Picobia species

Skoracki, Maciej, 2011, Quill mites (Acari: Syringophilidae) of the Palaearctic region 2840, Zootaxa 2840 (1), pp. 1-414 : 373

Key to Picobia species

(Females)

(Since all species of this genus described from other regions than the Palaearctic should be revised this key includes only the Palaearctic species).

1. Aggenital setae ag1 and ag2 situated at same transverse level................................................. 2

– Aggenital setae ag1 and ag2 situated not at same transverse level.............................................. 5

2. Terminal setae f1 and h1 subequal in length................................................................ 3

– Terminal setae h1 2–4 times longer than f1 ................................. P. paludicola Skoracki and Kiljan, 2002

3. Hypostomal apex rounded. Genital lobes clearly visible, bearing bases of genital setae. Genital plate densely punctate. Pygidial shield divided longitudinally........................................................................... 4

– Hypostomal apex flat. Genital lobes absent. Genital plate apunctate. Pygidial shield not divided longitudinally........................................................................ .. P.biarmicus Skoracki, Bochkov and Wauthy, 2004

4. Propodonotal setae vi, ve, si strongly beaded. Length ratios of setae ve: si and d2: e2 1:1.3 and 1.3:1 respectively. Unpaired median propodonotal shield absent..................................... P. currucae Skoracki and Magowski, 2001

– Propodonotal setae vi, ve, si lightly beaded. Length ratios of setae ve: si and d2: e2 1:2 and 1.8:1 respectively. Unpaired median propodonotal shield present................................................................. P. cetti sp. nov.

5. Setae ag2 situated anteriorly to level of setae ag1 ........................................................... 6

– Setae ag2 situated posteriorly to level of setae ag1 .......................................................... 7

6. Hypostomal apex flat. Setae ag3 situated slightly posterior to level of setae ag2. Propodonotal setae vi, ve and si lightly beaded. Claws of legs III and IV subequal in size and shape.......... P. pycnonoti Glowska, Skoracki and Khourly, 2007

– Hypostomal apex rounded. Setae ag3 situated distinctly posterior to level of setae ag2. Propodonotal setae vi, ve and si strongly beaded. Claws of legs III and IV unequal in size and shape................ P. caudati Skoracki and Hebda, 2004

7. Genital setae thick and short, shorter than pseudanal setae.................................................... 8

– Genital setae filiform, longer than pseudanal setae, situated on well developed genital lobes........................ 10

8. Terminal setae f1 and h1 subequal in length........................... P.sturni Skoracki, Bochkov and Wauthy, 2004

– Terminal setae f1 and h1 distinctly unequal in length........................................................ 9

9. Length ratio of setae f1: h1 1:3–3.2. Each lateral branch of peritreme with 9–11 chambers. Pseudanal setae ps2 1.4–1.6 times longer than ps1. Length of setae ag2 60–80................................................. P. heeri Haller, 1878

– Length ratio of setae f1: h1 1:2. Each lateral branch of peritreme with 6–7 chambers. Pseudanal setae ps2 slightly (1.2 times) longer than ps1. Length of setae ag2 30.............................................. P. dryobatis ( Fritsch, 1958)

10. Hysteronotal shield absent. Movable cheliceral digit edentate in posterior part................................................................................................... P.chloris Bochkov, Mironov and Kravtsova, 2000

– Hysteronotal shield well developed. Movable cheliceral digit dentate in posterior part............................. 11

11. Claws of legs III and IV subequal in size. Pygidial shield not divided longitudinally. Genital lobes weakly developed or absent .................................................................................................... ..12

– Claws of legs III and IV unequal in size. Pygidial shield divided longitudinally. Genital lobes well developed.................................................................................................. P. galerida sp. nov.

12. Setae ag1 and ag2 subequal in length. Setae h1 5.4 times longer than f1. Bases of setae 3a–3a very close to each other. Propodonotal setae lightly beaded...................................................... P. eremophila sp. nov.

– Setae ag1 twice as long as ag2. Setae h1 3.8 times longer than f1. Bases of setae 3a–3a distinctly separate to each other. Propodonotal setae smooth............................................................... P. riparius sp. nov.