HistoryPedia - Внесок користувача [uk]

Ig. 17A ) .........................A. curtus Apical spine of penes brief (Fig. 17C

2018-03-30T07:01:31Z

Dockgrass45:

They may be identified by comparison with [http://hs21.cn/comment/html/?303038.html Xon at the specified rank and for the specified period, it] co-occurring males. hubbardi Having a group of two? very little disks beneath each and every disk like structure (Fig. 18C) ............................................................................................A. guarani Only smooth chorion below the disk like structures (Fig. 18B, E) ................ ................................................................................ A. angelae / A. magnusNymphs (only three species known, just about undistinguishable, the characters under ought to be confirmed using the study of much more material) 1 ?two ?Around the inner margin of left mandibular tusk, the space amongst the subbasal along with the submedian tubercles is quick and strongly concave (Fig. 14A); appropriate mandible with distal corner of mola strongly protruding ................A. curtus On the inner margin of left mandibular tusk, the space among the subbasal and the submedian tubercles is longer and straighter (Figs 14B ); appropriate mandible with distal corner of mola not strongly protruding ......................2 Ratio total length of mandible/mandibular tusk length: 1.59?.62 (Fig. 14B, F)................................................................................................. A. angelae Ratio total length of mandible/mandibular tusk length [https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00334 fpsyg.2015.00334] 142; Ulmer 1942: 105; Traver 1956b: 7; [https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2015.05.021 j.cub.2015.05.021] Kimmins 1960: 312; Sattler 1967: 104; Berner 1978: 103; Hubbard 1982a: 270;.Ig. 17A ) .........................A. curtus Apical spine of penes quick (Fig. 17C, E ) ................................................three Penes extended, apical spine slightly marked, median remnant of styliger plate projecting laterally (Fig. 17E ) ..................................................A. guarani Penes short, apical spine properly marked, median remnant of styliger plate regular (Fig. 17C) .......................................................................... A. hubbardi FW 9.5?0.1; penile lobe strongly widened basally (ratio length / basal width = two.9, Fig. 17G) and using a little distal indentation close to apical spine (arrow in Fig. 17G)................................................................................. A. magnus FW 7.0?.five mm; penile lobe not so wide at the base (ratio length / basal width = 4.0?.0, Fig. 17D); without the need of apical indentation as above .............A. angelaeFemale and eggs of Asthenopus species are strongly related. They might be identified by comparison with co-occurring males. Nevertheless the eggs extracted from female adults or mature nymphs may perhaps be keyed as follows: 1 Disk like structures on the equatorial region somewhat effectively separated from every single other, separation about 0.six or additional of maximum width of a disk (Fig. 18B, C, E)...........................................................................................................Carlos Molineri et al. / ZooKeys 478: 45?28 (2014)?2 ?Disk like structures around the equatorial location just about touching each other, maximum separation about 0.3 or much less of maximum width of a disk (Fig. 18A, D).... ...................................................................................... A. curtus / A. hubbardi Using a group of 2? quite tiny disks beneath each and every disk like structure (Fig. 18C) ............................................................................................A. guarani Only smooth chorion under the disk like structures (Fig. 18B, E) ................ ................................................................................ A. angelae / A. magnusNymphs (only 3 species recognized, virtually undistinguishable, the characters beneath need to be confirmed with all the study of much more material) 1 ?two ?Around the inner margin of left mandibular tusk, the space in between the subbasal along with the submedian tubercles is brief and strongly concave (Fig.

Ig. 17A ) .........................A. curtus Apical spine of penes brief (Fig. 17C

2018-03-23T07:23:05Z

Dockgrass45:

magnusNymphs (only three species recognized, virtually undistinguishable, the characters under must be confirmed with all the study of a lot more material) 1 ?two ?On the inner [http://www.medchemexpress.com/APTO-253.html LT-253 biological activity] margin of left mandibular tusk, the space between the subbasal and the submedian tubercles is quick and [http://www.medchemexpress.com/NVP-AUY922.html Luminespib supplier] strongly concave (Fig. ................................................................................ A. angelae / A. magnusNymphs (only three species known, almost undistinguishable, the characters below need to be confirmed using the study of additional material) 1 ?two ?On the inner margin of left mandibular tusk, the space involving the subbasal plus the submedian tubercles is brief and strongly concave (Fig. 14A); ideal mandible with distal corner of mola strongly protruding ................A. curtus On the inner margin of left mandibular tusk, the space in between the subbasal and also the submedian tubercles is longer and straighter (Figs 14B ); ideal mandible with distal corner of mola not strongly protruding ......................2 Ratio total length of mandible/mandibular tusk length: 1.59?.62 (Fig. 14B, F)................................................................................................. A. angelae Ratio total length of mandible/mandibular tusk length

Than in male. Abdominal sternum VIII with anteromedian keel (Fig. 18F

2018-03-21T09:57:34Z

Dockgrass45:

/ ZooKeys 478: 45?28 (2014)using a [http://www.medchemexpress.com/RG7800.html RG7800 side effects] double ventro-basal row of lengthy filtering setae; tibio-tarsus (fused, but fusion line distinguishable) with 3 rows of filtering setae (2 on dorsal "face" and 1 on inner margin), tarsus slightly and bluntly projecting apically (arrow i.Than in male. Oval (ratio maximum length / maximum width = 1.4?.8), with two relatively large polar caps (ratio maximum with of egg/maximum width of uncoiled polar cap = 1.1?.five), formed by three? very lengthy coiled threads. Chorionic surface with substantial subcircular chorionic plates, in some cases each and every plate is divided in two? portions. Nymphs. Length (mm): physique, 9.7?five.0 mm; cerci, 4.0?.0; terminal filament, 5.0?five.1. Head suboval in dorsal view, smooth (without the need of pilose area); occipital region effectively developed, strongly convex (Figs 4C , [https://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010112 bmjopen-2015-010112] 14I ). Head capsule having a dorsal spine-like projection at bases of antennae. Antennae 1.1?.five occasions length of head (length of head taken from hind margin for the apex of clypeus); pedicel with tuft of setae on dorsum, flagellum with minute scattered setae; length (mm): scape (0.five), pedicel (0.28), flagellum (2.0). Frons with anterior margin far more or much less straight (arrow in Fig. 14J), using a compact blunt lateral projection ("a" in Fig. 14I), devoid of median projection. Clypeus and labrum tiny, membranous, with quite a few setae on dorsum of labrum. Mandibular tusks robust, relatively stout, left tusk (Fig. 14A , E) with 3 apical teeth, rising in size in the median (smallest), inner and outer; inner tooth slightly directed medially, other people directed distally; right tusk (Fig. 14F ) with 2 teeth, the inner shorter. Inner margin of both tusks with a rounded tiny tubercle near subapex in addition to a larger and pointed subbasal tubercle (connected using a tuft of rigid setae), this significant basal tubercle shows a little basal protuberance (giving the impression of a bifid tubercle but with among the sides aborted); ventral surface and outer margin of tusks with small rounded protuberances around the exceptionally challenging cuticle; dorsal surface of tusks with several setae and with a little basal tubercle; this modest dorsal tubercle is easily seen without having dissecting the mandible and offers an additional point of articulation in between the mandible and the head capsule ("a" and "b" in Fig. 14I). Incisors and prostheca of each mandibles really lowered in size, molae reasonably nicely created. Maxillae with a small subtriangular basal membranous "gill" (membranous outgrouth). Thorax. Anterior ring of pronotum (or collar sensu Kluge 2004) short (ca. 1/4 the length of posterior ring), anteriorly projecting as spines on lateral corners; posterior ring longer, ring-like. Legs (Fig. 15A , F ). Leg I (Fig. 15A ): femora quite wide, well developed,Phylogeny and [https://dx.doi.org/10.1089/jir.2014.0026 jir.2014.0026] biogeography of Asthenopodinae with a revision of Asthenopus...Figure 15. Asthenopus nymphs. A. magnus: A foreleg, d.v. B identical, v.v. (arrow indicates apical projection of tibiotarsus) C middle leg, d.v. (arrow indicates distal brush on tibia) D hind leg E abdominal sterna IX (arrow indicates spine on paraproct). A. angelae: F hind femur, d.v. G foretarsal claw. A stereomicroscope photographs F light microscope photographs.Carlos Molineri et al.

N Fig. 15B); tarsal claw fairly big and stout using a

2018-03-19T09:10:49Z

Dockgrass45: Створена сторінка: The genus Asthenopus has been distinguished by indicates in the following characters (Dom guez 1988): 1) ratio foreleg/FW male: 3/5?/5; 2) male foretarsus 2.5 t...

The genus Asthenopus has been distinguished by indicates in the following characters (Dom guez 1988): 1) ratio foreleg/FW male: 3/5?/5; 2) male foretarsus 2.5 times longer than foretibia; 3) foretarsal segment two related for the other people, and 2/3 the length of tibia); 4) ratio length of Rs stem/fork to margin 1/4 (or fork Rs at 2/10 from base to margin) ; 5) cubital intercalaries slightly diverging toward hind margin, ICu2 and ICu1 basally fused to CuA by cross veins; 6) ICu2 ending at anal margin or inside the tornus, 7) marginal intercalary veins [http://www.medchemexpress.com/APTO-253.html get LOR-253] absent; 8) forceps ratio width/length: 1/7; eight) penes robust on basal 2/3; 9) MA fork base to margin 10/100; 11) IMP P1 not fused basally; 12) MP2-IMP equivalent in length, not fused; 13) foretarsal claws of male not so expanded distally (as in Asthenopodes). Coxae I and II directed ventrally, coxae III directed laterally. Abdomen. Gill I decreased in size, double, both portions subequal in length and width. Gills II II effectively developed, ventral portion smaller than dorsal portion; tergum X with properly developed ventral spine on posterior margin (not visible dorsally, Fig. 15E). Caudal filaments quick (curved in mature nymphs) with whorls of stout spines and basic setae at joinings. Distribution. Amazonas and Parana biogeographic subregions (Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru). Discussion. The genus Asthenopus has been distinguished by suggests on the following characters (Dom guez 1988): 1) ratio foreleg/FW male: 3/5?/5; 2) male foretarsus two.five times longer than foretibia; three) foretarsal segment 2 equivalent for the other folks, and 2/3 the length of tibia); four) ratio length of Rs stem/fork to margin 1/4 (or fork Rs at 2/10 from base to margin) ; 5) cubital intercalaries slightly diverging toward hind margin, ICu2 and ICu1 basally fused to CuA by cross veins; six) ICu2 ending at anal margin or within the tornus, 7) marginal intercalary veins absent; 8) forceps ratio width/length: 1/7; 8) penes robust on basal 2/3; 9) MA fork base to margin 10/100; 11) IMP P1 not fused basally; 12) MP2-IMP equivalent in length, not fused; 13) foretarsal claws of male not so expanded distally (as in Asthenopodes). Our phylogenetic analyses only recovered a few of these character states as synapomorphies of this genus (see diagnosis and Appendix 2). The proposal of [https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2013.00251 fnins.2013.00251] Dom guez (1988) and Hubbard Dom guez (1988) concerning the intermediacy of Priasthenopus gilliesi with respect to Asthenopus curtus and Asthenopodes picteti is in concordance with our results. Priasthenopus gilliesi resulted sister for the Povilla-Asthenopus clade, presenting some plesiomorphic character states shared with Asthenopodes. Crucial for the species of Asthenopus Male 1 ?Penile lobe (distad to basal thumb) using a related width along its length, basal thumb separated by a wide furrow (Figs 17A , E ); [https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00686 fnhum.2013.00686] forceps really stout (ratio length/ basal width = four.7?.0) ...........................................................two Penile lobe (distad to basal thumb) wider basally, basal thumb fused to penile lobe (Fig. 17D,G); forceps relatively slender (ratio length/ basal width = six.two?.0) ......................................................................................................Phylogeny and biogeography of Asthenopodinae using a revision of Asthenopus...Figure 16. Asthenopus fore (FW) and hind wings (HW) of male imago.