Coletinia tinauti Molero-Baltanas, Gaju-Ricart & Bach de Roca 1997

Autor: Molero-Baltan��s, Rafael, Gaju-Ricart, Miquel, Fi��er, ��iga, Bach de Roca, Carmen, Mendes, Lu��s F.
Rok vydání: 2022
Předmět:
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.6344265
Popis: Coletinia tinauti Molero-Baltan��s, Gaju-Ricart & Bach de Roca, 1997 Coletinia tinauti Molero-Baltan��s, Gaju-Ricart & Bach de Roca, 1997: 97���104, figs 1���4. Coletinia tinauti ��� Molero et al. 2013: 49���52, figs 1b, 6b, 9b, 153���163. Material examined SPAIN ��� 14 ♂♂, 8 ♀♀; Ja��n Province, Cueva de la Morciguilla; 24 Dec. 2013; GEV leg.; UCO Ref. Z2507. Variability remarks The abundant material belonging to this species collected at one locality (22 specimens) allows to assess the variability of C. tinauti. This sample comes from a cave about 35 km distance from the type locality of the species, and the insects collected completely fit the original description. Some specimens of this sample have been dissected and examined, concluding that most of their characters are proven to be constant inside the population, such as the shape of the urosternite VIII of males or the number of divisions of the ovipositor. Nevertheless, the variability of some characters proves to be wider than previously known for this species (see Table 1). For example, the shape of the hind margin of the urotergite X in males proves to be variable, since in some specimens it is folded in its median part or is more convex dorsally but more straight ventrally; this agrees with the variability detected for this character in C. maggi by Gilgado & Ortu��o (2015), although this variability is not detected in C. tinauti for females. The terminal filaments of this species present few pegs with blunt apex (at most 5 but usually 4 or less in each cercus). The paracercus has only, as usual, short, pigmented spines. The formula of the paracercus of the holotype is P1 (1[1 d]) +P2 (1[0]); in this specimen the paracercus is broken and only the first division is preserved. The illustration presented by Molero-Baltan��s et al. (1997) in the original description corresponds in fact to a cercus. Variability of the paracercus in other male specimens examined: the first division of the cercus bears in some specimens (as the holotype) one thin acute and small dorsal spine; in other specimens this spine is absent. The second division shows 3 more robust and short dorsal spines (the third longer than the preceding ones) inserted on alternate rings of setae. If the dorsal spine on P1 is absent, these spines are present on the first, third and fifth rings of setae; if the dorsal spine on P1 is present, the modified spines are inserted on the second, fourth and sixth rings of setae. So, the formula can be P1 (1[0]) +P2 (1[1d] +2[0]+ 3[1d] +4[0]+ 5[1d]) or P1 (1[1d])+P2 (1[0]+ 2[1d] +3[0] +4[1d] +5[0] +6[1d]). All these spines are acute but clearly different (shorter, more robust, and pigmented) to the unmodified setae of the dorsal side of the paracercus of females. In cerci, the inner-dorsal spines are more robust than the inner-ventral ones and usually show blunt apex, except those in the C3, and can be considered as pegs, but there is some variability (for example, in the holotype there is only one peg in the first ring of C2, see Fig. 1C). The remaining spines are thinner and frequently acute but always shortened compared with setae in similar position in females. The formula of the left cercus of the holotype (shown in Fig. 3) is: C1 (1[1id +1iv]) +C2 (1[1 id +1iv] +2[1id])+C3 (1[1id + 1iv]+ 2[1id]); the right cercus is drawn by Molero et al. (1997: fig. 3.6), except for the second ring of setae of C3, which is damaged (in the caption it is incorrectly indicated as paracercus) and its formula is C1 (1[1 id +1 iv])+C2 (1[1 id + 1iv]+ 2[1id]) +C3 (1[1id +1iv]). Variability of the cercus in other male specimens examined: the limit between the second and the third division of the cercus has a more distal position in most of the remaining specimens observed, so the spines of the first and second ring of setae of C 3 in the holotype correspond in these additional specimens to the third and fourth ring of setae of C2. But the arrangement of pegs is similar, with some exceptions: ��� The pegs of C1 are absent in some specimens; in this case, the apex of the spine of the third ring of setae of the C2 is blunt. ��� Some spines inserted on inner-ventral position can be absent or reduced to thin usual setae (not modified). Considering this variability, the formula of cerci of most specimens of C. tinauti where the division between C2 and C3 is placed beyond the fourth ring of setae is: C1(1[0���1 id +0���1iv]) + C2(1[1 id +0��� 1iv] + 2[1 id +0���1iv] +3[1 id + 0���1iv] + 4 [0���1 id + 0���1iv]). The maximum number of blunt pegs in C2 is 4. Key for identification of species of the genus Coletinia This key is based on that of Wygodzinsky (1980) but includes the 16 new species described afterwards. The females of Coletinia diania, C. herculea, C. setosula, C. dextra sp. nov. and C. serrata sp. nov. and the males of Coletinia corsica Chopard, 1924 are not known, so they are excluded from the key. The original description (only available) of the female Coletinia corsica is insufficient to identify some characters considered in this key, so this species is not included. For some characters, figures of original descriptions have been considered when not explicitly described in the text. Moreover, the variability of C. maggi discussed by Gilgado & Ortu��o (2015) is left pending, and the distinction established by Molero et al. (2013) between C. maggi and C. hernandoi Molero, Bach & Gaju 2013 is not considered, since both taxa require further investigation. We indicate this in the key as ��� Coletinia maggi species group���. For some characters, the key of Molero et al. (2013) has been used but revised and modified, because the high variability detected in several species, as commented in the discussion section. For example, the shape of the hind margin of the urotergite X has been discarded. 1. Frons with very numerous subequal long setae................................................................................ 2 ��� Frons with fewer setae, both distinct macrochaetae and short bristles............................................. 3 2. Macrochaetae of tibiae robust, the ventral ones of mesotibiae clearly longer than the diameter of the tibia (about 1.5 times this diameter) and bigger than those of metatibiae. Males with parameres that do not reach the level of apex of styli IX. SW Iberian Peninsula..... C. mendesi Wygodzinsky, 1980 ��� Macrochaetae of tibiae thin, the ventral ones of mesotibiae about as long as the diameter of the tibia and not bigger than those of metatibiae. Parameres large, attaining the level of apex of styli IX. Known from Sicily........................................................................... C. setosula Wygodzinsky, 1980 3. Males................................................................................................................................................. 4 ��� Females........................................................................................................................................... 24 4. Antennae symmetrical (left and right pedicellar apophyses similarly developed)......................... 12 ��� Antennae asymmetrical (left and right apophysis with different size and shape)............................ 5 5. Left apophysis with two elongate and narrow ribbon-like processes, longer than the width of the pedicel. Right apophysis less developed and triangular, without apical or subapical seta, its base more than half the width of the pedicel. Italy.................................. C. subterranea (Silvestri, 1902) ��� Apophyses without elongate ribbon-like processes. If processes are present, they are short and not ribbon-like, and their length is lower than the width of the pedicel. Right apophysis with diverse shapes, often with apical or subapical seta; if triangular and without seta, its size is smaller (its base less than half the width of the pedicel)............................................................................................. 6 6. The less developed apophysis is at least half the length of the more developed one and is subcylindrical or conical in shape, longer than wide. Terminal filaments without pegs, with acute spines similarly developed to those of females or slightly shortened and robust....................................................... 7 ��� The less developed apophysis (right) is very small, less than 0.2 times as long as the more developed one (left)............................................................................................................................................ 9 7. The more developed apophysis (left) has a sclerotized subapical ridge and its distal part is clearly wider than the base. Less developed apophysis (right) with subapical glandular seta. Terminal filaments with a setation like that of females; inner spines of cerci thin. Brazil............................................................................................................................ C. brasiliensis Mendes & Ferreira, 2002. ��� The more developed apophysis (left or right) lacks sclerotizations and its width is similar in the distal and in the basal part; the distal area shows a lamellar process. Less developed apophysis (left or right) without a visible subapical seta. Inner spines of cerci shortened and robust (spiniform pegs). S Spain and Portugal......................................................................................................................... 8 8. Left apophysis more developed than the right one. Lamellar process of the left apophysis with denticulate margin....... C. serrata Mendes, Molero-Baltan��s, Bach de Roca & Gaju-Ricart sp. nov. ��� Right apophysis more developed than the left one. Lamellar process of the left apophysis not clearly denticulate, almost straight......... C. dextra Molero-Baltan��s, Bach de Roca & Gaju-Ricart sp. nov. 9. Right apophysis of adult males of triangular shape, without glandular seta.................................. 10 ��� Right apophysis of adult males with other shape, with or without apical seta................................11 10. Left pedicellar apophysis without lamellar expansion, its sclerotized area placed besides or under the glandular seta; this seta is inserted on apical position. Only known from C��rdoba Province (S Spain)........................................................................ C. asymetrica Bach, Mendes & Gaju, 1985 ��� Lamellar expansion and sclerotized area of the left pedicellar apophysis extending above the glandular seta. Canary Islands............................ C. majorensis Molero, Gaju, L��pez & Bach, 2014 11. Posterior margin of eighth urosternite not very protruding (ratio length/width of the protruding part about 0.23) and slightly convex. Apophysis of the left pedicel of adults with a sclerotized region next to the glandular cone and a very well developed subapical lateroexternal process, showing no sclerotizations but densely covered with small hairs. Only known from a cave near Berja (Almer��a, SE Spain).......................................................... C. vergitana Molero, Barranco, Bach & Gaju, 2013 ��� Posterior margin of eighth urosternite more protruding (ratio length/width of the protruding part about 0.32) and convex. Apophysis of the left pedicel of adults with two lamellar processes, one apical without sclerotization, and one subapical with hook-shaped sclerotization and with a long and strong macrochaeta plus a few thin setae. Only known from S Spain (Straits of Gibraltar).......................................................................................................... C. herculea Molero, Bach & Gaju, 2013 12. Pedicellar apophyses simple, subcylindrical, not abruptly narrowed in their apex (simply rounded apically) without sclerotizations or processes (reported from several countries of southern and central Europe, in revision)................................................................ Coletinia maggi species group ��� Pedicellar apophyses not simple, abruptly narrowed or truncate at their apex and/or with processes or sclerotizations............................................................................................................................. 13 13. Pedicellar apophyses large, reaching the limit of annuli 7���8 of the flagellum, and even further elongated by a long thin sclerotised extension abruptly turning back on itself toward its pedicel, furnished with a predistal tooth and whose distal end is spatula like and toothed. Urotergite X with more than 20 +20 pegs. Only known from Turkey............................... C. longissima Mendes, 1988 ��� Pedicellar apophyses smaller and with a different shape. Urotergite X with a lower number of pegs, usually less than 10 +10.................................................................................................................. 14 14. Pedicellar apophyses subcylindrical, slightly widened in their distal half but narrowing in its apex forming a glandular cone that is not accompanied by any lamellar projection, sclerotizations of tegument or hook-shaped process. Cerci without blunt pegs, only with acute short spines. Tibiae lacking lateral spines..... C. dalmatica Molero-Baltan��s, Fi��er, Bach de Roca & Gaju-Ricart sp. nov. ��� Pedicellar apophysis not widened in their distal half, narrowing in the apex where the glandular cone is visible, and accompanied by lamellar projections, sclerotizations or hook-shaped processes. Cerci usually with blunt pegs in their basal divisions (at least in C2, except for C. jeanneli). Tibiae usually with one short lateral spine (not described in C. bulgarica (Kozaroff, 1939))..................................15 15. Pedicellar apophysis with a subapical hook-shaped projection and a sclerotized area besides the glandular cone. Metatibiae length is, according to the original figures, less than 4 times longer than wide. Only known from Bulgaria....................................................... C. bulgarica (Kozaroff, 1939) ��� Pedicellar apophysis different. If presenting hook-shaped projections, there are two or they are not sclerotized. Ratio length/width of metatibiae higher, 4 or more times longer than wide............... 16 16. Pedicellar apophysis with two curved projections, not lamellar. Hind margin of urosternite VIII very protruding and straight (Fig. 12D). Without blunt pegs on cerci (only acute spines, according to the original description). Known from France............................................ C. jeanneli (Silvestri, 1938) ��� Pedicellar apophysis with an apical lamellar projection besides the glandular cone (capolongoi type). Hind margin of urosternite VIII protruding; if straight, not so protruding (Fig. 12E). Usually with blunt pegs on cerci, at least in C2........................................................................................... 17 17. Hind margin of urosternite VIII straight or almost straight............................................................ 18 ��� Hind margin of urosternite VIII convex, rounded in the middle area............................................ 19 18. Urotergite X with at least 6 +6 sensory pegs. Known from caves of Castell��n Province (E Spain)................................................................................................. C. tessella Molero, Bach & Gaju, 2013 ��� Urotergite X with at most 5+5 sensory pegs. Known from gypsum caves of Almer��a (SE Spain)............................................................................. C. calaforrai Molero, Barranco, Bach & Gaju, 2013 19. C2 of cerci with at least 5 pegs, some of them inserted at the same level. Paracercus with some lateral blunt pegs and dorsal spiniform spines. Known only from a cave of Denia, Alicante Province (E Spain)................................................................................ C. diania Molero, Bach & Gaju, 2013 ��� C2 of cerci with at most 4 pegs; if 5 or more, all of them inserted in a single row. Paracercus usually without blunt pegs, only with acute spiniform dorsal spines.......................................................... 20 20. Ratio L/W of metatibiae higher than 6........................................................................................... 21 ��� Ratio L/W of metatibiae lower than 6............................................................................................ 22 21. Ratio L/W of paramera about 5. Ratio L/W of protibiae higher than 4. Ratio L/W of mesotibiae about 5. Only known from a cave in Castell��n Province (E Spain).............................................................................................................................................. C. longitibia Molero, Bach & Gaju, 2013 ��� Ratio L/W of paramera about 6. Ratio L/W of protibiae and mesotibiae usually lower than 4. Known from caves in Valencia Province (E Spain)................................. C. capolongoi Wygodzinsky, 1980 22. Metatibiae with only 1 dorsal spine. Species from S Spain............................................................................................................................................................ C. intermedia / C. tinauti / C. calaforrai ��� Metatibiae usually with 2���3 dorsal spines...................................................................................... 23 23. Metatibiae usually with 6 or more ventral spines. Cerci with at most 4 small and subcylindrical pegs. Known from Castell��n Province (E Spain)....................... C. redetecta Molero, Bach & Gaju, 2013 ��� Metatibiae with 4���6 ventral spines. Cerci in most cases with more than 4 large pegs............................................................................................................................. C. capolongoi Wygodzinsky, 1980 24. Ratio L/W of metatibiae about 3.5 (following original description and/or designs)...................... 25 ��� Ratio L/W of metatibiae higher than 3.75 (usually more than 4)................................................... 26 25. Ratio L/W of subgenital plate about 0.5, with the hind margin convex, slightly acute. Brazil....................................................................................................... C. brasiliensis Mendes & Ferreira, 2002 ��� Ratio L/W of subgenital plate higher, with the hind margin more rounded. Bulgaria.................................................................................................................................... C. bulgarica (Kozaroff, 1939) 26. Ovi
Published as part of Molero-Baltan��s, Rafael, Gaju-Ricart, Miquel, Fi��er, ��iga, Bach de Roca, Carmen & Mendes, Lu��s F., 2022, Three new species of European Coletinia Wygodzinsky (Zygentoma, Nicoletiidae), with additional records and an updated identification key, pp. 127-161 in European Journal of Taxonomy 798 (1) on pages 152-157, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2022.798.1675, http://zenodo.org/record/6341178
{"references":["Molero-Baltanas R., Gaju-Ricart M. & Bach de Roca C. 1997. Coletinia tinauti n. sp., nueva especie de Nicoletiidae de Andalucia (Insecta, Apterygota, Zygentoma). Zoologica Baetica 8: 95 - 110.","Molero R., Bach C., Sendra A., Montagud S., Barranco P. & Gaju M. 2013. Revision of the genus Coletinia (Zygentoma: Nicoletiidae) in the Iberian Peninsula, with descriptions of nine new species. Zootaxa 3615 (1): 1 - 60. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 3615.1.1","Gilgado J. D. & Ortuno V. M. 2015. Intra- and inter-population polymorphism in Coletinia maggii (Grassi, 1887) (Zygentoma: Nicoletiidae), an inhabitant of soil, mesovoid shallow substratum (MSS) and caves - A challenge for the strict classification of subterranean fauna? Zootaxa 3920 (1): 85 - 100. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 3920.1.5","Wygodzinsky P. 1980. A survey of the Nicoletiidae of Europe (Nicoletiidae, Thysanura, Insecta). American Museum Novitates 2695: 1 - 24. Available from http: // hdl. handle. net / 2246 / 5428 [accessed 16 Feb. 2022].","Mendes L. F. & Ferreira R. L. 2002. On a new cave-dwelling Nicoletiidae (Zygentoma: Insecta) from Brazil. Garcia de Orta, Serie de Zoologia, Lisboa 24: 101 - 106.","Mendes L. F. 1988. Sur deux nouvelles Nicoletiidae (Zygentoma) cavernicoles de Grece et de Turquie et remarques sur la systematique de la famille. Revue suisse de Zoologie 95 (3): 751 - 772. Available from https: // www. biodiversitylibrary. org / part / 81932 [accessed 16 Feb. 2022].","Silvestri F. 1938. Descrizione di una nuova specie di Nicoletia vivente in una grotta della Francia. Revue francaise d ' Entomologie 5: 188 - 193."]}
Databáze: OpenAIRE
Externí odkaz: