Neoseiulus barkeri Hughes, 1948
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.22073/pja.v12i1.77425 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03B71F3D-FFB6-D453-FD82-9CE4FE61D932 |
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
scientific name |
Neoseiulus barkeri Hughes, 1948 |
status |
|
Neoseiulus barkeri Hughes, 1948 View in CoL View at ENA
Neoseiulus barkeri Hughes, 1948: 141 View in CoL ; Ryu et al. 2001: 8; Moraes et al. 1986: 70, 2004: 104; Chant & McMurtry 2003: 35, 2007: 25.
Typhlodromus (Neoseiulus) barkeri, Nesbitt 1951: 35 .
Typhlodromus (Typhlodromus) barkeri, Chant 1959: 63 .
Amblyseius barkeri, Athias-Henriot 1961: 440 ; Moraes et al. 1989: 95.
Typhlodromus (Amblyseius) barkeri, Hughes 1961: 222 .
Typhlodromus barkeri, Hirschmann 1962: 5 .
Amblyseius (Amblyseius) barkeri, van der Merwe 1968: 112 .
Amblyseius mckenziei Schuster & Pritchard, 1963: 268 (synonymy according to Ragusa & Athias-Henriot 1983).
Amblyseius usitatus van der Merwe, 1965: 71 View in CoL (synonymy according to Ueckermann & Loots 1988). Amblyseius oahuensis Prasad, 1968: 1518 (synonymy according to Ragusa & Athias-Henriot 1983). Amblyseius picketti Specht, 1968: 681 (synonymy according to Ragusa & Athias-Henriot 1983). Amblyseius mycophilus Karg, 1970: 290 (synonymy according to Ragusa & Athias-Henriot 1983). Amblyseius masiaka Blommers & Chazeau, 1974: 308 (synonymy according to Ueckermann & Loots 1988).
Specimens examined – 20 ♀♀ and two ♂♂. Guilan Province – one ♀, Rasht (3 m aasl, 49° 35′ 33′′ E, 37° 16′ 50.87′′ N), from the leaves of Rubus idaeus View in CoL L. ( Rosaceae View in CoL ), 28.VII.2020. Sistan and Baluchestan Province – 1 ♀, Konarak city, Tang village (15 m aasl, 59° 59′ 14′′ E, 25° 32′ 02′′ N), on Prosopis juliflora (Swartz) De Candolle (Fabaceae) , 3.IV.2018; 2 ♀♀, Zabol city Balakhaneh village (483 m aasl, 61° 30′ 13′′ E, 31° 03′ 08′′ N), on Morus sp. (Moraceae) , 10.V.2018; 1 ♀, Chahanimeh region (501 m aasl, 61° 43′ 07′′ E, 30° 50′ 39′′ N), on Olea europea L. ( Oleaceae View in CoL ), 11.V.2018; 1 ♀, Bampur city, Rige Kaput village (526 m aasl, 60° 29′ 52′′ E, 27° 11′ 57′′ N), on Ziziphus sp. (Rhamnaceae) , 18.X.2018; 2 ♀♀, Zahedan city, Kalateh Razagh Zadeh (1497 m aasl, 60° 48′ 50′′ E, 29° 23′ 28′′ N), on Pinus sp. (Pinaceae) , 19.X.2018; 1 ♀, Zabol city, Agricultural Research Center (481 m aasl, 61° 29′ 22′′ E, 31° 01′ 10′′ N), on Phragmites sp. (Poaceae) , 5.II.2019; 2 ♀♀, Mirjaveh city (1562 m aasl, 61° 14′ 01′′ E, 28° 47′ 03′′ N), on Rosa damascena Miller (Rosaceae) View in CoL , 9.II.2019; 1 ♀ and 1 ♂, Fanouj city (729 m aasl, 61° 31′ 19′′ E, 30° 51′ 13′′ N), on Pistacia terebinthus View in CoL L. ( Anacardiaceae View in CoL ), 9.IV.2019; 2 ♀♀, Sistan Dam (486 m aasl, 59° 38′ 58′′ E, 26° 24′ 44′′ N), on unknown weeds, 31.V.2019; 1 ♀, Niatak forest (482 m aasl, 61° 37′ 15′′ E, 31° 07′ 06′′ N), on unknown weeds, 2.VI.2019; 3 ♀♀, Khash city, Deh Pabid village (1777 m aasl, 60° 47′ 08′′ E, 28° 36′ 29′′ N), on Prunus armeniaca View in CoL L. ( Rosaceae View in CoL ), 1.IX.2019; 1 ♀, Zabol city, Ebrahim Abad (481 m aasl, 61° 26′ 07′′ E, 30° 54′ 53′′ N), on Eucalyptus sp. (Myrtaceae) , 31.VII.2019; 1 ♀ and 1 ♂, Nimrooz city (481 m aasl, 61° 24′ 40′′ E, 31° 07′ 04′′ N), on Salsola sp. (Amaranthaceae) , 8.VII.2020.
World distribution – Algeria, Argentina, Australia, Benin, Brazil, Burundi, Canary islands, Cape Verde, Chile, China, Cyprus, Egypt, England, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guinea, Hawaii, India, Iran, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Latvia, Lebanon, Madagascar, Malawi, Mayotte island, Morocco, Mozambique, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Portugal, Reunion island, Rodrigues island, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Slovenia, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Syria, Taiwan, Tahiti, Thailand, Tunisia, Türkiye, Ukraine, USA, West bank, Yemen. Precise distribution in Iran is documented in Kazemi et al. (2022).
Remarks – This species was already recorded from Guilan Province but is a new record for Sistan and Baluchestan Province. Morphological and morphometric characters fit well the numerous previous measurements already published (See for example Rahmani et al. 2010; Beaulieu and Beard 2018; Kreiter et al. 2020b).
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |
Neoseiulus barkeri Hughes, 1948
Farazmand, Azadeh, Jalaeian, Mahdi, Kamali, Hashem, Saboori, Alireza, Tixier, MarieStéphane & Kreiter, Serge 2023 |
Amblyseius (Amblyseius) barkeri
van der Merwe, G. G. 1968: 112 |
Amblyseius usitatus
Blommers, L. & Chazeau J. 1974: 308 |
Karg, W. 1970: 290 |
Prasad, V. 1968: 1518 |
Specht, H. B. 1968: 681 |
van der Merwe, G. G. 1965: 71 |
Amblyseius mckenziei
Schuster, R. O. & Pritchard, A. E. 1963: 268 |
Typhlodromus barkeri
Hirschmann, W. 1962: 5 |
Amblyseius barkeri
Moraes, G. J. de & McMurtry, J. A. & Yaninek, J. S. 1989: 95 |
Athias-Henriot, C. 1961: 440 |
Typhlodromus (Amblyseius) barkeri
Hughes, A. M. 1961: 222 |
Typhlodromus (Typhlodromus) barkeri
Chant, D. A. 1959: 63 |
Typhlodromus (Neoseiulus) barkeri
Nesbitt, H. H. J. 1951: 35 |
Neoseiulus barkeri
Chant, D. A. & McMurtry, J. A. 2007: 25 |
Moraes, G. J. de & McMurtry, J. A. & Denmark, H. A. & Campos, C. B. 2004: 104 |
Chant, D. A. & McMurtry, J. A. 2003: 35 |
Ryu, M. O. & Lee, W. K. & Cho, S. R. 2001: 8 |
Moraes, G. J. de & McMurtry, J. A. & Denmark, H. A. 1986: 70 |
Hughes, A. M. 1948: 141 |