Brachyplatys vahlii ( Fabricius, 1787 )

Rédei, Dávid, 2016, The identity of the Brachyplatys species recently introduced to Panama, with a review of bionomics (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Plataspidae), Zootaxa 4136 (1), pp. 141-154 : 148-149

Brachyplatys vahlii ( Fabricius, 1787)

( Figs. 20–25 )

Cimex vahlii Fabricius, 1787: 283 . Syntypes: India orientalis [= East Indies]; ZMUC! Brachyplatys subaeneus (non Westwood, 1837): authors. Misidentification.

A complete list of synonyms was provided by Davidová-Vilímová (2006).

Brachyplatys subaeneus (misidentification): Vollenhoven 1863: 54 (redescription, figure, record), Tomokuni 1993: 213 (photos of adult and immatures, record, distribution), Hosokawa et al. 2006: 1842 (photo, gut symbionts), Kikuchi et al. 2008: 45, 49, 51 (gut symbionts).

Type material examined. Syntype #1: ♀, without labels; pinned, segments IV of both antennae and left hind leg lacking ( ZMUC, no. 00102796) ( Figs. 20–21 ). Syntype #2: ♀, “ Vahlii ” [hw]; pinned, head, right mid and hind legs and terminalia lacking, right thoracic pleuron damaged by museum beetles ( ZMUC, no. 00102797) ( Figs. 22–24 ). The following labels are pinned in the drawer next to the syntypes: “63 \ Brachyplatys \ vahlii F” [hw, with double black pr frame]; “Tetyra Vahlii F. \ Syst. Rhyng. p. 142.69” [typewritten] ( Fig. 25 ).

Remarks. Photographs of two syntypes deposited in ZMUC (cf. Zimsen 1964) were examined in connection with the present study ( Figs. 20–25 ).

Other than of B. vahlii , only one valid species of Brachyplatys with similar extensive yellow fasciae on the abdominal venter is recognized in Indomalaya, namely B. picturifrons Walker, 1867 (Sulawesi) . Based on topotypic specimens examined it certainly differs from B. vahlii at species level. Brachyplatys vahlii , however, is apparently a complex of morphologically similar species readily recognizable based on the genital capsules of the males. Based on the reexamination of the type material of several species currently recognized as junior synonyms of B. vahlii (cf. Kirkaldy 1909, Davidová-Vilímová 2006) some of these species represent valid species. The complex is therefore in need of revision. The situation is complicated further by the fact that the type material of B. vahlii consists of two females from an unspecified locality (“ India orientalis” [= East Indies], incorporating usually the whole Indomalaya or at least the Malay Archipelago and Indochina). This problem is not examined further in the present study, the main goal of treating the species here is to call the attention on its differences from B. subaeneus .

Distribution. Brachyplatys vahlii is widely distributed throughout the Indomalaya, and it was also recorded from Wallacea and New Guinea. Several specimens were seen from the Indian Subcontinent, Indochina, and the Malay Archipelago. Because of the broad recognition of this species, some of the old records, however, might need correction. The following remarks are made:

1. The redescription (p. 54) and illustration (plate IV, fig. 8) of B. subaeneus provided by Vollenhoven (1863) leave no doubt that the species in concern is B. vahlii .

2. The photos of B. subaeneus provided by Tomokuni (1993: plate 83 figs. 252a–b) are also based on misidentification and pertain to B. vahlii . Japanese records of B. subaeneus after Tomokuni (1993) are potentially based on this work and therefore might represent misidentifications too; at least the record of Hosokawa et al. (2006: 1842, fig. 1C) pertains to B. vahlii . Yamashita & Kikuhara (2012) and Nagashima & Tanaka (2014) identified both species correctly.

Figures

FIGURES 20 – 25. Two syntypes of Cimex vahlii Fabricius, 1787 and their labels. Fig. 20, syntype # 1, dorsal view; Fig. 21, same, ventral view; Fig. 22, syntype # 2, dorsal view; Fig. 23, same, ventral view; Fig. 24, same, label; Fig. 25, labels pinned in the bottom of the drawer next to the specimens. Scales in mm, Figs. 24 – 25 not to scale (© ZMUC).