Wygomiris paveli Yasunaga & Tamada & Hinami & Miyazaki & Duwal & Nagashima 2019, sp. nov.
Creators: name: Yasunaga, Tomohide
name: Tamada, Yui
name: Hinami, Haruka
name: Miyazaki, Ayana
name: Duwal, Ram Keshari
name: Nagashima, Tetsuya
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2019
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Insecta
Hemiptera
Miridae
Wygomiris
Wygomiris paveli

description: Wygomiris paveli Yasunaga & Duwal sp. nov.
(Figs 14–15, 36–39, 140–143, 196–200)
Type material. HOLOTYPE: ♁, TAIWAN: PINGDONG (= PINGTUNG): Siangjiao Bay, 21°55′42.7″N, 120°49′40″E, UV lighting, 16 Feb 2011, C.T. Chiu & Y.C. Lan (AMNH _ PBI 00380634) (NMNS). PARATYPES: TAIWAN: PINGDONG: Same locality as for holotype, 14 Mar 2012, Y.C. Lan & J.Z. Wang, 1 ♁ (NMNS); Nanrenshan, UV lighting, 26 Apr 2011, Y.C. Lan & Y.H. Peng, 1 ♁ (NMNS); Mutan, Cacevakan, 22°06′34.9″N, 120°48′06.1″E, UV lighting, 16 Mar 2017, T. Yasunaga, 1♁ (00380635) (TYCN). HUALIEN: Yuri, Chohsishan, Malaise trap, 24 Apr 2009 – 12 Dec 2012, W.T. Yang & K.W. Huang, 5 ♁♁, 2 ♀♀ (NMNS); Hsiulin, Wenlan, Malaise trap, 24 Jun–25 Aug 2009, K.W. Huang & W.T.Yang, 1 ♁ (00380636) (NMNS); same data except for date 13 Sep–24 Nov 2010, 1 ♁ (NMNS). CHIAYI: Chungpu, Yunshui Station, Mercury lighting, 7–8 Nov 2006, Lin, Chan, Liang & Lan, 1 ♁ (00380637) (NMNS).
Differential diagnosis. Recognized readily by its moderate size; generally castaneous basic coloration (Figs 14–15); rather small eyes; rather slender antenna; weakly shining pronotum; yellowish brown fascia on hemelytron; possession of stridulatory device (FWS+MFP, Figs 55, 141–142); and contrastingly darkened abdomen (Figs 164–165). Based on the similar genitalic structure (endosomal shape in particular), this new species is apparently sister to W. indochinensis which however has larger eye (Fig. 144) and rather terete antennal segments, and lacks the stridulatory device (Fig. 145) (see YASUNAGA 2012 and DUWAL et al. 2017, for detailed diagnosis and color habitus images of W. indochinensis).
Description. Male. Macropterous; body generally castaneous, elongate oval, parallel-sided, moderate in size; dorsal surface weakly shining, with sparsely distributed, simple upright setae and woolly (not scalelike) reclining setae. Head somewhat produced anteriorly, with pale, short, erect setae. Antenna pale reddish brown, rather slender, not significantly terete; apex of segment II slightly inflated, about as long as basal width of pronotum; two distal segments reddish brown. Labium shiny pale reddish brown, slightly exceeding apex of mesocoxa, slightly longer than antennal segment II or metafemur; segment IV dark reddish brown. Pronotum weakly shining, not polished; pleura including scent efferent system yellowish brown. Hemelytron chestnut brown, with a yellowish transverse fascia posterior to scutellum; FWS weak, minutely sutured (Figs 55, 141); membrane smoky brown, with pale, translucent basal half. Coxae and legs pale brown; each femur and tibia partly obscure; MFP minutely scattered (Figs 55, 142). Abdomen widely shiny dark brown. Male genitalia (Figs 196–198): Pygophore with a small pygophoral spine (Figs 143, 196). Left paramere with tumid, bulbous sensory lobe (Fig. 197). Endosoma L-shaped, with a long, tapered apical process (Fig. 198).
Female. Similar in overall appearance to male; body somewhat rounded laterally. Female genitalia (Figs 199–200): Bursa copulatrix rather narrow, not strongly sclerotized; sclerotized ring thickened posteriorly (Fig. 199); ovipositors (gonapophyses I and II) rather elongate.
Measurements (♁♁/ ♀♀, mm). Total length of body 3.18–3.26 / 3.18–3.43; head width including eyes 0.67– 0.70/ 0.64–0.70; vertex width 0.28–0.30 / 0.33–0.38; lengths of antennal segments I–IV 0.25–0.27, 1.03–1.05, 0.57–0.60, 0.45–0.47 / 0.24–0.30, 0.91–1.00, 0.54,? [in aberrant ♁ specimen (Figs 14–15, 142–143): 0.29, 1.19, 0.60, 0.51 (right) and 0.29, 1.35, 0.86 (left)]; labial length 1.21–1.23/ 1.36–1.37; basal width of pronotum 1.03–1.05 / 1.00–1.08; maximum width across hemelytron 1.06–1.16 / 1.21–1.32; and lengths of metafemur, tibia and tarsus 1.03–1.05, 1.66–1.68, 0.30–0.32/ 1.22, 1.53, 0.32.
Etymology. Named in honor of the eminent Czech heteropterist, Dr. Pavel Štys (former head of Department of Zoology of the Charles University, Praha), who regrettably passed away in 2018.
Biology. Adults were occasionally attracted to UV light at night. Collection records suggest that this mirid has two or three generations per year.
Distribution. Taiwan: Hualien, Pingtung (this paper).
description: Published as part of Yasunaga, Tomohide, Tamada, Yui, Hinami, Haruka, Miyazaki, Ayana, Duwal, Ram Keshari & Nagashima, Tetsuya, 2019, Taxonomic review for the Asian taxa of plant bug tribe Hallodapini, with emphasis on stridulatory mechanism (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Miridae), pp. 71-99 in Acta Entomologica Musei Nationalis Pragae (Acta. Ent. Mus. Natl. Pragae) (Acta. Ent. Mus. Natl. Pragae) 59 (1) on pages 93-98, DOI: 10.2478/aemnp-2019-0007, http://zenodo.org/record/4505468