Euseius hibisci (Chant)
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4048.2.2 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:DA85433F-27C6-4D5B-9243-F40B46B30C1D |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5625995 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03952D6D-CA7A-FF9C-FF41-C9794BA5FB1F |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Euseius hibisci (Chant) |
status |
|
Euseius hibisci (Chant) View in CoL
Typhlodromus (Amblyseius) hibisci Chant, 1959: 68 .
Amblyseius (Typhlodromalus) hibisci .— Muma, 1961: 288. Typhlodromus hibisci .— Hirschmann, 1962: 20.
Amblyseius hibisci .— Schuster & Pritchard, 1963: 228.
Amblyseius (Euseius) hibisci .— Rodriguez et al., 1981: 648. Euseius hibisci View in CoL .— Moraes et al., 2004: 70; Demite et al., 2015.
This species seems to have in North America an ecological an ecological importance similar to that of E. concordis View in CoL in South America, in terms of its wide distribution ( Demite et al., 2015), its abundance, and its wide range of host plants. As cited for E. concordis View in CoL , there are few reports of the occurrence of E. hibisci View in CoL outside the American continent and Caribbean islands, as summarised by Demite et al. (2015). These reports need to be confirmed, given the possibility of misidentifications. This species was not collected in this study, but there are several publications about the morphology of E. hibisci View in CoL in the literature ( Schuster & Pritchard, 1963; McMurtry et al., 1985; Congdon & McMurtry, 1986; Aponte & McMurtry, 1997).
This species is most similar to E. tularensis View in CoL , from which it is distinguished mostly by the insertion of r3 (in the unsclerotised cuticle in E. hibisci View in CoL and usually in the dorsal shield in E. tularensis View in CoL ) and the length of the peritreme (extending up to the level of j 3 in E. hibisci View in CoL and at most to the level of z 2 in E. tularensis View in CoL ).
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.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |
Euseius hibisci (Chant)
Lopes, Paula C., Mcmurtry, James A. & De Moraes, Gilberto J. 2015 |
Amblyseius (Euseius) hibisci
Moraes 2004: 70 |
Rodriguez 1981: 648 |
Amblyseius hibisci
Schuster 1963: 228 |
Amblyseius (Typhlodromalus) hibisci
Hirschmann 1962: 20 |
Muma 1961: 288 |
Typhlodromus (Amblyseius) hibisci
Chant 1959: 68 |