27 research outputs found

    A NEW SPECIES OF LASIOBELBA (ACARI, ORIBATIDA, OPPIIDAE) FROM TAIWAN

    No full text
    A new species of oribatid mites of the genus Lasiobelba (Oribatida, Oppiidae), collected from the soil sample in the forest of Yangmingshan National Park (Taiwan), is described. L. tsaoshanensis Ermilov sp.n. differs from L. sculpta Wang, 1993, L. yunnanensis Wen, 1999 and L. longisensilla Ermilov, 2017 by the absence of notogastral setae h3 and by the presence of notogastral setae lm, lp distinctly longer than la and h3. DOI: 10.21684/0132-8077-2018-26-1-81-8

    Systematics of the tribe Amblyseiini (Acari: Phytoseiidae) in Taiwan

    No full text
    植綏蟎科(捕植蟎)(Phytoseiidae) 包含 3 亞科:鈍綏蟎亞科 (Amblyseiinae)、植綏蟎亞科 (Phytoseiinae) 與盲走蟎亞科 (Typhlodrominae)。截至目前為止,全世界已經紀錄超過 2300 種。部分種類是生物防治時常被以應用的捕食性天敵,多能捕食田間植食性的微小害蟲,如葉蟎、節蟎及一些微小的昆蟲,對於農業生態系提供重要的貢獻。因此,自 1960 年代起,植綏蟎就因其生物防治潛力而受到重視,廣被研究。為了能妥善的應用植綏蟎,基礎的分類學研究是不可或缺的。錯誤的鑑定將使得非標的之天敵被釋放於田間,無法確實偵測田間天敵與害蟲之密度,掌握施用時機,甚至在新天敵的開發上均將造成問題。現行分類系統主要是依據背毛的毛相 (chaetotaxy)(排列、長度與形狀)、螯肢鉗 (chelicera chela) 形狀、腹肛板 (ventrianal shield) 形狀與毛相、第 4 對足的巨毛 (macroseta) 相等特徵,而雌性交尾囊在種的鑑定也是十分重要的。在臺灣,關於植綏蟎分類的研究可追溯至1970年代,大多完成於 1983 年之前;迄目前為止,已經記錄 54 種植綏蟎。然而,有許多可著墨之處:1. 多年來關於植綏蟎的調查,偏重於農業耕作區。2. 先前之種類描述多缺乏雄成蟎。3. 有些描述與繪圖可能缺乏晚近重視之特徵。4. 存在同物異名之可能性。6. 筆者判斷臺灣尚有未紀錄之種類。此外,整個科之系統發生史尚未論定。而在植綏螨科中,鈍綏螨族是常見且廣泛分布的類群,因此本研究將從鈍綏蟎族開始進行研究。除了平地外,也加入對山區與離島的調查,形態紀錄上加入足基節毛式 (coxal formula) 與 4 對足的足巨毛相描述,並針對雄蟎進行描述。由採集資料得知禾草綏蟎 (Graminaseius Chant and McMurtry) 與渡綏蟎屬 (Transeius Chant and McMurtry) 為臺灣地區發現之新紀錄屬,彎曲鈍綏蟎 (Amblyseius curvus sp. nov.)、巨趾鈍綏蟎 (A. megadactylus sp. nov.)、新三刺鈍綏蟎 (A. neotrisetosus sp. nov.)、馬唐禾草綏蟎 (Graminaseius digitaria sp. nov.)、高山渡綏蟎 (Transeius altusmontis sp. nov.) 與尖石擬鈍綏蟎 (Paraamblyseius jianshiensis sp. nov.) 為新種,佛氏鈍綏蟎 (A. fletcheri Schicha, 1981)、肯氏鈍綏蟎 (A. keni Schicha, 1987)、武夷鈍綏蟎 (A. wuyiensis Wu & Li, 1983) 3 種為臺灣地區發現之新紀錄種。重新調查後,臺灣地區紀錄之鈍綏蟎族種類自 4 屬 13 種增加至 6 屬 21 種。本研究並以形態上的共衍徵進行支序學之分析,其結果顯示鈍綏蟎族為一單系群,而其內分為兩分支:鈍綏蟎亞族一支、壯綏蟎亞族 (Arrenoseina) + 似前鋸綏蟎亞族 (Proprioseiopsina) 一支。此結果符合現行分類系統與其親緣關係假說;然而僅能解析亞族之關係,屬級以下分支呈現梳狀之情形。本研究另外希望藉以 DNA 之分子資料,釐清江原鈍綏蟎 (A. eharai Amitai & Swirski, 1981)、長尾鈍綏蟎 (A. herbicolus (Chant, 1959)) 與拉哥鈍綏蟎 (A. largoensis (Muma, 1955)) 之親緣關係,研究中選取部分粒線體 (mitochondrial) DNA 之細胞色素氧化酶第一次單元基因 (cytochrome c oxidase subunit I, COI) 與核醣體核酸基因 (rDNA) 之內轉錄區 (internal transcribed spacer, ITS) 進行比較分析;其結果顯示 ITS 基因在探討近緣種的關係時,有較好的解析度。而 COI 與 ITS 基因之結果顯示江原鈍綏蟎、長尾鈍綏蟎與拉哥鈍綏蟎三者均為單系群,而其分化順序結果並不一致;而江原鈍綏蟎與長尾鈍綏蟎間之形態混合種被認為是屬於長尾鈍綏蟎。最後,由分子結果推斷,胸版末緣有無凹陷用以鑑定江原鈍綏蟎與長尾鈍綏蟎不是穩定之特徵。The family Phytoseiidae is comprised of three subfamilies Amblyseiinae, Phytoseiinae, and Typhlodrominae. Up to date, more than 2300 species have been recorded. Mites of the family Phytoseiidae are famous biological control agents, which can purnish a strong contribution to agroecosystem. Therefore, phytoseiid mites had draw much attention due to their biological control potential since 1960s, and been studied extensively. In order to study, apply and monitor accurately on the appropriate species, a reliable taxonomy of Phytoseiidae is urgently needed. The current classification system is based on morphological characters, including the dorsal chaetotaxy, shape and dentition of chelicerae, shape and chaetotaxy of ventrianal shield , and macroseta on leg IV. In addition, the morphology of spermatheca is also important in the determination of species. In Taiwan, the taxonomic studies of phytoseiid mites can be traced back to 1970s. Most works were done before 1983. Fifty four species of phytoseiid mites were recorded from Taiwan. Nevertheless, there remains many works to be accomplished: 1. The survey of phytoseiid mites species were mainly carried out in agricultural areas. 2. Males of many species are still unknown. 3. Some works lack descriptions of characters and illustration considered important recently. 4. Possibility of the presence of synonyms. 5. My confidence on the existence of undescribed or unrecorded species in Taiwan. Furthermore, the phylogeny of phytoseiid mites is still not fulls resolved. This study, therefore, chose the tribe Amblyseiini, a large, species rich tribe both in the world and in Taiwan, as the first work to access Phytoseiidae. Mountain areas and offshore Islands were emphasized for collecting specimens. In addition to those characters conventionally described, the macrosetae on legs I-III, the morphology of male spermatodactyl, the setation of the ventrianal shield of adult male mites, and the coxal formula were also described. This study adds two newly recorded genera, Graminaseius Chant and McMurtry and Transeius Chant and McMurtry, five species new to science, Amblyseius curvus sp. nov., A. megadactylus sp. nov., A. neotrisetosus sp. nov., Graminaseius digitaria sp. nov., Transeius altusmontis sp. nov., Paraamblyseius jianshiensis sp. nov., and three newly recorded species, A. fletcheri Schicha, 1981, A. keni Schicha, 1987, A. wuyiensis Wu & Li, 1983 to the fauna of Amblyseiini from Taiwan. Taiwanese Amblyseiini increases from 4 genera 13 species to 6 genera 21 species after this survey. The phylogeny of the tribe Amblyseiini was also reconstructed by synapomorphic characters. The result revealed the tribe Amblyseiini is a monophyletic group, the subtribes within Amblyseiini form two clades, Amblyseiina and Arrenoseiina+Proprioseiopsina. It is congruent with the current classification system and the hypothetic phylogeny. However, the result can only explain the relationship among subtribe. The relationships among genera revelaed by current data is in polytomy. Besides, DNA-based were also performed to investigate the relationship between three closely species, Amblyseius eharai Amitai & Swirski, 1981, A. herbicolus (Chant, 1959), and A. largoensis (Muma, 1955). Two molecular markers were chosen to make the inference, mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase I (COI) and nuclear DNA ribosomal internal transcribed spacer (ITS). ITS provided better resolution than COI for inferring the relationship of related species, but the divergence were incongruent between these two genes. The results revealed these three species are monophyletic assemblages, repectively. The specimens collected with intermediate morph between A. eharai and A. herbicolus belong to A. herbicolus. Therefore, the curvature of posterior margin of sternal shiled is not a stable character for the distinguishment of A. eharai and A. herbicolus

    Amblyseius tsugawai Ehara 1959

    No full text
    <i>Amblyseius tsugawai</i> Ehara, 1959 <p> <i>Amblyseius tsugawai</i> Ehara, 1959: 290.</p> <p> <b>Material examined.</b> Japan: one female (QAR 101H028) from <i>Perilla frutescens</i> (Lamiaceae), 28 Sept 2011.</p> <p> <b>Previous records.</b> Asia: China (Zhu & Chen 1980), Japan (Ehara 1959), South Korea (Ryu & Kim 1998).</p> <p> <b>Remarks.</b> This species is distributed in East Asia, especially Japan, and is a major predator of spider mites in orchards in Japan. It is considered as Type III generalist predators (Funayama & Sonoda 2014). The food sources of the species ranges from spider mites, thrips, whiteflies, pyralid moths, and pollens (Yang <i>et al</i>. 2019).</p>Published as part of <i>Liao, Jhih-Rong, Ho, Chyi-Chen & Ko, Chiun-Cheng, 2021, Predatory mites (Acari: Mesostigmata: Phytoseiidae) intercepted from samples imported to Taiwan, with description of a new species, pp. 301-330 in Zootaxa 4927 (3)</i> on page 305, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4927.3.1, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/4542155">http://zenodo.org/record/4542155</a&gt

    Phytoseiulus persimilis Athias-Henriot 1957

    No full text
    <i>Phytoseiulus persimilis</i> Athias-Henriot, 1957 <p> <i>Phytoseiulus persimilis</i> Athias-Henriot, 1957: 347.</p> <p> <b>Material examined.</b> Netherlands: three females one male (HAL 095F302) from <i>Symphoricarpos albus</i> (Caprifoliaceae), 27 Aug 2006; three females one male (HAL 095F303) from <i>S</i>. <i>albus</i> (Caprifoliaceae), 27 Aug 2006; one female (HAL 095F317) from <i>Lactuca sativa var</i>. <i>capitata</i> (Asteraceae), 12 Oct 2006.</p> <p> New Zealand: three females (HAL099C250) from <i>Fragaria ananassa</i> (Rosaceae), 29 Nov 2010.</p> <p> USA: one male (QAR 101H016) from <i>F</i>. <i>ananassa</i> (Rosaceae), 30 Aug 2011.</p> <p> <b>Previous records.</b> Africa: Algeria (Athias-Henriot 1957a), Egypt (Afsah 2015), Kenya (Migeon <i>et al</i>. 2019), Lybia (Damiano 1961), Mauritius (Kreiter <i>et al</i>. 2018), Morocco (McMurtry & Bounfour 1989), South Africa (Mey- er 1981), Tunisia (Rambier 1972). Asia: China (Wu <i>et al</i>. 1997), Cyprus (Vassiliou <i>et al</i>. 2012), Iran (Hajizadeh & Mortazavi 2015), Israel (Swirski & Amitai 1968), Japan (Ohno <i>et al</i>. 2012), Jordan (Allawi 1991), Philippine (Corpuz-Raros 2005), Syria (Barbar 2013), Turkey (Sekeroglu & Kazak 1993). Central America: Costa Rica (Denmark <i>et al</i>. 1999), Guatemala (Denmark <i>et al</i>. 1999). Europe: Finland (Tuovinen 1993), France (Rambier 1972), Greece (Swirski & Ragusa 1976), Hungary (Bozai 1996), Italy (Kennett & Caltagirone 1968), Latvia (Salmane 2001), Portugal (Ferreira & Carmona 1994), Serbia (Kropczynska & Petanović 1987), Slovenia (Kreiter <i>et al</i>. 2020), Spain (Ferragut <i>et al</i>. 1983). North America: USA (Denmark & Evans 2011). Oceania: Australia (Goodwin & Schicha 1979). South America: Chile (Gonzalez 1961), Peru (El-Banhawy 1979), Venezuela (Aponte & McMurtry 1993).</p> <p> <b>Remarks.</b> The species is distributed worldwide but had no previous record in Taiwan. Lo <i>et al</i>. (1986) reported that the species was introduced for biological control purposes from the United States. EPPO (2020) listed this species as a commercially used biological control agent of Type I-a, specialized predators of spider mites of <i>Tetranychus</i> (McMurtry <i>et al</i>. 2013).</p>Published as part of <i>Liao, Jhih-Rong, Ho, Chyi-Chen & Ko, Chiun-Cheng, 2021, Predatory mites (Acari: Mesostigmata: Phytoseiidae) intercepted from samples imported to Taiwan, with description of a new species, pp. 301-330 in Zootaxa 4927 (3)</i> on pages 308-309, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4927.3.1, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/4542155">http://zenodo.org/record/4542155</a&gt

    Amblyseius largoensis

    No full text
    <i>Amblyseius largoensis (</i> Muma, 1955) <p> <i>Amblyseiopsis largoensis</i> Muma, 1955: 266.</p> <p> <b>Material examined.</b> USA: one female (HAL 100B062) from <i>Persea americana</i> (Lauraceae), 19 May 2011.</p> <p> <b>Previous records.</b> Africa: Angola (Carmona 1968), Benin (Zannou <i>et al</i>. 2007), Ivory Coast (Moraes <i>et al</i>. 1989a), Kenya (Swirski & Ragusa 1978), Mozambique (Rodrigues 1968), Sierra Leone (Zannou <i>et al</i>. 2007), Tanzania (El-Banhawy & Abou-Awad 1990). Asia: China (Chen <i>et al</i>. 1980), India (Gupta 1978), Iran (Daneshvar 1980), Malaysia (Ehara 2002a), Oman (Hountondji <i>et al</i>. 2010), the Philippines (Corpuz & Rimando 1966), Saudi Arabia (Alatawi <i>et al</i>. 2017), Singapore (Corpuz-Raros 1995), Sri Lanka (Moraes <i>et al</i>. 2004b), Taiwan (Ehara 1970), Thailand (Ehara & Bhandhufalck 1977), Turkey (Çobanoðlu 1989b), Vietnam (Fang <i>et al</i>. 2020). Central America: Cuba (Rodriguez <i>et al</i>. 1981), Dominican Republic (Ferragut <i>et al</i>. 2011), Guatemala (Chant 1959), Mexico (Chant 1959), Jamaica (Denmark & Muma 1978), Puerto Rico (De Leon 1965). Europe: Georgia (Wainstein & Vartapetov 1973). North America: USA (Muma 1955). Oceania: Australia (Collyer 1980), Fiji (Collyer 1980), Hawaii (Prasad 1968), New Caledonia (Schicha 1981b), New Zealand (Collyer 1964b), Papua New Guinea (Schicha & Gutierrez 1985), Vanuatu (Schicha 1981b). South America: Brazil (Ehara 1966), Colombia (Moraes & Mesa 1988), Guyana (De Leon 1966), Trinidad (De Leon 1967), Venezuela (Aponte & McMurtry 1993).</p> <p> <b>Remarks.</b> The species is distributed worldwide; however, it is doubtful if all recorded specimens are real <i>A</i>. <i>largoensis</i> (see D̂ker <i>et al</i>. 2020). Many researchers (e.g., Liao <i>et al</i>. 2020) indicated that the species can be identified by the parallel tubular calyx of the spermatheca. Additionally, this species is dominant in southern Taiwan, especially in the tropical region. This species has also been studied in terms of its potential in biological control of red palm mite, <i>Raoiella indica</i> Hirst (e.g., Mendes <i>et al</i>. 2018).</p>Published as part of <i>Liao, Jhih-Rong, Ho, Chyi-Chen & Ko, Chiun-Cheng, 2021, Predatory mites (Acari: Mesostigmata: Phytoseiidae) intercepted from samples imported to Taiwan, with description of a new species, pp. 301-330 in Zootaxa 4927 (3)</i> on page 304, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4927.3.1, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/4542155">http://zenodo.org/record/4542155</a&gt

    Neoseiulus loxus

    No full text
    <i>Neoseiulus loxus</i> (Schuster & Pritchard, 1963) <p> <i>Amblyseius loxus</i> Schuster & Pritchard, 1963: 263.</p> <p> <b>Material examined.</b> USA: one female (HAL 095F305) from <i>Fragaria chiloensis</i> (Rosaceae), 29 Aug 2006; one female (HAL 095F306) from <i>F</i>. <i>chiloensis</i> (Rosaceae), 29 Aug 2006; one female (HAL 095F315) from <i>F</i>. <i>chiloensis</i> (Rosaceae), 3 Oct 2006.</p> <p> <b>Previous records.</b> North America: USA (Schuster & Pritchard 1963).</p> <p> <b>Remarks.</b> The species is only distributed in the United States. Schuster & Pritchard (1963) reported the species from <i>Zostera marina</i> on sea shore, a species habitat for phytoseiid mites. Denmark & Evans (2011) recorded additional habitat plants, including strawberry, and <i>Malus</i> sp. The collecting records of the species are all from <i>Fragaria chiloensis</i>. The biological control potential of the species requires further confirmation.</p>Published as part of <i>Liao, Jhih-Rong, Ho, Chyi-Chen & Ko, Chiun-Cheng, 2021, Predatory mites (Acari: Mesostigmata: Phytoseiidae) intercepted from samples imported to Taiwan, with description of a new species, pp. 301-330 in Zootaxa 4927 (3)</i> on page 308, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4927.3.1, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/4542155">http://zenodo.org/record/4542155</a&gt

    Typhlodromus (Anthoseius) caudiglans Schuster 1959

    No full text
    <i>Typhlodromus</i> (<i>Anthoseius</i>) <i>caudiglans</i> Schuster, 1959 <p> <i>Typhlodromus</i> (<i>Typhlodromus</i>) <i>caudiglans</i> Schuster, 1959: 88.</p> <p> <b>Material examined.</b> USA: one female (HAL 095F312) from <i>Prunus persica</i> (Rosaceae), 16 Sept 2006; one female (QAR 101H020) from <i>P</i>. <i>persica</i> (Rosaceae), 16 Sept 2011; one female (QAR 101H021) from <i>P</i>. <i>persica</i> (Rosaceae), 19 Sept 2011; one female (HAL 101B058) from <i>P</i>. <i>persica</i> (Rosaceae), 23 Sept 2011; one female (QAR 102H019) from <i>P</i>. <i>persica</i> (Rosaceae), 8 June 2013; one female (QAR 102H047) from <i>P</i>. <i>persica</i> (Rosaceae), 12 Sept 2013; one female (QAR 102H052) from <i>P</i>. <i>persica</i> (Rosaceae), 17 Sept 2013.</p> <p> Japan: three females (QAR 102H049) from <i>Vitis vinifera</i> (Vitaceae), 13 Sept 2013;</p> <p> <b>Previous records.</b> Asia: Azerbaijan (Abbasova 1972), China (Wu 1988), Iran (Hajizadeh <i>et al</i>. 2002), Europe: Austria (El-Borolossy 1989), England (Collyer 1964), Latvia (Salmane & Petrova 2002), Lithuania (Pauriene 1970), Moldova (Beglyarov & Malov 1977), Norway (Evans & Edland 1998), Russia (Wainstein 1975), Slovakia (Jedlickova & Kolodochka 1994), Ukraine (Kolodochka 1978). North America: Canada (Downing & Moilliet 1971), USA (Schuster 1959). Oceania: Australia (Chant <i>et al</i>. 1978), New Zealand (Collyer 1964a).</p> <p> <b>Remarks.</b> The species is distributed worldwide, except in Africa and South America. Most of the specimens were found on peaches from the United States, except one was found on grapes from Japan.</p>Published as part of <i>Liao, Jhih-Rong, Ho, Chyi-Chen & Ko, Chiun-Cheng, 2021, Predatory mites (Acari: Mesostigmata: Phytoseiidae) intercepted from samples imported to Taiwan, with description of a new species, pp. 301-330 in Zootaxa 4927 (3)</i> on page 311, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4927.3.1, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/4542155">http://zenodo.org/record/4542155</a&gt

    Neoseiulus bicaudus

    No full text
    <i>Neoseiulus bicaudus</i> (Wainstein, 1962) <p> <i>Amblyseius bicaudus</i> Wainstein, 1962: 146.</p> <p> <b>Material examined.</b> Japan: one female (HAL 095F295) from <i>Vitis vinifera</i> (Vitaceae), 3 Aug 2006; one female (HAL 095F308) from <i>V</i>. <i>vinifera</i> (Vitaceae), 8 Sept 2006.</p> <p> <b>Previous records.</b> Africa: Egypt (Abo-Shnaf & Moraes 2014), Tunisia (Sahraoui <i>et al</i>. 2012). Asia: Armenia (Arutunjan 1969), Azerbaijan (Abbasova 1972), China (Zhang <i>et al</i>. 2017), Iran (Asali Fayaz <i>et al</i>. 2011), Israel (Swirski & Amitai 1985), Kazakhstan (Wainstein 1962), Saudi Arabia (Negm <i>et al</i>. 2012), Syria (Barbar 2014), Tajikistan (Wainstein 1962), Turkey (Çobanoðlu 1991). Europe: France (Athias-Henriot 1966), Georgia (Wainstein & Vartapetov 1973), Greece (Papadoulis & Emmanouel 1990), Hungary (Bozai 1980), Italy (Ragusa & Paoletti 1985), Latvia (Salmane 1996), Moldova (Kolodochka 1980), Norway (Denmark & Edland 2002), Portugal (Espinha <i>et al</i>. 1998), Russia (Wainstein 1962), Serbia (Stojnić <i>et al</i>. 2002), Slovakia (Fend’a 2010), Spain (Iraola <i>et al</i>. 1997), Switzerland (Airoldi <i>et al</i>. 1989), Ukraine (Livshitz & Kuznetsov 1972). North America: Mexico (Denmark & Evans 2011), USA (Congdon 2002). South America: Chile (Trincado <i>et al</i>. 2018).</p> <p> <b>Remarks.</b> The species is distributed worldwide, except in Oceania. It is a native predator of spider mites and thrips in Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region of China and is more adapted than nonnative species to hot and dry climates (Zhang <i>et al</i>. 2017). It was recently showed to be promising predator of the whitefly <i>Bemisia tabaci</i> (Han <i>et al.</i> 2020).</p>Published as part of <i>Liao, Jhih-Rong, Ho, Chyi-Chen & Ko, Chiun-Cheng, 2021, Predatory mites (Acari: Mesostigmata: Phytoseiidae) intercepted from samples imported to Taiwan, with description of a new species, pp. 301-330 in Zootaxa 4927 (3)</i> on page 306, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4927.3.1, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/4542155">http://zenodo.org/record/4542155</a&gt

    Typhlodromus (Anthoseius) vulgaris Ehara 1959

    No full text
    <i>Typhlodromus</i> (<i>Anthoseius</i>) <i>vulgaris</i> Ehara, 1959 <p> <i>Typhlodromus vulgaris</i> Ehara, 1959: 286.</p> <p> <b>Material examined.</b> Japan: one female (HAL 100B195) from <i>Vitis vinifera</i> (Vitaceae), 10 Nov 2011.</p> <p> <b>Previous records.</b> Asia: China [Hong Kong (Swirski & Shechter 1961)], Iran (Khalil-Manesh 1973), Japan (Ehara 1959), South Korea (Ryu & Ehara 1990). Europe: Russia (Sapozhnikova 1966).</p> <p> <b>Remarks.</b> The species is distributed in Asia and Europe. Kishimoto <i>et al</i>. (2013) reported that the species is considered as lifestyle Type III, generalist predator that could become an effective predator of spider mites and eriophyoid mites in field.</p>Published as part of <i>Liao, Jhih-Rong, Ho, Chyi-Chen & Ko, Chiun-Cheng, 2021, Predatory mites (Acari: Mesostigmata: Phytoseiidae) intercepted from samples imported to Taiwan, with description of a new species, pp. 301-330 in Zootaxa 4927 (3)</i> on page 315, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4927.3.1, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/4542155">http://zenodo.org/record/4542155</a&gt
    corecore