Craspedochaeta concinna (Williston, 1896)
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.1291.1.1 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:F7C11924-8B4C-475A-8A17-ECA5B8F5747C |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/039F8783-FFB3-CC75-FEC4-FEBBC5A5FC5A |
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
scientific name |
Craspedochaeta concinna |
status |
|
Craspedochaeta concinna group
This species group is defined solely on an absence of the prescutellar acrostichal bristles (character 3), which are also absent in C. festiva and several species in the C. biseta group. Craspedochaeta phaios and C. concinna are basal in the group because they lack banded wings (character 13), and these species plus C. fascipennis are basal because they have retained dark bristles (character 5).
There appear to be relatively few synapomorphies in the Craspedochaeta concinna group, making phylogenetic inference particularly difficult. Furthermore, because most of these characters are found only in the male, the females of most species may prove to be inseparable using conventional means. Conversely, females may be so highly autapomorphic that they may have been described as separate species, but this seems unlikely because most species are known only from males ( C. phaios , C. brunneivibrissa , C. biloba , C. chauliodon , C. loreto , C. pullipleura , C. xanthonotum and C. zongo ); only C. basalis and C. trivittata are known from females alone. If it were the case that females are practically inseparable, C. annulipes would most likely serve as the “dumping ground” for these specimens until more subtle autapomorphies are found, or until specimens are collected while copulating or emerging from a single brood.
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |