Apiomerus gallegoi Costa Lima, Seabra & Hathaway, 1951
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5281/zenodo.275474 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6201525 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/DD52878F-FFBA-FFE3-FF09-FB19AEE1FD36 |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Apiomerus gallegoi Costa Lima, Seabra & Hathaway, 1951 |
status |
|
Apiomerus gallegoi Costa Lima, Seabra & Hathaway, 1951 View in CoL
( Figs. 9–15 View FIGURES 9 – 16. 9 – 15 )
Discussion: Apiomerus gallegoi ( Figs. 9–15 View FIGURES 9 – 16. 9 – 15 ) was described based on a single female from Colombia and it was considered very close to A. vexillarius Champion, 1898 , a species described from Panama ( Champion 1898; Costa Lima et al. 1951).
The females examined here present some small color differences compared to the original description ( Costa Lima et al. 1951). The holotype of A. gallegoi was examined ( Fig. 9 View FIGURES 9 – 16. 9 – 15 ) and it has partially broken antennae and there is only one remaining foliaceous appendage, which is not in a good condition to ascertain the original color ( Fig. 10 View FIGURES 9 – 16. 9 – 15 ). One of the females from state of Acre shows all antennal segments black ( Fig. 11 View FIGURES 9 – 16. 9 – 15 ), the other one has the first antennal segment blackish, the second segment reddish with darkened base, the third and fourth segments reddish-brown while the yellowish coloration of corium of hemelytra are less extensive ( Fig. 12 View FIGURES 9 – 16. 9 – 15 ). Both specimens have fore trochanters almost all orange. The foliaceous appendages are brownish black ( Fig. 13 View FIGURES 9 – 16. 9 – 15 ). The female from state of Pará, Brazil ( Fig. 14 View FIGURES 9 – 16. 9 – 15 ), shows the two first antennal segments black; the fore coxae and trochanters, middle trochanters and ventral little spots at fore and middle femora yellowish; the foliaceous appendages are clear ( Fig. 15 View FIGURES 9 – 16. 9 – 15 ).
Costa Lima et al. (1951) stated that A. gallegoi and A. vexillarius ( Fig. 16 View FIGURES 9 – 16. 9 – 15 ) were very similar and pointed out differences only in coloration and in the relative size of the foliaceous appendages. The two species, nonetheless, are easy to distinguish from each other. The relative total size is much larger in A. vexillarius than in A. gallegoi . Furthermore, A. gallegoi has a dark pronotum whereas in A. vexillarius it is usually grayish. The foliaceous appendages in A. gallegoi are nearly circular and yellowish, whereas in A. vexillarius are slightly ovate, much more elongate basally, and are usually sanguineous red in coloration.
Both A. gallegoi and A. vexillarius are part of a larger group of species that include A. elatus Stål, 1862 , A. pilipes (Fabricius, 1787) and several other described and undescribed species from Central and South America ( Szerlip 1980; Forero obs. pers.). Some of these species are very similar in coloration, but can be unambiguously identified by characters of the male and female genitalia. A comprehensive revision of the genus Apiomerus will clarify the limits of these species, including A. gallegoi .
Distribution: The specimens examined here from Acre and Pará in Brazil, represent a new country record for A. gallegoi .
Type specimens examined: HOLOTYPE FEMALE: COLOMBIA, [without locality], X-1947, F. Luiz Gallego [leg.] / 9928 / Holotypo / “ Apiomerus gallegoi n. sp. C.L., C. R. H., C. A. C. S.” [ CECL].
Other specimens examined: Apiomerus gallegoi : BRAZIL, 2 females, Acre, Senador Guiomard, Reserva Catuaba, 09° 37´S - 68° 18´W, 23-27-VII-2008, Mielke & Casagrande leg.; 1 female, Pará, Almeirim, Monte Dourado, Proj.[ect] Jari, 22-II-2005, AL Nunes/CE Braga [leg.] [ MPEG]. Apiomerus vexillarius : COSTA RICA, 1 female, Puntarenas, Parque Nacional Corcovado Estacion Sirena, Rio Camaronal, 8.842°N 83.589°W, 30m, 13 Apr 1989, Holzenthal & Blahnik, UCR ENT 000130038 [ UMSP].
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 |