Research Article
Print
Research Article
New species and new records of Monohelea Kieffer (Diptera, Ceratopogonidae) from Brazil
expand article infoMaria Clara Alves Santarém‡, Erick Aragão Cardoso‡, Israel de Souza Pinto§, Maria Luiza Felippe-Bauer‡
‡ Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
§ Instituto Federal de Educação, Itaituba, Brazil

Corresponding author: Maria Clara Alves Santarém ( mcalves@ioc.fiocruz.br )

Academic editor: Art Borkent
© 2022 Maria Clara Alves Santarém, Erick Aragão Cardoso, Israel de Souza Pinto, Maria Luiza Felippe-Bauer.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation: Alves Santarém MC, Aragão Cardoso E, de Souza Pinto I, Felippe-Bauer ML (2022) New species and new records of Monohelea Kieffer (Diptera, Ceratopogonidae) from Brazil. ZooKeys 1136: 175-185. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.1136.86680
ZooBank: urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:F45E38EE-0E8C-4EE2-9AD5-8438203DEE56
Open Access

Abstract

Two new Brazilian species of Monohelea Kieffer are described and illustrated based on male specimens, Monohelea capixaba sp. nov. from Espírito Santo and Monohelea coimbrai sp. nov. from Rio de Janeiro. New records for M. aguirrei Tavares & Souza, M. archibaldoi Tavares & Souza and M. maculipennis (Coquillet) are given based on specimens from Espírito Santo (all three species) and Amapá (M. maculipennis only). All specimens are deposited in the Ceratopogonidae Collection of Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Brazil.

Keywords

Aquatic, biodiversity, Neotropical, predaceous midges, taxonomy

Introduction

The predaceous genus Monohelea Kieffer is distributed worldwide and includes 97 extant species (Borkent and Dominiak 2020; Borkent et al. 2022). Santarém and Felippe-Bauer (2021) recognized 25 species from the Neotropics, of which 16 are cited as present in Brazil. Monohelea is included in the tribe Ceratopogonini, the females of which are known to be predators of other small insects, mainly chironomids (Diptera, Chironomidae) (Wirth and Grogan 1988). Downes (1978) reported females of Monohelea preying on swarming males of chironomids in Ontario, Canada. According to Wirth and Grogan (1981), the larvae are most frequently found in sphagnum moss and other bog-like habitats. Only a few species of Monohelea are known as immatures. Glukhova (1971, 1977) described the larva and discussed the habitat of species from Russia. Elson-Harris (1990) provided information about larva and pupa of Monohelea from Australia. Wirth and Grogan (1981) and Borkent (2014) described two pupae of the genus belonging to species from the United States (Maryland and New York), reared from sphagnum bog. Knowledge concerning the habitat of immature stages of Monohelea is lacking in the Neotropical region. The study of material deposited in the Ceratopogonidae Collection of Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ/CCER) revealed the presence of two undescribed species from the Brazilian States of Espírito Santo and Rio de Janeiro and new records of Monohelea aguirrei Tavares & Souza, M. archibaldoi Tavares & Souza for Espírito Santo and M. maculipennis (Coquillet) for Espírito Santo and Amapá.

With the addition of the new species and the new records, there are now 27 species of Monohelea known from the Neotropics, 18 from Brazil and 11 from the Brazilian Amazon region.

Materials and methods

Adult specimens were mounted on microscope slides in phenol-Canada balsam after the method described by Wirth and Marston (1968). Diagnostic characters were microphotographed using a NIKON Eclipse E 200 microscope with digital camera MOTICAM 2300, 3.0 MP, USB 2.0, and the plates were prepared using GIMP Portable 2.6. The general terminology is that employed in the paper on Brazilian Monohelea by Felippe-Bauer et al. (2017). Terms of the wing follow the system of the Manual of Central American Diptera (Borkent et al. 2009). All measurements are in micrometers, except those of the wings, which are in millimeters. This research is registered at SisGen (National System for the Management of Genetic Heritage and Associated Traditional Knowledge) under the number ABBD939. All specimens were deposited in the Ceratopogonidae Collection of Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ/CCER) and have been given a specimen registration number.

Monohelea capixaba Santarém & Felippe-Bauer, sp. nov.

https://zoobank.org/B4C144D5-2EF4-42CF-876D-8860EC777758
Figs 1, 2

Holotype

Male, on microscope slide, labeled “Holotype Monohelea capixaba Santarém and Felippe-Bauer”, “São Luiz de Baixo, Pancas, Espírito Santo, BRASIL, 19° 12'34.43"S, 40°49’13.75"W, 14.XII.2010, CDC light trap, mata, Pinto, I.S. [leg.]” (CCER#3699).

Diagnosis

Male adult: The only Neotropical species of Monohelea with legs yellowish, hind femur with basal brown band, mesal brown stripe and subapical ventral brown spot; parameres triangular, greatly expanded at single base, tapering distally, with apical portion simple and pointed apex. Female adult: unknown.

Description

Male. Head (Fig. 1C): eyes separated medially by a distance of 2 ommatidia. Antenna (Fig. 1B) brown; antennal ratio 0.95. Palpus pale brown, short; 3rd segment with small, shallow sensory pit, 5th segment darker, palpal ratio 1.29.

Figure 1. 

Monohelea capixaba sp. nov., male A wing B antenna C head, anterior view D fore-, mid-, hind legs (left to right), lateral view E genitalia, ventral view F thorax, dorsal view.

Thorax. Scutum brown, two median pale strips (Fig. 1F). Legs (Fig. 1D) yellowish; coxae and trochanters brown; forefemur with basal brown band and mesal brown stripe, midfemur with basal brown band, hind femur with basal brown band, mesal brown stripe and subapical ventral brown spot; tibiae brown apically; hind tibia with subbasal spot, mesal stripe; tibiofemoral joints yellowish; hind tibial comb with 5 bristles. Tarsi pale; fore-, hind tarsomere 1 with one basal, one apical spine; midtarsomere 1 with 2 basal, 2 apical spines; apical spines of tarsomeres 2–4 of fore-, mid-, hind legs: 1-1-1, 2-2-2, 1-1-1; basal spines absent; fore-, mid-, hind tarsal ratios 2.14, 2.43, 1.87; claws small, paired, equal-sized, 0.43–0.48× as long as 5th tarsomeres. Wing (Fig. 1A): macrotrichia present in wing margin; microtrichia absent; 2nd radial cell nearly 2× longer than 1st; wing length 0.77 mm, width 0.30 mm; costal ratio 0.68. Halter pale, distal portion of knob darker.

Abdomen. Pale brown. Genitalia brown (Figs 1E, 2A–C): sternite IX spiculate except on basal portion, posterior margin with a short, convex, median lobe with 4 long setae; tergite IX tapering, quadrate, with a pair of short apicolateral processes. Gonocoxite (Fig. 2A) moderately stout, nearly 2.06X longer than basal width, inner margin with mesal pointed protuberance; gonostylus (Fig. 2A) straight, tipped apex, 0.64 length of gonocoxite, basal 2/3 moderately pilose. Parameres (Fig. 2B) 0.91 length of aedeagus, triangular, greatly expanded at single base, tapering distally; apical portion simple, pointed apex. Aedeagus (Fig. 2C) triangular, composed of 2 pointed ventral plates; basal arms slightly expanded laterally.

Figure 2. 

Monohelea capixaba sp. nov., male A terminalia, ventral view B parameres, ventral view C aedeagus, ventral view.

Female. Unknown.

Distribution and bionomics

This species is known only from forested areas in Espírito Santo State, Brazil.

Etymology

This species name refers to the Portuguese gentilic name for the inhabitants of the Brazilian state of Espírito Santo, where the species occurs.

Taxonomic discussion

The male of this species has yellowish legs with a pattern of brown patches and the brown base of the hind femur. This pattern is similar to the Brazilian Amazonian species M. patauateua Felippe-Bauer & Trindade. Also, this species keys to couplet 22 (male) of M. mayeri Ortíz and M. hieroglyphica Kieffer in the key to Neotropical Monohelea by Lane and Wirth (1964). It can be easily distinguished from these three species by the peculiar aspect of the triangular parameres with a single base, without a mesal process.

Monohelea coimbrai Santarém & Felippe-Bauer, sp. nov.

https://zoobank.org/B09403A-C4DC-44E1-84E2-D046A0B39BDB
Figs 3, 4

Holotype

Male, on microscope slide labeled “Holotype Monohelea coimbrai Santarém and Felippe-Bauer”, “Rio Cascatinha, sessão de 2ª ordem (acima da represa) 1470 m, drift Caledônia, Nova Friburgo, Rio de Janeiro, BRASIL, 24.VIII.1995, Fittkau, UFRJ, IOC [leg.].” (CCER#3075).

Diagnosis

Male adult: The only Neotropical species of Monohelea with legs pale, hind femur with large basal band slightly infuscated, mesal brown stripe, subapical ventral brown spot; gonostylus broad basally, tapering distally, deeply curved in distal 1/2; parameres stem swollen on proximal portion, curved, gradually tapering, internally directed, with small mesal pointed process, posteriorly directed arising from the swollen portion of the parameres. Female adult: unknown.

Description

Male. Head (Fig. 3C): eyes separated medially by a distance of 2 ommatidia. Antenna (Fig. 3B) pale brown; antennal ratio 1.09. Palpus pale brown; 3rd segment with small, shallow, sensory pit; palpal ratio 1.50.

Figure 3. 

Monohelea coimbrai sp. nov., male A wing B antenna C head, anterior view D fore-, mid-, hind legs (left to right), lateral view E thorax, dorsal view F genitalia, ventral view.

Thorax. Scutum (Fig. 3E) brown, pale brown laterally, two median pale strips. Legs (Fig. 3D) pale; coxae and trochanters pale; hind femur with large basal band slightly infuscated, mesal brown stripe and subapical ventral brown spot; hind tibia with mesal brown stripe, apical brown band; tibiofemoral joints yellowish; hind tibial comb with 7 bristles. Tarsi pale; fore-, hind tarsomere 1 with one basal, one apical spine; midtarsomere 1 with 2 basal, 2 apical spines; apical spines of tarsomeres 2–4 of fore-, mid-, hind legs: 1-1-1, 2-2-2, 1-1-1; basal spines absent; fore-, mid-, hind tarsal ratios 2.12, 2.34, 1.91; claws small, paired, equal-sized, 0.38–0.42× as long as 5th tarsomeres. Wing (Fig. 3A): infuscated, macrotrichia restricted to costa; microtrichia absent; 2nd radial cell nearly 2× longer than 1st; wing length 0.92 mm, width 0.35 mm; costal ratio 0.81. Halter pale brown.

Abdomen. Yellowish. Genitalia (Figs 3F, 4A–C) yellowish: sternite IX spiculate except on basal portion, posterior margin with a short, convex, median lobe with 4 long setae; tergite IX tapering, with a pair of short apicolateral processes, each with 3 setae. Gonocoxite (Fig. 4A) moderately stout, nearly 2× longer than basal width; gonostylus (Fig. 4A) broad basally, tapering distally, distal ½ deeply curved, apex blunt, 0.74 length of gonocoxite, moderately pilose on basal 1/2. Parameres (Fig. 4B) as long as aedeagus, fused at trilobed base, stem swollen, sclerotized on proximal portion, curved, gradually tapering, internally directed, with small inconspicuous mesal pointed process, tooth-shaped, posteriorly directed, arising from the swollen portion of the parameres. Aedeagus (Fig. 4C) triangular, composed of 2 pointed ventral plates, with slightly sclerotized dorsal structure, which arises in the middle way to aedeagus base and produced beyond the apices of ventral plates, ending as an apical projection; basal arms slender, broadly expanded laterally.

Figure 4. 

Monohelea coimbrai sp. nov., male A terminalia, ventral view B parameres, ventral view C aedeagus, ventral view.

Female. Unknown

Distribution and bionomics

This species is known only from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. It has been found in forested areas near rivers, up to 1470 m above sea level.

Etymology

This species is named in honor of Dr Adelmar Coimbra-Filho (1924–2016), a biologist and primatologist. He was an enthusiast of biodiversity conservation and acted on several strategies to protect the biodiversity of Atlantic Forest, where this species has been found.

Taxonomic discussion

This species has pale legs with a pattern of brown patches and mesal processes in the parameres. It keys to couplet 19 in the key to Neotropical Monohelea by Lane and Wirth (1964), but it can be easily distinguished from M. brasiliensis Lane, M. maculipennis (Coquillet) and M. poncai Lane & Wirth by the presence of a unique, small inconspicuous mesal process of the parameres, tooth-shaped, posteriorly directed and arising from the swollen proximal portion. Monohelea coimbrai sp. nov. has a single deeply curved gonostylus that is unique in the Brazilian species of this genus.

New records

Monohelea archibaldoi Tavares & Souza, 1980

Monohelea archibaldoi Tavares & Souza, 1980: 98 (male, female, Brazil - Rio de Janeiro); Wirth and Grogan 1988: 69 (type locality); Borkent and Wirth 1997: 101 (in catalog); Borkent and Spinelli 2000: 50 (in catalog); Felippe-Bauer and Oliveira 2001: 1111 (type specimens); Borkent and Spinelli 2007: 83 (in catalog); Borkent and Dominiak 2020: 165 (in catalog); Santarém and Felippe-Bauer 2021: 18 (in Brazilian catalog).

Distribution

Brazil (Espírito Santo, Rio de Janeiro)

New records

2 males, on microscope slides labeled “Monohelea archibaldoi Tavares & Souza, 1980”, “Comunidade de São Bento, Pancas, Espírito Santo, BRASIL, 19°13'44.0"S, 40°45'31.0"W, 06/II/2011, mata, CDC light trap, Pinto, I.S. [leg.]” (CCER#3700, CCER#3701).

Monohelea aguirrei Tavares & Souza, 1980

Monohelea aguirrei Tavares & Souza, 1980: 97 (in part; male, Brazil - Rio de Janeiro); Wirth and Grogan 1988: 69 (type locality); Borkent and Wirth 1997: 101 (in catalog); Felippe-Bauer 1998: 223 (redescription); Borkent and Spinelli 2000: 50 (in catalog); Felippe-Bauer and Oliveira 2001: 1111 (type specimens); Borkent and Spinelli 2007: 83 (in catalog); Borkent and Dominiak 2020: 165 (in catalog); Santarém and Felippe-Bauer 2021: 18 (in Brazilian catalog).

Distribution

Brazil (Espírito Santo, Rio de Janeiro, Santa Catarina) and Argentina (Corrientes, Buenos Aires Province).

New records

1 male, 1 female, on microscope slides labeled “Monohelea aguirrei Tavares & Souza, 1980”, “Palmital de Baixo, Pancas, Espírito Santo, BRASIL, 19°12'47.0"S, 40°47'20.0"W, 30/IX/2010, mata, CDC light trap, Pinto, I.S. [leg.]” (CCER#3702, CCER#3703); 1 male, same data except “Córrego Itauninhas, Mucurici, 18°04'11.8"S, 40°32'47.0"W, 02/IV/2010” (CCER#3704).

Monohelea maculipennis (Coquillett, 1905)

Ceratopogon maculipennis Coquillett, 1905: 64 (female, Fla.)

Monohelea maculipennis: Kieffer 1917: 312; Wirth 1953: 140 (redescr.; Mexico, Guatemala, Panama records; figs wing, female hind leg, male genitalia; discus.); Lane and Wirth 1964: 227 (distrib.; USA, Bahamas, Ecuador records; figs female hind leg, parameres; dimorphism); Wirth and Williams 1964: 308 (distrib.; fig. parameres; dimorphism); Wirth 1974: 41 (in catalog); Wirth and Grogan 1988: 69 (type locality); Borkent and Wirth 1997: 102 (in catalog); Felippe-Bauer 1998: 228 (Brazil records); Borkent and Spinelli 2000: 50 (in catalog); Borkent and Spinelli 2007: 83 (in catalog); Felippe-Bauer et al. 2017: 159 (Brazil - Pará record); Borkent and Dominiak 2020: 166 (in catalog); Santarém and Felippe-Bauer 2021: 18 (in Brazilian catalog).

Distribution

USA (Florida, Louisiana), Mexico (Tamaulipas, Yucatan), Bahamas, Guatemala, Panama, Brazil (Amapá, Pará, Espírito Santo, Rio de Janeiro).

New records

1 male on microscope slide labeled “Monohelea maculipennis (Coquillet), 1905”, “Floresta Nacional do Rio Preto, Espírito Santo, BRASIL, 18°21'23.9"S, 39°50'41.4"W, 14/XII/2009, CDC light trap, Pinto, I.S. [leg.]” (CCER#3705); 2 males, same data except “Monumento Natural dos Pontões Capixabas, Palmital de Baixo, Pancas, 19°12'47.0"S, 40°47'20.0"W, 30/IX/2010, mata” (CCER#3706); “Córrego São Bento, Pancas, 19°13'50.0"S, 40°45'24.7"W, 18/X/2010, casa” (CCER#3707); 1 male on microscope slide labeled “Monohelea maculipennis (Coquillet), 1905”, “Redenção, Amapá, BRASIL, 24/II/1964, Lacombe D. col.” (CCER#3123).

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Tiago do Nascimento da Silva for editing and compiling the drawings and figure plates, to Isadora Schroder for the first English revision, to Art Borkent and two anonymous reviewers for their critical review which improved this manuscript. We further thank Fiotec for the research grant (VPPCB-004-FIO-21) to the first author.

References

  • Borkent A (2014) The pupae of the Biting Midges of the World (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae), with a generic key and analysis of the phylogenetic relationships between genera. Zootaxa 3879(1): 001–327. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3879.1.1
  • Borkent A, Spinelli GR (2000) Catalog of the new world Biting Midges south of the United States of America (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae). Contributions on Entomology, International 4: 1–107.
  • Borkent A, Spinelli GR (2007) Neotropical Ceratopogonidae (Diptera: Insecta). In: Adis J, Arias JR, Rueda-Delgado G, Wantzen KM (Eds) Aquatic Biodiversity in Latin America (ABLA). Vol. 4. Pensoft, Sofia-Moscow, 1–198.
  • Borkent A, Wirth W (1997) World species of Biting Midges (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae). Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 233: 1–257.
  • Borkent A, Spinelli GR, Grogan WL (2009) Ceratopogonidae (biting midges, purrujas). Chapter 29. In: Brown BV, Borkent A, Cumming JM, Wood DM, Woodley NE, Zumbado MA (Eds) Manual of Central America Diptera. Vol. 1. NRC Research Pres, Ottawa, 407–435.
  • Borkent A, Dominiak P, Díaz F (2022) An update and errata for the catalog of the Biting Midges of the World (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae). Zootaxa 5120(1): 53–64. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5120.1.3
  • Coquillett DW (1905) New nematocerous Diptera from North America. Journal of the New York Entomological Society 13: 56–99.
  • Downes JA (1978) Feeding and mating in the insectivorous Ceratopogoninae (Diptera). Memoirs of the Entomological Society of Canada 104(S104): 1–62. https://doi.org/10.4039/entm110104fv
  • Felippe-Bauer ML (1998) Redescription of two species of Monohelea Kieffer (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae). Entomología y Vectores 5: 217–230.
  • Felippe-Bauer ML, Oliveira SJ (2001) Lista dos exemplares tipos de Ceratopogonidae (Diptera, Nematocera) depositados na Coleção Entomológica do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil. Memorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz 96(8): 1109–1119. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0074-02762001000800014
  • Felippe-Bauer ML, Cardoso EA, Trindade RL (2017) New species and new records of Monohelea Kieffer from eastern Amazon, Brazil (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae). Zootaxa 4358(1): 142–160. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4358.1.6
  • Glukhova VM (1971) Descriptions of the larvae of some non-bloodsucking midges of the family Ceratopogonidae (Diptera). Entomologicheskoe Obozrenie 50: 171–182. [In Russian] [English translation in Entomological Review 50: 99–105]
  • Glukhova VM (1977) Midges of the family Ceratopogonidae (Heleidae) In: Kutikova LA, Starobotagov YI (Eds) Determination of the freshwater invertebrates of the European Regions of the USSR (Plankton and Benthos). Zoological Institute, USSR Academy of Sciences. Hydrometeo, Leningrad, 1–510.
  • Lane J, Wirth WW (1964) The Biting Midge genus Monohelea Kieffer in the Neotropical region (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae). Studia Entomologica 7: 209–236.
  • Wirth WW (1974) A catalogue of the Diptera of the Americas south of the United States. 14 – Family Ceratopogonidae. Museu de Zoologia, Universidade de São Paulo, Brazil, 1–89.
  • Wirth WW, Grogan WL (1981) Natural History of Plummers island, Maryland XXV. Biting Midges (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae). 3. The species of the Tribe Stilobezziini. Bulletin of the Biological Society of Washington 5: 1–102.
  • Wirth WW, Grogan WL (1988) The predaceous midges of the World (Diptera: Ceraopogonidae, Tribe Ceratopogonini). Flora and Fauna handbook. No. 4. EJ Brill, New York, [xv +] 160 pp.
  • Wirth WW, Marston N (1968) A method for mounting small insects on microscope slides in Canada Balsam. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 61(3): 783–784. https://doi.org/10.1093/aesa/61.3.783
  • Wirth WW, Williams RW (1964) New species and records of North American Monohelea (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae). Annals of the Entomological Society of America 57: 302–310.https://doi.org/10.1093/aesa/57.3.302
login to comment