Cecidophyopsis hesariensis Lotfollahi & Hemmatzadeh, 2023
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.22073/pja.v12i3.81117 |
publication LSID |
urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:CB051133-4C5A-4ACD-8EC8-1B4389D473EF |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03C1950F-FFFD-FFD9-9E3C-FBDC02EA5017 |
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
scientific name |
Cecidophyopsis hesariensis Lotfollahi & Hemmatzadeh |
status |
sp. nov. |
Cecidophyopsis hesariensis Lotfollahi & Hemmatzadeh sp. nov.
http://zoobank.org/ urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:8B98D585-F485-486C-8C65-8E53F6263B50
Description
Female ( Fig. 1 View Figure 1 ; measured specimens = 12) – Body vermiform, 200 (187–206, excluding gnathosoma), 42* (no range available) thick, 54 (47–62) wide. Gnathosoma projecting obliquely downwards, cheliceral stylets 21 (19–25), palp 24 (20–25), palp coxal setae ep 2 (2–3), dorsal palp genual setae d 6 (6–7), unbranched, palp tarsal setae v not observed. Suboral plate a little concave on the front anteriorly, smooth. Prodorsal shield 31 (31–35) including frontal lobe, 48 (40–57) wide, sub-circular; with a broad distally rounded flexible frontal lobe, 4 (4–5), over gnathosomal base. Shield pattern distinct, consisting of complete median line and admedian lines, two pairs of submedian lines and two pairs of lateral lines, made by lined dashes and in some specimens broken. Several distinct granules between lateral sides of prodorsal shield and coxal region in lateral view. Scapular setae sc and related tubercles absent. Legs with all usual segments and setae. Leg I 25 (24– 27), trochanter 6 (5–7), femur 9 (8–10), genu 5 (4–5), tibia 6 (5–6), tarsus 7 (6–8), tarsal solenidion ω 7 (7–8), curved down, distally tapered, empodium simple, 6 (5–7), 5-rayed; femoral setae bv 10 (9–11), genual setae l" 24 (23–28), paraxial tibial setae l' 10 (8–13), located in middle of tibia, paraxial fastigial tarsal setae ft ' 12 (11–16), antaxial fastigial tarsal setae ft" 20 (16–23), paraxial unguinal tarsal setae u' 3.5 (3.5–4). Leg II 23 (22–24), trochanter 5 (5–6), femur 9 (8–9), genu 4 (4–4.5), tibia 5 (4–5), tarsus 6 (6–8), tarsal solenidion ω 9 (7–10), curved down, distally tapered, empodium simple, 6 (6–7), 5-rayed; femoral setae bv 12 (9–13), genual setae l" 9 (7–10), paraxial fastigial tarsal setae ft' 6 (6–8), antaxial fastigial tarsal setae ft " 22 (21–26), paraxial unguinal tarsal setae u' 3.5 (3–4). Coxisternal region: prosternal apodeme indistinct, anterior setae on coxisternum I 1b 6 (5–7), 9 (8– 10) apart; proximal setae on coxisternum I 1a 18 (17–22), 9 (8–11) apart; proximal setae on coxisternum II 2a 34 (31–39), 19 (19–23) apart; 5 (no variation) microtuberculate semiannuli between coxae and genital coverflap plus 0–1 transversal rows of lined fine granules at the coverflap base. Coxae with some distinct short lines. External genitalia 10 (10–14), 18 (18–21) wide, coverflap with two rows (basal and distal) of longitudinal striae including 9 (8–12) on basal part and 10 (10–13) on distal part; setae 3a 12 (10–14), 14 (14–17) apart. Internal genitalia: spermathecae globose, spermathecal tubes short, slightly swollen, directed obliquely posteriad; spermathecal process distinct, longitudinal bridge shorten, anterior (transverse) genital apodeme is a transverse plate, oblique apodeme indistinct. Opisthosoma dorsally evenly rounded, with 61 (57–65) dorsal semiannuli, 55 (53–59) ventral semiannuli. Microtubercles circular, on posterior part of dorsal and ventral semiannuli; spiny on the rear margin of last 4 (4–5) dorsal semiannuli and elongated and linear on last 3 (3–4) ventral semiannuli. Setae c2 21 (20–25) on ventral semiannulus 6 (5–8), setae d 50 (50–66) on ventral semiannulus 17 (17–19); setae e 7 (7–11) on ventral semiannulus 30 (29–33); setae f 20 (18–24) on ventral semiannulus 55 (53–59); 5 annuli posterior to setae f. Setae h2 60 (55– 66) apically very fine, h1 absent.
Male ( Fig. 1 View Figure 1 - GM; measured specimens = 2) – Similar in shape and prodorsal shield arrangement to female. Body smaller than female, 146–152 (excluding gnathosoma), 43–44 wide; palp genual setae d 5–6; prodorsal shield 31–33, 32–42 wide; scapular setae sc and related tubercles absent. Opisthosoma with 54–55 dorsal semiannuli and 50–52 ventral semiannuli; 5 semiannuli between coxae and genitalia, with microtubercles similar to that of female. Setae: 1b 5, 1a 17–19, 2a 27–29, c2 18–20, d 28–31, e 8, f 14–17, h1 absent, h2 31–40. Male genitalia 16–17 wide, setae 3a 10, 14–16 apart.
Nymph (Fig. 2; measured specimen = 1) – Body vermiform, 142 (excluding gnathosoma), 42 wide; palp genual setae d 5. Prodorsal shield 25 including frontal lobe, 37 wide, sub-circular. Shield pattern similar to female but not completely formed. Scapular setae sc and related tubercles absent. Opisthosoma with 50 dorsal semiannuli with circular microtubercles set on rear part of semiannuli, 41 ventral semiannuli with circular microtubercles, elongated on the posterior semiannuli. Setae: 1b 2, 1a 10, 2a 20, c2 15, d 30, e 5, f 13, h2 34, h1 absent. Setae 3a 7, 8 apart on semiannulus 9 after coxae.
Figure 2. Schematic drawings of Cecidophyopsis hesariensis Lotfollahi & Hemmatzadeh sp. nov. – Nymph prodorsal shield. Scale bar: 10 µm.
Type host plant Lonicera iberica M.Bieb. ( Caprifoliaceae ).
Type locality
Hesar village , Meshginshahr region, Ardabil province, Iran (38° 20' 09.60'' N, 47° 34' 43.86" E), 1405 m above sea level ( Table 2), coll. H. Hemmatzadeh, 7 August 2020 GoogleMaps .
Type material
Holotype: single female on a microscope slide (Lsp-IA-MR-HR-2020-H-1). Paratypes: 11 females, 2 males and 1 nymph mounted singly on separate microscope slides (Lsp-IA-MR-HR-2020- H-2–15).
Other materials
Mites preserved in a vial (Lsp-IA-MR-HR-2020-H) of Oudemans' fluid ( Walter and Krantz 2009) as extracted from the same sample as the type specimens; 2 females from Scabiosa ochroleuca L. ( Caprifoliaceae ) in the same locality of type specimens ( Table 2).
Relation to the host plant Vagrant; no symptoms were observed.
Distribution
Cecidophyopsis hesariensis Lotfollahi & Hemmatzadeh sp. nov. has been found only in Meshginshahr. However, Lonicera species are widely distributed in Ardabil province so future surveys could reveal a wider distribution for this new mite species.
Etymology This species is named after the village where it was collected.
Differential diagnosis
Cecidophyopsis cephalarius Chetverikov et al., 2018 was the only Cecidophyopsis species found on plants of family Caprifoliaceae View in CoL . This species was found and described on Cephalaria demetrii Bobr. View in CoL in Crimea, Karadag Nature Reserve. The new species differs from this species in ornamentations and morphometry. Prodorsal shield pattern of the new species is distinct, consisting of complete median and admedian lines, two pairs of submedian lines and two pairs of lateral lines, made by dashed lines and in some specimens broken. In addition, there are also several distinct granules between lateral sides of prodorsal shield and coxal region in lateral view. The prodorsal shield pattern of C. cephalarius consists of large round microtubercles forming median, two admedian and two submedian lines, whereas the lateral fields of the prodorsal shield and the epicoxal areas are provided with tiny microtubercles. The coxae of the new species are ornamented with some distinct short lines, while in C. cephalarius there are a few indistinct microgranulations and curved ridges on coxae. Female genital coverflap of the new species is ornamented with two rows of longitudinal striae including 8–12 on basal part and 10–13 on distal part, while the genital coverflap of C. cephalarius is rounded, with tiny round microtubercles on basal part and 11–13 longitudinal ridges on distal part. The new species is smaller than C. cephalarius and there are differences in some morphometric characters between the two species that are listed in Table 2. Also, the host plants of two species are different.
Remarks
This is the second Cecidophyopsis species found on plants of family Caprifoliaceae and the second Cecidophyopsis species found in Iran.
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 |
Cecidophyopsis hesariensis Lotfollahi & Hemmatzadeh
Hemmatzadeh-khorshidabadi, Hanieh, Lotfollahi, Parisa, Mehrvar, Ali, Shiri, Jalal, de, Enrico & Lillo 2023 |
Cecidophyopsis cephalarius
Chetverikov 2018 |