Review of Anaphes Haliday (Hymenoptera: Mymaridae) with key to species in Europe and a world catalogue.

Annotated catalogue of the Tachinidae (Insecta, Diptera) of Chile

The monograph presents the results of the study of the Cambrian small shelly fossil fauna of the Meishucun Locality (east of Yunnan Province, China), the reference section for the Cambrian stratigraphy and paleontology of China and the stratotype of the Meishucunian Regional Stage. This publication contains a monographic description of 66 species and 52 genera of zooproblematica and mollusks and an annotated checklist of the small shelly fossil species of the Cambrian of China. The checklist includes 744 nominal species (among them 508 species names are zooproblematica, 220 species names are mollusks, and 16 names represent other groups of organisms). A taxonomic revision of all mollusk and zooproblematic taxa that have ever been described from the Cambrian of China is made at the species and generic levels. We propose that, of the 508 checklisted species of zooproblematica, 221 species should be considered valid, 80 of them are considered as tentatively valid, whereas of the 220 checklisted species of mollusks, 92 species can be considered valid. It was found out that 28 species names of zooproblematica and 7 species names of mollusks should be considered as nomina nuda, since their descriptions do not satisfy the availability criterion. We have to consider 20 species of mollusks and 18 species of zooproblematica as nomina dubia, because these taxa have been described based on unsatisfactory or fragmentary preserved material lacking any diagnostic features. Based on taxonomic work, it has been shown that the great number of synonymous taxa resulted in a more than double overestimation of the real value of the nominal species biodiversity of the Cambrian small shelly fossil fauna of China. The following new taxa are described, i.e. genera: Hexagonellus Demidenko, gen. nov.; Asiapatella Parkhaev et Zhegallo, nom. nov.; Dorispira Parkhaev, gen. nov.; and species: Platyspinites elegans Demidenko, sp. nov.; Mongolodus sulcus Demidenko, sp. nov.; Hexagonellus kuzminae Demidenko, sp. nov.; Halkieria wangi Demidenko, sp. nov.; Asiapatella sinuata Parkhaev, sp. nov.; Pseudoscenella levigata Parkhaev, sp. nov.; Trifistulella tortilis Demidenko, sp. nov. Based on the analysis of biostratigraphic and chemostratigrahic data, we propose the correlation of the Upper Precambrian-Lower Cambrian boundary deposits of the Siberian Platform and Yangtze Platform. According to this correlation, the base of the Tommotian Stage corresponds to the level within the middle of the Zhongyicun Member of the Zhujiaqing Formation. The monograph contains an extensive bibliography of 379 publications on the subject.

This study combines phylogenetic analyses of mitochondrial DNA sequences with comparative morphological analyses to revise the taxonomy of 101 nominal siphonariid species from the Indo-West Pacific belonging to the genera Siphonaria Sowerby I, 1823 and Williamia Monterosato, 1884. We have examined preserved specimens that have been newly collected at 462 sites across Australasia, the Indo-West Pacific, and in temperate zones of the northern and southern Pacific. Critically, our sampling includes topotypic specimens of 98 nominal species. The study area covered herein extends between the latitudes of 60°N and 55°S and the longitudes of 37°E and 175°W. We have sequenced two mitochondrial genes (COI and 16S) from 546 individuals and conducted a phylogenetic analysis including additional sequences from GenBank. We also studied the anatomy of 436 individuals using dissections and scanning electron microscopy. This study offers a comprehensive documentation and taxonomic assessment of type specimens for nearly all examined nominal species. Our taxonomic revision leads us to accept 88 species, which are thoroughly redescribed. 52 nominal species are treated as synonyms of earlier names, 41 of which are newly synonymized herein. Thirteen species names are deemed unavailable or invalid under the rules of zoological nomenclature, and six names are considered as nomina dubia or nomina inquirenda, notably including the oldest name, Patella laciniosa, which was widely used previously. In addition, we describe 40 new species. We have identified eleven species with broad distributions in the IWP and beyond and four species with more limited distributions than previously accepted. Notably, many species have narrow ranges, some being single island endemics. To stabilize taxonomic names, we have designated neotypes for seven species (Siphonaria sipho Sowerby I, 1823, Patella japonica Donovan, 1824, S. obliquata Sowerby I, 1825, Pileopsis radiata Blainville, 1826, S. radians H. Adams & A. Adams, 1855, S. incerta Deshayes, 1863, and S. tasmanica Tenison Woods, 1877) and lectotypes for 25 species (Patella javanica Lamarck, 1819, S. albicante Quoy & Gaimard, 1833, S. atra Quoy & Gaimard, 1833, S. capensis Quoy & Gaimard, 1833, S. denticulata Quoy & Gaimard, 1833, S. diemenensis Quoy & Gaimard, 1833, S. guamensis Quoy & Gaimard, 1833, S. plana Quoy & Gaimard, 1833, S. plicata Quoy & Gaimard, 1833, S. punctata Quoy & Gaimard, 1833, S. viridis Quoy & Gaimard, 1833, S. savignyi Krauss, 1848, S. cancer Reeve, 1856, S. bifurcata Reeve, 1856, S. funiculata Reeve, 1856, S. kurracheensis Reeve, 1856, S. lirata Reeve, 1856, S. scabra Reeve, 1856, S. belcheri Hanley, 1858, S. nuttallii Hanley, 1858, S. nigerrima Smith, 1903, S. madagascariensis Odhner, 1919, S. alba Hubendick, 1943, M. lentulus Iredale, 1940, H. monticulus Iredale, 1940 and M. oppositus Iredale, 1940).

most important of which are summarized below.

The derivations of the names of 74 Anopheles species and one subgenus are explained together with accounts of the life and scientific work of people who have been honored by having a mosquito named after them. Descriptive accounts are given of geographical locations, whether towns, regions or counties, that have had anopheline species named after them.

Paradoris, traditionally a generic taxon of discodorid sea slugs, is revised for the first time. One hundred and thirty specimens were examined, including all types and most of the nontype specimens available. New records for Paradoris are provided: South Africa, Tanzania, Seychelles, Western Australia, Thailand, Philippines, shallow waters of New Caledonia, southern Japan, and Hawaii. The individual variation of all taxonomic characters is thoroughly evaluated. Prior to the present study, Paradoris included 15 nominal species: 12 valid names and three synonyms. Three additional names, Discodoris erythraeensis, D. lora, and D. cavernae, are re-allocated to Paradoris, based on phylogenetic analysis. A phylogenetic diagnosis is provided for Paradoris: in particular, two new synapomorphies are described. Eight species names are regarded as valid: P. araneosa, P. dubia, P. erythraeensis, P. indecora, P. liturata, P. lopezi, P. mulciber, and P. tsurugensis. However, most of these species are poorly known, i.e. from very few specimens, and their taxonomic status might change when more individuals are available. P. lora is regarded as a nomen dubium. Six new synonymies are proposed, and explained by the fact that: (1) species names were created for one or a few specimens, without considering individual variation; (2) authors have not worked within a phylogenetic framework and have created new species names without considering all the existing species names already available within Paradoris. Three new morphospecies are described, but not formally named because their taxonomic status is still uncertain for several reasons (e.g. lack of knowledge of individual variation for some critical features). © 2006 The Linnean Society of London, Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2006, 147, 125–238.

Márquez & Asiain (2010) described three new species of the Philonthus furvus species group: P. navarretei and P. pollens from Mexico, and P. rufotibialis from Mexico and Guatemala. They also provided new state and locality records for P. hoegei, P. testaceipennis and P. yaqui, as well as a key for the identification of the species. In this work (Márquez & Asiain 2010) the depositories of the type material and material examined were indicated, except for the holotype of P. navarretei. Based on article 16 (names published after 1999) of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature 1999), which indicates that species names must be accompanied by the explicit fixation of a holotype (16.4.1), a statement of intent that this will be deposited in a collection and a statement indicating the name and location of that collection (16.4.2), the species name is considered as an "unavailable name". Navarrete-Heredia & Newton (2013) placed P. navarretei Márquez & Asiain, 2010 as a nomen nudum because the term "nomen nudum" is often used loosely for names that do not meet one or more of the conditions necessary for availability in the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature.

The names for 19 genera, 17 subgenera, 150 species and 150 subspecies of Ixodidae described by Paul Schulze, names changed by him after the revision of certain taxa, new ranks for names originally described by other authors, a few lapsus calamorum and some incorrect names ascribed to Schulze by other workers are discussed. Two genera (Cosmiomma and Nosomma) are valid, but most of Schulze’s subgenera are difficult to assess because of the current disarray that prevails at this classificatory level in the Ixodidae. Thirty-six of 150 species names discussed by Schulze are considered valid herein (3 species of Amblyomma, 1 Bothriocroton, 1 Cosmiomma, 6 Dermacentor, 4 Haemaphysalis, 5 Hyalomma, 13 Ixodes, 1 Nosomma and 2 Rhipicephalus), while 28 are valid species epithets that are currently assigned to different genera (e.g., Acarus undatus was formerly classified in the genus Aponomma but is currently known as Bothriocroton undatum). Twenty-nine of these valid species names were authored by Schulze or Schulze & Schlottke. The remaining species names are mostly synonyms or names that are incertae sedis, nomen nudum or lapsus calamorum. The 150 subspecific names are treated as synonyms of valid species or as nomina nuda, nomina dubia, incertae sedis or lapsus calamorum. Many names used by Schulze have been synonymized based on sound systematic research, but the justification for synonymizing other names is occasionally weak. It will be important to take these names into account if, as has already happened, future molecular and morphological studies result in the reinstatement of Schulze names currently considered synonyms. This situation has particular relevance for Amblyomma geoemydae, the Amblyomma marmoreum species complex, Amblyomma testudinarium, Oriental species of Dermacentor, Hyalomma in general, Ixodes arboricola, Ixodes canisuga, Ixodes lividus, Ixodes trianguliceps and Ixodes uriae. In conclusion, the prolific contributions of Paul Schulze have their weak points —the many species and subspecies of Hyalomma described by him are unjustified as is the alleged worldwide distribution of the former genus Aponomma—but his perception of the complexity of the genus Dermacentor (under Indocentor) in the Oriental and Australasian Zoogeographic Regions, as well as his understanding of tick biodiversity in these regions constitute seminal scientific achievements.

This paper discusses the systematics and phylogeny of the genusTambjaBurn, 1962 throughout tropical and temperate areas in the Atlantic, eastern Pacific and Indo‐Pacific. The phylogenetic relationships withinTambjaare unknown and a comprehensive taxonomic revision is necessary in order to construct a phylogeny of the genus. To date,Tambjacomprises 28 nominal species, 22 of which have been examined morphologically based on newly collected and type material. The reproductive systems of four species (T. limaciformis(Eliot, 1908),T. sagamiana(Baba, 1955),T. amakusana, Baba, 1987 andT. olivaria, Yonow, 1993) were studied for the first time and two species previously considered as valid,Tambja morosa(Bergh, 1877) andTambja kushimotoensisBaba, 1987, are here synonymized. Of the remaining six nominal species, no additional material has been found since their original description. The holotypes of three (T. diaphana(Bergh, 1877),T. gratiosa(Bergh, 1890) andT. marbellensisSchick & Cervera, 1998) have been re‐examined and the original descriptions improved.Tambja diaphanais regarded asnomen dubium.Tambja amitina(Eliot, 1905),T. divae(Marcus, 1958) andT. anayanaOrtea, 1989 remain as valid species until further comparison with new specimens can be made. New structures are also described for several taxa. Morphological and anatomical data from 22 nominalTambjaspecies have been used to construct a phylogeny. The phylogenetic analysis rejects the monophyly ofTambjaand shows its preliminary relationships within the subfamily Nembrothinae.

Three ant-like salticid genera, Enoplomischus Giltay, Kima Peckham & Peckham and Leptorchestes Thorell are revised. Kima is removed from the synonymy of Leptorchestes and revalidated. Three new species are described: Kima montana, Leptorchestes algerinus and L. separatus. Two specific names are synonymised: Enoplomischus chattoni Berland & Millot = E. ghesquieri Giltay and Leptorchestes halogena Metzner = L. mutilloides (Lucas). One new combination is proposed (K. reimoseri ex L. reimoseri). A lectotype for L. peresi is designated. L. semirufus Simon is regarded as nomen dubium. Identification keys are provided. A comparison of morphological features of the three genera indicates that Kima and Leptorchestes are more closely related to each other than either of them is to Enoplomischus. However, it seems still justified to place all three genera in the subfamily Leptorchestinae (sensu Simon 1901).

The platycephalid genus Suggrundus Whitley 1930 was established as a replacement name for Insidiator Jordan and Snyder 1900 because the latter was considered to be preoccupied by Insidiator Oken 1842. Although Suggrundus has been regarded as valid, it was revealed in this study that Insidiator Oken 1842 is an unavailable name because no descriptions, definitions or indications for the name were shown. Although the name Insidiator Oken 1836 was shown in the list of a monograph, it is also unavailable because it lacked descriptions, definitions or indications. Insidiator Amyot 1845 is also an unavailable name as previously pointed out because the name was proposed in a non-binominal publication. Accordingly, Insidiator Jordan and Snyder becomes valid and Suggrundus is found to be an unnecessary replacement name. Insidiator Whitley 1930, being a junior homonym of Insidiator Jordan and Snyder, is newly recognized here as an available name because Whitley combined an unavailable generic name Insidiator Oken 1842 and available specific name insidiator from Sparus insidiator Pallas 1770 when he established Suggrundus. Repotrudis Whitley 1930 and Seychelliceps Prokofiev 2019 are synonymized here under Insidiator Jordan and Snyder.

This world catalog of the superfamilies Pterophoroidea and Alucitoidea is Volume 4 of a series in progress by Apollo Books. These fascinating “micromoth” superfamilies are called “plume moths” and “many-plumed moths” because most of the species have wings that are cleft into feathery, long-fringed lobes. At rest, the elegantly slender-bodied and longlegged plume moths often fold their wings and hold them out from their body in an easily recognizable T shape. They arewidely distributed and found in all the terrestrial biomes. The often hairy larvae typically feed on leaves, sowers, and stems of a variety of forbs, including many composites and some plants in the mint, Þgwort, pea, and morning glory families. Very few species of these poorly knowngroups havewidely used common names. The last world catalog comparable to Gielis was Meyrick (1913). However, study of these moths has recently undergone a modest revival, especially in Europe. The systematics has been greatly advanced, but it is still in sux. The biology of many species is still unknown or poorly known. This most-welcome book presents a complete and current classiÞcation and nomenclature, a comprehensive bibliography as well as a useful host plant list and summary distribution for 1,300 species. Although some features of the classiÞcation may be disputed and eventually superseded, and somemostly typographical errors are evident, the book Þlls a void in the literature on Pterophoroidea andAlucitoidea. Aswould be expected for a “catalog,” this book of annotated lists is not an identiÞcation or Þeld guide, and it contains no illustrations or descriptive information. The high-quality paper, print, and binding make it attractive and durable. Theauthor,CeesGielis, is a researchassociateof the National Natural History Museum in Leiden and a leading specialist and world authority on the family Pterophoridae. He is widely published, including a 1993 generic revision of the superfamily Pterophoroidea, a 1996 monograph on the Pterophoridae of Europe, numerous new species descriptions, and taxonomicactions.Michael Shaffer collaboratedwithGielis on the small family Tineodidae. Shaffer is the highly regarded, retired curator of Pyraloidea and Pterophoroidea at what is now The Natural History Museum, London. Volume 4 is edited by Hugo van der Wolf. Gielis treats the Pterophoroidea as comprised of two families: Pterophoridae, with 1,136 described species in four subfamilies and 89 genera; and Macropiratidae,with three species, all in the genusAgdistopsis. The Alucitoidea is treated as being comprised of two families: Alucitidae, with 186 species in nine genera; and Tineodidae, with 19 species in 11 genera. Several new synonyms and one new replacement name are presented, but without discussion. The books introduction refers to previous catalogs and checklists. The sources of information are discussed, and the format of the annotated species list is outlined. A breakdown of the classiÞcation used for the two superfamilies is shown to the genus level, and the number of species in each taxon is given. The core of this book is the annotated catalog itselfNa list of animal names with associated authorship, year of publication, synonyms, and other information. At the genus group and higher levels of classiÞcation, taxa are arranged in the phylogenetic order proposed by the author.Within each genus, the species names are listed in alphabetical order. Below each species name, the following information from the original description is given: genus in which the species was originally described, species name as originally spelled, year of publication, page number, and country of the type locality. Next, synonyms are listed with the same format and information. Additional annotation includes larval host plant names when known, parasite names when known, and distribution by biogeographic region and country insofar as the author considers the data to be valid. Several additional lists complete the book. One list catalogs the single fossil pterophorid species that has been named. Another is a “Comprehensive Reference List,” which is 45 pages and will save the serious researcher countless hours tracking down original descriptions and other literature. Next are indices of the dipterous and hymenopterous parasites. An index of hostplants is orderedalphabeticallybygenusand then by species within a genus. As might be expected from the concentration of detailed andexacting information in this catalog, some errors are present. The publisher has provided an errata sheet, but at present this sheet is incomplete. The errors include misspellings of some names of taxa and people, occasional incorrect use of the conventional parentheses around author name when originally described in a genus other than the current genus, onemention of an incorrect family name, a few omissions, and a few incorrect years of publication. Unfortunately, some of these errors may not be detectedbya readerwhodoesnot checkoriginal sources and might thus be repeated in subsequent literature. I thank Alma Solis, Deborah Matthews, and Cees Gielis for comments and suggestions that helped me write this review.

Girault (1917) very briefly described and diagnosed the encyrtid wasp species Ooencyrtus californicus Girault (Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae) with the following limited data (p. 22): "Sacramento, California, from bug eggs on Pinus sabiniana, September". The first author examined its two syntypes, poorly mounted on a slide, of which only parts of the four antennae and a slightly damaged fore wing remain (Triapitsyn et al. 2020). They concluded that this species was better considered a nomen dubium until fresh specimens could be collected from the same host plant in or near the type locality. In July 2019, an effort was made to re-collect O. californicus from foothill (or gray) pine, Pinus sabiniana (Pinaceae), in the Oakhurst area of Madera County, California, USA, where this pine is abundant, but no specimens were captured. At the same time, a very similar insect was collected from sentinel eggs of the invasive stink bug Bagrada hilaris (Burmeister) in Riverside, California. This insect was cultured in the laboratory as part of a B. hilaris biological control program. Due to the poor preservation of the type specimens and in the absence of genetic evidence, it was impossible to positively and properly attribute specimens of this newly collected parasitoid to O. californicus. Therefore, to provide a much needed scientific name for this native egg parasitoid, it was described as Ooencyrtus lucidus Triapitsyn Ganjisaffar in Triapitsyn et al. (2020). The two nominal species were separated based on minor differences in the proportions of the scape, pedicel, and first funicular segment of the female antenna (Triapitsyn et al. 2020). John S. Noyes, world expert on Encyrtidae and one of the reviewers of Triapitsyn et al. (2020), disagreed with the erection of O. lucidus as a new taxon based on the morphological similarities of the female antenna with that of O. californicus, so the description was published with the understanding that the two might be conspecific. But to settle this one way or another new specimens of O. californicus had to be collected to allow morphological and molecular analyses.

Excluding 102 species of the previously revised West Palaearctic species groups of Euura Newman, 1837 (gall-making groups, 84 species; amentorum group, 8 species; bergmanni group, 8 species; and oligospila group, 2 species), we treat here the remaining 164 West Palaearctic species of the genus. 145 new synonymies are proposed (one in Platycampus, one in Nematus, two in Pristiphora, and the rest in Euura: see Table 4 for details). 153 lectotypes are designated (see Table 4). Four nominal species are reinstated (valid name in square brackets): Pteronidea fuscarima Benson, 1933 [E. fuscarima (Benson, 1933) comb. nov.], P. fuscodorsata Lindqvist, 1949 [Euura fuscodorsata (Lindqvist, 1949) comb. nov.], Pachynematus perkioemaekii Lindqvist, 1960 [E. perkioemaekii (Lindqvist, 1960) comb. nov.], and Pontania poppii Konow, 1904 [Euura poppii (Konow, 1904) comb. nov.]. Euura tiliae (Zinovjev, 1998) comb. nov. and E. wuyishanica (Wei, 2003) comb. nov. are transferred from Nematus. Euura memoriakaszabi (Haris, 2002) comb. nov. is transferred from Pristiphora. Five new species are described: Euura halo Prous, Liston & Mutanen sp. nov., E. histriato Prous, Liston & Mutanen sp. nov., E. minivittata Prous & Mutanen sp. nov., E. polepso Prous & Mutanen sp. nov., and E. serela Prous & Mutanen sp. nov. Euura telos Liston & Prous nom. nov. (an East Palaearctic species) is proposed for Amauronematus terminalis Malaise, 1931, a secondary homonym of Pontania terminalis Marlatt, 1896 [Euura terminalis (Marlatt, 1896)]. Three treated putative species based on single males (E. bergmanni and E. clitellata group) and a female (E. bipartita group) remain unidentified pending further research. An identification key is provided to separate the genus Euura from the other similar genera. Host plants are now known for 80% (132) of the treated species (88% for all West Palaearctic Euura). Genetic data (at least mitochondrial COI and nuclear NaK and POL2) are reported for 91% (151) of the treated species. The genetic data were obtained with Sanger and Nanopore sequencing. In numerous cases, identification of one sex of a species remains difficult using morphological characters but is clear when using genetic data. In a few cases, however, identification based on morphology is reliable, while support from available genetic data is weak. Often, large morphological and genetic variability makes species delimitation ambiguous. Within-species genetic diversity, as estimated from diploid females (i.e., within-individual genetic diversity, which is an underestimate of within-species diversity), is large in Euura, on average with 0.3% divergence between the haplotypes (max 1.4%), while between-species divergence for a given species group is often only slightly higher (on average varies between 0.5–2.1%). Strong mito-nuclear discordance is observed within most species groups, but in some cases even between species groups. Over 50% of the species cannot be reliably identified based on mitochondrial COI barcodes. While nuclear DNA is significantly more congruent with morphology, identification of about 15% of the species can be ambiguous due to large genetic variability. Remarkably, two or more apparently functional COI variants are frequently observed within the same individual, with variants diverging by up to 9.6% in Euura lappo (for the 658 bp barcoding region).

Article 79 of the Fourth Edition of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (henceforth Code) describes an official List of Available Names in Zoology (henceforth LAN), consisting of a series of “Parts” (of defined taxonomic and temporal scope), compiled by relevant experts. The LAN represents a comprehensive inventory of names available under the Code. The aim of this manual is to define a procedure for implementing Article 79, with format suggestions for zoologists aiming to create a Part of the LAN for family-group, genus-group, or species-group names in zoological nomenclature. Because the LAN may serve as an important basis for retrospective content in ZooBank, the structure outlined here is designed to allow easy importation to ZooBank. A Part ultimately adopted for the LAN will contain nomenclaturally available names but not necessarily all those within the scope of the Part: the comprehensiveness of the candidate Part is at the discretion of the experts proposing the Part. They may choose to include all nomenclaturally available names or use the proposal of a Part to pare away nomina dubia so they lose “status in zoological nomenclature despite any previous availability” (to quote Articles 10.7 and 79.4.3; that this was the intention of the framers of Article 79 is clear from the Preface to the Code). Nonetheless, we advocate that the proposing body include an inventory of all known names deemed to be available so it will be obvious that names not advocated for inclusion in the Part have not simply been overlooked. Because a candidate Part of the LAN is for an entire taxon at the specified rank and for the specified period, it must include the names of both living and fossil representatives of the taxon. In the proposal for adding a Part to the LAN, an unavailable name corresponding to a later available one should be included in the Remarks section of the available name. Unavailable names that have not subsequently been made available can be added at the end of the candidate Part, along with information explaining them. The Commission and reviewers of the candidate Part will thereby have a list of such names and an understanding of why they are not available. Moreover, these names can be discussed during the periods required by Article 79 for input by the zoological community, when change in their status can be advocated by members of the community interested in the taxon under consideration.