Aeroppia consimilis Banks 1910
Creators: name: Ermilov, Sergey G.
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2016
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Arachnida
Sarcoptiformes
Oppiidae
Aeroppia
Aeroppia consimilis

description: Aeroppia consimilis (Banks, 1910)
(Figs 14–16)
Supplementary description (based on two specimens from the personal collection of Prof. Dr. Roy A. Norton, State University of New York, College of Environmental Science & Forestry, Syracuse, New York, USA)
Measurements. Body length: 514, 531 (2 specimens: 2 males); notogastral width: 298, 315 (2 specimens).
Integument (Figs 14, 16). Body color light brownish. Body surface, subcapitular mentum and genae, genital and anal plates, and legs punctate. Lateral parts of body with small, dense cerotegumental tubercles (diameter of tubercles up to 4).
Prodorsum (Figs 14, 16). Rostrum pointed. Rostral (61–65), lamellar (65–69), interlamellar (69–73) and exobothridial (36–41) setae setiform, barbed; ex slightly thinner than others, le located close to each other. Bothridial setae (36–41) lanceolate, distinctly pointed distally, barbed, stalks shorter than heads. Longitudinal rows of muscle sigillae indistinctly visible anteriad to bothridia. Interbothridial muscle sigillae distinct. Lateral ridges well developed, clearly not reaching acetabula IV.
Notogaster (Figs 14, 16). Thirteen pairs of notogastral setae, h 1 present. Setae da, la, dm, lm (90–102), dp, lp, h 2, h 3 (73–86) and p 1 (45–49) setiform, slightly blunt-ended, stiff, barbed, h 1 (24–32), c, p 2 and p 3 short (16–20), thin, smooth. Lyrifissures ia and ips well developed, im poorly visible, ih and ip not visible. Opisthonotal gland openings located laterally and close to im.
Gnathosoma. Morphology of subcapitulum, palps and chelicerae similar to Aeroppia friedrichi sp. nov., except subcapitular setae a and cheliceral setae cha. Size of subcapitulum: 123–127 × 90. Two pairs of subcapitular setae (h, m) and two pairs of adoral setae setiform, barbed, subcapitular setae a thickened, stiff, barbed, h (36–45) longer than m (32–36), a (20) and or 1, or 2 (10–12). Length of palps: 86–90. Postpalpal setae (4) spiniform. Length of chelicerae: 123–127. Cheliceral setae setiform, barbed, cha (36) straight, chb (20) slightly curved in median parts. Trägårdh’s organ tapered, indistinctly granulate.
Lateral podosomal and epimeral regions (Figs 15, 16). Epimeral setae setiform barbed, 3c (61–69) longer than 1b, 3b, 4a, 4c (41–49), 1a (32–36), 1c and 4b (20), 2a and 3a minute (4). Discidia pointed distally.
Anogenital region (Figs 15, 16). Five pairs of genital (16–24), one pair of aggenital (28–32), three pairs of adanal (ad 1, 41–45, ad 2, ad 3, 32–36) and two pairs of anal (24–28) setae setiform, barbed. Setae ad 1 thicker than ad 2 and ad 3. Adanal lyrifissures distinct.
Legs. Morphology of leg claws, segments, setae and solenidia and the leg formulas similar to Aeroppia friedrichi sp. nov. (Table 1).
Material examined. Two specimens (2 males): U.S.A., 35°58.9'N, 78°56.6'W, North Carolina, Durham Co., Duke Forest, forest litter, 4.V.1979 (L. Metz).
Remarks. Aeroppia floridana and A. consimilis were described by Banks in 1896 and 1910, respectively. Marshall et al. (1987) proposed their synonymy: Aeroppia floridana (= A. consimilis). Prof. Dr. Roy A. Norton has studied anew the type specimens of these species (a specimen labelled "cotype" of A. floridana from US National Museum, U.S.A., two syntypes of A. floridana and two syntypes of A. consimilis from Museum of Comparative Zoology, U.S.A.) in March, 2016, and he has sent me personal comments, photos and various data on morphology for analysis. Essentially, A. floridana and A. consimilis are morphologically similar, but A. consimilis is clearly smaller (body length: 708 in female "cotype" of A. floridana, 640 and 660 in male syntypes of A. floridana vs. 553 and 580 in female syntypes of A. consimilis). In my opinion, the synonymy proposed by Marshall et al. (1987) is most likely correct, and A. floridana and A. consimilis may be the same species with geographical variation. However the strong difference in body size leaves some doubt, and additional support would be useful (for example, findings of intermediate populations or genetic analysis).
description: Published as part of Ermilov, Sergey G., 2016, Contribution to the knowledge of the oribatid mite genus Aeroppia (Acari, Oribatida, Oppiidae), pp. 349-362 in Zootaxa 4138 (2) on pages 358-360, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4138.2.7, http://zenodo.org/record/261154