Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T12:11:15.444Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A REVISION OF THE NEARCTIC AMELETUS MAYFLIES BASED ON ADULT MALES, WITH DESCRIPTIONS OF SEVEN NEW SPECIES (EPHEMEROPTERA: AMELETIDAE)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

Jacek Zloty
Jacek Zloty
Affiliation:
Division of Ecology, Department of Biological Sciences, The University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2N 1N4
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A systematic revision of North American species of the genus Ameletus, excluding parthenogenetic species, is presented. Seven new species are described (A. andersoni, A. bellulus, A. doddsianus, A. edmundsi, A. majusculus, A. pritchardi, and A. tolae), separate keys are given to western and eastern species, annotated accounts of all 30 presently recognized bisexual species are provided, taxonomic characters are illustrated, and distribution data are presented for all species. The following nomenclatural changes are proposed: Ameletus aequivocus is considered a junior synonym of A. sparsatus; A. alticolus and A. celeroides junior synonyms of A. celer; A. connectina and A. connectus junior synonyms of A. velox; A. facilis a junior synonym of A. vancouverensis; A. monta a junior synonym of A. similior; A. querulus a junior synonym of A. shepherdi. The specific status of A. tuberculatus is questioned and it is provisionally considered to be the same as A. celer.

Résumé

On trouvera ici une révision systématique des espèces nord-américaines du genre Ameletus, à l’exception des espèces parfhénogénétiques. Sept nouvelles espèces sont décrites (A. andersoni, A. bellulus, A. doddsianus, A. edmundsi, A. majusculus, A. pritchardi et A. tolae) et des clés distinctes permettront de reconnaître les espèces de l’est; on trouvera aussi des descriptions commentées des 30 espèces bisexuées actuellement reconnues, des illustrations de leurs caractéristiques diagnostiques et des données sur leur répartition. Les changements taxonomiques suivants sont proposés : Ameletus aequivocus devient synonyme d’A. sparsatus; A. alticolus et A. celeroides deviennent synonymes d’A. celer; A. connectina et A. connectus deviennent synonymes d’A. velox; A. facilis devient synonyme d’A. vancouverensis; A. monta devient synonyme d’A. similior; A. querulus devient synonyme d’A. shepherdi. Le statut taxonomique d’A. tuberculatus est mis en doute et l’espèce est considérée provisoirement comme synonyme d’A. celer.

[Traduit par la Rédaction]

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 128 , Issue 2 , April 1996 , pp. 293 - 346
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1996

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

REFERENCES

Allen, R.K., and Chao, E.S.M.. 1981. Mayflies of the Southwest: New records and notes of Siphlonuridae (Ephemeroptera). Pan-Pacific Entomologist 57: 449–456.Google Scholar
Argyle, D.W., and Edmunds, G.F. Jr., 1962. Mayflies (Ephemeroptera) of the Curecanti Reservoir Basins, Gunnison River, Colorado. University of Utah Anthropological Papers 59: 179–189.Google Scholar
Baykova, O.J. 1976. Mayflies of the genus Ameletus Eaton (Ephemeroptera) in the Amur Basin. Entomologicheskoye Obozreniye 55: 56–60.Google Scholar
Bengtsson, S. 1913. Undersökningar öfver äggen hos Ephemeriderna. Entomologisk Tidsskrift 34: 71–320.Google Scholar
Bengtsson, S. 1930. Kritische Bemerkungen über einige nordische Ephemeropteren, nebst Beschreibung neuer Larven. Lunds Universitets Årsskrift, N.F. 26(3): 1–27.Google Scholar
Berner, L. 1959. A tabular summary of the biology of North American mayfly nymphs (Ephemeroptera). Bulletin of the Florida State Museum, Biological Sciences 4(1): 1–58.Google Scholar
Berner, L. 1977. Distributional patterns of southeastern mayflies (Ephemeroptera). Bulletin of the Florida State Museum, Biological Sciences 22(1): 1–56.Google Scholar
Brittain, J.E. 1974. Studies on the lentic Ephemeroptera and Plecoptera of Southern Norway. Norsk Entomologisk Tidsskrift 21: 135–154.Google Scholar
Brittain, J.E. 1978. The Ephemeroptera of Øvre Heimdalsvatn. Holarctic Ecology 1: 239–254.Google Scholar
Brodsky, K. 1930. Zur Kenntnis der mittelasiatischen Ephemeropteren. I (Imagines). Zoologishe Jahrbuecher. Abteilung fuer Systematik Oekologie und Geographie der Tiere 59: 681–720.Google Scholar
Burian, S.K., and Gibbs, K.E.. 1991. Mayflies of Maine: An Annotated Faunal List. Maine Agricultural Experiment Station Technical Bulletin 142: 109 pp.Google Scholar
Burks, B.D. 1953. The mayflies, or Ephemeroptera, of Illinois. Bulletin of the Illinois Natural History Survey 26: 1–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burrows, W.L. 1987. A new species of Ameletus (Ephemeroptera: Siphlonuridae) from eastern North America. Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington 89: 284–287.Google Scholar
Carle, F.L. 1978. A new species of Ameletus (Ephemeroptera: Siphlonuridae) from western Virginia. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 71: 581–584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahlby, R. 1973. A check-list and synonyms of the Norwegian species of Ephemeroptera. Norsk Entomologisk Tidsskrift 20: 249–252.Google Scholar
Davic, R.D. 1983. Southern range extension of Ameletus cryptostimulus (Ephemeroptera: Siphlonuridae). Entomological News 94: 47–48.Google Scholar
Day, W.C. 1952. New species and notes on California mayflies. Pan-Pacific Entomologist 28: 17–39.Google Scholar
Day, W.C. 1954. New species and notes on California mayflies II. Pan-Pacific Entomologist 30: 15–29.Google Scholar
Day, W.C. 1956. Ephemeroptera. pp. 79–105 in Usinger, R.L. (Ed.), Aquatic Insects of California. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA. 508 pp.Google Scholar
Demoulin, G. 1951. A propose de Metretopus goethgebueri Lestage, 1938, et des Metretopodidae (Insectes Ephéméroptères). Bulletin de l'Institut Royal des Sciences Naturelles de Belgique 27 (49): 1–20.Google Scholar
Dieterich, M. 1992. Insect Community Composition and Physico-chemical Processes in Summer-dry Headwater Streams of Western Oregon. Ph.D. dissertation, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR. 202 pp.Google Scholar
Dodds, G.S. 1923. Mayflies from Colorado. Descriptions of certain species and notes on others. Transactions of the American Entomological Society 59: 93–114.Google Scholar
Dodds, G.S., and Hisaw, F.L.. 1924. Ecological studies of aquatic insects. Ecology 5: 137–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eaton, A.E. 1871. A monograph on the Ephemeridae. Transactions of the Entomological Society of London 1871: 1–164.Google Scholar
Eaton, A.E. 1883–1888. A revisional monograph of recent Ephemeridae or mayflies. Transactions of the Linnean Society of London, Zoology 2(3): 1–352.Google Scholar
Edmunds, G.F. Jr., 1952. Studies of the Ephemeroptera. Part II. The Taxonomy and Biology of the Mayflies of Utah. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA. 339 pp.Google Scholar
Edmunds, G.F. Jr., 1954. The mayflies of Utah. Proceedings of the Utah Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters 31: 64–66.Google Scholar
Edmunds, G.F. Jr., 1960. Two generic synonyms in the Siphlonuridae (Ephemeroptera). Bulletin of the Brooklyn Entomological Society 55: 24.Google Scholar
Edmunds, G.F. Jr., 1962. The type localities of the Ephemeroptera of North America north of Mexico. University of Utah Biological Series 12(5): 1–39.Google Scholar
Edmunds, G.F. Jr., and Allen, R.K.. 1957. A checklist of the Ephemeroptera of North America north of Mexico. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 50: 317–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edmunds, G.F. Jr., Allen, R.K., and Peters, W.L.. 1963. An annotated key to the nymphs of the families and subfamilies of mayflies (Ephemeroptera). University of Utah Biological Series 13(1): 1–49.Google Scholar
Edmunds, G.F. Jr., Jensen, S.L., and Berner, L.. 1976. The Mayflies of North and Central America. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN. 330 pp.Google Scholar
Edmunds, G.F. Jr., and Traver, J.R.. 1954. An outline of a reclassification of the Ephemeroptera. Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington 56: 236–240.Google Scholar
Flannagan, J.F., Cobb, D.G., and Friesen, M.K.. 1990. The relationship between some physical factors and mayflies emerging from South Duck River and Cowan Creek, Montana. pp. 233–242 in Campbell, I.C. (Ed.), Mayflies and Stoneflies. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
Gledhill, T. 1959. The life-history of Ameletus inopinatus (Siphlonuridae, Ephemeroptera). Hydrobiologia 14: 85–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gustafson, D.L. 1991. Ecology of Aquatic Insects in the Gallatin River Drainage (Montana). Ph.D. dissertation, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT. 207 pp.Google Scholar
Harper, F. 1970. A new species of Ameletus (Ephemeroptera, Siphlonuridae) from Southern Ontario. Canadian Journal of Zoology 48: 603–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harper, F., and Harper, P.P.. 1981. Northern Canadian mayflies (Insecta; Ephemeroptera), records and descriptions. Canadian Journal of Zoology 59: 1784–1789.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harper, F., Anderson, N.H., and Harper, P.P.. 1995. Emergence of lotic mayflies in the Cascade Range of Oregon. pp. 207–222 in Ciborowski, J.J.H., and Corkum, L.D. (Eds.), Current Directions in Research on Ephemeroptera. Canadian Scholars Press, Toronto, Ont.Google Scholar
Hill, W.R., and Knight, A.W.. 1987. Experimental analysis of the grazing interaction between a mayfly and stream algae. Ecology 68: 1955–1965.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Imanishi, K. 1932. Mayflies from Japanese torrents. II. Further notes on the genus Ameletus. Annotationes Zoologicae Japonenses 13: 525–532.Google Scholar
Jacob, U. 1984. Larvale Oberflächenskulpturen bei Ephemeropteren und ihr Wert für Taxonomie und Systematik. pp. 181–191 in Landa, V., Soldán, T., and Tonner, M. (Eds.), Proceedings of the IVth International Conference on Ephemeroptera. CSAV.Google Scholar
Jensen, S.L. 1966. The Mayflies of Idaho (Ephemeroptera). M.Sc. thesis, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT. 365 pp.Google Scholar
Kang, S.C., and Yang, C.T.. 1994. Three new species of the genus Ameletus from Taiwan (Ephemeroptera: Siphlonuridae). Chinese Journal of Entomology 14: 261–269.Google Scholar
Kimmins, D.E. 1954. Ephemeroptera. Handbooks for the Identification of British Insects, Volume 1(9). Royal Entomological Society of London. 18 pp.Google Scholar
Kluge, N.J. 1979. A new species of mayflies of the genus Ameletus Eaton (Ephemeroptera, Siphlonuridae) from eastern Kazakhstan. Entomologicheskoye Obozreniye 58: 807–810.Google Scholar
Kluge, N.J. 1994. Pterothorax structure of mayflies (Ephemeroptera) and its use in systematics. Bulletin de la Société entomologique de France 99: 41–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kluge, N.J., Studemann, D., Landolt, P., and Gonser, T.. 1995. A reclassification of Siphlonuroidea (Ephemeroptera). Bulletin de la Société entomologique de Suisse 68: 103–132.Google Scholar
Landa, V. 1969. Jepice-Ephemeroptera. Fauna SSR. Svazek 18. Československé Akademie Věd, Praha. 349 pp.Google Scholar
Larsen, R. 1968. The life cycle of Ephemeroptera in the lower part of Aurland River in Sogn and Fjordane, western Norway. Norsk Entomologisk Tidsskrift 15: 49–59.Google Scholar
Lestage, J.A. 1938. Contribution à l'étude des Ephéméroptéres. XVI. Recherches critiques sur le complexe amétropo-métrétopodidien. Bulletin et Annales de la Société entomologique de Belgique 78: 155–182.Google Scholar
Lestage, J.A. 1940. Contribution á l'étude des Ephéméroptères. XXIV. Un cas de non-agnathisme chez l'adulte de Paleoameletus primitivus Trav. de l'Himalaya. Bulletin et Annales de la Société entomologique de Belgique 80: 118–124.Google Scholar
Matsumura, S. 1931. Ephemerida. pp. 1465–1480 in 6000 Illustrated Insects of the Japanese Empire. [In Japanese.]Google Scholar
Matthews, K.A., and Tarter, D.C.. 1989. Ecological life history, including laboratory respiratory investigation, of the mayfly, Ameletus tarteri (Ephemeroptera: Siphlonuridae). Psyche 96: 21–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayo, V.K. 1939. New western Ephemeroptera. Pan-Pacific Entomologist 15: 145–154.Google Scholar
Mayo, V.K. 1952. New western Ephemeroptera III. Pan-Pacific Entomologist 23: 93–103.Google Scholar
McCafferty, W.P. 1985. The Ephemeroptera of Alaska. Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington 87: 381–386.Google Scholar
McCafferty, W.P. 1991. Toward a phylogenetic classification of the Ephemeroptera (Insecta): A commentary on systematics. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 84: 343–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDunnough, J. 1923. New Canadian Ephemeridae with notes. The Canadian Entomologist 55: 39–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDunnough, J. 1924. New Canadian Ephemeridae with notes, II. The Canadian Entomologist 56: 90–98, 113–122, 128–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDunnough, J. 1928. The Ephemeroptera of Jasper Park, Alta. The Canadian Entomologist 60: 8–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDunnough, J. 1929. Notes on North American Ephemeroptera with descriptions of new species, II. The Canadian Entomologist 61: 169–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDunnough, J. 1931. New species of North American Ephemeroptera. The Canadian Entomologist 63: 82–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDunnough, J. 1933 a. New species of North American Ephemeroptera III. The Canadian Entomologist 65: 155–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDunnough, J. 1933 b. New Ephemeroptera from the Gaspé Peninsula. The Canadian Entomologist 65: 278–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDunnough, J. 1934. New species of North American Ephemeroptera IV. The Canadian Entomologist 66: 154–164, 181–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDunnough, J. 1935. Notes on western species of Ephemeroptera. The Canadian Entomologist 67: 95–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDunnough, J. 1936. Further notes on the genus Ameletus with descriptions of new species (Ephemeroptera). The Canadian Entomologist 68: 207–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDunnough, J. 1938. New species of North American Ephemeroptera with critical notes. The Canadian Entomologist 70: 23–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDunnough, J. 1939. New British Columbian Ephemeroptera. The Canadian Entomologist 71: 49–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Navás, L. 1915. Neue Neuropteren. Erste Serie, Entomologishe Mitteilungen 4: 146–153.Google Scholar
Needham, J.G. 1905. Mayflies and midges of New York. Bulletin of the New York State Museum 86: 17–62.Google Scholar
Needham, J.G., and Christenson, R.O.. 1927. Economic insects in some streams of northern Utah. Bulletin of the Utah Agricultural Experiment Station 201: 1–36.Google Scholar
Needham, J.G., Traver, J.R., and Hsu, Y.C.. 1935. The Biology of Mayflies with a Systematic Account of North American Species. Comstock Publishing, New York, NY. 759 pp.Google Scholar
Pritchard, G., and Zloty, J.. 1994. Life histories of two Ameletus mayflies (Ephemeroptera) in two mountain streams: The influence of temperature, body size, and parasitism. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 13: 557–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sartori, N. 1988. Some additions to the mayfly fauna of Switzerland (Insecta, Ephemeroptera). Mitteilungen der Schweizerischen Entomologischen Gesellschaft 61: 339–347.Google Scholar
Schoenemund, E. 1930. Eintagsfliegen oder Ephemeropteren. Volume 19 of Dahl, F., Dahl, M., and Bischoff, H. (Eds.), Die Tierwelt Deutschlands. Gustav Fischer, Jena. 104 pp.Google Scholar
Seemann, T.M. 1927. Dragonflies, stoneflies, and mayflies of southern California. Journal of Entomology and Zoology 19: 40–51.Google Scholar
Sinitshenkova, N.D. 1977. Mayflies of the genus Ameletus Eaton from the Coast. Trudy Biolog-Pochvennogo Instituta 45 (148): 44–49. [In Russian.]Google Scholar
Sinitshenkova, N.D. 1981. New species of mayflies of Ameletus Eaton (Ephemeroptera, Siphlonuridae) from Sikhote Alin. pp. 73–78 in Bespozvonochniye zhivotniye v ekosistemakh lososevykh rek Dalnego Vostoka. Vladivostok. [In Russian.]Google Scholar
Sinitshenkova, N.D., and Varykhanova, K.V.. 1990. A new species of the mayfly genus Ameletus Eaton (Ephemeroptera, Siphlonuridae) from Mongolia. Entomological Review 69: 152–157.Google Scholar
Soldán, T. 1978. Ameletus asiaecentralis sp. n. from Uzbekistan, with notes on A. alexandrae (Ephemeroptera, Siphlonuridae). Acta Entomologica Bohemoslovaca 75: 379–382.Google Scholar
Spieth, H.T. 1941. The North American ephemeropteran types of the Rev. A.E. Eaton. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 34: 87–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Studemann, D., Landolt, P., and Tomka, I.. 1988. Morphology and taxonomy of imagines and eggs of Central and Northern European Siphlonuridae (Ephemeroptera). Mitteilungen der Schweizerischen Entomologischen Gesellschaft 61: 303–328.Google Scholar
Studemann, D., Landolt, P., and Tomka, I.. 1994. Biochemical investigations of Siphlonuridae and Ameletidae (Ephemeroptera). Archiv für Hydrobiologie 130: 77–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Studemann, D., and Tomka, I.. 1991. European Siphlonuridae (Ephemeroptera): A phylogenetic system for the four genera. pp. 104–114 in Alba-Tercedor, J., and Santchez-Ortega, A. (Eds.), Overview and Strategies of Ephemeroptera and Plecoptera. Sandhill Crane Press, Gainesville, FL.Google Scholar
Traver, J.R. 1932. Mayflies of North Carolina. Journal of the Elisha Mitchell Science Society 47: 85–236.Google Scholar
Traver, J.R. 1934. New North American species of mayflies (Ephemerida). Journal of the Elisha Mitchell Science Society 50: 189–254.Google Scholar
Traver, J.R. 1939. Himalayan mayflies (Ephemeroptera). Annals and Magazine of Natural History 4: 32–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ulfstrand, S. 1968. Life cycles of benthic insects in Lapland streams (Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera, Diptera Simuliidae). Oikos 19: 167–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ulmer, G. 1920. Uebersicht ueber die Gattungen der Ephemeropteran, nebst Bemerkungen ueber einzelne Arten. Stettiner Entomologische Zeitung 81: 97–144.Google Scholar
Ulmer, G. 1927. Entomologische Ergebnisse der schwedischen Kamtchatka-Expedition 1920–1922. Ephemeropteren. Arkiv för Zoologi, Stockholm 19A (8): 10–17.Google Scholar
Ulmer, G. 1929. Eintagsfliegen, Ephemeroptera (Agnatha). Die Tierwelt Mitteleuropas 4: 1–43.Google Scholar
Wigle, M.J., and Thommasen, H.V.. 1990. Ephemeroptera from the Bella Coola and Owikeno Lake watersheds, British Columbia Central Coast. Journal of the Entomological Society of British Columbia 87: 7–15.Google Scholar
Zloty, J.S. 1992. Some Applications of Cellulose Acetate Gel Electrophoresis to Insect Systematics and Ecology. M.Sc. thesis, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alta. 151 pp.Google Scholar
Zloty, J., Pritchard, G., and Krishnaraj, R.. 1993. Larval insect identification by cellulose acetate gel electrophoresis and its application to life history evaluation and cohort analysis. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 12: 270–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar