Missimia Ballantyne & Lambkin 2009, gen. n.
Creators: name: Ballantyne, Lesley A.
name: Lambkin, Christine
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2009
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Insecta
Coleoptera
Lampyridae
Missimia

description: Missimia gen. n.   
(Figs 21, 22, 27, 29, 30, 32–34, 246–254)  
 Type species: Missimia flavida by monotypy.   
 Diagnosis. Males and females distinguished from all known Luciolinae by the lack of a clypeolabral suture and the heavily sclerotised labrum which is immovably joined to the rest of the head; elongate subparallel-sided body; head exposed; differing from all other genera treated here by the slight and acute prolongation of the posterolateral corners of pronotum and the epipleuron not covering the elytral humerus from below.   
 Male. Pronotum (Figs 21, 22, 34) dorsal surface lacking irregularities in posterolateral areas and longitudinal groove in lateral areas; punctation dense. Anterior margin not explanate. Pronotum wider across posterior area than rest; pronotal width less than humeral width; anterolateral corners rounded obtuse; lateral margins in anterior half divergent posteriorly; lateral margins in posterior half sinuate (in horizontal plane), continuing to diverge in posterior 1/4; lateral margins not sinuate in vertical plane, lacking indentation at midpoint, indentation near posterolateral corner, and irregularities at corner; posterolateral corners angulate (pointed); considerably less than 90°, inclined obliquely to median line and may project slightly beyond line of lateral margin; posterolateral corners project as far as median posterior margin, separated from it by shallow emargination.   
Hypomera closed. Median area of hypomeron not elevated vertically; anterior area of hypomeron not flat to side of head, posterior area narrowly flattened and closely adpressed; pronotal width/ GHW index 1.3.  
Elytron (Figs 21, 22) punctation dense, not linear, not as large as that of pronotum, nor widely and evenly spaced; apices not deflexed; epipleuron and suture extend beyond mid-point, almost to apex, do not extend as ridge around apex and not expanded in apical half; interstitial lines variable, one (nearest suture) or two (two inner lines nearest suture) almost as well developed as sutural ridge; elytral carina absent; viewed from below in horizontal specimen epipleuron at base (Fig. 33) does not cover humerus, viewed from above arises level with posterior margin of MS; epipleuron developed as lateral ridge along most of length; sutural margins approximate along most of length in closed elytra; lateral margins parallel-sided.  
Head (Figs 27, 29, 30, 32) moderately depressed between eyes; moderately exposed in front of pronotum, not capable of complete retraction within prothoracic cavity; eyes widely separated beneath at level of posterior margin of mouthpart complex; eyes above labrum widely separated (GHW 2–3 X SIW); frons-vertex junction rounded, lacking median elevation; posterolateral eye excavation not strongly developed, not visible in resting head position; antennal sockets separated by> 3 X ASW, on anterior parallel-sided prolongation of head which is as long as wide; posterior margin of antennal sockets (viewed with ‘labrum’ horizontal) just in front of anterior eye margins; labrum well marked basally with deep incisions at each side, no clypeolabral suture; area between labrum and rest of head well sclerotised, inflexible; outer edges of labrum reach inner edges of closed mandibles; anterior margin of labrum entire, lacking projections. Mouthparts functional; apical segment of labial palpi lunate, strongly flattened. Antennae 11 segmented; length 3–4 X GHW; FS 2–8 expanded at anteroapical angle; FS elongate slender, 4X longer than wide; pedicel not produced; FS1 not shorter than pedicel.  
Legs with inner tarsal claw not split; lacking MFC; no femora or tibiae swollen or curved; no basitarsi expanded or excavated.  
Abdomen (Figs 249, 250, 253, 254) lacking cuticular remnants in association with aedeagal sheath; no segments with curved posterior margins nor extending anteriorly into emarginated posterior margin of more anterior segment; LO in V7 entire, retracted from all margins and occupying slightly less than half total area; neither anterior nor posterior margin of LO emarginated; posterior half of V7 not arched or swollen, muscle impressions not visible in this area; LO present in V6, occupying most of V6; MPP present, apex rounded, symmetrical, entire, not laterally compressed, L>W, not strongly inclined dorsally nor engulfed by the apex of T8, lacking dorsal ridge and median longitudinal trough. V7 lacking median carina, median longitudinal trough, anteromedian depression on face of LO, incurving lobes or pointed projections along posterior margin, median ‘dimple’, or reflexed lobes on its dorsal surface. Posterolateral corners angulate, horizontal, appear slightly and narrowly produced in one pinned male. LO in V6 entire and retracted narrowly from all margins. T8 symmetrical, well sclerotised, W=L of visible posterior area which does not narrow abruptly, lacking prolonged posterolateral corners, median posterior emargination, median posterior projections, not inclined ventrally nor engulfing posterior margin of V7 nor MPP, not extending conspicuously beyond posterior margin of V7; T8 with a median longitudinal trough which is finely margined laterally and symmetrical; T8 ventral surface lacking flanges, lateral depressed troughs, asymmetrical projections, median posterior ridge; concealed anterolateral arms of T8 present, longer than posterior visible portion, not laterally emarginated before their origins, expanded widely horizontally, not expanded dorsoventrally, apices with bifurcation of inner margin and bases lacking ventrally directed pieces.  
 Aedeagal sheath (Fig. 252) never> 4 times as long as wide; lacking paraprocts; similar to that of Atyphella; asymmetrical in posterior area where sheath sternite emarginated on right side from point of attachment of tergite; sternite not angulate on L or R sides, not subparallel-sided, posterior margin entire, not medially emarginated, not emarginated on either side preapically, and rounded; anterior half of sternite broad, apically rounded; tergite not subdivided, lacking projecting pieces along posterior margin of tergite 9, tergite attaches to sheath sternite at 1/3 its length from anterior end; lacking transverse band; anterior margin of tergite 9 deeply, evenly and widely emarginated.   
Aedeagus (Figs 246–248) L/W 3.6/1; subparallel-sided for most of length (apices of LL diverge very slightly); LL lack lateral appendages, visible from beneath at sides of ML, LL/ML wide (3.8/1); LL of equal length, shorter than ML, (0.8 as long as ML), gently diverging along their length dorsally and separated along almost all their length; LL base width not = LL apex width which is wider than that of ML with apices expanded horizontally; dorsal base of LL symmetrical, anteriorly prolonged and pointed; LL lacking lateral hairy appendages along their outer ventral margins, which are not produced preapically nor narrowly on their inner apical margin; inner margins of LL with an elongate narrowly emarginated hair bearing area along ¼ their length; LL obliquely truncate along their preapical inner and outer margins, apices bluntly pointed; apices of LL lacking projection on left LL only; ML symmetrical, very narrow, lacking paired lateral teeth and tooth to left side, not strongly arched, apex not in shape of arrowhead, not bulbous, apex rounded, not further expanded, inclined ventrally and narrower than at base; BP wide, not strongly sclerotised, hooded, not strongly emarginated along anterior margin, apparently in a single piece.  
 Female. Macropterous. Pronotal outline as for male; pronotum lacking irregularities in posterolateral areas, punctation moderate to dense; dimensions C>A or B, pronotal width <humeral width; lacking indentation of lateral margin, irregularities at posterolateral corner. Elytral punctation not as large as that of pronotum nor evenly spaced; two well–defined interstitial lines (1 and 2) visible; elytral carina absent. Head with antennae on a short parallel-sided prolongation of head; posterior margin of antennal sockets in front of anterior eye margin (head held with labrum horizontal); eye size equivalent to male; clypeolabral suture not developed and junction of clypeus and labrum inflexible. No legs or parts thereof swollen and /or curved. LO in V6 only, lacking any elevations or ridges on V7; small depressed areas in midlateral area may represent postmortem torsion of D–V muscles.   
 Larva not associated.   
 Etymology. Missimia is considered a feminine noun and is latinised from the type locality Mt. Missim.   
 Remarks. Missimia is known only from the four specimens described here. It is distinguished from all other Luciolinae by the structure of the front portion of the head, which is well sclerotised and inflexible, the clypeus and labrum are fused and there is no obvious clypeolabral suture. In August 2007, J Lawrence confirmed his interpretation of the anterior plate of the head as the labrum. Missimia is superficially similar to Pygoluciola, and Ballantyne was first alerted to the distinctiveness of a single Aiyura female, which was tentatively assigned to Pygoluciola (Ballantyne, 1968). This female is included here. With so few specimens certain ‘variations’ that may be due to post-mortem changes have been difficult to assess and include the possibility of arching of V7 which occurred in one male after dissection (this is scored as non arched V7 as muscle impressions were not obvious posterior to the LO in V7). While interstitial lines were not as well developed as the sutural ridge in either of the males, they were so in the females. The wide difference in pronotal dimensions between the two males is due to a marked (horizontal) sinuousity of the lateral margins in the Missim male, which is mirrored in the Mt Shungol female pronotum. These specimens were included in Ballantyne & Lambkin (2000, 2001, 2006) as “Mt Missim”.
description: Published as part of Ballantyne, Lesley A. & Lambkin, Christine, 2009, Systematics of Indo-Pacific fireflies with a redefinition of Australasian Atyphella Olliff, Madagascan Photuroluciola Pic, and description of seven new genera from the Luciolinae (Coleoptera: Lampyridae), pp. 1-188 in Zootaxa 1997 on pages 72-74