10,946 research outputs found
A new Eumerus hoverfly (Diptera: Syrphidae) from Namibia and South Africa with notes on similar species
No full textRicarte, Antonio, Hauser, Martin, Kinnee, Scott, Marcos-García, Ángeles (2020): A new Eumerus hoverfly (Diptera: Syrphidae) from Namibia and South Africa with notes on similar species. Zootaxa 4890 (4): 493-508, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4890.4.
Identification of Nipaecoccus (Hemiptera: Coccomorpha: Pseudococcidae) species in the United States, with descriptions of Nipaecoccus bromelicola sp. n. and the male of N. floridensis Beardsley
No full textEllenrieder, Natalia Von, Watson, Gillian W., Kinnee, Scott A. (2018): Identification of Nipaecoccus (Hemiptera: Coccomorpha: Pseudococcidae) species in the United States, with descriptions of Nipaecoccus bromelicola sp. n. and the male of N. floridensis Beardsley. Zootaxa 4444 (2): 163-178, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4444.2.
FIGURE 5. Nipaecoccus floridensis Beardsley. Male, U.S.A in Identification of Nipaecoccus (Hemiptera: Coccomorpha: Pseudococcidae) species in the United States, with descriptions of Nipaecoccus bromelicola sp. n. and the male of N. floridensis Beardsley
No full textFIGURE 5. Nipaecoccus floridensis Beardsley. Male, U.S.A., California, San Bernardino County, in nursery on Fan palm, deposited at CSCA. Enlargements of structures are not drawn to scale.Published as part of Ellenrieder, Natalia Von, Watson, Gillian W. & Kinnee, Scott A., 2018, Identification of Nipaecoccus (Hemiptera: Coccomorpha: Pseudococcidae) species in the United States, with descriptions of Nipaecoccus bromelicola sp. n. and the male of N. floridensis Beardsley, pp. 163-178 in Zootaxa 4444 (2) on page 174, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4444.2.5, http://zenodo.org/record/130959
FIGURE 10 in A new Eumerus hoverfly (Diptera: Syrphidae) from Namibia and South Africa with notes on similar species
No full textFIGURE 10. Eumerus vestitus, females, paralectotypes, frons (A, B), antennae and eyes (C, D). A, C: specimen with typical E. vestitus morphology; B, D: outlier specimen (non-conspecific?). Scale bar = 0.5 mm.Published as part of Ricarte, Antonio, Hauser, Martin, Kinnee, Scott & Marcos-García, Ángeles, 2020, A new Eumerus hoverfly (Diptera: Syrphidae) from Namibia and South Africa with notes on similar species, pp. 493-508 in Zootaxa 4890 (4) on page 505, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4890.4.3, http://zenodo.org/record/430650
FIGURE 2 in Identification of Nipaecoccus (Hemiptera: Coccomorpha: Pseudococcidae) species in the United States, with descriptions of Nipaecoccus bromelicola sp. n. and the male of N. floridensis Beardsley
No full textFIGURE 2. Nipaecoccus bromelicola sp. n. Holotype female, U.S.A., California, Santa Barbara County, in nursery on Tillandsia sp., deposited at CSCA. Enlargements of structures are not drawn to scale.Published as part of Ellenrieder, Natalia Von, Watson, Gillian W. & Kinnee, Scott A., 2018, Identification of Nipaecoccus (Hemiptera: Coccomorpha: Pseudococcidae) species in the United States, with descriptions of Nipaecoccus bromelicola sp. n. and the male of N. floridensis Beardsley, pp. 163-178 in Zootaxa 4444 (2) on page 168, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4444.2.5, http://zenodo.org/record/130959
Paracoccus leucadendri Mazzeo & Franco in Mazzeo, Franco & Russo, 2009, a junior synonym of Paracoccus hakeae (Williams, 1985) comb. nov. (Coccomorpha: Pseudococcidae)
No full textEllenrieder, Natalia Von, Watson, Gillian W., Kinnee, Scott A., Franco, José C., Mazzeo, Gaetana (2016): Paracoccus leucadendri Mazzeo & Franco in Mazzeo, Franco & Russo, 2009, a junior synonym of Paracoccus hakeae (Williams, 1985) comb. nov. (Coccomorpha: Pseudococcidae). Zootaxa 4093 (4): 552-558, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4093.4.
FIGURE 4 in Identification of Nipaecoccus (Hemiptera: Coccomorpha: Pseudococcidae) species in the United States, with descriptions of Nipaecoccus bromelicola sp. n. and the male of N. floridensis Beardsley
No full textFIGURE 4. Nipaecoccus floridensis Beardsley. Macroscopic appearance. Adult females, immature females, crawlers and spent male cocoons on Fan palm, from a nursery in U.S.A., California, San Bernardino County.Published as part of Ellenrieder, Natalia Von, Watson, Gillian W. & Kinnee, Scott A., 2018, Identification of Nipaecoccus (Hemiptera: Coccomorpha: Pseudococcidae) species in the United States, with descriptions of Nipaecoccus bromelicola sp. n. and the male of N. floridensis Beardsley, pp. 163-178 in Zootaxa 4444 (2) on page 172, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4444.2.5, http://zenodo.org/record/130959
Eumerus lyneborgi Ricarte & Hauser & Kinnee & Marcos-García 2020, sp. nov.
No full textRemarks on Eumerus lyneborgi sp. nov. and similar species Eumerus lyneborgi sp. nov. is similar to E. vestitus Bezzi, 1912 in body size and constitution, predominantly pollinose frons, with punctured pollinosity (females), swollen metafemur, with two ventral rows of short black spinae, one antero-apically and other postero-apical, lateral margins of terga III and IV pollinose, and tergum IV widely pollinose posteriorly. Bezzi (1912) described E. vestitus based on males and females from ‘ Guinea Portoguese’ (nowadays, Guinea-Bissau), supposedly the male and three females the authors of the present paper found in the MCSNG collection. These specimens are all labelled as ‘syntypus’ and a female has an additional label of ‘Typus’. Bezzi (1912) did not mention a holotype or type specimen for his new species in the description. Thus, according to articles 73.1.1 and 73.1.2 of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (1999), this ‘Typus’ is not a valid holotype and therefore all specimens are syntypes. In addition, no subsequent type designation for E. vestitus is known to the authors of the present paper. In the past, curators sometimes labelled arbitrarily as ‘Typus’ the best looking specimen within the type series (M.A. Alonso-Zarazaga in lit.), and this is likely to be the case for this ‘Typus’ specimen. Thus, lectotype designation is possible for this nominal species in order to stabilise this species concept, especially because it is a mixed type series and the newly described species in this paper is similar to E. vestitus. Thus, we here designate the male specimen as lectotype (Fig. 9). All other specimens (females) become automatically paralectotypes (Figs 10, 11). All specimens of the type series, except for one are recognised to be conspecific. The outlier specimen (female paralectotype) has (1) denser and longer eye pilosity (eye with very short and scattered pile in the other two females) (Fig. 10C, D), (2) slight but obvious pollinosity surrounding posterior ocelli (this same area is shiny or nearly so in the other two females), (3) individual dots of frontal pollinosity very small (larger in the other females) (Fig. 10A, C), (4) basoflagellomere tapering dorsally for the apical two thirds (for the apical half or less, in the other two females) (Fig. 10C, D), (5) metatibia bumped ventrally (less bumped, tending to straight, in the other two females), (6) apex of metatibia without short black spinae (apex of metatibia with two short black spinae in the other two females) (Fig. 11). This outlier female is similar to the female of E. obliquus (Fabricius 1805) (widespread in Africa) and E. figurans Walker, 1859 (not recorded from Africa). However, it differs from that of E. obliquus in the pollinose vertex (broadly shiny in E. obliquus), wide pollinose posterior margin of scutellum (much narrower to almost absent in E. obliquus), narrow diagonal vittae of terga III and IV (wider in E. obliquus), and shiny posterior margin of tergum IV (extensively pollinose in E. obliquus); and differs from the female of E. figurans in the pollinose vertex and occiput (vertex and occiput shiny in E. figurans), the densely and homogeneously pollinose frons (frons with a medial line of sparser pollinosity in E. figurans), and the short spinae of the anteroapical row of metafemur (longer spinae in E. figurans). The outlier specimen did not key out with Lyneborg’s manuscript key to the Afrotropical species of Eumerus, and might represent an undescribed sister species of E. vestitus. However, we decided not to describe it as a separate taxon due to the absence of other specimens, including males with conspecific morphology. Additional examined material of other Eumerus species. Type series of the nominal species, Eumerus vestitus Bezzi, 1912. Lectotype: 1³, GUINEA PORTOGUESE, Rio Cassine, XII.1899 – IV.1900. L. Fea (part of the date crossed out as indicated) / SYNTYPUS ³ Eumerus vestitus Bezzi, 1912 (on pink label). Paralectotypes: 1♀, GUINEA POR- TOGUESE, Rio Cassine, XII.1899 – IV.1900. L. Fea (part of the date crossed out as indicated) / vestitus Bezzi / TYPUS (printed in red) / Eumerus vestitus n. sp. (handwritten on a pink label; ‘ n. sp. ’ is an interpretation of the actual label lettering) / SYNTYPUS ♀ Eumerus vestitus Bezzi, 1912 (on pink label) / Museo Civico di Genova; 2♀, GUINEA PORTOGUESE, Rio Cassine, XII.1899 – IV.1900. L. Fea (part of the date crossed out as indicated) / SYNTYPUS ♀ Eumerus vestitus Bezzi, 1912 (on pink label) / Museo Civico di Genova [MCSNG]. The male syntype lacks the antennae and the right prolegs, and the head is pasted to thorax in its original position. The female syntype labelled as ‘typus’ lacks the left basoflagellomere, while another female lacks the left metatarsus. There were specimens from Egypt, donated by Becker to Bezzi and found by this latter author that they were erroneously identified as E. obliquus, mentioned in the original description, which we could not locate. Additional material of Eumerus vesti-tus: 2³, 1♀, Egypt, Cairo, Gizera, 24.ix.1992, leg. M. Hauser [CSCA]; 1³, Egypt, Luxor, Westbank of Nile river 25.694N 32,628E, 1.iv.2018 leg Schmid-Egger [CSCA]; 1³, Tunisia, Monastir, 15km S Sousse, 28.vi.1994, leg. M. Hauser (first record of E. vestitus from Tunisia) [CSCA]. Eumerus obliquus: AFRICA. 1♀, ‘Cap. B. Spei.’ [South Africa, Cape of Good Hope], Coll. H. Loew, obliquus F (hand written); 1³, Africa, Coll. H. Loew [ZMB]; 1♀ [published in Marcos-García et al. (2013)], Île de la Réunion (France), Les Avirons, 24.vi.2010, Leg.: N. Estela Ribera, Det. as E. obliquus by A. Ricarte & M.A. Marcos-García in 2010 (CEUA00105083) [CEUA]; 1³, 2♀, Mozambique, Sofala Prov. Gorongosa Park, small lake, 18°56’39»S 34°26’35»E, 300m, ex Malaise, 19–30.iv.2015 leg. M. Hauser & A. Rung [CSCA]; 1³, Zambia Southern Prov., Livingston, 17.842 S 15.857 E, 960m, 1.v.2016, leg M. Hauser & CJ Borkent [CSCA]; 1³, Zambia, Northern Prov. 8.8 km WSW Kakumbi, S Luangwa NP, 22–26.iv. 2016, 525m, 13.115 S 31.726 E, Malaise trap, leg. M. Hauser, CJ Borkent & DM Ndalamei [CSCA]; 1³, Mali 30 km N Bamako, 20.vii.1991, leg. M. Schwarz [CSCA]; 1³, Ghana, Northern Region, Mole National Park, 165m, 09°15’33»N 01°51’43»W, Malaise trap, 28–30.iv.2014 leg. S. Gaimari & M. Hauser [CSCA]; 1³, Tunisia, Monastir, 15km S Sousse, 28.vi. 1994, leg. M. Hauser [CSCA]. AUSTRA-LIA. 1♀ with puparium, Palmwoods, nr Nambour, Qld, C. Hayward, emerged 17.v.1986, ex rotting guava infested with larvae of Dacus tryoni (UQIC Reg #94996) [CSCA]. EUROPE. 1♀, Spain (mainland), Alicante, San Juan, 01.iv.2020, Leg. M.A. Marcos; 1♀ [published in Ricarte et al. (2008)], Spain, Balearic Islands, Mallorca, Ses Salines, P/ 29.x.2005, Leg.: M.A. Marcos-García (#6844), Det. as E. obliquus by A. Ricarte in 2006 (CEUA00084841). Eumerus obliquus is widespread all over Africa, also found in the Canary and various Mediterranean islands, as well as in mainland Europe: Spain (first records in the present paper), southern France and Italy (Speight 2020). This species is also introduced in Australia and South America (Garcete-Barrett et al. 2020). A female of Eumerus punctifrons Loew, 1857 with the following data: Tunis, 62285 [ZMB]. Photos of the holotype of Eumerus figurans Walker, 1859 at the Natural History Museum, London, available at https://www.nhm.ac.uk/.Published as part of Ricarte, Antonio, Hauser, Martin, Kinnee, Scott & Marcos-García, Ángeles, 2020, A new Eumerus hoverfly (Diptera: Syrphidae) from Namibia and South Africa with notes on similar species, pp. 493-508 in Zootaxa 4890 (4) on pages 502-503, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4890.4.3, http://zenodo.org/record/430650
Nipaecoccus bromelicola Ellenrieder & Watson & Kinnee 2018, sp. n.
No full text<i>Nipaecoccus bromelicola</i> von Ellenrieder, Watson & Kinnee, sp. n. <p>(Figures 1–3)</p> <p> <b>Etymology.</b> We name this species <i>bromelicola</i> (from the Latin adjective meaning ‘inhabitant of bromeliads’) in reference to its host-plants, which belong to the family Bromeliaceae.</p> <p> <b>Type material. Holotype</b> adult female. U.S.A., California: Santa Barbara County, Carpinteria, in nursery on <i>Tillandsia</i> sp., 15.vii.2016, M. Taylor leg. [CSCA, PDR # 420P06463549]. <b>Paratypes</b>: 84 ♀, 10 ♂. 3 ♀, intercepted from Guatemala at San Diego County, Carlsbad, on <i>Tillandsia oaxacana</i>, 17.iv.1991, Neville leg. [CSCA, PDR # 807107]. 2 ♀, intercepted from Mexico on <i>Tillandsia gymnobotrya</i>, 14.ii.1996, D. Riley leg. [CSCA]. U.S.A.: San Diego County: 2 ♀, Chula Vista, in nursery on <i>Tillandsia</i> sp., 6.xi.1981, J. Kenyon leg. [CSCA, PDR # 85K8-14]; Los Angeles County: 13 ♀, Palos Verdes, in nursery on <i>Tillandsia baliophylla</i> and <i>Guzmania</i> sp., 5.xii.1978, Woods leg. [CSCA, PDR # 78L11-11]; Santa Barbara County: 16 ♀, Carpinteria, in nursery on <i>Tillandsia</i> sp., 15.vii.2016, M. Taylor leg. [CSCA, PDR # 420P06463549, including DNA vouchers 16V 450– 16V 453]; 1 ♀, same data but [BMNH]; 1 ♀, same data but [FSCA]; 1 ♀, same data but [HDOA]; 1 ♀, same data but [USNM]; 1 ♀, same data but [USDA-APHIS PPQ]; 2 ♀, 10 ♂, same data but 1.viii.2016 [CSCA, PDR # 420P06463545]; Madera County: 6 ♀, Coarsegold, in nursery on bromeliads, 27.x.1982, W.E. Carlson leg. [CSCA, PDR # 82K1-14]; 12 ♀, same data but 8.xi.1982 [CSCA, PDR # 82K8-45]; 1 ♀, same data but on <i>Tillandsia</i> sp., 4.ii.2000, Shima leg. [CSCA, PDR # 015367]; 6 ♀, same data but 25.xi.2002, Brar & Bueno leg. [CSCA, PDR # 040549]; 6 ♀, same data but 27.xi.2002, Brar & Bueno leg. [CSCA, PDR # 1220286]; San Mateo County: 1 ♀, Pacifica, in nursery on <i>Vriesea</i> sp., 2.viii.1990, Pummer leg. [CSCA, PDR # 937101]; 1 ♀, same data but on <i>Tillandsia</i> sp., 22.vii.1991, Solloway & Pummer leg. [CSCA, PDR # 967213]; 3 ♀, same data but on <i>Puya raimondii</i> [CSCA, PDR # 967213]; 3 ♀, same data but on <i>Tillandsia</i> sp., 26.vii.1991, Solloway leg. [CSCA, PDR # 967228]; 1 ♀, same data but on <i>Vriesea</i> sp., 16.iv.1997, M. Garibaldi leg. [CSCA, PDR # 937101]; 1 ♀, Oakland, in nursery on <i>Tillandsia</i> sp., 2.ii.1996, B. Rohn leg. [CSCA, PDR # 979151].</p> <p> <b>Description of adult female.</b> <i>Macroscopic appearance</i> (Fig. 1). Body of live adult female pale pink-orange, with a thin coating of powdery white wax on dorsum and paired lateral filaments of white wax on margins, filaments successively increasing in length gradually towards posterior end, with longest pair projecting from posterior-most segment. Color of body in alcohol pale pink-orange, not turning black or green when placed in ethanol or KOH.</p> <p> <i>Slide-mounted characters</i> (Fig. 2). Body of adult female oval, becoming larger and more rotund with age, 1.5 ± 0.4 [1.0] (0.9–2.3) mm long, maximum width (at metathorax) 0.9 ± 0.2 [0.6] (0.4–1.4) mm. Anal lobes moderately developed, each with an apical seta 142 ± 14 [152] (119–164) µm long. Antenna 241 ± 20 [222] (208–265) µm long, each with 7 segments. Legs well developed, hind tibia 97 ± 10 [92] (81–117) µm long, hind femur 107 ± 8 [110] (93–118) µm long, hind trochanter + femur 147 ± 12 [148] (124–164) µm long, hind tibia + tarsus 152 ± 14 [142] (131–181) µm long; claw well developed, 17 ± 2 [18] (14–19) µm long. Ratio of lengths of hind tibia + tarsus to hind trochanter + femur 1.0: 1.0 ± 0.05 [1.0: 1.0] (1.0: 0.9–1.0: 1.0). Ratio of lengths of hind tibia to tarsus 1.0: 1.7 ± 0.1 [1.0: 1.8] (1.0: 1.4–1.0: 2.0). Hind tibia distally with 5–10 [8] translucent pores, and hind coxa with 22–88 [29–32] translucent pores. Labium 86 ± 7 [75] (74–95) µm long (measured as l in Fig. 2); clypeolabral shield 125 ± 7 [119] (112–133) µm long (measured as c in Fig. 2); ratio of lengths of labium to clypeolabral shield 1.0: 1.5 ± 0.1 [1.0: 1.6] (1.0: 1.3–1.0: 1.7). Circulus present between SIII and SIV, undivided by intersegmental line, 40 ± 13 [45] (19–60) µm wide. Anterior and posterior ostioles moderately developed. Anal ring 63 ± 7 [64] (52–74) µm in diameter, with a double band of pores, bearing six setae, each seta 111 ± 8 [95] (95–124) µm long. Cerarii each containing 2 conical setae and a concentration of trilocular pores, numbering 12–14 pairs [13], present on all abdominal segments and on several cephalic and thoracic segments; if cerarii not recognizable, then 1 or more isolated marginal conical setae present in their positions. Anal lobe cerarii (C1) each containing 2 enlarged conical setae, each seta 18 ± 1.5 [19] (17–22) µm long, 2–4 auxiliary setae and a concentration of trilocular pores situated on a slightly sclerotized area; all other recognizable cerarii lacking auxiliary setae and situated on membranous cuticle.</p> <p> <b>Dorsum.</b> Slender lanceolate setae of two lengths present: shorter setae each about 7.2 µm long; longer setae each about 14.3 µm long. Multilocular pores and OR absent. Discoidal pores, each slightly smaller than a trilocular pore, scattered and scarce. Trilocular pores evenly distributed except absent from segmental folds.</p> <p> <b>Venter.</b> Setae normal, flagellate. Cisanal setae each 26 ± 3 [24] (21–29) µm long, obanal setae each 19 ± 2.5 [24] (15–24) µm long, anal lobe seta 142 ± 14 (119–165) µm long. Multilocular pores each 7.0 ± 0.4 µm [6.2] (6.2– 7.2) in diameter, present along margins from head to SVIII, sometimes present near front coxa, in medial area of abdomen on SV–VIII, and submedially on SIV–VII. Trilocular pores evenly distributed except absent from segmental lines and around coxal bases. Discoidal pores as on dorsum, scarce. OR absent. OC restricted to marginal areas, one per segment on head and thorax except for a small group opposite anterior coxa; on abdomen 1 per segment on SII and III, small groups of 2–6 OC of 2 sizes on SIV–VIII; larger type slightly wider than, and smaller type slightly narrower than a trilocular pore.</p>Published as part of <i>Ellenrieder, Natalia Von, Watson, Gillian W. & Kinnee, Scott A., 2018, Identification of Nipaecoccus (Hemiptera: Coccomorpha: Pseudococcidae) species in the United States, with descriptions of Nipaecoccus bromelicola sp. n. and the male of N. floridensis Beardsley, pp. 163-178 in Zootaxa 4444 (2)</i> on pages 164-166, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4444.2.5, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/1309596">http://zenodo.org/record/1309596</a>
Letter From William Bell Scott to Mr Chambers
No full textabstract: Concerning Scott's thanks, his writings about his own works, and a manuscript of "The Nightingale Unheard."Seller's Description: Reads "A.L.S. from Author to Mr. Chambers explaining how busy he is... The sonnet is printed in the book. Fredeman: 56.7 £87.50"Handwritten Note: Unknown handwriting at top right reads "June 1st 1877."Publication Details: "The Nightingale Unheard" published in "Poems" by William Bell Scott.Creation Date Details: Undated range is the author's lifespan.Provenance: Removed from:
Poems / by William Bell Scott. Ballads, studies from nature, sonnets, etc. / illustrated by seventeen etchings by the author and L. Alma Tadema. Publisher London : Longmans, Green, 1875. CALL #
HAYDEN SPECIAL COLL SPEC PRB-13
- …
