Centroptella longisetosa Braasch & Soldan , 1980

Kluge, Nikita J., Godunko, Roman J. & Svitok, Marek, 2020, Nomenclatural changes in Centroptella Braasch & Soldan, 1980 (Ephemeroptera, Baetidae), ZooKeys 914, pp. 81-125 : 81

publication ID	https://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.914.46652
publication LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:pub:91B11F13-EF55-4E71-B0D6-4491942912DC
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/05AA0EB1-B63A-5978-A812-D879736A154C
treatment provided by	ZooKeys by Pensoft
scientific name	Centroptella longisetosa Braasch & Soldan , 1980
status

Treatment

Centroptella longisetosa Braasch & Soldan, 1980 Figures 19-32 View Figures 19–39 , 40-48 View Figures 40–48 , 49-52 View Figures 49–52 , 53-59 View Figures 53–59 , 60-76 View Figures 60–76 , 77-80 View Figures 77–80 , 81-82 View Figures 81–82

Centroptella longisetosa Braasch & Soldán, 1980: 123 (larva)

Cloeodes longisetosus : Waltz and McCafferty 1987a: 179 (lava); 1987b: 201, 206 (larva); Tong et al. 2003: 669 (larva, ♂ & ♀ imago)

Bungona (Centroptella) longisetosa : Salles et al. 2016: 104, figs 6B, C, K, 7F, 9C (larva, ♂ imago); Shi and Tong 2019: 572, figs 1-5 (larva)

Centroptella liebenauae Soldán, Braasch & Muu, 1987: 342 (partim: ♂ & ♀ imagines, ♂ subimago; non larva), syn. nov.

Chopralla liebenauae : Tong and Dudgeon 2003: 19 (comparison of ♂ imago)

Bungona (Centroptella) liebenauae : Salles et al. 2016: Appendix S3 (partim: imaginal characters 20-30 and 122-131)

Material examined.

Paratypes of Centroptella longisetosa (deposited in the Institute of Entomology, BC CAS, České Budějovice and Purdue University Entomological Research Collection, West Lafayette, Indiana, USA): mature female larva with labels: "CHINA, Liu Chiu, Kuj Fon Shan Mt., stream, 11.12.1959, leg. Ivan Hrdý”, " Centroptella longisetosa T. Soldán det. 1980", “HOLOTYPE” (now parts of this specimen are mounted on 2 slides, eggs mounted for SEM; one middle larval leg of another specimen, in the same tube (now treated by alkali and mounted on separate slide); one larva, Peoples Republic of China, Liu Chui, Kuj Fon Shan River, 11-12-1959, I. Hrdy, PERC-0063355.

Neotype and paratypes of Centroptella liebenauae (deposited in the collection of the Institute of Entomology, BC CAS, České Budějovice): one tube containing: 3 male imagines (one without genitalia), 1 male subimago, 1 female imago, 1 male larval exuviae (neotype) and 1 abdomen of female subimago extracted from mature larva, with labels: "VIETNAM, stream, Tam-Dao 60 km NW of Hanoi, 23-25.5.1982 T. Soldán”, " Centroptella , T. Soldán det. 1982" and “PARATYPE”; now larval exuviae (neotype) and parts of male imago and male subimago (one of which possibly was reared from the neotype) are mounted on slides.

Additional material.

INDIA, Tamilnadu, Tirunelveli District, Courtallam, Chittar River near Peraruvi (= Main Falls), 3-7.II.2013, coll. N. Kluge & L. Sheyko: 3 L-S-I♂, 1 L-S-I♀, 1 S-I♀, 1 L/S♂, 1 L/S♀, 1 larva of penultimate instar.

Descriptions.

Larva. Cuticular coloration. Head mostly brown (Fig. 55 View Figures 53–59 ); specimens from India mostly colourless, but with frons brown. Pronotum and mesonotum brown with diffuse lighter and darker areas (Fig. 53 View Figures 53–59 ). Thoracic pleura and metanotum partly brown, partly colourless; sterna colourless (Fig. 57 View Figures 53–59 ). Forecoxa colourless; middle and hind coxa laterally brown, medially colourless; femur of each leg light, with large, diffuse, brown macula on posterior surface; tibia of each leg light at middle, at base and apex diffusely tinged with brown; tarsus of each leg proximally brown, with gradation to colourless distally; claws colourless (Fig. 54 View Figures 53–59 ). Abdominal terga brown with lighter areas; some terga with light medioanterior sigilla; terga IV and VIII lighter than others (Fig. 57 View Figures 53–59 ). Caudalii colourless (Fig. 56 View Figures 53–59 ).

Shape and setation. Frontal suture short, nearly semicircular (Fig. 55 View Figures 53–59 ). Labrum equally wide at base and middle, with pair of submedian long setae, 3-4 pairs of sublateral long setae and pair of long setae between submedian and sublateral ones (Fig. 43 View Figures 40–48 ). Prostheca of left mandible with 3 blunt processes and 3 pointed processes (Fig. 40 View Figures 40–48 ). Prostheca of right mandible directed medially or medially-proximally, bifurcate, with branches diverging under acute angle and longest branch directed proximally (Fig. 41 View Figures 40–48 ). Maxillary canines and distal dentiseta stout; distal dentiseta widened, with apex somewhat hooked toward canines (Fig. 42 View Figures 40–48 ). Maxillary palp in specimens from China and Vietnam short, either 2-segmented, or indistinctly 3-segmented (Figs 46 View Figures 40–48 , 47 View Figures 40–48 ); in specimens from India long and distinctly 3-segmented (Fig. 48 View Figures 40–48 ). Labium with glossae and paraglossae subequal, both narrowed apically (Figs 44-45 View Figures 40–48 ). Glossa ventrally with irregularly arranged setae in proximal part and 4-6 setae forming ventro-median row. Paraglossa with latero-apical setae forming one regular row and few (2-4) setae just dorsal of it; with 4-6 setae in ventro-median row; with 3 setae in dorso-median row. Distal segment of labial palp widened apically (Fig. 45 View Figures 40–48 ).

All thoracic terga without protuberances. Metanotum with vestiges of hind protoptera (Fig. 54 View Figures 53–59 ; Tong et al. 2003: fig. 7). Femora of all legs equal, tibia and tarsus on foreleg longest, on hind leg shortest; on foreleg tarsus longer than tibia, on middle and hind legs tarsus shorter than tibia (Fig. 54 View Figures 53–59 ); in paratype length of femur / tibia / tarsus / claw of foreleg (mm) 0.75: 0.48: 0.54: 0.13; on middle leg 0.75: 0.47: 0.44: 0.13; on hind leg 0.75: 0.44: 0.41: 0.13. Femur parallel-sided; outer margin straight or slightly concave, apically with blunt-angled projection bearing two subapical setae; inner margin slightly convex (Fig. 54 View Figures 53–59 ). Outer side of femur with row of 5-7 long blunt setae and 2 subapical setae of same form (Fig. 49 View Figures 49–52 ). Inner-dorsal side of forefemur with few stout setae, these setae being half length of setae on dorsal side; middle and hind femora with minute setae only. Foreleg without patella-tibial suture, middle and hind legs with patella-tibial suture greatly shifted to apex of tibia. Posterior arm of U-shaped row of long setae on fore- and middle tibiae oblique and directed more longitudinally than transversely (Figs 49-50 View Figures 49–52 ); on hind leg longitudinally (Fig. 51 View Figures 49–52 ). Inner margin of tibia and tarsus with irregular, small, stout, pointed setae. Outer-apical seta of tibia blunt and elongate (Figs 49-51 View Figures 49–52 ). Dorsal side of each tarsus with long, fine setae, situated irregularly and partly forming two longitudinal rows. Claw without denticles.

Scales on abdominal terga and sterna numerous, short, semicircular, colourless and delicate (Figs 52 View Figures 49–52 , 60-76 View Figures 60–76 ). Posterior margin of abdominal tergum I smooth, without denticles; posterior margins of terga II-VI partly without denticles, partly with short semicircular and triangular denticles; terga VII-IX with longer, triangular denticles (Figs 60-68 View Figures 60–76 ); on tergum IX denticles located behind pair of submedian setae, smaller and denser than others (but row of denticles not interrupted at this place) (Fig. 68 View Figures 60–76 ). Posterior margin of tergum X with even row of small, narrow, pointed denticles (Fig. 52 View Figures 49–52 ). Posterior margins of abdominal sterna I-III smooth; posterior margin of sternum IV with few, minute denticles (Fig. 70 View Figures 60–76 ); posterior margins of sterna V-VIII with regular pointed denticles, increasing in length from sternum V to sternum VIII (Figs 71-74 View Figures 60–76 ). Posterior margin of sternum IX in female convex, with even row of triangular denticles (Fig. 75 View Figures 60–76 ), in male with narrow and dense denticles between protogonostyli and by sides of them (Fig. 76 View Figures 60–76 ). Each sternum IV-VI with pair of regular, transverse rows of long, fine, bifurcate setae with spaced sockets; other sterna either without such setae, or with few, smaller setae irregularly situated (Figs 57-58 View Figures 53–59 ). Paraprocts without anterior median apodeme, with many small, pointed denticles on posterior margin, with scales as on sterna and terga (Fig. 52 View Figures 49–52 ).

Tergalii apically pointed and sharply differentiated as follows: tergalius I lanceolate, slightly bent, widened at midlength, with apex stretched and narrowly pointed (Figs 19 View Figures 19–39 , 26 View Figures 19–39 ); tergalius II especially wide, widest at proximal half, with anal margin more convex than costal margin (Figs 20 View Figures 19–39 , 27 View Figures 19–39 ); tergalii III-VI with gradation of shapes (Figs 21-24 View Figures 19–39 , 28-31 View Figures 19–39 ); tergalius VII narrow, widest at distal half, with costal margin more convex than anal margin (Fig. 32 View Figures 19–39 ). Each tergalius II-VII, besides costal and anal ribs, with straight and narrow middle rib, located on dorsal surface on background of main trachea. Costal margin with poorly expressed serration (Fig. 25 View Figures 19–39 ); anal margin without serration; outer margin free of ribs, slightly notched, with small seta in each notch. Lateral side of each cercus with several long, pointed denticles on each 4th segment (Figs 56 View Figures 53–59 , 59 View Figures 53–59 ). Each cercus, besides regular row of primary swimming setae on inner side, with smaller and thinner secondary swimming setae on outer margin; on most part of cercus secondary swimming setae with wide transverse oval bases, forming regular row (Fig. 59 View Figures 53–59 ); on proximal 1/5 of cercus secondary swimming setae with small round bases and situated irregularly.

Male genitalia (examined in Indian specimen): In last larval instar, developing subimaginal gonostyli folded under larval cuticle in peculiar pose, with 3rd segments bent medially-proximally (Fig. 79 View Figures 77–80 ).

Subimago. Adequately described by Soldán et al. (1987). Additional details: On all legs of male and female, all tarsal segments entirely covered with pointed microlepides (as in Fig. 137 View Figures 133–137 ).

Imago, male. Adequately described by Soldán et al. (1987). Additional details: Length of femur, tibia and tarsal segments (mm) on foreleg 0.8: 1: 0.04: 0.55: 0.4: 0.21: 0.12, on hind leg 0.55: 0.54: 0.15: 0.09: 0.04: 0.1. Tarsus of middle and hind leg with one apical spine on initial 3rd tarsomere (next after 1st+2nd tarsomere) (as in Fig. 137 View Figures 133–137 ). Genitalia: Figs 77 View Figures 77–80 , 80 View Figures 77–80 . Sterno-styligeral muscle present. Area between unistyligers forms well-outlined, trapezoid, colourless plate with distal margin widest; distal margin shallowly convex at middle and shallowly concave laterally, forming well-expressed angles adjacent to unistyligers. Gonostylus with 1st segment short and conic; 2nd segment thickened toward apex; 3rd segment elongate, narrow and thickened toward apex, with proportions varying individually (Fig. 77 View Figures 77–80 ). Penial bridge medially with semicircular, sclerotized, colourless projection and with pair of small, oblique, arched, sclerotized ridges proximad of it. Gonovectes shallowly bent, narrowed toward apices.

Imago, female. Adequately described by Soldán et al. (1987). Additional details: Patella-tibial suture present on middle and hind legs, absent on forelegs (as in male). Tarsus of each leg with one apical spine on initial 3rd tarsomere (on foreleg-on tarsomere next after 2nd tarsomere, on middle and hind leg-on tarsomere next after 1st+2nd tarsomere) (as in Fig. 136 View Figures 133–137 ).

Eggs (extracted from mature female larva, paratype of C. longisetosa ). Oval, chorion with numerous irregular small protuberances (Figs 81 View Figures 81–82 , 82 View Figures 81–82 ).

Dimension.

According to original descriptions, specimens from Vietnam (type series of C. liebenauae ) smaller, 3.7-4.3 mm; specimen from China (type series of C. longisetosa ) larger, 3.9-5.2 mm.

Variability.

All 8 examined specimens from India have maxillary palp relatively long (about 0.8 of lacinia length), while specimens from China and Vietnam have maxillary palp shorter (0.5-0.6 of lacinia length, Figs 46-48 View Figures 40–48 ). In all other respects larvae from India have the same structure as larvae from China and Vietnam, and we were unable to find any differences between them, other than the size of maxillary palp. Imagines reared from larvae of the Indian form, are indistinguishable from imagines of the typical form, and have the same unusual styliger structure. Possibly, the examined specimens from India belong to a separate geographical form, which can be considered as a separate subspecies of the species C. longisetosa .

Remarks about descriptions and figures.

The original description of C. longisetosa contains some errors. Instead of foreleg ( Braasch and Soldán 1980: fig. 2, “Vorderbein”), middle leg is shown, as evidenced by the presence of the patella-tibial suture (Fig. 50 View Figures 49–52 ); the text also refers to the middle tibia ("Tibia ... wenig länger als der Tarsus"), while foretibia is shorter than tarsus (Fig. 54 View Figures 53–59 ). Tergalius of first pair is wrongly figured ( Braasch and Soldán 1980: fig. 5); probably, this drawing was made from tergalius of sixth pair (Fig. 30 View Figures 19–39 ). Labrum ( Braasch and Soldán 1980: fig. 8) has wrong shape and demonstrates posterior surface. Maxilla is wrongly drawn and characterized as "Maxille (Fig. 11 View Figures 1–15 ) apikal dreizähnig”; actually, it has four apical denticles, if one regards the first dentiseta to be one of these denticles (Fig. 42 View Figures 40–48 ).

Waltz and McCafferty (1987b) examined the paratype of C. longisetosa (see above) and wrote that "The secondary row of tibial setae as illustrated for C. soldani (figs 3i and j of Müller-Liebenau 1983) is not present in C. longisetosus contrary to the data indicated in table 2 of Müller-Liebenau 1983)". Probably, under the "secondary row" they mean that arm of the U-shaped tibial row, which is located on the posterior side of the tibia; this posterior arm is present in C. longisetosa (Figs 49-51 View Figures 49–52 ), as well as in all other Centroptella .

Tong et al. (2003) redescribed the larva of C. longisetosa and described its imagines. Their figures, including figures of tergalii III, V and VII agree well with the species described here, but tergalius I is figured incorrectly with a rounded apex ( Tong et al. 2003: fig. 8).

The larval metanotum is figured by Tong et al. (2003: fig. 7) with a vestige of hind protopteron; based on larvae from the same series, Salles et al. (2016: fig. 6K) figured it without these vestiges. In all eight larvae of the last instar examined by us, including a paratype of C. longisetosa and the neotype of C. liebenauae , vestiges of hind protoptera are present (Fig. 54 View Figures 53–59 ).

On the figure of male imaginal genitalia ( Tong et al. 2003: fig. 14), the trapezoid plate between unistyligers is correctly figured ventrad of the semicircular penial projection, but on the figure by Salles et al. (2016: fig. 9C), made from a specimen of the same series, this trapezoid plate is wrongly figured dorsad of the semicircular projection.