Hiranetis atra Stal , 1872

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 : 94-101

Taxon classification Animalia Hemiptera Reduviidae

Hiranetis atra Stal, 1872 Figures 1-5, 6-10, 11-13, 14-17

Hiranetis atra Stål, 1872: 82-83 [description]; Lethierry and Severin 1896: 178 [catalog]; Wygodzinsky 1949: 40 [catalog]; Maldonado 1990: 218 [catalog]; Gil-Santana et al. 2013: 348 [citation]; Gil-Santana 2015: 36 [citation].

Notes.

Hiranetis atra was first described based on one or more female specimens from Bogotá, Colombia ( Stål 1872), without any further descriptions of the species. It is noteworthy that although the type locality of Hiranetis atra might really be “Bogota”, it is possible that the real locality of collecting of the specimens had been different. In the 19th century, “Bogotá” was just the shipping denomination for the commercial trade, including specimens going to Europe ( Forero 2006).

Although no figures of Hiranetis atra have so far been published, the Swedish Royal Natural History Museum (NRM) has made photos of its type available, and these can be freely accessed at: http://www2.nrm.se/en/het_nrm/a/hiranetis_atra.html.

Based on these photos, Gil-Santana (2015) stated that Hiranetis atra would have very small yellowish markings like dots in hemelytra, at a site where some other wasp-mimicking Harpactorini have larger yellowish ‘pterostigmata’.

However, Dr Gunvi Lindberg (NRM) subsequently provided new figures (Figs 1-2) and the information that both “type” and the “paratype” of Hiranetis atra have hemelytra completely dark. It seems that the apparent small dot on the hemelytra is likely to be some form of fouling, like mycelium.

On the other hand, because the original description ( Stål 1872) did not mention the number of types or designate a holotype, as was generally done at that time, it is better to consider all the type specimens to be syntypes.

In addition to the male and female from Costa Rica that are described below, an additional female from Ecuador (Figs 3-4) was examined at ZMHB, where it is deposited.

Material examined.

One male and one female, each with a green label with the same information: " Museum Paris, Costa Rica, Paul Serre, 1920" (MNHN). One female, labels: Hiranetis atra Stål / Balzapamba, (Ecuad.), R.Haensch S. / Hiranetis atra Stål, Breddin det. / k[?]olle v. [green label] (ZMHB).

Diagnosis.

Hiranetis atra can be readily separated from other species of the genus by its general coloration, which is mostly blackish, especially the hemelytra, which are completely dark (Figs 1-3, 5-6), while the other species have the pattern of yellowish or straw-colored hemelytra, with a median transverse band and dark apex.

Description.

MALE. Figures 6-17. Measurements (mm): Total length: to tip of abdomen: 12.1; to tip of hemelytra: 16.2; head: total length (lateral view): 1.9; maximum width across eyes: 1.9; interocular space: 1.0; antennal segments: I: 5.5; II: 1.7; III (very bent; approximately): 6.9; IV: 2.0; labium segments: II [first visible]: 1.4; III: 1.1; IV: 0.3. Thorax: pronotum: fore lobe length: 0.7; hind lobe: length: 2.0; width at posterior margin: 2.8. Legs: fore legs: femur: 5.4; tibia: 5.5; tarsus: 0.7; mid legs: femur: 4.8; tibia: 6.2; tarsus: 0.7; hind legs: femur: 6.5; tibia: 9.1; tarsus: 0.8. Abdomen: length: 6.3; maximum width: 2.3. Coloration: general coloration black (Fig. 6). Head, including antennae and labium, blackish, eyes brownish-black. Thorax blackish, with exception of metanotum, which is reddish-brown. Hemelytra blackish. Legs mostly blackish; fore femur with dorsal surface, except at base and extreme apex, pale yellowish, and with a lighter-colored subbasal portion ventrally; mid and hind femora with yellowish annulus situated somewhat distally to their midportion (Fig. 6). Abdominal segments II and III (first two visible) reddish; sternite IV almost completely reddish, except on posterolateral portion, including connexivum at this area, where it is blackish; sternite V mostly reddish but blackish on posterior and lateral portion, including connexivum. Tergites IV and V, and remaining segments, including pygophore and parameres, blackish. Structure and vestiture: Integument mostly shiny, smooth. Head gibbous, large, as long as wide across eyes; integument shiny, with sparse long and short, straight or somewhat curved blackish setae; the latter much denser, forming pubescence of long blackish thick setae on postocular portion and gula; almost completely glabrous between eyes. Labium curved, with scattered and somewhat curved blackish setae. Antennal segments I and II straight, the former approximately three times longer than head, with shiny and smooth integument and sparse short darkened setae; segments II-IV with opaque and somewhat rugose integument; segment II, except at basis, covered with very numer ous darkened short setae, with some longer intermixed setae and some very thinner elements at distal portions (interpreted as trichobothria); segment III thickened in basal half, curved; III and IV covered with dense, very short and somewhat lighter-colored pubescence, with short darkened setae scattered on segment III and few of these on segment IV; the latter is thinner than the other segments and moderately curved. Postantennal tubercles small and somewhat acuminate. Eyes globose, glabrous, projecting laterally, prominent in dorsal view, reaching dorsal margin of head at interocular sulcus in approximately its midportion; not reaching ventral margin of head, which is far from inferior margin of the eye. Interocular sulcus thin and moderately deep. Ocelli elevated, much closer to eyes than to each other. Collum thin. Thorax with shiny integument; prothorax covered with very numerous blackish thick setae on forelobe, anterior portions of propleura and hind lobe; the latter with sparse long setae at dorsal portion or, almost glabrous, except on midline, where thinner, somewhat shorter and light yellowish to whitish setae form a faint midlongitudinal line on hind lobe. Transverse sulcus not very deep, interrupted before middle by a pair of submedian shallow carina. Midlongitudinal sulcus on forelobe of pronotum becoming abruptly deeper at transverse sulcus to form a depression; posteriorly to the latter, a blunt short rounded prominence; disc of hind lobe smooth; lateral longitudinal sulci well marked at posterior half to posterior two-thirds of hind lobe of pronotum. Humeral angle elevated, rounded at lateral margin; median portion of posterior margin of pronotum with some long thin darkened setae. Scutellum elevated at disc, pointed posteriorly, with scattered thin dark long setae. Posterior portion of propleura, mesopleura, metapleura and thoracic sterna with long darkened setae, which are shorter and thinner at center of mesosternum and metasternum. Legs: coxae with numerous long dark setae on distal half, ventrally, and some longer thinner light-colored elements, while the basal third and lateral portions are almost completely glabrous; trochanters densely covered with long setae ventrally and with some scattered even longer thinner setae, which are lighter-colored on forelegs and dark on mid and hind legs. Fore femur subequally longer than head and pronotum together; all femora thicker basally and slightly subapically too, covered with scattered few long and strong dark setae and with a dense group of long and thick setae and some thinner and even longer setae on ventral portion of the basal enlarged portion of femora; these setae are lighter on fore femora and darker on the others. Fore tibiae somewhat curved, with uniform thickness, except at apex, which is somewhat enlarged, and where there is a dorsal spur and a mesal comb. Mid and hind tibiae straight and somewhat thickened at basal half. All tibiae with scattered long thick blackish setae; fore and mid tibiae covered with shorter dark setae on ventral surface, which become progressively more numerous towards apex, where they also covers lateral and dorsal surfaces; hind tibiae, except at base, densely covered with short dark setae, which are somewhat longer in the slightly enlarged basal half. Tarsi with moderately long dark setae. Hemelytra long, surpassing abdomen by about half length of membrane; corium with curved scattered adpressed short dark setae, which are much more numerous over costal and subcostal veins, becoming less numerous on distal half of corium, including over those veins; membrane glabrous. Abdomen: elongate; spiracles rounded; sternites with shiny integument and sparse long thin setae, which are light on reddish portions and dark on the blackish segments, and thicker, longer and more numerous on parts adjacent to genitalia and on the latter too. There is also a fusiform grouping of whitish minute short setae on midlateral portions of sternite V. MALE GENITALIA (Figs 7-17): pygophore: blackish, subpentagonal in ventral view, with a subtriangular rounded apex (medial process) (Fig. 7); lateral to the latter, a somewhat deep and rounded emargination (Fig. 8); between anterior and genital opening, a very well sclerotized bridge that has a conspicuous median dorsal rounded prominence; long, thick and dark setae ventrally (on exposed surface), somewhat more numerous on lateroapical portions. Parameres symmetrical, rod-like in shape; somewhat curved in basal half and straight towards apices, which are rounded, blackish, glabrous in basal two-thirds and with long setae in apical third; those at apicomedial margins even longer (Fig. 9). Phallus somewhat elongate when not inflated (Fig. 10); articulatory apparatus with basal plate arms and bridge narrow, forming a subrectangular set, except in apical portion, where the arms are curved (Fig. 11); basal plate extension (pedicel) moderately short, slightly expanded towards apex and somewhat more sclerotized than the arms and basal bridge (Fig. 11). Dorsal phallothecal plate weakly sclerotized, flat, suboval in shape, with numerous longitudinal thin grooves at apical half; apical margin almost transverse, straight (Fig. 12). Struts with curved lateral arms and parallel somewhat curved median arms which are expanded at apex into a pair of asymmetrical sub oval/subsquared structures; there is a medial bridge joining the bases of the latter (Figs 12-13). Endosoma wall mostly minutely spiny, with a small smooth semi-oblong dorsal prolongation at midportion (Figs 14-15). After endosoma extension, seven processes were observed: 1 - a larger U to M-shaped basal process formed by diffuse thickening (Fig. 14); 2 - a median subspherical process, situated between the upper arms of the basal process, formed by minute tooth-like thickenings (Figs 14-16); 3 - a pair of elongate apical-median flat, longitudinally striated and somewhat curved and moderately sclerotized processes, wrapped in a smooth portion (not minutely spiny, but with fine longitudinal grooves) of endosoma wall, all of which lying dorsally to the other subapical processes described next (Fig. 17); 4 - a pair of small sclerotized thickened curved processes, located below the next process (Fig. 15); 5 - a transverse thickening above the pair of processes described previously (Fig. 15). The spiny endosoma wall above the latter process has larger and more sclerotized elements (Fig. 15).

FEMALE (from Costa Rica): Measurements (mm): Total length: to tip of abdomen: 16.5; to tip of hemelytra: 21.0; head: total length (lateral view): 2.3; maximum width across eyes: 2.2; interocular space: 1.2; antennal segments: I: 6.3; II: 2.3; III-IV: absent; labium segments: II [first visible]: 1.6; III: 1.3; IV: 0.5. Thorax: pronotum: fore lobe length: 0.9; hind lobe: length: 2.5; width at posterior margin: 3.5. Legs: fore legs: femur: 6.0; tibia: 6.0; tarsus: 0.7; mid legs: femur: 4.9; tibia: 6.5; tarsus: 0.7; hind legs: femur: 7.2; tibia: 10.0; tarsus: 0.9. Abdomen: length: 9.5; maximum width: 3.8. Similar to male (Fig. 5). Anterior half of stridulitrum lighter-colored, reddish; sternite IV completely reddish; sternite V almost completely reddish, except on posterolateral portion, including connexivum in this area, where it is blackish; mid-anterior portion of sternite VI somewhat reddish.

Comments.

Since all the specimens studied here have hemelytra that are completely darkened without any yellowish markings (Figs 1-3, 5-6), the mistake in the statement of Gil-Santana (2015), who alleged the presence of small yellowish markings on the hemelytra, is confirmed. Because the features of females examined are in accordance with the description ( Stål 1872) and with those of the syntypes of Hiranetis atra (Figs 1-2), they were considered conspecific. Similarly, the male collected together with the female from Costa Rica was considered as belonging to the same species too. The variation in size, in which the male was shown to be smaller than the female measured here, may or may not be due to sexual dimorphism. This would be clarified if or when more specimens of both sexes are examined in the future. Additional data might also show whether the eyes of the males are or are not larger in this species, since it was not possible to ascertain this through the single observation made here. Although the third antennal segments were absent in the female that was directly compared with the male that had been collected together with it (from Costa Rica; Figs 5-6), the other females recorded here (Figs 1-3) show uniform thickness in this segment, while the male presented thickening in the basal half of this segment (Fig. 6). This form of sexual dimorphism has been recorded in several genera of Harpactorini ( Stål 1872, Champion 1898, Gil-Santana et al. 2013, Martin-Park et al. 2012) and in another species of Hiranetis , Hiranetis braconiformis ( Champion 1898). The minor differences in coloration between the male and female examined were probably due to intraspecific variation, as already recorded in other species of Hiranetis ( Spinola 1840, Herrich-Schäffer 1848, Champion 1898). On the other hand, they are in accordance with the Stål’s concise description of Hiranetis atra , including the coloration of the abdomen, which he defined as reddish in its basal half. The total length (measured to the tip of the abdomen) of the female described by Stål was 22 mm, i.e. very similar to that of the female specimen examined here (21 mm).

The importance of the male genitalia for distinguishing species within Harpactorini genera has previously been recorded, e.g. in Aristathlus Bergroth, 1913 ( Forero et al. 2008), Atopozelus Elkins, 1954 ( Elkins 1954a), Atrachelus Amyot & Serville, 1843 ( Elkins 1954b), Ischnoclopius Stål, 1868 ( Hart 1975) and Zelus Fabricius, 1803 ( Hart 1972, 1986, 1987, Zhang 2012). For the latter, which is a very speciose genus, studying the male genitalia for taxonomic purposes was shown to be so important that "while males of most species [of Zelus ] can be readily identified based on characters of the genitalia, identification of females is less straightforward" ( Zhang 2012). In all of these studies, the main structures that were shown to be important or that had attributes at a specific level were the medial process of the pygophore, the dorsal phallothecal plates and the struts. The endosoma contents, such as its processes, were not examined or recorded in most of these studies. Although other authors have provided records regarding endosomal structures, most of these studies relate to a single species or very few species in different genera of Neotropical Harpactorini , e.g. Aristathlus spp. ( Forero et al. 2008), Graptocleptes bicolor ( Gil-Santana et al. 2013) and Pronozelus schuhi Forero, 2012 ( Forero 2012). This impedes comparative appraisal between the studies for taxonomic purposes.

There are no previous studies describing the male genitalia of any species of Hiranetis , but there is one study on a species of Graptocleptes ( Graptocleptes bicolor ; Gil-Santana et al. 2013). This genus has been considered to be closely related to Hiranetis ( Stål 1872, Champion 1898, Gil-Santana 2015). The male genitalia of Hiranetis atra showed similarities to those of Graptocleptes bicolor , such as: pygophore with a subtriangular rounded apex (medial process); parameres similar in shape and somewhat similar in vestiture; dorsal phallothecal plate suboval in shape, with apical margin almost transverse, straight; and endosoma wall mostly minutely spiny. On the other hand, the shape of the struts is quite different, and the pattern observed in Hiranetis atra (Figs 12-13) may possibly be revealed as characteristic of this species, since the struts pattern has been shown to be useful with regard to the taxonomy of other Neotropical Harpactorini (e.g. Hart 1972, 1986, 1987, Zhang 2012). Interestingly, however, asymmetry on the apical portion of the median arms of the struts was recorded in the present study (Figs 12-13). No similar previous record could be found. If more specimens were to be observed in the future, it would be possible to ascertain whether this was an isolated anomaly or a real feature of the species. Thus, at least for the moment, and as stated in all the studies previously cited, the features of the male genitalia of Hiranetis atra that should specially be taken into consideration for future comparative purposes are the subtriangular rounded medial process of the pygophore (Fig. 7), the suboval shape of the dorsal phallothecal plate, with an apical margin that is almost transverse (Fig. 12), and the shape and “design” of the struts (Figs 12-13).

Distribution.

Colombia ( Stål 1872, Maldonado 1990).

New records.

Costa Rica, Ecuador.