identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
F40287F86246FFAB63EFDC4C2EDD796C.text	F40287F86246FFAB63EFDC4C2EDD796C.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Helionothrips Bagnall 1932	<div><p>Helionothrips Bagnall</p> <p>Helionothrips Bagnall, 1932: 506.</p> <p>Type species Heliothrips brunneipennis Bagnall 1915, by monotypy.</p> <p>Members of the genus Helionothrips are readily recognised within the subfamily Panchaetothripinae by the following character states: posterior part of head forming a wide transverse concave collar; antennal segments III &amp; IV with curved forked sense cones; abdominal tergites each with a strongly developed antecostal line forming a series of arches or contiguous scallop-like areas. Wilson (1975) has provided a detailed diagnosis of this genus, with a key to the 18 species that were described up to that time. Moreover, reviews have been published of the species known from the following areas: Africa (Faure 1961), India (Bhatti 1968), Japan (Kudô 1992), Taiwan (Wang 1993) and China (Mirab-balou et al. 2017). Despite these publications some species remain weakly discriminated, being based on descriptions that lack clarity. Here we discuss some characters that can be difficult to evaluate.</p> <p>Fore wing color. Typically, the fore wings of Helionothrips species are dark brown at the base, with a sub-basal white band and a brown area at the veinal fork, and with the extreme apex also brown. The differences between species are in the colour of the apical half of the wing. This varies from uniformly brown (annosus, brunneipennis, shennongjiaensis), gradually fading apically (cephalicus, communis, linderae, phragmitesi sp.n., ponkikiri, unitatis), clearly banded (minutus, rugatus), to almost pale (parvus, pallidus sp. n.) (Figs 1–9). It is important to note that “gradually fading apically” involves progressive variation and thus can be difficult to assess. For example, the apical half in aino (and mube) seems more suitably scored as “uniformly light brown” (Fig. 4), rather than “gradually fading apically” as described in most published literature. Wilson (1975) described the fore wing of cephalicus as “entirely brown except for a subbasal pale patch”, whereas our cephalicus specimens are consistent with “dark brown at fork and fading apicad” as described by Kudô (1992) (Fig. 6). Similarly, Mirab-balou et al. (2017) indicate that the fore wing colour of rugatus is the same as in shennongjiaensis (brown on apical half), but our specimens of rugatus have a well-defined subapical pale band (Fig. 7).</p> <p>Thorax sculpture. Including one of the new species described below, only four Helionothrips species share the character of “pronotum entirely covered with reticles having numerous wrinkles”. These four are cephalicus (Fig. 21), longisensibilis, pallidus sp. n. (Fig. 20) and rugatus. In contrast, more than 50% of Helionothrips species have all the pronotal reticles without internal wrinkles (e.g. aino, errans, shennongjiaensis) (Figs 23, 24). Bhatti (1968) described the body sculpture of parvus as “resembling that of errans ”, thus implying that the pronotum of parvus also lacks wrinkles in the reticles. However, Kudô (1992) suggested that cephalicus is related to parvus, but he mentioned only that these two species share a long and uniformly black head. He did not refer to body sculpture. Amongst our samples we have specimens of parvus with head and thoracic reticles lacking wrinkles (Figs 24, 27). Therefore, the key provided by Mirab-balou et al. (2017) seems incorrect in indicating the presence in parvus of pronotal reticles with wrinkles. An intermediate condition, with only the reticles on the posterior half of the pronotum having internal wrinkles, occurs in communis, phragmitesi sp.n. (Fig. 22), ponkikiri, and unitatis. Mirab-balou et al. (2017) suggested that the head and pronotum of unitatis lack wrinkles in the reticles, but this is contrary to the descriptions in Wang (1993), Feng et al. (2007) and the website of Taiwan Encyclopedia of Life (http://taieol.tw/pages/109391). It seems that unitatis has wrinkles not only on the pronotum posterior half, but also on the mesoscutum and metanotal triangle. A further problem is that Feng et al. (2007) provided line drawings of shennongjiaensis without wrinkles in the thoracic reticles, but with more specimens now available the mesoscutum reticles of this species always have internal wrinkles medially (Fig. 25).</p> <p>Antennal segment IV sense cone. The forked sense cone on this segment is reported to vary in length between species. It is short in phragmitesi sp. n. described below, not extending to the mid-point of segment V (Fig. 10). In contrast, more than 80% of species in this genus have this forked sense cone generally extending to the apex of V or mid-point of VI (Figs 11–15). Unusually, brunneipennis has this sense cone extremely long and extending to the middle of VIII (Fig. 19). This condition distinguishes brunneipennis from shennongjiaensis; this latter species has the sense cone on IV extending only to the mid-point of VI (Fig. 18). Wilson (1975) stated of brunneipennis in his key to Helionothrips species “sense cone on antennal segment IV reaching apex of segment VI”, but in the main text describing this species he states “sense cone on segment IV reaching the middle of VIII”. This suggests that in brunneipennis there may be variation in the length of the sense cone on antennal IV, or that there may have been a failure to note that the inner arm of this sense cone can be shorter than its outer arm. Examination of many specimens of shennongjiaensis indicate that this character is not stable, and relationships between these two species require further study. Similarly, mube has been distinguished from aino because the sense cone on IV surpasses the apex of VI (Kudô, 1992) (Fig. 17), whereas in aino it extends only to the middle of VI (Wilson, 1975) (Fig. 16). This sense cone is more variable than these two authors considered, and mube has recently been placed as a synonym of aino (Wang et al. [in press]).</p> <p>Sternal pore plates of males. The number of pore plates varies between Helionothrips species. Among the 15 species recorded from China, males are unknown for ponkikiri and phragmitesi sp. n. Pore plates are absent in four species, annosus, cephalicus, lushanensis and unitatis. Circular pore plates are present in the other species: on sternite VIII only in linderae; on sternites VII–VIII in brunneipennis, communis, errans, parvus, rugatus and shennongjiaensis; on sternites VI–VIII in pallidus sp. n.; and on V, VI or VII–VIII in aino (Wang et al. [in press]). Kudô (1992) stated that the only distinct difference between aino and mube was in the number of male pore plates - in aino on sternites VII–VIII (Fig. 30), but in mube on VI–VIII (Fig. 28). However, Kudô (1992) also mentioned that pore plates of mube on VI might be vestigial. Of the 33 male specimens we previously identified as aino or mube 26 specimens have pore plates on VII–VIII, and 7 specimens on VI–VIII, including one with the pore plate on VI reduced to a very small dot (Fig. 29). This variation indicates that the number of male sternal pore plates may not be entirely reliable to discriminate Helionothrips species.</p> <p>Key to Helionothrips species from China</p> <p>(* From original description)</p> <p>1. Abdominal tergite VIII posterior margin with a complete comb................................................. 2</p> <p>-. Abdominal tergite VIII posterior margin with comb interrupted medially......................................... 4</p> <p>2. Antecostal line on abdominal tergites III–VIII forming three contiguous scallops; [metascutal triangle with posterior margin extending over metascutellum; male without pore plate on abdominal sternites]............................... annosus</p> <p>-. Antecostal line on abdominal tergites III–VIII connected by a fine line, not forming contiguous scallops (Fig. 41)......... 3</p> <p>3. Head yellow anterior to fore ocellus; antennal segments II and VI brown; male with pore plates on abdominal sternites VII and VIII........................................................................................... errans *</p> <p>-. Head entirely dark brown; antennal segments II and VI yellowish brown; male lacking pore plate on abdominal sternites.............................................................................................. lushanensis *</p> <p>4. Antennal segments I and II yellow (Figs 11, 16–17).......................................................... 5</p> <p>-. Antennal segments I and II yellowish brown to dark brown, never yellow......................................... 6</p> <p>5. Head yellow anterior to fore ocellus and between antennal bases; mesoscutum with weak wrinkles in median reticles; male with pore plate only on abdominal sternite VIII........................................................... linderae *</p> <p>-. Head completely dark brown; mesoscutum without wrinkles in reticles; male with pore plates on abdominal sternites VI/VII– VIII.............................................................................................. aino</p> <p>6. Pronotum without wrinkles in most reticles, at most with weak wrinkles in only a few reticles (Figs 23–24); male with pore plates on abdominal sternites VII–VIII.................................................................... 7</p> <p>-. Pronotum with internal wrinkles in reticles, at least on posterior half (Figs 20–22).................................. 9</p> <p>7. Head yellowish brown, paler than pronotum; fore wing brown except for a small sub-basal pale brown patch............ 8</p> <p>-. Head as dark brown as pronotum; fore wing with a sub-basal white band and apical half pale, apex brown (Fig. 9).... parvus</p> <p>8. Antennal sense cone on segment IV not beyond apex of VI (Fig. 18)................................ shennongjiaensis</p> <p>-. Antennal sense cone on segment IV extend to mid of VIII (Fig. 19).................................... brunneipennis</p> <p>9. Pronotum with wrinkles only in reticles on posterior half (Fig. 22)............................................. 10</p> <p>-. Pronotum with numerous wrinkles in all reticles (Figs 20–21); head, meso- and metascutum also with internal wrinkles (Figs 26, 33, 35).......................................................................................... 13</p> <p>10. Head, meso- and metascutum without wrinkles in reticles [antennal segments I, II and VI brown; forked sense cone on antennal segment IV at least extending to apex of V; male unknown]............................................. ponkikiri *</p> <p>-. Head and mesoscutum with wrinkles in reticles, metascutal triangle with or without wrinkles in reticles................ 11</p> <p>11. Metascutal triangle without wrinkles in reticles (Fig. 40); antennal segments I–II darker than VI (Fig. 10); antennal sense cone on IV short, not surpassing mid of V [male unknown]........................................... phragmitesi sp. n.</p> <p>-. Metascutal triangle with wrinkles in reticles; antennal segments I–II as brown as or paler than VI; antennal sense cone on IV extending to VI...................................................................................... 12</p> <p>12. Antennal segments I–II yellowish brown, VI dark brown; forked sense cone on segment IV extending to basal half of VI; male with pore plate on abdominal sternites VII–VIII..................................................... communis *</p> <p>-. Antennal segments I–II as brown as VI; forked sense cone on segment IV extending to mid-point of VI; male without pore plate on abdominal sternites........................................................................... unitatis *</p> <p>13. Antennal segment VI uniformly dark brown, VI as brown as II (Fig. 13); female abdominal segment IX about 1.7 times as long as segment X............................................................................... pallidus sp. n.</p> <p>-. Antennal segment VI light brown with basal half paler, VI paler than II; female abdominal segment IX at least 2.0 times as long as segment X........................................................................................ 14</p> <p>14. Antennal segment I yellowish brown, paler than II (Fig. 12); fore wing with a well-defined sub-apical pale band shorter than the middle brown area (Fig. 7); male with pore plates on abdominal sternites VII–VIII......................... rugatus</p> <p>-. Antennal segment I as brown as II (Fig. 15); fore wing with a sub-basal white band, dark brown at fork and fading sub-apically (Fig. 6); male without pore plate on abdominal sternites................................................ cephalicus</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/F40287F86246FFAB63EFDC4C2EDD796C	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Xie, Yanlan;Li, Yajin;Zhang, Hongrui	Xie, Yanlan, Li, Yajin, Zhang, Hongrui (2022): The genus Helionothrips (Thysanoptera, Panchaetothripinae) in China, with two new species and an identification key. Zootaxa 5194 (3): 392-402, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5194.3.3
F40287F86240FFAA63EFDFE0296D7842.text	F40287F86240FFAA63EFDFE0296D7842.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Helionothrips pallidus Xie & Li & Zhang 2022	<div><p>Helionothrips pallidus sp.n.</p> <p>(Figs 8, 13, 20, 31–37)</p> <p>Female macroptera. Body color dark brown (Fig. 31), head uniformly dark brown (Fig. 35); fore legs yellow with a slight brown tint; mid and hind femora dark brown, tibiae dark brown with extreme base and apical third yellow; all tarsi yellow; antennal segments I–II and VI–VII brown, III–V yellow, VIII light brown (Fig. 13); fore wing (Fig. 8) dark brown at base, with a sub-basal white band and apical half pale, but brown at anterior and posterior margins of distal area, extreme apex brown; clavus dark brown.</p> <p>Head about 1.4–1.5 times as wide as long, with many wrinkles in polygonal reticles (Fig. 35); occipital collar arched medially, sculptured completely and posteromedian reticles with internal dots.Antennae 8-segmented, forked sense cones on segments III &amp; IV long and curve, on III reaching to the midpoint of IV, on IV extending to the basal fourth of VI (Fig. 13), simple dorsal sense cone on VI beyond apex of VIII, microtrichia present on segments IV–VI. Mouth cone rounded and moderately long, maxillary palps 2–segmented.</p> <p>Pronotum entirely reticulate and with numerous internal wrinkles throughout (Fig. 20); reticles of the anterior third, also posterolaterally, larger than those of the rest; discal setae long and slender. Mesoscutal median reticles and metascutal triangle reticles with weak internal wrinkles (Fig. 33); metascutum median setae wide apart and far from anterior margin, campaniform sensilla (CPS) and median setae almost being in a transverse line; metascutellum entirely reticulate, about 2.3 times as wide as long. Fore wing with distinct veinal setae (Fig. 8), first vein with 6–7 basal and 2 distal setae, second vein with 5–6 setae, posteromarginal cilia wavy; clavus with 4 veinal setae. Tarsi 1–segmented.</p> <p>Abdominal tergites completely reticulate except for the posterior submedian smooth part, laterally reticles on tergites II–VII with distinct internal wrinkles; antecostal line of tergites III–VIII heavy and divided into a series of arches connected by a fine line; tergite VIII with posterior margin comb interrupted medially by lacking about 6 microtrichial teeth (Fig. 37); tergite IX with 3 pairs of needle-like marginal setae, S1 and S2 subequal in length, slightly longer than S3 (Fig. 37); tergite X with a complete dorsal longitudinal split. Sternites entirely sculptured with reticles longitudinally elongate posterior of antecostal line, three pairs of long and slender setae situated in front of posterior margin.</p> <p>Measurements (holotype female in microns): Body length 1410. Head, length 103; width across genae 157. Eye, length 66; width 48. Pronotum, length 139; width 188. Fore wing length 940. Abdominal segments VIII–X median length 89, 103, 61. Antennal segments I–VIII length (width): 24(22), 34(29), 55(20), 45(22), 38(19), 26(18), 9(8), 35(4).</p> <p>Male macroptera. Similar to female but smaller, abdomen more slender (Fig. 32).Abdominal tergite IX with two pairs of thorn-like setae, the posterior pair slender and closer to each other than anterior pair (Fig. 36); posteromedian of these setae with five wart-like tubercles; sternites VI–VIII each with a circular pore plate (Fig. 34).</p> <p>Measurements (paratype male, in microns). Body length 1395. Head, length 100; width across genae 143. Eye, length 63; width 42. Pronotum, length 136; width 178. Fore wing length 912. Antennal segments I–VIII length (width): 22(21), 33(28), 51(20), 43(21), 38(19), 25(18), 8(7), 32(4). Anterior pair of thorn-like setae on tergite IX length 33. Pore plate on sternites VI–VIII diameter 20, 21, 22.</p> <p>Specimens studied. Holotype female, CHINA, Yunnan Province, Pingbian County, Dawei Mountain Nature Reserve, from leaves of ferns- Drynaria roosii, 4.v.2017 (Kong Bo), in collection of Yunnan Agricultural University, Kunming.</p> <p>Paratypes: Yunnan Province, 6 females, 2 males taken from same locality and plant as holotype; Wuding County, Lion Mountain, 4 males from grass, 25.x.2016 (Li Yajin), 1 female and 1 male from Stellaria saxatilis, 8.xii.2017 (Li Yajin); Kunming City, 1 female from Stellaria saxatilis, 29.v.2017 (Li Yajin). Guizhou Province, Hezhang County, Yelang National Forest Park, 6 females, 4 males from Oplismenus compositus, and 2 females, 1 male from ferns, 13.viii.2016 (Yan Xueqiang).</p> <p>Deposited in Australian National Insect Collection, Canberra: Wuding County, Lion Mountain, 1 female from grass, 25.x.2016 (Li Yajin); Kunming City, 1 female from Stellaria saxatilis, 29.v.2017 (Li Yajin); Yushe National Forest Park, 1 male from Cyclosorus parasiticus, 12.ix.2017 (Li Yajin).</p> <p>Etymology. Latin epithet “ pallidus ” meaning pale, refers to the fore wing colour.</p> <p>Comments. Body sculpture of this new species resembles that of cephalicus and rugatus with the pronotum entirely covered with reticles having numerous wrinkles, also head, meso- and metascutum reticulate with internal wrinkles. However, it can be distinguished easily by the uniformly dark brown of antennal segment VI (Fig. 13), versus the light brown and basal half yellow in cephalicus and rugatus (Figs 12, 15); also, the length ratio of female abdominal segment IX and X is about 1.7 in pallidus sp. n., but 2.1–2.4 in cephalicus, and 2.5–2.8 in rugatus. Fore wing color pattern of this new species is similar to that of parvus and errans with the apical half almost pale (apex brown), but parvus and errans both are without internal wrinkles in head and thorax reticles. Moreover, males of pallidus sp. n. have a distinct pore plate present on abdominal sternites VI–VIII (Fig. 34), but in parvus and errans, these are only on sternites VII–VIII.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/F40287F86240FFAA63EFDFE0296D7842	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Xie, Yanlan;Li, Yajin;Zhang, Hongrui	Xie, Yanlan, Li, Yajin, Zhang, Hongrui (2022): The genus Helionothrips (Thysanoptera, Panchaetothripinae) in China, with two new species and an identification key. Zootaxa 5194 (3): 392-402, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5194.3.3
F40287F86241FFA563EFDE8F28A579FE.text	F40287F86241FFA563EFDE8F28A579FE.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Helionothrips phragmitesi Xie & Li & Zhang 2022	<div><p>Helionothrips phragmitesi sp.n.</p> <p>(Figs 5, 10, 22, 38–42)</p> <p>Female macroptera. Body color dark brown, head entirely dark; fore femora brown, tibiae yellowish brown; mid and hind legs dark brown, with small extreme apex of tibiae yellow (Fig. 38); all tarsi yellow; antennal segments I–II dark brown, III–V and basal half of VI yellow, apical half of VI and VII–VIII light brown (Fig. 10); fore wing (Fig. 5) brown, base and apex darkest, with a sub-basal white band, weakly shaded between anterior and posterior margin at distal half; clavus dark brown.</p> <p>Head about 1.4–1.5 times as wide as long, completely sculptured; ocellar hump reticulate obvious with internal wrinkles (Fig. 39); ocelli large; anterior and posterior carina of occipital collar almost parallel, the posteromedian reticles of collar with many thicken dots inside. Antennae 8-segmented, general stout; forked sense cones on III extending to basal third of IV, on IV not surpassing midline of V (Fig. 10); simple dorsal sense cone on VI scarcely beyond apex of VIII, microtrichia present on ventral surface of segments IV–VI. Mouth cone rounded apically; maxillary palps 2–segmented.</p> <p>Pronotum entirely covered by polygonal reticles of a rather uniform size, discal setae moderately long; most median and posterior reticles with wrinkles inside (Fig. 22); mesoscutum with weak wrinkles in median reticles; metascutal triangle lacking wrinkles (Fig. 40), median setae outer and anterior to the CPS; metascutellum about 2.5 times as wide as long. Fore wing (Fig. 5) first vein with 6–7 basal and 2 distal setae, second vein with about 7 setae, posteromarginal cilia distinctive wavy; clavus with 4 veinal setae.</p> <p>Abdominal tergites I and II completely reticulate (Fig. 41); tergites III–VIII with heavy antecostal line divided into arches connected by a fine line, entirely covered with polygonal reticles except for posterior median unsculptured areas; II–VII lateral fourth with wrinkles in reticles (Fig. 41); VIII with comb of microtrichia narrowly interrupted medially by lacking about 4–5 teeth (Fig. 42); three pairs of needle-like setae on apex of tergite IX, S2 the longest, S1 and S3 almost subequal in length; Abdominal segment X short and small, less than half the length of IX; X with median split complete. Sternites entirely polygonally reticulate posterior of antecostal line, with three pairs of long posterior margin setae.</p> <p>Measurements (holotype female in microns): Body length 1562. Head, length 129; width across genae 183. Eye, length 73; width 48. Pronotum, length 154; width 223. Fore wing length 900. Abdominal segments VIII–X median length 101, 118, 55. Antennal segments I–VIII length (width): 23(21), 38(30), 53(22), 44(22), 40(20), 29(17), 9(8), 27(4).</p> <p>Male unknown.</p> <p>Specimens studied. Holotype female, CHINA, Chongqing City, Xiushan County, from leaves of Phragmites communis, 22.v.2017 (Li Yajin &amp; Liu Hui), in collection of Yunnan Agricultural University, Kunming.</p> <p>Paratypes: 19 females collected from same locality and plant as holotype, with 2 females deposited in Australian National Insect Collection, Canberra.</p> <p>Etymology. In reference to the host plant of this species.</p> <p>Comments. This new species is distinguished from other Helionothrips species by the reticles on the posterior half of the pronotum having internal wrinkles, the forked antennal sense cone on IV not surpassing mid-point of V, antennal segments I &amp; II dark brown while VI light brown with basal half yellow, also mid and hind tibiae with a small yellow area at apex. This new species is most similar to communis, ponkikiri and unitatis in having the posterior half of the pronotum with reticles bearing internal wrinkles. However, in communis, ponkikiri and unitatis, the forked sense cone on antennal segment IV at least extends to the apex of V, and segment VI as brown as I &amp; II (ponkikiri and unitatis) or darker than I &amp; II (communis). Moreover, in this new species, wrinkles are present in the mesoscutum reticles but not in the metascutum reticles. In contrast, both the meso- and metascutal reticles have internal wrinkles in communis and unitatis versus both lacking in ponkikiri.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/F40287F86241FFA563EFDE8F28A579FE	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Xie, Yanlan;Li, Yajin;Zhang, Hongrui	Xie, Yanlan, Li, Yajin, Zhang, Hongrui (2022): The genus Helionothrips (Thysanoptera, Panchaetothripinae) in China, with two new species and an identification key. Zootaxa 5194 (3): 392-402, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5194.3.3
