• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

H r GENERAL CATALOGUE GF THE HEMIPTERA G. HORVATH, General Editor H. M. PARSHLEY, Managing Editor FASCICLE III PYRRHOCORIDAE BY ROLAND F. HUSSEY, Sc. D., New York City With Bibliography BY ELIZABETH SHERMAN, A. B., Mt. Vernon, N. Y. PUBLISHED BY SMITH COLLEGE, NORTHAMPTON, MASS., U.S.A. 1929 521 H 68 GENERAL CATALOGUE OF THE HEMIPTERA G. HORVATH, General Editor H. M. PARSHLEY, Managing Editor ru i m CD o =- - r^ i^H FASCICLE III ^=m PYRRHOCORIDAE ^^» BY ^^ ROLAND F. HUSSEY, Sc. D., iVew York City With Bibliography BY ELIZABETH SHERMAN, A. B., Mt. Vernon, N. Y. PUBLISHED BY SMITH COLLEGE, NORTHAMPTON, MASS., V. S. A. 1929 STfjE CoUrgiate ^rcsa GEORGE BANTA PUBLISHING COMPANY MENASHA, WISCONSIN EDITORIAL BOARD Hungerpord H. G. Barber H. B. Knight W. E. China H. H. Z. P. Metcalf C. J. Drake W D. FUNKHOUSER H. M. Parshley DE LA TORRE-BUENO G. HORVATH J. R- PYRRHOCORIDAE BY Roland F. Hussey WITH Bibliography BY Elizabeth Sherman INTRODUCTION Thirty-five years have passed since the publication of the last complete list of the Pyrrhocoridae, in the second volume of the "Catalogue General des Hemipteres" by Lethierry and Severin. From that time until about 1912 this family received considerable attention from Hemipterists and nu- merous species were described, principally by Breddin, Bergroth, Distant and Schouteden. These were listed in Bergroth's second supplement to the Lethierry and Severin Catalogue, which appeared in the Memoires de la Societe Entomologique de Belgique in 1913. Since then, however, entomologists have given scant attention to the Pyrrhocoridae. It is my hope that renewed activity will follow the appearance of the present Catalogue, with its index to the literature on the family. This Catalogue of the Pyrrhocoridae was essentially completed late in 1926. Since then I have not been actively associated with any form of entomological endeavor, and it has not been possible for me to make a care- ful record of the literature which has appeared in the last three years. The citations I have included for 1926, 1927, and 1928 are limited, therefore, to references taken from the "Zoological Record," and to the few papers that have come to my personal attention. The references to the literature prior to 1926 are, I believe, reasonably complete, insofar as they refer to the taxonomy, distribution, and biology of the species. In some cases, notably Pyrrhocoris apterus, 1 have subjected the list of citations to a careful scrutiny and have eliminated a number of non-essential ones. Such omissions were restricted to the local lists which seem to add little of real importance to our knowledge of distribution. It should also be noted that in preparing this Catalogue I have made no attempt to cite the Pyrrhocorid references in the special literature of economic entomology. The few such references included are merely those which I chanced upon in my search of the general literature on this family. Acknowledgments are due to several of my hemipterological confreres for assistance in the preparation of the Catalogue: to Messrs. H. G. Barber and J. R. de la Torre-Bueno, as also to the American Museum of Natural History, for the privilege of utilizing their respective libraries, and Mr. Barber has also very kindly examined the types of several of Kirkaldy's species in the United States National Museum for me; to the late Dr. C. L. Witheycombe, for information regarding the identity of several species of American Dysdercus; to Mr. W. E. China, who has very gen- erously advised me regarding the correct assignments of certain forms de- scribed by Walker, Kirby, and Distant; and to Miss Elizabeth Sherman, student in Smith College, who has undertaken the formal Bibliography 3 4 Introduction printed at the end of the work. To all of these I wish to extend my most sincere thanks. The Pyrrhocoridae constitute one of the smaller families of the Hemip- tera, only 360 species being known at the present time. The majority of these are of medium size or larger, and many of them are brilliantly colored, so it is safe to say that a great number of Pyrrhocorids still await discovery. The family is primarily tropical and subtropical in its distribu- tion; and careful collecting, with attention concentrated on the less con- spicuous forms, will doubtless bring to light many species which thus far have not been detected. The genus Pyrrhocoris alone presents an exception to the general dis- tribution of the family: it is strictly Palaearctic in its range, and several of its species endure the rigorous climate of Siberia. The common Pyr- rhocoris apterus, so abundant in Europe, has also been reported from Madras and New Jersey, and is well established in Costa Rica according to Pittier and Biolley (1895), but its adventitious nature in these localities can not be questioned. Similarly, the Australian Dindymus versicolor is recorded from New Zealand, but Myers (1925) states that no Pyrrhocorid is es- tablished in those islands; so that this appears also to be an adventitious form insofar as New Zealand is concerned. And Kirkaldy (1902) was unable to confirm earlier reports of the occurrence of a Pyrrhocorid, Dysdercus peruvianus, in Hawaii. About one-third of all the known species, and more than half the genera of the Pyrrhocoridae, occur in the Indo-Malayan region, which thus appears to be the primary center of distribution of the family. Dispersal has occurred northward through the Philippines to Formosa and Japan, eastward and southward through the Moluccas and New Guinea to Aus- tralia and so to Oceanica, and westward to Africa, if not to America as well. There are several genera which occur both in Africa and in Indo-Malaya; and related myrmecoid genera have appeared in both regions. The great majority of the palaeogeic species belong to the subfamily Pyrrhocorinae, which is represented in America only by the wide-ranging genus Dysdercus. Otherwise, the American Pyrrhocoridae constitute a group which is very distinct from the Old World forms of the family, as will appear below. In this subfamily also myrmecoid forms have appeared, notably Arhaphe, Japetus, and the singular Brazilian Thaumastaneis, the latter approaching very near to the Myodochine L3'gaeidae. The affinities of the Pyrrhocoridae with the Lygaeidae have long been recognized. Until the beginning of the present century this family was very generally considered as a mere subfamily of the Lygaeidae, and was placed at the end of that group in numerous catalogues. However, its independent family rank as recognized by Renter, Horvath, Bergroth and other recent writers, can not be denied. I would go even farther than this, as it is my Introduction S belief that the Euryophthalminae and the Pyrrhocorinae are each worthy of elevation into distinct family rank, the two thus constituting the super- family Pyrrhocoroidea. The suggestion made by Singh-Pruthi (1925), to abolish this family entirely and to annex its subfamilies to different groups of Hemiptera, is extremely ill-considered and can not be supported. The two principal subdivisions of this family differ from one another very markedly in genital structure. In this respect the Euryophthalminae approach the Lygaeidae, while the Pyrrhocorinae show distinct evidence of relationship with the Coreidae. This difference in the female genital structure was used long ago by Stal (1866) to subdivide the family, but it was only recently that a similar differential relationship was demonstrated for the males by Singh-Pruthi (op. cit.). I shall not be surprised if future workers find it necessary to divide the Pyrrhocoridae into two families, whose lines of relationship lead respectively to the Lygaeidae on the one hand, and to the Coreoidea on the other. For the present, however, I retain the family Pyrrhocoridae in its standard sense, but the Euryophthalminae must be separated into two tribes, one comprising the American and the other the Old World forms. The basis for this was set forth by Stal (1870, Enum. Hem. I: 90), and the major divisions of the Pyrrhocoridae may be characterized as follows: Subfamily Euryopthalminae. Sixth ventral segment of female divided on the median line. Male genitalia similar to those of Lygaeidae. Tribe Euryophthalmini, nov. Lower surface of the head not sulcate or grooved longitudinally behind the bucculae; anterior femora terete or only very slightly sulcate beneath at base; orifices not auriculate. American forms. Tribe Physopeltini, nov. Lower surface of head longitudinally impressed behind the bucculae, the sulcus often reaching the base of the head; anterior femora sulcate beneath for most or all of their length; orifices auriculate. Old world forms. Subfamily P3nThocorinae. Sixth ventral segment of female entire; male genitalia constructed very much like those of Coreidae. The following new names are proposed in this Catalogue: Dysdercus mimulus, for Dysdercus mimus Stal, auctt., nee Say. var. tergiversans, for Dysdercus superstitiosus var. intermedius Schout., preoccupied, var, vacillans, for Dysdercus poecilus var, simplex Bredd,, preoccupied. The following terminology has been used in referring to the type species of the various genera: Orthotype—The species explicitly named as genotype by the founder of the genus, at the time of its description, when such designation has been made. 6 Introduction Monotype—A unique species named by the founder in connection with the description of the genus, but not explicitly named the type by him. Logotype—A species subsequently selected as the genotype, either by the founder or by another, from several species assigned to the genus at its founding, no orthotype having been designated by the founder of the genus. In accordance with the desire of the Editorial Board, the genera have been arranged as nearly as possible in their true systematic order, but the species are listed alphabetically under each genus.

Load more

  152

Copy Link