Hiranetis braconiformis (Burmeister, 1835)

Gil-Santana, Helcio R., 2016, First description of the male of Hiranetisatra Stal and new country records, with taxonomic notes on other species of Hiranetis Spinola (Hemiptera, Heteroptera, Reduviidae, Harpactorinae), ZooKeys 605, pp. 91-111 : 102-104

Taxon classification Animalia Hemiptera Reduviidae

Hiranetis braconiformis (Burmeister, 1835)

Myocoris braconiformis Burmeister, 1835: 226 [description]; Burmeister 1838: 107 [redescription]; Stål 1866: 295 [citation]; Walker 1873b: 129 [catalog]; Wygodzinsky 1949: 40 [catalog].

Hiranetis braconiformis ; Stål 1859: 371 [citation]; Stål 1872: 82 [redescription]; Lethierry and Severin 1896: 178 [catalog]; Champion 1898: 281 [included comments on color and morphological features], Tab. XVII [Figures 8, 8a, 9]; Maldonado 1990: 218 [catalog]; Maldonado and Lozada 1992: 165 [citation]; Froeschner 1999: 206 [catalog]; Gil-Santana et al. 2013: 348 [citation].

Myocoris pompilodes Burmeister, 1838: 106 [description]; Champion 1898: 281 [as a junior synonym of Hiranetis braconiformis ].

Hiranetis pompilodes ; Stål 1859: 371 [citation]; Stål 1872: 82 [diagnosis]; Champion 1898: 281 [as a junior synonym of Hiranetis braconiformis ]; Wygodzinsky 1949: 40 [catalog, as a valid species].

Myocoris pompiloides [sic]: Walker 1873b: 129 [catalog]; Maldonado 1990: 218 [catalog, as a junior synonym of Hiranetis braconiformis ].

Hiranetis pompiloides [sic]: Lethierry and Severin 1896: 178 [catalog]; Maldonado 1990: 218 [catalog, as a junior synonym of Hiranetis braconiformis ].

Material examined.

Myocoris braconiformis , female, “typus”, labels: 2777 / Braconiformis , N., Stoll. Cim. t. 21.f.147 [green label] / Pará, Sieber [green label] / Typus [red label]; Myocoris pompilodes , female, “typus”, labels: 2771 / Pompilodes , N. [green label] / Cameta, Sieber [green label] / Typus [red label]; Myocoris pompilodes , male, “allotypus”, labels: 2771 / * Hiranetis pompilodes Burm., ♂, Allotypus / Cameta, Sieber [green label] / Allo-Typus [red label] (ZMHB).

The female “typus” of Hiranetis braconiformis (Burmeister), described from “Para” ( Burmeister 1835, 1838), is deposited in ZMHB (Figs 18-20). This region ( “Pará”) is today a state in the northern region of Brazil, within the Amazonian region of South America.

The female “typus” and a male “allotypus” of Hiranetis pompilodes (Burmeister), from “Cameta”, are also deposited in ZMHB (Figs 21-24). Because the original description ( Burmeister 1838) did not designate a holotype, it is better to consider all the type specimens to be syntypes. In the male type, the distal portion of the abdomen is missing (Fig. 23). Although Burmeister (1838) had mentioned that “Cameta” was in "South Brazil", the only locality with this name in Brazil is the municipality of “Cametá” in the same northern state of Pará, from which Hiranetis braconiformis was described. It is possible that all these specimens were collected in the same region ( Pará) and even during the same period, since on all the labels, the name “Cameta” was followed by the name “Sieber” and at least those of the female syntype were apparently handwritten by the same person (Figs 20, 22). As a matter of fact, Friedrich Wilhelm Sieber was a servant and preparator of Johann Centurius Count von Hoffmannsegg, who obtained permission from the King of Portugal to send him to Brazil to collect insects. Leaving Lisbon in 1801, Sieber went to the province of Pará, where he remained 12 years, collecting in different parts of this province, including Cametá ( Papavero 1971). Friedrich W. Sieber did not collect in other regions of Brazil and remained in Amazonia throughout this period ( Papavero 1971), which reinforces the preceding assertion.

All of these points may be important in ascertaining the type locality of these taxa and are particularly relevant because Hiranetis pompilodes was subsequently considered by Champion (1898) to be a junior synonym of Hiranetis braconiformis .

With the exception of the mention of the length, the descriptions of Hiranetis braconiformis and Hiranetis pompilodes emphasized only their coloration ( Burmeister 1835, 1838). Stål (1872) stated that the two taxa were very similar and Hiranetis pompilodes differed from Hiranetis braconiformis through the coloration of the thorax (blackish, except at its margin), coxae, trochanters and basal portion of fore femora (yellowish and not blackish).

Champion (1898) considered Hiranetis pompilodes to be a junior synonym of Hiranetis braconiformis . He reported that he had examined "a long series" of Hiranetis braconiformis , stating that it varied in "the colour of the pronotum and also to a certain extent in that of the femora. In many of the specimens the pronotum is entirely rufo-testaceous ( braconiformis , Burm.); but in others (...) it is partly or entirely black, the basal margin or a subtriangular patch on the disc behind being pale in some examples ( pompilodes , Burm.)." Champion (1898) also recorded variation in coloration of the femora, which are sometimes narrowly (fore femora) to broadly (mid and hind femora) black basally; "the hind pair have the apex broadly, and rarely a median ring, fuscous or black", while the mid femora are often infuscate apically. In his figures of a pair of this species, he highlighted the variation in color amongst specimens from the same locality.

The fact that Champion (1898) recorded the color variation among specimens from the same locality, which had been attributed by Burmeister (1838) and Stål (1872) to Hiranetis braconiformis and Hiranetis pompilodes , may be considered to be arguments in favor of both the historical evidence that the types of these taxa must have been collected in the same region (Brazilian state of Pará) and the assumption that they belong to the same species as stated by Champion (1898).

On the other hand, Champion (1898) apparently did not examine any type specimens of these taxa, or any specimen from Brazil. He also did not mention how many specimens formed his "long series", or whether there might be any other sexual differences besides the third antennal segment thickened at its base. Moreover, he did not take into account any features other than coloration when commenting on the synonymy between Hiranetis braconiformis and Hiranetis pompilodes .

Subsequently, Wygodzinsky (1949) still listed Hiranetis pompilodes as a valid species in his catalogue, while Maldonado (1990) considered it to be a junior synonym of Hiranetis braconiformis .

Distribution.

Brazil (state of Pará, Amazonian region) ( Burmeister 1835, 1838), Mexico, Guatemala, Costa Rica, Panama and Guyana ( Champion 1898).