Haematoloecha nigrorufa ( Stål, 1867 ), Stal, 1867

Rédei, Dávid & Tsai, Jing-Fu, 2012, The assassin bug genus Haematoloecha in Taiwan, with notes on species occurring in the neighbouring areas (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Reduviidae: Ectrichodiinae), Zootaxa 3332, pp. 1-26 : 12-15

Haematoloecha nigrorufa ( Stål, 1867)

Figs. 22 , 39–40

Scadra nigrorufa [as nigro-rufa] Stål, 1867: 301. Syntype (s) (3): ‘Japonia’ [= Japan]; NRMS! Ectrichodia includens Walker, 1873: 51 . Syntypes (Ƥ): North China, Hong Kong, and ‘Yang-Tsse’ [= Yangtze River]; BMNH. Synonymized by Distant 1902: 289, 294.

Haematoloecha nigro-rufa var. β Reuter, 1881: 40. Syntype (s) (Ƥ): ‘Japonia’ [= Japan]; ZMHB.

Ectrycotes [sic] nigriventris Fallou, 1887: 413 . Syntype (s): China: ‘Fo-kien’ [= Fujian]; MNHN! Synonymized by Bergroth 1892: 263.

Haematoloecha nigrorufa f. fusca Hsiao & Ren, 1981: 434. Unavailable name (International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, ed. 4, 1999, Articles 10.2, 15.2: proposed as infrasubspecific).

Haematoloecha nigrorufa f. rufa Hsiao & Ren, 1981: 435. Unavailable name (International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, ed. 4, 1999, Articles 10.2, 15.2: proposed as infrasubspecific).

References. Stål 1874: 54 ( Haematoloecha ); Horváth 1879: 148 (record); Distant 1883: 442 (habitus); Lethierry & Severin 1896: 133 (catalogue, distribution); Uhler 1896: 270 (listed); Matsumura 1905: 30 (redescription, habitus); Oshanin 1908: 540 ( nigrorufa , includens , catalogue, distribution); Oshanin 1912: 52 ( nigrorufa , includens , catalogue); Fukui 1927: 10 (redescription, habitus, figure of head); Matsumura 1931: 1210 (redescription, habitus); Esaki 1932: 1659 (redescription, habitus); Matsumura 1932: 95 (redescription, habitus, phenology, food); * Kato 1933: [legend to plate 27] (distribution, habitat); Wu 1935: 464 ( nigrorufa , includens , catalogue, distribution); Hirayama 1937: 180 (diagnosis, record, distribution, colour photo); China 1940: 253 (listed); Hoffmann 1944: 35 (catalogue, China); Ishihara et al. 1953: 112 (record); Takeuchi 1955: 55 (distribution, colour photo); Miyamoto 1957: 75 (ovariole number); Takara 1957: 68 (listed); Esaki 1959: 248 (redescription, habitus); Stichel 1960a: 374 (catalogue, distribution); Stichel 1960b: 113 (catalogue, distribution); Miyamoto 1961: 218 (alimentary tract, figures); Tachikawa 1968: 42 (figures of male genitalia); Hsiao 1973: 61 (in key); Cook 1977: 75 ( nigriventris , nigrorufa , catalogue); * Han & Zhang 1978: 241 (redescription, distribution, habitus); Wen 1980: 37 (record); Hsiao & Ren 1981: 434 (redescription, variability, habitus, photos); Li 1981: 100 (record, prey); Tomokuni 1981: 109 (record); Zhao 1982: 62 (listed); Wu 1984: 46 (record, preys); * Yang 1985: 179 (redescription, phenology, distribution, habitus); Li et al. 1988: 17 (redescription, prey, distribution, habitus); Li et al. 1989: 46 (listed); Miyamoto & Yasunaga 1989: 171 (listed, distribution); Yan et al. 1989: 267 (listed, prey); Zhang 1989: 22 (as nigrarufa [lapsus], record); Chen 1990: 143 (diagnosos, records, biology, prey); Maldonado Capriles 1990: 49 (catalogue); * He 1991: 84 (distribution, prey); Xu 1991: 65 (prey); Wu et al. 1992: 455 (listed); Yu & Luo 1992: 146 (listed, prey); Shen 1993: 37 (records, prey); Su et al. 1993: 284 (listed); Tomokuni 1993: 170 (redescription, distribution, photo); Lu & Cai 1994: 18 (records, distribution); Zhang 1994: 41 (records); Zhang et al. 1994: 79 (record); Chen et al. 1995: 211 (records); Putshkov & Putshkov 1996: 152 ( nigriventris , nigrorufa , catalogue); Takeno 1998: 51 (record, distribution); * Zhang 1998: 93 (distribution); Ren 1999: 167 (redescription, diagnosis, distribution); Xiao et al. 1999: 471 (listed); * Hua 2000: 208 (listed, distribution, prey); Tomokuni et al. 2000: 36 (record); Fang & Wu 2001: 53 (records, prey); Kwon et al. 2001: 209 (catalogue, distribution); Ren et al. 2001: 30 (distribution, prey); * Cai & Yang 2002: 209 (redescription, distribution); Hayashi 2002: 138 (listed, distribution); * Lin 2003: 131 (distribution, prey); Meng 2003: 29 (listed, prey); Tomokuni 2005: 399 (record); * Zhao et al. 2005: 176 (redescription, record, distribution); Zhong 2005: 17 (prey, economic importance); Ishikawa & Yano 2006: 2 (records, distribution); Liu & Fu 2006: 393 (listed); Liu & Ju 2006: 328 (listed); Tomokuni 2006: 350 (record); Wu et al. 2006: 408 (listed); Yuan et al. 2006: 54 (record, distribution); Cao et al. 2007: 23 (listed, preys); Chen et al. 2007: 157 (listed); Huang et al. 2007: 18 (frequency in pear orchards); Peng et al. 2007: 243 (listed); Zhang et al. 2008: 802 (listed); Liu et al. 2009: 66 (record, distribution); Ye 2009: 56 (records); * Zhang & Gao 2009: 36 (listed, distribution); Zhu & Gao 2010: 164 (redescription, prey).

Type material examined. Scadra nigrorufa Stål, 1867 . Lectotype (present designation) (3): “ Japonia ” [handwritten], “Stevens.” [printed], “ Typus ” [red square with black frame]; pinned, segments II–IVd of left, segments IVa–IVd of right antenna lacking ( NRMS) ( Fig. 22 ). — Ectrychotes nigriventris Fallou, 1887 . Lectotype (present designation) (Ƥ): “Ectrichotes \ nigriventris ” [handwritten]; “Fo Kien” [circle with yellow margin, printed], “MUSEUM PARIS \ Fo Kien \ Coll. G. Fallou 259-95” [printed \ handwritten \ printed], pinned, segments IIIa–IVd of both antennae lacking ( MNHN).

Other specimens examined. Black-headed form (see below). — Taiwan. Nantou County: ‘ChipChip’ [= Chichi], ii.[19]09, leg. H. Sauter (4 3, HNHM); Huisun Exp. Forest Area, Guandashi LTER site, 15 km N of Puli, 950 m, 24°4'49"N 121°02'8"E, 3–4.i.2002, leg. A. Kun & L. Ronkay (1 3, HNHM); Dongpu, 19.iii.1989, collector unkown (1 Ƥ, NCHU). Chiayi County: ‘Taihorin’ [= Dalin], i.[1]910, leg. H. Sauter (1 3, HNHM). Kaohsiung County: ‘Kosempo’ [= Chiasien], [1]908, leg. H. Sauter (1 3, HNHM); ‘Mt. Hoozan’ [= Fengshan], i.1910 (1 3, HNHM). Pingtung County: Wutai, 1300 m, 8.v.1999, leg. W.I. Chiu (1 Ƥ, NTU).

Red-headed form (see below). — Taiwan. Taipei City: Sanchong, 25.iii.1963, leg. H.H. Cheng (1 3, TARI).

Yilan County: Dong-ao-ling, 23-24.ii.2009, leg. S.W. Hou (1 3 2 ƤƤ, NCHU); Taichung County: Guguan, 20.v.1979, leg. M.L. Hsiao (1 Ƥ, NCHU). Nantou County: Tungpu, 19.iii.1989, leg. Y.L. Wu (1 3, NCHU); Nanshanxi, 17.ii.2009, leg. W.J. Tsao (1 3, NCHU). Chiayi County: Fenchihu, 1400 m, 15.iv.1977, leg. J. & S. Klapperich (1 3, EHIA). Kaohsiung County: ‘Kosempo’ [= Chiasien], 1–15.viii. [1]908, leg. H. Sauter (1 Ƥ, HNHM); same locality and collector, iv.1909 (1 3, HNHM); same locality and collector, vii.1909 (2 3 [ Figs. 39–40 ] 1 Ƥ, HNHM); same locality and collector, viii.1909 (1 3 1 Ƥ, HNHM); same locality and collector, ix.1909 (1 Ƥ, HNHM); ‘Mt. Hoozan’ [= Fengshan], xii.1909 (4 3, HNHM); Tengzhi, Shishan logging road, 15.iv.2005, leg. J.F. Tsai (1 Ƥ, NCHU). Unknown location: ‘Miharashi’, 23.iii.1941, unknown collector (1 3, TARI);

Diagnosis. Recognized within Haematoloecha by the combination of the following characters: body length 12.5–15.0 mm; head and legs usually black, red in a colour variety endemic to Taiwan; head elongate, porrect, anteocular part 0.4 times as long as length of head; clypeus elevated, horizontal basally, sharply declivous anteriorly; vertex distinctly impressed between and anteriad of eyes; posterior lobe of pronotum 1.1–1.2 times as long as anterior lobe. — The following redescriptions, drawings, or photographs are useful for recognizing this species: Fukui (1927), Esaki (1932, 1959), Hsiao & Ren (1981), Li et al. (1988), Tomokuni (1993).

Intraspecific variability. This species is strongly variable in colour. Two main colour forms, without nomenclatural value, are distinguished:

Black-headed form ( Fig. 23 ). Head black, with more or less reddish suffusion on mandibular plates and laterad of ocelli; labium brown; proepisternum black; coriaceous portion of corium with an elongate spot adjacent to membranous portion of corium, and an apical spot along membranal margin black, sometimes the spots extensive and confluent; abdominal venter in lightest individuals bright red with sternites II–VI (3, Ƥ) margined with black posteriorly, the posterior black area of each sternite is broadened at the sublateral portion of the segments, the broadened portions frequently confluent to a broad longitudinal black vitta, in extreme dark individuals abdominal venter black except a red spot at anterolateral angle of each sternites; legs rather uniformly dark brown to black.

This form is rather variable in the colour of the fore wings. The examined syntype in NRMS is similar to the specimens keyed and figured by Hsiao and Ren (1981: 434–435, fig. 1305) under the name ‘f. typica ’. According to its original description, Reuter’s (1881: 308) ‘varietas β’ seems to be similar to ‘f. fusca ’ by Hsiao and Ren (1981: 424, fig. 1305). Although specimens representing the extremes of this form have quite different appearance, intermediate specimens (with more extensive and variously confluent black areas of the fore wing) are common, therefore this kind of variability is considered as of no taxonomical value.

Red-headed form ( Fig. 24 ). Head uniformly bright red; labium red, suffused with black towards apex; proepisternum suffused with brown; fore wing as in lightest individuals of dark form, never with extensive and confluent black pattern; abdominal venter as in lightest individuals of dark form, or the broadened portions of the transverse fasciae confluent to a broad longitudinal black vitta, but abdominal venter never extensively black; coxae, trochanters and femora bright red, apical third to two-fifth of fore and mid tibiae and extreme apex of hind tibiae brown, tarsi brown.

This form fits to the specimens keyed and figured by Hsiao and Ren (1981: 434–435, fig. 1306) under the name ‘f. rufa ’.

The ‘red-headed form’ conspicuously differs from the ‘black-headed form’ by its red head and femora; no intermediate forms were seen. Both forms show considerable variability in external morphological characters, such as the shape of the pronotum and the thickness of the fore femur. No morphological difference could be found which would indicate distinguishing the two forms at species level; their genitalia were identical.

The black-headed form is broadly distributed in continental Southeast Asia and also occurs in Taiwan. The redheaded form apparently only occurs in Taiwan, and it seems more common than the black-headed form.

Biology. The species is relatively frequent in its distribution area. In Zhejiang Province of China adults can be collected between June and September ( Chen 1990). Several authors reported about its prey, mostly based on observations made in China. Zhu and Gao (2010) reported its larvae and adults feed on the eggs and caterpillars of the western larch case-bearer, Coleophora laricella (Hübner, 1817) ( Lepidoptera : Coleophoridae ). According to Cao et al. (2007), it feeds on aphids, leafhoppers, and caterpillars of some lepidopteran species, e.g. the small white, Pieris rapae (Linnaeus, 1758) (Pieridae) and the cotton bollworm, Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner, 1805) (Noctuidae) . It was reported as natural enemy of the bamboo locust species Phlaeoba angustidorsis Bolívar, 1902 ( Orthoptera : Acrididae ) ( Zhong 2005) and the rice yellow stem borer, Scirpophaga incertulas (Walker, 1863) ( Lepidoptera : Crambidae ) ( Xu 1991). According to Chen (1990), Shen (1993) and Hua (2000) it feeds on delphacids or other auchenorrhynchans and caterpillars. Wu (1984) reported it to feed on the carmine spider mite, Tetranychus cinnabarinus (Boisduval, 1865) (Acarina: Tetranychidae ) and the lesser snout moth, Glyphodes pyloalis Walker, 1859 ( Lepidoptera : Crambidae ). He (1990) and Lin (2003) listed Leptocorisa acuta (Thunberg, 1783) and L. oratoria (Fabricius, 1794) ( Alydidae , both of these records probably referring to the same biological species), larvae of unspecified Lepidoptera species, and unspecified ‘rice planhoppers’ (probably referring to several delphacid species which are important pests of rice) as its preys. According to Ren et al. (2001) it is a predator of coleopterans. Chen et al. (2007) included it in a list of natural enemies of pest insects occurring in apple orchards, but noted that it is rare. It was reported to feed on Diplopoda in Japan ( Takeno 1998).

Distribution. This species is a Manchurian–Temperate Northwest Pacific element, widely distributed in China, also extending to the neighbouring temperate parts of East Asia ( Korea, Japan) and to Taiwan, but apparently does not enter the Indochinese Peninsula. It is recorded here as new to Vietnam. All examined specimens from localities other than Taiwan belong to the dark form. — South Korea ( Kwon et al., 2001). Japan. Honshū: Kurume, Chikugo! (MNHN), Okayama! (HNHM), Yokohama! (HNHM), ‘Misonokuchi’! [= Mizonokuchi] (HNHM), Tōkyō! (HNHM, MNHN); Shikoku; Kyūshū; Izu Islands; Tsushima Is.; Iki Is.; Ishigaki Is.; Yonaguni Is. ( Miyamoto & Yasunaga, 1989). China. Beijing: Wofoshi!, Xishan!, Yiheyuan! (NKUC); Fujian: Fuzhou! (NKUC); Guangxi: Wuming, Damingshan! (NKUC); ‘Kiang-Si’! [= Jiangxi], unspecified locality (MNHN); Shaanxi: Huayang! (NKUC); Shandong: Tai’an!, Taishan! (NKUC); Sichuan: Mt. Emei! (NKUC), ‘Siao-Lou’! (MNHN); Zhejiang: ‘Ile de Chusan’! [= Zhoushan Is.] (MNHN); Anhui ( Meng 2003); Jilin ( Ren et al. 2001); Guizhou ( Wen 1980, Wu 1984); Shanxi ( Li 1981); Tianjin ( Liu et al. 2009); Guangdong, Hebei, Henan, Hong Kong, Hubei, Hunan, Jiangsu ( Hua 2000). Taiwan! (see above). Vietnam. [Tuyên Quang Prov.:] ‘Riviére claire, Région de Bac Muc [= Hàm Yên] et Vinh-Thuy’, x–xii.1901, coll. E. Weiss! (1 3, MNHN).

Taxonomy. Haematoloecha nigriventris was placed into synonymy with H. nigrorufa by Bergroth (1892), and his opinion was followed by most subsequent authors. However, both H. nigriventris and H. nigrorufa were listed as distinct species by Maldonado Capriles (1990) and Putshkov and Putshkov (1996); both of these authors also cited Bergroth’s above paper under H. nigriventris , but did not provide any arguments for their decision to treat it as a distinct species. Re-examination of the single available syntype (here designated as lectotype) deposited at MNHN concluded that this specimen is indeed conspecific with H. nigrorufa , therefore the synonymy proposed by Bergroth (1892) is hereby confirmed.

Figures

FIGURES 22 – 24. Haematoloecha nigrorufa (Stål). 22, Lectotype, with labels; 23, male of ‘ black-headed form’; 24, male of ‘ red-headed form’. Scales in mm; labels not to scale. (Fig. 22: © NRMS, photographed by G. Lindberg, published with permission.)

FIGURES 33 – 42. Diagnostic characters of Haematoloecha pusilla sp. nov. (Figs. 33 – 38), H. nigrorufa Stål (red-headed form) (Figs. 39 – 40), and H. rubescens Distant (Figs. 41 – 42). 33 – 35, right paramere, three different views; 36, phallus, dorsal view; 37, same, lateral view; 38, dorsal sclerotized plate of phallotheca; 39, head, pronotum and scutellum, dorsal view; 40, head and thorax, lateral view, 41, head, dorsal view; 42, head and pronotum, lateral view. Scales in mm.