Catoplatus Spinola

Golub, Victor B., Luo, Zhaohui & Vinokurov, Nikolai N., 2012, Studies of True Bugs of Xinjiang, Western China. II. Cimicomorpha: Lace Bugs (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Tingidae: Tinginae), Zootaxa 3580, pp. 69-82 : 72-73

Key to species of the genus Catoplatus Spinola distributed in Central Asia

1. Occiput without tubercles (not to be confused with long pieces of light bloom which can be similar to those spines!) ( Fig. 1 ), often with a pair of small smooth spots or depressions medial to the posterior margin of eyes; these spots are visible if occiput is not covered by dense bloom........................................................................... 2

- Occiput with two small or extremely small light tubercles that are usually pressed to the head surface and often the same color as it ( Figs. 2, 3 )...................................................................................... 4

2. Subcostal area with two rows of areolae almost all of its length, with one row at the very base and at apex. 3.8–4.1 mm. ( Fig. 10 ). Tajikistan...................................................................... C. josifovi Golub, 2008

- Subcostal area with three or sometimes four rows of areolae at its widest part, often on long distance................... 3

3. Costal area very narrow but distinct and with one row of very small or extremely small areolae along its entire length; areolae can be indistinct in the middle part of area length ( Fig. 7 ). On average, larger: 4.0– 4.6 mm. Foothills, mountains, and piedmont plains of central and southern Kazakhstan and Central Asia................................ C. citrinus Horváth, 1897

- Costal area is reduced in the most part of hemelytra length (usually almost the entire length), and retained as convex marginal vein only, with one row of hardly visible areolae near of hemelytra apex only ( Fig. 6 ) or in the very base additionally. On average, smaller: 3.4–4.1 mm. Central and southern Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan, western China.................................................................................... C. immarginatus Golub, 1974

4. Costal hemelytral area very narrow but with a number of very small and not always distinct areolae along its entire length ( Fig. 5 ). Vertex narrower: 0.22–0.24 mm ( Fig. 2 ). Antennae thinner: thickness of segment III base 0.07–0.09 mm ( Fig. 9 ). Body is usually shorter and almost always narrower: length 3.3–3.8, width 1.25–1.4 mm. Semiarid and arid species. South-eastern

European parts of Russia, the plains and foothills of south Kazakhstan and Central Asia, Turkey, Syria, Iran, and Afghanistan............................................................................ C. fulvicornis (Jakovlev, 1889) - Costal area extremely narrow and with one row of hardly visible areolae in the basal quarter and apical 1/4–1/3 of its length only; medially 1/2–2/3 its costal area reduced to a marginal convex vein without areolae ( Fig. 4 ). Vertex wider: 0.27–0.31 mm ( Fig. 3 ). Antennae thicker: the thickness of segment III base is 0.10–0.12 mm ( Fig. 8 ). Slightly larger: body length 3.5–4.02 mm, body width 1.42–1.58, pronotal width 1.12–1.3 mm. ( Fig. 11 ). Southern Kazakhstan (Karatau Ridge)................................................................................................ C. guentheri Golub, 2007

Figures

FIGURES 1 – 9. Head, costal area of hemelytron and antenna in males of Catoplatus spp. 1 – 3. head: 1 — C. immarginatus; 2 — C. fulvicornis; 3 — C. guentheri. 4 – 7. costal area: 4 — C. guentheri; 5 — C. fulvicornis; 6 — C. immarginatus; 7 — C. citrinus; 8, 9. antenna: 8 — C. guentheri; 9 — C. fulvicornis. Scale bar 1 mm.

FIGURES 10 – 11. Habitus images. 10 — C. josifovi; 11 — C. guentheri.