Orius (Dimorphella) dravidiensis Muraleedharan, 1977

Yamada, Kazutaka, Yasunaga, Tomohide & Artchawakom, Taksin, 2015, The flower bug genus Orius Wolff, 1811 (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Anthocoridae: Oriini) of Thailand, Journal of Natural History 50, pp. 1103-1157 : 1148-1151

publication ID	https://doi.org/ 10.1080/00222933.2015.1104393
DOI	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4332757
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/EA370637-2075-0D10-413F-336FFB5EFF73
treatment provided by	Carolina
scientific name	Orius (Dimorphella) dravidiensis Muraleedharan, 1977
status

Treatment

Orius (Dimorphella) dravidiensis Muraleedharan, 1977 ( Figures 1E,F View Figure 1 , 4I – L View Figure 4 , 5Q,R View Figure 5 , 7C View Figure 7 , 8G – I View Figure 8 , 10D View Figure 10 , 13C View Figure 13 , 18G – I View Figure 18 , 20C View Figure 20 )

Orius (Heterorius) dravidiensis Muraleedharan, 1977: 234 . Holotype: ♂, Tamilnadu, India ( Zoological Survey of India) [not examined].

Specimens examined

Thailand: Nakhon Ratchasima: three ♂, two ♀, Sakaerat Environmental Research Station , 14°29 ʹ 24.4 ʺ – 30 ʹ 51.9 ʺ N, 101°54 ʹ 37.8 ʺ – 56 ʹ 19.7 ʺ E, 372 – 601 m alt ., 23 – 25 January 2009, T. Yasunaga ; 17 ♂ (one in Figure 18G – I View Figure 18 ) 37 ♀ (one in Figure 20C View Figure 20 ), same locality, February 2009, T . Yasunaga ; one ♀, same locality, 12 – 15 June 2009, K . Yamada ; two ♀, same locality, light trap, 17 – 20 March 2010, T . Yasunaga and K . Yamada ; 29 ♂ (one in Figure 1F View Figure 1 ) 17 ♀, same locality, 24 March 2014, T . Yasunaga and K . Yamada ; one ♂, eight ♀, same locality, light trap, 21 – 24 March 2014, K . Yamada; 10 ♂ (one in Figure 8G, H View Figure 8 ) eight ♀, Horticultural Experimental Station , Bandon, Murang, 18 March 2010, K . Yamada . Saraburi: 12 ♂ (one in Figure 10D View Figure 10 , one in Figure 13C View Figure 13 ) 229 ♀ (one in Figure 1E View Figure 1 , one in Figures 4K, L View Figure 4 , 5R View Figure 5 , one in Figure 7C View Figure 7 ), Kyusei Nature Farming Center, Champakpaew, Kaengkoi, 14°32 ʹ 75.8 ʺ N, 101°04 ʹ 71.5 ʺ E, 60 m alt ., 20 January 2009, K. Yamada and T . Yasunaga ; one ♂ ( Figures 4I, J View Figure 4 , 5Q View Figure 5 ) seven ♀, same locality, 22 January 2009, K . Yamada and T . Yasunaga . Nakhon Nayok: 11 ♂, 18 ♀, Sarika, 14°18 ′ 45.37 ″ N, 101° 18 ′ 03.83 ″ E, 40 m alt GoogleMaps ., 19 March 2014, K. Yamada ; one ♂, four ♀, Sarika, 14°18 ʹ 37.8 ʺ N, 101° 17 ʹ 58.6 ʺ E, 37 m alt GoogleMaps ., 6 March 2009, T. Yasunaga ; one ♂, 10 ♀, Sarika, 14°21 ′ 16.9 ″ N, 101° 16 ′ 22.41 ″ E, 96 m alt GoogleMaps ., 20 March 2014, T. Yasunaga and K . Yamada . Suphan Buri: 14 ♂ (one in Figure 8I View Figure 8 ) 132 ♀, Sri Prachan, 14°41 ʹ 18.3 ʺ N, 100°08 ʹ 25.8 ʺ E, 10 m alt GoogleMaps ., 21 January 2009, K. Yamada and T . Yasunaga . Ayutthaya: two ♂, six ♀, Rajamangala Univ . of Technology Suvarnabhumi, Hantra Campus , 14°22 ʹ 30.5 ʺ – 14°22 ʹ 39.9 ʺ N, 100°36 ʹ 07.0 ʺ – 100°36 ʹ 23.7 ʺ E, 10 – 20 m alt GoogleMaps ., 24 October 2008, K. Yamada ; one ♂, four ♀, same locality, 31 October 2008, K GoogleMaps . Yamada ; one ♂, same locality, 21 January 2009 GoogleMaps . All in TKPM .

Additional specimens examined

Cambodia: Siem Reap: one ♂, three ♀, 31 January 2014, T . Yasunaga. India: Karnataka: two ♂, Bangalore, Attur , January 2013, on Mango tree; one ♂, one ♀, Bangalore, Hebbel ,

March 2012, on Peltophorum ferrugineum (DC.); one ♀, Kanakapura, December 2013 . Maharashtra: one ♀, Ahmednagar, Rahuri, April 2013, on Cassia fi stula L . All in TKPM.

Diagnosis

Recognised by the following characters: head black with pale yellow at apex ( Figure 5Q, R View Figure 5 ); hemelytra yellowish brown, cuneus darkened, embolium sometimes posteriorly darkened ( Figures 1F View Figure 1 , 4I, K View Figure 4 ); male trochanters with one small fuscous tooth on ventral side; metafemora usually with fuscous annulation at apical third; cone wide, obtuse at apex in lateral view ( Figure 18H, I View Figure 18 ); denticule lacking; flagellum slender, moderately curved ( Figure 18G View Figure 18 ); copulatory tube slender, consisting of membranous apical section and weakly curved, tubular basal section ( Figure 20C View Figure 20 ).

Redescription

Colouration. Head black, with pale yellow at apex; eyes reddish brown, ocellus and its surrounding area red to reddish brown ( Figure 5Q, R View Figure 5 ). Antennae pale yellow; segment III with fuscous tinge; segment IV sometimes tinged with reddish brown ( Figure 5Q, R View Figure 5 ). Labium pale yellow; segment II and apex of segment IV fuscous ( Figure 4J, L View Figure 4 ). Pronotum and scutellum uniformly black ( Figure 4I, K View Figure 4 ). Hemelytra yellowish brown, cuneus darkened, embolium sometimes posteriorly darkened; membrane semitransparent greyish brown ( Figure 4I, K View Figure 4 ). Legs uniformly pale yellow; coxae basally blackish brown; metafemora with fuscous annulation at apical third, sometimes lacking ( Figure 4J, L View Figure 4 ). Venter of head and thorax blackish brown ( Figure 4J, L View Figure 4 ). Abdomen blackish brown, sometimes light brown to brown ( Figure 4J, L View Figure 4 ).

Structure. Body oblong oval ( Figure 4I, K View Figure 4 ). Head 0.66 – 0.70 times as long as width across eyes, densely punctate with very short setae; ante-ocular portion about 0.66 times as long as length of eye in dorsal view; vertex about 1.9 times as wide as width of eye in dorsal view; eye oblong, about 1.5 times as long as eye width in dorsal view, proximate to anterior margin of pronotum; neck indistinct ( Figure 10D View Figure 10 ). Antennal segment I stout, exceeding apex of head, sparsely covered with short suberect setae; segment II thickened, about half width of head across eyes, densely covered with suberect setae which are shorter than half width of the segment; segment III and IV narrower than maximum width of segment II, densely covered with suberect setae which are shorter than width of respective segment; segment III equal to segment IV ( Figures 5Q, R View Figure 5 , 10D View Figure 10 ). Labium reaching the procoxae, sparsely covered with short suberect setae. Anterior pronotal margin slightly concave, width about as wide as mesal length; lateral margin nearly straight; lateral carinae expanded at anterior twothirds; posterior margin slightly concave, width about 2.4 times as wide as anterior pronotal width; callus weakly convex, scattered short setae and deep punctures ( Figures 8G, H View Figure 8 , 10D View Figure 10 ). Maximum width of endocorium about twice as wide as embolium; cuneal margin about 0.54 times as long as embolial margin; membrane with two visible veins, one located near costal margin and one near posterior margin of the membrane. Ostiolar peritreme wide; anterior area to median furrow in ostiolar peritreme smooth, very narrow; posterior area to median furrow strongly squamous entirely, wider than twice maximum width of anterior area to median furrow; evaporative area narrow, a little narrower than maximum width of ostiolar peritreme; supracoxal area narrow, weakly rugose ( Figure 7C View Figure 7 ). Male trochanters with one small fuscous tooth on ventral side; male protibiae with a row of 19 – 20 small fuscous teeth on ventral side.

Male genitalia ( Figures 13C View Figure 13 , 18G–I View Figure 18 ). Pygophore globular shaped but somewhat dorsoventrally depressed, posteroventrally covered with three long, stout setae which are much shorter than half length of pygophore ( Figure 13C View Figure 13 ); mediodorsal surface distributed with short, suberect setae; cone wide in dorsal view, obtuse at apex in lateral view ( Figure 18G – I View Figure 18 ); denticule lacking; flagellum slender, moderately curved, exceeding the tip of cone in dorsal view ( Figure 18G – I View Figure 18 ).

Female genitalia ( Figure 20C View Figure 20 ): Copulatory tube slender, fused on left part of intersegmental membrane between sterna VII and VIII in dorsal view, remote from base of ovipositor, consisting of membranous apical section and weakly curved, tubular basal section.

Measurements (mm)

[♂ (n = 10)/ ♀ (n = 10)]. Body length 1.65 – 2.05/1.88 – 2.15; head length (excluding neck) 0.24 – 0.27/0.26 – 0.29; head width across eyes 0.37 – 0.40/0.37 – 0.41; vertex width 0.17 – 0.19/0.19 – 0.21; width between ocelli 0.15 – 0.18/0.17 – 0.19; lengths of antennal segments I – IV: I – 0.08 – 0.10/0.10 – 0.11, II – 0.19 – 0.23/0.18 – 0.23, III – 0.16 – 0.19/0.16 – 0.19, IV – 0.16 – 0.19/0.17 – 0.19; lengths of labial segments II – IV: II – 0.06 – 0.09/0.09 – 0.10, III – 0.23 – 0.26/ 0.25 – 0.28, IV – 0.13 – 0.16/0.17 – 0.19; anterior pronotal width 0.29 – 0.34/0.31 – 0.35; mesal pronotal length 0.27 – 0.33/0.31 – 0.35; basal pronotal width 0.66 – 0.78/0.73 – 0.88; length of embolial margin 0.53 – 0.61/0.61 – 0.69; length of cuneal margin 0.29 – 0.33/0.33 – 0.36; maximum width across hemelytra 0.72 – 0.81/0.79 – 0.91.

Distribution

Northeastern and central Thailand (Nakhon Ratchasima, Saraburi, Nakhon Nayok, Suphan Buri and Ayutthaya; new record); Cambodia (present study; new record); India ( Muraleedharan, 1977).

Remarks

We were unable to examine the holotype of this species directly, but were able to examine specimens from areas near its type locality in southern India. These specimens mostly correspond to the original description and illustrations of genitalia provided by Muraleedharan (1977). Thus, it was easy to identify the Thai specimens as O. dravidiensis .

Orius dravidiensis is similar in general aspect to O. latibasis Ghauri, 1972 from India, but is separable from it by the yellowish brown hemelytra with darkened cuneus (in latibasis , uniformly yellowish brown) and the wider cone (in latibasis , much narrower).

Muraleedharan (1977) assigned this species to the subgenus Heterorius based on the pronotal structure. Our careful examination of the pronotum, however, revealed that the pronotum of O. dravidiensis has a flattened callus being centrally separated by setigerous punctures. In addition, the metathoracic scent efferent system of this species is most similar in shape and surface condition to those of Dimorphella rather than those of Heterorius . Therefore, we transfer O. dravidiensis to Dimorphella from Heterorius .

Habitat

Very common species found on flowers of various trees. Readily collected on flowers of Mangifera indica (Anacardiaceae) and Leguminosae species ( Acacia sp., Leucaena sp., etc.). Orius dravidiensis was more abundant in such inflorescences than the other Orius species.