Yingabruxia, Viswajyothi & Clark, 2022

Viswajyothi, Keezhpattillam & Clark, Shawn M., 2022, New World genera of Galerucinae Latreille, 1802 (tribes Galerucini Latreille, 1802, Metacyclini Chapuis, 1875, and Luperini Gistel, 1848): an annotated list and identification key (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae), European Journal of Taxonomy 842, pp. 1-102 : 12-13

publication ID

https://doi.org/ 10.5852/ejt.2022.842.1945

publication LSID

lsid:zoobank.org:pub:390ED50A-A0D5-45B0-B9C4-BA4EE7F619B3

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 ).

Darwin Core Archive (for parent article) View in SIBiLS Plain XML RDF