Laccophilus vacaensis chihuahuae Zimmerman 1970

Laccophilus vacaensis chihuahuae DESCRIPTION AND DIAGNOSIS. — L. v. chihuahuae differs from v. vacaensis in its lighter color, less extensive elytral pattern, smaller size, highly modified female epipleura, and the structure of the male aedeagus. Yellow or yellowish-brown predominates as the principal base color of chihuahuae instead of the reddish-brown that is much more apparent in vacaensis. The irroration of chihuahuae is less intense with the individual dots smaller and more discretely separated from one another. The average size of chihuahuae is about 0.3 to 0.4 mm shorter than vacaensis. The width of the pronotum exceeds the length 2.50 times in the latter and 2.57 times in the former (n = 8 for each race). The female epipleura and male aedeagus are most strikingly different characters, however. The female epipleuron of chihuahuae almost always has a flange and an unusual conformation immediately anterior to it. The epipleuron is modified so that a groove can be distinguished even when the flange is comparatively small. This does not appear in vacaensis, but does in v. thermophilus. The aedeagus of vacaensis has a rather sinuate appearance, while that of chihuahuae is comparatively straight except just before the apex where it abruptly narrows to a curving bent tip. Also, if cut in cross-section at about half its length, the aedeagus would have a decidedly triangular outline. This is only suggested in vacaensis.
The aedeagus is the only reliable way to separate chihuahuae and thermophilus, although the latter seems to be slightly larger (Table 21). — L. v. chihuahuae ranges from the hill country of central Texas through west Texas, New Mexico, and Cochise County, Arizona ( fig. 15). I have collected it only in short-lived ephemeral ponds that occur after the summer rains in the flats between the separated mountain ranges of New Mexico, Arizona, and west Texas. This ephemeral condition seems to be the reason this race is so seldom collected. It does occur in the lower reaches of some mountain streams, however. Holotype male, allotype female, and a male paratype with the following locality data are in the United States National Museum: Boquillas, Big Bend National Park, Brewster County, Texas, viii.2.61, J. R. Zimmerman. One male and two female paratypes with the following data are in the California Academy of Sciences, San Francisco: 1 m. S. of Animas, Hidalgo County, New Mexico, vii.31.65, H. B. Leech; one male paratype, 5 miles N. of Tombstone, Cochise County, Arizona, ix.6.61, J. R. Zimmerman, and one female, 10 m. E. of Marathon, Brewster County, Texas, viii.1.61, J. R. Zimmerman, in the University of Michigan Museum of Zoology, Ann Arbor; and another female paratype from the same locality is also in the United States National Museum.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. — ARIZONA. Cochise County. Chiracahua Mtns., Cave Ck. Can., 1 9, ix.13-14.52, B. Malkin (FM). Huachucha City, 2 6,3 9, ix.6.61, JRZ (NMSU). Rodeo (N.M.), 2 m. NW., 2 6,2 9,
ix.5.61, JRZ (NMSU). Tombstone, 5m.S,H,l?, ix.6.61, JRZ (NMSU). NEW MEXICO. Harding County. Mosquero, 10 m. E., 1 ?, x.23.65, A. H. Smith (NMSU). Hidalgo County. Rodeo, 1 2, viii.31.59, H. E. Evans (CNL); 12 m. N., 1 <$ , 2 2, ix.5.61, JRZ (NMSU). TEXAS. Bexar County. Leon Ck., 1 $, 3 2, x.11.52, B. J. Adelson (CAS). Brewster County. Boquillas, 1 2, vii.7.48, C. & P. Vaurie (AMNH); 3 $, 4 2, viii.2.61, JRZ (NMSU). Marathon, 10 m. E., 4 2, viii.1.61, JRZ (NMSU). Burnett County. 1 <$, 8 2, Hubbard and Schwarz (USNM). Culberson County. Nickel Ck. Sta., 2.5 m. E., 2 2, ix.2.52, B. Malkin (FM). Lee County. Fedor, 1 2 (CNG). Webb County. Laredo, 2 <5 , v.20-24.48, W. Nutting and F. Werner