Schizoptera (Odontorhagus) repetita McAtee and Malloch, 1925

Leon, Stephanie & Weirauch, Christiane, 2016, Scratching the surface? Taxonomic revision of the subgenus Schizoptera (Odontorhagus) reveals vast undocumented biodiversity in the largest litter bug genus Schizoptera Fieber (Hemiptera: Dipsocoromorpha), Zootaxa 4184 (2), pp. 255-284 : 278

publication ID	https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4184.2.2
publication LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:pub:5B8F792E-EEDB-494D-9EB3-48CA6174CC6E
DOI	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6066348
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/C66D8798-782F-591F-F6A0-FB73FA8DF849
treatment provided by	Plazi
scientific name	Schizoptera (Odontorhagus) repetita McAtee and Malloch, 1925
status

Treatment

Schizoptera (Odontorhagus) repetita McAtee and Malloch, 1925 View in CoL

( Figs 3 View FIGURE 3 and 7)

Schizoptera (Odontorhagus) repetita McAtee and Malloch 1925: 67 View in CoL , 17 (orig. descr.).

Diagnosis. Distinguished among species of Schizoptera (Odontorhagus) by the broadly ovoid body shape, the prominent fuscous patch covering more than 1/2 of the wing membrane, and the thin, tomahawk-shaped process of the subgenital plate.

Holotype: GUATEMALA: Izabal: Livingston , 15.8333 ° N 88.75 ° W, 0 4 May 1906, Schwarz & Barber, Holotype, 1Ƌ (00028606) ( USNM) GoogleMaps .

Re-description. Male: length: 1.5 mm; body broadly ovoid. COLORATION: general coloration dark brown; fuscous patch absent covering more than 1/2 of wing membrane; Sc+C distinctly lighter than remainder of hemelytra ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 ). SURFACE AND VESTITURE: as in subgeneric description. STRUCTURE: HEAD: slightly rounded in ventral view ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 ); eyes about 1/3 as wide as synthlipsis. THORAX: as in subgeneric description; hemelytron as in subgeneric description; M2 vein straight, anterior membranal cell triangular. ABDOMEN: as in subgeneric description; stVI with small, tooth-like process on posterior margin; subgenital plate weakly asymmetrical; process of subgenital thin and tomahawk-shaped.

Female: Unknown.

Distribution. Known only from the type locality ( Fig. 7).

Discussion. No specimens examined matched the description of this species, ventral images of the holotype are available, but the pointmout obscures the process of the subgenital plate; therefore our re-description is solely somatic. For an illustration of the subgenital plate of this species see McAtee and Malloch (1925) Figure 61.