Rhinocypha Rambur 1842
Creators: name: Van Tol, Jan
name: Günther, André
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2018
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Insecta
Odonata
Chlorocyphidae
Rhinocypha

description: Genus: <i>Rhinocypha</i> Rambur Selected references <i>Rhinocypha</i>. — RAMBUR (1842): 232–233 (original diagnosis; type species: <i>Rhinocypha tincta</i> Rambur [designated by KIRBY 1890: 114]) — SELYS (1853): sep. 59–64 (revision, downgraded to subgenus, new species described); SELYS (1854): 198–225 (monograph); SELYS (1869): sep. 18–21 (additions to revision); SELYS (1873a): 487–493, 507–519 (sep. 23–29, 43–55) (additions to revision, table with classification); SELYS (1873b): 614–615 (sep. 61–62) (descriptions of <i>Rhinocypha monochroa</i> and <i>R. albistigma</i>); SELYS (1879): sep. 39–51 (additions to revision); SELYS (1882): 21–22 (Philippines); KIRBY (1890): 112–114 (upgraded to genus; species included, selection of type species); SELYS (1891): 213–216 (Philippines, discussion <i>R. semitincta</i>); RIS (1915): 87–89 (New Guinea); RIS (1916): 310–313 (revision species Celebes, key); FRASER (1926): 484 (<i>R. tincta</i> type locality Java [in error]); LIEFTINCK (1935): 175–177 (<i>Rhinocypha</i> species of Celebes); COW- LEY (1937): 1–18 (penis of Chlorocyphidae, group character); LIEFTINCK (1938): 49–70 (species of New Guinea described and illustrated); FRASER (1949): 10–16, figs. 1(4) (Chlorocyphidae revised, diagnoses of genera, key to genera); LAIdLAW (1950): 257–280 (classification of Chlorocyphidae, series <i>Rhinocypha</i> subdivid- ed, new genera erected); FRASER (1957): 70–74 (classification of Chlorocyphidae, with key to genera); VAN TOL &amp; GASSMANN (2007): 66–67, fig. 10 (<i>Rhinocypha tincta</i> group discussed); MICHALSKI (2012): 73–79 (summary taxa New Guinea). Diagnosis Here we repeat the diagnosis as provided by FRASER (1949: 10 f.): »Species varying from moderately large to rather small and slim stature. Wings of males, with few exceptions, coloured and marked with brilliant iridescent, vitreous and opaque fasciae or spot, the opaque areas often with hyaline vitreous spots or striae. Wings of females colourless or rarely with opaque tips, or, in old adults, often assuming an uniform brownish or yel- lowish tint. Shape of wings of males very variable, very narrow and elongate or broader, the hind wings often very broad and imparting an anisopterous character to the insects. Mesothoracic triangle variable, small and incon- spicuous or extending the whole length of dorsum and markedly dilated below. Body markings usually restricted and not ordinarily conspicuous, but occasionally blue, greenish yellow or even brick red on the male abdomen. MA entirely straight throughout its course and rather closely parallel with CuP to as far as wing margin: at least 2 intercalated veins between R2 and R3, the longer of which extends inwards to proximal of the pterostigma. Anal vein and CuP extending well beyond level of nodus; antenodals very numerous and always one or more secondaries between the two primaries.« LAIdLAW (1950: 270 ff.) split the genus as defined by Fraser, and limited the genus <i>Rhinocypha</i> to those species with a short mesothoracic triangle, with brownish black areas in the wings of the males, and deeply tinged wings with milky-white patch at the apex of the hind wings in the female. Species with an enlarged mesothoracic triangle were assigned to <i>Calocypha</i> Fraser, <i>Sundacypha</i> Laidlaw, <i>Heliocypha</i> Fraser, <i>Heterocypha</i> Laidlaw and <i>Aristocypha</i> Laidlaw. At present there is some debate concerning the classification of the Chlorocyphidae, with, for example, <i>Heliocypha</i> and <i>Aristocypha</i> be- ing included as subgenera of <i>Rhinocypha</i> by some authorities (DIJKSTRA et al. 2014). The generic attribution of the species on Sulawesi is undisputed. All spe- cies are closely allied to the type species of the genus <i>Rhinocypha,</i> viz., <i>Rhinocypha tincta</i> Rambur. Remarks No descriptions of secondary genitalia or anal appendages are included, since these structures exhibit little variation in Chlorocyphidae (COWLEY 1937; LIEFTINCK 1938; LAIdLAW 1950), while all species of the <i>Rhinocypha tincta</i> group share a similar penis structure (‘type II’ of Cowley). Anal appendages are simple and lack diagnostic characters. <b>Key to the <i>Rhinocypha</i> species of Sulawesi and adjacent islands</b> 1a – Males........................................................................................................ 2 1b – Females.................................................................................................... 10 2 – Males 2a – Head with paired blue or bluish white spot on frons (Fig. 3); size of spots with substantial variation between populations (Figs 30– 33, 35); median lobe of pronotum black; blue stripe on synthorax (Fig. 27) with distinct posterior projection over metepisternum, reaching posterior border of synthorax; ante-humeral stripe distinct in anterior part of mesepisternum (<i>Rhinocypha frontalis</i> complex)................................................................................................... 3 2b – Head with frons black, without pale spot; median lobe of prono- tum black, or with blue marking, usually extending on lateral cornerofanteriorlobe(<i>e.g.</i>, Fig.20);bluestripeonsynthorax (<i>e.g</i>., Figs 21, 63) dorsally straight, or with short projection over met- episternum, but with variation between populations; ante- humeral stripe absent.............................................................................. 5 3a – Opaque dark patch in wing medially usually from level well basal to nodus (population of SW Sulawesi even from Ax5–6); blue markings on median lobe of pronotum relatively small; blue markings on frons variable, but usually much larger than in next species; hind wing length 23–30 mm; Sulawesi (<i>R. frontalis</i>).............. 4 3b – Opaque dark patch of wing only distal to nodus; blue markings on median lobe of pronotum extensive; blue markings on frons small; hind wing length 19–20 mm; Sangihe Is........................................................................................................ <i>R. sangihensis</i> sp. nov. 4a – Opaque dark patch distal to nodus in costal space, medially starting from level 5Ax anterior to nodus; wing length 24–25 mm................................................................... <i>R. frontalis frontalis</i> 4b – Opaque dark patch distal to Ax5 in costal space, medially basis just distal to fork of Rs, but leaving quadrangle free (transparent); wing length 27–28 mm........... <i>R. frontalis sulselensis</i> ssp. nov. 5a – Mandibles with distinct blue spot, covering at least 50% of man- dible; blue stripe over synthorax with a ventral projection along the metapleural suture (Figs 41–42)................................. <i>R. monochroa</i> 5b – Mandibles black, or with small pale (blue, or pale yellow) spot only... 6 6a – Dorsum of abdomen pruinose (Fig. 8)............................. <i>R. phantasma</i> 6b – Dorsum of abdomen black, but may have well-defined blue annulae (rings) anteriorly on S4–S9....................................................... 7 7a – Distinct annulae anteriorly on S4–S9 of abdomen (Figs 10, 81)....................................................................................... <i>R. virgulata</i> sp. nov. 7b – Dorsum of abdomen black in all segments, no anterior annulae on S4–S9..................................................................................................... 8 8a – Pronotum black, without larger or smaller blue or creamish spots (Fig. 73); mesopreepisternum black................... <i>R. togeanensis</i> sp. nov. 8b – Pronotum with blue or creamish spots at least in latero-anterior corner of median lobe, and on lateral lobe; mesopreepisternum with blue marking..................................................................................... 9 9a – Opaque parts of wings fully distal to nodus (Fig.54); tibiae of mid and hind legs white............................................... <i>R. pelengensis</i> sp. nov. 9b – Opaque parts of wings extending in middle of wing to distal side of quadrangle (Fig. 18); tibiae of mid and hind legs typically pale yellow, but sometimes difficult to see in museum specimens................................................................... <i>R. flavipoda</i> sp. nov. 10 – Females 10a – Frons with paired pale spot (in some individual specimens rather small and indistinct) (Figs 29, 65).......................................... 11 10b – Frons black............................................................................................ 15 11a – Anterior lobe of pronotum with paired median spot (<i>e.g</i>., Fig. 4).. 12 11b – Anterior lobe of pronotum black, or with small spot in lateral corners, which continues on median lobe, usually much larger than on anterior lobe........................................................................... 14 12a – Mainland Sulawesi (<i>R. frontalis</i>)........................................................ 13 12b – Sangihe islands (only one teneral and incomplete specimen available)............................................................... <i>R. sangihensis</i> sp. nov. 13a – Distinct transverse brown band on fore and hind wing, extreme distal part of wings somewhat opaque white; base to transverse band usually slightly enfumed (Fig. 36); length of hind wing up to 26 mm.............................................................................. <i>R. f. frontalis</i> 13b – Transverse band on wings rather fuzzy, indistinct from approximately Px10 to just anterior to pterostigma (fore wing), or halfway pterostigma (hind wing); base enfumed dark brown (Fig. 37); length of hind wing <i>ca</i> 30 mm................................................................................ <i>R. frontalis sulselensis</i> sp. nov. 14a – Lateral lobe of pronotum with pale, creamy white spot; scapus (base of antenna) pale, only interrupted in middle of this antennal segment (Fig. 65). Sulawesi, Buton................. <i>R. phantasma</i> 14b – Pronotum black; scapus black (Fig. 59). Banggai Islands only................................................................................. <i>R. pelengensis</i> sp. nov. 15a – Mandible largely bluish white, only black at base; gena with extensive yellow marking, which is connected with pale stripe along the eye, dorsally running to level of lateral ocelli (Fig. 44).............................................................................. <i>R. monochroa</i> 15b – Mandible with pale spot covering 50% or less; yellow markings on gena and along eye small and narrow (<i>e.g</i>., Fig. 82).................. 16 16a – Pronotum and mesopreepisternum black. Togian Islands... <i>.............................................................................. R. togeanensis</i> sp. nov. 16b – Pronotum with pale markings; mesopreepisternum creamy white (see Fig. 11)................................................................................ 17 17a – Median lobe of pronotum latero-anteriorly with large irregular spot, which continues in lateral corner of anterior lobe; lateral lobe of pronotum with large, irregular spot; sides of abdominal S2–S4 against dorsum with a longitudinal or L-shaped mark- ing (Fig. 11)............................................................. <i>R. virgulata</i> sp. nov. 17b – Median lobe of pronotum latero-anteriorly with small pale spot; lateral lobe of pronotum with small spot; sides of abdom- inal segments against dorsum at most with a semicircular spot (there is a series of longitudinal markings close to ventral side of the tergites)......................................................... <i>R. flavipoda</i> sp. nov.
description: Published as part of <i>Jan van Tol &amp; André Günther, 2018, The Odonata of Sulawesi and adjacent islands. Part 8. Revision of the genus Rhinocypha Rambur, 1842 (Chlorocyphidae), pp. 299-386 in Odonatologica 47 (3)</i> on pages 308-313, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1481114