2004
DOI: 10.1590/s0085-56262004000200005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Ultrastructure of the eggs of two species of Anopheles (Anopheles) Meigen (Diptera, Culicidae)

Abstract: ABSTRACT. Egg ultrastructure of two morphologicaly similar species of the Arribalzagia Series, Anopheles (A.) costai Fonseca & Ramos, 1939 and A. (A.) mediopunctatus (Lutz, 1903) are described and illustrated using scanning electron micrographs. Although similar in the adult stage, male genitalia structures and larval and pupal stages, the eggs of these species are distinct. The eggs of A. costai and A. mediopunctatus are compared with that of A. forattinii . Incomplete illustration of egg of A. forattinii is… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

1
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
(4 reference statements)
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This specimen was identified as An.costai based primarily on the geographical distribution previously described for the species 27,28 . More recently, these species have been diagnosed based on features of the male genitalia, larvae and pupae.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This specimen was identified as An.costai based primarily on the geographical distribution previously described for the species 27,28 . More recently, these species have been diagnosed based on features of the male genitalia, larvae and pupae.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…mediopunctatus and An. forattinii was described and validated as a member species of the Arribalzagia Series 28,29 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In Colombia A. costai has a wider geographical distribution than A. forattini, having been reported in twenty departments, whereas A. forattini only has been reported in Meta and Vaupés (González and Carrejo 2009). Diagnostic characters based on morphology are only supported for eggs, pupa and male genitalia (Sallum and Flores 2004; Sallum et al . 1999; Wilkerson and Sallum 1999).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%