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.     

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.     

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).     

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.