Aphropsylla conversa ( Jordan & Rothschild, 1913 )

Hastriter, Michael, 2009, A description of four new species of fleas (Insecta, Siphonaptera) from Angola, Ethiopia, Papua New Guinea, and Peru, ZooKeys 8 (8), pp. 39-61 : 42-44

Aphropsylla conversa ( Jordan & Rothschild, 1913)

( Figs. 3 , 8 , 11, 13 , 17 )

Ctenocephalus conversus Jordan & Rothschild. 1913. Novitates Zoologicae, 20:231-232.

Aphropsylla conversus Jordan. 1932:292-293 ; Hopkins. 1947:152.

Aphropsylla conversa Hopkins & Rothschild. 1953:133 ; Cheetham. 1988:35; Beaucournu. 2004:190.

Material Examined. Holotype ♁, Kenya: Mutaragwa , Aberdare Range, [̴ 0°08’S, 36°07’E], ex. Lophuromys testudo = Lophiomys imhausi Milne-Edwards , 15 III 1910,

Robin Kemp (BMNH); “neallotype” ♀, same data as holotype except ex. Dendrohyrax crawshayi = Dendrohyrax arboreus (A. Smith) , 17 III 1910 ( BMNH); paratype ♁, same data as holotype except Genetta stuhlmanni Mataschie = Genetta maculata (Gray) , 23 III 1910, Robin Kemp ( BMNH); 5 ♁, 4♀, Uganda: Bumagabula , foot of Butandiga [̴ 1°10’N, 34°22’E], west side of Mt. Elgon, 2135 m elev., ex. “on man (acc.)”, 22 II 1961, A.W. R. McCrae ( BMNH) .

New Records. Uganda: nr Bumagabula , foot of Butandiga [̴ 1°10’N, 34°22’E], west side of Mt. Elgon, 2135 m elev., ex. “on man (acc.)”, 20 II 1961, A.W. R. McCrae (British Museum Reg. No. 1961-684), 5 ♁, 4♀ ( BMNH) .

Remarks. When Jordan and Rothschild described this species, they erroneously labeled one female (same data as holotype) as a “neallotype”. It is presumed they ment “ allotype ” and not “neallotype” or neoallotype. Host preferences for this species of Aphropsylla are virtually unknown since only a single specimen had been collected from each of the three known host species (other than man). Genetta maculata , a small agile

and scansorial carnivore, is certainly an accidental host, likely infested with one specimen correlated with the host’s carnivorous habits. Lophiomys imhausi and D. arboreus are both herbivores. Although the latter is arboreal, the single specimen recorded from it is also likely accidental. Th e label data for the nine specimens reported here, all indicate that the host was “on man” and it is presumed that the collector (or labeler) assumed man was an “acc. =?accidental” host. Unfortunately, the circumstances are not known surrounding the collection of no less than nine specimens from a human. There was surely some intimate contact with a bird or mammal nest by the “human host”. Th e fact that a sizable series of the new species described below was collected from bird nests (and not from a mammal per se) might suggest that the genus has close evolutionary affi nities to avian hosts.

Figures

Figures 1-4. 1-2. Aphropsylla truncata n. sp. 1. Head, holotype ♁. 2. Head, paratype ♀. 3. Aprhopsylla conversa, head, holotype ♁. 4. Aphropsylla wollastoni, head, lectotype ♁. Scale = 200 µm

Figures 5-9. 5-7. Aprhopsylla truncata n. sp. 5. Th orax and abdomen, paratype ♁ (B-74177). 6. Sternum eight, paratype ♁ (B-74129). 7. Process of ninth tergite (P1), paratype ♁ (B-74177), lower arrow = P2, upper arrow = P3. 8. Aphropsylla conversa, process of ninth tergite (P1), holotype ♁. 9. Aphropsylla wollastoni, process of ninth tergite (P1), lectotype ♁. Scale 5-6 = 200 µm, 7-9 = 100 µm

Figures 10-13. 10-11. Eighth tergite and anal stylet. 10. Aphropsylla truncata n. sp., allotype ♀. 11. Aphropsylla conversa, “neallotype” = allotype? ♀. 12-13. Spermatheca. 12. Aphropsylla truncata n. sp., paratype ♀. 13. Aphropsylla conversa, “neallotype” = allotype? ♀. Scale 10, 12-13 = 100 µm, 11 = 200 µm

Figure 14-18. 14-16. Aphropsylla truncata n. sp. 14. Aedeagus, paratype ♁ (B-74177). 15. Hind femur and tibia, allotype ♀. 16. Hind tarsi, holotype ♁. 17. Aphropsylla conversa, hind tarsi, holotype ♁. 18. Aphropsylla wollastoni, hind tarsi, lectotype ♁. Scale 14 = 100 µm, 15-18 = 200 µm