| Summary: | Abstract Background The worldwide genus Anopheles Meigen, 1918 is the only genus containing species evolved as vectors of human and simian malaria. Morbidity and mortality caused by Plasmodium Marchiafava & Celli, 1885 is tremendous, which has made these parasites and their vectors the objects of intense research aimed at mosquito identification, malaria control and elimination. DNA tools make the identification of Anopheles species both easier and more difficult. Easier in that putative species can nearly always be separated based on DNA data; more difficult in that attaching a scientific name to a species is often problematic because morphological characters are often difficult to interpret or even see; and DNA technology might not be available and affordable. Added to this are the many species that are either not yet recognized or are similar to, or identical with, named species. The first step in solving Anopheles identification problem is to attach a morphology-based formal or informal name to a specimen. These names are hypotheses to be tested with further morphological observations and/or DNA evidence. The overarching objective is to be able to communicate about a given species under study. In South America, morphological identification which is the first step in the above process is often difficult because of lack of taxonomic expertise and/or inadequate identification keys, written for local fauna, containing the most consequential species, or obviously, do not include species described subsequent to key publication. Methods Holotypes and paratypes and other specimens deposited in the Coleção Entomológica de Referência, Faculdade de Saúde Pública (FSP-USP), Museo de Entomología, Universidad del Valle (MUSENUV) and the US National Mosquito Collection, Smithsonian Institution (USNMC) were examined and employed to illustrate the identification keys for female, male and fourth-instar larvae of Anopheles. Results We presented, in four concurrent parts, introduction and three keys to aid the identification of South American Anopheles based on the morphology of the larvae, male genitalia and adult females, with the former two keys fully illustrated. Conclusions Taxonomic information and identification keys for species of the genus Anopheles are updated. The need for further morphology-based studies and description of new species are reinforced.
|
|---|
