Liogenys macropelma Bates. The 1887

Liogenys macropelma Bates, 1887 Figs. 5, 9. Liogenys macropelma Bates, 1887: 155 (original description); Nonfried 1892: 268 (checklist); Dalla Torre 1913: 318 (checklist); Blackwelder 1944: 227 (checklist); Frey 1969: 42 (key); United States Department of Agriculture 1971: 335; 1974: 28 (natural history); Evans 2003: 210 (checklist); Evans & Smith 2009: 179 (checklist); Krajčík 2012: 145 (checklist); Cherman et al. 2017: 14, 16, 69, 86 (taxonomy); 2019: 18, 64 (taxonomy), 53–55 (redescription). Liogenys gebieni Moser, 1921: 140 (original description); Blackwelder 1944: 227 (checklist); Frey 1969: 41 (key); Evans 2003: 209 (checklist); Evans & Smith 2009: 178 (checklist); Krajčík 2012: 145 (checklist). New junior subjective synonym. Type material examined. Liogenys macropelma male lectotype (MNHN): [white typeset] “V. de Chiriqui, / 25–4000 ft. / Champion.”, [white handwritten] “ Liogenys / macropelma / Bates ♂ ”, [red typeset] “ SYNTYPE ”, [white handwritten] “micropygus”, [white, outlined in red, typeset] “ LECTOTYPE / Liogenys macropelma / Bates, 1887 / Cherman M. A. 2015”. Genitalia mounted. Six males with the same labels as the lectotype, plus the label: [white, outlined in red, typeset] “ PARALECTOTYPE / Liogenys macropelma / Bates, 1887 / Cherman M. A. 2015”. One female with one different label: [white handwritten] “ Liogenys / macropelma / Bates ♀ ”. Six male and one female paralectotypes (BMNH): [white, typeset] “V. de Chiriqui, / 25–4000 ft. / Champion.”, [white, typeset and handwritten] “B.C.A.Col.II. (2) / Liogenys / macropelma”. One male paralectotype also has the labels: [round, white with red border] “Type”, [white, typeset] “Sp. figured.”. Liogenys gebieni male lectotype, present designation (ZMHB): [white typeset] “Columbien / LaGarita [Los Patios, Norte de Santander] (Gebirge [mountains]) / W. Fritsche / leg. 1912” [genitalia mounted on the label], [white handwritten] “Isonychus [misspelled Liogenys] / gebieni / Typen Mos.”, [red typeset] “TYPUS”, [white typeset] “ Liogenys / gebieni / Mos. ”,. [white, outlined in red, typeset and handwritten] “ LIOGENYS / GEBIENI / Moser, 1921 / LECTOTYPE / Des. Cherman M. A.”. One female paralectotype with the same labels as the lectotype, plus the label: [white, outlined in red, typeset] “PARALECTOTYPE / Des. Cherman M. A. [handwritten] LIOGENYS / GEBIENI Mos.”. Additional material examined. PANAMA. Colón: Coco Solo, 21.V.1976, B.C. Ratcliffe, 10 males, 20 females (UNSM); Coco Solo Hospital, V.1981, 2 males (UNSM); Fort Gulich, 17.V.1976, at lights, B.C. Ratcliffe, 1 male, 2 females; IV.1981, at lights, 5 males (UNSM); Fort Sherman, 26.IV.1980, D. Engleman, 1 female (UNSM). Panamá: Balboa, 16–17.V.1977, light, H.&A. Howden, 3 males, 1 female (CMNC); 19.VI.1977, H.&A. Howden, 1 male (CMNC); Corazal, 27.IV.1911, A. Busck, 2 males (USNM); Curundú, 8.V.1972, R.&E. Froeschner, 1 male (USNM); Diablo Heights, 3.V.1971, W.E. Bivin, 1 male, 1 female (USNM); Fort Clayton, 15.V.1961, C.E. Yunker, 8 males, 2 females (CNCI); Fort Clayton, V.1961, C.E. Yunker, 1 male (CMNC); La Sabanas, Panama City, IV.1927, at light, J. Zetek, 7 males, 19 females (USNM); Paraiso, 24.IV.1911, A. Busck, 2 males, 1 female (USNM); Punta Paitilla, Panama City, 8º59’N, 79º31`W, 17.V.1970, H. Hespenheide, 1 male (CMNC); Trivoli Hotel, Panama City, 15.IV.1967, H. Hespenheide, 1 male (CMNC). Geographical distribution. PANAMA (Chiriquí, Colón, Panamá), COLOMBIA (Norte de Santander). Remarks. After studying the type series of L. gebieni (ZMHB) (Fig. 5A–C), and comparing its external features and male genitalia (Fig. 5A–F) with that of L. macropelma type series and non-type material (Fig. 5G), we concluded that these specimens belong to the same species. The only difference is the color, which is darker in the L. gebieni types. Nonetheless, the difference in body color is a common intraspecific variation within Liogenys. Herein, we propose L. gebieni Moser as a junior subjective synonym of L. macropelma Bates. The parameres of each L. macropelma and L. gebieni drawn by Frey (1969) seem to be different. However, there were no specimens labeled as L. gebieni among Frey’s material housed at NHMB or USNM, thus, the material used by Frey (1969) to illustrate L. gebieni parameres remains unknown. According to the United States Department of Agriculture (1971, 1974), L. macropelma has been intercepted in Florida, Texas, and Puerto Rico (United States of America) coming by aircraft from El Salvador, Panama, and South America (probably Brazil) several times in a period from 1948–1971, always between April and May (identification verified based on the illustration in the report). Also, it was recorded being a host of okra plant Hibiscus esculentus L. (Malvaceae) coming from Guatemala, Panama, and Venezuela, which were intercepted in Florida, California, and Puerto Rico (United States of America). Several specimens in the USNM collection had been caught in port interceptions from Houston, Texas, originated from Panama, 1966 with no other explanation.Another specimen in the USNM bears the following data: 27 April 1962 port interception from Miami, Florida originating from “South America”. Based on the poor state of taxonomy of the genus Liogenys when these port interceptions took place, all identifications should be considered questionable unless they can be verified using voucher specimens.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.