1987
DOI: 10.1590/s0074-02761987000300013
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Third contribution to the knowledge of the Raviniini (Diptera, Sarcophagidae), based on observations of the larvae, using scanning electron microscope

Abstract: L1, L2 and L3 of Oxysarcodexia paulistanensis (Mattos), L3 of O. confusa Lopes, L2 of Ravinia belforti (Prado & Fonseca) and L2 of Oxyvinia excisa (Lopes) were described and figured using scanning electron microscope.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

0
9
1

Year Published

1999
1999
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
9
1
Order By: Relevance
“…At least the anterior and posterior spiracles and the cephalopharyngeal skeleton are described, drawn, or pictured for the third instar larvae of practically all species available in the literature. As regarding SEM descriptions, the sarcophagids have been barely and unevenly studied: the first instar larvae of about 70 European Miltogramminae species is known (Szpila, ; Szpila and Pape, , 2007, ); among the Paramachronychiinae, all the larval stages of Wohlfahrtia magnifica (Schiner, 1862) and first instar larvae of Sarcophila latifrons (Fallén, 1817) are known (Ruíz‐Martínez et al, ; Szpila, ); and from Sarcophaginae, the best studied genus is Sarcophaga , although several non‐Palaeartic species belonging to other genera have also been described (Leite and Lopes, ; Lopes and Leite, ; Mendoça et al, ). With regards to Sarcophaga , three species have been partially described (Aspoas, ), four species have descriptions of third instar larva stage alone (Kirk‐Spriggs, ; Pérez‐Moreno et al, ), and all the immature stages have been described for three more species (Awad et al, ; Draber‐Monko et al, ; Singh et al, ; Sukontason et al, , 2006; Suwannayod et al, ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…At least the anterior and posterior spiracles and the cephalopharyngeal skeleton are described, drawn, or pictured for the third instar larvae of practically all species available in the literature. As regarding SEM descriptions, the sarcophagids have been barely and unevenly studied: the first instar larvae of about 70 European Miltogramminae species is known (Szpila, ; Szpila and Pape, , 2007, ); among the Paramachronychiinae, all the larval stages of Wohlfahrtia magnifica (Schiner, 1862) and first instar larvae of Sarcophila latifrons (Fallén, 1817) are known (Ruíz‐Martínez et al, ; Szpila, ); and from Sarcophaginae, the best studied genus is Sarcophaga , although several non‐Palaeartic species belonging to other genera have also been described (Leite and Lopes, ; Lopes and Leite, ; Mendoça et al, ). With regards to Sarcophaga , three species have been partially described (Aspoas, ), four species have descriptions of third instar larva stage alone (Kirk‐Spriggs, ; Pérez‐Moreno et al, ), and all the immature stages have been described for three more species (Awad et al, ; Draber‐Monko et al, ; Singh et al, ; Sukontason et al, , 2006; Suwannayod et al, ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…, made some observations on antennae of larvae of Aedes aegypti with transmission electron microscopy (TEM). Lopes and Leite (1987) found probable structures in the integument of larvae of Sarcophagidae. Williams (1996, 1997) mentioned probable sensillae on the integument, antennae and mouth structures of L. longipalpis.…”
mentioning
confidence: 96%
“…The posterior spiracular cavity in G. nasalis bears similarities to that of Sarcophagidae ( Lopes & Leite 1987). The serrated or denticulate rima in G. nasalis is probably characteristic of Gasterophilus immature stages, because such structures have already been described in the third‐instar larva of G. intestinalis ( Principato & Tosti 1988).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…In contrast, the small spines of Gasterophilus larvae may have little importance in attachment. Although morphologically distinct from G. nasalis , ornamented maxillary surfaces are observed in Oxysarcodexia confusa (Lopes), O. thornax (Walker) , O. paulistanensis (Mattos) and Chaetoravinia almeidai (Lopes) (teeth) ( Lopes & Leite 1986, 1987; Leite & Lopes 1987), Cuterebra cuniculis (ridges) ( Baker 1986) and D. hominis (ventral denticles) ( Filippis & Leite 1997).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%