Minirhaphidophora Gorochov, 2002
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4853.2.5 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:D1AC7BC4-92B4-4B3D-9E0F-2BD6FE250139 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4501880 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/63168793-FFF1-FFD6-FF6A-DD2EFCF1B583 |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Minirhaphidophora Gorochov, 2002 |
status |
|
Genus Minirhaphidophora Gorochov, 2002 View in CoL
Entomologicheskoe Obozrenie, 81(2), 332.
Type species: Minirhaphidophora minima Gorochov, 2002 , by original designation
Note This genus was originally described based only on female characteristics ( Gorochov, 2002). In this paper, Minirhaphidophora is comprised of two species (type species and M. kerinci Gorochov, 2002 ) collected from the same locality of Sumatra and separated from the other genera of Rhaphidophorinae by a distinctly smaller body and less developed rostral tubercles. Later ( Gorochov, 2010b), two additional species of this genus were discovered, namely M. berezini Gorochov, 2010 and M. ocellata Gorochov, 2010 . The first species was described after a single male collected from another locality in Sumatra, and M. ocellata was described after a single female obtained from Borneo. Thus, the male of this genus was described for the first time. It clearly differs from the other genera of this subfamily via a combination of its sexual abdominal characteristics. At present, a new species of this genus was discovered in South Thailand. It is here described on the basis of both male and female specimens. However, its male sexual characteristics appear similar to the above-described male specimen with significant differences. These differences allow us to describe a new subgenus for this Thai species and to propose a new diagnosis for the genus Minirhaphidophora .
Diagnosis Body is small or very small (length of hind femur 7.8–12.7 mm). Rostral tubercles are short or very short, separated from each other by short and shallow longitudinal grooves ( Figs 32, 33 View FIGURES 32–38 ). Posterior part of the eight abdominal tergite in males appears with a pair of rather short angular projections or with one similar median projection ( Figs 34–36 View FIGURES 32–38 ), but in the female, appears with one short and rounded median lobe ( Fig. 39 View FIGURES 39–41 ); the ninth abdominal tergite is present with a short or very short rounded posteromedian lobe ( Figs 34, 35 View FIGURES 32–38 ). The male epiproct is more or less triangular with an apical part that is almost truncated but bilobate or bifurcate and curved upwards ( Figs 34–37 View FIGURES 32–38 ). The male paraprocts are simple, roundly angular ( Figs 34, 36 View FIGURES 32–38 ) and the male genital plate appears with large styles and a distinct posteromedian lobe between them ( Fig. 38 View FIGURES 32–38 ).
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 |
|
SubOrder |
Ensifera |
Family |
|
SubFamily |
Rhaphidophorinae |