Teinomordeus Gustafsson & Bush, new genus

Type species. Teinomordeus entelosetus new species

Diagnosis. Teinomordeus n. gen. (Figs 75–76) is morphologically similar to Brueelia s. str. (Figs 42–43), sharing the same preantennal head structure and chaetotaxy, except that s3 is present in Teinomordeus (Fig. 77) but absent in most Brueelia s. str. (Fig. 44). The two genera are separated by the following characters: antennae monomorphic in Brueelia s. str. (Fig. 44; except species on Turdoides spp.) but sexually dimorphic in Teinomordeus (Figs 77–78); ps absent on segment II in female Brueelia s. str. (Fig. 43) but present in female Teinomordeus (Fig. 76); female subgenital plate with cross-piece in Brueelia s. str. (Fig. 48), but without cross-piece in Teinomordeus (Fig. 82); ss absent in male Brueelia s. str. on tergopleurites III–IV [except in Br. nebulosa (Burmeister, 1838) where ss are present on tergopleurite IV; Table 3], but these are present in Teinomordeus (Fig. 75). In male Br. brachythorax tps are absent, but these are present in male Teinomordeus (Fig. 75) and in some groups of Brueelia s. str. (see Table 3); however, only in Br. brevipennis and Br. nebulosa and near relatives of these are tps present on tergopleurite V.

Male genitalia of Teinomordeus (Figs 79–81) similar to those of Anarchonirmus n. gen. (Figs 118–120), but differs in the shape of the basal apodeme and mesosomal lobes. In both genera, antennae are sexually dimorphic, but this is more pronounced in Anarchonirmus (Figs 116–117) than in Teinomordeus (Figs 77–78). Clypeo-labral suture does not reach anterior margin of head in Anarchonirmus (Fig. 116), but does so in Teinomordeus (Fig. 77). Tergopleurites reach lateral margins of abdomen in Teinomordeus (Figs 75–76) but not in Anarchonirmus (Figs 114–115). There are also differences in abdominal chaetotaxy of both genera (see Table 2), and while the female subgenital plate flares into a medianly displaced cross-piece in Anarchonirmus (Fig. 121), no cross-piece is present in Teinomordeus (Fig. 81).

Description. Both sexes. Head convex-dome shaped (Fig. 77), preantennal area shorter than postantennal area in male, but not in female. Marginal carina narrow, not interrupted, but deeply displaced posteriorly and dorsally at clypeo-labral suture. Frons hyaline. Ventral carinae diffuse anterior to pulvinus, not clearly continuous with marginal carina. Head setae as in Fig. 77; as3 and pns absent; ads very long; pos on eye. Ventral anterior plate absent. Antennae sexually dimorphic: male scape (Fig. 77) longer and broader than female scape (Fig. 78). Coni small. Marginal and occipital carinae not visible. Marginal temporal carina narrow; mts 3 only macroseta. Gular plate diffuse, broadly triangular.

Prothorax (Figs 75–76) rectangular; ppss on postero-lateral corner. Proepimera with hook-shaped median ends. Pterothorax trapezoidal: lateral margins divergent, posterior margin gently rounded. Meso- and metasterna not fused; one seta on postero-lateral corner of each on each side. Median ends of metepisterna blunt; mms moderately separated medianly. Leg chaetotaxy as in Fig. 25, except fI-p2, fI-v4, fII-v2, fIII-v2 absent.

Abdomen (Figs 75–76) oval, more oblong in female. Tergopleurites rectangular; tergopleurites II–IX+X in male and tergopleurites II–VIII in female narrowly divided medianly. Female tergopleurite XI diffuse. Sternal plates medianly continuous, rectangular, in male approaching pleurites. Pleurites completely fused to tergopleurites; re-entrant heads absent. Abdominal chaetotaxy as in Table 2. Male subgenital plate broadly trapezoidal, reaching posterior margin of abdomen. Female subgenital plate broadly trapezoidal, reaching or approaching vulval margin, but not flaring into cross-piece. Vulval margin (Fig. 82) with slender vms, thorn-like vss. vos follows lateral margins of subgenital plate; distal vos median to vss.

Basal apodeme (Fig. 79) slenderly rectangular, lateral sections extending distally. Proximal mesosome small, rounded. Gonopore (Fig. 80) large, open distally, antero-laterally with pronounced extensions. Mesosomal lobes large, elongated, rugose distally. Two pmes visible on each lobe. Parameral heads (Fig. 81) bluntly bifid. Parameral blades elongated distally, with distinct median heel just distal to mesosome; pst1–2 near distal end.

Host distribution. Limited to a single species of Laniidae, Eurocephalus rueppelli .

Geographical range. Afrotropical.

Etymology. Teinomordeus is formed by Greek “ teino ” for “extended”, referring to the distally elongated parameres, and Latin “ mordeo ” for “biting”, referring to the fact that this is a chewing louse. Gender: masculine.

Remarks. No representative of Teinomordeus was included on the phylogeny of Bush et al. (2016), and its relationships with other members of the Brueelia -complex are unknown. Similarities in head structure and structure of male genitalia places the genus close to Brueelia s. str.

Included species

* Teinomordeus entelosetus new species