Відмінності між версіями «N Fig. 15B); tarsal claw somewhat massive and stout having a»

Поточна версія на 20:37, 29 березня 2018

The genus Asthenopus has been distinguished by means of the following characters (Dom guez 1988): 1) ratio foreleg/FW male: 3/5?/5; two) male foretarsus 2.five times longer than foretibia; 3) foretarsal segment 2 comparable for the other people, 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; 6) ICu2 ending at anal margin or in 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 comparable 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 two). The proposal of fnins.2013.00251 Dom guez (1988) and Hubbard Dom guez (1988) concerning the intermediacy of Priasthenopus gilliesi with respect to Asthenopus curtus and Asthenopodes order AUY922 picteti is in concordance with our outcomes. Priasthenopus gilliesi resulted sister to 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) using a similar width along its length, basal thumb separated by a wide furrow (Figs 17A , E ); fnhum.2013.00686 forceps really 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 = 6.two?.0) ......................................................................................................Phylogeny and biogeography of Asthenopodinae having 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 (specifics) HW J A. angelae (from Argentina) FW HW. Ephoron sp.: L male HW (x.i. = additional intercalary). Baicalein 6-methyl ether cost Stereomicroscope photographs (except L line drawing).two ?three ?4 ?Apical spine of penes lengthy and acute (F.N Fig. 15B); tarsal claw fairly huge and stout using a row of marginal denticles (Fig. 15G). Leg II (Fig. 15C): smaller, with thinner femora, with scattered extended 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, having a distal brush of thick setae (arrow in Fig. 15C); tarsal claw relatively smaller, without denticles. Leg III (Fig. 15D, F): as leg II except bigger 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 without the need of distal brush. Coxae I and II directed ventrally, coxae III directed laterally. Abdomen. Gill I decreased in size, double, each portions subequal in length and width. Gills II II well created, ventral portion smaller than dorsal portion; tergum X with well 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).