Embryology of Triatoma infestans (KLUG), (Hemiptera, Reduviidae), a Chagas' disease vector

This study reports the embryogenesis of T. infestans (Hemiptera, Reduviidae). Morphological parameters of growth sequences from oviposition until hatching (12-14 d 28ºC) were established. Five periods, as percent of time of development (TD), were characterized from oviposition until hatching. The most important morphological features were: 1) formation of blastoderm within 7% of TD; 2) germ band and gastrulation within 30% of TD; 3) nerve cord, limb budding, thoracic and abdominal segmentation and formation of body cavity within 50% of TD; 4) nervous system and blastokinesis end, and development of embryonic cuticle within 65% of TD; 5) differentiation of the mouth parts, fat body, and Malphigian tubules during final stage and completion of embryo at day 12 to day 14 around hatching. These signals were chosen as appropriate morphological parameters which should enable the evaluation of embryologic modifications due to the action/s of different insecticides

Host cell adhesion to Schistosoma mansoni larvae in the peritoneal cavity of naive mice: histological and scanning electron microscopic studies

Cercariae of Schistosoma mansoni inoculated into the peritoneal cavity of naive mice induced host cell adhesion to their surface, but after 90 minutes the number of adherent cells sharply decreased. The cell detachment is progressive and simultaneous to the cercaria-schistosomule transformation. The histological study showed mainly neutrophils in close contact with the larvae. Mononuclear cells and some eosinophils were occasionally seen surrounding the adherent neutrophils. The scanning electron microscopy showed cells displaying twisted microvilli and several microplicae contacting or spreading over the larval surface, and larvae completely surrounded by clusters of cells. These results suggest that the neutrophils recognize molecules on the cercarial surface which induce their spreading

Dissecando o GEN

In thee present paper the classical concept of the corpuscular gene is dissected out in order to show the inconsistency of some genetical and cytological explanations based on it. The author begins by asking how do the genes perform their specific functions. Genetists say that colour in plants is sometimes due to the presence in the cytoplam of epidermal cells of an organic complex belonging to the anthocyanins and that this complex is produced by genes. The author then asks how can a gene produce an anthocyanin ? In accordance to Haldane's view the first product of a gene may be a free copy of the gene itself which is abandoned to the nucleus and then to the cytoplasm where it enters into reaction with other gene products. If, thus, the different substances which react in the cell for preparing the characters of the organism are copies of the genes then the chromosome must be very extravagant a thing : chain of the most diverse and heterogeneous substances (the genes) like agglutinins, precipitins, antibodies, hormones, erzyms, coenzyms, proteins, hydrocarbons, acids, bases, salts, water soluble and insoluble substances ! It would be very extrange that so a lot of chemical genes should not react with each other. remaining on the contrary, indefinitely the same in spite of the possibility of approaching and touching due to the stato of extreme distension of the chromosomes mouving within the fluid medium of the resting nucleus. If a given medium becomes acid in virtue of the presence of a free copy of an acid gene, then gene and character must be essentially the same thing and the difference between genotype and phenotype disappears, epigenesis gives up its place to preformation, and genetics goes back to its most remote beginnings. The author discusses the complete lack of arguments in support of the view that genes are corpuscular entities. To show the emharracing situation of the genetist who defends the idea of corpuscular genes, Dobzhansky's (1944) assertions that "Discrete entities like genes may be integrated into systems, the chromosomes, functioning as such. The existence of organs and tissues does not preclude their cellular organization" are discussed. In the opinion of the present writer, affirmations as such abrogate one of the most important characteristics of the genes, that is, their functional independence. Indeed, if the genes are independent, each one being capable of passing through mutational alterations or separating from its neighbours without changing them as Dobzhansky says, then the chromosome, genetically speaking, does not constitute a system. If on the other hand, theh chromosome be really a system it will suffer, as such, the influence of the alteration or suppression of the elements integrating it, and in this case the genes cannot be independent. We have therefore to decide : either the chromosome is. a system and th genes are not independent, or the genes are independent and the chromosome is not a syntem. What cannot surely exist is a system (the chromosome) formed by independent organs (the genes), as Dobzhansky admits. The parallel made by Dobzhansky between chromosomes and tissues seems to the author to be inadequate because we cannot compare heterogeneous things like a chromosome considered as a system made up by different organs (the genes), with a tissue formed, as we know, by the same organs (the cells) represented many times. The writer considers the chromosome as a true system and therefore gives no credit to the genes as independent elements. Genetists explain position effects in the following way : The products elaborated by the genes react with each other or with substances previously formed in the cell by the action of other gene products. Supposing that of two neighbouring genes A and B, the former reacts with a certain substance of the cellular medium (X) giving a product C which will suffer the action, of the latter (B). it follows that if the gene changes its position to a place far apart from A, the product it elaborates will spend more time for entering into contact with the substance C resulting from the action of A upon X, whose concentration is greater in the proximities of A. In this condition another gene produtc may anticipate the product of B in reacting with C, the normal course of reactions being altered from this time up. Let we see how many incongruencies and contradictions exist in such an explanation. Firstly, it has been established by genetists that the reaction due.to gene activities are specific and develop in a definite order, so that, each reaction prepares the medium for the following. Therefore, if the medium C resulting from the action of A upon x is the specific medium for the activity of B, it follows that no other gene, in consequence of its specificity, can work in this medium. It is only after the interference of B, changing the medium, that a new gene may enter into action. Since the genotype has not been modified by the change of the place of the gene, it is evident that the unique result we have to attend is a little delay without seious consequence in the beginning of the reaction of the product of B With its specific substratum C. This delay would be largely compensated by a greater amount of the substance C which the product of B should found already prepared. Moreover, the explanation did not take into account the fact that the genes work in the resting nucleus and that in this stage the chromosomes, very long and thin, form a network plunged into the nuclear sap. in which they are surely not still, changing from cell to cell and In the same cell from time to time, the distance separating any two genes of the same chromosome or of different ones. The idea that the genes may react directly with each other and not by means of their products, would lead to the concept of Goidschmidt and Piza, in accordance to which the chromosomes function as wholes. Really, if a gene B, accustomed to work between A and C (as for instance in the chromosome ABCDEF), passes to function differently only because an inversion has transferred it to the neighbourhood of F (as in AEDOBF), the gene F must equally be changed since we cannot almH that, of two reacting genes, only one is modified The genes E and A will be altered in the same way due to the change of place-of the former. Assuming that any modification in a gene causes a compensatory modification in its neighbour in order to re-establich the equilibrium of the reactions, we conclude that all the genes are modified in consequence of an inversion. The same would happen by mutations. The transformation of B into B' would changeA and C into A' and C respectively. The latter, reacting withD would transform it into D' and soon the whole chromosome would be modified. A localized change would therefore transform a primitive whole T into a new one T', as Piza pretends. The attraction point-to-point by the chromosomes is denied by the nresent writer. Arguments and facts favouring the view that chromosomes attract one another as wholes are presented. A fact which in the opinion of the author compromises sereously the idea of specific attraction gene-to-gene is found inthe behavior of the mutated gene. As we know, in homozygosis, the spme gene is represented twice in corresponding loci of the chromosomes. A mutation in one of them, sometimes so strong that it is capable of changing one sex into the opposite one or even killing the individual, has, notwithstading that, no effect on the previously existing mutual attraction of the corresponding loci. It seems reasonable to conclude that, if the genes A and A attract one another specifically, the attraction will disappear in consequence of the mutation. But, as in heterozygosis the genes continue to attract in the same way as before, it follows that the attraction is not specific and therefore does not be a gene attribute. Since homologous genes attract one another whatever their constitution, how do we understand the lack cf attraction between non homologous genes or between the genes of the same chromosome ? Cnromosome pairing is considered as being submitted to the same principles which govern gametes copulation or conjugation of Ciliata. Modern researches on the mating types of Ciliata offer a solid ground for such an intepretation. Chromosomes conjugate like Ciliata of the same variety, but of different mating types. In a cell there are n different sorts of chromosomes comparable to the varieties of Ciliata of the same species which do not mate. Of each sort there are in the cell only two chromosomes belonging to different mating types (homologous chromosomes). The chromosomes which will conjugate (belonging to the same "variety" but to different "mating types") produce a gamone-like substance that promotes their union, being without action upon the other chromosomes. In this simple way a single substance brings forth the same result that in the case of point-to-point attraction would be reached through the cooperation of as many different substances as the genes present in the chromosome. The chromosomes like the Ciliata, divide many times before they conjugate. (Gonial chromosomes) Like the Ciliata, when they reach maturity, they copulate. (Cyte chromosomes). Again, like the Ciliata which aggregate into clumps before mating, the chrorrasrmes join together in one side of the nucleus before pairing. (.Synizesis). Like the Ciliata which come out from the clumps paired two by two, the chromosomes leave the synizesis knot also in pairs. (Pachytene) The chromosomes, like the Ciliata, begin pairing at any part of their body. After some time the latter adjust their mouths, the former their kinetochores. During conjugation the Ciliata as well as the chromosomes exchange parts. Finally, the ones as the others separate to initiate a new cycle of divisions. It seems to the author that the analogies are to many to be overlooked. When two chemical compounds react with one another, both are transformed and new products appear at the and of the reaction. In the reaction in which the protoplasm takes place, a sharp difference is to be noted. The protoplasm, contrarily to what happens with the chemical substances, does not enter directly into reaction, but by means of products of its physiological activities. More than that while the compounds with Wich it reacts are changed, it preserves indefinitely its constitution. Here is one of the most important differences in the behavior of living and lifeless matter. Genes, accordingly, do not alter their constitution when they enter into reaction. Genetists contradict themselves when they affirm, on the one hand, that genes are entities which maintain indefinitely their chemical composition, and on the other hand, that mutation is a change in the chemica composition of the genes. They are thus conferring to the genes properties of the living and the lifeless substances. The protoplasm, as we know, without changing its composition, can synthesize different kinds of compounds as enzyms, hormones, and the like. A mutation, in the opinion of the writer would then be a new property acquired by the protoplasm without altering its chemical composition. With regard to the activities of the enzyms In the cells, the author writes : Due to the specificity of the enzyms we have that what determines the order in which they will enter into play is the chemical composition of the substances appearing in the protoplasm. Suppose that a nucleoproteln comes in relation to a protoplasm in which the following enzyms are present: a protease which breaks the nucleoproteln into protein and nucleic acid; a polynucleotidase which fragments the nucleic acid into nucleotids; a nucleotidase which decomposes the nucleotids into nucleoids and phosphoric acid; and, finally, a nucleosidase which attacs the nucleosids with production of sugar and purin or pyramidin bases. Now, it is evident that none of the enzyms which act on the nucleic acid and its products can enter into activity before the decomposition of the nucleoproteln by the protease present in the medium takes place. Leikewise, the nucleosidase cannot works without the nucleotidase previously decomposing the nucleotids, neither the latter can act before the entering into activity of the polynucleotidase for liberating the nucleotids. The number of enzyms which may work at a time depends upon the substances present m the protoplasm. The start and the end of enzym activities, the direction of the reactions toward the decomposition or the synthesis of chemical compounds, the duration of the reactions, all are in the dependence respectively o fthe nature of the substances, of the end products being left in, or retired from the medium, and of the amount of material present. The velocity of the reaction is conditioned by different factors as temperature, pH of the medium, and others. Genetists fall again into contradiction when they say that genes act like enzyms, controlling the reactions in the cells. They do not remember that to cintroll a reaction means to mark its beginning, to determine its direction, to regulate its velocity, and to stop it Enzyms, as we have seen, enjoy none of these properties improperly attributed to them. If, therefore, genes work like enzyms, they do not controll reactions, being, on the contrary, controlled by substances and conditions present in the protoplasm. A gene, like en enzym, cannot go into play, in the absence of the substance to which it is specific. Tne genes are considered as having two roles in the organism one preparing the characters attributed to them and other, preparing the medium for the activities of other genes. At the first glance it seems that only the former is specific. But, if we consider that each gene acts only when the appropriated medium is prepared for it, it follows that the medium is as specific to the gene as the gene to the medium. The author concludes from the analysis of the manner in which genes perform their function, that all the genes work at the same time anywhere in the organism, and that every character results from the activities of all the genes. A gene does therefore not await for a given medium because it is always in the appropriated medium. If the substratum in which it opperates changes, its activity changes correspondingly. Genes are permanently at work. It is true that they attend for an adequate medium to develop a certain actvity. But this does not mean that it is resting while the required cellular environment is being prepared. It never rests. While attending for certain conditions, it opperates in the previous enes It passes from medium to medium, from activity to activity, without stopping anywhere. Genetists are acquainted with situations in which the attended results do not appear. To solve these situations they use to make appeal to the interference of other genes (modifiers, suppressors, activators, intensifiers, dilutors, a. s. o.), nothing else doing in this manner than displacing the problem. To make genetcal systems function genetists confer to their hypothetical entities truly miraculous faculties. To affirm as they do w'th so great a simplicity, that a gene produces an anthocyanin, an enzym, a hormone, or the like, is attribute to the gene activities that onlv very complex structures like cells or glands would be capable of producing Genetists try to avoid this difficulty advancing that the gene works in collaboration with all the other genes as well as with the cytoplasm. Of course, such an affirmation merely means that what works at each time is not the gene, but the whole cell. Consequently, if it is the whole cell which is at work in every situation, it follows that the complete set of genes are permanently in activity, their activity changing in accordance with the part of the organism in which they are working. Transplantation experiments carried out between creeper and normal fowl embryos are discussed in order to show that there is ro local gene action, at least in some cases in which genetists use to recognize such an action. The author thinks that the pleiotropism concept should be applied only to the effects and not to the causes. A pleiotropic gene would be one that in a single actuation upon a more primitive structure were capable of producing by means of secondary influences a multiple effect This definition, however, does not preclude localized gene action, only displacing it. But, if genetics goes back to the egg and puts in it the starting point for all events which in course of development finish by producing the visible characters of the organism, this will signify a great progress. From the analysis of the results of the study of the phenocopies the author concludes that agents other than genes being also capaole of determining the same characters as the genes, these entities lose much of their credit as the unique makers of the organism. Insisting about some points already discussed, the author lays once more stress upon the manner in which the genes exercise their activities, emphasizing that the complete set of genes works jointly in collaboration with the other elements of the cell, and that this work changes with development in the different parts of the organism. To defend this point of view the author starts fron the premiss that a nerve cell is different from a muscle cell. Taking this for granted the author continues saying that those cells have been differentiated as systems, that is all their parts have been changed during development. The nucleus of the nerve cell is therefore different from the nucleus of the muscle cell not only in shape, but also in function. Though fundamentally formed by th same parts, these cells differ integrally from one another by the specialization. Without losing anyone of its essenial properties the protoplasm differentiates itself into distinct kinds of cells, as the living beings differentiate into species. The modified cells within the organism are comparable to the modified organisms within the species. A nervo and a muscle cell of the same organism are therefore like two species originated from a common ancestor : integrally distinct. Like the cytoplasm, the nucleus of a nerve cell differs from the one of a muscle cell in all pecularities and accordingly, nerve cell chromosomes are different from muscle cell chromosomes. We cannot understand differentiation of a part only of a cell. The differentiation must be of the whole cell as a system. When a cell in the course of development becomes a nerve cell or a muscle cell , it undoubtedly acquires nerve cell or muscle cell cytoplasm and nucleus respectively. It is not admissible that the cytoplasm has been changed r.lone, the nucleus remaining the same in both kinds of cells. It is therefore legitimate to conclude that nerve ceil ha.s nerve cell chromosomes and muscle cell, muscle cell chromosomes. Consequently, the genes, representing as they do, specific functions of the chromossomes, are different in different sorts of cells. After having discussed the development of the Amphibian egg on the light of modern researches, the author says : We have seen till now that the development of the egg is almost finished and the larva about to become a free-swimming tadepole and, notwithstanding this, the genes have not yet entered with their specific work. If the haed and tail position is determined without the concourse of the genes; if dorso-ventrality and bilaterality of the embryo are not due to specific gene actions; if the unequal division of the blastula cells, the different speed with which the cells multiply in each hemisphere, and the differential repartition of the substances present in the cytoplasm, all this do not depend on genes; if gastrulation, neurulation. division of the embryo body into morphogenetic fields, definitive determination of primordia, and histological differentiation of the organism go on without the specific cooperation of the genes, it is the case of asking to what then the genes serve ? Based on the mechanism of plant galls formation by gall insects and on the manner in which organizers and their products exercise their activities in the developing organism, the author interprets gene action in the following way : The genes alter structures which have been formed without their specific intervention. Working in one substratum whose existence does not depend o nthem, the genes would be capable of modelling in it the particularities which make it characteristic for a given individual. Thus, the tegument of an animal, as a fundamental structure of the organism, is not due to gene action, but the presence or absence of hair, scales, tubercles, spines, the colour or any other particularities of the skin, may be decided by the genes. The organizer decides whether a primordium will be eye or gill. The details of these organs, however, are left to the genetic potentiality of the tissue which received the induction. For instance, Urodele mouth organizer induces Anura presumptive epidermis to develop into mouth. But, this mouth will be farhioned in the Anura manner. Finalizing the author presents his own concept of the genes. The genes are not independent material particles charged with specific activities, but specific functions of the whole chromosome. To say that a given chromosome has n genes means that this chromonome, in different circumstances, may exercise n distinct activities. Thus, under the influence of a leg evocator the chromosome, as whole, develops its "leg" activity, while wbitm the field of influence of an eye evocator it will develop its "eye" activity. Translocations, deficiencies and inversions will transform more or less deeply a whole into another one, This new whole may continue to produce the same activities it had formerly in addition to those wich may have been induced by the grafted fragment, may lose some functions or acquire entirely new properties, that is, properties that none of them had previously The theoretical possibility of the chromosomes acquiring new genetical properties in consequence of an exchange of parts postulated by the present writer has been experimentally confirmed by Dobzhansky, who verified that, when any two Drosophila pseudoobscura II - chromosomes exchange parts, the chossover chromosomes show new "synthetic" genetical effects.

7ª Contribuição ao estudo dos Flebotomus (Diptera: Psychodidae): descrição dos machos de 24 novas espécies

The A. and his co-workers captured in trips in the hinterland of Brazil more tham 17.000 flebotomi from which 35 are new ones, 11 discribed by, him in previous papers. The A. found these insects in groups of species living in different habitats, some ones of them not yet known: ondoors, or outdoors attracted by light or animal baits, without Shannon’s trap, in great or small caves, in the jungle in tree’s holes, holes in stones, holes in the soil habited by animals like armadillos, pacas (Aguti paca), wild rats, cururú toad (Bufo sp.). He observed the life history of 13 species: Flebotomus longipalpis Lutz& Neiva, 1912, Flebotomus intermedius Lutz & Neiva, 1912, Flebotomus avellari Costa Lima, 1932, Flebotomus aragãoi costa Lima, 1932, Flebotomus lutzianus Costa Lima, 1932, Flebotomus limai fonseca, 1935, Flebotomus rickardi Costa Lima, 1936, Flebotomus dasipodogeton Castro, 1939, Flebotomus oswaldoi n. sp., Flebotomus villelai n. sp., Flebotomus triacanthus n. sp., Flebotomus longispinus n. sp. And flebotomus travassosi n. sp. He describes the male of 24 n. sp., explaining the differential diagnose of group or nearly allied species. He inclued F. rooti n. sp. And F. hirsutus n. sp. In the sub-genus Shannonomyia. The first one, very allied to F. davisi Root is different from it, for presenting in the dorsal side of the abdomen bristles and not scales and to have the median claspers longer than his inner appendage and F. hirsutus quite different from the others which show 3 spines on distal segment of the upper clasper and for being the only one who presents the bristles of inner appendage of median clasper longer than it. Only the females of F. amazonensis Root and f. chagasi Costa Lima, are known and then it is possible that they belong to one of the species of this sub-genus from whom only the male have been described. F. choti Floch & Abonnenc, captured also at Pará, F. triacanthus n. sp. F. trispinosus n. sp. And F. equatorialis n. sp. Are very related and to this group the A. proposes the same of Pressatia as sub-genus in honor to whom demonstrated the medical importance of the flebotomi, considering F. triacanthus as the type specie of this sub-genus. In this sub-genus the V papal joint is very long, longer than III + IV, the antennae with geniculated spines without posterior outgrowth. At the genitalia the basal segment of the upper clasper presents two types of bristles ou the inner face, arranged in tuft; the distal segment with 3 spines and 2 thin bristles something difficult to see one of them situated near the apical spine and the other on the base of tubercle where the median spine is articulated; the median clasper is unarmed and compressed; the inferior clasper is also unarmed and longer than de basal segment of the upper clasper; the pompeta is longer than the basal segment of the upper clasper. Following it is presented a key for the determination of the males of the four species of this sub-genus. F. micropygus n. sp., F. minasensis n. sp. e F. dandrophylus n. sp., f. shannoni, F. monticolus, F. pestanai, F. lanei and F. cayenensis constitute a group with many similars characters. F. micropygus is the only American species who present α smaller than β and for that reason and others is allied to. F. minuts and others related species, but presents two terminal spines on the distal segment of the upper clasper. F. micropygus and f. minasensis are quite different because they have very small genitalia, smaller than their heads. F. dendrophylus presents on the median clasper a naked area near the apex and for this and others characters is different from the others of the group. F. flaviscutellatus n. sp., F. oliverioi, F. intermedius and whithmani, are very allied but the first one can be very easily distinguished because it’s scutellum is light. Flebotomus barrettoi n. sp., F. coutinhoi n. sp., F. aragãoi, F. brasiliensis, F. lutzianus, F. texanus, F. pascalei, F. atroclavatus and F. tejeraae are very allied forming a natural group. The two last ones are not well known but the A. A. who have studied them described very long clipeus so long as the head and for that reason can be distinguished from all the others included the two new ones. F. coutinhoi is the only one who presents the apecis of the penis filaments twisted. F. barrettoi n. sp., can be distinguished from aragãoi, texamus and coutinhoi by the length of the penis filaments and from atrocavatus, tejeraae, lutzianus and brasiliensis by the arrangement of the spines of distal segment of the upper clasper. Flebotomus ubiquitalis n. sp., F. auraensis n. sp., F. affinis and F. microps e F. antunesi have many common characters. F. microps n. sp., can be distinguished from any one by the size of the eyes and the presence od well developed genae. This species and other new species are different from F. antunesi by the arrangement of the spines of the distal segment of the upper clasper of the latter. F. ubiquitalis n. sp. can be distinguished from others by the figure of the median clasper. F. auraensis n. sp. Can be distinguished from F. affinis n. sp. By the tuft hairs on the inner face of the basal segment and by arrangement of the spines of the sital segment of the upper clasper. Flebotomus brachipygus n. sp. Seemed to be F. rostrans, specie not well known, by the characters of the genitalia but can not be identified to her by the clypeus size and the palpi’s characters. Flebotomus costalimai, n. sp., f. tupynambai n. sp., and f. castroi Barreto & Coutinho, 1941, are very allied species and the A. proposes to included them the new sub-genus Castromyia, in honor to Dr. G. M. de Oliveira Castro, appointing like typespecies F. castroi with the V joint longer than III + IV; antennae with geniculated spines without posterior prolongation. Genitalia: the basal segment of the upper clasper with a tuft of hairs and the distal segment with 4 spines, one of them at the apex and near it a thin and straight bristle difficult to see; the median clasper with one spinous hair isolated...

Sôbre alguns Phlebotomus e Brumptomyia da Colômbia (Diptera, Psychodidae)

The first case of Kala-azar in Colombia was discovered in Soledad, S. Vicente do Chucuri, Dept. Santander, by Gast-Galvis who viscerotomized a three year old girl deceased in December, 1943. In 1944, fifty-three Phlebotominae were collected in the chicken pen of the girl's house, two new species included. Mangabeira helped by A. Gast Galvis, Juan Antonio Montoya and E. Osorno Mesa, collected some Phlebotomus in that country. The geographical distribution of the species of Phlebotomus collected in Colombia (P. abonnenci, P. camposi, P. columbianus, P. dubitans, P. gasti, P. montoyai, P. saulensis, P. serranus, P. triramulus) and two species of Brumptomyia (B. beaupertuyi and b mesari), are included. our description of the male P. columbianus is based on some specimens found in association with females. However, doubts exist about such association of sexes. There is no correspondence between the length of the spicules and the ducts of spermathecae. Besides, the specimens were not obtained by raising. The following new species are described and compared with previously known ones: a) Phlebotomus gasti sp. n. differs from the other species by a protruding tubercle in the gubernaculum. It has also fewer setae in the tuft of the basistyle, a different length of the inferior gonapophyses, and a differently shaped clasper. b) Phlebotomus dubitans sp. n. differs from P. walkeri and P. deanei (according to personal information from O. Theodor, who examined the types, they are identical to P. williamsi and P. sericeus respectively), mainly because these species have the inferior gonapophyses larger than the basistyle and fewer setae in the basistyle. P. evandroi is separated by the shape of the claspers and by the tuft of setae of the basistyle. P. marajoensis is the closest relative to P. dubitans. There is a possibility of their being synonymous. On the other hand, they can be differentiated by the existence of three extra distal spines in P. marajoensis. There is also a difference in their palpal indexes: for marajoensis I - II - IV - III - V, and for dubitans I - IV (III - II) - V. We notice, too, that the inferior gonapophyses in P. marajoensis is a little shorter. P. marajoensis has a long seta in the basistyle (clearly shown in the original drawing), not found in the new species. c) Phlebotomus montoyai sp. n.: The closest relatives are P. noguchii, P. peruensis, P. pescei, P. quinquifer and P. rickardi. They differ from the new species by the number and length of the setae of the basistyle tuft which are more numerous and longer in the new species. The shapes of their claspers are also different. Other differences are: the basal portion of the basistyle in P. noguchii is very wide (in montoyai it is narrower); the intermediate spine of the dististyle is located on a protruding tubercle ( in the new species there is hardly a tubercle); the spicules are long, and the inferior gonapophyses is longer than the basistyle. P. quinquifer and P. rickardi have a shorter dististyle and narrower wings, with different venation. The main difference, however lies, in the M4, which ends almost at the level of the junction of M1 with M2 (in P. montoyai the M4 ends far behind). In P. peruensis and P. pescei the intermediary spine of the dististyle is closer to the distal spine than to the basal one, whereas in the new species it is situated between the two pairs. Their inferior gonapophyses is longer than the basistyle. d) Brumptomyia mesai sp. n. - Closest relatives are: B. hamatus, B. pentacanthus, B. beaupertuyi which are easily separated from the new species because the tufts of their basistyle have thin and differently shaped hairs. Also their claspers are shaped differently. B. avellari is also easily recognized on account of the twisted aspect of its clasper and because the basal tuft of the basistyle has few setae, B. brumpti tuft of setae arise directly from the basistyle; these setae are stronger than those of the new species. It has 8 blade-like setae located on the inner surface of the distal half, whereas the new species has only six setae. In B. brumpti, there are three median and two terminal spines in the dististyle; in the new species, there are two median and two terminal spines and one between them, which is closer to the two median spines. The comparison with B. galindoi is based in a specimen determined by Fairchild and deposited in the entomological collection of the "Faculdade de Higiene e Saúde Pública da Universidade de S. Paulo". The genitalia of the new species is much shorter, in galindoi the inferior gonapophyses is 0,8 mm long whereas in B. mesai it hardly reaches 0,6 mm. The shape of the clasper and the distribution of its setae are different. The sub-median lamellae, besides being longer in B. galindoi are also longer in comparison with the other parts of the genitalia. The gubernaculum of the new species is longer, thinner, and more pointed; in B. galindoi it is shorter and triangular. In the drawing published by Fairchild and Hertig 91947), the basistyle shows 8 blade-like setae on the distal half, whereas in the new species only six are found.

Anopheles albitarsis Embryogenesis: Morphological Identification of Major Events

Anopheles albitarsis embryogenesis was analyzed through confocal microscopy of clarified eggs. Using Drosophila melanogaster as reference system, the major morphogenetic events (blastoderm, gastrulation, germ band extension, germ band retraction, dorsal closure) were identified. The kinetics of early events is proportionally similar in both systems, but late movements (from germ band retraction on) progress slower in An. albitarsis. Major differences in An. albitarsis related to D. melanogaster were: (1) pole cells do not protrude from the blastoderm; (2) the mosquito embryo undergoes a 180º rotation movement, along its longitudinal axis; (3) the head remains individualized throughout embryogenesis; (4) extraembryonary membranes surround the whole embryo. A novel kind of malaria control is under development and is based on the use of genetically modified mosquitoes. Phenotypic analysis of the embryonic development of mutants will be imposed as part of the evaluation of effectiveness and risk of employment of this strategy in the field. In order to accomplish this, knowledge of the wild type embryo is a prerequisite. Morphological studies will also serve as basis for subsequent development biology approaches.