Redescription of the monotypic genus Volkeliopsis Poppius (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Miridae: Bryocorinae)

The monotypic genus Volkeliopsis POPPIUS and its type species Volkeliopsis frontalis are redescribed. The male genital structures are described for the first time. Copyright © 2008 Magnolia Press.SCOPUS: ar.jinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

Volkeliopsis frontalis Poppius

<i>Volkeliopsis frontalis</i> Poppius <p> <i>Volkeliopsis frontalis</i> Poppius, 1915: 82 –83 (monotypy) <i>Volkeliopsis frontalis</i>: Carvalho, 1952: 60 (catalog)</p> <p> <i>Volkeliopsis frontalis</i>: Carvalho, 1957:149 (catalog) <i>Volkeliopsis frontalis</i>: Schuh, 1995: 533 (catalog)</p> <p> <b>Type material examined.</b> Holotype (ɗ): PHILIPPINES ISLANDS: “Mt. Makiling Luzon, Baker ” / “ Volkeliopsis frontalis n. gen. et. sp” / “Mus. Zool. H: fors; spec. typ. No 10169, Volkeliopsis frontalis Popp. ” / “ Holotypus (male)” / “Mus. Zool. Helsinki Loan no HE 5256” / “ Volkeliopsis frontalis g. n. sp. n. B. Poppius 1915 ” (MZHF).</p> <p> <b>Other material examined:</b> 1 ɗ: PHILIPPINES ISLANDS: Luzon: Mt Makiling, Baker leg. (MZHF).</p> <p>In his original description, Poppius (1915: 83) mentioned only one specimen (“1 exemplar”), so the second one cannot be included in the type series. However, the identification of the “true” holotype is uncertain because the two specimens have the same origin (same place and collector). The “ type ” label, too recent, cannot help. We suggest considering the damaged specimen as the holotype because it bears an apparently original handwriting label with following indications: “ Volkeliopsis frontalis n. gen. et sp”.</p> <p> <b>Redescription.</b> Body stout, relatively wide, shining, covered with pale, rather long, semi-erect simple setae. Total length of the body 4.77–6.81 mm, total width 3.0– 3.13 mm. Head, pronotum, and scutellum light yellowish brown to orange-brown, eyes blackish brown, hemelytra brown to dark brown with grayish membrane (Figs 1, 7).</p> <p> <i>Head</i> broad, short, with strongly pedunculate eyes (Fig. 4). Length of head (dorsal view) 0.9 mm, width across eyes 1.5 mm. Clypeus free, not covered by frons, barely or not visible in dorsal view, orange-brown, with brown patches. Lorae and juga orange-brown, large, lacking tubercles, with spare short recumbent simple setae. Frons prominent, orange-brown, darker medially, practically smooth, with several semi-erect simple setae and two wide submedian tubercles (Figs 3, 4). Eyes pedunculate, glabrous, blackish brown. Ocular peduncles distinctly removed from pronotal collar (Fig. 4). Anterolateral part of frons distinctly notched by large antennal socket. Antennae covered with rather long, dense, dark, semi-erect or erect simple setae (Fig. 2). First antennal segment short, its length about equal to head length anterior to eyes, wide, three times wider than long, yellowish brown, second antennal segment thick, dark brown, slightly thickened apically (Figs 1, 2). Third and fourth segments broken in the two available specimens (all segments lacking on holotype), but according to Poppius (1915), third segment apically thick, about half shorter than length of second. Length of antennal segments in mm: I: 0.36, II: 2.09. Vertex smooth, glabrous, orange-brown, narrower posteriorily. Posterior margin of vertex rounded, devoid of carina. Rostrum thick, yellowish brown, tinged with dark brown at acute apex, extremely short, reaching slightly beyond apex of procoxae [extending to mesocoxae according to POPPIUS (1915)]. Length of rostrum 1.14 mm, last segment 0.44 mm, length of other individual segments immeasurable in the examined specimens (Fig. 6). First segment thicker, not reaching posterior margin of head.</p> <p> <i>Pronotum</i> wide, yellow-orange or orange-brown, punctured, punctuation wide and deep (Fig. 5). Length of pronotum 1.36 mm (excluding pronotal collar), length the anterior margin 0.99–1.45 mm, lateral margins 1.45–1.5 mm, posterior margin 2.68–2.86 mm. Pronotal collar orange, wide, smooth, with sparse black erect setae. Anterior lobe of pronotum very small, smooth, separate from pronotal disk. Callosities distinct, elongated, relatively flat to weakly elevated, smooth, dark brown. Pronotal disk strongly punctured, with dark, stiff, semi-erect or erect simple setae. Posterior margin concave medially. Humeral angles rounded. Mesoscutum totally covered.</p> <p> <i>Scutellum</i> punctured, slightly swollen, lateral margins rounded, anterior margin right, slightly curved medially, posterior margin triangular. Length of anterior margin 1.09–1.36 mm, lateral margin 1.18–1.36 mm (Figs 1, 7).</p> <p> <i>Hemelytra</i>. Clavus and endocorium dark brown, anteriorily orange-brown, punctation narrow, shallow, pilosity simple, dense, relatively long and stiff, semi-erect or erect. Exocorium narrow, darker, practically black. Cuneus black. Membrane brown, with brown veins and only one cell, reaching beyond pygophore. Stub lacking. Maximum wide across hemelytra 2.13–2.5 mm (Figs 1, 7).</p> <p> <i>Legs</i>. Short (Fig. 9). Forefemora dark brown, tinged light yellowish brown at the extreme apex, foretibiae yellowish brown with slightly darker extreme apices, covered with dense, protruding setae, becoming slightly denser apically. Foretarsi black (except anterior part of first segment yellow), first segment practically as long as second and third together. Claw yellow.</p> <p> <i>Abdomen</i>: Connexivum wide (Fig. 6), flat, dark red-brown or orange brown, black on margins, laterally rounded, its vestiture identical to hemelytra. Ventral surface brown, setae narrower. Total length of pygophore: 1.77 mm; total width of pygophore: 2.68 mm.</p> <p> <i>Male genital structures</i>. Left paramere (Fig. 9) large. Right paramere (Fig. 10) distinctly smaller than left, simple. <i>Ductus semini</i> s (Ds, Fig. 11) elongated, coiled, with rings, secondary gonopore (G2) rounded, unarmed, simple, phallotheca (Ph) elongated, practically flat, slightly twisted, sclerotized at dorsal side only, endosoma <i>sensu</i> Kerzhner & Konstantinov (1999) membranous, with sclerotized armament (five small slightly curved sub-triangular sclerites; arrows), probably undivided into a vesica and a conjunctiva <i>sensu</i> Kerzhner & Konstantinov (<i>op</i>. <i>cit</i>.) (Fig. 11).</p> <p> <i>Female</i>. Unknown.</p> <p> <b>Distribution</b>: Philippine Islands: Luzon.</p>Published as part of <i>Sadowska-Woda, Izabela & Chérot, Frédéric, 2008, Redescription of the monotypic genus Volkeliopsis Poppius (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Miridae: Bryocorinae), pp. 51-56 in Zootaxa 1676</i> on pages 52-55, DOI: <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/180302">10.5281/zenodo.180302</a&gt

Volkeliopsis Poppius

VOLKELIOPSIS Poppius Volkeliopsis Poppius, 1915: 81 –82 (as new genus) Volkeliopsis: Carvalho, 1952: 60 (catalog) Volkeliopsis: Carvalho, 1955: 41 (key) Volkeliopsis: Carvalho, 1957: 149 (catalog) Volkeliopsis: Schuh, 1995: 533 (catalog) Type species: Volkeliopsis frontalis Poppius, 1915 (original designation)Published as part of Sadowska-Woda, Izabela & Chérot, Frédéric, 2008, Redescription of the monotypic genus Volkeliopsis Poppius (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Miridae: Bryocorinae), pp. 51-56 in Zootaxa 1676 on page 51, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18030

A preliminary phylogenetic analysis of the genus Fulvius Stål (Hemiptera:Miridae: Cylapinae) based on molecular data

The systematics and phylogeny of the genus Fulvius STÅL remains unclear. We present herein the first analysis of the phylogenetic relationships within the genus Fulvius based on DNA sequences. The phylogenetic interrelationships in the genus Fulvius are investigated using partial DNA sequence data from two mitochondrial genes, the 16S ribosomal large subunit and the cytochrome oxidase I (COI). DNA sequences for Fulvius species representing three different subgroups distinguished previously on the base of morphological characters alone are compared to sequences from the closely related genera Rhinocylapidius and Cylapus. The data are analyzed using parsimony and Bayesian inference. The results confirm that on the basis of molecular data we can distinguish the same congruent groups of Fulvius species as using morphological characters, however with inclusion of the specimens of the genus Rhinocylapidius in the bifenestratus-group. Additional studies are needed to clarify the phylogenetic relationships within the tribe Fulviini, as well as within the genus Fulvius and its relation to Rhinocylapidius. However, the results of this study suggest that 16S and COI sequences will be very useful as molecular markers for such studies among these species-groups. © Insect Systematics & Evolution.SCOPUS: ar.jinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe