Procontarinia matteiana Kieffer & Cecconi
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4847.1.1 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:1F8E3DED-6EA9-4D8A-8DA9-CD8C0CC9147F |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4476909 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/A32D87D4-1C73-5348-55DE-F993226FE7F4 |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Procontarinia matteiana Kieffer & Cecconi |
status |
|
Procontarinia matteiana Kieffer & Cecconi View in CoL
[ Figs 33 View FIGURES 33 a–i]
Procontarinia matteiana Kieffer & Cecconi, 1906: 135 View in CoL
Material. Male, female, pupal and larval syntypes were reared from pustulate leaf galls on Mangifera indica L. in the Botanical Gardens, Palermo, Sicily, Italy, v-1906 ( Kieffer & Cecconi 1906). The syntypes are presumed lost ( Gagné & Jaschhof 2017). One of us ( PK) visited the Botanical Gardens in Palermo, ix-2018, but found only young, recently planted, mango trees with no galls on their leaves. Harris (1966) described adults from an undisclosed country and locality, possibly India. The presence of P. matteiana in Indonesia is based on the presence of galls recorded by DvLR & DvL (1926, gall No. 801).
Description (based on Kieffer & Cecconi (1906) and Harris (1966). Adult: Wing: 1.5–2.0 mm long, R 1 joining C at basal half, R 5 slightly curved, joining at near wing apex [ Fig. 33i View FIGURES 33 ]. palpus 4-segmented [ Fig. 33g View FIGURES 33 ]. Antenna with 12 flagellomeres; in male binodal, internode very short, each node with whorl of looped circumfila [ Fig. 33f View FIGURES 33 ]; in female nodes cylindrical, not longer than wide, neck shorter than wide, circumfila simple. Tarsal claws according to Harris (1966) toothed on some, possibly all legs. Kieffer & Cecconi (1906) recorded simple claws, but teeth in other Procontarinia spp. are very thin so conceivably were overlooked by them. Male terminalia: gonocoxite long, narrow, cylindrical except for pronounced obtusely triangular mesobasal lobe; gonostylus narrow, curved medially; aedeagus long, evenly broad, bearing many asetose papillae; cerci ovate, well-separated; hypoproct slightly wider and much shorter than aedeagus, deeply bilobed [ Figs 33d, h View FIGURES 33 ]. Ovipositor barely protrusible, cerci stout [ Fig. 33e View FIGURES 33 ].
Pupa without antennal horns.
Larva unknown.
DNA. Three COI sequences (GenBank numbers JQ823235 View Materials – JQ823237 View Materials ) are available for the Réunion Island population (Amouroux et al. 2013) .
Remarks. The genus Procontarinia contains 16 described ( Gagné & Jaschhof 2017, Jiao et al. 2018) and over 10 undescribed ( Kolesik et al. 2009, 2017) species, all restricted to mango where they feed on leaves, young stems, flowers or fruit. While only two species are currently reported from Indonesia ( P. matteiana and P. robusta ) it is likely that many more occur there. Procontarinia matteiana differs from P. robusta in several characters of the male: flagellomeral internode bare, narrow gonocoxite bearing acute mesobasal lobe, long and narrow gonostylus, blunt aedeagus of even width, deeply divided hypoproct and triangular cerci in P. matteiana as opposed to flagellomeral internode setulose, robust gonocoxite without mesobasal lobe, short and proximally wide gonostylus, tapering aedeagus, shallowly divided hypoproct and shallowly divided round cerci in P. robusta .
Biology. This species causes leaf galls on Mangifera indica (Anacardiaceae) ( Kieffer & Cecconi (1906, Fig. 3 View FIGURES 3 [ Fig. 33a View FIGURES 33 ]), DvLR & DvL (1926, gall No. 801, Fig. 577 [ Fig. 33b View FIGURES 33 ])). Tiny circular galls, about 1.5–2 mm across and 1 mm high, developed on both sides of the leaf or on young twigs. Galls are pale green at first [ Fig. 33c View FIGURES 33 ], later becoming pink and purple, finally black. Inside, there is a single larval chamber. The larva pupates in the gall ( Augustyn et al. 2013). Procontarinia matteiana is a pest not only on the Indian subcontinent, where mango was first domesticated, but also in other countries of the world where it is cultivated now ( Kolesik et al. 2017). Resistant mango varieties ( Githure et al. 1998) and the presence of natural enemies ( Sankaran 1988) are currently the major control strategies.
Geographical distribution. Procontarinia matteiana has been confirmed in Italy [ Fig. 33a View FIGURES 33 ], India, Indonesia, Mauritius, Réunion, Kenya and South Africa [ Fig. 33c View FIGURES 33 ] ( Gagné & Jaschhof 2017), and reported also from Oman, Trinidad and Iran ( Kolesik et al. 2017). In Indonesia it was found in Java at the following localities (DvLR & DvL 1926): Mangkang, near Semarang, vii-1910; Candi, near Semarang, alt. 50 m, iii-1911; Mt Muria, alt. 500 m, ix- 1912; Bandung, alt. 600 m, vi-1916 & vi-1918; Jakarta, v-1917; Bogor, alt. 250 m, ix-1918; Mt Pancar, near Bogor, alt. 500 m, xii-1923.
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 |
Procontarinia matteiana Kieffer & Cecconi
Kolesik, Peter & Gagné, Raymond J. 2020 |
Procontarinia matteiana
Kieffer, J. - J. & Cecconi, G. 1906: 135 |