Montandoniola moraguesi ( Puton, 1896 )

Pluot-Sigwalt, Dominique, Streito, Jean-Claude & Matocq, Armand, 2009, Is Montandoniola moraguesi (Puton, 1896) a mixture of different species? (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Anthocoridae), Zootaxa 2208, pp. 25-43 : 28-32

Montandoniola moraguesi ( Puton, 1896)

( Figs. 1–5 , 27 , 29, 32, 35 , 38 )

Montandoniella moraguesi Puton, 1896: 233 (sp. n.); Marchal, 1908: 253 (record, Algeria); Del Cañizo, 1944 (record, Spain); Gomez-Menor Guerrero, 1956: 105 (redescription), Tawfik & Nagui, 1965: 181 (biology); Tawfik, 1967 (biology).

Montandoniola moraguesi (Puton) : Bergevin, 1926 (record Algeria); Melis, 1935: 129 –138 (redescription, biology, as Ectemnus reduvinus (Herrich-Schaeffer)) ; Priesner & Alfieri, 1953: 82 (list Egypt); Stichel, 1959: 50 (diagnosis); Ramade, 1960: 207 (record France, as Ectemnus reduvinus (Herrich-Schaeffer)) ; Carayon, 1961a: 135 (biological control); Carayon, 1961b: 536, 538, 542 (record South Africa, male paramere, copulatory tube); Linnavuori, 1961: 35 (list Israel); Carayon & Ramade, 1962: 207 (record France, Sicily, biology); Herring, 1966: 93 ( M. thripodes and pictipennis synonymyzed); Péricart, 1972: 191 (redescription); Carayon, 1972: 314, 316, 317, 327, 346 (classification); Péricart & Halperin, 1989: 94 (list Israel); Servadei, 1995: 220 (catalog); Péricart, 1996: 122 (catalog).

Doubtful identifications (cannot be verified) or misidentification (erroneously cited as M. moraguesi ) (see Comments below)

Risbec, 1951: 262 ( Senegal, note); Villiers, 1952: 184 ( Senegal, list); Davis & Krauss, 1965: 90; 1966: 206 (Hawaii, biological control); Funasaki, 1966: 209 (Hawaii, biology, biological control); Herring, 1967: 398 ( Palau, list); Muraleedharan & Ananthakrishnan, 1971: 4 (biology, description); Lewis, 1973: 251 (biological control); Muraleedharan & Ananthakrishnan, 1978: 4 (biology); Reimer, 1988: 132 (biological interference); Henry, 1988: 12 (Hawaii, California); Paine, 1992: 164 (biological control); Tomokuni et al., 1993: 27, 169 ( Japan, illustrations); Bennet, 1995 (biological control); Lattin, 2000: 218 (biological control in part); Yasunaga et al., 2001: 287 ( Japan); Bu & Zheng, 2001: 183 ( China, illustrations); Halbert, 2001, 2002 (record Florida); Postle et al., 2001: 234 ( Australia, redescription); Denmark et al., 2004 (biological control); Dobbs & Boyd, 2006: 41 (review, records from USA); Lattin, 2007a, b: 370 (review, in part); Ya ma d a et al., 2007: 38 (record Indonesia); Cabrera & Segarra, 2008: 232 (prey, host plant).

Type material examined: Holotype Ƥ, Montandoniella moraguesi Puton, Majorca ( MNHN, coll. Puton) ( Fig. 1 ). Dissection of genitalia has been made by us.

Additional material examined: ITALY: 2 3, Bari, août 1962, s/ Ficus nitida ( MNHN, slides). ALGERIA: 1 Ƥ, Alger, jardin d’essai, août 56, s/ Ficus ( MNHN, slide); 1 3, Alger, à la lumière [without date]; 2 3, 4 Ƥ, n° 1564, Alger, square Lamy, 17.08.1908, sur Ficus nitida ; 2 3, 1 Ƥ, Philippeville [without date] ( MNHN, coll. Bergevin). TUNISIA: 2 3, 7 Ƥ, Tunis, [from] 20.II.1967 [to] 19.II.1968, M. Hannothiaux ( MNHN); 2 3, 4 Ƥ, Tunis, [from] 20.II.1967 [to] 19.II.1968, M. Hannothiaux (coll. JP); 1 3, 3 Ƥ, Tunis, [from] 20.II.1967 [to] 19.II.1968, M. Hannothiaux (coll. JCS). MOROCCO: 1 3, 1 Ƥ, Casablanca [without date and collector] ( MNHN); 1 3, 3 Ƥ, Casablanca, XII.1973, sur Ficus nitida ( MNHN); 1 3, 1 Ƥ, Casablanca [without date and collector] ( MNHN, slides); 1 3, 2 Ƥ, Casablanca, nov. 1956, Busson leg., sur Ficus ( MNHN, slides). CANARY ISLANDS: 1 3, 3 Ƥ, Santa Cruz de Tenerife, 28.III.1964, J. Ribes (coll. JP). ISRAEL: 1 Ƥ, Neguev, 26.VII.1958, R. Linnavuori (coll. JP); Israel, [sex?] ( USNM). CHAD: 3 3, 2 Ƥ, Farcha, 20–22.V.1973, R. Linnavuori ( AMNH); 1 Ƥ, Bas Chari, environs de Fort Lamy, Farcha; 26.VII.1963, sur Acacia nilotica (coll. JP); 1 3, 1Ƥ, Tibesti, Emi Koussi, 21.XII.1958, Ph. Bruneau de Miré ( MNHN). BURKINA FASO: 1 3, Upper Volta, near Orodara, 30.X.1973, Linnavuori ( AMNH). EGYPT: 1 Ƥ, A. Alfieri ( USNM). SUDAN: 1 Ƥ, Khartoum, 30.VI.–3.VII.1961, R. Linnavuori ( MNHN); 1 3, 4 Ƥ, Kardofan, Tendelti-Umm Ruwaba, 25.I.1963, R. Linnavuori ( MNHN). SOUTH AFRICA: 3 Ƥ, Cape province, Grahamstown, E. McC. Callan ( MNHN); 1 3 2 Ƥ, Grahamstown, E. McC. Callan leg., 2 mai 1953, s/ Ficus ( MNHN, slides); 2 Ƥ, Cape province, Boknes, 25.II.1953, E. McC. Callan ( MNHN).

Redefinition. Body length: 2.5–3.5 mm. Head: antennal segments I and II dark brown to black, III whitish, IV light brown to reddish; labium entirely dark brown. Thorax: lateral margins of pronotum slightly concave, lateral carinae thin, not expanded anteriorly; ostiolar peritreme rounded posteriorly ( Fig. 27 ); legs dark brown except apical part of foretibia whitish (this part being variable, from third to half); tarsi I and II whitish, III and claw darker. Male genitalia ( Figs. 29, 32, 35 ): pygophore covered on right side with many long soft setae; a typical group of stout and dense setae forming a brush anterior to genital opening ( Fig. 29 , arrow); paramere: flagellum long and slightly curved, surpassing the lame in dorsal view; lame long and acute apically with conspicuous denticule at base. Female genitalia ( Fig. 38 ): copulatory tube elongate, slightly apically bulged, mesally located close to base of ovipositor, reaching anterior margin of sternite VII.

Illustrations of several diagnostic characters were provided by Carayon (1961b): male paramere, female copulatory tube; and by Carayon (1972): hindwings, metapleural evaporative area, tarsus, male internal genital structures. Péricart (1972) gave a detailed description of the species.

Biological data. Biology and life history of M. moraguesi have been studied in detail by Melis (1935) in Italy (as Ectemnus reduvinus ) and by Tawfik & Nagui (1965) in Egypt (as Montandoniella moraguesi ). The latter data were summarized by Péricart (1972).

M. moraguesi feeds on several thrips species and has been collected on various host plants ( Table 1 ). The species live in galls or gall-like deformations caused by the thrips: curled or rolled leaves of the host plants. It can also live freely, feeding on non-gall-making thrips as observed in Africa (Tibesti) on Euphorbiaceae (see Carayon & Ramade, 1962). All stages of the bug prey on thrips.

According to Carayon (comm. pers.), who attempted several times to rear the species in the laboratory, individuals will feed only on thrips of the suborder Tubulifera. Seasonal fluctuations of the species have also been pointed out by Carayon & Ramade (1962). Very early authors noticed that the bugs reduced efficacious population of thrips on Ficus , the first one being Marchal (1908), when he described the new thrips species, Gynaikothrips ficorum (Marchal) , infesting the trees in the Algiers’s streets.

unknown Gossypium herbaceum Malvaceae Morocco Gómez-Menor, 1956 Distribution ( Fig. 41 ). The presence of M. moraguesi can be confirmed in southwestern Europe (Mediterranean region) and Africa, from the following countries: Balearic Islands, France, Italy, Spain, Canary Islands, Israel, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Egypt, Chad, Sudan, Burkina-Faso, South Africa.

Note: A record from France is given here although we were unable to find, in the MNHN collection, the specimens from the south of France (Allauch near Marseille) studied by J. Carayon (Carayon & Ramade, 1962). We did not examine either specimens from Spain; however, the record from Spain ( Del Cañizo, 1944) is plausible and has been added to the list.

Comments. M. moraguesi differs from all other species we have examined by its relatively large size (body length: 2.5–3.5 mm), the diagnostic characters given above (coloration of legs and labium, shape of ostiolar peritreme), and mainly by the male and female genitalia.

From the examined specimens, M. moraguesi appears restricted to the Mediterranean region and Africa. All the specimens identified as M. moraguesi we have examined from Americas, Australia, and Pacific regions have proven to be the new species M. confusa n. sp. described below from Guadeloupe. It is likely that a great number of papers dealing with M. moraguesi , concerns in reality M. confusa sp. nov.

Until further information is available, the references below should be removed from the list devoted to M. moraguesi . In some papers, several morphological details strongly suggest that the so-called M. moraguesi specimens pertain to another species. Most other papers have mainly ecological purpose and so do not contain morphological details about the studied species; consequently identification cannot be verified.

Risbec, 1951: From specimens studied in Senegal, Risbec gave just a drawing (habitus), no description or morphological detail. We have examined 10 3 and 6 Ƥ collected in 1981 in Senegal (J. Etienne leg.); all belong apparently to an undescribed species.

Funasaki (1966), Davis & Krauss (1965, 1966), Reimer (1988), Bennet (1995), Halbert (2001, 2002), Denmark et al. (2004), Dobbs & Boyd (2006), Lattin (2007a, b), Cabrera & Segarra (2008): these data referred to biological control in Hawaii, Bermuda, and the papers did not provide any morphological information. The species in question could be a other species (see below M. confusa sp. nov.).

Herring (1967) reported the species from Palau ( Micronesia), without any additional information.

Muraleedharan & Ananthakrishnan (1971), Muraleedharan (1977), Muraleedharan & Ananthakrishnan (1978): These authors gave detailed biological data (prey, host plant, life cycle etc.) on an Indian species identified as M. moraguesi (in the 1971 paper, it is said that Carayon confirmed the identification of the Indian specimen). In the first paper (1971), they gave also useful morphological data which led us to conclude that the species in question was not moraguesi : the small size (2 mm), the coloration of labium (apex light yellow) and legs (all tibiae yellow except hind tibiae dark) indicate that the studied species was probably not M. moraguesi .

Tomokuni et al. (1993), Yasunaga et al. (2001) recorded M. moraguesi from Japan. From the illustrations, the following characters do not fit with those of M. moraguesi : coloration of labium (apex light yellow) and legs (all tibiae yellow except hind tibiae dark).

Postle et al. (2001) recorded M. moraguesi from Australia for the first time. They gave a detailed, well illustrated redescription of the species. It is clear that the given diagnostic characters, particularly the genitalic characters, are very different from those of M. moraguesi . Moreover, these characters fit well M. confusa sp. nov. (see below).

Bu & Zheng (2001) illustrated a specimen from China identified as M. moraguesi ; but the ostiolar peritreme (angular posteriorly), and the paramere do not exactly correspond to those of M. moraguesi .

Ya ma d a et al. (2007) recorded M. moraguesi from Indonesia. In their description, several details suggest that the studied specimen could be another species: the coloration pattern of labium (segment III and basal part of IV: pale yellow) and legs (fore- and midtibiae and tarsi pale yellow).

Figures

FIGURE 41. Distribution of the four Montandoniola species studied in the present paper, as is revealed through the examined material.

FIGURES 1 – 5. Montandoniola moraguesi, female holotype. 1, type specimen with its labels; 2, habitus, dorsal view; scale bar: 1 mm; 3, head and pronotum, lateral view; scale bar: 1 mm; 4, evaporative area and ostiolar peritreme of the metathoracic glands (left metapleura), lateral view; scale bar: 0.1 mm. 5, base of ovipositor and copulatory tube, internal ventral view; scale bar: 0.2 mm.

FIGURES 27 – 28. Metapleural evaporative area and ostiolar peritreme (left metapleura). 27, M. moraguesi; 28, M. confusa sp. nov.; scale bar: 0.1 mm.

FIGURES 29 – 37. Comparison of the male genitalia between M. moraguesi, M. thripodes, and M. confusa sp. nov. 29 – 31, pygophore, dorsal view; 32 – 34, paramere, dorsal view; 35 – 37, paramere, lateral view; scale bars: 0.1 mm. d = denticule; f = flagelle; l = lame.

FIGURES 38 – 40. Female copulatory tube, internal ventral view. 38, M. moraguesi; 39, M. pictipennis; 40, M. confusa sp. nov.; scale bar: 0.1 mm. ct = copulatory tube; StVII = sternite VII.

Tables

TABLE 1. Preys and associated host plants of M. moraguesi. Note: Ficus microcarpa cited as host-plant is often mentioned by the authors listed below as F. nitida or F. re t u s a two synonyms.

Thrips species	Plants	Family	Country	Authors
Liothrips oleae	Olea europaea	Oleaceae	Italy	Melis, 1935
Liothrips oleae	Olea europaea	Oleaceae	France	Ramade, 1960
Liothrips oleae	Olea europaea	Oleaceae	France	Carayon & Ramade, 1962
Liothrips oleae	Olea europaea	Oleaceae	Spain	Gómez-Menor, 1956
Liothrips fluggeae	Fluggea virosa	Euphorbiaceae	Chad (Tibesti)	Carayon & Ramade, 1962
Thrips sp.	Ficus craterostoma	Moraceae	South Africa	Carayon, 1961b
unknown	Ficus microcarpa	Moraceae	Canary Islands	Horváth, 1909
unknown	Ficus indica	Moraceae	Canary Islands	Lindberg, 1953
Gynaikothrips ficorum	Ficus microcarpa	Moraceae	Israel	Péricart & Halperin, 1989
Gynaikothrips ficorum	Ficus microcarpa	Moraceae	Algeria	Marchal, 1908
Gynaikothrips ficorum	Ficus microcarpa	Moraceae	Algeria	Bergevin, 1926
Gynaikothrips ficorum	Ficus microcarpa	Moraceae	Egypt	Priesner & Alferi, 1953
Gynaikothrips ficorum	Ficus microcarpa	Moraceae	Spain	Gómez-Menor, 1956
Gynaikothrips ficorum	Ficus microcarpa	Moraceae	Sicily	Carayon & Ramade, 1962
Gynaikothrips ficorum	Ficus microcarpa	Moraceae	Egypt	Tawfik & Nagui, 1965
unknown	Ficus microcarpa	Moraceae	Israel	Linnavuori, 1961
unknown	Ficus microcarpa	Moraceae	Italy	Present study
unknown	Ficus sp.	Moraceae	Algeria	Present study
unknown	Ficus sp.	Moraceae	Morocco	Present study
unknown	Acacia nilotica	Fabaceae	Burkina Faso	Present study