Ceroplastes floridensis Comstock
Creators: name: Hodgson, Chris J.
name: Peronti, Ana L. B. G.
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2012
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Insecta
Hemiptera
Coccidae
Ceroplastes
Ceroplastes floridensis

description: Ceroplastes floridensis Comstock   
(Fig. 36; Map fig. 104)  
 Ceroplastes floridensis Comstock, 1881: 331.   
 Cerostegia floridensis (Comstock); De Lotto, 1969b: 211.   
 Paracerostegia floridensis (Comstock); Tang, 1991: 306.   
 Type material not seen. Lectotype ♀ designated by Gimpel et al. (1974), from U.S.A., Florida, on tangerine orange (USNM).   
 Material examined from area of study: Canary Is., Gran Canaria, Las Palmas Botanical Gardens, on leaves on unknown plants, 23 & 24.ii.2011, C.J. Hodgson (BMNH): 2/5 (fair-poor). Egypt, Alexandria, no host, 12.vii.1910, W.J. Hall (BMNH): 1/4 (good; misidentified as C. rusci); Damanhur, on Mandarin?, 23.ix.1913, no coll. (BMNH): 1/3 (fair-poor; misidentified as C. rusci); Kafr el Dawar, on quince, 4.ii.1923, W.J. Hall (BMNH): 1/2 (good); Kafr el Dawar, on guava, 1922 and 1923, W.J. Hall (BMNH): 2/2 (good); Alf, on mandarin, 11.xii.1921, W.J. Hall (BMNH): 1/2 (good). Tanzania [Tanganyika], Amani, on tea, no date or collector (BMNH: CIE 6978-18610): 2/4 (1 fair, 3 poor). Sudan, Shambal, on a consignment of plants from India, 17.ix.1936, A.M. Makkawi (BMNH): 1/1 (fair; misidentified as C. actiniformis). Madagascar, on cloves, -. vii.1949, J. Millet (BMNH): 1/3 (1 good, 1 poor, 1 imm); Tulear, on Azadirachta indica, -. viii.1992, no collector (BMNH: IIE 22516): 2 dorsums (good) + 1 venter (poor). Mauritius, Cycas, no date, R. Mamet (BMNH – EEG 30/33 #28): 1/1 (fair – poor). Seychelles, no site, on “Mangrove” Avicennia sp., no date, R. Dupont (BMNH): 1/5 (poor).   
 Also: India, Bhubaneswar, on grasses, 7.iii.1977, no coll., (BMNH): 1/3 (good); Alageswar, on Coffea arabica, -. iv.1976, no coll. (BMNH): 1/2 (good). United States of America, California, San Diego Co., Fallbrook, on Mango, 8.ix.1987, Dessarich & Parker (BMNH): 1/4 (good).   
 Note. Description made from several of above specimens, combined with data from Gimpel et al., 1974.   
 Unmounted material. “Wet wax rectangular in young adult females and in old adult females in dorsal view, nearly flat in young females and hemispherical in older specimens laterally, without horn, grayish to pinkish white, with large marginal flange in old female absent or small in young females not hiding lateral filaments, without plates and nuclei. Dry wax with filaments as follows: cephalic filament appearing trifurcate, with acute apices; anterolateral and mediolateral filaments simple; posterolateral filaments bifurcate; caudal filaments with weakly divided bifurcate apices; dorsal dry wax of first and second instars forming small central cap, not surrounded by nucleus; dorsal dry wax not tilted. Stigmatic wax bands present near both pairs of spiracles, anterior bands directed dorsally, filamentous wax confined to stigmatic areas. Length 3.0 mm (range 1.5–4.0), width 2.0 (range 1.3–3.5) mm, height 1.5 (range 1.0–2.0) mm.” (Gimpel et al., 1974: 44).   
 Mounted material. Broadly oval, with small lateral tubercles. Stigmatic clefts shallow. Caudal process conical, pointing dorso-posteriorly. Length about 1.0– 3.5 mm, width 0.8–2.5 mm.   
 Dorsum. Derm membranous except for heavily sclerotised caudal process. Caudal process about 0.3–0.55 mm long; width across flattened process 0.3–0.6 mm; sclerotised derm on inner half of caudal process of several specimens from different localities with a reticulate pattern. Derm with 7 clear areas, medio-dorsal area absent; each without simple pores or setae, except cephalic area. Dorsal setae very short, length subequal to or less than width of basal socket, setal length 2.5–3.5 µm; basal socket width about 3–4 µm; each seta with slightly convergent sides and a blunt apex; present sparsely throughout but absent in clear areas except cephalic area with 2–4 setae. Dorsal pores of perhaps only 1 type: (i) loculate microducts of complex type, each 5.0–6.5 µm widest, with 1–4 satellite loculi; pores with 2 or 3 satellite loculi most abundant; apparently randomly distributed and abundant throughout but absent from all clear areas; wax-plate lines not detected; (ii) simple microducts not detected, perhaps absent. Preopercular pores: 6–12 in a narrow band 2–3 pores wide. Anal plates each 112–130 µm long, combined widths about 95–105 µm, each with 2 long, stout dorsal setae, each 58–60 µm long, with 1 semi-medially and other near apex on outer margin; also with 1 or 2 smaller setae, with 1 generally near apex on inner margin (length about 28–30 µm), plus a small apical seta (about 10 µm long). Anal tube quite long, about 180–200 µm long (nearly 2x length of anal plates); anal ring setae each about 180 µm long.   
 Margin. Marginal setae all curved, each stoutly setose with a sharp apex, each about 13–23 µm long (longest on margin near anal cleft); abundant, with about 17–28 between eyespots anteriorly and, on each side, 8–11 between eyespots and anterior stigmatic cleft, 8–10 between stigmatic clefts, and 34–50 on each side of abdomen; each anal lobe with 3 longer setae, longest about 40–67 µm long. Stigmatic clefts shallow, each with a line of rather bullet-shaped stigmatic setae extending some distance along margin on either side of cleft, becoming about 3 deep within each cleft; with about 27–35 in each anterior cleft and 35–45 in each posterior cleft; smallest 8 µm long and 3.5 µm wide at base; largest 18 µm long and 8 µm wide at base; most dorsal seta usually largest. Eyespots each small, 20–22 µm wide.   
 Venter. Derm entirely membranous. Pregenital disc-pores abundant around genital opening (segment VII) and across preceding segment, plus: segment V 7–10 medially and 9–10 associated with each anogenital fold; IV 5–8 medially and 3–6 mediolaterally; III 6–8 medially and 2–6 mediolaterally, II 7–8 medially and 1–3 mediolaterally; metathorax 4 or 5 medially, mesothorax 2–4 near each coxa, and prothorax with 4 or 5 near each coxa. Spiracular disc-pores in fairly narrow bands of 50–90 pores; with none extending medially past peritreme. Ventral microducts small, each about 2.5 µm widest; scarce or absent medially, particularly on abdomen. Ventral tubular ducts each about 25–27 µm long; inner ductule greatly swollen and short (about 10 µm long), with a small tufted glandular apex; cup-shaped invagination small, on one side of inner ductule; present in a distinct but interrupted submarginal band extending from just laterad of each scape anteriorly to about abdominal segments VI or VII – absent beneath caudal process; each band roughly divided into groups of 5–16 ducts; absent elsewhere. Ventral setae sparse; submarginal setae less abundant than marginal setae and significantly smaller; each about 5–7 µm long.   
Antennae each with 6 (rarely 7) segments; segment III occasionally with a pseudo-articulation, occasionally very distinct giving 7 segments; total length 176–324 µm. Clypeolabral shield about 135–145 µm long. Spiracles: width of anterior peritremes 34–46 µm; posterior peritremes 36–50 µm wide. Legs well developed, each without a tibio-tarsal articulatory sclerosis; each claw without a denticle; claw digitules both broad; tarsal digitules obviously longer than claw digitules; dimensions of metathoracic legs (µm): coxa 125–130; trochanter + femur 90–165; tibia 75–112; tarsus 51–65, and claw 16–18.  
 Discussion. Within the area under study, C. floridensis is unique in having the ventral tubular ducts in a very distinct, rather narrow, submarginal band extending from near each antenna to near each anal lobe, each duct with a short, very swollen inner ductule. There was some variation in the material studied and some specimens had: (i) more than 2 pairs of interantennal setae; (ii) a reticulate pattern on the sclerotized area of the anal plate, and (iii) loculate microducts densest in a submarginal band. C. floridensis is quite close to C. japonicus Green which also has a submarginal band of similar tubular ducts extending part way around the submargin, bullet-shaped stigmatic setae, many marginal setae, and multilocular disc-pores associated with each coxa, but the latter differs in having the stigmatic setae continuous between the clefts on each side, not separated by a length of margin with just marginal setae. As C. japonicus has been found to be present in some southern areas of France and Italy (Pellizzari & Camporese, 1994), it is possible that it could be found in Africa.   
 C. floridensis has an almost world-wide distribution in tropical, subtropical and Mediterranean areas, having been recorded from the Austro-oriental, Neotropical, New Zealand & South Pacific, Nearctic, and Oriental Regions, as well as the Afrotropical Region as defined here. However, there are very few substantiated records from the latter area, Ben-Dov (1993) only mentioning Zanzibar, although Newstead (1914) also records it from ‘British Guinae’. However, fairly recently it has been recorded from Libya and Tunisia (Jendoubi et al., 2012), and there have been many records from Egypt (Hall, 1922, 1923; Ezzatt & Hussein, 1967; Swailem et al., 1976). In all 3 countries, it may pose a threat to the citrus industry. It seems likely that this species is scarce in the Afrotropical Region south of the Sahara where it may only be associated with imported plant material. However, Giliomee (1966) listed Kenya, Uganda, Sierra Leone, Tanzania, and South Africa. These latter records were taken from slides in the BMNH and, apart from the record from Tanzania, we have not located these slides and therefore consider these records doubtful and that they need to be checked. However, it has been found in Madagascar (on Psidium pomiferum, Citrus sp., Psiadia altissima and Treculia perrieri (Mamet, 1951)); from Mauritius (Mamet, 1943)), Réunion (Mamet (1954b) and Comoros Is (on Citrus histrix, C. aurantium bigaradia, Michelia champaca and Nerium oleander (Matile-Ferrero, 1978)), and it has also been recorded from the Azores (Carvalho et al.,1996) and Madeira (Green, 1923 b). C. floridensis has been recorded on about 70 plant families (Ben-Dov et al., 2011) and is a pest of some importance in the USA and Israel.
description: Published as part of Hodgson, Chris J. & Peronti, Ana L. B. G., 2012, 3372, pp. 1-265 in Zootaxa 3372 on pages 61-64