Fulvius bifenestratus group

Wolski, Andrzej, Gorczyca, Jacek, Yasunaga, Tomohide, indra, Zdenek & Herczek, Aleksander, 2018, Taxonomic review of the bifenestratus species group of the genus Fulvius Stal with descriptions of two new species (Hemiptera, Heteroptera, Miridae, Cylapinae), ZooKeys 796, pp. 107-129 : 107

Fulvius bifenestratus group

Diagnosis.

Dorsum shiny, covered with irregular, simple setae (Figs 1-12, 27-30, 37, 38); second tarsomere typically subdivided medially, without subapical claw (Figs 32, 33); aperture of pygophore subapical, oriented laterally, dorsal wall short (Figure 34); parameres strongly asymmetrical, right paramere vestigial and left paramere variable in shape (Figs 14, 15, 17, 18, 20, 22, 23, 25); endosoma membranous, without sclerites (Figs 16, 19, 21, 24, 26).

Discussion.

Each species of the bifenestratus group can be distinguished from other Old World species of Fulvius , members of the anthocoroides group, by several characters. In the bifenestratus group, the dorsum is shiny and covered with irregularly distributed, simple setae (Figs 1-9, 12, 29, 27, 30, 37, 38), whereas in the anthocoroides group the dorsum is matte, and covered with uniformly distributed, scale-like vestiture (Figs 41-44). The second tarsomere in species of the bifenestratus group typically is subdivided medially and the pretarsal claw lacks the subapical tooth (Figs 32, 33; Sadowska-Woda et al. 2008). In most representatives of the anthocoroides group the second tarsomere is not subdivided medially and the subapical tooth is present (Figs 45, 46; Sadowska-Woda et al. 2008). The aperture of the pygophore in the bifenestratus group is subapical and oriented laterally, with the dorsal wall relatively short (Figure 34; Sadowska-Woda et al. 2008), whereas in representatives of the anthocoroides group the aperture of the pygophore is oriented posteriorly and the dorsal wall is long (Figs 47, 48; Sadowska-Woda et al. 2008). The parameres in species of the bifenestratus group are strongly asymmetrical, with the right paramere vestigial and the left paramere quite variable in shape (Figs 14, 15, 17, 18, 20, 22, 23, 25). In contrast, members of the anthocoroides group have the parameres similar in size. The shape of both parameres is rather symmetrical, with the right paramere bearing a short and sharply pointed apical process and the apex of the inner surface of the paramere body possessing a short spine, whereas the left paramere is long and thin, with an incision subapically ( Carvalho and Lorenzato 1978: figs 56, 57, 68, 69; Gorczyca 2002: figs 1-4; Pluot-Sigwalt and Chérot 2013: 4B, C; Yasunaga 2000: 23, 24, 28, 29; Sadowska-Woda and Gorczyca 2005: 2, 3; Yasunaga and Wolski 2017: 3A, B). The endosoma in the bifenestratus group is always broadly membranous and the sclerotized portion of the seminal duct is short and variable in shape (Figs 16, 19, 21, 24, 26; Sadowska-Woda et al. 2008). In species of the anthocoroides group, by contrast, the endosoma has sclerites or sclerotized appendages, and the sclerotized portion of the seminal duct is well developed, long and tubular ( Carvalho and Lorenzato 1978: fig. 55; Pluot-Sigwalt and Chérot 2013: fig. 4A; Yasunaga 2000: 30; Yasunaga and Wolski 2017: fig. 3C; Sadowska-Woda et al. 2008). The membranous structure between the second valvulae is always absent in the bifenestratus group, and always present in species of the anthocoroides group ( Sadowska-Woda et al. 2008).

Members of the bifenestratus group are most similar to species of the New World bisbistillatus group in sharing characters such as the shiny dorsum, covered with simple setae (Figs 1-9, 12, 27, 30, 37, 38, 50); the divided second tarsomere; the pretarsal claw without subapical tooth (Figs 32, 33, 52, 53); the male pygophore with aperture subapical, oriented laterally and with dorsal wall relatively short (Figs 34, 54); the parameres strongly asymmetrical with the right paramere vestigial (Figs 14, 15, 17, 18, 20, 22, 23, 25; Carvalho and Costa 1994: figs 4-6, 12-14, 19-21, 33-35, 40-42); and the membranous structure between the second valvulae absent ( Sadowska-Woda et al. 2008). Representatives of the bifenestratus group can be distinguished from members of the bisbistillatus group by having the cuneus uniformly brown to dark brown (Figs 1-9), whereas in bisbistillatus the cuneus always possesses a pale, whitish or yellow patch at the base ( Carvalho and Costa 1994: figs 1, 8, 16, 30, 37, 44). The apex of the first and second valvulae is slightly rounded or straight in the bifenestratus group, whereas in species of the bisbistillatus group the apices of the first and second valvulae are always triangular ( Sadowska-Woda et al. 2008).