Neoseiulus imbricatus ( Corpuz & Rimando, 1966 )

Farazmand, Azadeh, Jalaeian, Mahdi, Kamali, Hashem, Saboori, Alireza, Tixier, MarieStéphane & Kreiter, Serge, 2023, Phytoseiidae (Acari: Mesostigmata) in four provinces of Iran, Persian Journal of Acarology 12 (1), pp. 21-58 : 27

Neoseiulus imbricatus ( Corpuz & Rimando, 1966)

Amblyseius imbricatus Corpuz & Rimando, 1966: 127 .

Amblyseius (Amblyseius) imbricatus, Ehara & Bhandhufalck 1977: 52 .

Amblyseius (Neoseiulus) imbricatus, Gupta 1986: 114 .

Neoseiulus imbricatus, Moraes et al. 1986: 84, 2004: 124 ; Chant & McMurtry 2003: 21, 2007: 29. Neoseiulus oryzacolus Daneshvar, 1987: 18 (synonymy according to Faraji et al. 2007).

Specimen examined – one ♀ collected and measured. Guilan Province – one ♀, Rasht (3 m aasl, 49° 35′ 33′′ E, 37° 16′ 50.87′′ N), on Rubus idaeus L. ( Rosaceae ), 28.VII.2020.

World distribution – Azerbaijan, China, India, Iran, Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Thailand. Precise distribution in Iran is documented in Kazemi et al. (2022).

Remarks – This species was already recorded in Iran in Guilan Province under the name N. oryzacolus ( Daneshvar 1987) , species indicated as a junior synonym by Faraji et al. (2007), synonymy accepted by the present authors. Measurements of the single specimen collected agree well with previous published measurements of specimens ( Table 2 ) from various regions of the world, especially with Iranian specimens described by Daneshvar (1987) under the name N. oryzacolus . After Faraji et al. (2007), only the number of teeth on the fixed digit is different but not well visible in our specimen to be enough sure that this number is correct. However, the dorsal gland pores gd6 are present in the former species and absent in the latter ( Daneshvar 1987; Schicha & Corpuz-Raros 1992). The presence of an additional dorsal gland pore in the genus Neoseiulus may correspond to two separate species or not (see Tixier et al. 2011). Our specimens without gd6 are all belonging to N. imbricatus .