Siphlonurus davidi ( Navás, 1932 )
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5711.1.1 |
|
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:3178B789-303D-448B-9624-6423117DE14F |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/E57D87B7-FFF7-FFF9-FF71-FB847CFEFB62 |
|
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
|
scientific name |
Siphlonurus davidi ( Navás, 1932 ) |
| status |
|
Siphlonurus davidi ( Navás, 1932) View in CoL
Figures 3–4 View FIGURE 3 View FIGURE 4
Siphluriscus? davidi Navás, 1932: 929 (male subimago, from Sichuan Province, China).
Siphluriscus davidi : Wu 1935: 251; Gui 1985: 80.
Siphlonurus davidi View in CoL : Zhou & Peters 2003: 346; Sartori & Peters 2004: 2 View Cited Treatment ( type re-description); Han et al. 2016: 38 View Cited Treatment (adult and nymph, re-description); Zhou 2013: 204 (list); Zhou et al. 2015: 254 (list); Yang et al. 2023: 121 (comparison).
Material examined: 65 nymphs, 3♀ imagos, 1♂ imago, Jiuzhaigou Valley Scenic and Historic Interest Area , Aba Tibetan and Qiang Autonomous Prefecture , Sichuan Province, 33.159°N, 103.901°E, ca. 2400 m, 6–7.VII.2013, Beixing Wang, Yun He, and Guangba Li; 130 nymphs, Jiuzhaigou Valley Scenic and Historic Interest Area , Aba Tibetan and Qiang Autonomous Prefecture, Sichuan Province, 33.159°N, 103.901°E, ca. 2400 m, 9–12.VII.2019, Beixing Wang, Xinyu Ge, and Yu Wang; 1♀ imago, 1♂ imago, Jiuzhaigou Valley Scenic and Historic Interest Area , Aba Tibetan and Qiang Autonomous Prefecture , Sichuan Province, 33.1715°N, 103.52108°E, ca. 2400 m, 6.VII.2023, Mengyao Li GoogleMaps .
Description: see Han et al. (2016).
Distribution: China ( Sichuan).
Diagnosis
Mature nymph: Body length 13.0–17.0 mm, wingpads with spots ( Figs 3A, B View FIGURE 3 ). Length ratio of first segment of maxillary palp to galea-lacinia about 1.0: 1.0, inner margin of maxillary palp segment II straight ( Fig. 3C View FIGURE 3 ). Posterolateral spines on terga I–IX gradually larger from anterior to posterior, length ratio of posterolateral spine on tergum IX to its tergum = 1.0: 2.0 ( Figs 3D–F View FIGURE 3 ). Each abdominal sternum with pair of fused reddish-brown oblique stripes ( Fig. 3B View FIGURE 3 ). Posterior margin of abdominal sternum IX distinctly convex ( Figs 3E, F View FIGURE 3 ). Both dorsal surface and margins of tergum X with stout and pointed spine-like setae ( Fig. 3G View FIGURE 3 ). Outer margins of dorsal lamellae of both gills I and II straight while those of ventral lamellae concave, costal rib of dorsal lamella in gill II longer than half of anterior margin ( Figs 3H, I View FIGURE 3 ). Outer and posterior margins of gill III straight, proximal plate of gill VII well developed ( Figs 3J, K View FIGURE 3 ).
Male imago: Body length 13.0–16.0 mm, forewing with dark brown crossveins and large dark brown spots between C and Rs 1, distal half of hindwing light brown with a spot near middle of R 1 and a brown stripe near forking point of MA. Forelegs entirely brown, midlegs and hindlegs entirely light brown ( Figs 4A–C View FIGURE 4 ). Anterior and lateral margins of each abdominal sternum darker ( Fig. 4D View FIGURE 4 ). Posterolateral spines of abdominal segments VIII and IX relatively small ( Figs 4D–G View FIGURE 4 ). Inner margin of basal segment of forceps without projection, length of penis subequal to styliger ( Figs 4F, G View FIGURE 4 ). Dorsal elongation of penis straight and spineless with sclerotized outer margin, dorsal sclerotized transverse band of penis without expansion, each penis lobe tip with brown sclerotized plates, length of two penis lobes ca. 1.1x width ( Figs 4H, I View FIGURE 4 ).
Female imago: Body length 15.0–16.0 mm, wings with brown stripe and dots. Color pattern similar to male. Sternum VII extended posteriorly into a rectangular lobe, sternum VIII with a pair of reddish-brown stripe ( Fig. 4J View FIGURE 4 ).
Remarks
For morphological comparison of three closely related species ( S. davidi , S. dongxi , and S. orientalis sp. nov.) see remarks of S. orientalis sp. nov.
Three diagnostic characteristics proposed by Yang et al. (2023) for distinguishing between S. dongxi and S. davidi appear to be problematic: (1) Sclerotization of penis lobe: Yang et al. (2023) proposed that two elongations on transverse sclerite of penis lobes could serve as a diagnostic feature for male S. dongxi . However, further observations reveal that dorsal sclerotization pattern of penis lobes is similar across all three species ( S. davidi , S. dongxi , and S. orientalis sp. nov.). This pattern includes a pair of rounded sclerotized plates and a medially convex transverse sclerotized band, and each rounded plate with a small apical elongation ( Fig. 4H View FIGURE 4 ); (2) Posterolateral spines on tergum IX in male adults: While Yang et al. (2023) proposed that male imagos of S. dongxi can be distinguished from S. davidi by well-developed posterolateral spines on tergum IX, our observations indicate that all three species ( S. dongxi , S. davidi , and S. orientalis sp. nov.) exhibit relatively small spines compared to S. immanis . (3) Posterolateral spines on terga in nymph: Yang et al. (2023) stated that posterolateral spines on the terga of S. dongxi nymph are restricted to segments II–IX, but this may require reconsideration. All reported Siphlonurus nymph in China possess posterolateral spines on abdominal terga I–IX. Additionally, posterolateral spines of these three species ( S. davidi , S. dongxi , and S. orientalis sp. nov.) are relatively large, with a spine-to-tergum IX length ratio of approximately 1.0: 2.0.
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 |
Siphlonurus davidi ( Navás, 1932 )
| Qiang, Xin-He & Zhou, Chang-Fa 2025 |
Siphlonurus davidi
| Yang, K. & Li, X. F. & Tong, X. L. & Cai, Q. H. 2023: 121 |
| Han, Y. K. & Zhang, W. & Hu, Z. & Zhou, C. F. 2016: 38 |
| Zhou, C. F. & Su, C. R. & Gui, H. 2015: 254 |
| Zhou, C. F. 2013: 204 |
| Sartori, M. & Peters, J. G. 2004: 2 |
| Zhou, C. F. & Peters, J. G. 2003: 346 |
Siphluriscus davidi
| Gui, H. 1985: 80 |
| Wu, C. F. 1935: 251 |
Siphluriscus? davidi Navás, 1932: 929
| Navas, L. 1932: 929 |
