Matskási István (szerk.): A Magyar Természettudományi Múzeum évkönyve 98. (Budapest 2006)

Gattolliat, J.-L. ; Sartori, M.: The mayflies of Ghana (Insecta: Ephemeroptera)

(Fig. 7) indicates that it belongs to the Adenophlebiodes ornatus group of species. These two specimens differ from A. massirius by the greater size (body 8.5 mm, fore wing 9 to 10 mm) and the more extensive pigmentation of the hindwing, and from A. adrieni by the absence of a rounded brown marking on the apical half of the fore wing (figs 26 to 28 in ELOUARD-HlDEUX & ELOUARD 1991). Adenophlebiodes sp. A appears more similar to A. ornatus due to the body size. The pigmentation of the basal half is similar to the subimago of A. ornatus (fig. 8 in ELOUARD-HlDEUX & ELOUARD 1991), but is clearly much more developed than in the imago (fig. 10 in ELOUARD-HlDEUX & ELOUARD 1991). Consequently, we refrain to attribute these specimens to any species of the ornatus group. Adenophlebiodes (Hyalophlebia) sp. Material examined - GHANA: Northern Region, Banda-Nkwanta, Volta, 2°09'W, 8°22'N, 122 m, 1 $, 01.09.1965 (G070); same locality, 1 Ç, 07.10.1965 (G089); 1 $, 13.09.1965 (G073); Ashanti Region, Kumasi, Volta, 1°36'W, 6°43'N, 293 m,2 $$, 18.05.1967 (G2

17); Ashanti Region, Kwadaso/Kumasi, Volta, 1°39'W, 6°42'N, 259 m, 2 ÇÇ, 21.07.1969 (G382). All collected by S. ENDRŐDY-YOUNGA. Diagnostic features - Hyalophlebia DEMOULIN, 1955 was first recognized as a subgenus of Adenophlebiodes ULMER, 1924 (DEMOULIN 1955). Afterwards, most of the characters used for separating the two subgenera were shown to be unreliable except that the members of Adenophlebiodes s.s. have pigmented wings, whereas those of Hyalophlebia are hyaline (PETERS & EDMUNDS 1964). Some larval characters allow the separation of specimens belonging to Adenophlebiodes or Hyalophlebia into two groups (PETERS & EDMUNDS 1964). However, as in most cases the adult-nymph association remains unknown, the correspondence between each one of the two larval groups with either Adenophlebiodes or Hyalophlebia still needs to be established (PETERS & EDMUNDS 1964). More recently, Hyalophlebia was raised to the generic level without any justification or new arguments (MCCAFFERTY & DE MOOR 1995), therefore we continue to consider Hyalophlebia as a subgenus. The female imagoes studied here were attributed to Hyalophlebia because they possess hyaline wings and pretarsi with two similar hooked claws (as in fig. 45 in PETERS & EDMUNDS 1964). Four species of Hyalophlebia have been described (DEMOULIN 1970); for most of them only one stage and one sex is known, making any serious attempt of identification extremely uncertain. The recent study of the closely related subgenus Adenophlebiodes illustrated that West Africa possesses species with restricted distribution (ELOUARD-HlDEUX &