taxonID	type	description	language	source
E428AB521C09FF8EFE222592823AFCF4.taxon	discussion	Remarks — The following arthropods were found in association with P. brasiliensis: on leaves of A. pavonina, unidentified Euseius Wainstein species (Phytoseiidae) and insects of the order Psocoptera ; on V. labrusca, the pronematids Dasilcoferla nadirae (Da Silva et al. (2017) and Peridasilcoferla paraensis n. gen. n. sp., and unidentified Amblyseius Berlese and Iphiseiodes De Leon species (Phytoseiidae) ; on S. occidentalis, Eutetranychus banksi (McGregor) (Tetranychidae).	en	De VisK, Raf M. J., K, José Dantas Araujo Lacerda, de MoraesK, Gilberto J., Ueckermann K, Edward A. (2025): Pronematinae (Trombidiformes: Iolinidae) from Brazil, with original and complementary descriptions of taxa as well as with a reappraisal of the subfamily and of Parapronematus. Acarologia 65 (2): 331-372, DOI: 10.24349/7w23-xsl9, URL: https://doi.org/10.24349/7w23-xsl9
E428AB521C03FF84FE22267684FBFD05.taxon	description	(Figures 5 – 11) Measurements — Measurements of different structures of each life stage shown in Table 1.	en	De VisK, Raf M. J., K, José Dantas Araujo Lacerda, de MoraesK, Gilberto J., Ueckermann K, Edward A. (2025): Pronematinae (Trombidiformes: Iolinidae) from Brazil, with original and complementary descriptions of taxa as well as with a reappraisal of the subfamily and of Parapronematus. Acarologia 65 (2): 331-372, DOI: 10.24349/7w23-xsl9, URL: https://doi.org/10.24349/7w23-xsl9
E428AB521C1AFF99FE22222F84BEFEBA.taxon	description	Most of the descriptions of species of this group are rather incomplete. Several of them do not have measurements and none indicates the variability of measurements. Most do not provide scale bars in illustrations. Characters of doubtful value have been used to distinguish species while characters of recognizable value are not always considered. Although complementary descriptions should be done, in this work we could only redescribe P. geminus, as in most cases the museums in which they are deposited do not allow their shipment. None of the descriptions mentions lyrifissures. However, in our specimens, lyrifissures could be seen in most males and all immatures, despite not always visible in adult females. Similarly, striae are very fine and indistinct in part of the body of several species. We suppose that they are present but not always visible. In our specimens, digital augmentation shows striae in specimens where striae are not distinguishable under phase contrast microscopic 121: MZLQ 4404). examinations at 1000 X. It seems that this characteristic is influenced by mounting conditions. We therefore do not consider this a reliable characteristic for distinguishing species based on publications of distinct authors (as used for the characterization of P. citri, e. g.). As the species are not sclerotized, distances between setae are influenced by the state of the mite when mounted, mounting conditions, as the amount of medium used and the ′ pressure′ on the specimens, the presence of folds, etc. These aspects will lead to inaccurate measurements of distance between setae. Thus, we also consider this characteristic inadequate to separate species. Likewise, length of the dorsal setae on femora III and IV in relation to the width of the segment seems a characteristic of questionable value. We believe that the width or height of femora are also influenced by the mounting conditions. So, any parameter comparing the length of the dorsal setae with the width of the segment may be inaccurate and should preferably not be used to separate species. This type of problem seems of lesser importance in relating the length of eupathidia and length of tarsus I. Hence, in this publication the ratio between the lengths of tc ″ ζ and of tarsus I is taken into account in the separation of species. The length of individual setae, even on the same species, can differ significantly, so relative length can also vary, for practical reasons. The tips of the setae can break off and that may be overlooked. We therefore recommend measuring setae of Pronematinae at 1000 X for higher confidence on measurements. André (1979: 204) considered the description of a new genus based on a single specimen to be unadvisable, except when the specimen exhibits very special characteristics. We propose to extend this suggestion to the description of new species. For Phytoseiidae, Tixier (2012) concluded that measurement of at least ten specimens is necessary to express variability reliably. We, therefore, suggest describing new taxa only when several specimens are available, unless the specimen exhibits special characteristics assumed to be of lower variability. The position of the solenidion on tarsus I is used as a distinctive character in the Parapronematus key of Gupta (2002). However, this is not always clearly presented in illustrations of different species. The number of setae on tarsi III and IV varies between species, so it could be considered a reliable feature to separate species. However, in P. connarus n. sp., we found two specimens with five setae on tarsi III and IV instead of six in the majority of the specimens. This characteristic is not always clearly stated in the descriptions, and we see discrepancies between the text of descriptions and the respective illustrations (e. g. P. acaciae Baker, 1965) and in all descriptions but that of P. formosanus, leg figures are unclear or incomplete. It is concluded that a revision of the whole genus is necessary, starting with a redescription of its type species and the creation of eventual new genera according to the generic concept of André (1980). Types of P. acaciae can only be studied in the museum where they are deposited. Thus, in this publication we selected characteristics that allow the separation of the species, although many uncertainties remain concerning other characteristics. A provisional re-characterization of Parapronematus is subsequently provided, based on what is available in the literature, the examination of the type specimens of the new species here described (P. connarus n. sp.) and the complementary description of P. geminus, provided in this publication. Additionally, a discussion about the other species placed in the genus is presented, concerning their main characteristics and the limitation of the information available in the literature.	en	De VisK, Raf M. J., K, José Dantas Araujo Lacerda, de MoraesK, Gilberto J., Ueckermann K, Edward A. (2025): Pronematinae (Trombidiformes: Iolinidae) from Brazil, with original and complementary descriptions of taxa as well as with a reappraisal of the subfamily and of Parapronematus. Acarologia 65 (2): 331-372, DOI: 10.24349/7w23-xsl9, URL: https://doi.org/10.24349/7w23-xsl9
E428AB521C1EFF98FE2223648300FCBD.taxon	description	The type specimens could not be studied because they could not be loaned ; hence, in this publication, the length of setae of the dorsal part of opisthosoma and of tarsus I were estimated (Table 2) based on the illustrations provided in the original description. We found the following inconsistencies between the description and the illustrations: tarsus III is depicted with five setae, instead of six in the description of the genus. Also, according to the original description, “ The forked seta of femur IV is at least twice as long as the width of the segment ”, but in the illustration, the length of the seta and the width of the segment are similar. For the moment, we retain the genus description with six setae on tarsus III and the estimated setal lengths as distinguishing characteristics and we consider the relative length of the dorsal setae of femora III and IV to the width of the segment as an unreliable characteristic. However, we are convinced that the species needs a redescription, especially for being the type of the genus. As distinguishing characters, we retain: f 1 49, h 1 49 and h 2 68, which are clearly longer than in P. camelia, P. formosanus, P. murshidabadensis and P. connarus n. sp. Eupathidia long, tc ″ ζ / tarsus I ≈ 3.0 but seta p ″ ζ 34 is shorter than in P. connarus n. sp. (37.5 – 47.3 µm), tarsus III with six and tarsus IV with five setae, according to the text of the original description of the genus.	en	De VisK, Raf M. J., K, José Dantas Araujo Lacerda, de MoraesK, Gilberto J., Ueckermann K, Edward A. (2025): Pronematinae (Trombidiformes: Iolinidae) from Brazil, with original and complementary descriptions of taxa as well as with a reappraisal of the subfamily and of Parapronematus. Acarologia 65 (2): 331-372, DOI: 10.24349/7w23-xsl9, URL: https://doi.org/10.24349/7w23-xsl9
E428AB521C1FFF98FE222736850FFA6C.taxon	description	As distinguishing characters, we retain: f 2 short (56 µm) ; seta c 2 stout and lanceolate, other setae thin and pointed ; eupathidia intermediate, tc ″ / tarsus I ≈ 2.2 ; tarsus III with six and tarsus IV with five setae, according to the illustration of the original description. In the original description, the species was named Pronematus camelia (the designation camelia is a name in apposition). In his monograph, Gupta (2002) changed the name to P. cameliae. We believe that that change is not justified.	en	De VisK, Raf M. J., K, José Dantas Araujo Lacerda, de MoraesK, Gilberto J., Ueckermann K, Edward A. (2025): Pronematinae (Trombidiformes: Iolinidae) from Brazil, with original and complementary descriptions of taxa as well as with a reappraisal of the subfamily and of Parapronematus. Acarologia 65 (2): 331-372, DOI: 10.24349/7w23-xsl9, URL: https://doi.org/10.24349/7w23-xsl9
E428AB521C1FFF98FE2222668270F82B.taxon	description	We consider to be distinctive characteristics of this species: setae ro, ex, c 1, c 1, d 1 and e 1 11 – 13, shorter than all other setae ; eupathidia long (tc ″ / tarsus I ≈ 3.0) ; tarsi III and IV respectively with six and five setae.	en	De VisK, Raf M. J., K, José Dantas Araujo Lacerda, de MoraesK, Gilberto J., Ueckermann K, Edward A. (2025): Pronematinae (Trombidiformes: Iolinidae) from Brazil, with original and complementary descriptions of taxa as well as with a reappraisal of the subfamily and of Parapronematus. Acarologia 65 (2): 331-372, DOI: 10.24349/7w23-xsl9, URL: https://doi.org/10.24349/7w23-xsl9
E428AB521C1CFF9BFE22249B828CFC9B.taxon	description	Double checking it would be convenient ; if correct, this characteristic would be sufficient to distinguish this from all other species. The lengths of the dorsal setae of femora III and IV were not provided, but they seem to be longer than in other species. There is a contradiction between the descriptive text and the illustration concerning the number of setae on tarsus III ; in the text it is mentioned to be the same as reported for the genus, while the illustration shows both tarsi III and IV with five setae. Distinguishing characteristics: f 1 almost twice as long as f 2 (the opposite in all other species) ; setae ro, ex, c 1, c 2, d 1 stout and lanceolate ; other dorsal setae on opisthosoma, thin and pointed ; eupathidia short (tc ″ / tarsus I ≈ 1.5) ; tarsi III and IV each with five setae (based on the illustration of the original description).	en	De VisK, Raf M. J., K, José Dantas Araujo Lacerda, de MoraesK, Gilberto J., Ueckermann K, Edward A. (2025): Pronematinae (Trombidiformes: Iolinidae) from Brazil, with original and complementary descriptions of taxa as well as with a reappraisal of the subfamily and of Parapronematus. Acarologia 65 (2): 331-372, DOI: 10.24349/7w23-xsl9, URL: https://doi.org/10.24349/7w23-xsl9
E428AB521C1CFF9BFE22275184B0FA34.taxon	description	varying from the very broad and leaflike pt to the lanceolate mtβ. Calls attention the statement “ legs strongly sclerotized, brown in colour ”. As far as we know no other sclerotised species have been reported in Iolinidae. Two inconsistencies were detected between the descriptive text and the illustrations: in the differential diagnosis with P. acaciae, femora III and IV are mentioned to have two pairs of setae each. We suppose that this should refer to femora I and II, as described in the table with the number of setae on the legs and the depicted number of setae in the illustrations. Secondly, the text mentions the presence of striae in a diamond pattern anteriad ag 1, which seems to be correct, while the pattern is illustrated in Figure 130 anteriad mtβ. As distinguishing characteristics, we retain: setae ro, ex, c 1, c 2, d 1 and e 1 stout and lanceolate, other dorsal setae on opisthosoma long, thin and pointed ; eupathidia of intermediate length (tc ″ / tarsus I ≈ 2.2) ; two setae on each of femora I and II (instead of the usual three) ; tarsi III and IV each with five setae ; setae pt, mtα and mtβ barbed, from leaflike to lanceolate.	en	De VisK, Raf M. J., K, José Dantas Araujo Lacerda, de MoraesK, Gilberto J., Ueckermann K, Edward A. (2025): Pronematinae (Trombidiformes: Iolinidae) from Brazil, with original and complementary descriptions of taxa as well as with a reappraisal of the subfamily and of Parapronematus. Acarologia 65 (2): 331-372, DOI: 10.24349/7w23-xsl9, URL: https://doi.org/10.24349/7w23-xsl9
E428AB521C10FF97FE22249B843EFCB9.taxon	description	D 4 (f 1) 44, L 2 (f 2) 78, D 5 (h 1) = 40, L 3 (h 2) 56. The used nomenclature does not coincide with that of Baker (1965). Solenidion ωI stout, φI extremely small and blunt. We suppose that in this case φ 1 is confused with κ. As an inconsistency within the text of the original description, it is stated in the key to species that the solenidion on tarsus I is placed in the middle of the segment, whereas in Figure 65 of Gupta (1992) it appears in the distal half. Distinguishing characteristics: seta f 1 nearly twice as long as e 1 (44 and 21). Setae f 1, f 2, h 1 and h 2 (44, 78, 40, 56) longer than in other species and ft ″ ζ relative short, less than half length of p ″ ζ (figure 65 of Gupta, 1992). Setae ro, ex, c 1, d 1 and e 1 thick and lanceolate ; other dorsal setae of opisthosoma long, thin and pointed (c 2 unclear) ; eupathidia intermediate ; tc ″ / tarsus I ≈ 1.7, but tarsus I seems long ; tarsi III and IV each with five setae.	en	De VisK, Raf M. J., K, José Dantas Araujo Lacerda, de MoraesK, Gilberto J., Ueckermann K, Edward A. (2025): Pronematinae (Trombidiformes: Iolinidae) from Brazil, with original and complementary descriptions of taxa as well as with a reappraisal of the subfamily and of Parapronematus. Acarologia 65 (2): 331-372, DOI: 10.24349/7w23-xsl9, URL: https://doi.org/10.24349/7w23-xsl9
E428AB521C10FF96FE2223FB85E9F8CD.taxon	description	As presently conceived, Pronematinae is composed of 19 genera, depending upon a definition of the validity of the synonymy of Pausia Kuznetsov & Livshitz, 1972 under Naudea Meyer & Rodrigues, 1966. The latter two genera were synonymized by Baker and Delfinado (1976), who considered them to differ only in the number of opisthosomal setae (ten pairs in Pausia and nine in Naudea). André (1980) considered both valid, without referring to Baker and Delfinado (1976) and providing a brief characterization of each. Thus, the structure of this section starts with a characterization of the sole species included in Naudea, followed by a comparative characterization of the genera, subgenera (of Proctotydaeus Berlese, 1911) and species of this subfamily, ending with the presentation of a key to separate the genera and subgenera. Our examination of the holotype female, one paratype female and the paratype male of the single known species of Naudea led to the following characterization.	en	De VisK, Raf M. J., K, José Dantas Araujo Lacerda, de MoraesK, Gilberto J., Ueckermann K, Edward A. (2025): Pronematinae (Trombidiformes: Iolinidae) from Brazil, with original and complementary descriptions of taxa as well as with a reappraisal of the subfamily and of Parapronematus. Acarologia 65 (2): 331-372, DOI: 10.24349/7w23-xsl9, URL: https://doi.org/10.24349/7w23-xsl9
