辽宁省首株柯萨奇病毒B组5型全基因组序列分析

研究引起辽宁地区手足口病的柯萨奇病毒B组5型（coxsackievirus B5,CV-B5）基因组特征。对2018年从辽宁省688份肠道病毒核酸阳性的标本中分离到的1株CV-B5进行高通量测序，并对其全基因组进行遗传进化分析。结果表明，CV-B5辽宁分离株与国内流行株的全基因组核苷酸序列同源性为78.5%～97%，氨基酸序列同源性为75.3%～96.7%。基于全基因组的进化分析将CV-B5流行株分为A～D四个基因型，辽宁分离株属于D基因型。通过重组分析发现其在P3区的3D区段发生重组。首次在辽宁地区手足口病患儿中分离出CV-B5，辽宁省分离株（LN2018-23-21/CHN/2018）可能为重组株。     

柯萨奇病毒A组2型江苏分离株(JS16-80)全基因组序列分析

柯萨奇病毒A组2型(CV-A2)是引起手足口病和疱疹性咽峡炎暴发流行的重要病原体。本文选取中国大陆流行的D基因型代表毒株JS16-80/JS/CHN/2016(简写JS16-80)进行全基因组序列测定和分析,了解其基因特征,并进行重组和进化分析。结果提示,JS16-80在非结构蛋白P2和P3多区段均有出现重组现象,并且多个A组肠道病毒血清型参与了非结构蛋白的重组。本研究可帮助了解CV-A2的全基因组特征和重组特点,进一步为CV-A2重组对其进化和潜在致病力的影响提供基础数据。     

天津市致病毒性脑炎柯萨奇病毒B组5型全基因组序列分析

肠道病毒是我国病毒性脑炎(Viral encephalitis,VE)的主要病原体。本文研究对4株引起VE的天津柯萨奇病毒B组5型(Coxsackievirus B5,CV-B5)分离株进行Illumina MiniSeq高通量测序,并对其全基因组特征、进化及重组特点进行分析。结果提示,4株CV-B5天津分离株的全基因组核苷酸和氨基酸序列同源性分别为84.5%~100.0%和98.1%~100.0%,与国内流行株的全基因组核苷酸序列同源性为83.2%~96.5%,氨基酸序列同源性为96.4%~99.4%。基于全基因组的系统进化分析将CV-B5流行株分为A-D四个基因型,其中天津与国内流行株均属于C基因型。C基因型进一步分为3个进化分支,而天津分离株处在两个不同的分支上。基于基因组各区段序列的系统进化与SimPlot重组分析结果显示,天津分离株15-39N、15-41N与埃可病毒30型(Echovirus 30,E-30)原型株在P3区3B、3C、3D区域均检测到重组信号。本研究有助于了解CV-B5的全基因组特点和重组规律,为相关疾病的防控提供依据。     

广东省一株新型肠道病毒EV-B83型的全基因组序列进化分析及重组分析

本研究对2001年广东省急性弛缓性麻痹(Acute flaccid paralysis,AFP)病例中分离到的一株肠道病毒AFP341_GD-CHN_2001株进行了高通量测序后,获取该全基因组序列,经鉴定该毒株为EV-B83。为了解该广东省首株EV-B83分离株的全基因组特征及其重组特点,本研究对AFP341_GD-CHN_2001毒株通过最大似然法构建系统进化树,利用bootscanning分析该毒株与其它型别肠道病毒的重组位点,最后根据该重组位点分区段构建系统进化树,进一步验证重组分析结果。全长VP1序列构建的分子进化树表明,AFP341_GD-CHN_2001毒株与EV-B83原型株及柬埔寨SEP025_KH_2012分离株形成一簇;初步构建P1、P2、P3编码区序列系统进化树,提示该分离株在其分子进化中可能存在基因重组,而bootscanning分析表明非结构蛋白编码区是其发生基因重组的区域。根据bootscanning分析的断裂点对该毒株的全基因组序列分成3段构建系统进化树,该系统进化分析结果进一步明确该分离株于2B、2C、3D非结构编码区存在型间重组,与AFP341_GD-CHN_2001发生重组的毒株为CV-A9分离株NSW-V20_AU_2008、CV-B2分离株NSW-V53_AU_2010以及CV-B3分离株SSM_JL-CHN_2006。当前GenBank数据库中仅有来自美国以及中国云南的两株EV-B83全基因组序列,缺乏对该基因型的分子进化特征描述,本研究中的AFP341_GD-CHN_2001毒株为广东省首株EV-B83分离株,扩展了EV-B83数据信息,为今后EV-B83的研究提供了基础性资料。     

中国广东省18株柯萨奇病毒A6型分离株全基因组特征分析

为了解2013年广东省引起手足口病的CVA6全基因组特征,探索研究暴发流行期与非流行期CVA6毒株间的基因异同,本研究选取18株广东省CVA6毒株进行全基因组序列扩增及测序,采用DNASTAR6.0、MEGA5.2和SimPlot3.5.1等软件对获取全基因组序列进行遗传进化、比对及重组分析。序列比对显示,18株广东省CVA6毒株基因组长度在7 390~7 392bp之间,与原型株Gdula比较,在编码区无碱基插入或缺失,在非编码区存在个别碱基的插入或缺失。遗传进化分析显示,18株广东省CVA6毒株全基因组序列核苷酸和氨基酸同源性分别为90.5%~99.6%和97.5%~99.9%。2013年广东省CVA6流行期毒株在全基因组进化树中处于Ⅲ、Ⅳ两个分支,2011年非流行期毒株只存在于Ⅳ分支。基因重组分析显示,广东省GD870/2013株在P2和P3区存在基因重组现象,GD839/2013株未发现明显的重组来源。结果表明,2013年广东省引起手足口病的CVA6在暴发流行期存在Ⅲ、Ⅳ两条病毒传播链的共同流行,其中Ⅲ传播链在非结构蛋白编码区存在基因重组现象,与Ⅳ传播链相比具有较大基因差异,然而2011年CVA6非流行期间只存在Ⅳ病毒传播链。     

福建一例HAstV-5型星状病毒的全基因组测序与重组分析

为了探究一例福建省检出的HAstV-5型星状病毒2013/Fuzhou/85毒株基因组分子结构特点,本研究采用PCR分段扩增、测序、拼接的方法,获得2013/Fuzhou/85毒株基因组序列全长6 803bp:5’端和3’端均有85bp非编码区;中间3个开放阅读框:ORF1a长2 802bp(86～2 887nt),编码非结构蛋白丝氨酸蛋白酶;ORF1b长1 548bp(2 827～4 374nt),编码非结构蛋白RNA聚合酶;ORF2长2 352bp(4 367～6 718nt),编码结构蛋白衣壳蛋白前体。目前,GenBank中仅有两株HAstV-5型星状病毒全基因组序列:中国辽宁毒株(JQ403108)和巴西哥亚尼亚毒株(DQ028633),2013/Fuzhou/85毒株和中国辽宁毒株核苷酸相似度最高,达94.4%。对该HAstV-5型星状病毒3个开放阅读框分别构建系统进化树,发现ORF1a与HAstV-1(JF327666)相似度最高,ORF1b和ORF2与HAstV-5(JQ403108)相似度最高,提示其有可能存在重组,用Simplot软件进行重组分析,重组位点位于2 741bp,在ORF1a和ORF1b重叠区的上游。本研究中对2013/Fuzhou/85毒株的全基因组测序和重组分析,可以为星状病毒的重组和遗传进化规律研究提供参考。     

一株A型口蹄疫流行毒株全序列的测定及其全长感染性克隆的构建

【目的】测定一株A型口蹄疫流行毒株的全基因组序列,并构建其全长感染性克隆。【方法】参照已公布的A型口蹄疫病毒序列设计引物,将分离的口蹄疫病毒株A/Sea-97/CHA/2014全基因组分为4个重叠的片段进行RT-PCR扩增,并对其进行序列测定与分析。利用酶切连接法将4个基因片段依次克隆至p Blue Script SKhdv载体中,构建该流行毒株的全长c DNA克隆p QAHN。pQAHN经NotⅠ线性化后转染表达T7 RNA聚合酶的BSR/T7细胞,拯救病毒。【结果】口蹄疫病毒全基因组序列测定结果表明该毒株基因组全长8 171 bp[不包括poly(C)区段和poly(A)尾巴],开放阅读框为6 996 bp,编码2 332个氨基酸,5′和3′非编码区分别为1 091 bp和95 bp。VP1系统发生树分析表明该毒株与A/GDMM/CHA/2013毒株亲缘关系最近,相似性为99.1%。线化全长质粒转染BSR/T7细胞68 h后可观察到典型的细胞病变。拯救病毒的间接免疫荧光、RT-PCR和序列测定结果表明成功拯救出了具有感染性的FMDV。拯救病毒与亲本病毒的噬斑表型及生长曲线试验表明二者具有相似的生长表型和增殖能力。【结论】该研究为我国口蹄疫病原生态分布、分子流行病学调查以及A型FMD新型疫苗的研究提供了有益的材料。     

2012年江苏省柯萨奇病毒A组14型分离株全基因序列分析

目的探讨2012年江苏省手足口病(HFMD)病原体CVA14病毒的全基因序列特点。方法采集江苏省邳州市2012年HFMD患儿的咽拭子或肛拭子样本,分离培养得到2株CVA14病毒,利用RT-PCR扩增CVA14全长基因。利用DNAStar软件包的Meg Align进行核苷酸序列分析,构建系统进化树。结果扩增得到覆盖CVA14全基因组的3个片段,拼接后为CVA14全基因组,分别命名为PZ05Y/JS/2012和PZ15G/JS/2012。同源性分析结果显示,这2株分离株之间同源性为99.4%,原型株(G-14)的核苷酸同源性为84.4%。进化树结果显示,所有的CVA14形成A、B和C共3个分支。结论获得了江苏省CVA14的全基因序列,分析了该毒株的进化特点,补充了中国CVA14病毒的基因信息。     

F基因型腮腺炎病毒全基因组基因特征分析

为了解我国现流行的F基因型腮腺炎病毒全基因组的基因特征,本研究选择对腮腺炎病毒F基因型参考株MuVi/Shandong.CHN/4.05[F]进行全基因组测序,结合其它来自于GenBank的腮腺炎病毒全基因组序列,共同分析我国流行的F基因型腮腺炎病毒的全基因组特征及其与现有疫苗株的遗传差异及抗原位点变异情况。通过研究发现,和腮腺炎病毒其它基因型相比,腮腺炎毒株MuVi/Shandong.CHN/4.05[F]全基因组核苷酸差异在3.8%~6.5%之间,其中与A基因型(疫苗株)差异最大,与B和N基因型差异最小。腮腺炎毒株MuVi/Shandong.CHN/4.05[F]和疫苗株在全基因组序列上分别存在26个和25个N-糖基化位点,和疫苗株相比,腮腺炎毒株MuVi/Shandong.CHN/4.05[F]在HN蛋白上第464~466氨基酸位点上增加了一个N-糖基化位点,而其它基因型的腮腺炎病毒在这个位点上也均为N-糖基化位点。另外,腮腺炎毒株MuVi/Shandong.CHN/4.05[F]和疫苗株在其它已知的抗原相关位点上也存在着氨基酸变异。我国现流行的腮腺炎流行株与腮腺炎病毒其它基因型及疫苗株之间在全基因组上已存在较大的差异,提示需进一步加强对国内现有腮腺炎流行株与疫苗株之间的遗传变异分析,系统评价当前疫苗的免疫保护效果。     

一株柯萨奇病毒B组5型分离株V1641/YN/CHN/2016的全基因序列分析

对2016年云南省昆明市手足口病相关的柯萨奇病毒B组5型分离株V1641/YN/CHN/2016（简称V1641）全基因组进行测序,并分析其分子变异和进化特点。设计针对V1641的引物,提取病毒RNA,RT-PCR扩增和测序,拼接获得的全基因组序列。利用MEGA7.0.26、Geneious9.1.4和SimPlot3.5.1软件分析全基因序列。V1641毒株基因组全长7 392nt,5’-UTR和3’-UTR分别长744nt和90nt,编码区长6 558nt,与其他CVB5相比未见核苷酸的插入和缺失,编码一个2 185aa的多聚蛋白。CVB5流行株大体上分为两个基因组,中国大陆流行株同原型株Faulkner一起分布于GenogroupⅠ分支,外国流行株大多分布于GenogroupⅡ分支。在GenBank中,V1641与KY303900-417/JS-CHN-2013最为同源,相似性为97.86%。V1641与其他中国大陆流行株的全基因组序列的核苷酸和氨基酸相似性分别为85.1%～97.8%和97.1%～99.6%。V1641在P1、P2和P3区段均与EV-B不同血清型的原型株聚类,经...     

Effect of host plants on the infectivity of nucleopolyhedrovirus to Spodoptera exigua larvae

Previous studies have shown that the infectivity of baculovirus to herbivores is affected by phytochemicals ingested during the acquisition of viral inoculum on the foliage of host plants. Here, we measured the effects of 14 host plant species on the infectivity of Spodoptera exigua nucleopolyhedrovirus (SeNPV) to its larvae. The order of the LD₅₀ values of SeNPV among the host plants was Ipomoea aquatica > Brassica oleracea > Raphanus sativus > Amaranthus tricolor > Spinacia oleracea > Vigna unguiculata > Solanum melongena > Capsicum annuum > Apium graveolens > Allium fistulosum > Lactuca sativa > Brassica chinensis > Zea mays > Glycine max, with 940.1 ± 2.26, 424.0 ± 0.60, 295.2 ± 1.13, 147.3 ± 0.63, 138.6 ± 0.22, 119.9 ± 0.07, 119.8 ± 0.02, 109.2 ± 0.18, 104.8 ± 0.62, 102.1 ± 0.66, 97.9 ± 0.22, 89.9 ± 0.32, 79.0 ± 0.13 and 64.0 ± 0.38 OBs per larva, respectively, and the values of mean time to death of virus‐infected larvae were 6.21 ± 0.11, 7.12 ± 0.10, 7.33 ± 0.21, 6.97 ± 0.02, 7.06 ± 0.01, 7.29 ± 0.03, 7.32 ± 0.05, 7.07 ± 0.08, 7.24 ± 0.11, 7.09 ± 0.13, 7.50 ± 0.06, 7.23 ± 0.01, 7.30 ± 0.02 and 7.19 ± 0.07 days, respectively. The mean time to death of larvae decreased with increasing viral dose, and corrected mortality decreased as the larval mean time to death increased. These findings have significance for understanding the effects of host plants on the infectivity of baculovirus to noctuids.     

The genera in the second catalogue (1833–1836) of?Dejean’s Coleoptera collection

All genus-group names listed in the second edition of the catalogue (1833-1836) of Dejean’s beetle collection are recorded. For each new genus-group name the originally included available species are listed and for generic names with at least one available species, the type species and the current status are given. Names available prior to the publication of Dejean’s second catalogue (1833-1836) are listed in an appendix.The following new synonymies are proposed: Cyclonotum Dejean, 1833 (= Dactylosternum Wollaston, 1854) [Hydrophilidae], Hyporhiza Dejean, 1833 (= Rhinaspis Perty, 1830) [Scarabaeidae], Aethales Dejean, 1834 (= Epitragus Latreille, 1802) [Tenebrionidae], Arctylus Dejean, 1834 (= Praocis Eschscholtz, 1829) [Tenebrionidae], Euphron Dejean, 1834 (= Derosphaerus Thomson, 1858) [Tenebrionidae], Hipomelus Dejean, 1834 (= Trachynotus Latreille, 1828) [Tenebrionidae], Pezodontus Dejean, 1834 (= Odontopezus Alluaud, 1889) [Tenebrionidae], Zygocera Dejean, 1835 (= Disternopsis Breuning, 1939) [Cerambycidae], and Physonota Chevrolat, 1836 (= Anacassis Spaeth, 1913) [Chrysomelidae]. Heterogaster pilicornis Dejean, 1835 [Cerambycidae] and Labidomera trimaculata Chevrolat, 1836 [Chrysomelidae] are placed for the first time in synonymy with Anisogaster flavicans Deyrolle, 1862 and Chrysomela clivicollis Kirby, 1837 respectively. Type species of the following genus-group taxa are proposed: Sphaeromorphus Dejean, 1833 (Sphaeromorphus humeralis Erichson, 1843) [Scarabaeidae], Adelphus Dejean, 1834 (Helops marginatus Fabricius, 1792) [Tenebrionidae], Cyrtoderes Dejean, 1834 (Tenebrio cristatus DeGeer, 1778) [Tenebrionidae], Selenepistoma Dejean, 1834 (Opatrum acutum Wiedemann, 1823) [Tenebrionidae], Charactus Dejean, 1833 (Lycus limbatus Fabricius, 1801) [Lycidae], Corynomalus Chevrolat, 1836 (Eumorphus limbatus Olivier, 1808) [Endomychidae], Hebecerus Dejean, 1835 (Acanthocinus marginicollis Boisduval, 1835) [Cerambycidae], Pterostenus Dejean, 1835 (Cerambyx abbreviatus Fabricius, 1801) [Cerambycidae], Psalicerus Dejean, 1833 (Lucanus femoratus Fabricius, 1775) [Lucanidae], and Pygolampis Dejean, 1833 (Lampyris glauca Olivier, 1790) [Lampyridae]. A new name, Neoeutrapela Bousquet and Bouchard [Tenebrionidae], is proposed for Eutrapela Dejean, 1834 (junior homonym of Eutrapela Hübner, 1809).The following generic names, made available in Dejean’s catalogue, were found to be older than currently accepted valid names: Catoxantha Dejean, 1833 over Catoxantha Solier, 1833 [Buprestidae], Pristiptera Dejean, 1833 over Pelecopselaphus Solier, 1833 [Buprestidae], Charactus Dejean, 1833 over Calopteron Laporte, 1836 [Lycidae], Cyclonotum Dejean, 1833 over Dactylosternum Wollaston, 1854 [Hydrophilidae], Ancylonycha Dejean, 1833 over Holotrichia Hope, 1837 [Scarabaeidae], Aulacium Dejean, 1833 over Mentophilus Laporte, 1840 [Scarabaeidae], Sciuropus Dejean, 1833 over Ancistrosoma Curtis, 1835 [Scarabaeidae], Sphaeromorphus Dejean, 1833 over Ceratocanthus White, 1842 [Scarabaeidae], Psalicerus Dejean, 1833 over Leptinopterus Hope, 1838 [Lucanidae], Adelphus Dejean, 1834 over Praeugena Laporte, 1840 [Tenebrionidae], Amatodes Dejean, 1834 over Oncosoma Westwood, 1843 [Tenebrionidae], Cyrtoderes Dejean, 1834 over Phligra Laporte, 1840 [Tenebrionidae], Euphron Dejean, 1834 over Derosphaerus Thomson, 1858 [Tenebrionidae], Pezodontus Dejean, 1834 over Odontopezus Alluaud, 1889 [Tenebrionidae], Anoplosthaeta Dejean, 1835 over Prosopocera Blanchard, 1845 [Cerambycidae], Closteromerus Dejean, 1835 over Hylomela Gahan, 1904 [Cerambycidae], Hebecerus Dejean, 1835 over Ancita Thomson, 1864 [Cerambycidae], Mastigocera Dejean, 1835over Mallonia Thomson, 1857 [Cerambycidae], Zygocera Dejean, 1835 over Disternopsis Breuning, 1939 [Cerambycidae], Australica Chevrolat, 1836 over Calomela Hope, 1840 [Chrysomelidae], Edusa Chevrolat, 1836 over Edusella Chapuis, 1874 [Chrysomelidae], Litosonycha Chevrolat, 1836 over Asphaera Duponchel and Chevrolat, 1842 [Chrysomelidae], and Pleuraulaca Chevrolat, 1836 over Iphimeis Baly, 1864 [Chrysomelidae]. In each of these cases, Reversal of Precedence (ICZN 1999: 23.9) or an applicationto the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature will be necessary to retain usage of the younger synonyms.     

Comments on controversial tick (Acari: Ixodida) species names and species described or resurrected from 2003 to 2008

There are numerous discrepancies in recent published lists of the ticks of the world. Here we review the controversial names, presenting evidence for or against their validity and excluding some altogether. We also address spelling errors and present a list of 17 species described or resurrected during the years 2003–2008. We consider the following 35 tick species names to be invalid: Argas fischeri Audouin, 1826, Ornithodoros boliviensis Kohls and Clifford, 1964, Ornithodoros steini (Schulze, 1935), Amblyomma acutangulatum Neumann, 1899, Amblyomma arianae Keirans and Garris, 1986, Amblyomma bibroni (Gervais, 1842), Amblyomma colasbelcouri (Santos Dias, 1958), Amblyomma concolor Neumann, 1899, Amblyomma cooperi Nuttall and Warburton, 1908, Amblyomma curruca Schulze, 1936, Amblyomma cyprium Neumann, 1899, Amblyomma decorosum (Koch, 1867), Amblyomma nocens Robinson, 1912, Amblyomma perpunctatum (Packard, 1869), Amblyomma striatum Koch, 1844, Amblyomma superbum Santos Dias, 1953, Amblyomma testudinis (Conil, 1877), Amblyomma trinitatis Turk, 1948, Dermacentor confractus (Schulze 1933), Dermacentor daghestanicus Olenev, 1928, Haemaphysalis himalaya Hoogstraal, 1966, Haemaphysalis vietnamensis Hoogstraal and Wilson, 1966, Hyalomma detritum Schulze, 1919, Ixodes apteridis Maskell, 1897, Ixodes donarthuri Santos Dias, 1980, Ixodes kempi Nuttall, 1913, Ixodes neotomae Cooley, 1944, Ixodes rangtangensis Teng, 1973, Ixodes robertsi Camicas, Hervy, Adam and Morel, 1998, Ixodes serrafreirei Amorim, Gazetta, Bossi and Linhares, 2003, Ixodes tertiarius Scudder, 1885, Ixodes uruguayensis Kohls and Clifford, 1967, Ixodes zealandicus Dumbleton, 1961, Ixodes zumpti Arthur, 1960 and Rhipicephalus camelopardalis Walker and Wiley, 1959. We consider the following 40 names valid: Argas delicatus Neumann, 1910, Argas vulgaris Filippova, 1961, Ornithodoros aragaoi Fonseca, 1960, Ornithodoros dugesi Mazzoti, 1943, Ornithodoros knoxjonesi Jones and Clifford, 1972, Ornithodoros marocanus Velu, 1919, Ornithodoros nattereri Warburton, 1927, Amblyomma beaurepairei Vogelsang and Santos Dias, 1953, Amblyomma crassipes (Neumann, 1901), Amblyomma echidnae Roberts, 1953, Amblyomma fuscum Neumann, 1907, Amblyomma orlovi (Kolonin, 1995), Amblyomma parkeri Fonseca and Arag?o, 1952, Amblyomma pseudoconcolor Arag?o, 1908, Bothriocroton oudemansi (Neumann, 1910), Bothriocroton tachyglossi (Roberts, 1953), Dermacentor abaensis Teng, 1963, Dermacentor confragus (Schulze 1933), Dermacentor ushakovae Filippova and Panova, 1987, Haemaphysalis anomaloceraea Teng, 1984, Haemaphysalis filippovae Bolotin, 1979, Haemaphysalis pavlovskyi Pospelova-Shtrom, 1935, Hyalomma excavatum Koch, 1844, Hyalomma isaaci Sharif, 1928, Hyalomma rufipes Koch, 1844, Hyalomma turanicum Pomerantzev, 1946, Ixodes arabukiensis Arthur, 1959, Ixodes boliviensis Neumann, 1904, Ixodes columnae Takada and Fujita, 1992, Ixodes maslovi Emel′yanova and Kozlovskaya, 1967, Ixodes sachalinensis Filippova, 1971, Ixodes siamensis Kitaoka and Suzuki, 1983, Ixodes sigelos Keirans, Clifford and Corwin, 1976, Ixodes succineus Weidner, 1964, Rhipicephalus aurantiacus Neumann, 1907, Rhipicephalus cliffordi Morel, 1965, Rhipicephalus pilans Schulze, 1935, Rhipicephalus pseudolongus Santos Dias, 1953, Rhipicephalus serranoi Santos Dias, 1950 and Rhipicephalus tetracornus Kitaoka and Suzuki, 1983.     

The Nabidae (Insecta,Hemiptera, Heteroptera) of?Argentina

In Argentina, five genera and 14 species are recorded in the subfamilies Prostemmatinae and Nabinae: Hoplistoscelis sordidus Reuter, Lasiomerus constrictus Champion, Metatropiphorus alvarengai Reuter, Nabis argentinus Meyer-Dür, Nabis (Tropiconabis) capsiformis Germar, Nabis faminei Stål, Nabis paranensis Harris, Nabis punctipennis Blanchard, Nabis roripes Stål, Nabis setricus Harris, Nabis tandilensis Berg, Pagasa (Pagasa) costalis Reuter, Pagasa (Lampropagasa) fuscipennis Reuter and Pagasa (Pagasa) signatipennis Reuter.     

Contributions to the knowledge of subterranean trechine beetles in southern China’s karsts: five new genera (Insecta,Coleoptera, Carabidae,Trechinae)

Recent discoveries reveal that southern China’s karsts hold the most diverse and morphologically modified subterranean trechine beetles in the world, albeit the first troglobitic blind beetle was only reported in the early 1990’s. In total, 110 species belonging to 43 genera of cavernicolous trechines have hitherto been recorded from the karsts of southern China, including the following five new genera proposed below: Shiqianaphaenops Tian, gen. n., to contain two species: Shiqianaphaenops majusculus (Uéno, 1999) (= Shenaphaenops majusculus Uéno, 1999, comb. n.), the type species from Cave Feng Dong, Shiqian, Guizhou, and Shiqianaphaenops cursor (Uéno, 1999) (= Shenaphaenops cursor Uéno, 1999, comb. n.), from Cave Shenxian Dong, Shiqian, Guizhou; and the monotypic Dianotrechus Tian, gen. n. (the type species: Dianotrechus gueorguievi Tian, sp. n., from Cave Dashi Dong, Kunming, Yunnan), Tianeotrechus Tian & Tang, gen. n. (the type species: Tianeotrechus trisetosus Tian & Tang, sp. n., from Cave Bahao Dong, Tian’e County, Guangxi), Huoyanodytes Tian & Huang, gen. n. (the type species: Huoyanodytes tujiaphilus Tian & Huang, sp. n., from Longshan, Hunan) and Wanhuaphaenops Tian & Wang, gen. n. (the type species: Wanhuaphaenops zhangi Tian & Wang, sp. n., from Cave Songjia Dong, Chenzhou, Hunan).     

Revision of the subfamily Opiinae (Hymenoptera,Braconidae) from Hunan (China), including thirty-six new species and two new genera

The species of the subfamily Opiinae (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) from Hunan (Oriental China) are revised and illustrated. Thirty-six new species are described: Apodesmia bruniclypealis Li & van Achterberg, sp. n., Apodesmia melliclypealis Li & van Achterberg, sp. n., Areotetes albiferus Li & van Achterberg, sp. n., Areotetes carinuliferus Li & van Achterberg, sp. n., Areotetes striatiferus Li & van Achterberg, sp. n., Coleopioides diversinotum Li & van Achterberg, sp. n., Coleopioides postpectalis Li & van Achterberg, sp. n., Fopius dorsopiferus Li, van Achterberg & Tan, sp. n., Indiopius chenae Li & van Achterberg, sp. n., Opiognathus aulaciferus Li & van Achterberg, sp. n., Opiognathus brevibasalis Li & van Achterberg, sp. n., Opius crenuliferus Li & van Achterberg, sp. n., Opius malarator Li, van Achterberg & Tan, sp. n., Opius monilipalpis Li & van Achterberg, sp. n., Opius pachymerus Li & van Achterberg, sp. n., Opius songi Li & van Achterberg, sp. n., Opius youi Li & van Achterberg, sp. n., Opius zengi Li & van Achterberg, sp. n., Phaedrotoma acuticlypeata Li & van Achterberg, sp. n., Phaedrotoma angiclypeata Li & van Achterberg, sp. n., Phaedrotoma antenervalis Li & van Achterberg, sp. n., Phaedrotoma depressiclypealis Li & van Achterberg, sp. n., Phaedrotoma flavisoma Li & van Achterberg, sp. n., Phaedrotoma nigrisoma Li & van Achterberg, sp. n., Phaedrotoma protuberator Li & van Achterberg, sp. n., Phaedrotoma rugulifera Li & van Achterberg, sp. n., Li & van Achterberg,Phaedrotoma striatinota Li & van Achterberg, sp. n., Phaedrotoma vermiculifera Li & van Achterberg, sp. n., Rhogadopsis latipennis Li & van Achterberg, sp. n., Rhogadopsis longicaudifera Li & van Achterberg, sp. n., Rhogadopsis maculosa Li, van Achterberg & Tan, sp. n., Rhogadopsis obliqua Li & van Achterberg, sp. n., Rhogadopsis sculpturator Li & van Achterberg, sp. n., Utetes longicarinatus Li & van Achterberg, sp. n. and Xynobius notauliferus Li & van Achterberg, sp. n. Areotetes van Achterberg & Li, gen. n. (type species: Areotetes carinuliferus sp. n.) and Coleopioides van Achterberg & Li, gen. n. (type species: Coleopioides postpectalis sp. n. are described. All species are illustrated and keyed. In total 30 species of Opiinae are sequenced and the cladograms are presented. Neopius Gahan, 1917, Opiognathus Fischer, 1972, Opiostomus Fischer, 1972, and Rhogadopsis Brèthes, 1913, are treated as a valid genera based on molecular and morphological differences. Opius vittata Chen & Weng, 2005 (not Opius vittatus Ruschka, 1915), Opius ambiguus Weng & Chen, 2005 (not Wesmael, 1835) and Opius mitis Chen & Weng, 2005 (not Fischer, 1963) are primary homonymsandarerenamed into Phaedrotoma depressa Li & van Achterberg, nom. n., Opius cheni Li & van Achterberg, nom. n. andOpius wengi Li & van Achterberg, nom. n., respectively. Phaedrotoma terga (Chen & Weng, 2005) comb. n.,Diachasmimorpha longicaudata (Ashmead, 1905) and Biosteres pavitita Chen & Weng, 2005, are reported new for Hunan, Opiostomus aureliae (Fischer, 1957) comb. n. is new for China and Hunan; Xynobius maculipennis(Enderlein, 1912) comb. n. is new for Hunan and continental China and Rhogadopsis longuria (Chen & Weng, 2005) comb. n. is new for Hunan. The following new combinations are given: Apodesmia puncta (Weng & Chen, 2005) comb. n., Apodesmia tracta (Weng & Chen, 2005) comb. n., Areotetes laevigatus (Weng & Chen, 2005) comb. n., Phaedrotoma dimidia (Chen & Weng, 2005) comb. n., Phaedrotoma improcera (Weng & Chen, 2005) comb. n., Phaedrotoma amputata (Weng & Chen, 2005) comb. n., Phaedrotoma larga (Weng & Chen, 2005) comb. n., Phaedrotoma osculas (Weng & Chen, 2005) comb. n., Phaedrotoma postuma (Chen & Weng, 2005) comb. n., Phaedrotoma rugulosa (Chen & Weng, 2005) comb. n., Phaedrotoma tabularis (Weng & Chen, 2005) comb. n., Rhogadopsis apii (Chen & Weng, 2005) comb. n., Rhogadopsis dimidia (Chen & Weng, 2005) comb. n., Rhogadopsis diutia (Chen & Weng, 2005) comb. n., Rhogadopsis longuria (Chen & Weng, 2005) comb. n., Rhogadopsis pratellae(Weng & Chen, 2005) comb. n., Rhogadopsis pratensis (Weng & Chen, 2005) comb. n., Rhogadopsis sculpta (Chen & Weng, 2005) comb. n., Rhogadopsis sulcifer (Fischer, 1975) comb. n., Rhogadopsis tabidula(Weng & Chen, 2005) comb. n., Xynobius complexus (Weng & Chen, 2005) comb. n., Xynobius indagatrix (Weng & Chen, 2005) comb. n., Xynobius multiarculatus (Chen & Weng, 2005) comb. n.The following (sub)genera are synonymised: Snoflakopius Fischer, 1972, Jucundopius Fischer, 1984, Opiotenes Fischer, 1998, and Oetztalotenes Fischer, 1998, with Opiostomus Fischer, 1971; Xynobiotenes Fischer, 1998, with Xynobius Foerster, 1862; Allotypus Foerster, 1862, Lemnaphilopius Fischer, 1972, Agnopius Fischer, 1982, and Cryptognathopius Fischer, 1984, with Apodesmia Foerster, 1862; Nosopoea Foerster, 1862, Tolbia Cameron, 1907, Brachycentrus Szépligeti, 1907, Baeocentrum Schulz, 1911, Hexaulax Cameron, 1910, Coeloreuteus Roman, 1910, Neodiospilus Szépligeti, 1911, Euopius Fischer, 1967, Gerius Fischer, 1972, Grimnirus Fischer, 1972, Hoenirus Fischer, 1972, Mimirus Fischer, 1972, Gastrosema Fischer, 1972, Merotrachys Fischer, 1972, Phlebosema Fischer, 1972, Neoephedrus Samanta, Tamili, Saha & Raychaudhuri, 1983, Adontopius Fischer, 1984, Kainopaeopius Fischer, 1986, Millenniopius Fischer, 1996, and Neotropopius Fischer, 1999, with Phaedrotoma Foerster, 1862.     

Family-group names in Coleoptera (Insecta)

We synthesize data on all known extant and fossil Coleoptera family-group names for the first time. A catalogue of 4887 family-group names (124 fossil, 4763 extant) based on 4707 distinct genera in Coleoptera is given. A total of 4492 names are available, 183 of which are permanently invalid because they are based on a preoccupied or a suppressed type genus. Names are listed in a classification framework. We recognize as valid 24 superfamilies, 211 families, 541 subfamilies, 1663 tribes and 740 subtribes. For each name, the original spelling, author, year of publication, page number, correct stem and type genus are included. The original spelling and availability of each name were checked from primary literature. A list of necessary changes due to Priority and Homonymy problems, and actions taken, is given. Current usage of names was conserved, whenever possible, to promote stability of the classification.New synonymies (family-group names followed by genus-group names): Agronomina Gistel, 1848 syn. nov. of Amarina Zimmermann, 1832 (Carabidae), Hylepnigalioini Gistel, 1856 syn. nov. of Melandryini Leach, 1815 (Melandryidae), Polycystophoridae Gistel, 1856 syn. nov. of Malachiinae Fleming, 1821 (Melyridae), Sclerasteinae Gistel, 1856 syn. nov. of Ptilininae Shuckard, 1839 (Ptinidae), Phloeonomini Ádám, 2001 syn. nov. of Omaliini MacLeay, 1825 (Staphylinidae), Sepedophilini Ádám, 2001 syn. nov. of Tachyporini MacLeay, 1825 (Staphylinidae), Phibalini Gistel, 1856 syn. nov. of Cteniopodini Solier, 1835 (Tenebrionidae); Agronoma Gistel 1848 (type species Carabus familiaris Duftschmid, 1812, designated herein) syn. nov. of Amara Bonelli, 1810 (Carabidae), Hylepnigalio Gistel, 1856 (type species Chrysomela caraboides Linnaeus, 1760, by monotypy) syn. nov. of Melandrya Fabricius, 1801 (Melandryidae), Polycystophorus Gistel, 1856 (type species Cantharis aeneus Linnaeus, 1758, designated herein) syn. nov. of Malachius Fabricius, 1775 (Melyridae), Sclerastes Gistel, 1856 (type species Ptilinus costatus Gyllenhal, 1827, designated herein) syn. nov. of Ptilinus Geoffroy, 1762 (Ptinidae), Paniscus Gistel, 1848 (type species Scarabaeus fasciatus Linnaeus, 1758, designated herein) syn. nov. of Trichius Fabricius, 1775 (Scarabaeidae), Phibalus Gistel, 1856 (type species Chrysomela pubescens Linnaeus, 1758, by monotypy) syn. nov. of Omophlus Dejean, 1834 (Tenebrionidae). The following new replacement name is proposed: Gompeliina Bouchard, 2011 nom. nov. for Olotelina Báguena Corella, 1948 (Aderidae).Reversal of Precedence (Article 23.9) is used to conserve usage of the following names (family-group names followed by genus-group names): Perigonini Horn, 1881 nom. protectum over Trechicini Bates, 1873 nom. oblitum (Carabidae), Anisodactylina Lacordaire, 1854 nom. protectum over Eurytrichina LeConte, 1848 nom. oblitum (Carabidae), Smicronychini Seidlitz, 1891 nom. protectum over Desmorini LeConte, 1876 nom. oblitum (Curculionidae), Bagoinae Thomson, 1859 nom. protectum over Lyprinae Gistel 1848 nom. oblitum (Curculionidae), Aterpina Lacordaire, 1863 nom. protectum over Heliomenina Gistel, 1848 nom. oblitum (Curculionidae), Naupactini Gistel, 1848 nom. protectum over Iphiini Schönherr, 1823 nom. oblitum (Curculionidae), Cleonini Schönherr, 1826 nom. protectum over Geomorini Schönherr, 1823 nom. oblitum (Curculionidae), Magdalidini Pascoe, 1870 nom. protectum over Scardamyctini Gistel, 1848 nom. oblitum (Curculionidae), Agrypninae/-ini Candèze, 1857 nom. protecta over Adelocerinae/-ini Gistel, 1848 nom. oblita and Pangaurinae/-ini Gistel, 1856 nom. oblita (Elateridae), Prosternini Gistel, 1856 nom. protectum over Diacanthini Gistel, 1848 nom. oblitum (Elateridae), Calopodinae Costa, 1852 nom. protectum over Sparedrinae Gistel, 1848 nom. oblitum (Oedemeridae), Adesmiini Lacordaire, 1859 nom. protectum over Macropodini Agassiz, 1846 nom. oblitum (Tenebrionidae), Bolitophagini Kirby, 1837 nom. protectum over Eledonini Billberg, 1820 nom. oblitum (Tenebrionidae), Throscidae Laporte, 1840 nom. protectum over Stereolidae Rafinesque, 1815 nom. oblitum (Throscidae) and Lophocaterini Crowson, 1964 over Lycoptini Casey, 1890 nom. oblitum (Trogossitidae); Monotoma Herbst, 1799 nom. protectum over Monotoma Panzer, 1792 nom. oblitum (Monotomidae); Pediacus Shuckard, 1839 nom. protectum over Biophloeus Dejean, 1835 nom. oblitum (Cucujidae), Pachypus Dejean, 1821 nom. protectum over Pachypus Billberg, 1820 nom. oblitum (Scarabaeidae), Sparrmannia Laporte, 1840 nom. protectum over Leocaeta Dejean, 1833 nom. oblitum and Cephalotrichia Hope, 1837 nom. oblitum (Scarabaeidae).     

Chemical implantation of Group 4 cations on silica via cyclopentadienyl- and N,N-dialkylcarbamato derivatives

Chemical implantation of Group 4 cations [Ti(III), Ti(IV), Zr(IV), Hf(IV)] has been carried out under mild conditions by the reaction of polycyclopentadienyl- (MCp_n; M = Ti, n = 3, 4; M = Zr, Hf, n = 4), mixed cyclopentadienyl/N,N-dialkylcarbamato (ML_x(O₂CNEt₂)_y; M = Ti, L = Cp, C₅Me₅ (Cp*), x = 2, y = 1; M = Hf, L = Cp, x = 1, y = 3), and N,N-dialkylcarbamato (M(O₂CNR₂)_n, M = Ti, n = 3, R = ⁱPr; M = Ti, Hf, n = 4, R = Et; M = Zr, n = 4, R = ⁱPr) derivatives, with the silanol groups of amorphous silica. Cyclopentadiene/pentamethylcyclopentadiene and/or carbon dioxide and the secondary amine are released in the process. The amount of implanted cations depends on the metal and on the ligands, the pentamethylcyclopentadienyl complex being less reactive than the unsubstituted congener. The starting complexes and the final products have been characterized by EPR or by ¹³C CP-MAS NMR spectroscopy.     

Occurrence of species of the genus Pityophthorus Eichhoff (Coleoptera,Curculionidae, Scolytinae) in?the?province of Quebec,Canada

Twig beetles in the genus Pityophthorus Eichhoff, 1864 include more than 300 species worldwide, with maximum diversity in tropical and subtropical regions. To date, approximately 50 species of Pityophthorus have been recorded in Canada, and these species are associated mainly with coniferous trees. Since 1981, no comprehensive study on this difficult taxonomic group has been conducted in Quebec, Canada, most likely due to their limited significance as forest pests. Based on data gathered from five years of field sampling in conifer seed orchards and compiled from various entomological collections, the distribution of Pityophthorus species in Quebec is presented. Approximately 291 new localities were recorded for the Pityophthorus species. Five species-group taxa, namely Pityophthorus puberulus (LeConte, 1868), Pityophthorus pulchellus pulchellus Eichhoff, 1869, Pityophthorus pulicarius (Zimmermann, 1868), Pityophthorus nitidus Swaine, 1917,and Pityophthorus cariniceps LeConte&Horn, 1876 were the most widespread. In contrast, Pityophthorus consimilis LeConte, 1878, Pityophthorus intextus Swaine, 1917, Pityophthorus dentifrons Blackman, 1922, Pityophthorus ramiperda Swaine, 1917, and Pityophthorus concavus Blackman, 1928 display a notably limited distribution. In addition, the first distribution records of Pityophthorus intextus and Pityophthorus biovalis Blackman, 1922 are furnished, and the subspecies Pityophthorus murrayanae murrayanae Blackman, 1922is reported from Quebec for the second time. Moreover, distribution maps are provided for all Pityophthorus species recorded in the province of Quebec.     

Does immunization of cucumber against anthracnose by Colletotrichum lagenarium affect host suitability for arthropods?

Restricted infection of a lower leaf of cucumber,Cucumis sativus L., with the anthracnose fungusColletotrichum lagenarium has been previously shown by others to induce persistent, systemic resistance to the same fungus and to at least 12 other diverse plant pathogens. The non-specificity of pathogen-induced resistance has fueled speculation that it might also affect arthropod herbivores. However, we found that immunization of cucumber withC. lagenarium had no effect on population growth of twospotted spider mites,Tetranychus urticae Koch, reared on foliage for which induced resistance to the same pathogen was confirmed. Similarly, immunization withC. lagenarium had no systemic effect on weight gain, duration of development, or pupal weight of fall armyworms, or on progeny production by melon aphids. In reciprocal tests, previous feeding injury from spider mites or fall armyworms did not induce systemic resistance toC. lagenarium. These results indicate that, at least for cucumber, pathogen-activated induced resistance is specific to plant pathogens, suggesting separate mechanisms of induced resistance to pathogens or herbivores.

---

Résumé Dans une étude de résistance induite, l'infection basale des feuilles du concombre,Cucumis sativus L., avecColletotrichum lagenarium, le champignon de l'anthracnose, a généré une induction systémique et persistante, non seulement au même champignon, mais aussi et surtout à l'égard de douze autres. La nature non-spécifique de cette résistance a dès lors engendré une hypothèse, celle de savoir si cette non-spécificité pourrait s'entendre au niveau d'arthropodes phytophages. Cependant, nos travaux ont démontré que l'immunité vis-à-vis deC. lagenarium n'affecte ni la population de tétraniques,Tetranychus urticae Koch, élevée sur des feuilles résistantes de concombre; ni le gain pondéral, ni la durée de développement, ni le poids nymphal deSpodoptera frugiperda, ou la fertilité des aphides de melon. De ces résultats, il peut-être déduit que, au moins chez le concombre, l'induction de résistance due àC. lagenarium démeure spécifique aux champignons saprophytes, c'est à dire qu'il existe des mécanismes séparés pour la résistance, soit aux champignons, soit aux arthropodes phytophages.