identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
DA46878AFFFA904FC3D1FB28694EF915.text	DA46878AFFFA904FC3D1FB28694EF915.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Brontostoma alboannulatum (Stål 1860) Stal 1860	<div><p>Brontostoma alboannulatum (Stål, 1860) / Brontostoma rubrovenosum (Stål, 1860)</p><p>Brontostoma alboannulatum and B. rubrovenosum were each described based on one female specimen from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (Stål 1860) (Figs. 1–2) and are most probably the same species. In the original description of these taxa, Stål (1860) expressed his doubt whether or not B. alboannulatum might be a variation of B. rubrovenosum (“ An varietas praecedentis.?”; see page 72). Indeed, the few pointed color differences between them are very likely intra-specific variation. On the other hand, B. discus and B. nanus were once considered as variations within the same species (Wygodzinsky 1951), but were later shown to have discrete morphological characters distinguishing them (Carpintero 1980). So, if further studies can find acceptable morph characters, then they would stand as different taxa. If not, a synonym should be formally proposed. Some taxa, such as B. rubrum and particularly B. colossus, in which individuals show a great range of variation in coloration (Wygodzinsky 1951; Carpintero 1980) and, to some extent, also in size, could represent more than one species in each case as well.</p><p>Material examined: Brontostoma alboannulatum: BRAZIL, Bahia, 1 female, [no date], Camille leg., Maldonado det., 1985 [IRSNB].</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/DA46878AFFFA904FC3D1FB28694EF915	Public Domain	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Gil-Santana, Hélcio R.;Baena, Manuel;Grillo, Horacio	Gil-Santana, Hélcio R., Baena, Manuel, Grillo, Horacio (2013): Berengeria Gil-Santana & Coletto-Silva, a junior synonym of Ectrichodiella Fracker & Bruner, with new records and taxonomic notes on Ectrichodiinae from Brazil, and with keys to Ectrichodiinae and Reduviinae genera of the New World (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Reduviidae). Zootaxa 3652 (1), DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3652.1.2
DA46878AFFFA904BC3D1F8E6692EFEC5.text	DA46878AFFFA904BC3D1F8E6692EFEC5.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Brontostoma diringshofeni Gil-Santana & Baena 2009	<div><p>Brontostoma diringshofeni Gil-Santana &amp; Baena, 2009</p><p>Brontostoma diringshofeni was recently described based on a male from Bolivia (Gil-Santana &amp; Baena 2009). The specimen examined here is also a male and very similar to the holotype (Fig. 3).</p><p>New record. Brazil, Mato Grosso State.</p><p>Material examined: BRAZIL, 1 male, Mato Grosso, Pontes e Lacerda, 10-X-1988, [MNRJ].</p><p>PLATE 1. Figs. 1–2, holotypes deposited in Swedish Royal Natural History Museum (Naturhistoriska riksmuseet, NHRS) (courtesy of Dr. Bert Gustafsson), dorsal view, 1, Brontostoma alboannulatum, female, 2, Brontostoma rubrovenosum, female, 3, Brontostoma diringshofeni, male, dorsal view, 4–5, Brontostoma discus, syntypes deposited in Museum of Natural History, Humboldt University (Museum für Naturkunde der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, ZMHB) (courtesy of Dr. Jürgen Deckert), dorsal view, 4, “ typus,” female, 5, male, “ paratypus,” 6, Brontostoma nanus, male holotype, deposited in “Museo de La Plata, Universidad Nacional de La Plata” (MLPA) (courtesy of Dr. Diego L. Carpintero), dorsal view, 7–8, fore (A) and middle (B) femora, lateral view, 7, Brontostoma nanus, 8, Brontostoma discus, 9–10, posterior process of pygophore, 9, B. discus, 10, B. nanus .</p><p>Brontostoma nanus Carpintero, 1980</p><p>As previously mentioned, B. discus and B. nanus were once considered as variations within the same species (Wygodzinsky 1951). B. discus was described based on specimens actually deposited in the Museum of Natural History, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany (Museum für Naturkunde der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, ZMHB) (Figs. 4–5).</p><p>B. nanus was described based on a single male from Paraguay (Carpintero 1980) (Fig. 6). Maldonado (1990) recorded the species only from Paraguay. However, Dougherty (1995) recorded this species only from Argentina, which may have possibly been a mistake because most of the species described by Carpintero (1980), including Brontostoma spp., were from Argentina.</p><p>Until the description of B. nanus, all the variability observed in the Brontostoma discus species group was considered as merely infraspecific variations of B. discus (e. g., Wygodzinsky 1951). Both species seem to be very common in Brazil and many specimens previously identified as B. discus in collections are actually B. nanus .</p><p>Among the diagnostic features of B. nanus furnished by Carpintero (1980), the most objective seems to be the presence of short teeth and several hairs on the basal portion of the ventral face of the fore and middle femora (Fig. 7, A–B), which are not observed in B. discus (Fig. 8, A–B). Another objective feature to separate these two species recorded for the first time here is the shape of the median portion of the posterior process of pygophore, being subtriangular in B. discus (Fig. 9) and sub-rectangular with a discrete median notch in B. nanus (Fig. 10).</p><p>New record. Brazil.</p><p>Material examined: Brontostoma discus: BRAZIL, Ba[h]ia, Jacobina, 1 male, XII.1941, Mangabeira leg., J. C. M. Carvalho det., 1992; Mato Grosso, Serra Caeté, Mirassol d´Oeste, 1 male, 30.XI.1984, Magno &amp; Alvarenga [leg.], J. C. M. Carvalho det., 1992 [MNRJ].</p><p>Brontostoma nanus: BRAZIL, Amazonas, Manaus, 1 male, 20.X.1963, G. Marlier leg.,“ Brontostoma discus,” Maldonado det., 1985 [IRSNB]; Bahia, 1 male, [no date], Camille leg., “ Brontostoma discus,” Maldonado det., 1985 [IRSNB]; Mato Grosso [do Sul], Urucum, 1 male, I.1955, Comissão I. O. Cruz [leg.], “ Brontostoma discus,” Wygodzinsky det., 1959; Pará, Taperinha, 1 male, [no date], G. Hagmann leg. “Museu Nacional,” n° [blank], “ Brontostoma discus,” Wygodzinsky det., 1959, [MNRJ]; São Paulo, Pirapora, 1 female, [no date], J. Whithofs leg., Brontostoma discus ”, Maldonado det., 1985 [IRSNB].</p><p>Brontostoma trux (Stål, 1859)</p><p>Brontostoma trux was unknown to Wygodzinsky (1951), who misinterpreted the species and confused it with B. rubrovenosum . This mistake can be inferred now by the study of photographs of syntypes of the former species (Figs. 11–12). Specimens of B. trux determined as B. rubrovenosum by P. Wygodzinsky and deposited in MNRJ confirmed this fact, which was reflected in misdiagnosis of both species in his key for species of Brontostoma (Wygodzinsky 1951) . His opinion was followed in the keys provided by Gil-Santana et al. (2004, 2005), in which a specimen of B. trux is wrongly identified as B. rubrovenosum . In the description of B. trux, Stål (1859) recognized two varieties of this species (“a” and “b”; Figs. 11 and 12, respectively) based on the coloration of the corium of hemelytra (reddish with variation in the blackish markings). An additional variation of these color features on the corium of the hemelytra was observed in specimens from two locations in Rio de Janeiro State, Brazil. Specimens from lowland areas (sea level) have darkened corium with reddish markings at basal and distal corial margins (Fig. 13), whereas those from higher altitudes (ca. 1000 m above sea level) have extensive longitudinal reddish stripes (Fig. 14). Additionally, the extremities of the femora, tibiae, and tarsus are darkened or blackish in the specimens from higher altitudes (Fig. 14) and in the type specimens (Stål 1859), whilst these parts have very small or no darkened or blackish markings in the specimens from lowland regions (Fig. 13).</p><p>Importantly, the antenna of a nymph (Fig. 15) of this species has seven segments (Fig. 16), as observed in adults.</p><p>Material examined: Brontostoma trux: BRAZIL, Rio de Janeiro, Cabo Frio (22º 40’ S – 42º 00’ W), 1 male, 10.I.1997, 1 male, 29.V.2003, at light, 1 female, 28.X.2001, 1 female, 01.II.1999, 1 nymph, IX.2002, on the ground, Gil-Santana leg.; Itaguaí, 500 m, 1 female, 25.II.1948, W. Zikán leg., “ Brontostoma rubrovenosum,” Wygodzinsky det. [MNRJ]; Nova Friburgo (22º 17’ S – 42º 29’ W), 1049 m, 1 female, 02.II.2003, on the ground, PLATE 2. Figs. 11–16, Brontostoma trux, 11–12, syntypes deposited in Museum of Natural History, Humboldt University (Museum für Naturkunde der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, ZMHB) (courtesy of Dr. Jürgen Deckert), dorsal view, 11, female, 12, male, 13–14, females from Rio de Janeiro State, Brazil, 13, specimen from lowland region, alive, 14, specimen from ca. 1000 m above sea level, dorsal view, 15–16, nymph, 15, dorsal view, 16, right antenna.</p><p>W. Zeraik leg., 1 female., 30.III.2003, R. Vassallo Monteiro leg.; Rio de Janeiro, Jacarepaguá, 1 male, [no date], H. Berla [leg.], “ Brontostoma rubrovenosum,” Wygodzinsky det. [MNRJ].</p><p>Discussion. Since the coloration patterns in Ectrichodiinae seem to be aposematic (Dougherty 1995; Gil- Santana et al. 2005), and coloration has been used as the main character to separate the species, future revision of Brontostoma is needed to help understand the species’ limits, reveal potential synonyms among them, and possibly identify cryptic and undescribed species.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/DA46878AFFFA904BC3D1F8E6692EFEC5	Public Domain	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Gil-Santana, Hélcio R.;Baena, Manuel;Grillo, Horacio	Gil-Santana, Hélcio R., Baena, Manuel, Grillo, Horacio (2013): Berengeria Gil-Santana & Coletto-Silva, a junior synonym of Ectrichodiella Fracker & Bruner, with new records and taxonomic notes on Ectrichodiinae from Brazil, and with keys to Ectrichodiinae and Reduviinae genera of the New World (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Reduviidae). Zootaxa 3652 (1), DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3652.1.2
DA46878AFFFA904FC3D1FEC36ABAFBD4.text	DA46878AFFFA904FC3D1FEC36ABAFBD4.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Brontostoma Kirkaldy 1904	<div><p>Brontostoma Kirkaldy, 1904</p><p>The genus Brontostoma Kirkaldy, 1904, currently includes just over twenty species (Maldonado 1990; Dougherty 1995; Gil-Santana et al. 2004; 2005; Gil-Santana &amp; Baena 2009). Although Maldonado (1990) and Dougherty (1995) disagreed regarding the validity of some of the described species (see Gil-Santana et al. 2005 for a complete discussion), the generic concept of Brontostoma is the same in both Dougherty (1995) and Carpintero &amp; Maldonado (1996).</p><p>Species of Brontostoma are brightly colored with red, orange, yellow, and black or, rarely, buff-yellow and brown (Dougherty 1995). The main character used for separation of the species has been the coloration pattern (Wygodzinsky 1951), despite the intra-specific variation observed in several species and doubts on the limits between some specific taxa (Wygodzinsky 1951; Dougherty 1995; Carpintero &amp; Maldonado 1996; Gil-Santana et al. 2005). Because the coloration patterns in Ectrichodiinae seem to be aposematic, with apparent Müllerian mimicry between many species (Dougherty 1995; Gil-Santana et al. 2005), coloration may not be useful for ascertaining the proximity between some species within each genus. Several species of Brontostoma have similar structural characteristics that are more useful for generic diagnosis than for species determination. In many species of the genus there is sexual dimorphism; females are usually bigger than males and may have thickened forelegs, widened abdomens, and reduced eyes and wings (Dougherty 1995).</p><p>The Brontostoma species already cited in Brazil (Stål 1872; Lethierry &amp; Severin 1896; Wygodzinsky 1949, 1951; Maldonado 1990; Dougherty 1995; Gil-Santana et al. 2004, 2005; Gil-Santana 2008) are: Brontostoma alboannulatum (Stål, 1860), B. bahiensis Gil-Santana, Costa &amp; Marques, 2004, B. basalis (Stål, 1859), B. circumductum (Stål, 1859), B. colossus (Distant, 1902), B. discus (Burmeister, 1835), B. doughertyae Gil-Santana, Lopes, Marques &amp; Jurberg, 2005, B. fraternum (Stål, 1859), B. infensum Wygodzinsky, 1951, B. oglobini oglobini Wygodzinsky, 1951, B. rubrovenosum (Stål, 1860), B. rubrum (Amyot &amp; Serville, 1843), B. sanguinosum (Stål, 1872), and B. trux (Stål, 1859) .</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/DA46878AFFFA904FC3D1FEC36ABAFBD4	Public Domain	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Gil-Santana, Hélcio R.;Baena, Manuel;Grillo, Horacio	Gil-Santana, Hélcio R., Baena, Manuel, Grillo, Horacio (2013): Berengeria Gil-Santana & Coletto-Silva, a junior synonym of Ectrichodiella Fracker & Bruner, with new records and taxonomic notes on Ectrichodiinae from Brazil, and with keys to Ectrichodiinae and Reduviinae genera of the New World (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Reduviidae). Zootaxa 3652 (1), DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3652.1.2
DA46878AFFFE9044C3D1F89F6A69F97E.text	DA46878AFFFE9044C3D1F89F6A69F97E.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ectrichodia minima (Valdes 1910) Valdes 1910	<div><p>Ectrichodiella minima (Valdés, 1910)</p><p>In the “Reduvini” Family in a catalog of the Hemiptera of the Gundlach Museum in Cuba, Valdés (1910) (page 435) recorded the specimen number 45 as “ Ectoiocchoda [sic] minima,” an unpublished taxon. Fracker &amp; Bruner (1924) described a new genus and species, Ectrichodiella cubensis, based on a single female from Sierra Maestra, Cuba, conserved in USNM (Fig. 17). These authors also stated “two examples of this species in the Gundlach Museum are considerably smaller than the above. These are labeled “ Ectrichodia minima Uhler,” which is evidently a manuscript name as no description has been found.” Bruner &amp; Barber (1937) established E. cubensis as a junior synonym of E. minima, transferring this species to Ectrichodiella. They had found that the manuscript name in the Gundlach Museum, Ectrichodia minima Uhler, had been published in 1910 by Pedro Valdés as Ectoiocchoda minima, arguing that those who adhere to a very strict interpretation of the International Code will prefer to use this specific name and credit it to Valdés (Bruner &amp; Barber 1937). These authors also commented on a male of this species, which was very similar to the female. The type of Ectrichodiella has been considered to be Ectrichodia minima Valdés, 1910 by Wygodzinsky (1949), Dougherty (1995), and Carpintero &amp; Maldonado (1996). However, Maldonado (1990) considered it to be Ectrichodiella cubensis Fracker &amp; Bruner, 1924, by original designation, although there was no explicit mention to this designation by Fracker &amp; Bruner (1924). According to ICZN, it seems that the type of Ectrichodiella must be, in fact, Ectrichodia minima Valdés, 1910, by monotypy, but mainly by subsequent designation by Wygodzinsky (1949).</p><p>Redescription. Male (Figs. 18–23). Dimensions (in mm): Total length: to tip of abdomen: 3.79; to tip of hemelytra: 4.17; maximum width of the body (at level of tergites IV–V): 1.79. Head: length: 0.61; width: 0.98; interocular width: 0.38; eye width: 0.18; antennal segments: I: 0.58; II: 0.93; III: 0.25; IV: 0.76; IV-1: 0.18; IV-2: 0.19; IV-3: 0.18; IV-4: 0.20; rostral segments: I: 0.51; II: 0.38; III: not measured. Thorax: pronotum: fore lobe: length: 0.23; width: 0.63; hind lobe: length: 0.51; width: 1.19; scutellum: length: 0.35. Legs: forelegs: femur: 0.96; tibia: not measured; tarsus: 0.33; middle legs: femur: 1.01; tibia: 1.01; tarsus: 0.3; hind legs: femur: 1.14; tibia: 1.31; tarsus: 0.35. Hemelytra: length: 2.78; maximum width (at level of tergites IV–V): 1.34; membrane maximum width: 1.39. Body testaceous yellow. Hemelytra brown, clearer light brown or testaceous veins. Body covered with long, thin, yellow pilosity HEAD: Eyes dark brown, large, protruding, reniform in side view, almost reaching bottom of head; ommatidia hemispheric, very well marked. Back of eyes and head covered with dense fringe of short whitish hairs. Ocelli large, prominent, separated by one wide groove slightly wider than ocellar diameter; dark ring surrounding base of each ocellus. Front with shallow median sulcus, more pronounced posteriorly near ocelli where flanked by two hemispherical elevations visible in side view surpassing the eye level and below level of ocelli. Occipital sulcus extends from posterior edge of eye, reflecting in the bottom of the head. Tylus prominent, carinated throughout its length, basally with U-shaped depression with extremes reaching base of antennae. Antennae: covered with small setigerous tubercles, its base covered by semicircular lateral sclerite. First antennomere thickened, provided with two tubercles apically more pronounced than the others, one dorsal and one lateral. Second antennomere somewhat thinner than first. III and IV much thinner and delicate than I and II. All antennomeres covered with long, thin hairs whose length exceeds twice diameter of segments. Rostrum: first segment thick and longer, second shorter than first and third very short. Proportions of segments 40: ~ 30: ~ 6. THORAX: Meso and metasternum of caramel color, smooth, shiny, its sutures covered with dense fringe of short whitish pubescence; which is at center of thorax and abdominal-thoracic suture too. Pronotum: bell-shaped; fore lobe narrower than hind, anterior angles rounded, not protruding; fore edge straight, finely beaded and covered with short, dense pubescence; the disc smooth, glossy with shallow convolutions; longitudinal groove shallow reaching the transverse constriction. It has two blunt discal tubercles. Hind lobe smooth. Median groove does not reach posterior border, deep in disc and less pronounced towards end; two shallow lateral longitudinal grooves at level of humeral angles. Posterior margin straight between scutellar angles and with wide scutellar notch which fits the scutellum; scutellar angles straight. Posterior margins of pronotum between scutellar and humeral angles oblique. Humeral angles rounded. Scutellum triangular, ending in thick rounded tip; base of scutellum with deep depression finely keeled in middle and limited laterally by two carinae ending in two points finer than median tip. Carinae and scutellar apex with long, thin yellowish hairs. Hemelytra surpassing tip of abdomen. Corium with reduced venation, a large cell occupying almost its entire length; distal region broad, heavily sclerotized with straw color that stands out on the darkest membranous areas. Veins and cuneal area with long and thin yellow hairs. Membrane large which is 2/3 of hemelytra, finely wrinkled on back and smooth in cells; has two large cells of unequal size: basal squared, and distal piriform. Legs: Femora and tibiae covered with small setigerous tubercles. Femora somewhat dilated apically, finely granular on its top, covered with dense and fine hairs, longer than diameter of femur. Fore femora a bit thicker than others. Two small teeth in lower distal end of femur. Tibiae cylindrical, without fossula spongiosa; fore tibia compressed and dilated distally with tibial comb at tip. Tarsi twosegmented, basal segment very small, four times shorter than second. Claws long and thin, longer than first tarsomere. ABDOMEN: squared, subcircular, posterior edge straight, with long pilosity on all borders, more dense and long towards the end. Sternites smooth, with some sparse and weak punctuation. Abdominal spiracles located in middle, on suture of the sternites with connexivum. Connexivum finely rough-looking, with rim along its entire length, which is visible dorsally in segments II–VI, and with one blunt tubercle on posterior edge of segment I. Sutures VI and VII somewhat split. Posterior edge of pygofer reaching end of abdomen. MALE GENITALIA (Figs. 19–23): Paramere falciform with sensory hairs in tip, without distal teeth (Fig. 21). Pygophore (Figs. 19–20): with ventral notch in side view, in lateral view with two lateral and one central tuff of hairs; hind border without median projection and finely and irregularly ondulated. Phallus with two sclerotizations in distal region (Fig. 23).</p><p>Material examined: CUBA, Topes de Collantes, Escambray, 1 male, IV-1976, Molto leg., coll. Horacio Grillo.</p><p>Ectrichodiella rafaeli (Gil-Santana &amp; Coletto-Silva, 2005), new combination</p><p>Morphological remarks. Female (Figs. 24–35). Dimensions (in mm): HOLOTYPE: Total length: to tip of abdomen: 3.55; to tip of hemelytra: 3.8; head length: 0.65; head width: 0.63; interocular distance: 0.45; eye width: 0.12; antennal segments: I: 0.5; II: 0.6; III–IV: absent; rostral segments: I: 0.45; II: 0.2; III: 0.1. Thorax: pronotum: fore lobe: length: 0.3; width: 0.65; hind lobe: length: 0.45; width: 1.2; scutellum: length: 0.3; maximum width: 0.5. Legs: forelegs: femur: 0.9; tibia: 0.9; tarsus: absent; middle legs: femur: 0.9; tibia: 0.95; tarsus: 0.3; hind legs: femur: 1.15; tibia: 1.2; tarsus: 0.3. Abdomen: length: 1.7; maximum width: 1.7. General coloration brownish (Fig. 24). HEAD (Figs. 25–27): with long fine yellowish hairs, and dense fringe of short whitish hairs on ventral and posterior areas; integument opaque; eyes salient, somewhat small; with transverse sulcus just behind eyes; ocelli bright; rostrum elongated, reaching prosternum; first rostral segment reaching posterior margin of eyes, longer than second and third segments combined; antennal insertion protected laterally by small sclerite; clypeus thin; covered with fine long hairs; antennal segments I and II (other absent) covered with long fine hairs; segment I somewhat enlarged; segment II somewhat curved; median portion of ventral area of head forming a tumescence; posterolateral angle of head prominent almost forming a tubercle. THORAX (Figs. 24–25, 28): somewhat darker, covered with long fine yellowish hairs and fringe of short whitish hairs on anterior margin, adjacent to head, on mesosternum, metasternum, pleural area adjacent to meso-metathorax suture, besides small tufts of these hairs on posterior portions of pro and middle coxae; integument opaque; fore lobe of pronotum much narrower than hind lobe; midlongitudinal furrow formed by series of small shallow subcircular impressions, more profound at mid portion, interrupted at anterior margin and obsolete posteriorly; transverse furrow not well defined; fore lobe with granulosity on lateral sides, a small spine on left side of lateral margin at posterior half, and a pair of conspicuous spines on its center (Fig. 28); posterior margin of hind lobe produced sublaterally; metasternum with fringe of short whitish hairs in area adjacent to first sternite; scutellum with median well developed process with rounded apex and two lateral short subtriangular processes, and a pair of somewhat excavated and shiny areas at basal portion. Legs brighter, with long yellowish hairs; coxae short, globose; trochanters subtriangular; femora with granulosity on its upper portion, a small subapical dilatation and a pair of apical small denticles; fore tibiae enlarged apically (Figs. 29–30), somewhat excavated at ventral side on apex, with much more numerous and shorter hairs on ventral apical portion (Fig. 30); with apical conspicuous spine on anterior margin and another two much smaller, one near this bigger spine and other at posterior margin, between these there is a short comb (Fig. 29); middle and hind tibiae straight; with much more numerous and shorter hairs on posterior apical portion; some straight hairs on posterior margin of hind tibiae are especially long, reaching six times the width of the segment (Fig. 34); tarsi two-segmented. Hemelytra extending beyond tip of abdomen; darkened; base, veins and surround area on corium bright, almost yellowish; corium with elongated cell near costal margin; membrane blackish with bright veins and two large cells, the distal a little larger than basal one; corium has very sparse fine long hairs, mainly on distal half of Costal vein; membrane glabrous. ABDOMEN: enlarged; with a pair of conspicuous spines on lateral margin of first abdominal segment (Figs. 31, 33); connexivum with long bright hairs, mainly on its margin, with dorsal prominent crest on inner margin and intersegmental sutures white (Figs. 24, 32); sternites brighter, with shining integument; first sternite with fringe of short whitish hairs basally (Fig. 33); other sternites with very sparse long bright hairs; median keel is present on first five sternites; intersegmentar sutures very faintly marked between sternites II–IV. Genital segments with opaque integument, with long fine hairs; their external appearance in posterior view as Fig. 35.</p><p>Material examined: Berengeria rafaeli, HOLOTYPE female: BRAZIL, Amazonas, Reserva Ducke, 26 km N of Manaus, 27-VIII-1982 / J. A. Rafael [leg.], Ar. Malaise / Hemipt 155 Holotipo / HOLOTIPO, Berengeria rafaeli Gil-Santana &amp; Coletto-Silva, 2005 (red label) [INPA].</p><p>Discussion. E. rafaeli, new comb. was described based on a single female (Gil-Santana &amp; Coletto-Silva 2005), which remains as the unique known specimen of this species. It has only the first two antennal segments. Gil-Santana &amp; Coletto-Silva (2005) included E. rafaeli, new comb. in Reduviinae based on features recorded in other genera or species belonging to this subfamily, like two-segmented tarsi, absence of fossula spongiosa in tibiae, and two cells in the membrane of hemelytra ( Nalata Stål, 1860); a relative reduction of the area of the corium when compared to the membrane of hemelytra ( Microlestria Stål, 1872) as well as the general resemblance, hemelytral coloration, and long body hairs like Peregrinator biannulipes (Montrouzier &amp; Signoret, 1861) . However, recently, the French entomologist Dr. Jean-Michel Bérenger noticed an evident similarity between Berengeria and Ectrichodiella Fracker &amp; Bruner, 1924, suggesting that the former should be, in fact, a junior synonymy of the latter and kindly communicated this fact to the senior author. The holotype of B. rafaeli was reexamined and the synonym between Berengeria and Ectrichodiella, with E. rafaeli as a new combination as well as its transference to Ectrichodiinae, are formally presented here. All features considered by Gil-Santana &amp; Coletto-Silva (2005) as diagnostic of Berengeria, as well as belonging to Reduviinae, are shared with Ectrichodiella, which reinforces the synonym proposed.</p><p>E. minima and E. rafaeli, new comb. show features that have not been found in other New World Ectrichodiinae (Fracker &amp; Bruner 1924; Bruner 1926; Wygodzinsky 1951; Dougherty 1995; Carpintero &amp; Maldonado 1996): antennal insertion protected laterally by a small sclerite, the scutellum triangular finished in a blunt tip and with two midlateral projections, absence of spongy fossae on apex of fore and middle tibia, and twosegmented tarsi. Both species also have in common a small size, long fine hairs on integument, general shape of the head, first rostral segment reaching posterior margin of the eyes, hemelytra with similar venation, and abdomen relatively broad.</p><p>According to our observations the scutellum of Ectrichodiella does not have three distal projections as occurs in other genera of Ectrichodiinae from the Old World like Libaviellus, Miller 1954 and Rellimocoris, Dougherty 1982 (Dougherty 1982; see her Figs. 1, 2-E, 4-C). In fact, the scutellum of Ectrichodiella is triangular with two lateral projections located at the middle and finished in a rounded blunt tip (Fig. 25; see also Fracker &amp; Bruner 1924: their Fig. 1).</p><p>The actual taxonomic position of Ectrichodiella as an Ectrichodiinae should be based more on future comprehensive phylogenetic studies and, if possible, by examining more specimens of Ectrichodiella.</p><p>Regarding the validity of E. rafaeli, new comb., there are several features to be considered. The ocelli are not prominent in E. rafaeli, new comb. as they are in E. minima (Figs 26–27; see also Weirauch 2010, her Fig. 1-F). The pronotum of E. rafaeli, new comb. is opaque, brownish, covered with long fine hairs, showing granulosity on the lateral sides of the fore lobe, together with a pair of conspicuous spines on the center of the fore lobe (Figs. 24– 26, 28); whereas in E. minima the fore lobe is yellowish, glabrous, shining, smooth, polished, with just a pair of hemispherical elevations, each with a small tubercle in front of the fore lobe (Fracker &amp; Bruner 1924; Carpintero &amp; Maldonado 1996) (Figs. 17–18). A median keel occurs on the first five sternites of E. rafaeli, new comb., but only the distal sternite is keeled in E. minima (Fracker &amp; Bruner 1924; Carpintero &amp; Maldonado 1996). E. rafaeli, new comb. shows a pair of conspicuous spines on the lateral margin of first abdominal segment (Figs. 25, 31, 33), which is much less developed in E. minima (Figs. 17–18); and a prominent crest on the inner margin of connexivum, dorsally (Fig. 32), which are absent in E. minima . Thus, differences showed by E. rafaeli, new comb. and E. minima may be sufficient to maintain these two taxa as separated species. On the other hand, perhaps the differences may be because of geographical variation, which can be clarified only if more specimens can be studied in the future.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/DA46878AFFFE9044C3D1F89F6A69F97E	Public Domain	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Gil-Santana, Hélcio R.;Baena, Manuel;Grillo, Horacio	Gil-Santana, Hélcio R., Baena, Manuel, Grillo, Horacio (2013): Berengeria Gil-Santana & Coletto-Silva, a junior synonym of Ectrichodiella Fracker & Bruner, with new records and taxonomic notes on Ectrichodiinae from Brazil, and with keys to Ectrichodiinae and Reduviinae genera of the New World (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Reduviidae). Zootaxa 3652 (1), DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3652.1.2
DA46878AFFFA904FC3D1FF3C6A99FF56.text	DA46878AFFFA904FC3D1FF3C6A99FF56.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ectrichodiinae	<div><p>Subfamily Ectrichodiinae</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/DA46878AFFFA904FC3D1FF3C6A99FF56	Public Domain	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Gil-Santana, Hélcio R.;Baena, Manuel;Grillo, Horacio	Gil-Santana, Hélcio R., Baena, Manuel, Grillo, Horacio (2013): Berengeria Gil-Santana & Coletto-Silva, a junior synonym of Ectrichodiella Fracker & Bruner, with new records and taxonomic notes on Ectrichodiinae from Brazil, and with keys to Ectrichodiinae and Reduviinae genera of the New World (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Reduviidae). Zootaxa 3652 (1), DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3652.1.2
DA46878AFFF19040C3D1F8C86ED2FE73.text	DA46878AFFF19040C3D1F8C86ED2FE73.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Racelda robusta Berenger & Gil-Santana 2005	<div><p>Racelda robusta Bérenger &amp; Gil-Santana, 2005</p><p>Racelda robusta was recently described based on a male from French Guiana (Bérenger &amp; Gil-Santana 2005). Whereas the holotype has the center of posterior lobe of pronotum entirely blackish, the male recorded here has a less extensive blackish coloration (Fig. 36).</p><p>PLATE 4. Figs. 24–35, Berengeria rafaeli, female holotype, 24, dorsal view, 25, head, pronotum and basal portion of hemelytra, dorsal view, 26–27, head, lateral view, 27(fringe of whitish hairs not represented), 28, head and pronotum, lateral view, the arrow points to the spine of the fore lobe of pronotum, 29–30, apex of fore femur, 29, outer face, 30, inner face, 31, spines of first abdominal segment, 32, crest of inner margin of connexivum, 33, left portion of first sternites, ventral view, 34, hind leg, lateral view, 35, genital segments, posterior view, 36, Racelda robusta, male, dorsal view.</p><p>The taxonomic validity and systematic position of the New World genera of Ectrichodiinae should be evaluated by an extensive revision of the taxa, including a cladistic analysis. In this work, all the genera considered valid by Carpintero &amp; Maldonado (1996) and those described by Dougherty (1995) and Bérenger &amp; Gil-Santana (2005), were included in the following key to New World genera of Ectrichodiinae .</p><p>Key to the New World genera of Ectrichodiinae, based on Wygodzinsky (1951), Dougherty (1995), Carpintero &amp; Maldonado Capriles (1996), Forero (2004), and Bérenger &amp; Gil-Santana (2005).</p><p>1. Antennal insertion protected laterally by a small sclerite. Scutellum with two midlateral projections and an apical blunt tip.</p><p>Tarsi bi-segmented. Fore- and middle tibia without fossula spongiosa.............. Ectrichodiella Fracker &amp; Bruner, 1924 1’. Antennal insertions unprotected laterally, with at most a small prolongation of the antennophore. Scutellum with two distal</p><p>prongs. Tarsi tri-segmented. Fore- and mesotibia with fossula spongiosa .......................................... 2 2. Antennal insertion protected laterally by an extension of the antennophore; vertex elevated, ocellar callus conical..........</p><p>............................................................................... Jorgcoris Carpintero, 1980 2’ Antennal insertions unprotected laterally; vertex not elevated, ocellar callus conical or rounded........................ 3 3. Four antennal segments.................................................................................4 3’. Six or more [apparent] antennal segments.................................................................. 5 4. Ocelli not raised on an ocellar tubercle; sternites with heavy punctuation..................... .. Schuella Dougherty, 1995 4’. Ocelli raised on an ocellar tubercle; sternites without heavy punctuation.............................. Zirta Stål, 1859 5. Fore femur with a ventral cleft.......................................................................... 6 5’. Fore femur without ventral cleft, although it may be armed on ventral surface...................................... 9 6. Coloration uniformly black.................................................. Wygodzinskyocoris Dougherty, 1995 6’. Coloration with a combination of dark and light brown........................................................ 7 7. Sternites heavily punctuated.................................................... Cryptonannus Dougherty, 1995 7’. Sternites lacking heavy punctuation....................................................................... 8 8. Head elongate in lateral view, i. e., head length greater than head “height”................. Sinchocoris Dougherty, 1995 8’. Head subtriangular in lateral view, i. e., head length and height subequal.............. Doblepardocoris Dougherty, 1995 9. Fore femora with a row of large dentiform process ventrally......................... Borgmeierina Wygodzinsky, 1949 9’. Fore femora disarmed or at most with series of minute denticles or stiffened hairs ventrally.......................... 10 10. Post-ocular region with a pair of blunt elevations; seven antennal segments; fore and middle femora incrassated, with a ventral</p><p>carina and a row of setigerous and dentiform tubercles; ornamented with lemon yellow; length 9–9.5 mm ................</p><p>................................................................................ Xarada Carpintero, 1980 10’. Post-ocular region without a pair of elevations; seven or eight antennal segments; fore and middle femora incrassated or not</p><p>incrassated, without a ventral carina and a row of setigerous and dentiform tubercles; coloration different, usually with brown</p><p>or dark and red pattern................................................................................ 11 11. Seven antennal segments; fore lobe of pronotum with a pair of paramedial carinated lobes, ocellar callus conical; prongs of</p><p>scutellum close basally, divergent distally, spiniform............................... Travassocoris Wygodzinsky, 1947 11’. Seven to eight antennal segments; fore lobe of pronotum without a pair of paramedial carinated lobes; ocellar callus not coni-</p><p>cal: prongs of scutellum separated basally, subparallel........................................................ 12 12. Robust species with 15 to slightly over 40 mm of length; fore femora thickened, sometimes strongly so; middle femora less</p><p>frequently thickened, both with blunt tubercles or sharp and dentiform apophyses set on areas with short stiff hairs; fore and</p><p>middle trochanters with similar armature; fore and middle tibiae slightly or strongly thickening toward apex, with fossula</p><p>spongiosa well developed......................................................... Brontostoma Kirkaldy, 1904 12’. Smaller and/or less robust species; another set of characters................................................... 13 13. Head length longer than width, slender or robust............................................................ 14 13’. Head length as long as or shorter than width, robust......................................................... 20 14. First rostral segment elongated, longer than second and third together; pronotum smooth, shiny, and polished........... 15 14’. First rostral segment shorter or at most subequal, than second and third together; pronotum callous, opaque, rugose, seldom</p><p>shiny, and smooth................................................................................... 16 15. Fore lobe of pronotum with paramedial lobes, separated by a well marked midlongitudinal sulcus, which does not reach trans-</p><p>verse constriction............................................................... Parapothea Carpintero, 1980 15’. Fore lobe or pronotum without paramedial lobes, with the longitudinal sulcus obsolete..... Pothea Amyot &amp; Serville, 1843 16. Second rostral segment longer than first; fore lobe of pronotum callous, hind lobe of pronotum rugous; metasternum with two</p><p>transverse carinae.............................................................. Margacoris Carpintero, 1980 16’. Second rostral segment length subequal to first segment; another set of characters................................. 17 17. First rostral segment shorter than second and third together; second rostral segment subequal than first, at most slightly longer or shorter; red-orange and black, rarely brownish species..................................................... 18 17’. First rostral segment almost as long as or longer than second and third together; second rostral segment markedly shorter than first; dark brown, brownish, blackish, at most with yellowish markings species.................................... 19 18. Longitudinal sulcus of fore lobe of pronotum well developed anteriorly, not reaching transverse constriction; pronotum often rugose, generally on anterior lobe, opaque or moderately shiny; length 10–26 mm ................... Rhiginia Stål, 1859 18’. Longitudinal sulcus of pronotum profound in the median portion, not reaching anterior and posterior margins; pronotum shiny, smooth; length 12–15 mm .............................................. Pseudozirta Bérenger &amp; Gil-Santana, 2005 19. First antennal segment approximately half length of head; median longitudinal sulcus in anterior lobe obsolete; length 9–11.2 mm ...................................................................... Pseudopothea Wygodzinsky, 1951 19’. First antennal segment about as long as head; median longitudinal sulcus well developed in anterior lobe of pronotum and extending into posterior lobe continuously; length 8–17 mm ................................. .. Racelda Signoret, 1863 20. Body not flattened dorsoventrally........................................................................ 21 20’. Body flattened dorsoventrally........................................................................... 22 21. With ventrolateral pouches behind eyes; eyes, ocellar callus and ocelli large to very large; legs slender, unspined, not carinated below; fossula spongiosa very reduced, less than 1/5 length of fore and 1/10 length of middle tibiae; length 14–25 mm ................................................................................... Cricetopareis Breddin, 1903 21’. Without ventrolateral pouches behind eyes; eyes, ocellar callus conical or flattened; fore and middle legs strongly carinated below, femora with setigerous granules and dentiform spines; fossula spongiosa on fore and middle tibiae moderately developed, from 1/5 to 1/3 length of segment; length 6–13 mm ........................................ Daraxa Stål, 1859 22. Longitudinal sulcus of anterior lobe of pronotum reduced to a fovea; anteocular portion of head longer than postocular; head prognathous; fore and middle femora slightly enlarged, fusiform, carinated below, with setigerous tubercles.......................................................................................... Pseudodaraxa Carpintero, 1980 22’. Longitudinal sulcus of pronotum continuous along both lobes; anteocular portion of head much shorter than postocular; head hemispherical, vertical; fore femora enlarged basally, narrowing to apex, curved, thinly carinated on basal 2/3, with setiferous and teeth-like tubercles; middle and hind femora similar, slender, straight, without carinae... Pseudoracelda Carpintero, 1980</p><p>As the most recent keys to the American Reduviinae genera were written in three different Latin languages but not in English (Bérenger et al. 1996; Forero 2004; Gil-Santana &amp; Coletto-Silva 2005), an updated key to these taxa is herein presented.</p><p>Key to the New World genera of Reduviinae, based on Lent &amp; Wygodzinsky (1948), Bérenger et al. (1996), Forero (2004), and Gil-Santana &amp; Coletto-Silva (2005).</p><p>1. Mandibular plates lamellate and elongated, including between them the base of the rostrum and surpassing the level of first</p><p>antennomere; antenna inserted laterally on head...................................... Aradomorpha Champion 1899 1’. Mandibular plates different; antennae inserted dorsally on head.................................................. 2 2. Tibiae without fossula spongiosa ......................................................................... 3 2’. Tibiae with fossula spongiosa ............................................................................ 5 3. More than 20 mm in length; legs long and slender, dorsal surface of femora smooth; lateral margins of scutellum with a pair of</p><p>sub-basal tubercles................................................................... Patago Bergroth, 1905 3’. Less than 10 mm in length; legs short, dorsal surface of femora strongly granulated; lateral margins of scutellum without tuber-</p><p>cles................................................................................................. 4 4. Anterior trochanter ventrally with a stout spiniform process; corium and membrane of hemelytra sharply detached from each</p><p>other, their relative dimensions as usual....................................................... Nalata Stål, 1860 4’. Anterior trochanter without a spiniform process; corium of hemelytra reduced to a narrow external band, not sharply detached</p><p>from the membrane, the latter very large, elongated forward to reach the hind border of pronotum..... Microlestria Stål, 1872 5. Apex of all femora at ventral surface with a distinct pair of dentiform processes.................... Leogorrus Stål, 1859 5’. Apex of all femora at ventral surface without such processes...................................................6 6. Disc of fore lobe of pronotum without tubercles or spines......................................................7 6’. Disc of fore lobe of pronotum with tubercles or spines....................................................... 12 7. Anterior and median femora with teeth all over ventral surface................................ Pantopsilus Berg, 1879 7’. Anterior and median femora without teeth processes on ventral surface........................................... 8 8. Smaller species, 6–8 mm of length........................................................................ 9 8’. Larger species, over 10 mm of length..................................................................... 10 9. Body covered with long fine hairs; posterior angles of connexivum smooth.................. Peregrinator Kirkaldy, 1904 9’. Body not covered with long fine hairs; posterior angles of connexivum with denticular lateral processes..................</p><p>....................................................................... Namapa Wygodzinsky &amp; Lent, 1980 10. Anterior femora slightly sulcated longitudinally on ventral surface, with two longitudinal rows of very numerous short bristles;</p><p>the two cells of membrane with equal width................................... Corupaia Lent &amp; Wygodzinsky, 1948 10’. Anterior femora not sulcated ventrally, with simple hairs only; the two cells of membrane with different dimensions...... 11 11. Outer cell of the membrane wider than inner cell; posterior border of hind lobe of pronotum not reflexed.................</p><p>................................................................................. Reduvius Fabricius, 1775 11’. Inner cell of the membrane wider than outer cell; posterior border of hind lobe of pronotum reflexed.....................</p><p>................................................................... Pseudozelurus Lent &amp; Wygodzinsky, 1947 12. Pronotum distinctly granulated..........................................................................13 12’ Pronotum not granulated...............................................................................14 13. Disc of anterior lobe of pronotum with four tubercles; fore and median femora more thickened than hind ones.............</p><p>................................................................................ Opisthacidius Berg, 1879 13’. Disc of anterior lobe of pronotum with a pair of tubercles or short spines; fore and median femora slender, not much more</p><p>thickened than hind ones.................................................. Zeluroides Lent &amp; Wygodzinsky, 1948 14. Mandibular plates very thickened, prominent, reaching surpassing apex of head; clypeus vertical.......................</p><p>...................................................................... Neivacoris Lent &amp; Wygodzinsky, 1947 14’. Mandibular plates less developed, not reaching apex of head; clypeus never vertical.................. Zelurus Hahn, 1826</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/DA46878AFFF19040C3D1F8C86ED2FE73	Public Domain	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Gil-Santana, Hélcio R.;Baena, Manuel;Grillo, Horacio	Gil-Santana, Hélcio R., Baena, Manuel, Grillo, Horacio (2013): Berengeria Gil-Santana & Coletto-Silva, a junior synonym of Ectrichodiella Fracker & Bruner, with new records and taxonomic notes on Ectrichodiinae from Brazil, and with keys to Ectrichodiinae and Reduviinae genera of the New World (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Reduviidae). Zootaxa 3652 (1), DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3652.1.2
