Tynacantha marginata Dallas, 1851

Brugnera, Ricardo, Campos, Luiz Alexandre & Grazia, Jocelia, 2019, Revision of Tynacantha Dallas with description of two new species (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Pentatomidae: Asopinae), Zootaxa 4656 (3), pp. 445-458 : 447-449

Tynacantha marginata Dallas, 1851

( Figs 1–3 , 7–9 , 19–23 , 34–36 , 46–48 , 54 )

Tynacantha marginata Dallas, 1851: 107 ; Walker, 1867: 144; Stål, 1867: 497; Stål, 1870: 56; Schouteden, 1907: 59; Kirkaldy, 1909: 16; De Tella, 1951: 179; Buckup, 1960: 10, 11; Saini & De Coll, 1992: 7, 8; Thomas, 1992: 122, 123; Zanuncio et al., 1994: 67, 71; Moreira et al., 1995: 255-259; Moreira et al., 1996: 253-256; Assis Jr. et al., 1998: 247; Kuwahara et al., 2000: 8111; Sánchez et al., 2001: 213, 214; Zanuncio et al., 2002: 1228; Evangelista et al., 2003: 682; Zanuncio et al., 2004: 359; Oliveira et al., 2005: 295; Zanuncio et al., 2005: 37; Campos et al., 2009: 168; Bunde et al., 2010: 85, 86; Picanço et al., 2010: 69; Dalvi et al., 2011: 1, 2; Buenos et al., 2012: 511; Pires et al., 2015: 1531; Grazia et al., 2015: 688; Dellapé et al., 2018: 115, 119; Melo et al., 2017: 496 ; Brugnera & Grazia, 2018: 121, 126; Brugnera et al., 2019: 17 .

Rhaphigaster albiseptus Germar ,?; Herrich-Schäffer, 1845: 7; Herrich-Schäffer, 1851: Figure 1000; Thomas, 1992: 122.

Podisus albiseptus Herrich-Schäffer, 1851: 339 ; Herrich-Schäffer, 1853: 168; Stål, 1867: 497; Stål, 1870: 56; Kirkaldy, 1909: 16; Thomas, 1992: 122.

Tynacantha marginata var. cyanescens Horváth, 1911: 434 ; Buckup, 1960: 10, 11; Thomas, 1992: 122.

Tynacantha sanguinolenta Horváth, 1911: 434 ; Buckup, 1960: 10, 11; Thomas, 1992: 122, 123.

Comments on Rhaphigaster albiseptus: The oldest publication where the name appears (that we are aware of) is Herrich-Schäffer (1845), page 7. In this publication, Herrich-Schäffer attributed the name to Germar, but without mention of the year of description. Stål (1867, 1870), Kirkaldy (1909) and Thomas (1992) have all attributed the authorship of Rhaphigaster albiseptus to Herrich-Schäffer. Although Herrich-Schäffer did not provide a formal description of this species until 1851, his use of the name in a short key to species in 1845 is enough to validate the name. He also (1851) transferred Rhaphigaster albiseptus to the genus Podisus , however he still used Rhaphigaster albiseptus in the figure legend (Fig. 1000), probably by mistake. Later, Stål (1867: page 497) considered P. albiseptus to be a synonym of Tynacantha marginata .

Although Herrich-Schäffer’s (1845) first valid use of the name Rhaphigaster albiseptus is prior to Tynacantha marginata (1851) , we here consider R. albiseptus to be the senior synonym of T. marginata , but based on the confusion surrounding the original description, and because Herrich-Schäffer’s name has not been used since Kirkardy, (1909), for the sake of maintaining stability, we believe that Tynacantha marginata should continue to be used as the name for this species.

Material examined. Type material: Lectotype ♀ Venezuela , “ Tynacantha marginata ”, a, NHMUK 010592371 ( BMNH) . Additional material; VENEZUELA: 6 ♀ 3 ♂, Aragua, El Limón, 450m. 14, 16, 19.III.1951. F. Fernandez & C. J. Rosales leg. ( UFRG) ; 1 ♀, Aragua, El Limón, 20.XII.1950, C. Prado leg. ( UFRG) ; 1 ♀, Aragua, Henri Pittier National Park , 1100 m, 18.IV.1953, Já Gonz. leg. ( UFRG) ; 1 ♀, Aragua, El Limón, Campo Ceniap, 12.8.1976, Fred- dy Godoy leg. ( UFRG) ; 2 ♀ 1 ♀, Portuguesa, Acarigua , 20.II.1962, J.J Castilho, leg. ( UFRG) ; 1 ♀, Caracas , D.F., 6.VI.1953, F. Fernandes leg. ( UFRG) ; 1 ♂, Monagas, Jusepín , 50m, 15.IX.1965 ( UFRG) ; Yaracuy, 1 ♂, San Javier , 23.II.1995 ( UFRG) ; 1 ♀, Acaringua (Pimpinela y Sta. Ana ), 20-II-62, J.J Castilho leg. ( UFRG) ; 1 ♀ 1 ♂, Táchira, Rio Frio , 13.VII.1981, J. Mateu leg. ( MRCC) ; COLOMBIA: 1 ♀, Cundinamarca, San Antonio Del Tequendama , 6.I.1972, N 4°37’04’’ W 74°21’15’’, 1503 m, J. E.. Gutierrez leg. ( UNAB) ; 1 ♀, Antioquia, Santa Barbará, Vda Damasco, Cerro Amarillo , Fca La Linda , N 5°47’ W 75°34’, 1189 m, 6.I.2012, Serna F. leg. ( UNAB) ; BRAZIL: 1 ♀, Pará, Marudá, Ilha Algodoal , 12.VII.1981, Edmar Lima leg. ( UFRG) ; 1 ♀, Pará, Belém, Mocambo , 02.I.1978 ( UFRG) ; 1 ♀, Pará, Belém, Comissão Executiva do Plano da Lavoura Cacaueira ( CEPLAC) ( UFRG) ; 1 ♀, Pará, Tucuruí, Rio Tocantins, 19.VII.1984, Jacundá leg. ( MPEG) ; 1 ♂, Maranhão, São Luís , 09.IV.1974 ( UFRG) ; 1 ♀, Amazonas, Km 4.5, Am 010, 25.IV.1982, E.F. Ribeiro leg. ( INPA) ; 1 ♀, Bahia, Maracás , 18.VIII.1964, C. Elias leg. ( MZSP) ; 1 ♀, Mato Grosso, Utiariti, Rio Papagaio , 325 m, VII-VIII.1961, K. Lenko leg. ( MZSP) ; 1 ♂, Distrito Fed- eral, Brasília ( NMPC) ; 1 ♀ 1 ♂, Goiás, Morada Nova , 8.VIII.1994, J. C. Zanuncio leg. ( UFVB) ; 1 ♂, Goiás, Co- rumbá, Fazenda Monjolinho , 8.VI.1942, F. Lane leg. ( MZSP) ; 1 ♀, Espírito Santo, Santa Teresa , 18-23.XII.1967, C. Elias leg. ( MZSP) ; 2 ♂, Minas Gerais, Serra Caraça , 1880 m, XI.1961, Kloss, Lenko, Martins & Silva leg. ( MZSP) ; 1 ♀, Minas Gerais, Sete Lagoas , 26.IV.1984, H. R. Pimenta leg. ( BHMH) ; 1 ♀ 1 ♂, Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Campus UFMG, XI.1997 ( BHMH) ; 2 ♂, Minas Gerais, Uberlândia , 07.III.1997, C. M. Paro leg. ( UFRG) ; 3 ♀, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, 10.II.1943, J. Moraes leg. ( MNRJ) ; 1 ♀, Rio de Janeiro, Itaguaí , km 47, 15.I.1971, M. Silva leg. ( UFRG) ; 1 ♀ 1 ♂, Mato Grosso, near Trivelato, Rio Aripuanã , 300 m, 17/ 22.III.1977, D. Engleman leg. ( UFRG) ; 1 ♀, São Paulo, Jaguariuna , 07.VII.1981, F. R. Reis leg. ( UFRG) ; 1 ♀ 1 ♂, São Paulo, Indiana , Dirings leg. ( MZSP) ; 1 ♀, São Paulo, Serra da Cantareira ( MNRJ) ; 2 ♀, São Paulo, Paulínia, Lixão , 12.IV.1982, C. Paiva leg. ( UFRG) ; 1 ♀, São Paulo, Campinas , 20.X.1981, B. Geraldo leg. ( UFRG) ; 1 ♀ 1 ♂, São Paulo, Piracicaba, Estalo , X.1983 ( UFRG) ; 1 ♀, São Paulo, Campinas , UNICAMP, VIII.1995, P. N. Patel leg. ( UFRG) ; 2 ♂, São Paulo, Campinas , 28.IV.1982 ( UFRG) ; 1 ♀, São Paulo, Indaiatuba , 04.IX.1981, M. L. E. Kato leg. ( UFRG) ; 1 ♀, Paraná, Guarapuava , 25.X.1985 ( MZSP) ; 1 ♀, Paraná, Curitiba , 4.VII.1973, H. A. Gastal ( MCNZ) ; 1 ♀, Paraná, Cascavel , 15.XI.1887, A. R. Panizzi leg. ( MCNZ) ; 1 ♀, Paraná, Fazenda Rio Grande , V.2003, K. Costa leg. ( UFRG) ; 1 ♂, Santa Catarina, Chapecó , 04.IV.1983 ( UFRG) ; 1 ♂, Santa Catarina, Criciúma, Unesc , 20.X.2008, F. M. Bianchi & J. Vicente ( UFRG) ; 1 ♂, Santa Catarina, Nova Teutônia , 10.II.1939, Fritz Plaumann leg. ( DARC) ; 1 ♀, Santa Ca- tarina, Nova Teutônia , 12.XII.1952 ( DARC) ; 2 ♀, Santa Catarina, Nova Teutônia , 300m- 500m, II.1981, Fritz Plau- mann leg. ( MZSP) ; 2 ♂, Santa Catarina, Nova Teutônia , 4.V.1950 ( EMG) ; 1 ♀, Santa Catarina, Içara , 11.IV.2007, F. S. Martins leg. ( UFRG) ; 2 ♀ 1 ♂, Santa Catarina, Maracajá, Parque Ecológico , 13.XII.2005, T. Bertolin leg. ( UFRG) ; 9 ♀ 6 ♂, Santa Catarina, Jaguaruna , 24.X.2011, C. Perin leg. ( UFRG) ; 2 ♂, Santa Catarina, Araranguá, Morro dos Conventos , 20.VII.2006, T. Bertolin ( UFRG) ; 3 ♀, Santa Catarina, Nova Veneza , 05.III.2005, P. Dami- nelli ( UFRG) ; 1 ♀, Rio Grande do Sul, Santo Augusto , 10.IX.2005, R. Moraes leg. ( MCNZ) ; 12 ♀ 6 ♂, Rio Grande do Sul, São Domingos do Sul, Santa Gema , 13.V.2017, R. Brugnera leg. ( UFRG) ; 2 ♀, Rio Grande do Sul, Monte- negro, 01.XII.1977, C. H. Buckup leg. ( MCNZ) ; 1 ♂, Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre , XII.1958, Dr. Hüdepohl leg. ( EMG) ; 10 ♀ 6 ♂, Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Morro Santana , 21.I.2017, R. Brugnera, leg. ( UFRG) ; 8 ♀ 4 ♂, Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, UFRGS Campus do Vale , VI.2017, R. Brugnera leg. ( UFRG) ; 1 ♂, Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre , 14.VII.1949 ( MCNZ) ; 1 ♂, Rio Grande do Sul, Triunfo , 14.V.1981, K. Zano leg. ( MCNZ) ; 1 ♀, Rio Grande do Sul, Santa Maria , 07.V.1977, I. C. Canuto leg. ( MCNZ) ; 1 ♀, Rio Grande do Sul, Santa Maria , 02.IV.1984, N. M. Dalmolin leg. ( UFRG) ; 1 ♂, Rio Grande do Sul, Palmares do Sul , 07.VI.2003 ( MCNZ) ; 1 ♀, Rio Grande do Sul, Bagé , 18.VI.1977, H. C. Vaz leg. ( MCNZ) ; 2 ♀ 1 ♂, Rio Grande do Sul, Barra do Quaraí , marco geográfico, 16.V.2003, Bunde & Schwertner leg. ( UFRG) ; 1 ♀, Rio Grande do Sul, Iraí , 19.X.1975, A. Lise leg. ( MCNZ) ; PERU: Amazonas Dept., Cocachimba, vic. Gocta Lodge , S 06°03’22.5” W 077°53’42.6”, 1815 m, 21- 24.X.2012, J. E. Eger ( JEE) ; BOLIVIA: 1 ♀ 1 ♂, Santa Cruz, El Refugio Los Volcanes, 3363 m, 18-24.X.2014, Morris & Wappes leg. ( JEE) ; 1 ♀, Santa Cruz, Potrerillo del Guenda , 400m, 6-8.XII.2011, Morris & Wappes leg. ( JEE) ; 1 ♀, Santa Cruz, Dpt. Refugio Los Vulcones , S 18°06’ W 63°36’, 3400-4200, 16/ 20.IX.2012, Wappes, Skei- ley, Bonaso, Hamel leg. light trap ( DBTC) ; PARAGUAY: 1 ♀ 1 ♂, PARAGUAY: Alto Parana Dept. , 21-23.X.1989, G. Arriagada leg. ( JEE) ; 1 ♀, Caazapa Dept., Parque Nac. Caaguazu, 1-8.XII.1990, G. Arriagada leg. ( JEE) ; 1 ♀, Itapus Dept., Encarnacion , 2-28.II.1991, G. Arriagada leg. ( JEE) ; URUGUAY: Artigas, Tres Cruces , 4.VII. 1973, H. A. Gastal leg. ( MCNZ) ; ARGENTINA: Tucuman, Reserva Horco Molle , IX.1997 P. Rebagliati leg. ( UFRG) .

Diagnosis. Dorsal coloration usually bright green, sometimes light brown; scutellum without a calloused pale spot; lateral margin of connexival segments concolorous with abdominal sternites; usually with three rows of black spots, two located mediolaterally and one in the lateral margin on each segment of ventral abdomen, sometimes the internal row in zigzag; punctures concolorous, deep and close to each other ( Figs 1–2 , 7, 9 ); posterior margin of gonocoxites VIII concave ( Figs 46, 47 ); capsula seminalis slightly longer than pars intermedialis; ductus receptaculi distalis as long as pars intermedialis ( Fig. 48 ); inner branch of parameres longer and thinner than outer branch ( Fig. 22 ).

Measurements. Total length, ♀ 11.23 ± 0.95 (7.36–12.64) ♂ 9.36 ± 0.40 (8.42–9.98); width of abdomen across segment III, ♀ 4.16 ± 0.26 (3.76–5.15) ♂ 3.46 ± 0.17 (3.06–3.66); head: length, ♀ 1.96 ± 0.14 (1.71–2.18) ♂ 1.70 ± 0.12 (1.4–2,0); width, ♀ 2.18 ± 0.13 (2,03–2.96) ♂ 2.00 ± 0.11 (1,72–2.18); pronotum: length, ♀ 2.16 ± 0.24 (1.36– 2.96) ♂ 1.76 ± 0.15 (1.46–2.06); width, ♀ 4.16 ± 0.30 (3.56–5.77) ♂ 3.46 ± 0.22 (2.16–3.76); scutellum: length, ♀ 2.76 ± 0.17 (2.56–3.28) ♂ 2.26 ± 0.13 (1.96–2.56); width, ♀ 2.66 ± 0.14 (2.26–3.12) ♂ 2.16 ± 0.13 (1.86–3.06); length of antennal segments: I, ♀ 0.27 ± 0.08 (0.20–0.50) ♂ 0.25 ± 0.05 (0.25–0.55); II, ♀ 2.85 ± 0.56 (1.10–3.55) ♂ 2.55 ± 0.29 (1.15–2.95); III, ♀ 2.35 ± 0.53 (1.10–3.15) ♂ 2.25 ± 0.28 (1.05–3.05); IV, ♀ 2.55 ± 0.29 (2.07–3.05) ♂ 2.45 ± 0.17 (2.05–2.75); V, ♀ 1.33 ± 0.17 (1.14–1.85) ♂ 1.23 ± 0.10 (1.00–1.35); length of labial segments: I, ♀ 1.16 ± 0.10 (1.06–1.56) ♂ 0.96 ± 0.13 (0.56–1.16); II, ♀ 1.26 ± 0.19 (0.96–1.96) ♂ 1.11 ± 0.08 (0.95–1.26); III, ♀ 0.76 ± 0.08 (0.55–0.96) ♂ 0.66 ± 0.03 (0.55–1.76); VI, ♀ 0.66 ± 0.07 (0.25–0.83) ♂ 0.56 ± 0.05 (0.35–0.66).

Distribution. Venezuela (Monagas, Aragua, Yaracuy, Distrito Capital, Portuguesa, Táchira), Colombia (Cun- dinamarca, Antioquia), Ecuador, Brazil (Pará, Maranhão, Amazonas, Bahia, Mato Grosso, Distrito Federal, Goiás, Espírito Santo, Minas Gerais, Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo, Paraná, Santa Catarina, Rio Grande do Sul), Peru, Bolivia, Paraguay, Argentina (Corrientes, Formosa, Jujuy, Misiones, Salta ( Dellapé et al. 2003), Tucumán), Uruguay ( Fig. 54 ).

Figures

FIGURES 1–6. Lectotypes of T. marginata and T. splendes and their respective labels. 1–3, Tynacantha marginata. 4–6, Tynacantha splendens. (photos by T. Roell)

FIGURES 7–18. Habitus of species of Tynacantha in dorsal, ventral and head + pronotum views, respectively. 7–9, Tynacantha marginata; 10–12, Tynacantha splendens; 13–15, Tynacantha cuprea sp. nov.; 16–18, Tynacantha umeridenigrata sp. nov.. Scale bars: 1 mm.

FIGURES 19–33. Pygophore of species of Tynacantha. Pygophore in dorsal (19, 24, 29), posterior (20, 25, 30), and ventral (21, 26, 31) views. Left paramere (22, 27, 32). Left superior process of dorsal rim (23, 28, 33). 19–23, Tynacantha marginata; 24–28, Tynacantha splendens. 29–33, Tynacantha cuprea sp. nov.. Abbreviations: dr = dorsal rim; par = paramere; slvr = superior layer of ventral rim; spdr = superior process of dorsal rim; vr = ventral rim. Scale bars: 19–21, 24–26, 29–31 = 1 mm; 22–23, 27–28, 32–33 = 0,1 mm.

FIGURES 34–45. Phallus of species of Tynacantha. Phallus in dorsal (34, 37, 40, 43), lateral (35, 38, 41, 44), and ventral (36, 39, 42, 45) views. 34–36, Tynacantha marginata; 37–39, Tynacantha splendens; 40–42, Tynacantha cuprea sp. nov.; 43–45, generalized phallus. Abbreviations: ap = apical conjunctiva; bt = basal theca; lc = lobes of conjunctiva; sg = secondary gono- pore; ts = thecal shield; v = vesica. Scale bars: 0,1 mm.

FIGURES 46–53. Female external and internal genitalia of Tynacantha. Genital plates (46–47, 49–50, 52–53). Internal genitalia (48, 51). 46–48, Tynacantha marginata; 49–51, Tynacantha cuprea sp. nov.; 53–53, Tynacantha umeridenigrata sp. nov.. Abbreviations: aaf = anterior annular flange; cs = capsula seminalis; drd = ductus receptaculi distalis; drp = ductus receptaculi proximalis; paf = posterior annular flange; pi = pars intermedialis; rs = ring sclerites; st = secondary thickening of gonapophyses IX; tvi = thickening of vaginal intima; va = vesicular area Scale bars: 46–47, 49–50, 52–53 = 1 mm; 48–51 = 0,1 mm.

FIGURES 54–56. Geographic distribution of the species of Tynacantha. 54, Tynacantha marginata; 55, Tynacantha cuprea sp. nov. and Tynacantha umeridenigrata sp. nov.; 56, Tynacantha splendens.