Chagasia bonneae Root, 1927

Harbach, Ralph E. & Howard, Theresa M., 2009, Review of the genus Chagasia (Diptera: Culicidae: Anophelinae), Zootaxa 2210, pp. 1-25 : 13-15

Chagasia bonneae Root, 1927

bonneae Root, 1927: 474 (3 Ƥ L* P*), holotype 3LePe: Dam, Suriname (USNM).

Diagnosis. The adults of Ch. bonneae are distinguished from those of other species of Chagasia as follows: front of anterior promontory with yellow scales contiguous and well contrasted with dorsocentral scales (distinction from Ch. fajardi ); acrostichal scales all pale ( Fig. 3 A) (distinction from Ch. ablusa , Ch. fajardi and Ch. rozeboomi ); without short line of pale scales on mesal margin of supraalar scales (distinction from Ch. fajardi ); veins of wing with mixture of dark and pale scales (distinction from Ch. ablusa , Ch. fajardi and Ch. rozeboomi ); hindtibia with distinct semi-erect clusters of dark scales (as in Fig. 4 A) (distinction from Ch. fajardi and Ch. rozeboomi ); hindtarsomeres 2–5 without postbasal dark band (distinction from Ch. bathana ), basal pale band of hindtarsomere 2 relatively short, 0.90–1.53 (mean = 1.24) length of apical dark band, hindtarsomere 5 with line of dark scales on distal 0.7 of ventral surface (unique) ( Fig. 5 B). Males have many stout specialised setae on the dorsomesal prominence of the gonocoxite and setae are absent from the claspette ( Fig. 1 C) (distinctions from Ch. ablusa , Ch. fajardi and Ch. rozeboomi ). Larvae have long setae 5- and 7-C (distinction from Ch. rozeboomi ); seta 5-C is inserted more or less in line with base of antenna, its rachis extends forward to a point about halfway to the insertion of seta 4-C and the distance between the insertions of the 2 seta 5-C is greater than the distance between the insertions of setae 5- and 7-C (distinctions from Ch. ablusa ); seta 11-C is about as long as seta 13-C and the antenna (distinction from Ch. ablusa , Ch. bathana and Ch. rozeboomi ); seta 15-C is short and multiple branched and extends only about halfway to seta 14-C (distinction from Ch. ablusa , Ch. bathana and Ch. rozeboomi ); and seta 1-P has long aciculae that arise near the middle of each primary branch (distinction from Ch. rozeboomi ). Pupae are easily recognised by the presence of a unique ligulate process that emanates from the rim of the trumpet.

Etymology. Although there is no specific dedication to Johanna Bonne-Wepster, there is no doubt that this species was named in her honour ( Kitzmiller, 1982). Mrs Bonne-Wepster and her husband Prof. Cornelis Bonne, both Dutch, jointly and separately published the results of fieldwork they conducted in Suriname and the East Indies.

Discussion. Based on overall similarity, Ch. bonneae appears to be more closely related to Ch. bathana than to the other species of Chagasia . They appear to be sister species. The adults are only distinguished by features of the hindtarsi (postbasal dark bands in Ch. bathana ; a ventral line of dark scales on tarsomere 5 in Ch. bonneae ) and larvae are difficult to distinguish despite the differences noted in the keys below. Pupae of Ch. bonneae are easily recognised by the presence of the ligulate process that projects from the rim of the trumpet.

Distribution. Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, French Guiana, Guyana, Peru, Suriname and Venezuela.

Material examined. Three hundred and twenty-two specimens: BRAZIL, Mato Grosso, Aripuan (1Ƥ); Pará, Marabá (1Ƥ), Gnania (1Ƥ); Rondonia, Costa Marques (15Ƥ, 73, 14Le, 19Pe, 8L). COLOMBIA, Meta, Villavicencio (9Ƥ, 63, 63G, 12Le, 11Pe, 4L); unknown locality (10Ƥ). ECUADOR, Nepo, Coca (1Ƥ), Tena (3Ƥ); Pastaza, Santa Ana (1Ƥ). FRENCH GUIANA, Guyane, Cayenne (1Ƥ). GUYANA, unknown locality (1Le, 1Pe). PERU, Huánuco, Cochicote (6Ƥ), Tingo María (4Ƥ, 23); Junín, Satipo (94Ƥ, 83, 43G, 1 0 L e, 18Pe, 1L, 1P); Madre de Dios, Pakitza (12Ƥ, 73, 23G, 10Le, 10Pe, 1L).

Literature. Bonne, 1923: 112–114 (as farjardi, 3*); Root, 1922: 382, 384, 387–89, 392 (as fajardoi , L*); Root, 1923: 266, 270, 271 (as fajardoi , 3*); Bonne & Bonne-Wepster, 1925: 544–546 (as farjardi, Suriname, 3* Ƥ L*); Dyar, 1928: 428, 432–433 ( Suriname, 3* Ƥ L*); Shannon, 1931: 152, 153 (taxonomy); Edwards, 1932: 32 (type data); Senevet, 1934: 67 (P key); Antunes, 1937: 79, 84 ( Colombia, Ƥ); Pinto, 1939: 305 (3*); Gabaldon et al., 1940: 58, 60, 61 (A L P*); Floch & Abonnenc, 1942: 1–3 ( French Guiana, Ƥ*); Simmons & Aitkin, 1942: 39, 41, 48, 54, 62–63 (3 Ƥ L keys, distribution, bionomics); Cerqueira, 1943: 16 ( Bolivia, collection record); Gast Galvis, 1943: 5, 8, 9, 19 ( Colombia, 3 Ƥ L); Russell et al., 1943: 35, 39, 42 (Ƥ L, bionomics, distribution); Causey et al., 1945: 341, 344–346, 348 ( Brazil, 3 Ƥ L*); Causey et al., 1946: 25, Fig. 4 ( Brazil, 3*); Deane, L.M. et al., 1946: 9, 16, Figs 59, 62, 62a ( Brazil, Ƥ*); Deane, M.P. et al., 1946a: 40, 44, Figs 17, 19, 22 ( Brazil, L*); Deane, M.P. et al., 1946b: 360, 366, Figs 17, 19, 22 ( Brazil, L*, identification); Deane, L.M. et al., 1948: 831, 832, 930–931, 933, 937, 945, 946, 949, 951 ( Brazil, bionomics); Rachou, 1948: 715–717 ( Brazil, distribution, L identification); Floch & Abonnenc, 1951: 5, 22, 23–27, 78, 81, 85 ( French Guiana, 3* Ƥ* L*, distribution, keys); Levi-Castillo, 1951: 79 (list); Gabaldon & Cova-Garcia, 1952: 179, 197, Fig. 8G ( Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Guyana); Lane, 1953: 140, 144–146 ( Colombia, Peru, Suriname, 3* Ƥ L* P*); Horsfall, 1955: 41 (distribution, L, bionomics); Senevet, 1958: 8 (catalogue); Stone et al., 1959: 10 (catalogue); Cova-Garcia, 1961: 181–183 ( Venezuela, A, identification); Villanueva Rodriguez, 1961: 219–223 (as bathanus , Peru, L, collections, bionomics); Forattini, 1962: 306, 469 (distribution, A L keys); Deane, L.M. et al., 1968: 338, 339, 340 ( Brazil, Ƥ, bionomics); Ferreira Neto et al., 1970: 171, 172, 174 ( Brazil, Ƥ, bionomics); Forattini et al., 1970: 20 ( Brazil, Colombia, collection); Deane, L.M. et al., 1971: 316, 317 ( Brazil, Ƥ, bionomics); Knight & Stone, 1977: 68 (catalogue); Heinemann & Belkin, 1978b: 412, 437 ( French Guiana, collection record); Heinemann & Belkin, 1978c: 532, 537 ( Colombia, collection record); Heinemann & Belkin, 1979: 65, 80, 97, 107 ( Brazil, Ecuador, collection records); Wilkes & Charlwood, 1979: 137, 138 ( Brazil, Ƥ, gonotrophic cycle); Wilke et al., 1980: 587 ( Bolivia, Brazil, collection data); Roberts et al., 1981: 383, 384, 385 ( Brazil, A, bionomics); Hayes et al., 1987: 420, 421 ( Peru, Ƥ, bionomics); Lourenço de Oliveira, 1989: 394, 395, 396 ( Brazil, A, bionomics); Guimarães, 1997: 30 (catalogue); Harbach & Kitching, 1998: 343, 367; Ianelli et al., 1998: 199, 200 ( Brazil, Ƥ, bionomics); Lourenço-de-Oliveira & Luz, 1998: 690, 691, 692 ( Brazil, A, bionomics); Reinert, 1999: 77 (P); Forattini, 2002: 194, 195, 241 (A, L, distribution).

Figures

FIGURE 1. Pupa and male genitalia of Chagasia bonneae: A, pupa, left side of cephalothorax, dorsal to right; B, pupa, dorsal (left) and ventral (right) aspects of metathorax and abdomen; C, male genitalia, aspects as indicated. Ae, aedeagus; Cl, claspette; CT, cephalothorax; Gc, gonocoxite; Gs, gonostylus; Pa, paddle; T, trumpet; I – IX = abdominal segments I- IX; 1 – 14 = setal numbers for specified areas, e. g., seta 3 - I. Scales in mm.

FIGURE 3. Scutum (dorsal view) of (A) Chagasia bonneae and (B) Ch. fajardi. The acrostichal scales (red arrows) are entirely pale in Ch. bonneae and dark posteriorly in Ch. fajardi (some scales have been lost in specimen shown); pale para-supraalar scales (yellow arrows), absent in the former species, are often present in the latter species. Note that the dorsocentral scales on the anterior promontory are distinctly yellow in Ch. bonneae but more or less unicolorous with the other dorsocentral scales in Ch. fajardi.

FIGURE 4. Hindtibia (anterior view) of (A) Chagasia ablusa and (B) Ch. fajardi showing the presence and absence of semi-erect clusters of dark scales, respectively.

FIGURE 5. Hindtarsus (anterior view) of (A) Chagasia bathana, (B) Ch. bonneae, (C) Ch. fajardi, (D) Ch. ablusa and (E) Ch. rozeboomi.