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

The genus Dom guez 1988a: 24; Hubbard and Dom guez 1988: 207; Dom guez 1989a: 173 (described Asthenopus has been distinguished by signifies with the following characters (Dom guez 1988): 1) ratio foreleg/FW male: 3/5?/5; 2) male foretarsus 2.5 instances longer than foretibia; three) foretarsal segment two equivalent 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 within the tornus, 7) marginal intercalary veins absent; eight) 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). 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 created 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 suggests of 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 two similar to the others, 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 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 2). The proposal of fnins.2013.00251 Dom guez (1988) and Hubbard Dom guez (1988) regarding the intermediacy of Priasthenopus gilliesi with respect to Asthenopus curtus and Asthenopodes picteti is in concordance with our final results. Priasthenopus gilliesi resulted sister towards the Povilla-Asthenopus clade, presenting some plesiomorphic character states shared with Asthenopodes. Important for the species of Asthenopus Male 1 ?Penile lobe (distad to basal thumb) having a comparable width along its length, basal thumb separated by a wide furrow (Figs 17A , E ); fnhum.2013.00686 forceps quite 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 comparatively slender (ratio length/ basal width = 6.2?.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.