Pseudoparasitus missouriensis (Ewing)

Joharchi, Omid, Halliday, Bruce, Saboori, Alireza & Kamali, Karim, 2011, New species and new records of mites of the family Laelapidae (Acari: Mesostigmata) associated with ants in Iran, Zootaxa 2972, pp. 22-36 : 32-33

Pseudoparasitus missouriensis (Ewing)

Hyletastes missouriensis Ewing, 1909: 66 .

Gymnolaelaps missouriensis .— Hennessey & Farrier, 1988: 30.

Hypoaspis (Laelaspis) misoriensis (sic).— Babaeian et al., 2010: 328. Pseudoparasitus obsoletus Berlese, 1916: 164 (synonymy by Hennessey & Farrier, 1988). Laelaspis austriacus Sellnick, 1935: 353 (synonymy by Hennessey & Farrier, 1988). Laelaspis austriacus .— Willmann, 1951: 113.

Gymnolaelaps austriacus .— Hunter, 1961: 680.

Pseudoparasitus austriacus .— Hunter, 1966: 9.

Hypoaspis austriacus .— Hirschmann & Bernhard, 1969: 132.

Hypoaspis (Euryaspis) austriacus .— Bernhard, 1971: 8.

Hypoaspis (Gymnolaelaps) austriacus .— Bregetova, 1977: 526.

Hypoaspis (Laelaspis) austriaca .— Tenorio, 1982: 264; Karg, 1979: 101; 1989a: 120; 1993: 161.

Specimens examined. Three females, Karaj, Shahrestanak, O. Joharchi coll., 18 September 2009, 35˚56’ N, 51˚22’ E, alt. 2330 m, in nest of Camponotus sp.

Notes. The synonymy presented above shows that this species has had a very unstable taxonomic history. Most of the information on this species has been published under the names Gymnolaelaps austriacus or Hypoaspis austriacus . Hunter (1961) placed this species in Gymnolaelaps , but later ( Hunter, 1966) moved it to Pseudoparasitus . The species may be recognised by the podal plates behind coxa IV, which are narrower than for other species in the genus, the very long and narrow metapodal plates, the very wide rounded genito-ventral shield with four pairs of setae, including two pairs of ventral setae inserted well inside the shield, and a pair of opisthogastric setae in the soft skin between the genito-ventral and anal shields. We can confirm the observations by Sellnick (1935), Hunter (1966), Bernhard (1971) and Bregetova (1977), that this species has only a single tooth on the movable digit of the chelicera. Our specimens agree completely with Bregetova (1977, Figure 417), who showed that the fixed digit has a small distal tooth and a larger bifid proximal tooth. The illustration of the chelicera in Hennessey & Farrier (1988) is not detailed enough to allow this comparison.