Morfologia e duração do desenvolvimento pós-embrionário de Chrysomya megacephala (Diptera: Calliphoridae) em condições de laboratório

Abstract

A morfologia e o tempo de desenvolvimento pós-embrionário de Chrysomya megacephala (Fabricius) criada em condições de laboratório e em dieta de carne bovina, foi descrita e comparada ao de outras espécies. Os parâmetros analisados foram à duração dos instares larvais e a morfologia. Para isso as larvas foram fixadas e preservadas em intervalos de tempo de 2 horas, desde a eclosão das larvas até a 50ª hora, a fim de se determinar o tempo de desenvolvimento de cada estágio. O tempo total de desenvolvimento larval para C. megacephala foi de 98 horas, com média de comprimento 15,51 mm. Essa espécie tem comportamento necrobiontófago e de importância sanitária e médico-legal, usada na estimativa do intervalo post-mortem em investigação criminal.

Morphology and identification of first instars of the European and Mediterranean blowflies of forensic importance. Part I: Chrysomyinae

“…A discrepancy with the present description concerns the anterior spinose band on segment a5, which is described by both Florez & Wolff (2009) and Barros‐Cordeiro & Pujol‐Luz (2010) as broadly interrupted. Barros‐Cordeiro & Pujol‐Luz (2010) describe larval spines as very variable in form, with mono‐, bi‐ or tricuspid tips. This is not consistent with our observations, in which all spines were noted as having a monocuspid form (e.g.…”

“…2C) provided a light microscope photograph of those variable spines, but the caption for the figure does not specify which instar is documented. Further enquiry has confirmed that the illustrated spines belonged to a second‐instar larva and that the first‐instar larvae analysed by Barros‐Cordeiro and Pujol‐Luz (2010) had only monocuspid spines (J. R. Pujol‐Luz, personal communication, 2012). Other publications provide descriptions and figures of only the cephaloskeleton and very general aspects of larval morphology.…”

“…Only two descriptions of spinulation include comments about anterior spinose bands (Florez & Wolff, 2009; Barros‐Cordeiro & Pujol‐Luz, 2010) and none refer to posterior spinose bands. A discrepancy with the present description concerns the anterior spinose band on segment a5, which is described by both Florez & Wolff (2009) and Barros‐Cordeiro & Pujol‐Luz (2010) as broadly interrupted. Barros‐Cordeiro & Pujol‐Luz (2010) describe larval spines as very variable in form, with mono‐, bi‐ or tricuspid tips.…”

“…6F). Barros‐Cordeiro and Pujol‐Luz (2010, Fig. 2C) provided a light microscope photograph of those variable spines, but the caption for the figure does not specify which instar is documented.…”

“…albiceps and Ch. megacephala were the subject of recent descriptive papers, which included advanced techniques of documentation such as SEM (Sukontason et al , 2003; Barros‐Cordeiro & Pujol‐Luz, 2010; Mendonça et al , 2010). The morphologies of first instars of Ch.…”