Yingabruxia, Viswajyothi & Clark, 2022
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5852/ejt.2022.842.1945 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:390ED50A-A0D5-45B0-B9C4-BA4EE7F619B3 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14513896 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/80E0FCE4-B2DE-4000-9CBF-5762AFA93C9E |
taxon LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:act:80E0FCE4-B2DE-4000-9CBF-5762AFA93C9E |
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
scientific name |
Yingabruxia |
status |
gen. nov. |
Genus Yingabruxia gen. nov.
urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:80E0FCE4-B2DE-4000-9CBF-5762AFA93C9E
Type species
Galleruca sordida LeConte, 1858 , by present designation.
Diagnosis
Although the species included in this genus were formerly placed in Monoxia , the two genera are significantly different. The tarsal claws in Yingabruxia gen. nov. are always bifid, while those of most species (one exception) of Monoxia are bifid in the male and simple in the female. In Yingabruxia , the prothorax is usually more than twice as wide as long, and the lateral third of the pronotum is almost entirely occupied by a large depression. In contrast, the pronotum of Monoxia is usually not more than twice as wide as long, and the lateral third of the pronotum is partially occupied by a convex elevation. See the following key for additional diagnostic characters.
Etymology
The genus name ‘ Yingabruxia ’ is a conglomeration, suggesting similarities to Yingaresca , Brucita , and Monoxia . It should be treated as a female noun.
Remarks
Four species previously included in Monoxia [ M. apicalis Blake, 1939 ; M. batisia Blatchley, 1917 ; M. brisleyi Blake, 1939 ; and M. sordida (LeConte, 1858) ] are here transferred to this new genus, all comb. nov. The distribution of Yingabruxia gen. nov. is from Canada to Mexico.
The food plants of Yingabruxia gen. nov. are often Solanaceae , while those of Monoxia are often Asteraceae . Both genera are in some instances associated with Amaranthaceae . The general appearance of Yingabruxia is similar to that of Yingaresca and Brucita , while the appearance of Monoxia is more similar to Ophraella . See Fig. 36 View Figs 28–36 for a habitus illustration of Yingabruxia . See Blake (1939) and Wilcox (1965) for keys to the species (treated as part of Monoxia ).
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 |
|
SubFamily |
Galerucinae |