Gilliesia pulchra, Zhou, 2004
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.421.1.1 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:8A7D84FF-9A0B-44FE-8AE7-86D8036E7F85 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5236777 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03C9FD09-1353-FFBD-0871-F908FDF2F8F6 |
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
scientific name |
Gilliesia pulchra |
status |
sp. nov. |
Gilliesia pulchra View in CoL n. sp.
Male imago (in alcohol): body length 7.5 mm, fore leg 12.5 mm, fore wing 8.0 mm, hind wing 1.2 mm. Compound eyes dark basally and gray apically; antennae pale, ocelli pale apically with basal reddish ring. Vertex of head and pronotum pale. Mesonotum pale, with 2 pairs of brown round dots, one pair located near anterior margin, the other two near posterior margin. Wing base dark. Metanotum with yellowishbrown posterior margin. Forefemora washed with indistinct gray to brownish pigments in basal half, brown band in posterior 3 rd and apices brown; tibiae pale, brown at apices; tarsi pale. Mid and hindlegs pale, with femora pale yellow. Ratio of forefemora: tibiae: tarsi = 1.0: 1.5: 1.8, that of mid and hindlegs = 1.0: 1.5: 0.6; arrangement of foretarsal segments from longest to shortest 2, 3, 4, 5, 1. Forewing transparent, cross veins yellowishbrown, those in CSc, ScR 1 and R 1 Rs cells surrounded by dark reddishbrown clouds forming markings as shown in Fig. 1; MA fork asymmetrical, fork a little basal to middle of wing; MP 2 independent of vein MP 1 at base; two long intercalaries between CuA and CuP. Hind wing very small with distinct acute costal projection past middle of wing (Fig. 2). Abdominal terga 1–8 translucent white, terga 9–10 opaque, cream; tergum 9 with one pair of median longitudinal brown stripes; all terga with brown posterior margins. Caudal filaments pale. Genitalia (Fig. 3–4): basal segment of forceps much longer than apical segments, 2 nd segment distinctly broadened, apical segment smallest. Styliger plate with deep Ushaped median cleft. Penes tubelike, apical portion of each lobe bent laterally and then ventrally, apex of each penis lobe tapered.
Female imago (in alcohol): body length 8.5 mm, fore wing 10.0 mm, hind wing 1.5 mm. Body color darker than male. Vertex of head brown. Pronotum pale, with a transverse dark brown stripe on anterior margin and a pair of additional "X"shaped submedian dark marks. Meso and metanotum yellowishbrown, lateral and ventral parts of body pale. Forefemora yellowishbrown with brown apices, washed with irregular and unclear gray pigments in basal half, apices and subapices brown; tibiae and tarsi pale with apices of tibiae reddishbrown. Mid and hindlegs pale, femora pale yellow. Ratio of femora: tibiae: tarsi of forelegs = 1.0: 1.5: 0.9, of mid and hindlegs = 1.0: 1.25: 0.5. Abdomen yellowishbrown, terga 1–10 each with 2 pairs of longitudinal brown stripes, outer stripes broader than middle pair and incurved, meeting posteriorly (Fig. 5), posterior margins dark brown. Color pattern of wing similar to that of male, but crossveins darker, surrounded by reddishbrown pigments, more distinct than those of male. Sternum 7 slightly expanded posteromedially. Apex of sternum 9 with deep median cleft (Fig. 6).
Larva: unknown.
Diagnosis: In the males, Gilliesia pulchra n. sp. can be distinguished from G. hindustanica by the shape of the apex of the penis lobes: those of G. hindustanica are broad and those of G. pulchra n. sp. are tapered. Further, the tibiae of the forelegs are longer than femora and the tarsi are longer than the tibiae, but in G. hindustanica the tibiae are equal in length to the tarsi, which are about twice as long as the femora. Gilliesia pulchra n. sp. also lacks the brown median band on the forefemora and the apical femoral bands on the middle and hind legs of G.. hindustanica ( Gillies 1951) . In the females, G. pulchra n. sp. has yellowishbrown abdominal terga with distinct markings (Fig. 5) while G. hindustanica has a dark orange brown abdomen with pitch brown posterior margin on terga 1–8 ( Gillies 1951).
Etymology: The epithet of new species from pulcher (L., meaning beautiful), referring to the distinct and beautiful color pattern of the wings.
Material examined: Holotype male imago: P. R. CHINA: Chongqing municipality, HuangCaoPing, JingFuShan mountain, 29.00°N, 107.10°E, ca. 1,200 m alt., 3IX2000, leg. LI ChuangRen & ZHOU ChangFa GoogleMaps . Paratypes: 3 male, 1 female, 3 male subimagos, same data as the holotype GoogleMaps ; 2 male and 1 female subimagos, Guizhou Province, NanZhu forestry center, ChiShui City , 28.34°N, 105.42°E, 9VI1995, leg. SUN ChangHai & WANG BeiXing. All types deposited in Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing, China GoogleMaps .
Collection information: The holotype and paratypes from JingFuShan mountain were collected in a bamboo forest by sweeping vegetation during the day. The forest is beside a small stream (width 1–2 m, water current less 1 m /s, depth less than 30 mm), with a substrate of small stone and leaves.
Discussion: Previously, Gilliesia was known from northern India ( Gillies 1951, Peters & Edmunds 1970). The discovery of this genus in mainland China shows that the genus Gilliesia has much broader distribution than previously known. and extends to the east of the Himalaya Mountains.
R |
Departamento de Geologia, Universidad de Chile |
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |