Arocatus longiceps Stål, 1872
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5281/zenodo.5352740 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:BBAC4FCE-495F-44AB-B249-13F56FACF695 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03CF9C3A-FFFE-FFEC-FECB-F370FD0FFA83 |
treatment provided by |
Tatiana |
scientific name |
Arocatus longiceps Stål, 1872 |
status |
|
Arocatus longiceps Stål, 1872 View in CoL
( Figs. 1A View Fig ; 2A–C View Fig )
Arocatus longiceps Stål, 1872: 42 View in CoL . Holotype (male): Greece; NHRS.
Arocatus grassii Picco, 1920: 101 View in CoL (syn. Stichel, 1959: 314). Syntype (s): Italy, Lazio; MCZR?
For detailed synonymy including infrasubspecific taxa, see Péricart (2001: 38).
References. — Stichel, 1957: 82 (keyed, redescription, host plant, distribution, intraspecific variability); Stichel, 1959: 314 (listed); Slater, 1964a: 20 (catalogue); Putshkov, 1969: 76 (redescription, larva, distribution, biology); Çağatay, 1995: 169 (male genitalia); Kondorosy, 1997: 249 ( Hungary record); Péricart, 1999a: 170 (redescription, habitus, larva, biology, distribution); Stehlík & Hradil, 2000: 99 (intraspecific variability, Czech Republic record); Péricart, 2001: 38 (catalogue); Kment & Bryja, 2001: 238 ( Slovakia record, host plants, distribution); Protić, 2001: 22 ( Slovenia, Serbia and Macedonia records); Bianchi & Štepanovičová, 2003: 75 (distribution); Hoffmann, 2003: 27 ( Switzerland record); Austin, 2006 (as A. roeselii View in CoL , Great Britain: Guernsey record); Aukema et al., 2007 (as A. roeselii View in CoL , Belgium record); Nau & Straw, 2007: 8 (as A. roeselii View in CoL , Great Britain record); Rieger, 2008: 29 (host plant); Ribes & Pagola-Carte, 2008: 353 ( Spain record); Barndt, 2008: 187 ( Germany: Berlin record); Aukema & Hermes, 2009: 71 ( Netherlands record); Göricke, 2008: 23 ( Portugal record); Linnavuori, 2011: 30 ( Iran record, host plant, distribution); Gil et al., 2011: 26 ( Poland record); Aukema et al., 2013: 354 (catalogue).
Diagnosis. — Pale species, ground colour varying from yellowish to orange or red. Antennae, and legs invariably concolorous with the ground colour. Vertex black, middle of head red to black, fore part of head red. Anterior half of pronotum red, hind part often red or with black punctures or with black spots or mostly black. Scutellum black with T-shaped red carina. Clavus red, corium often with indistinct dark areas except along margins; connexivum red. Body ventrally red except middle of thoracic sterna, sometimes abdominal sterna with a row of small black spots.
Type material examined. — Holotype, male: Graecia. // A. Dohrn (hw) // (red) Typus // Naturhistoriska / Riksmuseet / Stockholm / Loan no. 242/90 ( NHRS).
Additional material examined. — BULGARIA: 1 male ,
Blagoevgrad , 42°1'N 23°6'E, coll. Y. H. Wang, 25 Jun.2012, alt. 480 m ( NKUM) GoogleMaps ; GREECE: 3 males, 2 females, Attica, coll. Reitter ( HNHM) ; 1 female, Cyclades , coll. Krüper ( HNHM) ; 1 male, 1 female, Ins. Poros ( HNHM) ; HUNGARY: 1 male, Hőgyész , coll. E. Kondorosy, 9 Sep.1990 ( EKCK) ; 3 males, 2 females, Keszthely , coll. E. Kondorosy, 15 Nov.1992 ( EKCK) ; TURKEY: 1 male, Brussa [= Bursa], coll. Merkl ( HNHM) .
Host plants. — Recorded on Acer , Carpinus , Castanea , Tilia , Alnus and Platanus trees ( Protić, 2001; Nau & Straw, 2007; Rieger, 2008; Linnavuori, 2011). But we think the only sure food plant is Platanus .
Distribution. — Asia: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Cyprus, Iran, Israel, Turkey; Europe: Albania, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Great Britain, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Macedonia, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Russia (South European Territory), Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Switzerland, Ukraine (Kment & Bryja, 2001; Péricart, 2001; Protić, 2001; Hoffmann, 2003; Aukema et al., 2007, 2013; Nau & Straw, 2007; Göricke, 2008; Ribes & Pagola-Carte, 2008; Aukema & Hermes, 2009; Gil et al., 2011).
Discussion. — In the last years, the limits of A. longiceps and A. roeselii became uncertain, because the specimens found in Western Europe on Platanus showing the characters of A. roeselii together with typical longiceps specimens and some transitional exemplars ( Carayon, 1989; Barclay, 2007; Hoffmann, 2008). Hoffmann (2012) tried to find at least genetic difference between the both species but it was unsuccessful. Therefore the validity of A. longiceps is questionable. However, when check the genitalia of them, we find the pygophore opening is parallel in anterior part in A. longiceps , whereas anteriorly widened in A. roeselii ( Fig. 2A, D View Fig ). In addition, parameres are also different, e.g., base of blade nearly straight while in A. roeselii it is strongly convex ( Fig. 2B–C, E–F View Fig ). The decision needs further investigations.
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.