Getes Bergroth, 1916

Malipatil, M. B. & O’Donnell, J. E., 2022, Paratasmanicola inerma gen. et. sp. nov. from Tasmania (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Rhyparochromidae), Zootaxa 5141 (2), pp. 192-198 : 196-197

Genus Getes Bergroth, 1916 —comparison with Paratasmanicola and tribal placement

The monotypic genus Getes with type-species G. fusciceps Bergroth , was described by Bergroth, 1916, from Tasmania. The genus was placed in the subfamily Rhyparochrominae of the Rhyparochromidae , with uncertain tribal status (Slater 1964, Cassis & Gross 2002, Dellapé & Henry 2022). Bergroth noted this taxon was described based on material sent to him by Mr Charles French of Melbourne. It was thought that the type specimen might be deposited in Melbourne Museum where most of French’s specimens had been deposited, but attempts to locate this type by Sweet (2008), and by the senior author during the present study have been unsuccessful.

Bergroth (1916) stated this genus “does not seem to have any near ally among the described tropical genera, but is closely related to the Mediterranean genus Hyalochilus Fieb. ”. The latter genus was included in the Stygnocorini when Sweet (1967) discussed the tribal classification of the Rhyparochrominae . However, Getes differs from Hyalochilus in having shorter bucculae, the first antennal segment produced farther beyond the apex of the head, the second segment longer, the fourth segment not fusiform, the scutellum shorter, and the fore femur less slender ( Bergroth 1916).

The new Tasmanian genus Paratasmanicola , placed as a member of tribe Stygnocorini in this study, agrees with the description of Getes ( Bergroth 1916) in the following: body sub-ovate; antenniferous tubercles perpendicularly descending and ending slightly beneath the level of their lower angle; bucculae very short; pronotum trapeziform, about twice as broad as head, all margins straight, lateral margins only slightly carinate; corium with apical margin straight; and the fore femora only slightly more incrassate than the others and unarmed. On the other hand, Paratasmanicola differs from the description of the latter genus in the second segment of antenna less than twice as long as first; labium short, ending just before metathoracic sternum, basal segment reaching only to ½ the length of head and subequal to first antennal segment; pronotum without a distinct transverse impression; scutellum without raised smooth median line; claval commissure much shorter than scutellum length; and hind tibiae without a row of spinelike bristles beneath.

An attempt was made also in the present study to resolve the tribal placement uncertainty of the genus Getes within subfamily Rhyparochrominae . Unfortunately, from Bergroth’s description alone, without the availability of type specimen for examination, it has not been possible to ascertain several of the important characters of the tribe, particularly the position of spiracles on abdominal segments, and the placement of posterior pair of trichobothria on abdominal sternum 5 in relation to each other, as well as to spiracle and posterior margin of segment 5, the presence of inner laterotergites on abdominal segments 3-6, and the structures of the aedeagus such as holding sclerites and the helicoid process ( Slater & Sweet 1970, Sweet 1967). Until the type is found and these characters can be assessed, we do not feel it is appropriate to formally move Getes into the Stygnocorini despite its superficial similarity in some respects to Paratasmanicola . In addition, even though Bergroth (1916) suggested an affinity between Getes and Hyalochilus , that resemblance might also be superficial and not supported by characters important in establishing tribal relationships. The spiracle positions and inner laterotergite configurations need to be critically examined both across genera within the Stygnocorini and among representatives of the related tribe Ozophorini , as some of these characters seem not to be consistent even within the Stygnocorini ..