Biguembia Szumik, 1997, 1998

Pereyra, Veronica, 2017, Gibocercus Szumik and Biguembia Szumik (Embioptera, Archembiidae): new species and the potentiality of female traits, Zootaxa 4317 (2), pp. 338-354 : 349

Biguembia Szumik, 1997

Biguembia Szumik,1997:149 ; Ross, 2001: 60 (genus composition); Szumik, 2002: 444 (family composition); Szumik, 2004: 229 (phylogeny); Szumik et al., 2008: 1003 (phylogeny); Szumik, 2012: 352 (family composition). Type species: Biguembia copo Szumik, 1997

= Aphanembia Ross, 2001: 64 ; Szumik, 2004: 229 (junior synonym of Biguembia ).

Diagnosis. LC1dp Strongly quadrate and flattened. 10Rp caudally extended aS an arm with a hunch on itS baSe. 10Lp with a Short baSe; tipS of 10Lp1 Similar in Shape, thin and tubular, inner tip more Sclerotized and with longitudinal keelS (See Szumik 2004).

Composition and distribution. In a cladiStic analySiS of the family Archembiidae ( Szumik 2004) Biguembia waS limited to four SpecieS: Biguembia copo Szumik, 1997 from the Dry Chaco region of Argentina; B. cocum Szumik, 1997 from the Pantanal region of Brazil; B. multivenosa from the Caatinga of Brazil and B. obscura from the Amazonian region of Peru and Brazil ( RoSS 2001). Two new SpecieS are deScribed from Brazil in thiS paper: B. mirador n. sp. from the Cerrado region and B. troncol n. sp. from Amazonia. AS with Gibocercus , the SpecieS of Biguembia are known from only a few localitieS and recordS ( Fig. 18 ).

Relationships. The cladiStic analySiS indicateS that Biguembia iS a monophyletic genuS Supported by Cua Vein completely deVeloped (ch. 40); LC2-LC1 almoSt with the Same length (ch. 52); LC1dp quadrangular and dorSally flattened (chS. 54 and 57); baSe of 10Rp1 with a conVexity (ch. 74), 10Rp1 with a longitudinal carinae (ch. 88); 10Lp hyperdeVeloped (ch. 91) and node of Lpp non caudally directed (ch. 93). The monophyly of the genuS iS well Supported ( Fig. 4 ) but there are two optimal reSolutionS for the relationShipS inSide the genuS ( FigS. 4 , 19, 20 ). B. copo , B. cocum and B. multivenosa appearS alwayS aS a monophyletic and well Supported group ( Fig. 4 ). The two reSolutionS differ alSo on the poSition of B. troncol and B. obscura . ThiS iS more a caSe of ambiguity and perhapS with additional data from femaleS thiS problem could be SolVed (from the Six known SpecieS four of them haVe unknown femaleS). Unlike Gibocercus , the Biguembia clade and the diStribution of itS SpecieS iS leSS clear. The apical clade of B. copo , B. cocum and B. multivenosa apparently haS a roughly South to eaSt diStribution ( Fig. 18 ) while the other three SpecieS at the baSe of the clade (not a monophyletic group) moStly haVe a weStern diStribution equiValent to the Cerrado with an eaStern extenSion repreSented by B. mirador ( Fig. 18 ).

Figures

FIGURE 4. Bremer support, Relative Bremer support and symmetric resampling. Asterisks (*) indicate junior synonyms.

FIGURE 18. Map with records for the six described species of Biguembia.

FIGURES 19 – 20. Two optimal resolutions for Biguembia.