DOCSLIB.ORG

Zootaxa, the Gelechiid Fauna of the Southern Ural

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Zootaxa, the Gelechiid Fauna of the Southern Ural Zootaxa 2366: 1–34 (2010) ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) www.mapress.com/zootaxa/ Article ZOOTAXA Copyright © 2010 · Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) The gelechiid fauna of the southern Ural Mountains, part I: descriptions of seventeen new species (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) JARI JUNNILAINEN1 & KARI NUPPONEN2, 3 1Mahlapolku 3, FIN-01730 Vantaa, Finland. E-mail: [email protected] 2Merenneidontie 19 D, FIN-02320 Espoo, Finland. E-mail: [email protected] 3Corresponding author Table of contents Abstract ............................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Material and methods .......................................................................................................................................................... 2 Systematics .......................................................................................................................................................................... 3 The Apatetris Staudinger, 1879 genus group ...................................................................................................................... 4 Catatinagma Rebel, 1903 stat. rev....................................................................................................................................... 4 Caulastrocecis Chrétien, 1931 ............................................................................................................................................. 4 Megacraspedus Zeller, 1839................................................................................................................................................ 6 Descriptions of new species ................................................................................................................................................ 6 Catatinagma kraterella Junnilainen & Nupponen sp. n.............................................................................................. 6 Metanarsia guberlica Nupponen sp. n. ....................................................................................................................... 8 Caulastrocecis perexigella Junnilainen sp. n. ............................................................................................................. 9 Megacraspedus litovalvellus Junnilainen sp. n. ........................................................................................................ 10 Megacraspedus multispinella Junnilainen & Nupponen sp. n. ................................................................................. 11 Megacraspedus orenburgensis Junnilainen & Nupponen sp. n. ............................................................................... 13 Megacraspedus albovenata Junnilainen sp. n........................................................................................................... 14 Megacraspedus longipalpella Junnilainen sp. n. ...................................................................................................... 16 Monochroa uralensis Junnilainen sp. n. ................................................................................................................... 17 Teleiodes kaitilai Junnilainen sp. n. ........................................................................................................................... 19 Athrips aquila Junnilainen sp. n. ...............................................................................................................................21 Athrips bidzilyai Junnilainen sp. n. ........................................................................................................................... 23 Ephysteris tenuisaccus Nupponen sp. n. ................................................................................................................... 24 Hedma karsholti Nupponen sp. n. ............................................................................................................................. 26 Lutilabria prolata Junnilainen & Nupponen sp. n. ................................................................................................... 28 Syncopacma steppicolella Junnilainen sp. n. ............................................................................................................ 30 Helcystogramma flavescens Junnilainen sp. n. ......................................................................................................... 33 Acknowledgments ............................................................................................................................................................. 33 References ......................................................................................................................................................................... 34 Accepted by J. Rota: 9 Dec. 2009; published: 23 Feb. 2010 1 Abstract This paper is the first in a two-part series treating the family Gelechiidae from the Southern Ural Mountains, including newly described species. The material was collected during 1996–2007 on 21 different Finnish-Russian expeditions. Catatinagma Rebel, 1903, stat. rev., is removed from synonymy of Apatetris Staudinger, 1879, and is now considered valid. Two generic names are synonymized: Coloptilia Fletcher, 1940, syn. n. of Catatinagma and Chilopselaphus Mann, 1867, syn. n. of Megacraspedus Zeller, 1839. A short introduction is given for the following unrevised genera: Apatetris Staudinger, 1879, Catatinagma Rebel, 1903 comb. rev., Caulastrocecis Chrétien, 1931 and Megacraspedus Zeller, 1839. Seventeen new species are described: Catatinagma kraterella Junnilainen & Nupponen sp. n., Metanarsia guberlica Nupponen sp. n., Caulastrocecis perexigella Junnilainen sp. n., Megacraspedus litovalvellus Junnilainen sp. n., Megacraspedus multispinella Junnilainen & Nupponen sp. n., Megacraspedus orenburgensis Junnilainen & Nupponen sp. n., Megacraspedus albovenata Junnilainen sp. n., Megacraspedus longipalpella Junnilainen sp. n., Monochroa uralensis Junnilainen sp. n., Teleiodes kaitilai Junnilainen sp. n., Athrips aquila Junnilainen sp. n., Athrips bidzilyai Junnilainen sp. n., Ephysteris tenuisaccus Nupponen sp. n., Hedma karsholti Nupponen sp. n., Lutilabria prolata Junnilainen & Nupponen sp. n., Syncopacma steppicolella Junnilainen sp. n. and Helcystogramma flavescens Junnilainen sp. n. Key words: Europe, Russia, faunistics, new species Introduction This paper is the first in a two-part series summarizing results of our study of the family Gelechiidae from the Southern Ural Mountains. The present paper includes descriptions of new species and some taxonomical changes to the generic classification. In the second paper (part II in this issue (Junnilainen et al. 2010)) a complete list of 236 gelechiid species recorded from the Southern Ural Mountains is provided, as well as additional currently unpublished taxonomical and distributional notes on the included taxa. Material and methods Area of study. Area of study is situated in Sverdlovsk, Cheliabinsk and Orenburg districts and Bashkiria in the southern Ural Mountains, between 50°40’N–59°32’N and 53°05’E–63°45’E. The majority of collecting localities were situated on the southeastern foothill region and at low altitude. The habitats were mainly different kinds of steppe, but also taiga forests, alpine meadows and mountain tundra. The lowest elevation locality was in the valley of the river Ilek, Novoiletzk (100 m), and the highest was the Iremel Mountain (1580 m). Most localities were at an elevation of 200–450 m. For further information on collecting sites, see Junnilainen et al. (2010). The present paper is based on the material collected during 1996–2007 on 21 different expeditions. Collecting was conducted both by artificial light at night and by sweeping and netting during daytime. Additional material from the collection of the Finnish Museum of Natural History, University of Helsinki (ZMH) is included in the type series when available. The type specimens can be borrowed by request through the Finnish Museum of Natural History, University of Helsinki or directly from the authors. Abbreviations.The following abbreviations are used: ZMH (Finnish Museum of Natural History, University of Helsinki, Finland), BMNH (The Natural History Museum, London, UK), LMK (Landesmuseum Kärnten, Klagenfurt, Austria), ZISP (Zoological Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg, Russia), ZMUC (Zoological Museum, University of Copenhagen, Denmark); TKN (personal collection of T. and K. Nupponen); JPK (personal collection of J.-P. Kaitila); and JJ (personal collection of J. Junnilainen). 2 · Zootaxa 2366 © 2010 Magnolia Press JUNNILAINEN & NUPPONEN.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Harmful Non-Indigenous Species in the United States
    Harmful Non-Indigenous Species in the United States September 1993 OTA-F-565 NTIS order #PB94-107679 GPO stock #052-003-01347-9 Recommended Citation: U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, Harmful Non-Indigenous Species in the United States, OTA-F-565 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, September 1993). For Sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office ii Superintendent of Documents, Mail Stop, SSOP. Washington, DC 20402-9328 ISBN O-1 6-042075-X Foreword on-indigenous species (NIS)-----those species found beyond their natural ranges—are part and parcel of the U.S. landscape. Many are highly beneficial. Almost all U.S. crops and domesticated animals, many sport fish and aquiculture species, numerous horticultural plants, and most biologicalN control organisms have origins outside the country. A large number of NIS, however, cause significant economic, environmental, and health damage. These harmful species are the focus of this study. The total number of harmful NIS and their cumulative impacts are creating a growing burden for the country. We cannot completely stop the tide of new harmful introductions. Perfect screening, detection, and control are technically impossible and will remain so for the foreseeable future. Nevertheless, the Federal and State policies designed to protect us from the worst species are not safeguarding our national interests in important areas. These conclusions have a number of policy implications. First, the Nation has no real national policy on harmful introductions; the current system is piecemeal, lacking adequate rigor and comprehensiveness. Second, many Federal and State statutes, regulations, and programs are not keeping pace with new and spreading non-indigenous pests.
    [Show full text]
  • Lepiforums-Europaliste Der Schmetterlinge (Version 6, Stand 1
    Lepiforums-Europaliste der Schmetterlinge (Version 6, Stand 1. Januar 2019) – Hinweise zur Liste Bearbeitet von Erwin Rennwald & Jürgen Rodeland Hinweise zur Liste Die Version 6 vom 1. Januar 2019 löst die Version 5.2 vom 10. April 2018 ab. Sie enthält jetzt 10.543 für Europa akzeptierte Arten und zusätzlich die 47 seit der ersten Version unserer Liste gestrichenen Arten, also insgesamt 10.590 Einträge. In die zum freien Download verfügbar gemachte Excel-Liste selbst wurden diesmal auch – soweit vorhanden – die deutschen Namen aufgenommen. Seit der Version 5.2. vom 10. April 2018 wurden 17 Arten aus unserer Liste gestrichen, 6 davon, weil ihre angeblichen Vorkommen in Europa unzutreffend sind (Scythris fissurella BENGTSSON, 1996, Thiodia caradjana KENNEL, 1918, Ancylosis yerburii (BUTLER, 1884), Talis arenella RAGONOT, 1887, Scopula latelineata (GRAESER, 1892), Lasionycta leucocycla (STAUDINGER, 1857)), die anderen 11, weil sie zwischenzeitlich synonymisiert wurden (Coleophora paeltsaella PALMQVIST & HELLBERG, 1999, Megacraspedus grossisquammellus CHRÉTIEN, 1925, Megacraspedus subdolellus STAUDINGER, 1859, Megacraspedus tutti WALSINGHAM, 1897, Megacraspedus separatellus (FISCHER V. RÖSLERSTAMM, 1843), Megacraspedus incertellus REBEL, 1930, Megacraspedus litovalvellus JUNNILAINEN, 2010, Megacraspedus escalerellus A. SCHMIDT, 1941, Sciota rungsi LERAUT, 2002, Selagia uralensis REBEL, 1910, Agrotis luehri VON MENTZER & MOBERG, 1987). 66 neu (davon 58 im Jahr 2018) beschriebene Arten wurden neu aufgenommen: Pharmacis cantabricus KALLIES & FARINO, 2018, Nematopogon caliginella VARENNE & NEL, 2018, Eudarcia prealpina VARENNE & NEL, 2017, Eudarcia ajpetrica BUDASHKIN & BIDZILYA, 2018, Eudarcia kimmeriella BUDASHKIN & BIDZILYA, 2018, Eudarcia rutjani BUDASHKIN & BIDZILYA, 2018, Eudarcia zagulajevi BUDASHKIN & BIDZILYA, 2018, Penestoglossa gallica NEL & VARENNE, 2018, Phalacropterix valentinae BERTACCINI, 2018, Infurcitinea paratrifasciella VARENNE & NEL, 2018, Bucculatrix brunnella TOKÁR & LAŠTŮVKA, 2018, Phyllonorycter floridae Z.
    [Show full text]
  • Recerca I Territori V12 B (002)(1).Pdf
    Butterfly and moths in l’Empordà and their response to global change Recerca i territori Volume 12 NUMBER 12 / SEPTEMBER 2020 Edition Graphic design Càtedra d’Ecosistemes Litorals Mediterranis Mostra Comunicació Parc Natural del Montgrí, les Illes Medes i el Baix Ter Museu de la Mediterrània Printing Gràfiques Agustí Coordinadors of the volume Constantí Stefanescu, Tristan Lafranchis ISSN: 2013-5939 Dipòsit legal: GI 896-2020 “Recerca i Territori” Collection Coordinator Printed on recycled paper Cyclus print Xavier Quintana With the support of: Summary Foreword ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Xavier Quintana Butterflies of the Montgrí-Baix Ter region ................................................................................................................. 11 Tristan Lafranchis Moths of the Montgrí-Baix Ter region ............................................................................................................................31 Tristan Lafranchis The dispersion of Lepidoptera in the Montgrí-Baix Ter region ...........................................................51 Tristan Lafranchis Three decades of butterfly monitoring at El Cortalet ...................................................................................69 (Aiguamolls de l’Empordà Natural Park) Constantí Stefanescu Effects of abandonment and restoration in Mediterranean meadows .......................................87
    [Show full text]
  • ARTHROPODA Subphylum Hexapoda Protura, Springtails, Diplura, and Insects
    NINE Phylum ARTHROPODA SUBPHYLUM HEXAPODA Protura, springtails, Diplura, and insects ROD P. MACFARLANE, PETER A. MADDISON, IAN G. ANDREW, JOCELYN A. BERRY, PETER M. JOHNS, ROBERT J. B. HOARE, MARIE-CLAUDE LARIVIÈRE, PENELOPE GREENSLADE, ROSA C. HENDERSON, COURTenaY N. SMITHERS, RicarDO L. PALMA, JOHN B. WARD, ROBERT L. C. PILGRIM, DaVID R. TOWNS, IAN McLELLAN, DAVID A. J. TEULON, TERRY R. HITCHINGS, VICTOR F. EASTOP, NICHOLAS A. MARTIN, MURRAY J. FLETCHER, MARLON A. W. STUFKENS, PAMELA J. DALE, Daniel BURCKHARDT, THOMAS R. BUCKLEY, STEVEN A. TREWICK defining feature of the Hexapoda, as the name suggests, is six legs. Also, the body comprises a head, thorax, and abdomen. The number A of abdominal segments varies, however; there are only six in the Collembola (springtails), 9–12 in the Protura, and 10 in the Diplura, whereas in all other hexapods there are strictly 11. Insects are now regarded as comprising only those hexapods with 11 abdominal segments. Whereas crustaceans are the dominant group of arthropods in the sea, hexapods prevail on land, in numbers and biomass. Altogether, the Hexapoda constitutes the most diverse group of animals – the estimated number of described species worldwide is just over 900,000, with the beetles (order Coleoptera) comprising more than a third of these. Today, the Hexapoda is considered to contain four classes – the Insecta, and the Protura, Collembola, and Diplura. The latter three classes were formerly allied with the insect orders Archaeognatha (jumping bristletails) and Thysanura (silverfish) as the insect subclass Apterygota (‘wingless’). The Apterygota is now regarded as an artificial assemblage (Bitsch & Bitsch 2000).
    [Show full text]
  • Pathways Analysis of Invasive Plants and Insects in the Northwest Territories
    PATHWAYS ANALYSIS OF INVASIVE PLANTS AND INSECTS IN THE NORTHWEST TERRITORIES Project PM 005529 NatureServe Canada K.W. Neatby Bldg 906 Carling Ave., Ottawa, ON, K1A 0C6 Prepared by Eric Snyder and Marilyn Anions NatureServe Canada for The Department of Environment and Natural Resources. Wildlife Division, Government of the Northwest Territories March 31, 2008 Citation: Snyder, E. and Anions, M. 2008. Pathways Analysis of Invasive Plants and Insects in the Northwest Territories. Report for the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Wildlife Division, Government of the Northwest Territories. Project No: PM 005529 28 pages, 5 Appendices. Pathways Analysis of Invasive Plants and Insects in the Northwest Territories i NatureServe Canada Acknowledgements NatureServe Canada and the Government of the Northwest Territories, Department of Environment and Natural Resources, would like to acknowledge the contributions of all those who supplied information during the production of this document. Canada : Eric Allen (Canadian Forest Service), Lorna Allen (Alberta Natural Heritage Information Centre, Alberta Community Development, Parks & Protected Areas Division), Bruce Bennett (Yukon Department of Environment), Rhonda Batchelor (Northwest Territories, Transportation), Cristine Bayly (Ecology North listserve), Terri-Ann Bugg (Northwest Territories, Transportation), Doug Campbell (Saskatchewan Conservation Data Centre), Suzanne Carrière (Northwest Territories, Environment & Natural Resources), Bill Carpenter (Moraine Point Lodge, Northwest
    [Show full text]
  • Esperiana Memoir 5
    Esperiana Memoir 5 548 S. Schwanfeld, 6. Juni 2010 ISBN 978-3-938249-11-6 Contents Noctuidae of Cape Verde Islands (Lepidoptera, Noctuoidea) (Hermann H. Hacker, Hans-Peter Schreier and Eyjolf Aistleitner) 7 Noctuidae collected by Karlheinz Politzar in Bogué, Mauritania (Lepidoptera, Noctuoidea) (Hermann H. Hacker and Axel Hausmann) 97 Obituary to Dr. Karlheinz Politzar. 5th October 1938 – 20th October 2007 (Hermann H. Hacker and Axel Hausmann) 169 Noctuidae of the Socotra Archipelago (Yemen) with notes on the fauna of the southern Arabian Peninsula (Lepidoptera, Noctuoidea) (Hermann H. Hacker and Aidas Saldaitis) 172 Revision of the genus Oraesia Guenée, 1852 (Old World) and related genera (Lepidoptera, Noctuoidea, Noctuidae, Calpinae) (Gottfried Behounek, Hermann H. Hacker and Wolfgang Speidel) 243 A new genus of Metarbelidae (Lepidoptera: Cossoidea) from the Afrotropical Region with the description of seven new species (Ingo Lehmann) 294 New Dasypolia Guenée, 1852 (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) taxa from Central Asia (Povilas Ivinskis and Aidas Saldaitis) 323 Ulotrichopus eugeniae spec. nov. (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae, Catocalinae) from East-Africa (Aidas Saldaitis and Povilas Ivinskis) 329 Aethalopteryx diksami, a new species (Lepidoptera, Cossidae) from Yemen, Sokotra Island (Roman Yakovlev and Aidas Saldaitis) 333 Two new species of Tischeriidae from East Africa (Lepidoptera, Tischerioidea) (Wolfram Mey) 337 A taxonomic review of the genera Parapsectris Meyrick, 1911 and Athrips Billberg, 1820 in Africa (Oleksiy V. Bidzilya) 341 Records of interesting eremic Noctuidae species new to several southern Mediterranean countries (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae) (Lutz Lehmann) 409 Revisional notes on the Genus Thiacidas Walker, 1855 (= Trisula Moore, 1858, syn. nov.), new additional data on the Thiacidinae with descriptions of seven new species and two subspecies (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae) (Hermann H.
    [Show full text]
  • Redalyc.Miscellaneous Additions to the Lepidoptera of Portugal (Insecta
    SHILAP Revista de Lepidopterología ISSN: 0300-5267 [email protected] Sociedad Hispano-Luso-Americana de Lepidopterología España Corley, M. F. V.; Maravalhas, E.; Passos de Carvalho, J. Miscellaneous additions to the Lepidoptera of Portugal (Insecta: Lepidoptera) SHILAP Revista de Lepidopterología, vol. 34, núm. 136, 2006, pp. 407-427 Sociedad Hispano-Luso-Americana de Lepidopterología Madrid, España Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=45513611 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative 407-427 Miscellaneous addition 14/12/06 21:11 Página 407 SHILAP Revta. lepid., 34 (136), 2006: 407-427 SRLPEF ISSN:0300-5267 Miscellaneous additions to the Lepidoptera of Portugal (Insecta: Lepidoptera) M. F. V. Corley, E. Maravalhas & J. Passos de Carvalho (†) Abstrac 143 species of Lepidoptera collected by the authors and others in various localities in Portugal are listed as additions to the Portuguese fauna. 26 of the species are new records for the Iberian Peninsula. Two species are deleted from the Portuguese list. KEY WORDS: Insecta, Lepidoptera, distribution, Portugal. Adições à fauna de Lepidoptera de Portugal (Insecta: Lepidoptera) Resumo São referidas 143 espécies de Lepidoptera, coligidas de várias localidades de Portugal pelos autores e outros, que se considera serem novos registos para a fauna portuguesa. 26 destas espécies são também novas para a Península Ibérica. Dois registos são suprimidos. PALAVRAS CHAVE: Insecta, Lepidoptera, distribuição geográfica, Portugal. Adiciones a la fauna de Lepidoptera de Portugal (Insecta: Lepidoptera) Resumen Se citan 143 especies de Lepidoptera, cogidas en varios puntos de Portugal por los autores y otros, que se consideran nuevas para la fauna portuguesa.
    [Show full text]
  • Microlepidoptera.Hu Redigit: Fazekas Imre
    Microlepidoptera.hu Redigit: Fazekas Imre 5 2012 Microlepidoptera.hu A magyar Microlepidoptera kutatások hírei Hungarian Microlepidoptera News A journal focussed on Hungarian Microlepidopterology Kiadó—Publisher: Regiograf Intézet – Regiograf Institute Szerkesztő – Editor: Fazekas Imre, e‐mail: [email protected] Társszerkesztők – Co‐editors: Pastorális Gábor, e‐mail: [email protected]; Szeőke Kálmán, e‐mail: [email protected] HU ISSN 2062–6738 Microlepidoptera.hu 5: 1–146. http://www.microlepidoptera.hu 2012.12.20. Tartalom – Contents Elterjedés, biológia, Magyarország – Distribution, biology, Hungary Buschmann F.: Kiegészítő adatok Magyarország Zygaenidae faunájához – Additional data Zygaenidae fauna of Hungary (Lepidoptera: Zygaenidae) ............................... 3–7 Buschmann F.: Két új Tineidae faj Magyarországról – Two new Tineidae from Hungary (Lepidoptera: Tineidae) ......................................................... 9–12 Buschmann F.: Új adatok az Asalebria geminella (Eversmann, 1844) magyarországi előfordulásához – New data Asalebria geminella (Eversmann, 1844) the occurrence of Hungary (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae, Phycitinae) .................................................................................................. 13–18 Fazekas I.: Adatok Magyarország Pterophoridae faunájának ismeretéhez (12.) Capperia, Gillmeria és Stenoptila fajok új adatai – Data to knowledge of Hungary Pterophoridae Fauna, No. 12. New occurrence of Capperia, Gillmeria and Stenoptilia species (Lepidoptera: Pterophoridae) ……………………….
    [Show full text]
  • Harmful Non-Indigenous Species in the United States
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 368 561 SE 054 264 TITLE Harmful Non-Indigenous Species in the United States. INSTITUTION Congress of the U.S., Washington, D.C. Office of Technology Assessment. REPORT NO ISBN-0-16-042075-X; OTA-F-565 PUB DATE Sep 93 NOTE 409p.; Chapter One, The "Summary" has also been printed as a separate publication (OTA-F-566). ANAILABLE FROMU.S. Government Printing Office, Superintendent of Documents, Mail Stop: SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-9328. PUB TYPE Books (010) Reports Research/Technical (143) EDRS PRICE MF01/PC17 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Animals; Biotechnology; Case Studies; Decision Making; *Federal Legislation; Financial Support; Genetic Engineering; International Law; Natural Resources; *Plants (Botany); *Public Policy; Science Education; State Legislation; Weeds; Wildlife Management IDENTIFIERS Environmental Issues; Environmental Management; *Environmental Problems; Florida; Global Change; Hawaii; *Non Indigenous Speciez ABSTRACT Non-indigenous species (NIS) are common in the United States landscape. While some are beneficial, others are harmful and can cause significant economic, environmental, and health damage. This study, requested by the U.S. House Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee, examined State and Federal policies related to these harmful NIS. The report is presented in 10 chapters. Chapter 1 identifies the issues and options related to the topic and a summary of the findings from the individual chapters that follow. Chapters 2 "The Consequences of NIS" and 3 "The Changing Numbers, Causes, and Rates of
    [Show full text]
  • Horticultural, Landscape, and Ornamental Crops
    Section F Pests common to Douglas-fir, Horticultural, True Fir, Pine and Spruce Christmas tree (Common pests)—Conifer Landscape, and aphid Cinara occidentalis and Cinara abietis Ornamental Crops Pest description and crop damage C. abietis are large, dark aphids typically feeding on upper stems and tended by ants. May distort stems. C. occidentalis feed at the base of needles on 1 year IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING THE USE and older foliage, often in the lower portion of the tree and may be OF CHLORPYRIFOS: quite damaging. The State of Oregon has adopted new restrictive rules on See table: the use of chlorpyrifos-containing products in Oregon. Hosts and Symptoms of Major Aphid and Adelgid Pests of Please refer to Oregon Department of Agriculture Christmas Trees Permanent Chlorpyrifos Rule at https://www.oregon.gov/oda/programs/Pesticides/ Management—cultural control RegulatoryIssues/Documents/Documents/2020/ C. abietis is easily spotted and often controlled by squishing ChlorpyrifosRule.pdf colonies by hand or spot spraying. Minor outbreaks of both species may be kept in check with beneficial insect predators or spot treatments. Management—chemical control ♦ azadirachtin (AzaDirect and others)—Some formulations are OMRI-listed for organic use. ♦ bifenthrin (OnyxPro, Sniper and others)—Restricted use pesticide. (Group 3) Christmas Tree Plantation Pests ♦ chlorpyrifos (Lorsban Advanced, Warhawk and others)— RESTRICTED USE IN OREGON. (Group 1) Chal Landgren and Franki Porter ♦ Chromobacterium subtsugae (Grandevo)—OMRI-listed for Latest revision—March 2021 organic use. ♦ cyantraniliprole (Mainspring GNL)—(Group 28) ♦ cyclaniliprole (Group 28) + flonicamid (Group 29)—Pradia In all cases, follow the instructions on the pesticide label. The PNW ♦ dinotefuran (Safari 20 SG)— (Group 4) Insect Management Handbook has no legal status, whereas the ♦ flupyradifurone (Altus)—(Group 4) pesticide label is a legal document.
    [Show full text]
  • A Remarkable New Species of the Genus Catatinagma Rebel, 1903 (Lepidoptera, Gelechiidae) from Turkmenistan
    Nota Lepi. 37(1) 2014: 67–74 | DOI 10.3897/nl.37.7935 A remarkable new species of the genus Catatinagma Rebel, 1903 (Lepidoptera, Gelechiidae) from Turkmenistan Oleksiy V. Bidzilya1 1 Kiev National Taras Shevchenko University, Zoological Museum, Volodymyrska str., 60, MSP 01601, Kyiv, Ukraine; [email protected] http://zoobank.org/8A092C1D-38A1-47D9-B56C-9513184E4F6D Received 31 January 2014; accepted 29 April 2014; published: 15 June 2014 Subject Editor: Lauri Kaila Abstract. A new highly specialized Catatinagma Rebel, 1903 species is described from Turkmenistan. Both sexes have completely reduced hindwings and strongly reduced forewings. The adults are active in February, jumping amongst Carex physodes M. Bieb. and being associated with rodent burrows. The new species is similar to Metanarsia trisignella Bidzilya, 2008, in the male genitalia. Both species are placed here provisionally in Catatinagma Rebel, 1903, and their position within Apatetrini is briefly discussed. The adult and the genitalia of both sexes are illustrated, and the behaviour of the new species is described. Introduction As a result of my study of material deposited in the Zoological Institute of the Russian Acade- my of Sciences (Russia, Sankt-Petersburg, ZIN), a very remarkable narrow-winged species of Gelechiidae with prominent frontal process from Repetek Nature Reserve (SE Turkmenistan) was discovered. As it turned out after a detailed examination, the species was an undescribed member of the subfamily Apatetrinae, tribe Apatetrini (Karsholt et al. 2013) but its generic assignment was unclear. A well-developed beak-shaped frontal process on the head and stenoptery in both sexes with fully reduced hindwing were recognized as external morphological specializations of the new species.
    [Show full text]
  • Harmful Non-Indigenous Species in the U.S
    Harmful Non-Indigenous Species in the United States September 1993 OTA-F-565 NTIS order #PB94-107679 GPO stock #052-003-01347-9 Recommended Citation: U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, Harmful Non-Indigenous Species in the United States, OTA-F-565 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, September 1993). For Sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office ii Superintendent of Documents, Mail Stop, SSOP. Washington, DC 20402-9328 ISBN O-1 6-042075-X Foreword on-indigenous species (NIS)-----those species found beyond their natural ranges—are part and parcel of the U.S. landscape. Many are highly beneficial. Almost all U.S. crops and domesticated animals, many sport fish and aquiculture species, numerous horticultural plants, and most biologicalN control organisms have origins outside the country. A large number of NIS, however, cause significant economic, environmental, and health damage. These harmful species are the focus of this study. The total number of harmful NIS and their cumulative impacts are creating a growing burden for the country. We cannot completely stop the tide of new harmful introductions. Perfect screening, detection, and control are technically impossible and will remain so for the foreseeable future. Nevertheless, the Federal and State policies designed to protect us from the worst species are not safeguarding our national interests in important areas. These conclusions have a number of policy implications. First, the Nation has no real national policy on harmful introductions; the current system is piecemeal, lacking adequate rigor and comprehensiveness. Second, many Federal and State statutes, regulations, and programs are not keeping pace with new and spreading non-indigenous pests.
    [Show full text]