Paratachardina mithila Varshney

Kondo, Takumasa & Gullan, Penny J., 2007, Taxonomic review of the lac insect genus Paratachardina Balachowsky (Hemiptera: Coccoidea: Kerriidae), with a revised key to genera of Kerriidae and description of two new species, Zootaxa 1617, pp. 1-41 : 17-18

Paratachardina mithila Varshney

Paratachardina mithila Varshney, 1968: 489 ; 1977: 58.

Paratachardina mithilae Varshney, 1997: 30 . Incorrect subsequent spelling [see 'Notes'].

Type data. Holotype, adult female. INDIA: Assam, Shillong, in the gardens of Ward Lake, coll. R. K. Varshney, i.1967, on Photinia notoniana var. macrophylla . Paratypes: same data as holotype except some specimens coll. vi.1967 or viii.1970 ( NZSI). [Types not seen; see 'Notes'.]

Adult female

The following descriptions of unmounted and mounted material are adapted from Varshney (1977). Unmounted material. Lac test of adult female almost round, brownish black, with three small openings on top for brachial and anal orifices; with 16 conspicuous longitudinal ridges that divide the test into sectors; a circular spot on the middle of each ridge, probably corresponding to marginal duct cluster openings.

Mounted material. Body trilobed, 2.5–3.0 mm long, 2.8–3.0 mm wide. Brachia short, 103 µm long. Each brachial plate oval, distal half slightly larger, each 68–120 µm long, 51–70 µm wide; pseudospines totalling 44–50, occupying about two-thirds area of brachial plate center, with gaps on upper large portion. Anterior spiracles each 137 µm long, 86 µm wide, situated far away from brachial plates, spiracular pores with 5- loculi. Dorsal spine small, conical, 68–70 µm long, with a hollow, not pointed tip; membranous pedicel of dorsal spine well developed, 70–103 um long and 70–103 µm wide. Anal tubercle well developed, 86–170 µm long, 120–140 µm wide; supra-anal plate subequal or slightly longer than its maximum width. Anal ring not divided in sectors; supra-anal plate forming a cup-shaped cavity. Anal fringe of few acute lobes, with narrow and deep clefts. Anal ring setae just reach, or slightly protrude past anal fringe. Antennae minute and obscure. Marginal duct clusters in 8 pairs, each roughly round, poorly demarcated, with ducts arranged irregularly. Ventral duct clusters present.

Notes. Subsequent to his original description, Varshney (1997) listed the species name as " mithilae " rather than " mithila ", without giving an explanation for his action. Varshney's (1968, 1977) descriptions do not specify the etymology of the name " mithila ", and do not indicate whether it should be regarded as a noun or an adjective. According to the Article 31.2.2 of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature ( ICZN 1999), the name “ mithila ” becomes a noun in apposition and should be retained as " mithila ". Even though Varshney (personal communication) emended " mithila " to " mithilae " because the species was named after a woman, articles 31, 32 and 33 of the ICZN (1999) make it clear that such an alteration to the species name is an incorrect subsequent spelling, as recognised by Ben-Dov (2006).

According to Varshney (1977), this species is similar to P. t h e a e, from which it can be separated due to its larger adult female size, anal tubercle subequal in length and width, and pedicel of the dorsal spine not much longer than the length of the spine itself. Type material of P. mithila was not available in the present study, as we did not receive a reply to our request for a loan from the NZSI, and no type material or non-type topotypic specimens could be located in any other museum. Varshney (1977) gave a key to separate P. mithila and P.

theae as follows ( Varshney 1977: 56, key couplet number 4):

– Anal tubercle slightly longer than its maximum width; pedicel of dorsal spine as long as spine itself ........ ............................................................................................................................................................ mithila – Anal tubercle distinctly broader than its maximum length; pedicel of dorsal spine much longer than the spine ....................................................................................................................................................... theae

However, Varshney’s (1977) description of P. mithila overlaps with his description of P. t h e a e in the character states used to separate them in the key. The minimum length and width of the anal tubercle of P. mithila given by Varshney’s (1977) description is 86 µm and 120 µm, respectively, in which case, there must be specimens for which the anal tubercle is distinctly broader than its maximum length. On the other hand, the anal tubercle in the syntypes of P. t h e a e herein studied are approximately as long as wide, with some specimens being slightly longer than wide, and others being slightly wider than long. Furthermore, the length of the pedicel of the dorsal spine also varies in P. t h e a e and sometimes is about the same length as the spine. Specimens from China collected on the same host genus as P. m i t h i l a, i.e., on Photinia benthamiana , were available for study (see 'Other material studied' under P. t h e a e), but these could not be separated morphologically from P. t h e a e. Thus adult females of P. mithilae and P. t h e a e appear similar in all features considered and the two species cannot be separated with the available information (see also 'Diagnosis' of P. ternata ).