Allocotaphis multisetosa Stekolshchikov & Qiao 2023, comb. n

Autor: Stekolshchikov, Andrey V., Qiao, Ge-Xia
Rok vydání: 2023
Předmět:
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7529190
Popis: Allocotaphis multisetosa (L.K. Ghosh, 1986) comb. n. (Figs. 30–38, Tabl. 2) Spinaphis multisetosa L.K. Ghosh, 1986: 125 [Ghosh & Ghosh 2017: 362] Longisiphoniella subterranea Chakrabarti, Saha & Mandal, 1988: 37, syn n. [Chakrabarti & Sarkar 2001: 21, Ghosh & Ghosh 2017: 694] Material examined. Paratypes: Longisiphoniella subterranea Chakrabarti, Saha & Mandal, 1988 —one apterous viviparous female, 2.vi.1981, India, Uttarakhand, Sayanachatti, Cynoglossum wallichii var. glochidiatum (from collections of NHM). Additional materials: two apterous viviparous females, 6.xi.1981, India, Uttarakhand, Sanprayag, Erigeron bonariensis L. (from collections of MNHN). Also used data of Ghosh (1986) and Chakrabarti et al. (1988). Etymology. The specific name “ multisetosa ” is a compound (feminine) adjective derived from the Latin words “ multi- “, meaning “many” or “multiple” and “ setosus ”, meaning “bristly” or “hairy”, and refers to the presence of numerous setae on the body and appendages of individuals of this species. Description.Apterous viviparous female (Figs. 30–38). Body elongate elliptical, 1.9–2.0 times as long as wide. Color when alive unknown. Cleared specimens with head, sclerotized bands and shield on thorax and abdomen, antennal segment I, distal 0.30–0.75 of antennal segment III, antennal segments IV–V and base of antennal segment VI, coxae, distal halves of femora, the very base of tibia, siphunculi and subgenital plate dark brown; antennal segment II, processus terminalis, III and ultimate rostral segment, apices of tibia, tarsi, anal plate and cauda brown; basal 0.25–0.60 of antennal segment III, trochanters, basal halves of femora and tibia (except apices) light-brown. Dorsal surface of the thorax and abdomen is completely sclerotized, bands on the meso- and metathorax and abdominal tergites I–VII, marginal sclerites and peritremes on segments I–VII, as well as large sclerotized sclerites on abdominal sternites IV–VII fuse into a single shield, only on border of mesothorax and metathorax cuticle somewhat lighter, slightly less sclerotized; pronotum and abdominal tergite VIII with transverse band. Surface of head, thoracic dorsum and abdominal tergites I–VII smooth, sometimes weakly wrinkled, with sparse large pointed spinules arranged chaotically or forming short rows of 3–7 spinules; surface of abdominal tergite VIII with rows of smoothed partially fused spinules; cuticle on ventral side of abdomen smooth, only sternite VII and subgenital plate with sparse long rows of very small pointed spinules. Setae on dorsal surface of head, thorax, and abdomen pointed and finely pointed or, more rarely, blunt or weakly capitate, setae on abdominal tergite VIII and ventral side of body finely pointed. Head with weak traces of epicranial suture. Antennal tubercles conspicuous, but not high, median tubercle very low, almost flat.Antennae 6-segmented, without secondary rhinaria. Setae on antennae blunt or weakly capitate. Rostrum reaching abdominal segment II. Ultimate rostral segment elongated wedge-shaped, 1.9–2.3 times as long as its basal width. Setae on legs are pointed and finely pointed or, more rarely, blunt or slightly capitate. Peritremes on abdominal segments I and II separated by a distance less than diameter of peritreme. Siphunculi very slightly curved outwards, cylindrical, slightly tapering towards the apex, without setae. Cauda rounded escutcheonshaped. Setae on subgenital and anal plates and on cauda finely pointed. Alate viviparous female (after Chakrabarti et al. 1988). Body about 2.2 times as long as wide. Color when alive unknown. Cleared specimens with head, antennae and thorax brown; abdomen pale brown with brown sclerotized spino-pleural patch on tergites III–VI, bands on tergites VII–VIII, marginal sclerites on tergites I–VII and peritremes; marginal sclerites sometimes continuous with the spino-pleural patch; siphunculi pale brown. Antennal segment III with 23–30 protuberant secondary rhinaria, segment IV with 0–6 and segment V with 0–1 secondary rhinaria. Wings normal. Systematic relationships. The apterous viviparous females of Longisiphoniella subterranea described by Chakrabarti et al. (1988) have no morphological differences from Spinaphis multisetosa L.K. Ghosh, 1986, with one exception. Ghosh (1986) indicated in the description of apterous viviparous females that their processus terminalis is about 6.5–8.1 times as long as the base of antennal segment VI (page 126). At the same time, giving a description of the genus Spinaphis (page 125), he writes: “p.t. about 6 times as long as base of a.s. VI”, which agrees with Figure 178 (page 263) from this publication, also showing that the ratio of the length of the processus terminalis and the base of antennal segment VI is slightly less than 6. The ratio “6.5–8.1” indicated in the text may thus be in error. In conclusion, a high degree of morphological similarity allows us to propose Longisiphoniella subterranea Chakrabarti, Saha & Mandal 1988, syn. n. as a new subjective synonym of Allocotaphis multisetosa (L.K. Ghosh, 1986) Ghosh and Ghosh (2017), describing S. multisetosa in Figure 283 (page 696), showed the head, antennal segments I–V, posterior abdomen and siphunculus of alate viviparous female. However, neither in the text of the description nor in the list of materials used by the authors is there any mention of alate viviparous females. At the same time, the siphunculus shown in the figure differs sharply in its appearance from the siphunculi of apterous viviparous females. Thus, it remains unclear whether the individual depicted in Figure 283 really belongs to A. multisetosa or whether this is an error. ......continued on the next page The differences between A. multisetosa and A. quaestionis are given in the key. Comparison of A. multisetosa and A. minensis is difficult, since different morphs are known in these species: A. multisetosa has only summer generations from herbaceous plants, whereas A. minensis has only autumn morphs. In comparison with A. minensis, individuals of A. multisetosa have, on average, a shorter ultimate rostral segment, shorter setae on the body and a number of appendages, and fewer setae on some parts of the body and appendages, for example, on the cauda (Tables 1 and 2). However, taking into account significant differences in these characters, which exist even between individuals of different morphs of the same species (for example, between gynoparae and oviparae of A. minensis, Table 1), it cannot be ruled out that, after clarifying the life cycles of these species, it will turn out that these are different morphs of the same species migrating to secondary hosts from pears. Distribution. India: Himachal Pradesh, Shimla District, Narkanda; Sayanachatti Uttarkashi District, Uttarakhand (Ghosh 1986, Chakrabarti et al. 1988, Chakrabarti & Sarkar 2001, Ghosh & Ghosh 2017). Biology. Ghosh (1986) wrote in the description of the species that the aphids were collected from an unknown plant, without specifying the part of the plant on which the aphids were found. Chakrabarti et al. (1988) indicated that L. subterranea was collected from the roots of Artemisia sp. (Asteraceae), Cynoglossum wallichii var. glochidiatum (as Cynoglossum glochidiatum) (Boraginaceae), Rumex sp. (Polygonaceae) and unidentified grass (Poaceae). Later, this species was also collected from Erigeron bonariensis (Asteraceae) (material from collections of MNHN). Since only two individuals were found on unidentified grass and this may be a spurious event, and since Rumex is a ‘universally susceptible’ plant species (according to Shaposhnikov’s terminology) harboring many species of aphids, even those for which Rumex is not their usual host (Shaposhnikov 1961), it can be assumed that the main secondary hosts of A. multisetosa are plants from the families Asteraceae and Boraginaceae. This secondary host association is close to that of A. quaestionis. However, it is also possible that A. multisetosa is a polyphagous species capable of living on the basal part of herbaceous plants from various families and even classes.
Published as part of Stekolshchikov, Andrey V. & Qiao, Ge-Xia, 2023, Revision of the genus Allocotaphis Börner, 1950 (Hemiptera, Homoptera, Aphididae, Macrosiphini), pp. 63-99 in Zootaxa 5227 (1) on pages 74-77, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5227.1.3, http://zenodo.org/record/7518339
{"references":["Ghosh, L. K. (1986) A Conspectus of Aphididae (Homoptera) of Himachal Pradesh in Northwest Himalaya, India. Zoological Survey of India, Technical Monograph, 16, 1 - 282.","Ghosh, A. K. & Ghosh, L. K. (2017) The Fauna of India and the Adjacent Countries: Homoptera: Aphidoidea. Part 7 (2). Zoological Survey of India, Kolkata, 20 + 835 pp., 8 pls.","Chakrabarti, S., Saha, S. & Mandal, A. K. (1988 [1984]) Longisiphoniella subterranea gen. et sp. nov. and hitherto unknown aphids (Homoptera: Aphididae) from Garwhal Range of western Himalaya. Proceedings of the Zoological Society, 37 (1 - 2), 35 - 44.","Chakrabarti, S, & Sarkar, A. (2001) A supplement to the food-plant catalogue of Indian Aphididae. Journal of Aphidology, 15, 9 - 62.","Shaposhnikov, G. Ch. (1961) Specificity and appearance of adaptations to new hosts in aphids during the process of the natural selection. Entomologicheskoe Obozrenie, 40 (4), 739 - 762. [in Russian]"]}
Databáze: OpenAIRE
Externí odkaz: