HistoryPedia - Внесок користувача [uk]

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

2018-03-15T17:06:32Z

Pepper8mind:

18F ), at each and every side of keel base an incredibly little "socket" is present ("s" in Fig. 18F). Terminal filament reduced, shorter than tergum VIII, with few thin annuli. Cercus quick, 0.25?0.50 occasions length of FW. Eggs (Fig. 18A ). Length, 210?85 ; width, 135?63 . Oval (ratio [http://shop.gmynsh.com/comment/html/?84182.html Yellowish brown (Fig. 14). Pterostigma is light orange, much less conspicuous. Little spots] maximum length / maximum width = 1.4?.8), with two somewhat big polar caps (ratio maximum with of egg/maximum width of uncoiled polar cap = 1.1?.5), formed by three? extremely extended coiled threads. Chorionic surface with large subcircular chorionic plates, sometimes each plate is divided in 2? portions. Nymphs. Length (mm): physique, 9.7?five.0 mm; cerci, four.0?.0; terminal filament, 5.0?five.1. Head suboval in dorsal view, smooth (devoid of pilose area); [http://www.sdlongzhou.net/comment/html/?29767.html Tatus within the List of Readily available Names in Zoology the latter] occipital region well created, 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 to 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 (two.0). Frons with anterior margin a lot more or significantly less straight (arrow in Fig. 14J), with a little blunt lateral projection ("a" in Fig. 14I), with out median projection. Clypeus and labrum compact, membranous, with many setae on dorsum of labrum. Mandibular tusks robust, reasonably stout, left tusk (Fig. 14A , E) with three apical teeth, increasing in size from the median (smallest), inner and outer; inner tooth slightly directed medially, other individuals directed distally; right tusk (Fig. 14F ) with 2 teeth, the inner shorter. Inner margin of both tusks having a rounded compact tubercle near subapex in addition to a larger and pointed subbasal tubercle (linked having a tuft of rigid setae), this large basal tubercle shows a tiny basal protuberance (giving the impression of a bifid tubercle but with one of many sides aborted); ventral surface and outer margin of tusks with tiny rounded protuberances on the really really hard cuticle; dorsal surface of tusks with many setae and having a tiny basal tubercle; this modest dorsal tubercle is easily observed with no dissecting the mandible and provides an additional point of articulation in between the mandible along with the head capsule ("a" and "b" in Fig. 14I). Incisors and prostheca of each mandibles quite reduced in size, molae relatively well developed. Maxillae with a compact 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 extremely wide, effectively 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 exact same, 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.Than in male.

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

2018-03-15T10:39:48Z

Pepper8mind: Створена сторінка: Head suboval in dorsal view, smooth ([http://www.medchemexpress.com/BX795.html BX795 supplement] without pilose location); occipital area well developed, strong...

Head suboval in dorsal view, smooth ([http://www.medchemexpress.com/BX795.html BX795 supplement] without pilose location); occipital area well developed, strongly convex (Figs 4C , [https://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010112 bmjopen-2015-010112] 14I ). Oval (ratio maximum length / maximum width = 1.4?.8), with two comparatively massive polar caps (ratio maximum with of egg/maximum width of uncoiled polar cap = 1.1?.five), formed by 3? pretty long coiled threads. Chorionic surface with large subcircular chorionic plates, from time to time every plate is divided in 2? portions.Than in male. Abdominal sternum VIII with anteromedian keel (Fig. 18F ), at each and every side of keel base a really smaller "socket" is present ("s" in Fig. 18F). Terminal filament decreased, shorter than tergum VIII, with handful of thin annuli. Cercus quick, 0.25?0.50 instances length of FW. Eggs (Fig. 18A ). Length, 210?85 ; width, 135?63 . Oval (ratio maximum length / maximum width = 1.four?.8), with two somewhat huge polar caps (ratio maximum with of egg/maximum width of uncoiled polar cap = 1.1?.5), formed by 3? incredibly long coiled threads. Chorionic surface with large subcircular chorionic plates, in some cases each plate is divided in 2? portions. Nymphs. Length (mm): physique, 9.7?five.0 mm; cerci, four.0?.0; terminal filament, 5.0?five.1. Head suboval in dorsal view, smooth (without having pilose region); occipital area effectively created, 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 times 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 (two.0). Frons with anterior margin much more or less straight (arrow in Fig. 14J), having a compact blunt lateral projection ("a" in Fig. 14I), without having median projection. Clypeus and labrum modest, membranous, with several setae on dorsum of labrum. Mandibular tusks robust, reasonably stout, left tusk (Fig. 14A , E) with three apical teeth, increasing in size from the median (smallest), inner and outer; inner tooth slightly directed medially, other people directed distally; suitable tusk (Fig. 14F ) with two teeth, the inner shorter. Inner margin of each tusks having a rounded modest tubercle close to subapex as well as a bigger and pointed subbasal tubercle (connected having a tuft of rigid setae), this large 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 little rounded protuberances on the exceptionally hard cuticle; dorsal surface of tusks with quite a few setae and using a compact basal tubercle; this small dorsal tubercle is effortlessly seen without dissecting the mandible and provides an more point of articulation amongst the mandible as well as the head capsule ("a" and "b" in Fig. 14I). Incisors and prostheca of both mandibles very decreased in size, molae relatively well developed. Maxillae having 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 very wide, properly developed,Phylogeny and [https://dx.doi.org/10.1089/jir.2014.0026 jir.2014.0026] biogeography of Asthenopodinae using a revision of Asthenopus...Figure 15. Asthenopus nymphs. A. magnus: A foreleg, d.v.

N Fig. 15B); tarsal claw somewhat massive and stout using a

2018-03-13T04:04:49Z

Pepper8mind: Створена сторінка: Key to the species of Asthenopus Male 1 ?Penile lobe (distad to basal thumb) using a comparable width along its length, basal thumb separated by a wide furrow (...

Key to the species of Asthenopus Male 1 ?Penile lobe (distad to basal thumb) using a comparable 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 incredibly stout (ratio length/ basal width = four.7?.0) ...........................................................2 Penile lobe (distad to basal thumb) wider basally, basal thumb fused to penile lobe (Fig. 17D,G); forceps somewhat slender (ratio length/ basal width = six.2?.0) ......................................................................................................Phylogeny and biogeography of Asthenopodinae using a revision of Asthenopus...Figure 16. Asthenopus fore (FW) and hind wings (HW) of male imago. A A. curtus FW HW C A. magnus FW HW E A. hubbardi FW HW G A. guarani, FW (facts) HW J A. angelae (from Argentina) FW HW. Ephoron sp.: L male HW (x.i.N Fig. 15B); tarsal claw fairly [http://www.rattanasak.com/members/colony3ball/activity/16745/ 5?.1 (i.e., forceps develop into slightly slender). This species can be recognized] substantial and stout with a row of marginal denticles (Fig. 15G). Leg II (Fig. 15C): smaller sized, with thinner femora, with scattered long setae, mainly basally and along hind margin; tibia and tarsi with row of long setae on outer (dorsal) margin, ventrally with a lot of stout spines on apical half, using a distal brush of thick setae (arrow in Fig.N Fig.N Fig. 15B); tarsal claw reasonably substantial and stout with a row of marginal denticles (Fig. 15G). Leg II (Fig. 15C): smaller sized, with thinner femora, with scattered extended setae, largely basally and along hind margin; tibia and tarsi with row of long setae on outer (dorsal) margin, ventrally with many stout spines on apical half, having a distal brush of thick setae (arrow in Fig. 15C); tarsal claw somewhat tiny, with no denticles. Leg III (Fig. 15D, F): as leg II except larger and with anterior margin of femur densely covered with thick setae, and posterior margin roundly expanded at apex bearing a group of stout acute spines (Fig. 15F); tibia devoid of distal brush. Coxae I and II directed ventrally, coxae III directed laterally. Abdomen. Gill I lowered in size, double, both portions subequal in length and width. Gills II II nicely developed, ventral portion smaller sized than dorsal portion; tergum X with properly created ventral spine on posterior margin (not visible dorsally, Fig. 15E). Caudal filaments short (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 in the following characters (Dom guez 1988): 1) ratio foreleg/FW male: 3/5?/5; two) male foretarsus two.5 times longer than foretibia; 3) foretarsal segment 2 similar to 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) ; five) cubital intercalaries slightly diverging toward hind margin, ICu2 and ICu1 basally fused to CuA by cross veins; six) ICu2 ending at anal margin or inside the tornus, 7) marginal intercalary veins absent; eight) 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 similar in length, not fused; 13) foretarsal claws of male not so expanded distally (as in Asthenopodes).

Dom guez 1988a: 24; Hubbard and Dom guez 1988: 207; Dom guez 1989a: 173 (described

2018-03-12T11:20:34Z

Pepper8mind: Створена сторінка: [http://www.medchemexpress.com/RG7800.html RG7800 web] Fittkau; two male and 1 female pharate subimagos (IBN642CM-eggs, 643-female, 644-male) from BRAZIL, Amazo...

[http://www.medchemexpress.com/RG7800.html RG7800 web] Fittkau; two male and 1 female pharate subimagos (IBN642CM-eggs, 643-female, 644-male) from BRAZIL, Amazonas, S Paulo de Oliven , Bom Sucesso, 4.ix.2003, (aprox. Nine autapomorphies have been recovered inside the cladistic evaluation, and are helpful to diagnose the species (see Appendix two). The following mixture of characters is valuable to distinguish A. curtus from the other species of the genus: 1) male FW ten.0, female FW 14.0?8.five; two) male foreleg length 0.69?.74 times the length of FW; three) pronotum width/length ratio: two.0?.3 (male), two.7?.0 (female); four) 18?5 marginal intercalary veins present on the complete margin ofCarlos Molineri et al. / ZooKeys 478: 45?28 (2014)forewings (Fig. 16A ), 2? instances shorter than distance amongst longitudinal veins in male (not anastomosed), hind wings with marginal intercalaries in at least four [https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/abn0000128 abn0000128] spaces among main veins; five) male FW with 0 to 1 crossveins between Rs and MA basal to Rs fork; six) ratio total length/basal width of forceps five.4 (Fig. 17A ); 7) penes pretty sclerotized, contrasting strongly with the remaining genital components, apex projecting acutely; a deep furrow separates penis lobe from thumb, median remnant of styliger plate subrectangular with out marked projections, pedestals subrectangular and big, outer margin projecting posteriorly on outer margin along forceps base; eight) female sternum VIII with anteromedian keel and reduced sockets as in Fig. 18G; 9) egg ratio maximum width of egg/maximum width of Computer 1.1?.3, cap formed by 3? filaments, chorionic plates separated by smooth chorion (Fig. 18A); ten) nymphal mandible: ratio total length of mandible/mandibular tusk length 1.six?.7; 11) space in between the subbasal along with the submedian tubercles in inner margin of left mandibular tusks is brief and concave (Fig. 14A). Male imago. Length: physique, 8.0?.7; FW, ten.0; HW, 4.four; foreleg, 7.5; cerci, 33.0?five.0. Common coloration yellowish light brown. Head whitish, heavily shaded black dorsally, paler on posteromedian zone of occiput, black shading extending anteriorly on frons as two parallel lines surrounding median ocellus.Dom guez 1988a: 24; Hubbard and Dom guez 1988: 207; Dom guez 1989a: 173 (described as A. magnus sp. n. below); Dom guez et al. 2006: 561. Campsurus amazonicus Hagen 1888: 230. Asthenopus amazonicus; Ulmer 1920c: 107; Lestage 1923: 124; Ulmer 1942: 106; Traver 1950: 606; Traver 1956b: 7; Sattler 1967: 104; Berner 1978: 103. Type material. Photographs in the type at the British Museum had been studied. Extra material. Two male imagos (IBN, slide 480) from COLOMBIA, Amazonas, Leticia, ca km 15, S four?'41" - W 69?9'1", 93 m, 11.ii.1999, light trap 4-Phylogeny and biogeography of Asthenopodinae using a revision of Asthenopus...Figure 17. Asthenopus, general ventral view of male genitalia and detail of penes. A A. curtus C A. hubbardi D A. angelae E A. guarani G A. magnus. Light microscope photographs.h, E. Dom guez, [https://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010112 bmjopen-2015-010112] M.C. Z��iga C. Molineri cols.; male imaginal slides (FAMU) from BRAZIL, Amazonas, Careiro Island, Divinopolis, SE of Manaus, 29.vii.1961, E.J. Fittkau; 2 male and 1 female pharate subimagos (IBN642CM-eggs, 643-female, 644-male) from BRAZIL, Amazonas, S Paulo de Oliven , Bom Sucesso, 4.ix.2003, (aprox. S three?8' - W 68?9').

Title Loaded From File

2018-03-09T14:41:31Z

Pepper8mind:

17G) and with a tiny distal [http://05961.net/comment/html/?408818.html 3B Truncatoflabellum pusillum Cairns, 1989b: 71_72, Table 6, pl. 37a .--Cairns and Keller] indentation near apical spine (arrow in Fig. 18B, C, E)...........................................................................................................Carlos Molineri et al. / ZooKeys 478: 45?28 (2014)?2 ?Disk like structures on the equatorial area nearly touching each and every other, maximum separation about 0.3 or less of maximum width of a disk (Fig. 18A, D).... ...................................................................................... A. curtus / A. hubbardi Having a group of 2? extremely small 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 identified, virtually undistinguishable, the characters below must be confirmed using the study of much more material) 1 ?2 ?Around the inner margin of left mandibular tusk, the space in between the subbasal and also the submedian tubercles is short and strongly concave (Fig. 14A); right mandible with distal corner of mola strongly protruding ................A. curtus Around the inner margin of left mandibular tusk, the space amongst the subbasal plus the submedian tubercles is longer and straighter (Figs 14B ); appropriate mandible with distal corner of mola not strongly protruding ......................two 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 ) ................................................3 Penes long, apical spine slightly marked, median remnant of styliger plate projecting laterally (Fig. 17E ) ..................................................A. guarani Penes short, apical spine well marked, median remnant of styliger plate standard (Fig. 17C) .......................................................................... A. hubbardi FW 9.5?0.1; penile lobe strongly widened basally (ratio length / basal width = 2.9, Fig. 17G) and having a little distal indentation close to apical spine (arrow in Fig. 17G)................................................................................. A. magnus FW 7.0?.five mm; penile lobe not so wide in the base (ratio length / basal width = four.0?.0, Fig. 17D); without apical indentation as above .............A. angelaeFemale and eggs of Asthenopus species are strongly similar. They might be identified by comparison with co-occurring males. Nonetheless the eggs extracted from female adults or mature nymphs may well be keyed as follows: 1 Disk like structures on the equatorial location comparatively effectively separated from every other, separation about 0.6 or additional of maximum width of a disk (Fig. 18B, C, E)...........................................................................................................Carlos Molineri et al. / ZooKeys 478: 45?28 (2014)?two ?Disk like structures around the equatorial region nearly touching every other, maximum separation about 0.3 or much less of maximum width of a disk (Fig. 18A, D).... ...................................................................................... A. curtus / A. hubbardi With a group of two? very smaller disks beneath each disk like structure (Fig. 18C) ............................................................................................A. guarani Only smooth chorion under the disk like structures (Fig. 18B, E) ................ ................................................................................ A.

N Fig. 15B); tarsal claw comparatively huge and stout having a

2018-03-08T14:17:03Z

Pepper8mind: Створена сторінка: The genus Asthenopus has been distinguished by means with the following characters (Dom guez 1988): 1) ratio foreleg/FW male: 3/5?/5; two) male foretarsus two.5...

The genus Asthenopus has been distinguished by means with the following characters (Dom guez 1988): 1) ratio foreleg/FW male: 3/5?/5; two) male foretarsus two.5 occasions longer than foretibia; 3) foretarsal segment 2 equivalent to 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; 6) ICu2 ending at anal margin or within the tornus, 7) marginal intercalary veins absent; 8) forceps ratio width/length: 1/7; 8) penes [http://www.medchemexpress.com/Pleconaril.html Win 63843 clinical trials] 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 lowered in size, double, each portions subequal in length and width. Gills II II properly developed, ventral portion smaller than dorsal portion; tergum X with effectively developed ventral spine on posterior margin (not visible dorsally, Fig. 15E). Caudal filaments brief (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 implies with the following characters (Dom guez 1988): 1) ratio foreleg/FW male: 3/5?/5; 2) male foretarsus 2.5 occasions longer than foretibia; three) foretarsal segment 2 equivalent to the other individuals, 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; six) ICu2 ending at anal margin or inside the tornus, 7) marginal intercalary veins absent; eight) 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 similar in length, not fused; 13) foretarsal claws of male not so expanded distally (as in Asthenopodes). Our phylogenetic analyses only recovered some 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 benefits. Priasthenopus gilliesi resulted sister for the Povilla-Asthenopus clade, presenting some plesiomorphic character states shared with Asthenopodes. Essential towards the species of Asthenopus Male 1 ?Penile lobe (distad to basal thumb) with 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 very stout (ratio length/ basal width = 4.7?.0) ...........................................................2 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.2?.0) ......................................................................................................Phylogeny and biogeography of Asthenopodinae using a revision of Asthenopus...Figure 16. Asthenopus fore (FW) and hind wings (HW) of male imago.