Aneomochtherus africanus ( Ricardo, 1919 )
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5281/zenodo.7666136 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:5E567E59-041D-4F41-95FD-DCE4227CCAF8 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7666827 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/61467B0F-5346-171A-DC73-DFE5FC61FA46 |
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
scientific name |
Aneomochtherus africanus ( Ricardo, 1919 ) |
status |
|
Aneomochtherus africanus ( Ricardo, 1919) ( Figs 110–116 View Figs 110–116 )
Heligmoneura africanus Ricardo, 1919: 77–78 View in CoL .
Neomochtherus signatipes Lindner, 1955: 41–43 View in CoL . Syn. n.
Neomochtherus africanus View in CoL ; Tsacas, 1969: 6–7.
Aneomochtherus africanus ; Lehr, 1996: 78.
Aneomochtherus signatipes ; Lehr, 1996: 78.
Type material: Holotype: KENYA: 1^ [ africanus seen], 2^ paratypes [not seen], ‘ Magadi [01 ° 54'S: 36 ° 17'E], Brit. E. Africa, April 1912, FG Hamilton’ ( BMNH) GoogleMaps . Holotype: TANZANIA: 1ơ [ signatipes not seen], Ngaruka [= Nguruka 08 ° 07'S: 31 ° 02'E], 29 Jan–14 Feb 1952 ( SMNS) GoogleMaps .
Holotype designation: Although Ricardo (1919) did not designate a holotype as such, she only had three specimens, all female, one of which she designated (in her usual manner) as ‘Type’. There can be no confusion as to which specimen be considered the holotype. The other two specimens are therefore treated as paratypes.
Material examined: KENYA: 1ơ, 6 km S.W. Kampi-Ya-Samaki (Lk. Baringo), 00 ° 35'N: 36 ° 00'E, 1020 m, 31.v.1980, Lamoral; 3ơ, Rt. A 104, 15 km S.E. Nairobi [01 ° 17'S: 36 ° 49'E], 29.iv.–15.v.1991, Freidberg & Kaplan; 1ơ 2^, Rt. A 109, Athi River [02 ° 59'S: 38 ° 31'E], 30.iv.1991, Freidberg & Kaplan, Malaise trap GoogleMaps .
Type locality: Kenya, Magadi.
Comments: The literature relating to signatipes is confusing. Lindner (1955) apparently described the species on a single male from Ngaruka ( Tanzania) collected in 1952. Tsacas (1969), however, lists a holotype ơ and an allotype ^ from Mombassa ( Kenya) collected in 1922 (material I have not seen). Comparing the figures produced by Lindner and Tsacas suggests that two different species were involved.To add to the confusion, two other similar species, africanus and monobia , were known only from female specimens. With a few new records from Kenya and the collection of a good series of specimens from Mkomazi Game Reserve (northern Tanzania), close to the type locality of monobia (and with male genitalia similar to those figured by Tsacas for signatipes ), some clarity is now possible. I consider Lindner’s signatipes to be a synonym of africanus and Tsacas’ figures to represent monobia . The species is apparently confined to Kenya and northern Tanzania.
SMNS |
Staatliches Museum fuer Naturkund Stuttgart |
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 |
Aneomochtherus africanus ( Ricardo, 1919 )
Londt, Jason G. H. 2002 |
Neomochtherus signatipes
LINDNER, E. 1955: 43 |
Heligmoneura africanus
RICARDO, G. 1919: 78 |