Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T13:27:23.407Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A revision of the Tsetse-flies (Glossina), based on a study of the male genital armature

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

Robert Newstead
Robert Newstead
Affiliation:
The School of Tropical Medicine, the University, Liverpool.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The examination of the armature of the males of all the hitherto described species of the genus Glossina, with the exception of G. maculata, Newstead,* has not only revealed some very striking morphological characters, but has led to the discovery of three new species† and the re-establishment of Bigot's G. grossa.‡ One of these new species, G. submorsitans, Newstead, has hitherto been overlooked through its striking similarity to G. morsitans. Morphologically these two species are separable chiefly by the small but important organs herein described as the median lobes; these characters will be best understood by reference to the accompanying figures (figs. 15ml, 16ml), in which the difference is as well marked as that between the holoptic and dichoptic heads found in certain groups of Diptera. G. palpalis, R. D., and G. tachinoides, Westw., are also very closely allied in the general form of the armature of the males, but they are easily separable by the minute differential characters of the inferior claspers (figs. 9ic, 11ic).

Type
Original Articles
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 2 , Issue 1 , April 1911 , pp. 9 - 36
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1911

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

† Ann. Trop. Med. and Parasit., vol. iv., pp. 369–375 (1910).Google Scholar

‡ [After a careful re-examination of the types, Mr. E. E. Austen agrees with Mr. Newstead in regarding G. grossa, Big., as distinct from G. fusca, Walk., but he considers it conspecific with the earlier G. tabaniformis, Westw., which name will stand. Mr. Austen is further of opinion that the species provisionally referred to G. grossa by Mr. Newstead is not the same as Bigot's insect, and must therefore be known as G. nigrofusca, Newst., the name tentatively suggested for it by MrNewstead, . (l.c. p. 370).Google Scholar—ED.]

‡ Wesché, (Trans. Linn. Soc. Lond. 2nd ser. Zool. IX., 1906, pp. 339–386, pl. 23–30)Google Scholar has dealt with the armature of four species of Glossina, but unfortunately I find myself unable to agree with many of his statements and conclusions. There is also an earlier paper by the same author (Journ. Quek. Micr. Club, 1905, p. 236)Google Scholar dealing exclusively with the genitalia of Glossina palpalis.

‡ Austen, . Monograph of the Tsetse flies, p. 65.Google Scholar

* Austen, , Bull. Ent. Res., I., p. 294 (1910).CrossRefGoogle Scholar