ABSTRACT
The genus Lanta Hebard 1921 includes three species found in the Neotropical region. Two species are known from Argentina, L. peniculiger (province of Santa Fe), and L. scotia (provinces of Córdoba and Santiago del Estero) (see Crespo et al. 2010), and one from Brazil, L. borgesae, (Araras, São Paulo) (Rocha e Silva & Vasconcellos, 1984). All species have been described on the basis of male external characters, such as wing veins, leg spines, hypandrium, shape and position of the styli, in addition to coloration and size. Except for a partial representation of the male genitalia of L. borgesae (Rocha e Silva & Vasconcellos 1984), this structure went untreated in morphological and phylogenetic investigations of the Blattaria (Snodgrass 1937; McKittrick 1964; Grandcolas 1996; Klass 1997; Roth 2003;). Females remain unknown.
Subject(s)
Blattellidae/classification , Genitalia, Male/anatomy & histology , Animal Distribution , Animal Structures/anatomy & histology , Animal Structures/growth & development , Animals , Blattellidae/anatomy & histology , Blattellidae/growth & development , Body Size , Brazil , Female , Genitalia, Male/growth & development , Male , Organ SizeABSTRACT
The multivariate allometric growth patterns from longitudinal data of leg and rostral segments of all instars of Belostoma elegans (Mayr) and B. cummingsi De Carlo are presented for the first time, and the allometric coefficients are compared. The segments of the middle and hind legs present allometric coefficients with opposite polarity to those of forelegs. This discrepancy in the ontogenetic trajectories may be due to the different functions of the legs. The foreleg main function is to capture of the prey, while the middle and hind legs are adapted to swimming. The relative size of rostral segments is an important taxonomic character in Belostoma. In B. cummingsi, the proximal segment is longer than the middle one, while in B. elegans they are subequal. Our purpose is to explain these differences through the analysis of their ontogenetic trajectories in an attempt to illuminate the morphological differences among species from a developmental perspective.
Los patrones de crecimiento alométrico de los segmentos del rostro y de las patas de Belostoma elegans (Mayr) y B. cummingsi De Carlo son presentados y comparados por primera vez. Se emplearon datos longitudinales de todos los estadios ninfales en un contexto multivariado. Los segmentos de la pata media y posterior presentan coeficientes alométricos con polaridad opuesta a los de la pata anterior. Estas diferencias observadas pueden deberse al diferente rol que presentan las patas. La función principal de la pata anterior es la captura de las presas, mientras que las patas media y posterior están adaptadas para la natación. El tamaño relativo de los segmentos del rostro es una característica taxonómica importante en Belostoma. En B.cummingsi el segmento proximal es más largo que el medio, mientras que en B. elegans son subiguales. Nuestro propósito es explicar estas diferencias a través del análisis de las trayectorias ontogéneticas en un intento de aclarar diferencias morfológicas entre especies desde una perspectiva del desarrrollo.
Subject(s)
Animals , Heteroptera/growth & development , Heteroptera/anatomy & histology , Time FactorsABSTRACT
The multivariate allometric growth patterns from longitudinal data of leg and rostral segments of all instars of Belostoma elegans (Mayr) and B. cummingsi De Carlo are presented for the first time, and the allometric coefficients are compared. The segments of the middle and hind legs present allometric coefficients with opposite polarity to those of forelegs. This discrepancy in the ontogenetic trajectories may be due to the different functions of the legs. The foreleg main function is to capture of the prey, while the middle and hind legs are adapted to swimming. The relative size of rostral segments is an important taxonomic character in Belostoma. In B. cummingsi, the proximal segment is longer than the middle one, while in B. elegans they are subequal. Our purpose is to explain these differences through the analysis of their ontogenetic trajectories in an attempt to illuminate the morphological differences among species from a developmental perspective.
