Leurolophus Tuthill, 1942
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.1080/002229300299688 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:203D05D3-DED0-44D2-B749-1B877B2DEB05 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03ED87CC-FFB0-A670-FE6C-159DFF4DFA55 |
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
scientific name |
Leurolophus Tuthill |
status |
|
Leurolophus Tuthill View in CoL
L eurolophus Tuthill, 1942: 92 . Type species: L eurolophus vittatus Tuthill View in CoL , by original designation and monotypy
When adding L. inopinatus to the previously monotypic genus L eurolophus, Burckhardt (1989) noted some important di erences (head shape, presence of costal break and absence of cellular pattern on membrane in the forewing) to L. vittatus View in CoL , the type species. Despite these di erences, L. inopinatus was assigned to L eurolophus mostly on the basis of the paramere shape, and the egg which lacks an apical ®lament. Burckhardt and Lauterer (1989) recorded two specimens from Dominican amber which they referred to Tainarys View in CoL . The present improved material base suggests that head and forewing structure in the adults, and the position of the anus in the larvae de®ne L eurolophus and Tainarys View in CoL (cf. keys). The paramere shape is only super®cially similar, and presence or absence of an apical pedicel in eggs occur in other groups in closely related species (e.g. Aphalara, Burckhardt and Lauterer, 1997 View in CoL ).
Here we transfer L. inopinatus to Tainarys (see below), and the fossil species from Dominican amber to L eurolophus . The latter resembles L. vittatus in the head shape, whereas the paramere is lamellar and the male proctiger indistinctly 2-segmented resembling L. oriformae . As L. vittatus and L. oriformae , the amber species lacks a costal break, bears a cellular pattern on the forewing mebrane, and has stout legs.
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 |
Leurolophus Tuthill
Burckhardt, D. & Basset, Y. 2000 |
L eurolophus
TUTHILL, L. D. 1942: 92 |