identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
03ED87A7FF86FFEC6B02FB71FD05FE66.text	03ED87A7FF86FFEC6B02FB71FD05FE66.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pavania neoafricana Khaustov & Frolov 2022	<div><p>Pavania neoafricana sp. nov. (Figs. 1–3)</p> <p>http://zoobank.org/ urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act: 5E86BBCC-CDC4-4314-9217-5E964E0B89FB Description</p> <p>Female (Figs. 1–3) – Body weakly sclerotized. Length of idiosoma 125 (120–125), width 77 (72–78).</p> <p>Gnathosoma – Gnathosomal capsule, excluding palps, almost round, its length 25 (23–25), width 24 (23–25). Dorsally with two pairs of smooth subequal cheliceral setae (cha, chb). Setae cha 12 (11–12) blunt-tipped; chb 11 (10–11) pointed. Dorsal median apodeme weakly developed. Postpalpal setae (pp) rod-like with tiny distal projections, situated posterolaterally to setae cha. Venter of gnathosoma with one pair of smooth, pointed subcapitular setae m 13 (11–13). Palps freely articulated to gnathosomal capsule, with smooth setae dFe and dGe dorsally, setae dGe 11 (10–11) pointed, about two times longer than weakly blunt-tipped dFe 4 (4–5). Palps ventrally with solenidion almost three times longer than accessory setigenous structure (ass). Palps terminated with a welldeveloped tibial claw. Palp tibiotarsus with tiny eupathid-like distal seta and small lateral seta l”. Cheliceral stylets strong, curved. Pharynx poorly visible, with weak lateral projections.</p> <p>Idiosomal dorsum (Figs. 1A, 3A) – All dorsal sclerites with clearly visible numerous round and very small puncta. Prodorsal shield with three pairs of setae (v1, v2, sc2) and one pair of clavate, barbed trichobothria sc1 with rounded apex. All dorsal setae blunt-tipped; tips of setae h2 clubshaped. Setae v1, v2, and sc2 smooth, other dorsal setae weakly barbed. Only cupules ia on tergite D clearly visible; other cupules not evident. Posterior margins of tergites C, D, and EF with several distinct tooth-like projections. Lengths of dorsal setae: v1 13 (13–14), v2 7 (6–7), sc2 20 (20–22), c1 15 (14–15), c2 20 (19–21), d 13 (12–14), e 13 (12–13), f 13 (13–14), h1 13 (12–14), h2 37 (37–38). Distances between setae: v1–v1 17 (17), v2–v2 26 (25–26), sc2–sc2 27 (27), c1–c1 23 (22–23), c1– c2 18 (18–19), d–d 32 (28–32), e–e 41 (39–41), f–f 29 (28–29), h1–h1 12 (11–12), h1–h2 7 (7).</p> <p>Idiosomal venter (Figs 1B, 3B) – All ventral plates smooth. All ventral setae weakly blunttipped; setae ps weakly barbed, other ventral setae smooth. Apodemes 1 (ap1) and apodemes 2 (ap2) well developed; ap1 joined with poorly visible prosternal apodeme (appr), sejugal apodeme represented by pair of small sclerites located posterolaterad setae 2c; apodemes 3 (ap3) and 4 (ap4) well developed. Poststernal apodeme absent. Coxal fields I-IV each with three pairs of setae.</p> <p>Lengths of ventral setae – 1a 6 (6), 1b 6 (6), 1c 6 (6), 2a 10 (8–10), 2b 6 (5–6), 2c 9 (8–9), 3a 8 (7–8), 3b 8 (7–8), 3c 10 (9–11), 4a 8 (7–8), 4b 9 (9–10), 4c 9 (9), ag 8 (8–9), g1 3 (3), g2 3 (3), ps 8 (8–9).</p> <p>Legs (Fig. 2) – Leg I slightly longer than subequal legs II-IV. Leg I (Fig. 2A). Setal formula: 0– 4–2–6(2) –11(2). Tarsus with two small claws and semioval empodium. All leg setae smooth. Setae l’ of femur, l’ and v’ of genu, k and v’ of tibia blunt-tipped; other leg setae (except eupathidia p’, p”, ft’, ft”) pointed; setae (u) and (pv) of tarsus not modified. Trochanter dorsally with four short toothlike projections. Tarsus I with ventrodistal membranous flange. Lengths of solenidia ω1 7 (6–7), ω2 3 (3), φ1 8 (8), φ2 5 (4–5); solenidion ω1 digitiform; solenidia φ2 and ω2 baculiform; solenidion φ1 clavate. Leg II (Fig. 2B). Setal formula: 0–2–1–4(1)–6(1). Tarsal claws simple, hooked; empodium large, extending beyond tips of claws. Solenidion ω 5 (4–5) digitiform; solenidion φ 3 (3) weakly clavate. Trochanter dorsolaterally with two tooth-like projections. Seta l’ of genu weakly barbed, other setae smooth; all setae pointed. Leg III (Fig. 2C). Setal formula: 0–1–1–4–5. Claws and empodium of same shape as on tarsus II. Setae d of femur blunt-tipped, other leg setae pointed; all setae smooth. Trochanter ventrally with short lobe. Leg IV (Fig. 2D). Setal formula: 0–1–1–4–5. Claws and empodium of same shape as on tarsus II. Setae d of femur blunt-tipped, other leg setae pointed; all setae smooth. Trochanter ventrally with short lobe.</p> <p>Male – unknown</p> <p>Type material</p> <p>Female holotype, slide No. ZISP T-Dol-003, Tanzania, Arusha, 1975 (the original label includes only a code [1777]; the Arusha locality was inferred from the labels of the beetles collected apparently in the same locality), on H. neptunus; paratypes: 50 females, same data.</p> <p>Type deposition</p> <p>The holotype and 10 paratypes are deposited in the collection of the Zoological Institute of RAS, Saint Petersburg, Russia; five female paratypes are deposited in the acarological collection of Jalal Afshar Zoological Museum, Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran (JAZM); other paratypes are deposited in the collection of the Tyumen State University Museum of Zoology, Tyumen, Russia.</p> <p>Differential diagnosis</p> <p>The new species is most similar to Pavania africana Khaustov and Frolov, 2018 and P. carabidophila Khaustov, 2005 by the similar length of idiosomal setae and absence of modified setae on legs. The new species differs from P. africana in having seta c2 blunt-tipped (pointed in P. africana), longer genital setae (3) (1–2 in P. africana), shorter setae ps (8–9) (14 in P. africana), in having four tooth-like projections on trochanter I (three projections in P. africana), and solenidion φ2 with rounded tip (φ2 with attenuate tip in P. africana). The new species differs from P. carabidophila in having setae c2 blunt-tipped (pointed in P. carabidophila), setae h2 with clubshaped tips (pointed in P. carabidophila), by much shorter solenidion ω1 (6–7) (11–12 in P. carabidophila), and in having setae cha and chb subequal (cha distinctly longer than chb in P. carabidophila).</p> <p>Etymology</p> <p>The name of the new species is a combination of two words: Greek neos meaning new and africana, the name of closely related species.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03ED87A7FF86FFEC6B02FB71FD05FE66	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.		Plazi	Khaustov, Alexander A.;Frolov, Andrey V.	Khaustov, Alexander A., Frolov, Andrey V. (2022): Two new species of Pavania (Acari: Heterostigmata: Dolichocybidae) associated with scarab beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) from Tanzania and Madagascar. Persian Journal of Acarology 11 (4): 545-558, DOI: https://doi.org/10.22073/pja.v11i4.76531
03ED87A7FF82FFE168E9FD84FBF6FB93.text	03ED87A7FF82FFE168E9FD84FBF6FB93.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pavania madagascariensis Khaustov & Frolov 2022	<div><p>Pavania madagascariensis sp. nov. (Figs. 4–6)</p> <p>http://zoobank.org/ urn:lsid:zoobank.org: act: CFDAAEAE-9088-4266-9812-EE93CB9AE306</p> <p>Description</p> <p>Female (Figs. 4–6) – Body weakly sclerotized. Length of idiosoma 120 (115–120), width 78 (75–80).</p> <p>Gnathosoma – Gnathosomal capsule, excluding palps, almost round, its length 24 (23–24), width 27 (27–28). Dorsally with two pairs of blunt-tipped cheliceral setae (cha, chb). Setae cha 15 (15–16) weakly barbed; chb 10 (10–11) smooth. Dorsal median apodeme weakly developed. Postpalpal setae (pp) rod-like with tiny distal projections, situated posterolaterally to setae cha. Venter of gnathosoma with one pair of smooth, pointed subcapitular setae m 12 (12–13). Palps with smooth setae dFe and dGe dorsally, setae dGe 11 (10–11) pointed, about two times longer than weakly blunttipped dFe 4 (4–5). Palps ventrally with solenidion almost two times longer than accessory setigenous structure. Palps terminated with well-developed tibial claw. Palp tibiotarsus with tiny eupathid-like distal seta and small lateral seta l”. Cheliceral stylets strong, curved. Pharynx poorly visible, with weak lateral projections.</p> <p>Idiosomal dorsum (Figs. 4A, 6A) – Tergites D, EF and H with round and very small puncta, similar puncta also poorly visible on prodorsal shield; tergite C smooth. Prodorsal shield with three pairs of setae (v1, v2, sc2) and one pair of clavate, barbed trichobothria sc1 with rounded apex. Setae sc2 and c1 pointed, other dorsal setae blunt-tipped; tips of setae h2 club-shaped. Setae v1, v2, sc2 and c1 smooth, other dorsal setae weakly barbed. Cupules on tergites not evident. Posterior margins of tergites C, D, and EF with several very small tooth-like projections. Lengths of dorsal setae: v1 17 (17–18), v2 6 (6), sc2 41 (39–43), c1 30 (29–31), c2 18 (18–19), d 14 (15–16), e 9 (9–10), f 16 (17– 19), h1 11 (10–11), h2 52 (52–54). Distances between setae: v1–v1 20 (21–23), v2–v2 31 (29–32), sc2–sc2 34 (33–35), c1–c1 26 (26–28), c1–c2 20 (19–22), d–d 53 (50–53), e–e 42 (39–43), f–f 32 (31–34), h1–h1 9 (8–10), h1–h2 8 (8).</p> <p>Idiosomal venter (Figs. 4B, 6B) – All ventral plates smooth. Setae 2c pointed, other ventral setae weakly blunt-tipped; all ventral setae smooth. Apodemes 1 (ap1) and apodemes 2 (ap2) well developed; ap1 joined with poorly visible prosternal apodeme (appr), sejugal apodeme represented by pair of small sclerites located posterolaterad setae 2c; apodemes 3 (ap3) and 4 (ap4) well developed. Poststernal apodeme absent. Coxal fields I-IV each with three pairs of setae. Lengths of ventral setae: 1a 7 (6–7), 1b 7 (6–7), 1c 6 (6–7), 2a 11 (10–11), 2b 7 (7), 2c 20 (18–20), 3a 10 (8– 10), 3b 9 (8–10), 3c 10 (9–10), 4a 9 (9), 4b 9 (9–10), 4c 9 (8–9), ag 9 (8–9), g1 5 (5), g2 5 (5), ps 7 (7–8).</p> <p>Legs (Fig. 5) – All legs subequal in length. Setation of legs I-IV as in P. neoafricana sp. nov. Leg I (Fig. 5A). Tarsus with two small claws and semi-oval empodium. At least seta d of femur weakly barbed, other setae smooth. Setae l’ of femur, l’ and v’ of genu, k, v’ of tibia, and (u) of tarsus blunt-tipped; other leg setae (except eupathidia p’, p”, ft’, ft”) pointed; setae (u) and (pv) of tarsus not modified. Trochanter dorsally with one short tooth-like projection. Tarsus I with large ventrodistal membranous flange. Lengths of solenidia ω1 6 (6), ω2 3 (3), φ1 7 (7), φ2 4 (4–5); solenidion ω1 digitiform; solenidia φ2 and ω2 baculiform; solenidion φ1 clavate. Leg II (Fig. 5B). Tarsal claws simple, hooked; empodium large, extending beyond tips of claws. Solenidion ω 5 (4–5) digitiform; solenidion φ 3 (1–3) weakly clavate. Trochanter dorsolaterally with two tooth-like projections. All leg setae smooth; seta l’ of tibia incrassate, spiniform and slightly curved; setae tc”, u’ and (pv) weakly blunt-tipped; other setae pointed. Leg III (Fig. 5C). Claws and empodium of same shape as on tarsus II. All setae smooth; setae d of femur and (tc) of tarsus weakly blunt-tipped, other leg setae pointed. Trochanter ventrally with short lobe. Leg IV (Fig. 2D). Claws and empodium of same shape as on tarsus II. All setae smooth; setae d of femur, pl” and (tc) of tarsus weakly blunt-tipped, other leg setae pointed. Trochanter ventrally with short lobe.</p> <p>Male – unknown.</p> <p>Type material</p> <p>Female holotype, slide No. ZISP T-Dol-004, Madagascar, Ankaratra Andraraty, 19° 21' 20.78" S, 47° 18' 18.71" E, on beetle Helictipleurus quadripunctatus collected in cow dung, 23.02.2022, A.V. Frolov leg; paratypes: 48 females, same data.</p> <p>Type deposition</p> <p>The holotype and 10 paratypes are deposited in the collection of the Zoological Institute of RAS, Saint Petersburg, Russia; five female paratypes are deposited in the acarological collection of Jalal Afshar Zoological Museum, Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran (JAZM); other paratypes are deposited in the collection of the Tyumen State University Museum of Zoology, Tyumen, Russia.</p> <p>Differential diagnosis</p> <p>The new species is most similar to Pavania riparia Sevastianov, 1980 and P. copridis Khaustov and Frolov, 2020a by the similar length of idiosomal setae and setae 2c pointed and about twice longer than 2a. The new species differs from both species in having seta l’ on tibia II spiniform (setiform in P. riparia and P. copridis) and in having only one tooth-like projection on trochanter I (four in P. riparia, five in P. copridis).</p> <p>Etymology The name of the new species refers to its geographical distribution.</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03ED87A7FF82FFE168E9FD84FBF6FB93	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.		Plazi	Khaustov, Alexander A.;Frolov, Andrey V.	Khaustov, Alexander A., Frolov, Andrey V. (2022): Two new species of Pavania (Acari: Heterostigmata: Dolichocybidae) associated with scarab beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) from Tanzania and Madagascar. Persian Journal of Acarology 11 (4): 545-558, DOI: https://doi.org/10.22073/pja.v11i4.76531
03ED87A7FF8FFFE3684CFBE2FA46FA4C.text	03ED87A7FF8FFFE3684CFBE2FA46FA4C.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pavania Lombardini 1949	<div><p>Key to world species of Pavania (based on Khaustov &amp; Frolov 2020b)</p> <p>1. Setae sc1 absent ……………………………………………………………………………….… 2</p> <p>– Setae sc1 present …..…………………………………………………………………………….. 9</p> <p>2. Setae 2b present...……………………………………………………………………………..… 5</p> <p>– Setae 2b absent..……………………………………………………………………………….… 3</p> <p>3. Setae 1c present, seta d of femur IV absent …………...……………………………………….... 4</p> <p>– Setae 1c absent, seta d of femur IV present ….... P. neotropica Khaustov &amp; Frolov, 2017 (Brazil)</p> <p>4. Seta d of femur III present; setae d pointed, distinctly longer than c2 ……………………………. ………………………………...…… P. semireducta Khaustov &amp; Frolov, 2020a (French Guiana)</p> <p>– Seta d of femur III absent; setae d blunt-tipped, distinctly shorter than c2 ……………………… ……………………………...…...… P. brevicaudata Khaustov &amp; Frolov, 2020a (French Guiana)</p> <p>5. Seta d absent on each femora III and IV ………………………………………………………… 6</p> <p>– Seta d present on each femora III and IV ….………………………………………………….… 7</p> <p>6. All dorsal setae blunt-tipped; setae c2 only slightly longer than c1 ………………………………. ……………………………………...….… P. pusilla Khaustov &amp; Frolov, 2020a (French Guiana)</p> <p>– Setae sc2, c2 and d pointed; setae c2 about three times longer than c1 …………………………… ………………….……………...…. P. hansreiaphila Khaustov &amp; Frolov, 2020a (French Guiana)</p> <p>7. Setae v1 shorter than distance between their bases; setae cha less than three times longer than chb; setae e never longer than f; setae h2 at most seven times longer than h1 …………...……… 8</p> <p>– Setae v1 longer than distance between their bases; setae cha three times longer than chb; setae e longer than f; setae h2 15 times longer than h1 …………………………………………………… …………………………………………..… P. gymnopleuri Hajiqanbar &amp; Khaustov, 2010 (Iran)</p> <p>8. Genu I with one seta (v’); dorsal idiosomal setae smooth; setae c1 longer than c2; setae c1 and d pointed …………………………...……… P. sabzevarensis Hajiqanbar &amp; Khaustov, 2010 (Iran)</p> <p>– Genu I with two setae (v’, l’); dorsal idiosomal setae weakly barbed; setae c2 longer than c1; setae c1 and d distinctly blunt-tipped ….…... P. onthophagi Hajiqanbar &amp; Khaustov, 2010 (Iran)</p> <p>9. Setae sc1 capitate ……………………...……………………………………………………….. 10</p> <p>– Setae sc1 seta-like …………………...……… P. setiformis Loghmani &amp; Hajiqanbar, 2013 (Iran)</p> <p>10. Setae (u) and (pv) of tarsus I not lanceolate ……………………...…………………………... 14</p> <p>– Setae (u) and (pv) of tarsus I lanceolate ……………………...………………………………. 11</p> <p>11. Seta pv” of tarsus III lanceolate …………………………...……………………………….… 12</p> <p>– Seta pv” of tarsus III not modified ……...………………………………………………….… 13</p> <p>12. Seta tc” of tarsus II lanceolate, setae c2 distinctly longer than c1 ………………………………. ………………………………………….… P. lanceolata Bahramian &amp; Hajiqanbar, 2015 (Iran)</p> <p>– Seta tc” of tarsus II not modified, setae c1 distinctly longer than c2.…………………………… …………………………………………………... P. foliata Khaustov &amp; Frolov, 2020b (Russia)</p> <p>13. Setae c1, c2 and d pointed; setae 2c distinctly longer than 2a …………...………………………..……………...……………… P. kermaniensis Hajiqanbar, Khaustov &amp; Mortazavi, 2019 (Iran)</p> <p>– Setae c1, c2 and d blunt-tipped; setae 2c and 2a subequal ………………………………………. …………………………... P. scarabaeophilus Hajiqanbar, Khaustov &amp; Mortazavi, 2019 (Iran)</p> <p>14. Coxal fields II with 3 pairs of setae ………………………………...………………………… 15</p> <p>– Coxal fields II with 2 pairs of setae................................. P. equisetosa Mahunka, 1975 (Ghana)</p> <p>15. Empodium on tarsi II-IV small, not exceeding beyond tips of claws ……...………………… 16</p> <p>– Empodium on tarsi II-IV large, exceeding beyond tips of claws ………….…………………. 17</p> <p>16. Seta pv’ on tarsi III and IV thickened, spiniform and blunt-tipped, solenidia on tibiae III and IV absent ………………………………….……………… P. protracta Sevastianov, 1980 (Russia)</p> <p>– Seta pv’ on tarsi III and IV simple, solenidia on tibiae III and IV present ………………………. ……………………………...……….…. P. tahanae Sevastianov and Abo-Korah, 1985 (Egypt)</p> <p>17. Setae h2 less than 3.5 times longer than h1 …...……………………………………………… 18</p> <p>– Setae h2 more than 3.5 times longer than h1 …...……………………………………………. 24</p> <p>18. Setae c1 never reaching beyond bases of setae f; setae c1 shorter than h2; setae d shorter than h2 ……………………………………………………………………………………………... 19</p> <p>– Setae c1 reaching beyond bases of setae f; setae c1 longer than h2; setae d and h2 subequal …... ……………………………………………….………….. P. perhirsuta Mahunka, 1973 (Ghana)</p> <p>19. Setae sc2 subequal to distance between their bases ……………...…………………………... 21</p> <p>– Setae sc2 distinctly longer than distance between their bases ………………………………... 20</p> <p>20. Setae h2 more than twice longer than h1; posterior margins of tergites C, D, and EF with distinct tooth-shaped projections ………………………….... P. luisiae Mahunka, 1974 (Ghana)</p> <p>– Setae h2 less than twice longer than h1; posterior margins of tergites C, D, and EF with very weak projections ………… P. megasolenidia Hajiqanbar, Khaustov &amp; Mortazavi, 2019 (Iran)</p> <p>21. Setae c1, d, e and f blunt-tipped ……………………...………………………………………. 22</p> <p>– Setae c1, d, e and f pointed …………………...… P. bembidii Khaustov, 2005 (Russia: Crimea)</p> <p>22. Tips of setae h2 club-shaped, solenidion ω1 6–7 in length ……...…………………………… 23</p> <p>– Tips of setae h2 pointed, solenidion ω1 11–12 in length ………………………………………... ………….… P. carabidophila Khaustov, 2005 (Russia: Krasnodarskiy Kray, Primorskiy Kray)</p> <p>23. Setae c2 pointed; trochanter I with three tooth-like projections; solenidion φ2 with attenuate tip …………………………………………… P. africana Khaustov &amp; Frolov, 2018 (South Africa)</p> <p>– Setae c2 blunt-tipped; trochanter I with four tooth-like projections; solenidion φ2 with rounded tip …………………………………………………………………….… P. neoafricana sp. nov.</p> <p>24. Setae h2 more than six times longer than h1 ……………………………………………….… 25</p> <p>– Setae h2 less than six times longer than h1 ……………………………………………...…… 29</p> <p>25. Setae sc2 less than 2.5 times longer than v1; setae f less than twice as long as e; setae e shorter than v1........................................................................................................................................ 26</p> <p>– Setae sc2 at least 3.5 times longer than v1; setae f more than twice as long as e; setae e longer than v1 ……………………………………………….….. P. endroedyi Mahunka, 1975 (Ghana)</p> <p>26. Setae sc2 more than twice as long as v1; setae f and d subequal; setae c1 never reaching beyond posterior border of tergite C ………………………………………………….…………….… 27</p> <p>– Setae sc2 less than twice as long as v1; setae f longer than d; setae c1 reaching beyond posterior border of tergite C ……………………………………. P. brasiliensis Mahunka, 1970b (Brazil)</p> <p>27. Setae 2a as long as 2c and both longer than c1, d and f; setae m protruding beyond anterior border of gnathosoma ……………………...... P. elongata Hajiqanbar &amp; Khaustov, 2010 (Iran)</p> <p>– Setae 2a longer than 2c and both shorter than c1, d and f; setae m never protruding beyond anterior border of gnathosoma ………………………………...……………………………... 28</p> <p>28. Setae c1, d and f subequal and shorter than c2 …………………………………………………... …………………………………….……...…. P. gazellatris Katlav &amp; Seeman, 2020 (Australia)</p> <p>– Setae c1, d, f and c2 subequal ………………….………….. P. simplex Mahunka, 1973 (Ghana)</p> <p>29. Empodium on tarsus I with rounded anterior margin; solenidia on tibiae III and IV absent.... 30</p> <p>– Empodium on tarsus I with 3 lobes; tibiae III and IV with tiny solenidion ………………..……. ………………………………..... P. magowskii Hajiqanbar, Khaustov &amp; Mortazavi, 2019 (Iran)</p> <p>30. Setae f distinctly longer than e; setae e and h1 subequal ………...…………………………… 31</p> <p>– Setae e and f subequal; setae e longer than h1 …………………………………………………… …………………………………………. P. tadjikistanica Sevastianov, 1980 (Tadjikistan, Iran)</p> <p>31. Setae 2c subequal with 2a ………………………………………………………...………….. 34</p> <p>– Setae 2c about two times longer than 2a ……………………………………………………... 32</p> <p>32. Seta l” on tibia II setiform; trochanter I with 4-5 tooth-like projections ……………...……... 33</p> <p>– Seta l” on tibia II spiniform; trochanter I with 1 tooth-like projection ………………………….. ……………………………………………………………….…… P. madagascariensis sp. nov.</p> <p>33. Setae c1 distinctly longer than c2; setae chb blunt-tipped ………………………………………. ………………………………………….…… P. riparia Sevastianov, 1980 (Ukraine, Slovakia)</p> <p>– Setae c1 and c2 subequal; setae chb pointed …………………………………..………………… ………………………………………..… P. copridis Khaustov &amp; Frolov, 2020 (Borneo island)</p> <p>34. Setae f more than two times longer than e ………………………………...………………..… 34</p> <p>– Setae f less than 1.5 times longer than e ……….………………………………………………… ……………………….…. P. khiavensis Sobhi &amp; Hajiqanbar, 2017 (in Sobhi et al. 2017) (Iran)</p> <p>35. Most dorsal idiosomal setae weakly barbed and blunt-tipped; setae c1 longer than c2; setae sc2 less than twice as long as c1 … …………...…... P. kamalii Hajiqanbar &amp; Khaustov, 2010 (Iran)</p> <p>– Dorsal idiosomal setae smooth and pointed; setae c2 longer than c1; setae sc2 more than twice as long as c1 …………………….………………… P. fusiformis Lombardini, 1949 (Italy, Iran)</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03ED87A7FF8FFFE3684CFBE2FA46FA4C	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.		Plazi	Khaustov, Alexander A.;Frolov, Andrey V.	Khaustov, Alexander A., Frolov, Andrey V. (2022): Two new species of Pavania (Acari: Heterostigmata: Dolichocybidae) associated with scarab beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) from Tanzania and Madagascar. Persian Journal of Acarology 11 (4): 545-558, DOI: https://doi.org/10.22073/pja.v11i4.76531
