Brueelia inusta, Gustafsson & Grossi & Halajian & Engelbrecht, 2024

Gustafsson, Daniel R., Grossi, Alexandra A., Halajian, Ali & Engelbrecht, Derek, 2024, New species and new records of Brueelia Kéler, 1936 (Phthiraptera: Ischnocera) from South Africa, Zootaxa 5446 (1), pp. 88-104 : 95-98

Brueelia inusta new species

( Figs 4 , 14 , 27–33 , 39–40 )

Type host: Ploceus velatus tahatali Smith, 1836 —Southern masked weaver.

Type locality: Old Herbarium , University of Limpopo, Limpopo Province, South Africa.

Diagnosis. In the key of Gustafsson et al. (2019a), males of B. inusta n. sp. key out to Brueelia sima Gustafsson et al., 2019a , based on the abdominal chaetotaxy, and females key out to Brueelia semiscalaris . However, the morphologically most similar species to B. inusta is B. oschadlei n. sp.; for characters separating these two new species, see above.

Brueelia inusta can be separated from Brueelia sima by the following characters: lateral margins of preantennal head more convex in B. inusta ( Fig. 29 ) than in B. sima ; proximal mesosome proportionately smaller and gonopore proportionately larger in B. inusta ( Fig. 31 ) than in B. sima ; parameres much elongated in B. inusta ( Fig. 32 ) compared to B. sima ; female vulval margin with only 1 vms on each side in B. sima , but with 4–6 vms on each side in B. inusta ( Fig. 33 ).

Brueelia inusta can be separated from B. semiscalaris by the following characters: head proportionately rounder and broader in B. inusta ( Fig. 29 ) than in B. semiscalaris ; female abdominal segments IV–VII with 2 ps on each side in B. semiscalaris , but with 1 ps on each side in B. inusta ( Fig. 28 ); dark pigmentation of male subgenital plate more extensive in B. inusta ( Fig. 4 ) than in B. semiscalaris ( Fig. 8 ); male parameres slender and elongated, about 2 times as long as mesosome, in B. inusta ( Fig. 30 ), but stouter, not elongated and less than 1.5 times as long as mesosome in B. semiscalaris ; proximal mesosome somewhat flattened and irregular in B. inusta ( Fig. 31 ), but gently rounded in B. semiscalaris ; female vulval margin more flattened in B. semiscalaris than in B. inusta ( Fig. 33 ), and with fewer vms (4–6) and vss (3–4) in B. inusta ( Fig. 33 ) than in B. semiscalaris (6–7 and 7–8, respectively).

Description. Head rounded triangular ( Fig. 29 ), lateral margins of preantennal area clearly convex, frons shallowly concave. Marginal carina slender, deeply displaced and somewhat widened at osculum. Ventral anterior plate small. Head chaetotaxy and pigmentation patterns as in Fig. 29 . Preantennal nodi broad. Preocular nodi larger than postocular nodi. Marginal temporal carina variable in width, with undulating median margin. Thoracic and abdominal segments, chaetotaxy, and pigmentation patterns as in Figs 27–28 .Anterior dark band of female subgenital plate continuous with central dark area. Male abdominal chaetotaxy: ss present on tergopleurites V–VIII; tps present on tergopleurites VII–VIII; psps present on tergopleurites VI–VII; aps present on tergopleurites VI–VII; ps present on segments IV–VIII. Female abdominal chaetotaxy: ss, tps, aps absent; psps present on tergopleurites VI–VII; ps present on segments IV–VIII. Proximal section of basal apodeme not clearly delimited and not illustrated; holotype ( Fig. 39 ) with genitalia everted and folded anteriorly, and basal apodeme thus slightly constricted compared to other males ( Fig. 30 ). Proximal mesosome trapezoidal, with irregular somewhat flattened, anterior margin ( Fig. 31 ). Mesosomal lobes convergent distally, with extensive rugose areas. Gonopore large, rounded. Penile arms not extended beyond distal margin of mesosome. Parameres elongated, sinuous, with pst1–2 as in Fig. 32 . Female subgenital plate rounded trapezoidal, with broad connection to cross-piece ( Fig. 33 ). Vulval margin rounded convergent to median point, with 4–6 short, slender vms and 3–4 short, thorn-like vss on each side; 2–4 short, slender vos on each side of subgenital plate; distal 1 vos on each side median to vss. Measurements are given in Table 1 .

Etymology: The species epithet derives from “ inustus ”, Latin for “burnt”, referring to the pigmentation patterns.

Type material. Ex Ploceus velatus tahatali : Holotype ♂, Old Herbarium , University of Limpopo, Limpopo Province, South Africa, 11 Sep. 2014, coll. A. Halajian, SAFRING BC09995 ( NMHL) . Paratypes: 1♀, same data as holotype ( NHML) . 1♂, 1♀, same data as holotype, SAFRING BB72401 ( NHML) . 1♂, 1♀, same data as holotype, SAFRING BB72402 ( NHML) . 1♂, 1♀, Polokwane Game Reserve, Polokwane, Limpopo Province, South Africa, 11 Feb. 2012, coll. A. Halajian, Pve-PGR2 ( NHML) . 1♀, same data as previous, Pve-PGR3 ( NHML) . 1♂, 1♀, same data as previous, SAFRING CV27561 , Pve-PGR4 ( NHML) . 1♀, University of Limpopo , Limpopo Province, South Africa, 28 Sep. 2012, coll. A. Halajian, SAFRING CV27571 , Pve-PGR11 ( NHML) . 1♂, 1♀, same data as previous, SAFRING CV27573 , Pve-PGR12 ( NHML) . 1♀, De Loskop , Limpopo Province, South Africa, 7 Dec. 2012, coll. A. Halajian, SAFRING CV27598 , Pve-PGR17 ( NHML) . 1♂, 1♀, same data as previous, SAFRING CV65202 , Pve-PGR 20 ( NHML).

Figures

FIGURES 1–10. Male subgenital plates of the species in the “African pied Brueelia” group, showing pigmentation patterns. 1, Brueelia aguilarae Gustafsson & Bush, 2017. 2, Brueelia cantans Sychra [in Sychra et al.], 2010b. 3, Brueelia oschadlei n. sp. 4, Brueelia inusta n. sp. 5, Brueelia mpumalangensis Gustafsson et al., 2018. 6, Brueelia ploceus (Lakshminarayana, 1968). 7, Brueelia quelea Sychra & Barlev [in Sychra et al.], 2010a. 8, Brueelia semiscalaris Gustafsson et al., 2019. 9, Brueelia sima Gustafsson et al., 2019. 10, Brueelia terpsichore Gustafsson et al., 2019. Note: Pigmentation patterns are variable and often asymmetrical, and the degree of darkness and colour differ among species. All setae have been omitted.

FIGURES 11–19. Female subgenital plates of the species in the “African pied Brueelia” group, showing pigmentation patterns. 11, Brueelia aguilarae Gustafsson & Bush, 2017. 12, Brueelia cantans Sycha [in Sychra et al.], 2010b. 13, Brueelia oschadlei n. sp. 14, Brueelia inusta n. sp. 15, Brueelia mpumalangensis Gustafsson et al., 2018. 16, Brueelia quelea Sychra & Barlev [in Sychra et al.], 2010a. 17, Brueelia semiscalaris Gustafsson et al., 2019. 18, Brueelia sima Gustafsson et al., 2019. 19, Brueelia terpsichore Gustafsson et al., 2019. Note:All illustrations are redrawn from their respective original descriptions. The pattern of the female subgenital plate of Brueelia ploceus (Lakshminarayana, 1968) is not available. All setae have been omitted.

FIGURES 27–28. Brueelia inusta n. sp. 27, male habitus, dorsal and ventral views. 28, female habitus, dorsal and ventral views.

FIGURES 29–33. Brueelia inusta n. sp. 29, male head, dorsal and ventral views. 30, male genitalia, dorsal view. 31, male mesosome, ventral view. 32, male paramere, dorsal view. 33, female subgenital plate and vulval margin, ventral view.

FIGURES 37–40. Male and female habitus showing pigmentation patterns. 37, Brueelia oschadlei n. sp. holotype male. 38, Brueelia oschadlei n. sp. paratype female. 39, Brueelia inusta n. sp. holotype male. 40, Brueelia inusta n. sp. paratype female.