Neophysopelta Ahmad & Abbas, 1987

Stehlík, Jaroslav L., 2013, Review and reclassification of the Old World genus Physopelta (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Largidae), Acta Entomologica Musei Nationalis Pragae 53 (2), pp. 505-584 : 518-519

Subgenus Neophysopelta Ahmad & Abbas, 1987 , stat. nov.

Neophysopelta Ahmad & Abbas, 1987: 132 , 134–136, 138, 141–142 (key to genera, description, figures, phylogeny, distribution).

Type species: Cimex slanbuschii Fabricius, 1787 , original designation.

Note. AHMAD & ABBAS (1987) did not explicitely designate a type species for Neophysopelta , but in a comment on p. 136 they stated: ‘this species is at the moment the only species of the genus,’ which should be understood as designation of the type species by monotypy ( KERZHNER 2001).

Neophysopelta: PERVEEN & AHMAD (1991) : 161–162 (key to species, taxonomy); STEHLÍK & KERZHNER (1999): 121 (synonymized with Physopelta ).

Diagnosis. Body rather large, relatively narrow. Labium reaching between metacoxae. Antennomere 1 shorter than antennomere 2, much shorter than length of pronotum. Sexual dimorphism markedly developed. Callar lobe strongly gibbose in males, only slightly gibbose in females. Profemora strongly incrassate in males, ventrally provided with a longitudinal furrow along its entire length, bordered with a number of spines on both sides of the furrow ( Figs 19 , 98 ). Profemora distinctly more slender in females, with fewer spines. Protibia of males with a row of small denticles along its entire length but without any strong tooth ventrally near the apex. In females protibia unarmed.

The presence or absence of the longitudinal furrow and small denticles on the meso- and metafemora vary among the species of this subgenus. The small denticles as well as the longitudinal furrow may be present on the ventral surface of the mesofemora but missing on the metafemora, or be present on both the meso- and metafemora; in males, more rarely also in females, the denticles could be very small, or may be completely missing. There are also differences between allometric males with strongly expressed sexual characters and less developed specimens. In Physopelta slanbuschii ( Fabricius, 1803) , the meso- and metafemora lack any longitudinal furrow and denticles. In allometric males of Ph. trimaculata Stehlík & Jindra, 2008 with pronounced sexual characters, the tibiae are curved.

A stridulatory organ occurs in the form of a tooth on the ventral surface of the procoxa (strigil), and a flat, wrinkled area of cuticule on the protrochanter (plectrum) ( Figs 17−18 ). The peritreme of the metathoracic scent glands is roughly horizontal, ca. scimitar-shaped, with a rounded apex, from the ostiole directed posterolaterad ( Figs 20, 22 ). The paramere with its apex shorter and wider and its outer margin basally without angulate process ( Figs 30−34 ).

Comment. Neophysopelta Ahmad & Abbas, 1987 was established by AHMAD & ABBAS (1987) as a genus to accommodate a single species, Physopelta slanbuschii , distinguishing it from all the remaining Physopelta species. AHMAD & ABBAS (1987) distinguished Neophysopelta from Physopelta by the following characters: body bright red; covered with more silvery hairs and long black stiff hairs; antennomere 1 subequal to length of head; spermatheca with a long duct having many coils; paramere with middle dorsal lobe slightly above the middle portion. Physopelta was characterized: dull reddish ochraceous body covered with less silvery hairs and without long black stiff hairs; antennomere 1 distinctly longer than length of head; spermatheca with a short duct; and paramere with middle dorsal lobe more towards the proximal end ( AHMAD & ABBAS 1987). STEHLÍK & KERZHNER (1999) pointed out that all characters used for distinguishing Neophysopelta from Physopelta are variable within the genus, and therefore considered Neophysopelta as a junior subjective synonym of Physopelta. However, as Neophysopelta Ahmad & Abbas, 1987 is an available generic name for the clade of Physopelta which includes Ph. slanbuschii, it is redefined and restituted as a valid subgenus in the present paper.

Included species. The subgenus Neophysopelta in its revised sense includes 20 described species and two subspecies distributed in the East Palaearctic, Oriental, and Australian Regions from Afghanistan, Pakistan and Japan to New Guinea, Solomon Islands, and northern Australia. However, there are several undescribed species from New Guinea and surrounding islands available in collections.

Figures

Figs 17–19. Physopelta (Neophysopelta) gutta gutta (Burmeister, 1834), male. 17 – fore coxae and trochanters (magnification 50×), 18 – detail of procoxa and protrochanter (95×), 19 – ventral surface of profemur (37×). Scale bars: 0.5 mm. (SEM micrographs: P. Kment).

Figs 93–98. Kmentia festiva (Fabricius, 1803). 93 – female; 94 – male; 95–96 – fore leg (95 – large male, 96 – small male); 97 – ventral surface of profemur. 98 – Physopelta (Neophysopelta) gutta gutta (Burmeister, 1834), ventral surface of profemur. (Photos: L. Dembický).

Figs 20–25. Physopelta (Neophysopelta) gutta gutta (Burmeister, 1834), female. 20 – meso- and metapleuron with the external scent efferent system (magnification 30×); 21 – detail of ostiole (300×); 22 – ostiole, peritreme, and surrounding evaporatorium (130×); 23 – apical portion of peritreme in detail (300×); 24 – evaporatorium, detail of mycoid microsculpture mesad of the median furrow (1200×); 25 – peritreme, detail of microsculpture (smooth peritremal surface of median furrow left, spinules of the remaining peritremal surface right; 1200×). Lettering: ev – evaporatorium, mf – median furrow of peritreme, o – ostiole, pe – peritreme. Scale bars: 10 μm (Figs 24, 25), 50 μm (Figs 21, 23), 100 μm (Fig. 22), 500 μm (Fig. 20). (SEM micrographs: P. Kment).

Figs 30–34. Physopelta (Neophysopelta) gutta gutta (Burmeister, 1834), male, paramere (different orientations, magnification 190×). Scale bars: 0.2 mm. (SEM micrographs: P. Kment).