Philopterus trepostephanus, Gustafsson & Najer & Zou & Bush, 2022
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5852/ejt.2022.790.1641 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:E3ED109B-70C8-414D-A245-6E3590C9E5B5 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6304091 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/BA72A2B0-545C-434F-8820-152AB279A3CA |
taxon LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:act:BA72A2B0-545C-434F-8820-152AB279A3CA |
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
scientific name |
Philopterus trepostephanus |
status |
sp. nov. |
Philopterus trepostephanus sp. nov.
urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:BA72A2B0-545C-434F-8820-152AB279A3CA
Figs 25–30 View Fig View Fig View Figs 27–30 ; Tables 2–5 View Table 2
Diagnosis
Apart from the similarity between Philopterus trepostephanus sp. nov. and P. sinensis sp. nov. outlined under the latter species (see above), P. trepostephanus sp. nov. does not appear to be morphologically close to any other known species of the genus. The species morphologically closest to P. trepostephanus sp. nov. may be P. petrescuae Adam in Sychra et al., 2011 (ex Dicrurus hottentottus (Linnaeus, 1766)). These two species share the following characters: hyaline margin extends lateral to as1 ( Fig. 27 View Figs 27–30 ); ventral sclerite of male mesosome with lateral extensions ( Fig. 29 View Figs 27–30 ); long vulval setae far anterior to the vulval margin ( Fig. 30 View Figs 27–30 ); gonopore extensive, collar-shaped. These two species can be separated by the following characters: lateral extensions of ventral mesosomal sclerite in distal half in P. trepostephanus sp. nov. ( Fig. 29 View Figs 27–30 ), but in proximal half in P. petrescuae , and the overall shape of this sclerite also differs between these species; coni with recurving anterior ‘hooks’ in P. petrescuae , but without such hooks in P. trepostephanus sp. nov. ( Fig. 27 View Figs 27–30 ); central sternite absent on male abdominal segment VI in P. petrescuae , but present in P. trepostephanus sp. nov. ( Fig. 25 View Fig ); lateral lobes of hyaline margin more extensive in P. petrescuae than in P. trepostephanus sp. nov. ( Fig. 27 View Figs 27–30 ); dorsal anterior plate (ignoring posterior extension) longer than wide in P. petrescuae , but about as wide as long in P. trepostephanus sp. nov. ( Fig. 27 View Figs 27–30 ); macrosetae of female subgenital plate all situated on plate in P. trepostephanus sp. nov. ( Fig. 30 View Figs 27–30 ), but lateral setae on each side situated lateral to plate in P. petrescuae .
Etymology
The species name is constructed from ‘ trepo ’, Greek for ‘I turn’, and ‘ stephanos ’, Greek for ‘crown, wreath’. This refers to the shape of the gonopore, with its anterio-lateral hooks.
Material examined
Holotype THAILAND • ♂; Songkhla Province, Muang, Thung Wang ; 4 Sep.1963; W.Songprakob [as Songphabob] and W. Suwan Laong leg.; ex Tephrodornis virgatus fretensis ; “ WS-471 ”; NHMUK.
Paratypes THAILAND • 1 ♀; same collection data as for holotype; NHMUK • 1 ♂; same collection data as for holotype; PIPR .
Non-type material
THAILAND • 3 ♂♂, 3 ♀♀; Loei Province, Thali, Ban Muang Khai ; 26 Jan. 1955; R.E. Elbel leg.; ex Tephrodornis virgatus mekongensis ; “ RE-4564 , RT-B-31145 ”; PIPR • 1 ♂, 1 ♀; same collection data as for preceding; “ RE-4563 , RT-B-31144 ”; PIPR .
Type host
Tephrodornis virgatus fretensis Robinson & Kloss, 1920 – large woodshrike (Vangidae).
Other host
Tephrodornis virgatus mekongensis Meyer de Schauensee, 1946 .
Description
Head shape and chaetotaxy as in Fig. 27 View Figs 27–30 , preantennal area broad. Hyaline margin broad, extending laterally beyond marginal carina, shallowly concave medianly. Dorsal anterior plate roughly quadratic, with shallowly concave anterior margin and broad posterior extension. Ventral anterior plate roughly semicircular, with slightly concave anterior margin. Coni moderate, slender, pointed posteriorly. Gular plate large. Thoracic and abdominal segments as in Figs 25–26 View Fig View Fig . Measurements as in Table 5 View Table 5 .
Male
Thoracic and abdominal chaetotaxy as in Fig. 25 View Fig and Tables 2–4 View Table 2 . Central sternal plates absent on segments II–V, present and broad on segment VI. Lateral accessory plates present on segments II–VI. Subgenital plate broad anteriorly, narrowing markedly on segment IX+X, widening distally; lateral accessory plates present on abdominal segment IX+X, of about same size as other lateral accessory plates. Basal apodeme short, slender, constricted at mid-length ( Figs 28–29 View Figs 27–30 ). Mesosomal thickening long, rounded anteriorly, with slight lateral bulges. Mesosome with 3 microsetae on each side ( Fig. 28 View Figs 27–30 ). Gonopore as in Fig. 29 View Figs 27–30 , broad and with prominent distal lobes; 2 microsetae on each side of gonopore. Parameres elongated, slender; pst1–2 as in Figs 28–29 View Figs 27–30 .
Female
Thoracic and abdominal chaetotaxy as in Fig. 26 View Fig and Tables 2–4 View Table 2 . Central sternal plates absent on segments II–VI. Lateral accessory plates present on segments II–VI. Subgenital plate and vulval margin as in Fig. 30 View Figs 27–30 , chaetotaxy as in Fig. 30 View Figs 27–30 and Table 3. Subvulval plates broad.
Remarks
Specimens from the two host subspecies differ slightly in head shape and size (specimens from Tephrodornis virgatus mekongensis are generally larger than specimens from T. v. fretensis ; Table 5 View Table 5 ) and abdominal chaetotaxy (specimens from T. v. mekongensis typically have more tergal setae per segment than those from T. v. fretensis ), but some specimens from T. v. mekongensis have the same abdominal chaetotaxy as material from the type host subspecies, and most measurements overlap somewhat. The ranges of the two known host subspecies are separated by a gap in distribution in peninsular Thailand ( Robson 2006). We tentatively consider all specimens from both host subspecies conspecific.
NHMUK |
Natural History Museum, London |
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 |
|
SuperFamily |
Ischnocera |
Family |
|
Genus |