Pharoscymnus Bedel, 1906
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5281/zenodo.172031 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6262162 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/F64E7864-FF94-824A-916F-FCFBC021FDB2 |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Pharoscymnus Bedel, 1906 |
status |
|
Pharoscymnus Bedel, 1906 View in CoL View at ENA ( Figs. 5–7 View FIGURES 5 – 7 )
Pharus Mulsant, 1850: 948 , 949 (preoccupied). Type species: Coccinella View in CoL 6 guttata Gyllenhal in Schönherr, 1808: 206, by monotypy.
Pharoscymnus Bedel, 1906: 93 View in CoL (replacement name).
Neojauravia Gordon & Almeida, 1991: 153. Type species: Neojauravia naeida Gordon & Almeida, by original designation (Type locality: Brazil; Type depository: DZUP). New synonym.
The genus Pharoscymnus Bedel (1906) has been hitherto known only from the Oriental and African regions. During our studies, the genus Neojauravia Gordon & Almeida (1991), described from Brazil, was found to be a new junior synonym of Pharoscymnus (new synonym). Examination of the paratype in the USNM collections indicated that it is congeneric with Pharoscymnus by virtue of the following characters: pubescent body, short, 10segmented antenna, lateral expansion of clypeus for a short distance over the eyes and the quadrate prosternal process. The type species, Neojauravia naeida Gordon & Almeida (1991), was found to be a new junior synonym of Pharoscymnus flexibilis ( Mulsant, 1853) (new synonym).
Pharoscymnus flexibilis ( Figs. 5 View FIGURES 5 – 7 a–k) is widely distributed in north and northwestern India and Pakistan, and to a limited extent, peninsular India. The paratype of N. naeida examined has nine elytral spots, though the spots are often fused or reduced to a great extent in specimens from the Indian subcontinent ( Figs. 5 View FIGURES 5 – 7 b–k). All the specimens collected in peninsular India by the senior author have the elytral spots greatly reduced in size and / or number. The postantennal canthus in the paratype of N. naeida appears to be slightly broader than that in the examples from the Indian subcontinent.
Kapur (1956) illustrated the habitus, elytral pattern variations and the genitalia and provided a detailed description of P. flexibilis . The male genitalia are illustrated here ( Figs. 6–7 View FIGURES 5 – 7 ) for reference as Kapur (1956) did not illustrate the sipho and Gordon & Almeida (1991) have illustrated only a truncated version of the sipho. The basal lobe ( Fig. 6 View FIGURES 5 – 7 ) is long and tubular, gradually tapering to an acuminate apex. The sipho ( Fig. 7 View FIGURES 5 – 7 ) is very elongate and slender, with an enlarged, spatulate capsule.
Remarks: The type material of P. flexibilis at University of Cambridge, Crotch Collection (UCCC) has been out on loan for many years and was therefore not available for examination. A second specimen in the box under P. flexibilis examined by the junior author was found to be extremely teneral and scarcely coloured. However, it was clearly a species of Pharoscymnus , but not a syntype as it was labelled Chevr., presumably having come from Chevrolat’s collection and not Deyrolle’s as listed in the original 1853 description.
There is no available record in the literature about any deliberate introduction of P. flexibilis in Brazil or anywhere in the Americas ( Gordon, 1985). However, Clausen (1959) mentions about the introduction and release of a Pharoscymnus sp. in southern California, which did not establish. The source of this Pharoscymnus is not indicated and it is not clear if it was P. flexibilis . Its occurrence in Brazil appears to be a case of accidental introduction through trade and commerce.
Specimens examined: Paratype: “Piracicaba, SP, Brazil, 13.02.1987, L. Crestana/ Schinus terebinthifolium em follias aivore 4A/ Paratype Neojauravia naeida Gordon & Almeida (Green label)” (USNM). Numerous specimens from India.
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
Pharoscymnus Bedel, 1906
Poorani, J. & Booth, R. G. 2006 |
Pharoscymnus
Bedel 1906: 93 |
Pharus
Mulsant 1850: 948 |
Schonherr 1808: 206 |