This paper represents the first redescription of Hemileius suramericanus (Hammer, 1958) (Oribatida, Scheloribatidae). Morphological and chaetotactic details are added to original Hammer's description. The species is compared with others Neotropical species of Hemileius and two new synonyms, H. laticlava and H. confundatus sensu Hammer, are proposed.Fil: Fredes, Natalia. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Departamento de Biología; ArgentinaFil: Martínez, Pablo Antonio. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Departamento de Biología; Argentin

Fredes, Natalia

Martínez, Pablo Antonio

English

LAReferencia - Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas Latinoamericanas

 2014                                         PERSIAN JOURNAL OF ACAROLOGY                                               249  Persian Journal of Acarology, Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 249–256.  Article  Redescription of Hemileius suramericanus (Acari, Oribatida, Scheloribatidae) with comments about Neotropical congeneric species Natalia A. Fredes & Pablo A. Martínez Departamento de Biología, Unversidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Argentina; E-mail: nfredes@mdp.edu.ar  Abstract This paper represents the first redescription of Hemileius suramericanus (Hammer, 1958) (Oribatida, Scheloribatidae). Morphological and chaetotactic details are added to original Hammer's description. The species is compared with others Neotropical species of Hemileius and two new synonyms, H. laticlava and H. confundatus sensu Hammer, are proposed.  Keywords: Morphology, chaetotaxy, Neotropical species, Argentina, new synonyms.  Introduction The knowledge of oribatid mites from South America was increased greatly with Mary Hammer's contributions (Hammer 1958; 1961; 1962a, b). Her investigations were carried out along the Andes Mountain in Argentina, Chile, Peru and Bolivia. In these works, about 300 new species of oribatid mites were described, but they were, in many cases, very short and uncompleted descriptions and focused mainly on dorsal and ventral characters of the adults, seldom analyzing lateral aspect, legs and palp chaetotaxy or gnathosoma. Among the species of South America, Hammer described several members of Scheloribatidae and particularly some species currently considered as Hemileius, such as Hemileius suramericanus.  The genus Hemileius was proposed by Berlese in 1916 with H. initialis (Berlese, 1908) as type species. In Neotropical region, it also been recorded H. proximus (Berlese, 1916), H. initialis (cited by Accattoli (2013)) and recorded by Hammer (1961, 1962a) as Hemileius confundatus (Sellnick, 1928), H. trichosus (Hammer, 1958) (also cited by Accattoli et al. (2010)), H. muscicola (Hammer, 1961), H. microclava (Hammer, 1961), H. major (Mahunka, 1985) and H. laticlava (Pérez-Iñigo & Baggio 1991). But morphological differences among some of them are very slight.  In Hammer's original description (1958), this species appeared as Oribatula (?Hemileius) suramericana; the author highlighted the presence of setae ro unilaterally ciliated, lamellae formed by two cross-linked border, sensilla with club-like head and short peduncle and presence of a double contour in the dorsosejugal suture. Balogh & Csiszár (1963) found it in El Bolsón, Río Negro, Argentina and cited it as Hemileius suramericanus. Recently, Fredes & Martínez (2010) analyzed reproductive aspects and body size variation of a population of H. suramericanus from soil of a native forest in Buenos Aires. Hemileius suramericanus represents a very abundant species in soils of Buenos Aires, recording in densities ranging from 7500 to 10000 ind./m2 (Fredes & Martínez 250          FREDES & MARTÍNEZ: REDESCRIPTION OF HEMILEIUS SURAMERICANUS           2014  2010). The aim of this paper is to redescribe H. suramericanus, contributing with morphological aspects to a reliable identification. Taxonomical revision of Neotropical Hemileius species and comparison with H. suramericanus are discussed. Materials & methods Specimens were collected in “Nahuel Rucá” farm, Mar Chiquita district (37° 37' 10.35'' S, 57° 25' 18.34'' W), Buenos Aires, Argentina, July 2008. Samples were kept in Berlese funnels during 12 days; specimens were determinated with microscope Olympus CX31. Sketches were performed with a drawing tube and were processed in software Gimp 2.8. Selected specimens were mounted in a stub of aluminum, sputter-coated with gold (100 Å thick) for one minute and observed in electronic microscope JSM 6460LV (JEOL). The morphological terminology follows that of F. Grandjean (Travé & Vachon 1975).  Results Scheloribatidae Grandjean, 1933 Hemileius Berlese, 1916 Hemileius suramericanus (Hammer, 1958) Integument. Adult individuals pale yellowish to brown in color, integument smooth with pits in the anterior region of notogaster; cerotegument only in podosomatic and bothridial regions. Adult size (n= 40). Female length= 335–417 μm (mean= 374); width= 189–277 μm (mean= 231). Male length= 308–395 μm (mean= 350); width= 172–266 μm (mean 208). Prodorsum. Rostrum rounded, ending in a delicate hook in lateral view; setae ro, le and in setiform smooth; presence of a slightly visible line before setae in (Fig. 3A); sensilla club-shaped with a short peduncle and scarce barbs; lamellar system fully developed formed by lamellae, sublamellae and prolamellae; lamellae thin and marginal; sublamellae thinner than lamellae; prolamellae as thick as sublamellae, reaching setae ro insertion, continuing until the border of the camerostome (Fig. 1C); carinae kf present; setae ex setiform and tiny; porose areas Al absent. Gnathosoma. Subcapitulum diarthric; chelicerae normal; setae cha and chb located as in H. initialis. Palp formula: 0-2-1-3-8(+1ω); setae vt present; eupathidic setae not arranged in a plane. Notogaster. Oval in shape (Fig. 1A); anterior margin of notogaster quasi-straight, with an humeral border formed by a fold of notogastral shield, projecting beyond the level of acetabula III (Fig. 3A, 3C) and stretching after this level (Fig. 3B, white arrow). This kind of border has been described previously in H. initialis (Grandjean, 1953); ten pairs of smooth and setiform setae; four pairs of sacculi located as in Dometorina; lyrifissures im oblique, lyrifissures ia and ip undetectable. Anterior and posterior region with a series of sigillae, located as shown in Fig. 1A. Ventral region. Epimeral region with a pattern of irregular sigillae; pedotecta I and II well developed, being the last one scale-shaped (Figs. 1B, 1C); epimeral formula 3-1-3-3, setae 1c observable in lateral view; circumpedal carinae present; ventral plate smooth; lyrifissures iad located lateral to anterior part of anal plates; 4 pairs of genital setae, 1 pair of aggenital, 2 pairs of anal and 3 pairs of adanal setae located as shown in Fig. 1B.  2014                                         PERSIAN JOURNAL OF ACAROLOGY                                               251  Legs. Tarsi tridactylous; femora with sigillae in paraxial face; presence of porose areas in all tibiae and tarsi; solenidia of tibiae I and II arising from an anterior protuberance (Fig. 2A, 2B); all tarsi with a notorious lyrifissures ly (Figs. 2A–D). Setation: I (1-5-3-4-18+1); II (1-5-2-4-15); III (2-3-1-3-15); IV (1-2-1-3-12); solenidia: I (1-2-2); II (1-1-2); III (1-1-0); IV (1-1-0). Immature. Unknown.  Figure 1. Adult of Hemileius suramericanus (Hammer, 1958). A. Dorsal view of body; B. Ventral view of body; C. Prodorsum in lateral view.  Knowing distribution. Semicosmopolitan; Neotropical region: Argentina, Bolivia, Galapagos Islands (Schatz 1998), Uruguay (Altesor et al. 2006) and Holarctic region (Subías 2004).  Material. Argentina, Buenos Aires, Mar Chiquita district (Nahuel Rucá farm 37° 37' 10.35'' S, 57° 25' 18.34'' W), 10 specimens (5 males and 5 females) (MACN-Ar 31440). Specimens were preserved in alcohol. The specimens will be kept in the Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales (MACN), Buenos Aires, Argentina. Discussion  This paper represents the first redescription of H. suramericanus, providing the first SEM images and a complete description of gnathosoma and leg setation.  A B C 50μm 20μm 252          FREDES & MARTÍNEZ: REDESCRIPTION OF HEMILEIUS SURAMERICANUS           2014   Figure 2. Legs of adults of Hemileius suramericanus (Hammer, 1958). A. Leg I right, antiaxial aspect; B. Leg II left, antiaxial aspect; C. Leg IV right, antiaxial aspect; D. Leg III left, antiaxial aspect.  From the revision of bibliographic material of all Neotropical species of Hemileius, we noted a higher resemblances among H. suramericanus, H. confundatus sensu Hammer (1961) and H. laticlava. In the following paragraphs, we summarize the knowledge of these species, and we discuss their similarities. Hemileius confundatus, considered a junior synonym of H. initialis by Subías (2004), was recorded by Hammer from Machu Picchu, Perú (Hammer 1961) and La Serena, Chile (Hammer 1962a). Analyzing the figure provided (Hammer 1961, Fig. 78), H. confundatus resembles to H. suramericanus. The characteristic sigillae in the anterior and posterior regions of notogaster, and also several pits on the anterior region of the notogaster can be observed, as is described for H. suramericanus in the present paper. We consider that H. confundatus sensu Hammer could represent a misidentification, and the specimens found by Hammer are actually H. suramericanus. Therefore, we proposed to consider H. confundatus sensu Hammer (1961, 1962a) as junior synonym of H. suramericanus. Hemileius laticlava, described from material collected in Brazil (Pérez-Iñigo & Baggio 1991), can be distinguished from other Hemileius by having sensilla with an enlarged and club-shaped head. Nevertheless, the shape of sensilla of H. laticlava illustrated looks like H. proximus, (Mahunka & Mahunka-Papp 1995, Fig. 89) and H. suramericanus (Hammer 1958, Fig. 80 and Figs. 3A, 3C, 3D of this paper) ones. A B C D 20μm  2014                                         PERSIAN JOURNAL OF ACAROLOGY                                               253  Therefore, sensilla club-shape solely does not represents a distinctive characteristic of H. laticlava. Beside this argument, three differences can distinguish this species from the type species H. initialis: H. laticlava has lateral prodorsum epimeric region with sigillae and its carinae kf is arched and quite developed (Pérez-Iñigo & Baggio 1991, Figs. 7 & 9). Considering the new morphological details of H. suramericanus provided here, taken into account that the hitherto characteristics are also present in it, and in absence of any other distinctive character in H. laticlava, we propose to consider H. laticlava as junior synonym of H. suramericanus.  Figure 3. Adults of Hemileus suramericanus (Hammer, 1958). A. Dorsal view of body, scale bar = 50 μm; B. Lateral view of body, scale bar = 50 μm; C. Detail of prodorsum in lateral view, scale bar = 20 μm; D. Detail of tibia and tarsus I, scale bar = 10 μm; E. Frontal view, scale bar = 50 μm.  Other Neotropical records of Hemileius include: H. major, from The Lesser Antilles, H. muscicola (Hammer, 1961), from Perú, H. microclava (Hammer, 1961), A B C D E 254          FREDES & MARTÍNEZ: REDESCRIPTION OF HEMILEIUS SURAMERICANUS           2014  from Perú and Panamá, H. trichosus (Hammer, 1958), from Bolivia, H. initialis (Berlese, 1908) and H. proximus (Berlese, 1916), from Argentina and Paraguay. The majority of them have very short and simple descriptions that complicate their mutual comparison; however, it is possible to make a brief comparison with H. suramericanus.  Hemileius major was characterized by its large size and long interlamellar setae. On lateral view, there is not carinae kf but a fully developed lamellar–sublamellar– prolamellar system can also be observed (Mahunka 1985, Fig. 118). This species differs from H. suramericanus mainly in its larger body size, the degree of development of the carinae kf, strongly reduced in the former, and in the shape of the sublamella, more delicate in H. major. Considering the original description, the most notorious characteristic of H. trichosus is its long interlamellar setae, its slimmer sensilla and its size (holotype length = 640 μm), but from the analysis of specimens collected in grassland soils of Buenos Aires, new distinctive characteristics arise. First, H. trichosus has a hardly discernible sublamellar ridge that runs from the region above setae ex to the middle of lamella. The ratio of length of interlamellar setae against length of prodorsum, a character remarked by Hammer, is about 0.9 in H. trichosus and only 0.4 in H. suramericanus. Secondly, H. trichosus is larger species (female 635 μm (n= 1) and male 530 μm (n= 1)). According to Grandjean’s redescription (1953), H. initialis differs from H. suramericanus by having on lateral view, a short and poorly developed carinae kf and a conspicuous porose area Al; on femora of all legs H. suramericanus has sigillae (Figs. 3A-D) and on genua IV it has only one seta (seta l'' is absent). The notogaster of H. initialis is smooth (Grandjean 1953, Fig. 1), whereas H. suramericanus presents a sort of sigillae in anterior and posterior region of it. The data about H. muscicola and H. microclava are insufficient and redundant, but we can distinguished from H. suramericanus mainly because both do not have notogastral setae and the shape of the sensilla is quite remarkable, similar to the typical sensilla found in several species of Scheloribates. Finally, Hemileius proximus, as Pérez-Iñigo (1984) already pointed out, represents a poorly known species. Mahunka & Mahunka-Papp (1995) observed Berlese’s material, but they could not certainly affirm that this specimen belongs to Hemileius. Until the identity of this species be confirmed we suggest referring it as species inquirenda.  Conclusion Considering the arguments present above, the synonymy list of H. suramericanus is as follows: Hemileius suramericanus (Hammer, 1958) Oribatula (?Hemileius) suramericana Hammer, 1958 Scheloribates confundatus Sellnick, 1928: in Hammer (1961, 1962a) syn. nov. Hemileius suramericanus: in Balogh & Csiszár (1963) Hemileius laticlava Pérez-Iñigo & Baggio, 1991 syn. nov.  References Accattoli, C. (2013) Oribátidos (Acari: Oribatida) de la Selva Marginal de Punta Lara, Buenos Aires, Argentina. Revista de la Sociedad Entomologica Argentina, 72: 75–82. Accattoli, C., Salazar Martínez, A. & Schnack, J. (2010) Nuevos registros de ácaros  2014                                         PERSIAN JOURNAL OF ACAROLOGY                                               255  oribátidos (Acari: Oribatida) para la Argentina. Revista de la Sociedad Entomologica Argentina, 69: 293–298. Altesor, A., Piñeiro, G., Lezama, F., Jackson, R.B., Sarasola, M. & Paruelo, J.M. (2006) Ecosystem changes associated with grazing in subhumid South American grasslands. Journal of Vegetation Science, 17: 323–332. Balogh, J. & Csiszár, J. (1963) The zoological results of Gy. Topal’s Collectings in South Argentina. 5. Oribatei (Acarina). Annales Historico-Naturales Musei Nationales Hungarici, 55: 463–485. Fredes, N.A. & Martínez, P.A. (2010) Tamaño corporal y fecundidad de Hemileius suramericanus (Acari: Oribatida) en un bosque nativo del sudeste de Buenos Aires. Ecología Austral, 20: 293–301. Grandjean, F. (1953) Sur les genres “Hemileius” Berl. et “Siculobata” ng. (Acariens, Oribates). Memoires du Museum National d'histoire Naturelle, Serie A, Zoologie, 6: 117–137. Hammer, M. (1958) Investigations on the oribatid fauna of the Andes Mountains I. The Argentine and Bolivia. Biologiske Skrifter Det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskab, 10: 1–262. Hammer, M. (1961) Investigations on the oribatid fauna of the Andes Mountains II. Peru. Biologiske Skrifter Det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskab, 13: 1–200. Hammer, M. (1962a) Investigations on the oribatid fauna of the Andes Mountains. III. Chile. Biologiske Skrifter Det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskab, 13: 1–96. Hammer, M. (1962b) Investigations on the oribatid fauna of the Andes Mountains. IV. Patagonia. Biologiske Skrifter Det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskab, 13: 1–35. Mahunka, S. (1985) Mites (Acari) from St. Lucia (Antilles). 2. Oribatida. Acta Zoologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, 31: 119–178. Mahunka, S. & Mahunka-Papp, L. (1995) The oribatid species described by Berlese (Acari). Hungary Natural History Museum, Budapest, 325 pp. Pérez-Iñigo, C. (1984) Hemileius hierrensis n. sp. de ácaro oribátido (Acari, Oribatei, Oribatulidae) de la Isla Hierro (Canarias). Boletin de la Asociación española de Entomología, 8: 167–173. Pérez-Iñigo, C. & Baggio, D. (1991) Oribates édaphiques du Brésil (VI) oribates de l’état de São Paulo. III. Acarologia, 32: 79–92. Schatz, H. (1998) Oribatid mites of the Galápagos Islands – faunistics, ecology and speciation. Experimental and Applied Acarology, 22: 373–409. Subías, L. (2004) Listado sistemático, sinonímico y biogeográfico de los ácaros oribátidos (Acariformes, Oribatida) del mundo (1758-2002). Graellsia, 60: 3–305. Travé, J. & Vachon, M. (1975) François Grandjean, 1882-1975 (Notice biographique et bibliographique). Acarologia, 17: 1–19.  Received: 30 July 2014 Accepted: 20 August 2014 Published: 15 October 2014 COPYRIGHT Fredes & Martínez. Persian Journal of Acarology is under free license. This open-access article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons-BY-NC-ND which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. 256          FREDES & MARTÍNEZ: REDESCRIPTION OF HEMILEIUS SURAMERICANUS           2014   (Hemileius suramericanus (Acari, Oribatida, Scheloribatidae بازتوصیف  جنس نئوتروپیکالهاي همهمراه با تفسیرهایی در مورد گونه    پابلو اي. مارتینزو  ناتالیا اي. فردس    nfredes@mdp.edu.arدل پالتا، آرژانتین؛ رایانامه:  ملی ماردانشگاه شناسی، زیستگروه   هچکید ,Hemileius suramericanus (Hammer, 1958) (Oribatidaمقاله حاضر نخستین بازتوصیف گونۀ Scheloribatidae) شناسی و کتوتاکسی به توصیف اصلی هامر افزوده کند. جزئیات ریختارایه می را .Hد، مقایسه و دو مترادف جدی Hemileiusهاي نئوتروپیکال جنس شود. این گونه با دیگر گونهمیlaticlava  وH. confundatus sensu Hammer      .در نظر گرفته شد    هاي جدید.ادفرهاي نئوتروپیکال، آرژانتین، متشناسی، کتوتاکسی، گونهریخت واژگان کلیدي:       8/5/1393: افتیدر خیتار 29/5/1393: رشیپذ خیتار32/7/1393: چاپ خیتار  

Redescription of Hemileius suramericanus (Acari, Oribatida, Scheloribatidae) with comments about Neotropical congeneric species

CONICET Digital

 2014                                         PERSIAN JOURNAL OF ACAROLOGY                                               249  Persian Journal of Acarology, Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 249–256.  Article  Redescription of Hemileius suramericanus (Acari, Oribatida, Scheloribatidae) with comments about Neotropical congeneric species Natalia A. Fredes & Pablo A. Martínez Departamento de Biología, Unversidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Argentina; E-mail: nfredes@mdp.edu.ar  Abstract This paper represents the first redescription of Hemileius suramericanus (Hammer, 1958) (Oribatida, Scheloribatidae). Morphological and chaetotactic details are added to original Hammer's description. The species is compared with others Neotropical species of Hemileius and two new synonyms, H. laticlava and H. confundatus sensu Hammer, are proposed.  Keywords: Morphology, chaetotaxy, Neotropical species, Argentina, new synonyms.  Introduction The knowledge of oribatid mites from South America was increased greatly with Mary Hammer's contributions (Hammer 1958; 1961; 1962a, b). Her investigations were carried out along the Andes Mountain in Argentina, Chile, Peru and Bolivia. In these works, about 300 new species of oribatid mites were described, but they were, in many cases, very short and uncompleted descriptions and focused mainly on dorsal and ventral characters of the adults, seldom analyzing lateral aspect, legs and palp chaetotaxy or gnathosoma. Among the species of South America, Hammer described several members of Scheloribatidae and particularly some species currently considered as Hemileius, such as Hemileius suramericanus.  The genus Hemileius was proposed by Berlese in 1916 with H. initialis (Berlese, 1908) as type species. In Neotropical region, it also been recorded H. proximus (Berlese, 1916), H. initialis (cited by Accattoli (2013)) and recorded by Hammer (1961, 1962a) as Hemileius confundatus (Sellnick, 1928), H. trichosus (Hammer, 1958) (also cited by Accattoli et al. (2010)), H. muscicola (Hammer, 1961), H. microclava (Hammer, 1961), H. major (Mahunka, 1985) and H. laticlava (Pérez-Iñigo & Baggio 1991). But morphological differences among some of them are very slight.  In Hammer's original description (1958), this species appeared as Oribatula (?Hemileius) suramericana; the author highlighted the presence of setae ro unilaterally ciliated, lamellae formed by two cross-linked border, sensilla with club-like head and short peduncle and presence of a double contour in the dorsosejugal suture. Balogh & Csiszár (1963) found it in El Bolsón, Río Negro, Argentina and cited it as Hemileius suramericanus. Recently, Fredes & Martínez (2010) analyzed reproductive aspects and body size variation of a population of H. suramericanus from soil of a native forest in Buenos Aires. Hemileius suramericanus represents a very abundant species in soils of Buenos Aires, recording in densities ranging from 7500 to 10000 ind./m2 (Fredes & Martínez 250          FREDES & MARTÍNEZ: REDESCRIPTION OF HEMILEIUS SURAMERICANUS           2014  2010). The aim of this paper is to redescribe H. suramericanus, contributing with morphological aspects to a reliable identification. Taxonomical revision of Neotropical Hemileius species and comparison with H. suramericanus are discussed. Materials & methods Specimens were collected in “Nahuel Rucá” farm, Mar Chiquita district (37° 37' 10.35'' S, 57° 25' 18.34'' W), Buenos Aires, Argentina, July 2008. Samples were kept in Berlese funnels during 12 days; specimens were determinated with microscope Olympus CX31. Sketches were performed with a drawing tube and were processed in software Gimp 2.8. Selected specimens were mounted in a stub of aluminum, sputter-coated with gold (100 Å thick) for one minute and observed in electronic microscope JSM 6460LV (JEOL). The morphological terminology follows that of F. Grandjean (Travé & Vachon 1975).  Results Scheloribatidae Grandjean, 1933 Hemileius Berlese, 1916 Hemileius suramericanus (Hammer, 1958) Integument. Adult individuals pale yellowish to brown in color, integument smooth with pits in the anterior region of notogaster; cerotegument only in podosomatic and bothridial regions. Adult size (n= 40). Female length= 335–417 μm (mean= 374); width= 189–277 μm (mean= 231). Male length= 308–395 μm (mean= 350); width= 172–266 μm (mean 208). Prodorsum. Rostrum rounded, ending in a delicate hook in lateral view; setae ro, le and in setiform smooth; presence of a slightly visible line before setae in (Fig. 3A); sensilla club-shaped with a short peduncle and scarce barbs; lamellar system fully developed formed by lamellae, sublamellae and prolamellae; lamellae thin and marginal; sublamellae thinner than lamellae; prolamellae as thick as sublamellae, reaching setae ro insertion, continuing until the border of the camerostome (Fig. 1C); carinae kf present; setae ex setiform and tiny; porose areas Al absent. Gnathosoma. Subcapitulum diarthric; chelicerae normal; setae cha and chb located as in H. initialis. Palp formula: 0-2-1-3-8(+1ω); setae vt present; eupathidic setae not arranged in a plane. Notogaster. Oval in shape (Fig. 1A); anterior margin of notogaster quasi-straight, with an humeral border formed by a fold of notogastral shield, projecting beyond the level of acetabula III (Fig. 3A, 3C) and stretching after this level (Fig. 3B, white arrow). This kind of border has been described previously in H. initialis (Grandjean, 1953); ten pairs of smooth and setiform setae; four pairs of sacculi located as in Dometorina; lyrifissures im oblique, lyrifissures ia and ip undetectable. Anterior and posterior region with a series of sigillae, located as shown in Fig. 1A. Ventral region. Epimeral region with a pattern of irregular sigillae; pedotecta I and II well developed, being the last one scale-shaped (Figs. 1B, 1C); epimeral formula 3-1-3-3, setae 1c observable in lateral view; circumpedal carinae present; ventral plate smooth; lyrifissures iad located lateral to anterior part of anal plates; 4 pairs of genital setae, 1 pair of aggenital, 2 pairs of anal and 3 pairs of adanal setae located as shown in Fig. 1B.  2014                                         PERSIAN JOURNAL OF ACAROLOGY                                               251  Legs. Tarsi tridactylous; femora with sigillae in paraxial face; presence of porose areas in all tibiae and tarsi; solenidia of tibiae I and II arising from an anterior protuberance (Fig. 2A, 2B); all tarsi with a notorious lyrifissures ly (Figs. 2A–D). Setation: I (1-5-3-4-18+1); II (1-5-2-4-15); III (2-3-1-3-15); IV (1-2-1-3-12); solenidia: I (1-2-2); II (1-1-2); III (1-1-0); IV (1-1-0). Immature. Unknown.  Figure 1. Adult of Hemileius suramericanus (Hammer, 1958). A. Dorsal view of body; B. Ventral view of body; C. Prodorsum in lateral view.  Knowing distribution. Semicosmopolitan; Neotropical region: Argentina, Bolivia, Galapagos Islands (Schatz 1998), Uruguay (Altesor et al. 2006) and Holarctic region (Subías 2004).  Material. Argentina, Buenos Aires, Mar Chiquita district (Nahuel Rucá farm 37° 37' 10.35'' S, 57° 25' 18.34'' W), 10 specimens (5 males and 5 females) (MACN-Ar 31440). Specimens were preserved in alcohol. The specimens will be kept in the Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales (MACN), Buenos Aires, Argentina. Discussion  This paper represents the first redescription of H. suramericanus, providing the first SEM images and a complete description of gnathosoma and leg setation.  A B C 50μm 20μm 252          FREDES & MARTÍNEZ: REDESCRIPTION OF HEMILEIUS SURAMERICANUS           2014   Figure 2. Legs of adults of Hemileius suramericanus (Hammer, 1958). A. Leg I right, antiaxial aspect; B. Leg II left, antiaxial aspect; C. Leg IV right, antiaxial aspect; D. Leg III left, antiaxial aspect.  From the revision of bibliographic material of all Neotropical species of Hemileius, we noted a higher resemblances among H. suramericanus, H. confundatus sensu Hammer (1961) and H. laticlava. In the following paragraphs, we summarize the knowledge of these species, and we discuss their similarities. Hemileius confundatus, considered a junior synonym of H. initialis by Subías (2004), was recorded by Hammer from Machu Picchu, Perú (Hammer 1961) and La Serena, Chile (Hammer 1962a). Analyzing the figure provided (Hammer 1961, Fig. 78), H. confundatus resembles to H. suramericanus. The characteristic sigillae in the anterior and posterior regions of notogaster, and also several pits on the anterior region of the notogaster can be observed, as is described for H. suramericanus in the present paper. We consider that H. confundatus sensu Hammer could represent a misidentification, and the specimens found by Hammer are actually H. suramericanus. Therefore, we proposed to consider H. confundatus sensu Hammer (1961, 1962a) as junior synonym of H. suramericanus. Hemileius laticlava, described from material collected in Brazil (Pérez-Iñigo & Baggio 1991), can be distinguished from other Hemileius by having sensilla with an enlarged and club-shaped head. Nevertheless, the shape of sensilla of H. laticlava illustrated looks like H. proximus, (Mahunka & Mahunka-Papp 1995, Fig. 89) and H. suramericanus (Hammer 1958, Fig. 80 and Figs. 3A, 3C, 3D of this paper) ones. A B C D 20μm  2014                                         PERSIAN JOURNAL OF ACAROLOGY                                               253  Therefore, sensilla club-shape solely does not represents a distinctive characteristic of H. laticlava. Beside this argument, three differences can distinguish this species from the type species H. initialis: H. laticlava has lateral prodorsum epimeric region with sigillae and its carinae kf is arched and quite developed (Pérez-Iñigo & Baggio 1991, Figs. 7 & 9). Considering the new morphological details of H. suramericanus provided here, taken into account that the hitherto characteristics are also present in it, and in absence of any other distinctive character in H. laticlava, we propose to consider H. laticlava as junior synonym of H. suramericanus.  Figure 3. Adults of Hemileus suramericanus (Hammer, 1958). A. Dorsal view of body, scale bar = 50 μm; B. Lateral view of body, scale bar = 50 μm; C. Detail of prodorsum in lateral view, scale bar = 20 μm; D. Detail of tibia and tarsus I, scale bar = 10 μm; E. Frontal view, scale bar = 50 μm.  Other Neotropical records of Hemileius include: H. major, from The Lesser Antilles, H. muscicola (Hammer, 1961), from Perú, H. microclava (Hammer, 1961), A B C D E 254          FREDES & MARTÍNEZ: REDESCRIPTION OF HEMILEIUS SURAMERICANUS           2014  from Perú and Panamá, H. trichosus (Hammer, 1958), from Bolivia, H. initialis (Berlese, 1908) and H. proximus (Berlese, 1916), from Argentina and Paraguay. The majority of them have very short and simple descriptions that complicate their mutual comparison; however, it is possible to make a brief comparison with H. suramericanus.  Hemileius major was characterized by its large size and long interlamellar setae. On lateral view, there is not carinae kf but a fully developed lamellar–sublamellar– prolamellar system can also be observed (Mahunka 1985, Fig. 118). This species differs from H. suramericanus mainly in its larger body size, the degree of development of the carinae kf, strongly reduced in the former, and in the shape of the sublamella, more delicate in H. major. Considering the original description, the most notorious characteristic of H. trichosus is its long interlamellar setae, its slimmer sensilla and its size (holotype length = 640 μm), but from the analysis of specimens collected in grassland soils of Buenos Aires, new distinctive characteristics arise. First, H. trichosus has a hardly discernible sublamellar ridge that runs from the region above setae ex to the middle of lamella. The ratio of length of interlamellar setae against length of prodorsum, a character remarked by Hammer, is about 0.9 in H. trichosus and only 0.4 in H. suramericanus. Secondly, H. trichosus is larger species (female 635 μm (n= 1) and male 530 μm (n= 1)). According to Grandjean’s redescription (1953), H. initialis differs from H. suramericanus by having on lateral view, a short and poorly developed carinae kf and a conspicuous porose area Al; on femora of all legs H. suramericanus has sigillae (Figs. 3A-D) and on genua IV it has only one seta (seta l'' is absent). The notogaster of H. initialis is smooth (Grandjean 1953, Fig. 1), whereas H. suramericanus presents a sort of sigillae in anterior and posterior region of it. The data about H. muscicola and H. microclava are insufficient and redundant, but we can distinguished from H. suramericanus mainly because both do not have notogastral setae and the shape of the sensilla is quite remarkable, similar to the typical sensilla found in several species of Scheloribates. Finally, Hemileius proximus, as Pérez-Iñigo (1984) already pointed out, represents a poorly known species. Mahunka & Mahunka-Papp (1995) observed Berlese’s material, but they could not certainly affirm that this specimen belongs to Hemileius. Until the identity of this species be confirmed we suggest referring it as species inquirenda.  Conclusion Considering the arguments present above, the synonymy list of H. suramericanus is as follows: Hemileius suramericanus (Hammer, 1958) Oribatula (?Hemileius) suramericana Hammer, 1958 Scheloribates confundatus Sellnick, 1928: in Hammer (1961, 1962a) syn. nov. Hemileius suramericanus: in Balogh & Csiszár (1963) Hemileius laticlava Pérez-Iñigo & Baggio, 1991 syn. nov.  References Accattoli, C. (2013) Oribátidos (Acari: Oribatida) de la Selva Marginal de Punta Lara, Buenos Aires, Argentina. Revista de la Sociedad Entomologica Argentina, 72: 75–82. Accattoli, C., Salazar Martínez, A. & Schnack, J. (2010) Nuevos registros de ácaros  2014                                         PERSIAN JOURNAL OF ACAROLOGY                                               255  oribátidos (Acari: Oribatida) para la Argentina. Revista de la Sociedad Entomologica Argentina, 69: 293–298. Altesor, A., Piñeiro, G., Lezama, F., Jackson, R.B., Sarasola, M. & Paruelo, J.M. (2006) Ecosystem changes associated with grazing in subhumid South American grasslands. Journal of Vegetation Science, 17: 323–332. Balogh, J. & Csiszár, J. (1963) The zoological results of Gy. Topal’s Collectings in South Argentina. 5. Oribatei (Acarina). Annales Historico-Naturales Musei Nationales Hungarici, 55: 463–485. Fredes, N.A. & Martínez, P.A. (2010) Tamaño corporal y fecundidad de Hemileius suramericanus (Acari: Oribatida) en un bosque nativo del sudeste de Buenos Aires. Ecología Austral, 20: 293–301. Grandjean, F. (1953) Sur les genres “Hemileius” Berl. et “Siculobata” ng. (Acariens, Oribates). Memoires du Museum National d'histoire Naturelle, Serie A, Zoologie, 6: 117–137. Hammer, M. (1958) Investigations on the oribatid fauna of the Andes Mountains I. The Argentine and Bolivia. Biologiske Skrifter Det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskab, 10: 1–262. Hammer, M. (1961) Investigations on the oribatid fauna of the Andes Mountains II. Peru. Biologiske Skrifter Det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskab, 13: 1–200. Hammer, M. (1962a) Investigations on the oribatid fauna of the Andes Mountains. III. Chile. Biologiske Skrifter Det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskab, 13: 1–96. Hammer, M. (1962b) Investigations on the oribatid fauna of the Andes Mountains. IV. Patagonia. Biologiske Skrifter Det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskab, 13: 1–35. Mahunka, S. (1985) Mites (Acari) from St. Lucia (Antilles). 2. Oribatida. Acta Zoologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, 31: 119–178. Mahunka, S. & Mahunka-Papp, L. (1995) The oribatid species described by Berlese (Acari). Hungary Natural History Museum, Budapest, 325 pp. Pérez-Iñigo, C. (1984) Hemileius hierrensis n. sp. de ácaro oribátido (Acari, Oribatei, Oribatulidae) de la Isla Hierro (Canarias). Boletin de la Asociación española de Entomología, 8: 167–173. Pérez-Iñigo, C. & Baggio, D. (1991) Oribates édaphiques du Brésil (VI) oribates de l’état de São Paulo. III. Acarologia, 32: 79–92. Schatz, H. (1998) Oribatid mites of the Galápagos Islands – faunistics, ecology and speciation. Experimental and Applied Acarology, 22: 373–409. Subías, L. (2004) Listado sistemático, sinonímico y biogeográfico de los ácaros oribátidos (Acariformes, Oribatida) del mundo (1758-2002). Graellsia, 60: 3–305. Travé, J. & Vachon, M. (1975) François Grandjean, 1882-1975 (Notice biographique et bibliographique). Acarologia, 17: 1–19.  Received: 30 July 2014 Accepted: 20 August 2014 Published: 15 October 2014 COPYRIGHT Fredes & Martínez. Persian Journal of Acarology is under free license. This open-access article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons-BY-NC-ND which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.  4102           SUNACIREMARUS SUIELIMEH FO NOITPIRCSEDER :ZENÍTRAM & SEDERF          652  )eaditabirolehcS ,aditabirO ,iracA( sunaciremarus suielimeH ﺑﺎزﺗﻮﺻﯿﻒ  ﺟﻨﺲ ﻧﺌﻮﺗﺮوﭘﯿﮑﺎلﻫﺎي ﻫﻢﻫﻤﺮاه ﺑﺎ ﺗﻔﺴﯿﺮﻫﺎﯾﯽ در ﻣﻮرد ﮔﻮﻧﻪ    ﭘﺎﺑﻠﻮ اي. ﻣﺎرﺗﯿﻨﺰو  ﻧﺎﺗﺎﻟﯿﺎ اي. ﻓﺮدس    ra.ude.pdm@sederfnدل ﭘﻼﺗﺎ، آرژاﻧﺘﯿﻦ؛ راﯾﺎﻧﺎﻣﻪ:  ﻣﻠﯽ ﻣﺎرداﻧﺸﮕﺎه ﺷﻨﺎﺳﯽ، زﯾﺴﺖﮔﺮوه   هﭼﮑﯿﺪ ,aditabirO( )8591 ,remmaH( sunaciremarus suielimeHﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﻧﺨﺴﺘﯿﻦ ﺑﺎزﺗﻮﺻﯿﻒ ﮔﻮﻧﮥ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﯽ و ﮐﺘﻮﺗﺎﮐﺴﯽ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻮﺻﯿﻒ اﺻﻠﯽ ﻫﺎﻣﺮ اﻓﺰوده ﮐﻨﺪ. ﺟﺰﺋﯿﺎت رﯾﺨﺖاراﯾﻪ ﻣﯽ را )eaditabirolehcS .Hﺪ، ﻣﻘﺎﯾﺴﻪ و دو ﻣﺘﺮادف ﺟﺪﯾ suielimeHﻫﺎي ﻧﺌﻮﺗﺮوﭘﯿﮑﺎل ﺟﻨﺲ ﺷﻮد. اﯾﻦ ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺑﺎ دﯾﮕﺮ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﻣﯽ  در ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪ.      remmaH usnes sutadnufnoc .Hو  avalcital  ﻫﺎي ﺟﺪﯾﺪ.ادفﺮﻫﺎي ﻧﺌﻮﺗﺮوﭘﯿﮑﺎل، آرژاﻧﺘﯿﻦ، ﻣﺘﺷﻨﺎﺳﯽ، ﮐﺘﻮﺗﺎﮐﺴﯽ، ﮔﻮﻧﻪرﯾﺨﺖ واژﮔﺎن ﮐﻠﯿﺪي:       3931/5/8: ﺎﻓﺖﯾدر ﺦﯾﺗﺎر 3931/5/92: ﺮشﯾﭘﺬ ﺦﯾﺗﺎر  3931/7/23: ﭼﺎپ ﺦﯾﺗﺎر

http://ri.conicet.gov.ar/bitstream/11336/34858/2/CONICET_Digital_Nro.0eec8786-4eb4-4dcd-b2c4-b9dafd0253f1_A.pdf

Redescription of Hemileius suramericanus (Acari, Oribatida, Scheloribatidae) with comments about Neotropical congeneric species

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

LAReferencia - Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas Latinoamericanas

CONICET Digital