An Unusual Chrysopid Larva: Identification, Description, and Taxonomic Implications Author(s): Catherine A. Tauber and Maurice J. Tauber Source: Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 106(6):729-740. Published By: Entomological Society of America URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.1603/AN13105 BioOne (www.bioone.org) is a nonprofit, online aggregation of core research in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences. BioOne provides a sustainable online platform for over 170 journals and books published by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses. Your use of this PDF, the BioOne Web site, and all posted and associated content indicates your acceptance of BioOne’s Terms of Use, available at www.bioone.org/page/terms_of_use. Usage of BioOne content is strictly limited to personal, educational, and non-commercial use. Commercial inquiries or rights and permissions requests should be directed to the individual publisher as copyright holder. BioOne sees sustainable scholarly publishing as an inherently collaborative enterprise connecting authors, nonprofit publishers, academic institutions, research libraries, and research funders in the common goal of maximizing access to critical research. SYSTEMATICS An Unusual Chrysopid Larva: Identification, Description, and Taxonomic Implications 1,2,3 1,2 CATHERINE A. TAUBER AND MAURICE J. TAUBER Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 106(6): 729Ð740 (2013); DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1603/AN13105 ABSTRACT Berchmansus is a small Neotropical genus in the green lacewing tribe Leucochrysini; its larvae and biology are unknown. Adults of Berchmansus adumbratus Nava´s were found in samples from the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History Upper Amazonian forest canopy project; these samples came from palms at each of two widely separated Peruvian localities. The same samples also yielded specimens of an unusual leucochrysine larva. For a variety of reasons, we conclude that the larvae are likely conspeciÞc with the adults. If our reasoning proves correct, they would represent the Þrst reported larvae from the genus Berchmansus. Their anatomical features are consistent with either specialized trash-carrying or a naked lifestyle. Here we describe the larvae, and because they have many attributes not previously reported from leucochrysines, we reevaluate the suite of larval features that characterize the tribe. Our analysis illustrates that in both larval morphology and perhaps trash-carrying habits, the tribe Leucochrysini displays a much broader range of variation than previously recorded. KEY WORDS Neuroptera, Chrysopidae, Leucochrysini, Berchmansus cinctipes, trash-carrying Currently, the chrysopid tribe Leucochrysini contains lection and preservation, to do so would be unusual seven valid genera (Brooks and Barnard 1990, Tauber for leucochrysine larvae. 2007, Tauber et al. 2008b). Of these, larvae have been 2) Although the larvae display several of the traits that described for three: Leucochrysa (both subgenera), we had considered diagnostic of leucochrysine lar- Gonzaga, and Santocellus (Adams 1987; Tauber 2004; vae, they lack several others. For example, they Mantoanelli et al. 2006, 2011; Tauber et al. 2008a,b, have the elongate, digitiform thoracic tubercles 2011, 2013). Together, these larvae display a large set that are uniquely characteristic of all currently of distinctive features that heretofore we had consid- described leucochrysine larvae. However, they ered as characteristic of the tribe Leucochrysini also have a narrow, slightly ßattened, fusiform (Mantoanelli et al. 2011, Tauber et al. 2011). Larvae body, and all their dorsal setae are without hooks; are unknown for the remaining four leucochrysine both of these features are unknown for leuco- genera (Berchmansus, Cacarulla, Neula, and Nuvol). chrysines. During recent visits to the Smithsonian National 3) The larvae express an attribute that until now has Museum of Natural History (USNM), we sorted not been documented for any extant chrysopid through a large number of insecticidal fogging samples larvaÑa series of elongate lateral tubercles (LTs) (in alcohol) that T. L. Erwin and M. G. Pogue col- on abdominal segments A2 through A7. These tu- lected in the Upper Amazonian forest canopy. Among bercles resemble those on some myrmeleontiform the Neuroptera that we found were adults of Berch- larvae, except that the setae on the leucochrysine mansus adumbratus Nava´s and specimens of an un- larvae are much longer and more ßexible (e.g., usual chrysopid larva. We identiÞed the larvae as sec- Nymphidae: New 1991; extant Ascalaphidae: ond and third instars, belonging to the tribe Henry 1976; fossil Ascalaphidae: MacLeod 1970). Leucochrysini, but we did not recognize the genus or The only other chrysopid larva that is reported to species. have elongate abdominal tubercles is the fossil These larvae are exceptional among leucochrysines Hallucinochrysa (Pe´rezÐde la Fuente et al. 2012), in several respects: but its tubercles are very unlike those on the leu- cochrysine larva. 1) None had packets of trash on their dorsa. Although it is possible that they lost their trash during col- The presence of such exceptional larval traits raises some intriguing questions: What is the identity of the 1 Department of Entomology, Comstock Hall, Cornell University, larvae? Should they be classiÞed as trash-carriers or as Ithaca, NY 14853-2601. naked? Given the inclusion of these unusual larvae 2 Department of Entomology, University of California, Davis, CA 95616. within the Leucochrysini, how should the list of larval 3 Corresponding author, e-mail: [email protected]. features that currently characterize the tribe (Man- 0013-8746/13/0729Ð0740$04.00/0 ᭧ 2013 Entomological Society of America 730 ANNALS OF THE ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA Vol. 106, no. 6 toanelli et al. 2011, Tauber et al. 2011) be revised? scribed (see details later in the text). The remaining Moreover, how does the degree of larval variation possibilities among the leucochrysines are Berchman- among leucochrysine genera now compare with that sus, or one of the rare monotypic leucochrysine gen- among genera in the other tribes of Chrysopinae? era, or a previously undiscovered genus. To help provide a basis for answering these ques- Larval Size. The relatively small size of the second tions: we 1) provide evidence for a probable generic and third instars in our samples corresponds well to and speciÞc identiÞcation of the larvae, 2) describe the Berchmansus adults, which are among the smallest the larvae, 3) reevaluate each of the 12 larval features leucochrysines (for relative forewing sizes: see Brooks that currently characterize the tribe Leucochrysini, and Barnard 1990, Tauber 2007). Cacarulla (also re- and 4) brießy discuss aspects of the larval morphology ported from the Amazonian region of Peru) has a body of this leucochrysine in relation to the biology and that is much too large to correspond to the larvae in phylogeny of the genus. the samples. The adults of the other two monotypic genera are also reported to be large (Nava´s 1916, 1917); we have been unable to conÞrm these reports Materials and Methods because specimens from these genera are lacking. All terminology and methods for the preparation Thus, on the basis of body size, Berchmansus remains and measurement of the larvae are identical to those the closest Þt. we used previously (Mantoanelli et al. 2011, Tauber et Coincidence in Time, Locality, and Habitat of Lar- al. 2011). Ultimately, the specimens will remain in the vae and Adults. Among the samples we sorted, the USNM. larvae in question (n ϭ 11) consistently were associ- ated with adult specimens of B. adumbratus (n ϭ 13). SpeciÞcally, the larval and adult specimens were re- Identification of the Larvae stricted to samples from two widely separated Peru- Normally, we are very hesitant to identify unknown vian localities, one from Loreto in northern Peru, the larvae based primarily on contemporaneously col- other in Madre de Dios in southeastern Peru. At each lected adults (without rearing), but, as outlined later of these localities, the adults and larvae were taken in the text, we conclude that the larvae in the USNM only from palm trees. We did not Þnd similar adults or samples are those of B. adumbratus Nava´s for a series larvae among the many other samples that we sorted of three independent reasons as follows: from nearby or distant localities, or from other types Taxonomic Considerations. In identifying the lar- of plants. Furthermore, at each locality, the larval and vae, we considered all three chrysopid subfamilies. adult specimens coincided in their collection dates. First, the larvae do not express the well-established This complete overlap in time, locality, and habitat distinguishing features of Nothochrysinae (cf Dõ´azÐ constitutes substantial evidence for a close association Aranda et al. 2001, Monserrat and Dõ´azÐAranda 2012). between the larvae and the adults. They also lack the large size and morphological fea- Conclusion From Evidence. Given the diverse tures of the known larvae of Apochrysinae (cf Tsu- sources of evidence mentioned earlier, it is reasonable kaguchi 1995; Fig. 129 in Aspo¨ck and Aspo¨ck 2007). to postulate that the Peruvian larvae are those of B. However, their larval morphology and body size fall adumbratus. We plan to test this hypothesis further by well within the range of variation reported for using molecular data from both adults and larvae. Chrysopinae (cf Tsukaguchi 1995,