Brasidas waray, Hennemann, 2023

Brasidas waray View in CoL n. sp.

( Fig. 22 & 70N)

ZooBank: https://zoobank.org/ 4C45C1B9-C80C-4988-9448-BC3BBCBD3AC3

? Brasidas samarensis, Zompro 2004: 216 View in CoL , figs. 127a-b. (Misidentification of ♂ and ♀ from Mount Balocaue , Leyte Id.)

HT, ♀: Philippinen, Eastern Visayas, Prov. Leyte, Leyte Island , Mahaplag Munip., local collector IV.2010 [ RBINS, ex coll. FH No. 0819-1] .

Differentiation. – The ♀ (the only sex known) can best be compared with that of B. viscayanus from Minadanao with which it agrees in the general form and appearance and basic armature. It is however separable by having all the cephalic and body armature much reduced, lacking lateralcoronals and anterior lateralson the metapleurae,as well as the posterior pair of spines and medio-lateral spine of abdominalterga II-IV seen in viscayanus , more uniformly sized and less numerous supra-coxals of the metapleurae and almost smooth abdominal tergum IX (with a distinctprotuberance in viscayanus ). Moreover, the epiproct and subgenital plate are relatively longer and the metasternal foramina are less deep and open-oval pits, whereas they are asymmetrically tearshaped, very deep and cingulate holes in viscayanus .

Etymology. – Named after the Waray people (or Waray-Waray people), who inhabit the northern part of the island of Leyte – A. Habitus, dorsal view (Mindanao, Agusan del Sur Prov., Sibagat) [FH 1432-5]. – B. Habitus, dorsolateral view (Mindanao, Agusan del Sur Prov., Sibagat) [FH 1432-5]. – C. Habitus of specimen without median mesonotal spines, dorsolateral view (Mindanao, Agusan del Sur Prov., Sibagat) [FH 1432-6]. – D. Terminalia in dorsal view [FH]. – E. Terminalia in lateral view [FH]. – F. Head, prothorax and anterior of mesothorax in dorsolateral view [FH]. – G. Mesosternum [FH].

including the Mahaplag municipality, where they are called Leyteños and form a significant population.

Description

The following description is based on the unique dried holotype, which however seems to have the colour very well preserved.

♀ ( Fig. 22)

Form and colouration. – Sizeratherlarge(body length 103.5mm), form rather slender with the elements of armature quite poorly developed if compared to congenerics; body surface otherwise moderately granular. Colouration fairly plain fuscous with faint darker mottling; a very faint and washed olive pre-median lateral marking on pronotum, and a similar preposterior lateral marking on meso- and metanotum; the posterior mesonotals, posterior metanotals and mesopleural spines olive but with the tip yellow. Limbs irregularly flecked with buff.

Head. – Scarcely longer than wide, subrectangular with vertex gently rounded;supra-antennalssmall, the supra-orbitalsmore pronouncedand conical and a few rather irregularly dispersed supra-orbitals and occipital medials present. The occipitals and median coronals roughly equal in size, moderately distinct, obtusely conical and roughly forming a quadrate; the lateral coronals much reduced and almost wholly wanting; genae only with 2-3 gulars represented as node-like granules. Eyes projecting almost hemispherically and their diameter corresponding to a little less than half the length of gena. Antennae with 29 joints and reaching to abdominal segment III; scapus compressed dorsoventrally and oval in outline, pedicellus globose, III notably longer than pedicellus, III very short and the following gradually increasing in the length with the median antennomeres in particular strongly elongate.

Thorax. – Pronotum about as long but slightly narrower than head and with a distinct pre-median narrowing;notably longer than wide.Armed witha prominent pair of fairly acute medial spinesjust behind the rather shallow and widely V-shaped transverse median sulcus; anterior margin with weakly developed, conical anterior mesal and antero-lateral tubercles. Mesothorax notably widening towards the posterior, elongate and about 2.75x longer than prothorax; the mesonotum with lateral margins notably concave in posterior one-third and almost 2.5x wider than long. Mesonotum with a moderately distinct pair of anterior and pre-medianspines anda slightly smaller pre-lateral spine; a small and more narrowly spaced pair of median mesonotals present and the poster mesonotals distinct, pointed and surrounded by 3-4 small spiniform tubercles. Posterior metanotals similar but metanotum otherwise only with a small conical pair of antero-lateral metanotals; metanotum weakly trapezoidal in outline. Mesopleurae with a rather prominent spinose antero-lateral, and slightly smaller medio-lateral and two posterior-laterals; notably smaller but unequally sized tubercles are placed in between these spines; meso-pleural rather large and spinose. Metapleurae with a large spinose metapleural and six distinct and pointed supra-coxal spines, that slightly decrease in size towards the posterior of metapleurae. Mesosternum smooth except for rather low and tuberculate mesosternal and some scatteredgranules close to lateral margins ( Fig. 22E). Metasternum only with two node-like metasternals; the pseudo-foramina of average size, just moderately deep, not fully cingulate and open posteriorly and basically oval in shape ( Fig.70N).

Abdomen. – Median segment distinctly transverse with anterior and lateral margins widely rounded, almost semi-circular in shape; armed with a small but spinose pair of medials. Segments II-V roughly uniform in width and length and about 1.8x wider than long; VI-X gradually narrowing with VIII basically trapezoidal and IX scarcely longer than wide. Terga unarmed except for a pair of latero-anterior spines, which is distinct on II and III but notably decreases in size on IV and V and is merely tuberculate on V. Sterna smooth; praeopercular organ on sternum VII formed by a median notch of posterior margin and a small pit some distance in front of margin ( Fig. 22D). Tergum IX only with a very small, obtuse posteromedian tubercle. Anal segment longer than wide, obtusely and weakly tectate longitudinallywith the lateral margins arcuate in posterior half and with a shallow emargination medially; the posterior margin obtusely bi-dentate with a distinct V-shaped median emargination. Epiproct about 1.3x longer than anal segment, weakly tectate and slightly gradually narrowing towards a narrow, obtusely angular tip ( Fig.22C). Subgenital plate elongate, lanceolate, distinctly keeledintheapical half with apex narrowly rounded and slightly surpassing epiproct ( Fig.22D).

Legs. – Relatively slender, basal flexure of profemora distinct. Profemora with three moderately distinct spiniform teeth in apical half of two ventral carinae; dorsal carinae with a few small dentations. Meso- and metafemora basically with about six teeth on all four carinae, these more spiniform on ventral carinae of metafemora and mostly with a small intercalated tooth. Medioventral carina of meso- and metafemora notable and with 6-8 small spiniform tuberclesin basalhalf, which gradually disappear towards the apical one-third. Meso- and metatibiae with rather minute dentations ventrally, smooth dorsally. Basitarsus almost as long as three proceeding tarsomeres.

Measurements [mm]. – Body 103.5, pronotum 7.2, mesonotum 17.0, metanotum 8.2, median segment 3.8, profemora 16.4, mesofemora 14.3, metafemora22.0, protibiae 17.2, mesotibiae 14.1,metatibiae 23.9, antennae 57.0.

Remarks. – The ♂ and ♀ recorded and illustrated as Brasidas samarensis by Zompro (2004: 216, figs. 127a-b) are apparently misidentified and may represent this new species. The ♂ has very prominent but slender thoracic spines and paired spines on abdominal terga II-III and there is a fairly distinct pair of median mesonotals. Unfortunately, the specimens are within the personal collection of O. Zompro (Berlin) and could not be examined to evaluate their identity. Males and eggs unknown.

Distribution. – Leyte, endemic.