Chilocorus infernalis Mulsant
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.5378.1.1 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:68976F75-EC46-480B-AB8A-061B1441A958 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11067917 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03C44153-FF83-FF9E-FF77-FCF6FC10FE43 |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Chilocorus infernalis Mulsant |
status |
|
( Figs 35 View FIGURE 35 , 36 View FIGURE 36 )
Chilocorus infernalis Mulsant, 1853: 189 .
Chilocorus bijugus Mulsant, 1853: 61 .
Chilocorus bijugus : Crotch 1874: 183; Korschefsky 1932: 242; Kapur 1956: 259; Nagaraja & Hussainy 1967: 249; Miyatake 1970a: 324, 1985: 12; Pang & Mao 1979: 90; Jing 1992: 566; Cao et al. 1992: 162; Pang et al. 2004: 27; Kovář 2007: 593; Ren et al. 2009: 126; Li et al. 2018: 23 View Cited Treatment .
Chilocorus bijugus infernalis : Korschefsky 1932: 242.
Chilocorus infernalis : Crotch 1874: 183; Poorani 2002: 311.
Diagnosis. Length: 4.30–6.00 mm; width: 4.00–5.00 mm. Form obovate, posteriorly narrowed, dorsum strongly convex and glabrous. Ground colour uniformly shiny black, sometimes with a greenish tinge, each elytron with a pair of reddish testaceous or orange yellow spots a little before middle in anterior half, outer spot usually smaller than inner spot, rarely subequal ( Fig. 35a–c View FIGURE 35 ). Rarely both elytral spots fused, forming a much larger yellowish-orange, quadrate macula around middle ( Fig. 36a–c View FIGURE 36 ). Abdominal postcoxal line incomplete ( Fig. 35d View FIGURE 35 , 36d View FIGURE 36 ). Male genitalia ( Figs 35e–g View FIGURE 35 , 36e–g View FIGURE 36 ) and spermatheca ( Fig. 35h View FIGURE 35 ) as illustrated.
Distribution. India (Arunachal Pradesh; Himachal Pradesh; Jammu & Kashmir; Meghalaya; Uttarakhand; Uttar Pradesh); Pakistan; Bhutan; Nepal; Himalayas; Introduced and established in parts of Russia. All records of this species from peninsular India (e.g. Maqbool et al. 2020) are certainly erroneous.
Prey/associated habitat. Hemiptera : Aleyrodidae : Citrus whitefly. Aphidoidea: Adelges sp. , Aphis pomi De Geer , Brachycaudus helichrysi (Kaltenbach) , Eriosoma lanigerum (Hausmann) . Coccoidea: Aonidiella aurantii (Maskell) , Ericerus pela (Chavannes) , Lepidosaphes afganensis Borchsenius (= Cornimytilus afganensis (Borchsenius)) , Diaspidiotus prunorum (Laing) , Lopholeucaspis japonica (Cockerell) , Metaceronema japonica (Maskell) , Parlatoria ziziphi (Lucas) , Comstockaspis perniciosa (Comstock) , Tecaspis sp. , Unaspis yanonensis (Kuwana) . Collected in association with scales on apple, wild apple, pear, peach, and other temperate fruits, gum Arabic tree (‘Kikar’), olive, citrus, Euonymus , Olea cuspidata , willow, mulberry, etc.
Seasonal occurrence. Active during May-September in north-western and north-eastern regions of India. Very effective in the early months of summer in Kashmir ( Pruthi & Rao 1951). Collected during April–May, July and October in northern India (label data). In Kashmir, adults were observed to emerge in June and started overwintering in November ( Maqbool et al. 2020).
Natural enemies. Heavily parasitized by a number of chalcid and eulophid parasitoids from the end of July in Kashmir ( Pruthi & Rao 1951); Homalotylus sp. ( Encyrtidae ); Aprostocetus neglectus (Domenichini) (listed as Tetrastichus neglectus ) ( Richerson 1970).
Notes: Chilocorus bijugus is used as the valid name of this species by many workers, including Li et al. (2018) who treated it in their revision of Chinese Chilocorus . Though Mulsant (1850) described both C. bijugus and C. infernalis in the same work (with a page precedence to C. bijugus ), Crotch (1874) gave precedence to C. infernalis over C. bijugus and going by the First Reviser Principle of the ICZN, C. infernalis has priority over C. bijugus as treated by Crotch (1874) though C. bijugus is the more popular and widely used name in the published literature.
For more detailed descriptions and / or illustrations, see Kapur (1956), Nagaraja & Hussainy (1967), Miyatake (1970a), Rafi et al. (2005), Ren et al. (2009), Hayat et al. (2014), and Li et al. (2018). Ahmad & Ghani (1966) and Jalali & Singh (1989a) studied its biology on various diaspine scales.
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 |
Chilocorus infernalis Mulsant
POORANI, J. 2023 |
Chilocorus bijugus infernalis
Korschefsky, R. 1932: 242 |
Chilocorus bijugus
Li, W. J. & Huo, L. Z. & Wang, D. & Ahrens, D. & Wang, X. M. 2018: 23 |
Ren, S. X. & Wang, X. M. & Pang, H. & Peng, Z. Q. & Zeng, T. 2009: 126 |
Kovar, I. 2007: 593 |
Pang, H. & Ren, S. X. & Zeng, T. & Pang, X. F. 2004: 27 |
Jing, X. 1992: 566 |
Cao, C. Y. & Pan, Y. Z. & Wang, H. 1992: 162 |
Miyatake, M. 1985: 12 |
Pang, X. F. & Mao, J. L. 1979: 90 |
Miyatake, M. 1970: 324 |
Nagaraja, H. & Hussainy, S. U. 1967: 249 |
Kapur, A. P. 1956: 259 |
Korschefsky, R. 1932: 242 |
Crotch, G. R. 1874: 183 |
Chilocorus infernalis
Poorani, J. 2002: 311 |
Crotch, G. R. 1874: 183 |