateral view 2.2–2.2; total length of cercus in lateral view 1.0–1.2.

Larva. Needham (1940, p. 382) by supposition.

Diagnosis. Both sexes of C. waltheri can be distinguished from Tibiagomphus spp. by defined antehumeral stripes (as Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 B, stripes from undefined to a very narrow first antehumeral stripe in Tibiagomphus ), males by V4 cornet-like distal portion wide ( Figs 6 View FIGURE 6 C–D), cercus cylindrical, slightly curved toward to the upturned tapered apex ( Figs 7 View FIGURE 7 A–C, 8A–B), and branches of epiproct with a distal concavity ( Figs 8 View FIGURE 8 B, D, F), and female by subgenital plate short (ratio between length of plate and S9 <0.4), and with a wide concavity ( Figs 9 View FIGURE 9 A–B, V4 distal portion narrow, apex of cercus toward posteriorly, epiproct dorsally smooth, without concavity, and female subgenital plate large and with a narrow mesal incision in Tibiagomphus , Figs 6 View FIGURE 6 F–G, 7J– O, 8G–J, 9E). This species is more similar to C. angelomachadoi sp. nov., than to C. comparabilis and is diagnosed under those species. The black dorsal surface of the tibia in C. waltheri and allopatric distribution in the Atlantic Forest further separates it from them ( Figs 3 View FIGURE 3 B, 12, dorsal surface of tibia pale and Cerrado distribution in C. angelomachadoi sp. nov. and C. comparabilis , Figs 3 View FIGURE 3 A, 12). The female differs from C. angelomachadoi sp. nov. by the color pattern with defined mesepisternal stripes; however, the male from Serra do Salitre (ABMM) and possible females also can exhibit a mesepisternal color similar to that of the latter species ( Figs 1 View FIGURE 1 A–B) but C. waltheri also differs by its larger size (Hw 30.9–31.6 vs. 24.4–24.5 in C. angelomachadoi sp. nov.).

Distribution. From Minas Gerais State south to Rio Grande do Sul State in Brazil and Misiones Province in Argentina; along in the Parana dominion in the Atlantic and Parana Forest biogeographical provinces ( Fig. 12 View FIGURE 12 ).

Biological and ecological data. Supposed larvae of this species were found in lotic environments in silt, sand and gravel beds of rocky forested streams ( Carvalho & Nessimian 1998; Costa et al. 2004), where they apparently prey on smaller organisms found on the surface of the substrate ( Carvalho & Nessimian 1998). Larvae are common in rocky forested rivers in the Atlantic Forest domain of southeastern Brazil (APP, pers. obs.); adults were observed perched on low vegetation and shrubs at the shore, from sea level to 914 meters of elevation.

Remarks. Females from the Cerrado of Goiás State, Brazil, determined by Belle (1980) do not pertain to this species, and due to scarce data about females of other species, we are unable to identify them (see under Cyanogomphus sp.). The type locality at the Botanical Garden of Rio de Janeiro is contiguous to Parque Nacional da Tijuca; however, this species was not found in the Tijuca forest after 47 years of collections by Santos & Costa (1987) and recent collecting expeditions undertaken by APP (2009–2011) and MVA (since 2014), even though adults of other Gomphidae including Epigomphus paludosus Hagen in Selys, 1854, Progomphus complicatus Selys, 1854 , and Zonophora campanulata campanulata (Burmeister, 1839) were frequently collected during the summer season. Preferential habits for C. waltheri might be reduced, making it less abundant and thus difficult to detect, or it may be extinct locally.

As in other species in the Agriogomphus -complex, synthoracic coloration in C. waltheri varies considerably. The majority have the pale areas similar to the holotype illustrated by Belle (1980, fig. 1), but these areas also can be larger, approaching the pattern observed in the paratype of C. angelomachadoi sp. nov. from Serra do Salitre ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 C). In the darker specimens these areas are reduced, and the first antehumeral stripe is largely unconnected to other pale areas, thus not reaching the mesothoracic collar and base of the antealar sinus.

Probable larvae of this species are fairly common in sandy creeks in the Atlantic Forest of southeastern Brazil based on previously published data (e.g. Carvalho & Nessimian 1998) and recent collections (APP, pers. obs.); however their identity needs confirmation, as the larva was described by supposition by Needham (1944) and may be difficult to differentiate from larvae of Tibiagomphus .