Lathropus rhabdophloeoides Thomas, 2010
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5281/zenodo.5352802 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/985B2935-6D15-DD23-FF5A-908BFED4F97B |
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
scientific name |
Lathropus rhabdophloeoides Thomas |
status |
sp. nov. |
Lathropus rhabdophloeoides Thomas , n. sp.
Fig. 8 View Figure 5-8 , 14 View Figure 13-18 , 22 View Figure 19-24 , 31 View Figure 27-32 , 40 View Figure 38-40 , 47-50 View Figure 47-50 , 60, 61 View Figure 57-61. 57
Diagnosis. Length, 1.12mm - 1.74mm. The adults of this species are similar to those of L. jamaicensis , differing primarily in their less developed sublateral line ( Fig. 31 View Figure 27-32 ) and in the armature of the internal sac ( Fig. 40 View Figure 38-40 ).
Description. Holotype, female, in FSCA, with label data: “ BAHAMAS: Andros Island Uncle Charlie’s Blue Hole 7-VI-2001; beating coll. M.C. Thomas”
Body ( Fig. 8 View Figure 5-8 ) elongate-oval; dark testaceous, mouthparts paler. Length, 1.72mm.
Head 1.80× wider than long; surface sculpture extremely coarse ( Fig. 14 View Figure 13-18 ); setae bifurcate; epistome prolonged, comprising 0.36 total length of head measured along midline from front of eyes to front of head capsule, emarginate; antennal scape and pedicel subequal in length, scape broad, pedicel narrower; antennomeres III-VIII quadrate, about equal in length; antennomeres IX-X broader and longer than preceding flagellar antennomeres; XI longer than X; eye slightly convex, about 0.54 length of head.
Pronotum ( Fig. 22 View Figure 19-24 ) 1.40× wider than long; surface sculpture extremely coarsely areolate-rugose ( Fig. 31 View Figure 27-32 ); setae as on head; broadest at basal third, broader across base than at apex; sublateral line sinuate, strongly carinate ( Fig. 22 View Figure 19-24 ); anterior angles obtuse, not produced; posterior angles almost right, not produced; lateral margins with four broad denticles.
Elytra 1.53× longer than combined width; broadest near midlength; margins broadly explanate; microsculpture coriarious.
Genitalia. Sclerotization of internal sac of male genitalia as in Fig. 40 View Figure 38-40 .
Variation. The degree of development of the lateral pronotal denticles varies from well developed to not discernible.
Distribution. Florida, Bahamas, Cuba, Hispaniola, Virgin Islands.
Type material. Paratypes,75, with label data as follows: 1, “ BAHAMAS: Andros Island Cpt. Bill’s Blue Hole ; 27-VII-2006; MC Thomas beating vegetation” ( FSCA) ; 1, “ BAHAMAS: Andros Forfar Field Station bl trap, 26 July 2006 R. Turnbow” ( RHTC) ; 1, “ BAHAMAS: Andros Island Forfar Field Sta., Stafford Creek , 4-VI-2001, M.C. Thomas, blacklight trap in coastal coppice” ( FSCA) ; 1, “ BAHAMAS: Andros Is. Maidenhair Coppice 9-VI-2001 M.C. Thomas ” ( FSCA) ; 8, “ BAHAMAS: Andros Is. Maidenhair Coppice 10-VI-2004 M.C. Thomas ” ( FSCA) ; 6, “ BAHAMAS: Andros Island Uncle Charlies Blue Hole 7-VI- 2001 coll. M.C. Thomas beating” ( FSCA) ; 24, “ BAHAMAS: Andros Uncle Charlies Blue Hole 7 June 2001 R. Turnbow” ( RHTC) ; 26, “ BAHAMAS: Great Abaco Marsh Harbour, Pinewoods Nursery 22-XII-1990 R. Keys blacklight trap ” ( FSCA, USNM) ; 4, “ BAHAMAS: Great Abaco Marsh Harbour, Pinewoods Nursery 17-XI-1990 R. Keys blacklight trap ” ( FSCA) ; 1, “ BAHAMAS: Great Inagua, Northwest Point , 9 July 2007 R. Turnbow” ( RHTC) ; 1, “ BAHAMAS: Long Island Stella Maris 7-I-1977 Coll: R.M. Baranowski blacklight trap ” ( FSCA) ; 1, “ BAHAMAS: Long Island Hard Bargain 27-VI-1972 coll. F.D. Bennett blacklight trap” ( FSCA) .
Other specimens examined. In addition to the type series from the Bahamas, another 67 specimens were examined from the British Virgin Islands, Cuba, Dominican Republic, and Florida in the USA. Label data for those specimens are summarized in Table 1. All are deposited in the FSCA and RHTC.
Etymology. The species epithet refers to its resemblance to members of the genus Rhabdophloeus Sharp. Discussion. There are a number of Florida specimens that are similar to this species in being unicolored testaceous but which have different genitalia. Their status is still uncertain and they are not dealt with in this review.
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.