Back to Search
Start Over
Erythraeus (Zaracarus) hainanensis Xu & Yi & Guo & Jin 2019, sp. nov
- Publication Year :
- 2019
- Publisher :
- Zenodo, 2019.
-
Abstract
- Erythraeus (Zaracarus) hainanensis sp. nov. (Figs. 12–23) Diagnosis (larva). AL with swelling near bases; fnBFe = 3-3-3; coxala 2b with bifid ends. Ta I 141–158; Ti I 232– 237; Ta III 159–163; Ti III 336–358; fD 40–44. Description (n = 3; holotype, two paratypes). Dorsum. Idiosoma almost oval, with 42 (fD = 40–44 in paratypes) barbed and blunted setae behind scutum. Two pairs of eyes without platelets posterolateral to scutum. Six normal setae between two pairs of eyes. Scutum as transverse oval, wider than long, anterior and posterior margins almost straight (Figs. 12, 14). Scutum with two pairs of scutalae (AL and PL), both fully barbed. AL tapering, with swelling near bases (Figs. 12, 14, 17) and longer than PL (2.15–2.31 times). PL apices blunt (Figs. 12, 14). Scutum with two pairs of trichobothria (ASE and PSE), ASE with few long setules, inserted in sclerotized and oblique socket (Figs. 12, 14), PSE with minute barbs in distal half and longer than ASE (2.09–2.26 times). Venter (Fig. 13). All ventral setae including coxalae barbed, 1a and 1b with pointed apices, 2b with distally bifid, 3a, 3b and 20 setae (18–20 in paratypes) with blunted ends behind coxae III. Coxala 1b longer than other coxal setae, 3b slightly longer than 2b (Table 3). Gnathosoma with one pair of nude galealae (cs), one pair of nude anterior hypostomalae (as) and one pair of nude posterior hypostomalae (bs) (Fig. 15), hypostomal lip fimbriated like a stamen. Dorsal of palpfemur and palpgenu each with one barbed and pointed setae, PaScGed thicker than PaScFed (Figs. 15, 17). Palptibia with one nude seta on ventral surface, one barbed seta and one nude seta on dorsum, odontus bifid (Fig. 15). Palptarsus with eight setae including six nude setae, one solenidion (ω) and one eupathidium (ζ) (Figs. 15, 16), fPp = 0-B-B-BNN 2 -6Nωζ (Figs. 15, 16). Palpal supracoxal seta (elcp) peg like. Leg (Figs. 18–23) with seven segments (femora divided). IP = 2864–2869 (Holotype and two paratypes). All normal setae on legs barbed and pointed. Leg setal formula: Leg I: Cx—1n; Tr—1n; BFe—3n; TFe—5n; Ge—1σ, 1κ, 8n; Ti—2φ, 1κ, 1Cp, 14n; Ta—1ω, 1ε, 2ζ, 1Cp, 25n. Leg II: Cx—1n; Tr—1n; BFe—3n; TFe—5n; Ge—1κ, 8n; Ti—2φ, 15n; Ta—1ω, 2ζ, 1Cp, 23n. Leg III: Cx—1n; Tr—1n; BFe—3n; TFe—5n; Ge—8n; Ti—1φ, 15n; Ta—1ζ, 24n. Etymology. The name of the new species is derived from the province where it was collected. Type material. Holotype, larva, unidentified treehoppers (Hemiptera: Membracidae), collector XIN-FENG ZHANG, 24 April 2009, Bawangling National Natural Reserve, Hainan Province, China. Paratypes: one larva, the same data as the holotype; one larva, ex unidentified delphacid planthoppers (Hemiptera: Delphacidae), collector XIN-FENG ZHANG, 22 April 2009, Datian National Natural Reserve, Hainan Province, China. The holotype and all paratypes are deposited in Institute of Entomology, Guizhou University, China (GUGC) (Zhang 2018). Remarks. Representatives of the subgenus Zaracarus are arranged into five species groups (Table 2). The subdivision might be artificial but is adopted here because of relatively reasonable morphological basis and convenience for classification at the species level. Erythraeus (Zaracarus) hainanensis sp. nov. belongs to the species groups having AL with swelling or slightly swelling near bases and fn Bfe 3-3-3. This group includes 11 species: E. (Z.) lancifer Southcott, 1995; E. (Z.) fabiolae Haitlinger, 1997; E. (Z.) rajabii Saboori, 2000; E. (Z.) longipedus Saboori & Nowzari, 2001; E. (Z.) sibuljinicus Haitlinger, 2004; E. (Z.) aydinicus Saboori, Cakmak & Nouri-Gonbalani, 2004; E. (Z.) jinkaensis Haitlinger, 2006; E. (Z.) passidonicus Haitlinger, 2006; E. (Z.) ruizporterae Mayoral & Barranco, 2008; E. (Z.) perpusillus Kamran, Afzal, Raza, Irfanullah, Bashir & Ahmad, 2009; E. (Z.) adrianicus Haitlinger, 2012. Erythraeus (Zaracarus) hainanensis sp. nov. differs from E. (Z.) lancifer in having two solenidia on Ti II (vs. one solenidion), two pairs of hypostomal setae (vs. one pair), the greater number of palptarsal setae including solenidion and eupathidium (8 vs. 7), the greater number of fD (40–44 vs. 32) and fV (18–20 vs. 12); coxalae I entirely with minute setules (vs. only distal half with minute setules). E. (Z.) hainanensis sp. nov. differs from E. (Z.) fabiolae in having the greater number of palptarsus setae including solenidion and eupathidium (8 vs. 7), and NDV (60–62 vs. 38). E. (Z.) hainanensis sp. nov. differs from E. (Z.) rajabii as follows: on Ta I and Ta, eupathidium has one companion seta (vs. companion setae absent on both segments); Ta I and Ta II each with two eupathidia, respectively (vs. each with one eupathidium). ...Continued on the next page ...Continued on the next page ...Continued on the next page * All lengths excluding coxa Metric data for E. (E.) phalangoides, E. (E.) tinnae, E. (E.) chinensis, E. (E.) picaforticus, E. (E.) kacperi, E. (E.) yangshuonicus, E. (E.) etnaensis, E. (E.) walii, E. (E.) serbicus and E. (E.) aphidivorous were given by Haitlinger (1997, 2002, 2004b, 2006c, 2011b), Kamran et al. (2011), Southcott (1961), Stålstedt et al. (2016), Šundić et al. (2015a, 2015b), Zheng (2002) E. (Z.) hainanensis sp. nov. differs from E. (Z.) longipedus as follows: on Ta I and Ta, eupathidium has one companion seta (vs. companion setae absent on both segments); the greater number of fD (40–44 vs. 30) and fV (18–20 vs. 8). E. (Z.) hainanensis sp. nov. differs from E. (Z.) sibuljinicus as follows: shape of scutum is a transverse oval (vs. trapezoid); eyes are off platelet (vs. on platelet); the greater number of fD (40–44 vs. 24) and fV (18–20 vs. 13). E. (Z.) hainanensis sp. nov. differs from E. (Z.) aydinicus as follows: the greater number of palptarsus setae including solenidion and eupathidium (8 vs. 7), fD (40–44 vs. 31) and NDV (60–62 vs. 43). E. (Z.) hainanensis sp. nov. differs from E. (Z.) jinkaensis as follows: Ta I, Ta II and Ti I has companion seta (vs. setae absent on all these segments), Ta I has famulus (vs. famulus absent); the greater number of eupathidia on Ta I (2 vs. 1), Ta II (2 vs. 1), Ta III (1 vs. 0). E. (Z.) hainanensis sp. nov. differs from E. (Z.) passidonicus by the presence of solenidion on Ge I (vs. absent), the greater number of palptarsus setae including solenidion and eupathidium (8 vs. 7). E. (Z.) hainanensis sp. nov. differs from E. (Z.) ruizporterae in having the anterior margin of scutum almost straight (vs slightly concave); Ta I and Ta II with companion setae (vs. absent).. E. (Z.) hainanensis sp. nov. differs from E. (Z.) perpusillus in having two pairs of hypostomal setae (vs. one pair). ...Continued on the next page ...Continued on the next page ...Continued on the next page Metric data for E. (Z.) lancifer, E. (Z.) fabiolae, E. (Z.) rajabii, E. (Z.) longipedus, E. (Z.) sibuljinicus, E. (Z.) aydinicus, E. (Z.) jinkaensis, E. (Z.) passidonicus, E. (Z.) ruizporterae, E. (Z.) perpusillus, E. (Z.) adrianicus were given by Haitlinger (1997, 2004a, 2006a, 2006b, 2012b), Kamran & Alatawi (2014), Kamran et al. (2009), Mayoral & Barranco (2008), Saboori (2000), Saboori & Nowzari (2001), Saboori et al. (2004), Southcott (1995). E. (Z.) hainanensis sp. nov. differs from E. (Z.) adrianicus by more fD (40–44 vs. 28); eyes not on platelet (vs. on platelet). Differences in measurements between the new species and all species compared above are in Table 5. In the key to species of the subgenus Erythraeus s. str. of the world presented by Šundić et al. (2015b) (for species known from larvae), six species, E. (E.) albanicus Haitlinger, 2012, E. (E.) chrysoperlae Khanjani, Mirmoayedi, Fayaz & Sharifian, 2012, E. (E.) layyahensis Kamran, Afzal & Bashir, 2013, E. (E.) nipponicus Kawashima, 1961, E. (E.) populi Khanjani, Mirmoayedi, Fayaz & Sharifian, 2012 and E. (E.) uhadi Kamran & Alatawi, 2014, were missed. In this paper, we have added all these species, except E. (E.) nipponicus, because we were not able to find the original description. One more species described several years ago, E. (E.) pistacicus Haitlinger, Mehrnejad & Šundić, 2016, is also added to the updated identification key.
Details
- Database :
- OpenAIRE
- Accession number :
- edsair.doi...........67eeb8257999d1ef9ba039061657b409
- Full Text :
- https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5584397