Type species of genera in Aphididae (Hemiptera Sternorrhyncha) with two new generic synonymies

P. 65-68The aphidologist community attending the Seventh International Symposium on Aphids in Fremantle (Western Australia, 2005) entrusted to us the preparation of a Part of the List of Available Names in Zoology devoted to the aphid genus-group taxa names, and this to be presented at the subsequent aphid symposium. During the course of our work (Nieto Nafría et al. 2009), we checked each genus to make sure its type species designation conformed to the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature 1999) ―henceforth The Code and The Commission―, and that these designations were correctly represented in the literature, especially the two most recent taxonomic catalogues (Eastop & Hille Ris Lambers 1976; Remaudière & Remaudière 1997). Previous authors have used most of the procedures of type fixation enumerated in The Code, The Commission itself has used its Plenary Powers to fix six type species, and 11 genus-group names remain without types (Table 1). In the recent aphid taxonomic catalogues (Eastop & Hille Ris Lambers op. cit.; Remaudière & Remaudière op. cit.), we found three errors caused by mistakes propagated in the literature and two errors caused by incorrect application of Article 11 of The Code. We have also found that in the case of 11 names, the criteria of Article 70.3 of The Code were not met, and regardless, earlier editions of The Code did not allow type designations of that kind (see the last paragraph of the example in Article 70.3). This article corrects the five errors and conforms the 11 aphid type species designations to the nomenclatural standards of The Code.S

Uroleucon (Uromelan) lehri Zaitzev, Lelej, Storozhenko & Kurzenko 2006, s. str.

Uroleucon (Uromelan) lehri Zaitzev, Lelej, Storozhenko & Kurzenko, 2006, nomen nudum In 2000 N.F. Pashtshenko began publishing a series of papers dedicated to aphids of the genus Uroleucon Mordvilko, 1914 from the Russian Far East. As she writes in the first publication: “The results of the study of the genus Uroleucon will be presented in a series of three papers; the first and second papers dealing with the subgenera Uroleucon s. str., Divium subgen. n., and Lambersius Olive, and third paper with the subgenus Uromelan Mordv. ” (Pashtshenko, 2000). However, only the first two works were published (Pashtshenko, 2000, 2001), and the third article dedicated to the subgenus Uromelan never saw the light for reasons unknown to me. However, Pashtshenko wrote "sp.n." on the labels of those species that she was going to describe in this article as new to science, and sent some of these slides with paratype designations to Dr. G. Remaudière for the collection of Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle. She labelled one of these species Uroleucon (Uromelan) lehri, in honor of her husband, the eminent Russian entomologist P.A. Lehr. Slides prepared by Pashtshenko are stored in the collection of the Institute of Biology and Soil Science FEB RAS, where she worked. When after the death of Lehr an article was prepared dedicated to his memory (Zaitsev et al., 2006), the name “ Uroleucon (Uromelan) lehri ” was included in the list of species described in honor of P.A. Lehr, based on labels on the slides of Pashtshenko. Since the species was not described, Favret (2013) rightly catalogued it as a nomen nudum. Ultimate length 111–170 119–134 rostral length / length of 2 nd segment of hind tarsus 0.81–1.17 0.83–0.96 segment length of base of last antennal segment 0.65–0.82 0.58–0.70 number of accessory setae 4–5 4–6 Length of hind femura 711–995 832–944 2 nd segment of hind length 109–161 129–157 tarsus length / length of base of last antennal segment 0.69–0.87 0.63–0.80 Setae on number 3–5 4–6 tergite length 43–63 41– 61 VIII length/ articular diameter of 3 rd antennal segment 1.21–1.91 0.86–1.26 Length of siphunculi 410–774 460–521 Length of distal polygonal reticulation on siphunculi/length of siphunculi 0.20–0.27 0.21–0.26 4 — after Hille Ris Lambers (1939), Heie (1995), Lampel (1980) and materials from collection of Zoological Institute RAS (14 apterous viviparous female from Murmansk Region, Russia). I have examined all slides from the collection of the Institute of Biology and Soil Science FEB RAS and collection of Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle that contain individuals designated by Pashtshenko as holotype and paratypes of U. lehri. Samples Nr 4091 and 4163, on the basis of which Pashtshenko was going to describe U. lehri, were collected respectively on 14 and 24 June 1981 to the southeast of the peak Aborigen in the Tenkinskiy district of Magadan region, on Astrocodon kruhseanus Fed. (= Campanula expansa Rudolph). In the first case, the dark brown aphids were located in the upper part of the plant, and in the second case the aphids were brown-black and black and fed on the stem. There are only 5 apterous viviparous females on the slides; 3 in sample Nr 4091 and 2 in sample Nr 4163. As can be seen from a comparison of morphometric data (Tabl. 5) specimens labelled by Pashtshenko with the name “ lehri ” are practically indistinguishable from Uroleucon (Uromelan) campanulae (Kaltenbach, 1843) and therefore should be attributed to this species.Published as part of Stekolshchikov, Andrey V., 2014, Taxonomic notes on some species and subspecies of aphids (Hemiptera: Aphididae), pp. 563-570 in Zootaxa 3760 (4) on pages 567-569, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3760.4.5, http://zenodo.org/record/22448

Dysaphis indica Chakrabarti & Medda 1993, new status

<i>Dysaphis indica</i> Chakrabarti & Medda, 1993, new status <p> This aphid has previously been treated as a subspecies of <i>Dysaphis pavlovskiana</i> Narzikulov, 1957. Chakrabarti and Medda (1993) described 53 apterous viviparous females collected from <i>Sorbus</i> in India (Uttar Pradesh, Garhwal Hills) as specimens of new subspecies— <i>Dysaphis pavlovskiana indica</i>. They noted that the new subspecies differs from the nominative taxon mainly in the lack of spines on the head, the greater length of the ultimate segment of rostrum, the slightly longer siphunculus and the fact that all the setae on the antennae were thin and pointed unlike those of the nominotypical subspecies, which has most of the setae on the antennae blunt or slightly capitate. Actually there is no description of the apterous vivipara in their paper, which only gives the differences listed above and measurements of several characters of the holotype. The authors also suggested that the seven alate and two apterous viviparous females and 30 nymphs which they collected on 16 September 1982 from <i>Saussurea piptathera</i> Edgew. (cited as <i>Saussurea pipethera</i> in their paper) in Uttar Pradesh (Garhwal Hills), as well as one alate female which they caught on 17 September 1982 on <i>Rhamnus dahurica</i> Pall. in Garhwal Hills refer to this subspecies. According to the authors the aphid was accidentally on <i>Rhamnus dahurica</i>. They also suggested that the alatae collected on <i>Saussurea</i> are gynoparae which should migrate to <i>Sorbus</i>. Indeed, judging by the description of alatae and apterous viviparous females from <i>Saussurea piptathera</i> given in the article and by the comparison of aphids from <i>Sorbus</i> and aphids from <i>Saussurea</i> made by the authors, these individuals all belong to one taxon.</p> <p> Hitherto <i>Dysaphis pavlovskiana</i>, sensu stricto was known from Eastern and Western Siberia, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Pakistan (Narzikulov 1957; Ivanovskaya, 1977; Gabrid, 1989; Kadyrbekov, 1990; Naumann-Etienne & Remaudière, 1995; Stekolshchikov & Shaposhnikov, 1998; Holman, 2009). Slides have now been studied of aphids collected by G. Remaudière on 17 June 1966 from <i>Sorbus graeca</i> (Lindl.) Fritsch & Rech. in Turkey (Konya, Ereğli) at an altitude of 2000 m above sea level and stored in the aphid collection of Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle.</p> <p> This sample contains four fundatrices, eight apterae and 34 alate viviparous females. These aphids are very similar to <i>D. pavlovskiana</i> housed in the Russian collections in all characters, differing from them only by the greater length of the ultimate segment of the rostrum and its relation to the length of 2nd segment of hind tarsus, as well as having more long setae on the body and appendages. However, if we consider the variation in these characters in different populations of <i>D. pavlovskiana</i> (Tabl. 1), we see that when going from north to south, not only the absolute length of the ultimate segment of the rostrum but its ratio to the length of 2nd segment of hind tarsus increases, and this phenomenon is more or less clearly expressed for all morphs for which it is possible to make a comparison. A similar, though less clearly expressed situation is observed with the length of setae. Individuals from Turkey are thus just an extreme variant on the line of these changes, conforming completely to this trend and undoubtedly belonging to the species <i>D. pavlovskiana</i>.</p> <p> The situation is different with <i>Dysaphis pavlovskiana indica</i> Chakrabarti & Medda, 1993. In <i>indica</i> the absolute length of the ultimate segment of the rostrum is greater than in <i>pavlovskiana</i> s.str., but the ratio of the length of the ultimate segment of the rostrum to the length of the second segment of hind tarsus does not differ (Table 1). In addition, <i>indica</i> differs from <i>pavlovskiana</i> in the following characters (apart from those listed in the original description): body length (<i>indica</i> longer), ratio of length of processus terminalis to length of base of last antennal segment (greater in <i>indica</i>, especially for the morph from <i>Saussurea</i>), longer cauda (at least for morph from secondary host), number of rhinaria on the segments of antenna of gynoparae (more in <i>indica</i>), and by some other characters (Table 2). Information about the length of setae of apterous females of <i>indica</i> from <i>Sorbus</i> is absent from the original description, but morphs of <i>indica</i> from the secondary host have longer setae than the respective morphs of <i>pavlovskiana</i>. However, as stated above, this character has no significant value in the taxonomy of this group. Apterous exules of <i>pavlovskiana</i> from <i>Plantago</i> are strongly sclerotized, with sclerotic bands from meso- or metathorax to VII abdominal tergite fused with marginal sclerites and forming a complete dorsal shield. Apterae of <i>indica</i> from <i>Saussurea</i> are almost unsclerotized, having only a sclerotized band on abdominal tergite VIII. The secondary host of <i>indica</i> is <i>Saussurea</i>, whereas <i>pavlovskiana</i> migrates from <i>Sorbus</i> to <i>Plantago</i> (Shaposhnikov, 1974; Stekolshchikov & Shaposhnikov, 1998). These significant differences between <i>indica</i> and <i>pavlovskiana</i> in morphology and, more importantly, in biology (a different secondary host) indicate that it as a separate species— <i>Dysaphis indica</i> Chakrabarti & Medda, 1993 <b>(new status).</b></p> <p> <i>D. indica</i> is undoubtedly very closely related to <i>D. pavlovskiana</i> and they have a common ancestor that may have migrated from <i>Sorbus</i> in the second and third generation to a more-or-less wide range of secondary hosts. This ancestor had a long ultimate segment of the rostrum, long thin setae, slightly swollen or unswollen siphunculi, and strongly sclerotized apterous viviparous females on <i>Sorbus</i> and on secondary hosts. After separation <i>D.indica</i> apparently remained in a relatively narrow area within the Himalayas, while <i>D. pavlovskiana</i> became widespread in Eurasia—from Turkey to Eastern Siberia. As already pointed out (Stekolshchikov & Shaposhnikov, 1998), the spread of <i>D. pavlovskiana</i> from south to north was accompanied by some changes in its morphology and, more importantly, in its biology; both emigrants and apterous viviparous females are among the offspring of the fundatrix in populations of Tajikistan and Turkey (in Tajikistan apterae are found on <i>Sorbus</i> until the 5th generation), but there are no apterae on Sorbus in the Kazakhstan and East Siberian populations, the fundatrix producing only alatae females—emigrants.</p>Published as part of <i>Stekolshchikov, Andrey V., 2014, Taxonomic notes on some species and subspecies of aphids (Hemiptera: Aphididae), pp. 563-570 in Zootaxa 3760 (4)</i> on pages 563-565, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3760.4.5, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/224483">http://zenodo.org/record/224483</a&gt

Revision of the genus Neoceruraphis Shaposhnikov, 1956 (Hemiptera: Aphididae)

Stekolshchikov, Andrey V. (2022): Revision of the genus Neoceruraphis Shaposhnikov, 1956 (Hemiptera: Aphididae). Zootaxa 5159 (1): 23-63, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5159.1.

FIGURES 1 – 8 in Redescription and lectotype designation of Sitobion (Metobion) graminearum (Mordvilko) (Hemiptera: Aphididae)

FIGURES 1 – 8. Sitobion (Metobion) graminearum, apterous viviparous female. 1, body; 2, frons; 3, antennae; 4, base of 3 rd antennal segment; 5, ultimate segment of rostrum, 6, hind tarsus; 7, siphunculus; 8, cauda

Miyazakia, a new aphid genus from Japan (Hemiptera: Aphididae: Macrosiphini)

Stekolshchikov, Andrey V. (2014): Miyazakia, a new aphid genus from Japan (Hemiptera: Aphididae: Macrosiphini). Zootaxa 3861 (6): 575-584, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3861.6.

A contribution to the aphid fauna (Hemiptera, Aphidoidea) of Republic of Mali

Stekolshchikov, Andrey V. (2022): A contribution to the aphid fauna (Hemiptera, Aphidoidea) of Republic of Mali. Zootaxa 5183 (1): 423-438, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5183.1.3

Taxonomic notes on some species and subspecies of aphids (Hemiptera: Aphididae)

Stekolshchikov, Andrey V. (2014): Taxonomic notes on some species and subspecies of aphids (Hemiptera: Aphididae). Zootaxa 3760 (4): 563-570, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3760.4.

Aphis taraxacicola Borner 1940

Aphis taraxacicola (Börner, 1940) Aphis plantaginis asiatica Daniyarova, 1979, syn. n. In 1979 M.M. Daniyarova published an article devoted to the first record of Aphis plantaginis Goetze, 1778 in Tajikistan (Daniyarova, 1979). Apterous and alatae viviparous females of this species, according to Daniyarova, were found in the spring of 1973 and 1974 on root parts and on leaves of Taraxacum officinale Wigg. Daniyarova described the collected morphs and compared them with individuals of Aphis plantaginis from Czechoslovakia and Uzbekistan, which she had at her disposal. She noted that the Tajik aphids differ from Czechoslovak aphids by having shorter hind tibiae (650–820 for aphids from Tajikistan and 890–950 for aphids from Czechoslovakia), by greater sclerotization of cuticle, darker color of cauda, by presence of marginal tubercles on the first five abdominal segments, by different ratio of length of processus terminalis to the length of 3 rd antennal segment, and by shorter siphunculi (240–350 for aphids from Tajikistan and 400–450 for aphids from Czechoslovakia). Aphids from Uzbekistan, according Daniyarova, are very similar to the Tajik aphids and differ from them only in that 3 rd and 4 th antennal segments and base of 6 th antennal segment of apterous viviparous females from Uzbekistan are the same length (equivalent measurements of a single individual from Tajikistan for which Daniyarova gave exact data are 3 rd antennal segment—280, 4th— 190, base of 6 th antennal segment— 110), and alatae from Uzbekistan have secondary rhinaria only on 3 rd antennal segment (aphids from Tajikistan have secondary rhinaria both the 3 rd and the 4 th antennal segments). On the basis of the great similarity between aphids from Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, and their differences from aphids from Czechoslovakia, Daniyarova described Central Asian aphids as a separate subspecies— Aphis plantaginis asiatica. She suggested that the differences between aphids from Tajikistan and Uzbekistan could be caused by their development on different food plants. Later the same data were published in the work of Narzikulov and Daniyarova (1990). This subspecies was not included in the catalog of Remaudière and Remaudière (1997), and was not mentioned in the work of Blackman and Eastop (2006). Holman (2009) also did not mention this subspecies in his catalog, but he did record Aphis taraxacicola from Tajikistan on Taraxacum officinale among the data about distribution and food specialization of Aphis taraxacicola (Börner, 1940), referring to Daniyarova (1979) and Narzikulov and Daniyarova (1990) and noting in parentheses that the species was determined by the authors as plantaginis. All the samples from Tajikistan studied by Daniyarova were collected in the spring, when there is an active migration of aphids to new plants and many alatae were present in the colonies. In this situation, a large number of individuals that are intermediate between alatae and apterae may be present in the colonies. Apterous viviparous females described by Daniyarova have a wide sclerotized band on the mesothorax, a sclerotized margins to the metathorax and rhinaria on the antennae, morphological characters that are found in alatiform individuals. Daniyarova described her new subspecies and compared it with other materials on the basis of a very small number of specimens, but even these data are sufficient to conclude that these individuals are morphologically indistinguishable from Aphis taraxacicola (Börner, 1940) (Tables 3 and 4). Therefore it is clear that Holman was right to consider this Taraxacum -feeding aphid to be A. taraxacicola, and, accordingly, A. plantaginis asiatica Daniyarova, 1979 should be made a synonym of A. taraxacicola (Börner, 1940). 1 — only one specimen 2 — after Heie, 1986 3 — data differ in works of Daniyarova (1979) and Narzikulov and Daniyarova (1990). Measurements of one individual are given in both papers and all measurement data for all characters coincide in these publications, except for the length of the ultimate segment of rostrum (in Daniyarova (1979) - 110, in Narzikulov and Daniyarova (1990) - 120).Published as part of Stekolshchikov, Andrey V., 2014, Taxonomic notes on some species and subspecies of aphids (Hemiptera: Aphididae), pp. 563-570 in Zootaxa 3760 (4) on pages 565-567, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3760.4.5, http://zenodo.org/record/22448

FIGURES 1 – 7 in Miyazakia, a new aphid genus from Japan (Hemiptera: Aphididae: Macrosiphini)

FIGURES 1 – 7. Miyazakia ranunculi (Miyazaki, 1971), apterous viviparous female: 1, habitus; 2, front of head; 3, antennae; 4, ultimate segment of rostrum; 5, hind tarsus; 6, siphunculus; 7, cauda