New Genus and New Subgenera of Camerobiid Mites (Acari: Prostigmata: Camerobiidae) with a Key to World Species of the Genus †
Abstract
:Simple Summary
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
3. Results
3.1. Family Camerobiidae Southcott, 1957
3.2. Synonymy of the Genus Tillandsobius
3.3. New Genus Monobius Alatawi and Kamran
3.3.1. Monobius meyerae (Bolland) comb. nov.
3.3.2. Monobius electrus (Żmudziński) comb. nov.
3.4. Genus Tycherobius Bolland
Tycherobius floridensis (Bolland) comb. nov.
3.5. Genus Neophyllobius Berlese
3.6. Subgenera in the Genus Neophyllobius
3.6.1. New subgenus Neophyllobius Berlese
3.6.2. New subgenus Monophyllobius Mirza
3.7. Redescriptions
3.7.1. Neophyllobius combreticola Bolland
3.7.2. Neophyllobius fissus de Leon
3.7.3. Neophyllobius muscantribii Bolland
3.8. New Records
3.8.1. Neophyllobius lorestanicus Khanjani, Hoseini, Yazdanpanah and Masoudian
3.8.2. Neophyllobius denizliensis Akyol
3.8.3. Genus Tycherobius Bolland
3.8.4. Genus Camerobia Southcott
3.9. Additional Notes
- Neophyllobius elegansBerlese
- Neophyllobius guajavaeChatterjee and Gupta
- Neophyllobius hyderabadensisIndra, Rao and Thakur
- Neophyllobius mexicanusMcGregor
- Neophyllobius ornatusWomersley
- Neophyllobius saxatilisHalbert
- Neophyllobius summersiMcGregor
- Neophyllobius vanderwieliOudemans
- Neophyllobius sp.
- Neophyllobius sp.
3.10. Ventral idiosoma chaetotaxy
3.11. Key to World Species of the Genus Neophyllobius (Modified after Bolland 1991)
- 1 Leg tarsi III–IV always with two midventral setae………………new subgenus Neophyllobius……15
- 1‘Leg tarsus III with one or two and tarsus IV always with one midventral seta ………………new subgenus Monophyllobius.……2
- 2 Tarsi III–IV with one midventral ……………………………………………N. variegata Fan and Walter
- 2‘Tarsus III with two and tarsus IV with one midventral setae…………………………………………3
- 3 Femur I–III with 4–3–2 setae ……………………………………………………………………………..4
- 3‘ Femur I–III with 3–2–1 setae ……………………………………………………………………………14
- 4 Femur IV with one seta ………………………………………………………………………N. orhani Doğan and Ayyildiz
- 4‘ Femur IV with two setae ………………………………………………………………………………5
- 5 Dorsal striations typically hooked between c1–d1 and d1–e1 …………………………………………….N. interruptus Bolland
- 5‘ Dorsal striations not hooked between c1–d1 and d1–e1………………………………………………6
- 6 Dorsal seta d1 the longest setae ……………………………………………………………………N. dichantii Bolland
- 6‘ Dorsal seta d1 not the longest setae ………………………………………………………………………………7
- 7 Dorsal setae, both e1 and f1, the longest setae …………………………………………………………………8
- 7‘ Either of the dorsal setae e1 or f1 the longest setae ………………….………………………………………………9
- 8 Tarsus II with 10(ω) setae ………………………………………………………………………N. yunusi Bolland *
- 8‘ Tarsus II with 9(ω) setae …………………………………………………………N. fani
- 9 Dorsal setae e1 the longest setae ………………………………………………………………10
- 9‘ Dorsal setae f1 the longest setae ………………………………………………………………11
- 10 Genu I–II with 1–1 tactile setae, setae pdx 10 µm long …….…………………………………………….N. panici Bolland
- 10‘ Genu I–II with 2–2 tactile setae, setae pdx 57 µm long….……………………………………………………N. mamaneae Bolland and Swift
- 11 Genu IV setae two times the genu length …………………………………………………N. texanus McGregor
- 11‘ Genu IV setae more than two times the genu length ………………………….………………………………………………………………12
- 12 Dorsal setae d1 longer than setae h1 ………………………….………………………………………………………………N. muscantribii
- 12‘ Dorsal setae d1shorter than setae h1 ………………………….………………………………………………………………………………...13
- 13 Five pairs of dorso–central setae, pdx absent, second seta on femur II is the shortest …………………………………………… N. quinquepilis Bolland
- 13‘ Six pairs of dorso–central setae, pdx present, second seta on femur II is the longest …………………………………………………N. graminicola Bolland
- 14 Dorsal setae d1 set on strong tubercles and much longer than e1 and f1, setae h1 based close to f1 …………………………………N. bialagorensis Bolland
- 14‘ Dorsal setae d1 not on strong tubercles and equal to e1 and f1, setae h1 based far from f1 …………………………………………N. vandebundi Bolland
- 15 Coxae II with two setae……………………………………….…………………………………………………………………..............……16
- 15‘ Coxae II with one seta ……………………………………………………………………………….....................……………………………...17
- 16 Coxae III–IV each with two setae; genu I–II setae long, reaching half the length of respective tibiae ………………………N. bisetalis Bolland and Swift +
- 16‘ Coxae III–IV each with one setae; genu I–II setae short, less than half the length of respective tibiae ……………………………N. spatulus De Leon +
- 17 Femur I with 5 setae …………………………………………………………………………………………………N. gonzali Zaher and Gomaa
- 17‘ Femur I with 3 or 4 setae………………………………………………………………………………………………………………................. 18
- 18 Femur I with 3 setae ……..….….. ………………………………………………………………………………N. crinitus du Toit, Theron and Ueckermann
- 18‘ Femur I with 4 setae …………………………………………………………………………………………………………....................……… 19
- 19 Femur II with 4 setae ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….................... …20
- 19‘ Femur II with 3 setae …………………………………………………………………………………….....................................................…21
- 20 All dorsal body setae reaching base of setae in line, dorso–central setae d1 reaching base of e1 ………………………………N. quadrisetosus De Leon
- 20‘ All dorsal body setae very long, extending beyond the base of setae next in line, dorso–central setae d1 reaching base of h1 …… N. sultanensis Akyol and Koç
- 21 Femur III with 3 setae ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..............…22
- 21‘ Femur III with 2 setae ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..............…33
- 22 Femur IV with 1 or 2 setae ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..............23
- 22‘ Femur IV with 3 setae ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..............…24
- 23 Femur IV with 1 seta ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………N. foliosetosus Fan
- 23‘ Femur IV with 2 setae ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..............…25
- 24 Lateral setae vi long, at least two times of h2, two most proximal setae on femur III on one level ……………………………………………………….... N. ueckermanni Bolland
- 24‘ Lateral setae vi normal, shorter than two times of h2, two most proximal setae on femur III not on one level …………………………………………. N. sanctaeluciae Bolland
- 25 Dorso–central setae longer than interval to setae next behind …..................... ………………………………26
- 25‘ Dorso–central setae just reach or shorter than interval to setae next behind .. …………………………………………29
- 26 Dorsal setae d1 longest setae …………………………….………………………N. trisetosus Bolland
- 26‘ Dorsal setae e1 longest setae ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..............…27
- 27 Dorsal setae d1 longer than c1, coxal setae different in length ………………. 28
- 27‘ Dorsal setae d1 as long as c1, coxal setae equal in length … N. montanus Bolland
- 28 Genu II and III setae as long as genu, palps small ………. N. capparidis Bolland
- 28‘ Genu II and III setae longer than genu, palps thicker …… N. graminum Bolland
- 29 Dorso–central setae reaching to setae next in line …….. N. glaesus Zmudzinski
- 29‘ Dorso–central setae shorter than the distance between setae next in line....... 30
- 30 Some dorso–central setae shorter than interval to setae next behind ……….. 31
- 30‘ All dorso–central setae shorter than interval to setae next behind ………………………………………………………….... N. bequartiodendri Bolland
- 31 Genu IV seta five times longer than genu and longer than half the length of tibia IV ………………………………………………………………. N. mkuzensis du Toit et al.
- 31‘ Genu IV seta twice as long as genu and less than half the length of tibia IV.. 32
- 32 Dorsal setae c1 and d1 shorter than interval to setae next behind, third and fourth seta on femur I equal in length, distal seta on palpfemur at least two times longer than the proximal seta, coxa I setae nearly equal in length ………… N. gigantorum Bolland
- 32‘ Dorsal setae c1 shorter and d1 longer than interval to setae next behind, third seta on femur I much shorter than fourth seta, distal seta on palpfemur not two times longer than the proximal seta, coxa I setae much different in length N. hypoleanae Bolland
- 33 Femur IV with 2 setae …………………………………………………… 34
- 33‘ Femur IV with 1 seta ………………………………………………….............. 122
- 34 Palptarsus with 1 eupathidion ………………………………………………….. 35
- 34‘ Palptarsus with 2 eupathidia ……………………………………………………. 37
- 35 Palptarsus with 1 seta ………………………….… N. euonymi Bolland and Ripka
- 35‘ Palptarsus with 2 setae …………………………………………………………… 36
- 36 Dorso–central setae d1, e1, f1 equal in length ………………. N. plumifer Bolland
- 36‘ Dorso–central setae d1 the longest dorsal setae ……N. demirsoyi Akyol and Koç
- 37 Palptarsus with 3 setae …………………............................................................... 38
- 37‘ Palptarsus with 2 setae …………………………………………………………… 42
- 38 Genu I–II, each with 1 solenidion ……………………………………………….. 39
- 38‘ Genu without solenidia ………………….…. α N. edwardi Khanjani and Hoseini
- 39 Tibiae II with 9 tactile setae …………………………… N. zolfigolii Khanjani et al.
- 39‘ Tibiae II with 8 tactile setae …………………………………………….………. 40
- 40 Dorso–central setae c1 and d1 equal in length .. N. dogani Khanjani and Hoseini
- 41‘ Dorso–central seta d1 longer than c1 ………........................................................ 41
- 41 Tarsi I–II with 9–8 tactile setae ……………….. N. seemani Khanjani and Hoseini
- 41‘ Tarsi I–II with 10–9 tactile setae ………………………… N. mitrae Khanjani et al.
- 42 Band of coarse striae interrupted and hooked between setae c1 and d1 …………………………………..................................................... N. natalensis Meyer and Ryke
- 42‘ Striae neither interrupted nor hooked between setae c1 and d1 .…………….. 43
- 43 Two solenidia on distal end of tibia I, one solenidion on the distal end of tibiae II–IV …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 44
- 43‘ One solenidion on distal end of tibiae I–IV ……………………………………. 46
- 44 Tarsus II with 9 tactile setae …………………………. N. kamalii Khanjani et al. *
- 44‘ Tarsus II with 10 tactile setae ……………………………………………………. 45
- 45 In males, genu I seta less than fifth the length of tibiae I, coxae I–IV without polygonal dimples …………………………………………. N. karabagiensis Akyol and Koç *
- 45‘ In males, genu I seta less than third the length of tibiae I, coxae I–IV with polygonal dimples …………………………………………… N. sycomorus Zaher and Gomaa β
- 46 Dorsal setae c1 long, passes at least bases of e1 ……………………………….. 47
- 46‘ Dorsal setae c1 just reaching or shorter than the distance to bases of e1 ......... 58
- 47 Dorsal setae e1 longer than c1 ……………………………………………………. 48
- 47‘ Dorsal setae e1 as long as or shorter than c1 …..……………………………….. 52
- 48 Dorsal setae c1 longer than d1 …………… N. nemoralis Kuznetsov and Livshits
- 48‘ Dorsal setae c1 shorter than d1 …………………………………………………... 49
- 49 Setae h1 longer than h2 …………………………………………………………… 51
- 49‘ Setae h1 equal to or shorter than setae h2 ………………………………………. 50
- 50 Tarsus II with 9 tactile setae, dorso–central setae c1, d1, e1 very long > 200 µm in length …………………………………………… N. astragalusi Khanjani and Ueckermann
- 50‘ Tarsus II with 10 tactile setae, dorso–central setae c1, d1, e1 < 200 µm in length ……………………………………………………………….. N. platanobius Bolland
- 51 Tarsus II with 10 setae, tibiae III with 7 setae, setae e1 the longest…………………………………………………………………………… N. podocarpi Bolland
- 51‘ Tarsus II with 9 setae, tibiae III with 8 setae, setae d1 and e1 almost same in length ………………………………………………………………………... N. izmirensis Akyol
- 52 Setae e1 as long as setae c1 ………………………………. N. parthenocissi Bolland
- 52‘ Setae e1 shorter than setae c1…………………………………………………….. 53
- 53 Dorsal setae very small, distal seta on femur I not reaching femur–genu boarder …………………………………………………………………………………………. 57
- 53‘ Dorsal setae thicker, distal seta on femur I easily reaching femur–genu boarder ………………............................................................................................................ 54
- 54 Dorsal setae d1 and e1 unequal in length ………………………………………. 55
- 54‘ Dorsal setae d1 equal in length to setae e1 …………………. N. femoralis Bolland
- 55 Tarsus II with 10 tactile setae ……………………... N. turcicus Koç and Ayyildiz
- 55‘ Tarsus II with 9 tactile setae …………………………………………………….. 56
- 56 Dorso–central setae pdx, unpaired, single, 75 µm long ……………………………………………….….. N. ostovani Khanjani and Hoseini
- 56‘ Dorso–central setae pdx, paired, 88 µm long…………………………………………………N. asalii Khanjani and Ueckermann
- 57 Dorso–central setae c1 not reaching the base of setae f1 … N. tenuipilis Bolland
- 57‘ Dorso–central setae c1 long, reaching the base of setae f1 .………………………………………………………… N. afyonensis Akyol and Koç
- 58 Setae d1 reach or pass bases of setae f1 …………………………………………. 59
- 58‘ Setae d1 do not reach at all to bases of setae f1 …………………………………. 75
- 59 Setae e1 do not reach setae h2 ……………………………………………………. 60
- 59‘ Setae e1 reach or extend beyond the setae h2 ………………………………….. 70
- 60 Setae e1 reach bases of h1 ……………………………............................................. 61
- 60‘ Setae e1 does not reach the bases of h1 ……………............................................. 63
- 61 Genu I–II setae long, extending beyond half the length of respective tibiae ………………………………………………………….. N. populus Akyol and Koç
- 61‘ Genu I–II setae short, reaching less than half the length of respective tibiae .. 62
- 62 Dorsal setae c1 longer than pdx ………………. N. mangiferus Zaher and Gomaa
- 62‘ Dorsal setae pdx and c1 equal in length ………….……… N. theobromae Bolland
- 63 Setae f1 pass easily the bases of setae h1 ………….……………………………. 64
- 63‘ Setae f1 just reach the bases of setae h1 …………………. N. marginatus De Leon
- 64 Setae c1 easily reach bases of setae d1 ………………………………………….. 66
- 64‘ Setae c1 and pdx do not reach bases of setae d1 ……………………………….. 65
- 65 Leg tarsi I–III with 10–10–8 tactile setae, genu IV seta not reaching tibial border ………………………………………………………………….. N. longulus De Leon
- 65‘ Leg tarsi I–III with 9–9–7 tactile setae, genu IV seta long, reaching tibial border …………………………………………. N. persiaensis Khanjani and Ueckermann
- 66 Setae pdx reach bases of setae d1 ………………………………………………… 68
- 66‘ Setae pdx do not reach bases of setae d1 ………………………………………… 67
- 67 Second seta on the femur II the longest, palptarsus without solenidion …………………........................................................................ N. hispanicus Bolland
- 67‘ First and second setae on femur II equal in length, palptarsus with one solenidion ……………………………………………………………………….. N. denizlyensis Akyol
- 68 Genu I–III setae not whip like, not extending beyond half the length of corresponding tibiae ……………………………………………………………………………….. 69
- 68‘ Genu I–III setae whip like, extending till corresponding tarsi border …………………………………………………….. N. bolvadinensis Akyol and Koç
- 69 Setae d1 the longest dorsal body setae ……..………………… N. deleoni Bolland
- 69‘ Setae c2 the longest dorsal body setae.. N. helichrysi du Toit, Theron and Ueckermann
- 70 Most distal seta on femur I longer than the third one ………………………….71
- 70‘ Most distal seta on femur I shorter than the third one …… N. communis Gerson
- 71 Setae c1 and pdx shorter than f1 …………………………………………………. 72
- 71‘ Setae c1 longer than f1 ……………………………………………………………. 73
- 72 Tarsus II with 9 tactile setae ………………………. N. lorestanicus Khanjani et al.
- 72‘ Tarsus II with 10 tactile setae …………………………….. N. lachishensis Bolland
- 73 Dorso–central seta c1, d1 and e1 not equal in length ………………………….. 74
- 73‘ Dorso–central setae c1, d1 and e1 equal in length ………………………………………………… N. pistaciae Bolland and Mehrnejad
- 74 Tarsi I–II with 10 setae each ………………………………..N. levanticola Bolland
- 74‘ Tarsi I–II with 9 setae each …………………………….. N. saberi Ahaniazad et al.
- 75 Third seta on femur I shorter than the fourth seta …………………………….. 76
- 75‘ Third seta on femur I longer than the fourth seta …………………………….. 83
- 76 Most distal seta on femur I not reaching the genu border, pdx reaching the marginal side of the dorsum ……………………………………………………………………… 77
- 76‘ Most distal seta on femur I passing the genu border, pdx not reaching the marginal side of the dorsum ……………………………………………………………………… 78
- 77 All genu setae shorter than the length of respective leg ………………………………...…………………………N. quercus Uluçay and Koç
- 77‘ All genu setae very long, extending beyond the length of respective leg ……………………………………………………………….. N. lamimani McGregor
- 78 Most distal seta on femur I about 3–4 times longer than the third seta .......... 79
- 78‘ Most distal seta on femur I shorter than 3 times the third seta ……………… 82
- 79 Distal seta on femur II shorter than 1/3 of the length of the proximal one …………………………………………………………………….. N. coxalis Bolland
- 79‘ Distal seta on femur II longer than 1/3 of the length of the proximal one ….. 80
- 80 Dorso–central setae pdx and c1 equal in length, shorter than d1, e1 and f1….. 81
- 80‘ Setae c1 the longest dorso–central setae …….. N. olurensis Doğan and Ayyildiz
- 81 Setae c1 reach half to the distance c1–d1, third seta on tibia I close to seta one and two, setae e1 longer than f1 …………………………………………. N. arenarius Bolland
- 81‘ Setae c1 reach till bases of d1, third seta on tibia I far away from seta one and two, setae e1 as long as f1 ………………………………………………. N. oregonensis Bolland
- 82 Setae c1 do not reach the bases of d1, the distance e1–f1 much shorter than normal ………………………………………………………………………. N. danthoniae Bolland
- 82‘ Setae c1 reach the bases of d1, setae e1 not based close to setae f1 ……………………………………………………………….. N. coloradensis Bolland
- 83 Distal femur I seta passes genu border ….............................................................. 84
- 83‘ Distal femur I seta just reaches or not reaching the genu border at all ……… 90
- 84 Third seta of femur I as long as or longer than the fourth seta ……………… 88
- 84‘ Third seta of femur I equal to or more than half the length of the fourth ……85
- 85 Setae d1 longer than e2 ……………………………………………………………. 86
- 85‘ Setae d1 shorter than or as long as e2 …………………………………………… 87
- 86 Second seta on femur I shorter than the third one, femur I setae more lanceolate ………………………………………………………………… N. parisianus Bolland
- 86‘ Second seta on femur I longer than the third one, femur I setae more whip like …………………………………………………………………N. burrellis McGregor
- 87 Setae c1 do not reach bases of d1 …………………………. N. ponderosus Bolland
- 87‘ Setae c1 just reach or pass bases of d1 …………………… N. dickansoni Bolland
- 88 Genu I–III setae equal to the length of segment ……………………………..…….………………………………………………N. succineus Bolland and Magowski
- 88‘ Genu I–III setae longer than the length of segment …………………………. 89
- 89 Genu III setae reaching or just passing first row of tibia setae, distal setae on femur III reach genu border ………………………………………… N. sturmerwoodi Bolland
- 89‘ Genu III setae longer than tarsus border, distal setae on femur III does not reach genu border ……………………………………………………………………N. aesculi Bolland
- 90 None of the dorso–central setae reach bases of the setae next in line, all dorsal and femoral setae short, small and equal in length, genu setae passing tarsus end …………………………………………………………………. N. tamarindi Bolland
- 90‘ Some or all dorso–central setae reach bases of the setae next in line …………91
- 91 Some of the dorso–central setae reach or cross the bases of setae next in line (i.e., e1 or e1 and f1) ….………………………………………………………………………… 92
- 91‘ Nearly all dorsal or dorso–central setae reach the bases of setae next in line . 95
- 92 Setae e1 and f1 only longest dorso–central setae ……………………………… 93
- 92‘ Only setae e1 the longest dorso–central setae ..………………………………... 94
- 93 Tarsi II with 10(+ω) setae, genu IV setae not reaching base of corresponding tarsi ………………………………………………………………………… N. conocarpi Bolland
- 93‘ Tarsi II with 9(+ω) setae, genu IV setae reaching base of corresponding tarsi ………………………………………………………….............N. ayvalikensis Akyol
- 94 Femur setae very short, femur I setae 3 and 4 nearly at one level, coxal setae 1c twice the length of 1b, genus I seta passes tibiae and genu II and IV seta passing tarsi ends ………………………………………………………..…. N. lorioi Smiley and Moser
- 94‘ Femur setae longer, coxal seta 1c nearly as long as 1b, none of the genu setae reaching tibia end ……………………………………………………………. N. acaciae Bolland
- 95 Femur I–IV strongly serrulate at their proximal posterior margins …………………………………………………………………………………N. lobatus De Leon
- 95‘ Femur I–IV not strongly serrulate at their bases ……………………………… 96
- 96 Femur I setae 3 and 4 not based on one or nearly one level ………………….. 97
- 96‘ Femur I setae 3 and 4 based on one or nearly one level ……...........................113
- 97 Genu I–III and femur I–IV setae strongly lanceolate ………………………….. 98
- 97‘ Genu I–III setae not lanceolate …………………………………………………... 99
- 98 Distal setae on femur IV not passing genu border, coxal seta 1c longer than 1b…………………………………………………………………. N. ceratoniae Bolland
- 98‘ Distal setae on femur IV passing genu border, coxal seta 1c shorter than 1b…………………………………………………………………N. lanceolatus Bolland
- 99 Genu I setae not reaching second row of tibia setae ………………………... 100
- 99‘ Genu I setae reaching or longer than second row of tibia setae …………….. 104
- 100 Genu II setae not reaching second row of tibia setae …………………………. 101
- 100‘ Genu II setae reaching second row of tibia setae ……….. N. binisetosus Bolland
- 101 Genu III setae not whip like and plumed at the top ……….. N. atriplicis Bolland
- 101‘ Genu III setae whip like …………………………………………………………. 102
- 102 Genu II setae not reaching the first row of tibiae setae, dorso–central setae d1, e1 and f1 much longer than other dorsal setae, coxal setae 1c much shorter than 1b …… …………………………………………………………………….N. ambulans Meyer
- 102‘ Genu II setae reaching at least the first row of tibiae setae …......................... 103
- 103 Dorso–central setae d1 and e1 much longer than other dorsal setae ……… …………………………………………………. N. cavumarboris Meyer and Ryke
- 103‘ Dorso–central setae c1 longer than other dorsal setae …………………………………………….. N. camelli Khanjani and Ueckermann
- 104 Genu II setae not whip like ….…………………………………………………. 105
- 104‘ Genu II setae whip like ………………………………………………………….. 107
- 105 Proximal setae on femur IV reaching the base of distal setae ......................... 106
- 105‘ Proximal setae on femur IV not reaching the base of distal setae………………………………………………………………N. armeniaca Bolland
- 106 Genu II seta long whiplike, crossing first row of setae on respective tibiae ……………………………………………… N. abiegnus Khaustov and Abramov
- 106‘ Genu II seta short, not reaching first row of setae on respective tibiae …………………………………………………..… N. ayyildizi Koç and Madanlar
- 107 Genu I and II setae reach till second row of tibia setae ……………………… 108
- 107‘ Genu I and II setae are passing tibial border …………………………………. 109
- 108 Dorsal setae small, not pointed, body small, coxa 1 seta 1c:1b = 6:18 …………………………………………………………………… N. iramus De Leon
- 108‘ Dorsal setae more broad and occupied with very strong stings, coxa I seta 1c:1b = 6:17 ………………………………………………………………………… N. equalis De Leon
- 109 Dorsal setae specially spinosed ………………………………………………………………………… N. setosus Bolland
- 109‘ Dorsal setae not specially spinosed ………………………………………………………………………… 110
- 110 First seta on femur II not reaching the third, proximal femur I seta not the longest ……………………………………………………………................................................. 111
- 110‘ First seta on the femur II the longest femur seta which passes easily the third, proximal femur I seta the longest …………………………………………… N. pruni Bolland
- 111 Setae e1 longest among the dorso–central setae……………………………………
- ……………………………………………………N. askalensis Doğan and Ayyildız
- 111‘ Setae e1 not the longest among the dorso–central setae …………………….. 112
- 112 Proximal seta on femur I equal in length with the second, distal seta on femur IV long, passes genu border, first seta on femur I reaches the bases of the fourth ……................................................................................................. N. viticola Bolland
- 112‘ Proximal seta on femur I shorter than the second, distal seta on femur IV short, not passing genu border, first seta on femur I does not reach the fourth seta at all ………………………………………………………………………… N. combreticola
- 113 Dorsal setae broad, setae d1 strong, genu II seta as long as genu, genu I and II setae not reaching first row of tibiae setae ………………………………………………… 114
- 113‘ Dorsal setae smaller, genu I and II setae at least reaching first row of tibiae setae ……………………………………………………………………………………... 115
- 114 Genual setae distinctly spinose …………………………….. N. curtipilis De Leon
- 114‘ Genual setae linear and faintly spinose …………………….. N. spatulus De Leon
- 115 Genu I setae reach till first row of tibiae setae, palp femur swollen, palp genu short ………………………………………………………………………… N. sierrae McGregor
- 115‘ Genu I setae longer, palp femur longer ……………………………………… 116
- 116 Two eupathidia on the palp tarsus based very different in level, dorsal setae small with many spicules ……………………………………………….. N. americanus Banks
- 116‘ Two eupathidia on the palp tarsus on similar level, dorsal setae broader with less spicules …………………………………………………………………………………... 117
- 117 Genu III–IV setae are passing tarsus end ……………………………………… 118
- 117‘ Genu III–IV setae not reaching beyond end of respective legs ……………… 120
- 118 Dorso–central setae pdx and c1 grouped on a small finely striated platelet ……………………………………………………. N. tescalicola Parades–Leon et al.
- 118‘ Dorso–central setae pdx and c1 not grouped on a platelet …………………… 119
- 119 Lengths of dorsal setae c1 and d1 are the same as the distance between setae c1–d1 and d1–e1 respectively ………………………………………………. N. farrieri De Leon
- 119‘ Dorsal setae c1 and d1 are distinctly longer than the distance between setae c1–d1 and d1–e1 respectively ……………………………………… N. cibyci Parades–Leon et al.
- 120 Setae sce shorter sci ……………………………………………………… 121
- 120‘ Setae sce equal in length to sci …………………………ΩN. consobrinus De Leon
- 121 Lateral setae vi, ve and sci subequal in length ……………ΩN. inequalis De Leon
- 121‘ Lateral setae sci distinctly longer than vi and ve ………… ΩN. piniphilus Bolland
- 122 Setae e1 passes the bases of h1 ………….……. N. aegyptium Soliman and Zaher
- 122‘ Setae e1 do not reach the bases of h1 ……………………………………… 123
- 123 Genu I seta short not reaching second row of setae on corresponding tibiae ……………………………………… 124
- 123‘ Genu I seta long, extend beyond corresponding tarsus base ……………… 126
- Tarsi I–II with 8 setae each ……………………………………N. ferrugineus Fan
- 124‘ Tarsi I–II with 10 setae each ……………………………………… 125
- 125 Coxal seta 1c twice as long as coxal seta 1b …. N. lalbaghensis Zeity and Gowda
- 125‘ Coxal seta 1c 1.5 times as long as coxal seta 1b … N. womersleyi Fan and Walter
- 126 Distance e1–f1 two times longer as distance d1–e1, setae f1 the longest ………………………………………………………………… N. niloticus Bolland
- 126‘ Distance e1–f1 sub–equal to d1–e1 ……………………………………………. 127
- 127 Palp femur with both setae short, not reaching end of palp genu; long setae of genu I–III not reaching end of respected legs …………………. N. bamiensis Khanjani et al.
- 127‘ Palp femur with one of two setae reaches end of tarsus ……………………. 128
- 128 Dorsal setae d1 reaching base of e1, coxal setae 1c longer than 2c in length ………………………………………………………………………………... N. fissus
- 128‘ Dorsal setae d1 extend beyond the bases of e1, coxal setae 1c almost equal to 2c in length ……………………………………………………………………N. punctulatus Fan
- * = species described based on male holotype.
- α = The character of genu I–IV without solenidion is mentioned in the original description [38].
- β = The male specimens were not reported at the time of original description for N. sycomorus. However, Bolland [16] provided very few morphological characters of N. sycomorus with the illustrations of male and female.
- Ω = These three species have minute differences among them. Bolland and Swift [50] have also questioned the close similarity of N. consobrinus and N. inequalis suggesting later could be a deutonymph of former. However, these species are placed in the diagnostic key based on available information. but types of each species require re–examination.
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Berlese, A. Acari dannosi alle piante coltivati. Padova Sacchetto 1886, 31, plsI–plsV. [Google Scholar]
- Bolland, H.R. Review of the systematics of the family Camerobiidae (Acari, Raphignathoidea): Genera Camerobia Decaphyllobius Tillandsobius Tycherobius. T. V. Entomol. 1986, 129, 191–215. [Google Scholar]
- Fan, Q.H.; Walter, D.E. Acamerobia inflatus gen. n. and sp. n. from Australia (Acari: Prostigmata: Raphignathoidea: Camerobiidae) with notes on the idiosomal chaetotaxy. Zootaxa 2011, 3045, 45–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Southcott, R.V. Description of a new Australian Raphignathoid mite, with remarks on the classification of the Trombidiformes (Acarina). Proc. Linn. Soc. New South Wales 1957, 81, 306–312. [Google Scholar]
- du Toit, B.J.; Theron, P.D.; Ueckermann, E.A. A new genus and four new species of the family Camerobiidae (Acari: Raphignathoidea) from South Africa. Int. J. Acarol. 1998, 24, 3–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Paredes–León, R.; Corona–López, A.M.; Flores–Palacios, A.; Toledo–Hernández, V.H. Camerobiid mites (Acariformes: Raphignathina: Camerobiidae) inhabiting epiphytic bromeliads and soil litter of tropical dry forest with analysis of setal homology in the genus Neophyllobius. Europ. J. Taxon. 2016, 202, 1–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Beron, P. Acarorum Catalogus VII. Trombidiformes, Prostigmata, Raphignathoidea (Fam. Barbutiidae, Caligonellidae, Camerobiidae, Cryptognathidae, Dasythyreidae, Dytiscacaridae, Eupalopsellidae, Homocaligidae, Mecognathidae, Raphignathidae, Stigmaeidae, Xenocaligonellididae). Adv. Books 2020, 1, e55087. [Google Scholar]
- Akyol, M. A new species of the genus Neophyllobius Berlese (Acari: Camerobiidae) from Denizli province, Turkey. Acarol. Stud. 2020, 2, 88–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Żmudziński, M. New fossil stilt–legged mites of Neophyllobius Berlese, 1886 (Acariformes, Camerobiidae) from Eocene Baltic amber. J. Paleont. 2020, 94, 696–715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McGregor, E.A. Mites of the genus Neophyllobius. Bull. Soc. Calif. Acad. Sci. 1950, 49, 55–70. [Google Scholar]
- Baker, E.W.; Wharton, G.W. An Introduction to Acarology; McMillan, Co.: New York, NY, USA, 1952; p. 465. [Google Scholar]
- Summers, F.M.; Schlinger, E.I. Mites of the family Caligonellidae (Acarina). Hilgardia 1955, 23, 539–561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Atyeo, W.T. The taxonomic position of the genus Neophyllobius Berlese, 1886 (Acarina: Caligonellidae) with the description of a new genus and species. Acarologia 1961, 3, 153–158. [Google Scholar]
- Gerson, U. A new species of Camerobia Southcott, with a redefinition of the family Camerobiidae (Acari: Prostigmata). Acarologia 1972, 13, 502–508. [Google Scholar]
- Uluçay, I.; Koç, K.; Akyol, M. A new species and two new records of the genus Tycherobius Bolland (Acari: Camerobiidae) from Turkey. Int. J. Acarol. 2016, 42, 168–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bolland, H.R. Review of the systematics of the family Camerobiidae, II. The genus Neophyllobius Berlese, 1886 (Acari: Raphignathoidea). Genus 1991, 2, 59–226. [Google Scholar]
- Khanjani, M.; Ueckermann, E.A. Camerobiidae of Iran with descriptions of three new species (Acari: Camerobiidae). Syst. Appl. Acarol. 2002, 7, 159–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khanjani, M.; Ueckermann, E.A. A new species of the genus Neophyllobius Berlese (Acari: Camerobiidae) from Iran. Int. J. Acarol. 2006, 32, 277–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khanjani, M.; Asadabadi, A.; Izadi, H.; Doğan, S. A new species of Neophyllobius (Acari: Raphignathoidea, Camerobiidae) from southeast Iran. Syst. Appl. Acarol. 2012, 17, 67–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khanjani, M.; Asali, F.B.; Nori, G.G. Two new species of the genus Neophyllobius Berlese (Acari: Camerobiidae) from Iran. Zootaxa 2010, 2521, 53–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koç, K.; Madanlar, N. A new species of Neophyllobius Berlese (Acari: Camerobiidae) from Turkey. Acarologia 2002, 1, 61–66. [Google Scholar]
- Akyol, M. Two new species of the genus Neophyllobius Berlese (Acari: Camerobiidae) from Turkey. Int. J. Acarol. 2013, 39, 542–544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nasrollahi, S.; Khanjani, M.; Mirfakhraee, S. A new species Tycherobius banehiensis (Acari: Camerobiidae) from Iran. Syst. Appl. Acarol. 2019, 24, 2231–2239. [Google Scholar]
- Lindquist, E.E. Anatomy, Phylogeny and Systematics. In Spider Mites: Their Biology, Natural Enemies and Control; Helle, W., Sabelis, M.W., Eds.; Elsevier Science Publisher BV: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1985; pp. 3–28. [Google Scholar]
- Kethley, J. Acarina: Prostigmata (Actinedida). In Soil Biology Guide; Dindal, D.L., Ed.; Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 1990; pp. 667–756. [Google Scholar]
- Alatawi, F.J. Six new records of predaceous mites associated with some trees from Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. J. Egyp. Soc. Acarol. 2011, 5, 37–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alatawi, F.J.; Kamran, M. Predatory prostigmatid mite (Acari: Trombidiformes) fauna of the date palm agro–ecosystem in Saudi Arabia. Syst. Appl. Acarol. 2017, 22, 1444–1475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grandjean, F. Au sujet de l’organe de Claparède, des eupathidies multiples et des taenidies mandibulaires chez les Acariens actinochitineux. Arch. Des Sci. Phys. Et Nat. 1946, 28, 63–87. [Google Scholar]
- Khanjani, M.; Yazyanpanah, S.; Ostovan, H.; Fayaz, B.A. Three new species of the genus Tycherobius Bolland (Acari: Camerobiidae) from Iran. Zootaxa 2012, 3266, 23–40. [Google Scholar]
- Chaudhri, W.M. Taxonomic studies of the mites belonging to the families Tenuipalpidae, Tetranychidae, Tuckerellidae, Caligonellidae, Stigmaeidae and Phytoseiidae. Univ. Agric. Lyallpur Pak. Tech. Bull. 1974, 1, i–xiv+. [Google Scholar]
- Doğan, S.; Ayyildiz, N. New species of Neophyllobius (Acari, Camerobiidae) and description of Cryptognathus ozkani (Acari, Cryptognathidae) male from Turkey. Biol. Bratisl. 2003, 58, 121–132. [Google Scholar]
- Bolland, H.R.; Magowski, W.L. Neophyllobius succineus sp.n. from Baltic amber (Acari: Raphignathoidea: Camerobiidae). Entomol. Ber. 1990, 50, 17–21. [Google Scholar]
- Kuznetsov, N.N.; Livshits, L.Z. Predatory mites of the Nikita Botanical. Gardens (Acariformes: Bdellidae, Cunaxidae, Camerobiidae). Trudy Gos. Nikit. Bot. Sada 1979, 79, 51–105. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
- Beyzavi, G.; Ueckermann, E.A.; Faraji, F.; Ostovan, H. A catalog of Iranian prostigmatic mites of superfamilies Raphignathoidea and Tetranychoidea (Acari). Persian J. Acarol. 2013, 2, 389–474. [Google Scholar]
- de Leon, D. The genus Neophyllobius in Mexico (Acarina: Neophyllobiidae). Fla. Entomol. 1958, 41, 173–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khanjani, M.; Hoseini, M.A.; Yazdanpanah, S.; Masoudian, F. Neophyllobius lorestanicus sp. nov. and N. ostovani sp. nov. (Acari: Camerobiidae) from Iran. Zootaxa 2014, 3764, 441–454. [Google Scholar]
- Khanjani, M.; Hajizadeh, J.; Ahmad, H.M.; Jalili, M. Two new species of the genus Tycherobius Bolland (Acari: Camerobiidae) from north of Iran. Int. J. Acarol. 2013, 39, 130–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hoseini, M.A.; Khanjani, M. Stilt–legged mites (Acari: Prostigmata: Camerobiidae) in Iran. Persian J. Acarol. 2013, 2, 209–217. [Google Scholar]
- Berlese, A. Gli Acari agrari.—Riv. Pathol. Veg. 1900, 8, 227–297. [Google Scholar]
- Canestrini, G. Prospetto dell’acarofauna Italiana. Famiglia del Tetranychini. Atti Del R. Inst. Veneto Di Ser. 6 1989, 7, 491–537, Plates VIII–XI. [Google Scholar]
- Gupta, S.K. A monograph of plant inhabiting predatory mites in India. Part 1: Orders Prostigmata, Astigmata and Cryptostigmata. Mem. Zool. Survey Ind. 2002, 19, 1–159. [Google Scholar]
- Indira, N.S.; Rao, B.K.; Thakur, S.S. A new mite, Neophyllobius hyderabadensis, n.sp. of the family Neophyllobidae described from Hyderabad A.P. Proc. Ind. Acad Parasit. 1980, 1, 121–123. [Google Scholar]
- Womersley, H. Studies in Australian Acarina—Tetranychidae and Trichadenidae. Trans. Royal Soc. S. Aust. 1940, 64, 233–265. [Google Scholar]
- Halbert, J.N. Notes on Acari, with descriptions of new species. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 1923, 35, 363–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- van Eyndhoven, G.L. Neophyllobius saxatilis Halbert, a new mite for the Dutch fauna. Entomol. Berichten 1938, 10, 25–28. [Google Scholar]
- Zaher, M.A.; Gomaa, E.A. Genus Neophyllobius in Egypt with description of three new species (Prostigmata—Neophyllobiidae). Int. J. Acarol. 1979, 5, 123–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oudemans, A.C. Acarologische Aanteekeningen. Lxxxii. Entomol. Ber. 1926, 7, 119–126. [Google Scholar]
- Ueckermann, E.A.; van Harten, A.; Meyer, M.P.K.S. The mites and ticks (Acari) of Yemen: An annotated check–list. Fauna Arab. 2006, 22, 243–286. [Google Scholar]
- Ripka, G.; Fain, A.; Kazmierski, A.; Kreiter, S.; Magowski, W.L. New data to the knowledge of the mite fauna of Hungary (Acari: Mesostigmata, Prostigmata and Astigmata). Acta Phytopathol. Entomol. Hung. 2005, 40, 159–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bolland, H.R.; Swift, S.F. Hawaiian Raphignathoidea: Family Camerobiidae (Acariformes: Prostigmata), with descriptions of three new species. Int. J. Acarol. 2013, 26, 347–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Monobius gen. nov. (2 Species) | Tycherobius (26 Species) | Neophyllobius | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Neophyllobius (114) | Monophyllobius (15) | ||||
Coxa I | 2–3 | 2–3 | 2–3 | 3 | |
Coxa II | 1 | 1 | 1–2 | 1 | |
Coxa III | 2 | 2 | 1–2 | 2 | |
Coxa IV | 2 | 1–2 | 1–2 | 2 | |
Femur I | 4 | 3–4 | 3–5 | 3–4 | |
Femur II | 3 | 3 | 2–4 | 2–3 | |
Femur III | 2–3 | 1–4 | 1–3 | 1–2 | |
Femur IV | 2 | 1–3 | 1–3 | 1–2 | |
Genu I | 1 | 1 | 1–2 | 1–2 | |
Genu II | 1 | 1 | 1–2 | 1–2 | |
Genu III | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | |
Genu IV | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | |
Tibiae I | 9 | 8–9 | 8–10 | 8–10 | |
Tibiae II | 8 | 7–8 | 7–9 | 7–9 | |
Tibiae III | 8 | 6–8 | 7–9 | 7–9 | |
Tibiae IV | 7 | 6–7 | 6–8 | 6–8 | |
Tarsus I | 9 | 7 or 9 or 10 | 7–11 | 10–11 | |
Tarsus II | 9 | 7–10 | 6/8–11 | 9–10 | |
Tarsus III | 7 | 7 | 6–8 | 7–8 | |
Tarsus IV | 7 | 7 | 7–8 | 7 | |
Midventral setae on tarsi I–IV | Number | 1–1–1–1 | 2–2–1–1 | 2–2–2–2 | 2–2–2(1)–1 |
Position | – | not in a longitudinal line, variously spaced | in a longitudinal line |
Species | vanderwieli | ornatus | mexicanus | summersi | saxatilis | elegans | guajavae | hyderabadensis | Species 1 | Species 2 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Published Year | 1926 | 1940 | 1950 | 1950 | 1938 | 1886 | 2002 | 1980 | 2006 | 2005 | ||
Country | Netherland | Australia | Mexico | California | Ireland | Italy | India | India | Yemen | Hungary | ||
Habitat/Host plant | Nest of Talpa europaea. | Apiomorpha galls on Eucalyptus sp. | – | Zanthoxylon sp. | Saltgrass | Lichen covered rocks | – | Psidium guajava | Caryota urens | Malaise Trap | D–Vac Sample | |
Body | Length | – | 250 | 250 | – | – | 320 | 250 | 240 | No Literature/Description Available | ||
Width | – | 175 | 175 | – | – | 210 | 220 | 178 | ||||
Number of dorsal setae | mc | 6 | 6 (?) | – | 15? | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | |||
l | 9 | 9 (?) | – | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | |||||
Number of setae on leg segments | coxae | 3–1–2–2 | 3–1–?–? | 1a+2–1–?–? | – | 3–1–2–2 | 3–1–2–2 | – | ||||
trochanter | 1–1–1–1 | 1–1–1–1 | 1–1–1–1 | – | 1–1–1–1 | 1–1–1–1 | 1–1–1–1 | – | ||||
femora | 4–3–2–2 | 4–2?–2?–1? | 4–2?–2?–1? | – | 4––– | 3?–1?–2–2 | 4–3–2–2 | – | ||||
genua | 1–1–1–1 | 1–1–1–1 | 1–1–1–1 | – | 1–1–1–1 | 1–1–1–1 | 1–1–1–1 | – | ||||
tibiae | 9–8–8–7 | ?–8–8–7 | ?–8–8–7 | – | – | ?–8–8–7 | 9–8–8–7 | – | ||||
tarsi | 10–10–8–8 | 2–2–2–2 | 2–2–2–2 | – | 2––– | ?–10–8–8 | 10–10–8–8 | – | ||||
Number of setae on palp | trochanter | 0 | – | 0 | – | – | 0 | 0 | – | |||
femora | 2 | 2 | 2 | – | 3 | 2 | 2 | – | ||||
genua | 1 | 2 | 2 | – | – | 1 | 1 | – | ||||
tibiae | 3+1 sword like | 2?+1 sword like | 2+1 claw | – | – | 3+1 sword like | ?+? | – | ||||
tarsi | 2+2 eup | 2+2 eup | 2+2 eup | – | – | 2+2 eup | ?+2 eup | – | ||||
Reference | [16] | [16] | [3] | [10,16] | [10,16] | [16] | [16] | [41] | [7] | [48] | [49] |
Species | Ventral Idiosomal Setae | Species | Ventral Idiosomal Setae | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
3a | 4a | ag | g | 3a | 4a | ag | g | ||
abiegnus | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | lamimani | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
afyonensis | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | lorestanicus | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
asalii | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | mamaneae | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
askalensis | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | mangiferus | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
astragalusi | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | mitrae | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
ayvalikensis | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | olurensis | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
ayyildizi | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | orhani | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
bamiensis | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | ostovani | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
bisetalis | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | parisianus | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
bolvadinensis | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | parthenocissi | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
camelli | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | persiaensis | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
cibyci | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | pistaciae | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
communis | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | podocarpi | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
consobrinus | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | populus | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
crinitus | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | punctulatus | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
demirsoyi | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | quercus | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
denizliensis | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | saberi | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
dogani | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | saxatilis | 1 | 1 | – | – |
edwardi | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | seemani | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
euonymi | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | sturmerwoodi | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
fani | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | sultanensis | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
ferrugineus | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | sycomorus | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
foliosetosus | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | tepoztalensis | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
gonzali | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | tescalicola | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
izmirensis | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | womersleyi | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
karabagiensis | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | yunusi | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
lachishensis | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | zolfigolii | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
lalbaghensis | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Mirza, J.H.; Kamran, M.; Alatawi, F.J. New Genus and New Subgenera of Camerobiid Mites (Acari: Prostigmata: Camerobiidae) with a Key to World Species of the Genus . Insects 2022, 13, 344. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects13040344
Mirza JH, Kamran M, Alatawi FJ. New Genus and New Subgenera of Camerobiid Mites (Acari: Prostigmata: Camerobiidae) with a Key to World Species of the Genus . Insects. 2022; 13(4):344. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects13040344
Chicago/Turabian StyleMirza, Jawwad Hassan, Muhammad Kamran, and Fahad Jaber Alatawi. 2022. "New Genus and New Subgenera of Camerobiid Mites (Acari: Prostigmata: Camerobiidae) with a Key to World Species of the Genus " Insects 13, no. 4: 344. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects13040344
APA StyleMirza, J. H., Kamran, M., & Alatawi, F. J. (2022). New Genus and New Subgenera of Camerobiid Mites (Acari: Prostigmata: Camerobiidae) with a Key to World Species of the Genus . Insects, 13(4), 344. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects13040344