Hemigryllus ortonii, stat. rev.

Hemigryllus ortonii (Scudder, 1869) and Hemigryllus kriechbaumeri Saussure, 1877 stat. rev. Comments. This species was originally described as Nemobius ortonii based on a female from Napo or Marañón (Scudder, 1869). The locality is imprecise, but considering the mentioned rivers, the most likely area is the Peruvian Amazon, possibly at the confluence of the Napo and Marañón rivers, with the Ucayali and the Amazon rivers, between the towns of Iquitos and Nauta, in the Loreto department, Peru. Rehn (1917) tentatively suggested synonymizing H. kriechbaumeri under N. ortonii, establishing it as Hemigryllus ortonii for authors dealing with the species. Several records have been provided for this species (Map 2): 1) Giglio-Tos (1894, 1897) as H. kriechbaumeri for Santa Rosa and Oran, San Francisco (Salta Province, Argentina), without specifying the sex or the number of specimens studied. 2) Bruner (1916) recorded as H. kriechbaumeri for several localities of South America, not specifying the sex or the number of specimens studied. From Brazil: Pará [possibly Belem]; Santa Anna, Rio São Francisco, Bahia; Isla de Carropote in Rio São Francisco, 150 miles from Joazeiro, Bahia. From Bolivia: Santa Cruz de la Sierra; Las Juntas, Santa Cruz; and Province del Sara. 3) Rehn (1917) records for H. ortonii to Brazil, with one female from Parahyba (= Paraíba); one female from Itacoatiara; four males, and two females from Rio Madeira and its surroundings. 4) Hebard (1928, 1931) records one male and one female from the Chocó department, Colombia; and one female from Villa Montes, Chuquisaca, Bolivia. 5) Finally, Chopard (1931, 1954) records one female from Taperinha, Brazil; one female from Sivia, and one male and one female from the banks of the Apurimac, Peru. With this overview, it is evident that over time, there has been confusion regarding the identity of H. ortonii. Since its original description, its full status has been difficult to determine, as it was described based on a female. The known females of the genus are very similar, making it difficult to differentiate them among the established species. Since Gorochov's contributions (1986, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1999), males have been essential for species differentiation, with characters such as venation and genitalia. Specimens from different localities have been successfully differentiated into distinct specific entities. Keep H. ortonii and H. kriechbaumeri stat. rev. as separate species, is the best course of action based on the information presented, as there is no evidence to keep them as synonyms, only a suggestion accompanied by doubts proposed by Rehn (1917), which later authors followed. H. kriechbaumeri stat. rev. returns to being the type species of the genus and, at least by venation, is different from the already described species. The study of the genitalia of the type specimens is still pending to corroborate its differentiation from the other known species. As for H. ortonii, it is only known from its type female, and although several records have been recorded from distant localities (Map 2), all these specimens need to be reviewed to verify their correct identification. In fact, the only reliable record is from the type locality. Studying specimens of both sexes from localities such as Iquitos and Nauta would be ideal to define this species fully.