A) to Manaus (Brazil). Discussion. Significantly confusion exists inside the literature

curtus, with very wide forceps, extended penis lobes and slender and really acute apical spines, along with the more or significantly less uniform brownish mesothoracic coloration (an exception of this final character would be the males from Colombia-Leticia, a lot paler). The egg of A. curtus (Fig. 18A) is equivalent to that of A. hubbardi (Fig. 18D), inside the shape and relative significant size with the disk-like structures that leaves exposed only a reduced surface of smooth chorion. On the contrary the egg of A. angelae presents smaller disk-like structures having a bigger surface of smooth chorion amongst them (Fig. 18B). As the result with the present study, the female adult, egg, and nymphal stages are described here for the first time. Prior descriptions of female and nymphs within the literature had been carried out from specimens of A. angelae or other species but are certainly not useful to clearly distinguish the species.Phylogeny and biogeography of Asthenopodinae using a revision of Asthenopus...Figure 19. Povilla spp, SEM and light Ecular analysis of lipoxygenases related with nodule improvement in soybean. Mol microscope photographs. P. adusta: A male forewing B male hind wing C detail of keel geronb/gbp074 on female abdominal sternum eight (b = base, k = keel, s = socket) D male genitalia (mp = median remnant of styliger plate) E female abdominal sternum 8 (common view) G male genitalia (median remnant of styliger plate partially ):1493?04. 15. Park MY, Wu G, Gonzalez-Sulser A, Vaucheret H, Poethig RS. Nuclear broken and detached from suitable pedestal) H eggs and detail of chorion (LD = big disks). P. cf. heardi: j.addbeh.2012.10.012 F female abdominal sternum VIII J filaments surrounding the eggs inside female abdomen K eggs. Scale bar = one hundred , except Figure 1 (ten ).Carlos Molineri et al. / ZooKeys 478: 45?28 (2014)Asthenopus magnus sp. n. http://zoobank.org/70A79C87-DD63-4371-8085-7BD7B5E55C26 Figs 4C, 14C, E, G, I , 15A , 16C , 17G, 18E Asthenopus curtus, Dom guez 1989: 173; Dom guez et al. 2006: 561 (missidentification). Material. Holotype (IBN) male imago from Ecuador, Napo Province, Laguna Limon Cocha, 250 m, 6.iv.1984, E. Dom guez col.(aprox. S 0?4' - W 76?8').A) to Manaus (Brazil). Discussion. Much confusion exists within the literature concerning this species. Numerous authors mention A. curtus but from missidentified material. For example Ulmer (1942) described and illustrated (as A. curtus) a pair of males of Asthenopus angelae. The material from Ecuador studied by Dom guez (1988) proved to be a different but associated species (A. magnus sp. n.). Berner (1978) synonymized A. curtus with a. amazonicus, showing that the variations among each species were only attributable to sexual dimorphism, but he was operating having a. angelae males (de Souza and Molineri 2012). Nonetheless, Berner conclusions have been correct given that sexual dimorphism in FW venation is present in each species. Because it is impossible to assign any specimen to A. amazonicus, we favor to treat it as synonym of A. curtus, as Berner proposed. Essentially, only one particular specimen from earlier functions is positively determined as A. curtus: the kind, studied by Eaton (1883) and illustrated by Kimmins (1966). We add here some other records from the Amazonas River: a pair of males from Colombia, some reared nymphs from Brazil and Fittkau's slides at FAMU.