The genus Neoseiulus Hughes (Mesostigmata: Phytoseiidae) in the Espinhaço Range, a great reservoir of biodiversity in Brazil Author Ferragut, Francisco 0000-0003-1545-6011 fjferrag@eaf.upv.es Author Navia, Denise 0000-0003-1545-6011 fjferrag@eaf.upv.es text Zootaxa 2022 2022-03-29 5120 4 523 542 journal article 20051 10.11646/zootaxa.5120.4.4 bf85911d-3c0f-4b62-acf3-34460eb1a63f 1175-5326 6392828 387A79A2-9F77-4FEA-9BBB-7B57343BB692 Neoseiulus benjamini ( Schicha, 1981 ) Amblyseius benjamini Schicha, 1981: 203 Amblyseius ( Amblyseius ) benjamini .— Ueckermann & Loots, 1988: 142 Neoseiulus benjamini .— Beard, 2001: 131 Specimens examined. Four females, 3 males on Paspalum carinatum (Poaceae) ; one female on Andropogon leucostachyus (Poaceae) ; pedestrian grasslands, Mucugê, Chapada Diamantina, 12º53’49”S , 41º18’58”W , 1125 m asl; 19 January 2012 . One female on Rhynchospora tenuis (Cyperaceae) ; pedestrian grasslands, crossroad MG-010 with track Morro do Pilar, Morro do Pilar, Serra do Cipó, 19º13’12”S , 43º29’04”W , 1290 m asl; 13 August 2011 . Geographical distribution. Southern Hemisphere, Australia , Brazil , Chile and South Africa , with one record in the French Caribbean isles (island of Martinique ). Additional description ( six females ; Figure 14A ). Dorsal shield 367 (348–379) long, 149 (141–153) wide. Length of setae j1 15 (13–17), j3 13 (11–14), j4 9 (8–9), j5 8 (7–9), j6 9 (8–10), J2 10 (9–11), J5 10 (9–10), z2 10 (9–11), z4 10 (9–11), z5 8 (7–9), Z1 10 (10–11), Z4 19 (17–22), Z5 60 (57–63), s4 11 (11–12), S2 13 (12–15), S4 19 (15–21), S5 23 (19–25). Sublateral setae r3 and R1 placed on small sclerites; r3 12 (9–14), R1 10 (9–12). The soft integument between the dorsal and ventral shields also bears the solenostome gd3 and the poroid idR3 . Seven pairs of dorsal solenostomes, all small and punctiform, except gd9 , which is large and horseshoe-shaped; sixteen pairs of poroids, with poroids id4 , idl1 , idl4 and sometimes is1 on the margin of the shield. Tip of the peritremes arriving to near the base of setae j1 , though in the female from Serra do Cipó is slightly shorter; total length 194 (179–203); groove of the peritrematal shield with three lines of microvilli. Sternal shield 92 (91–93) long and 63 (62–64) wide. Epigynal shield 117 (111–120) long, distance st5–st5 59 (57–61). Ventrianal shield 115 (104–121) long, 82 (76–87) wide at level of setae ZV2 , 74 (69–77) wide at level of anus. Distance between solenostomes gv3 15 (13–17). Posterior (primary) metapodal shield very long and narrow, being broader anteriorly and pointed posteriorly; 42 (40–44) long. Setae JV5 on platelets, 28 (26–30). Genua II and III with 7 setae, setal formulae 2 2/0, 2/0 1 and 1 2/1, 2/0 1, respectively; tibia I with 10 setae (2 2/1, 2/1 2). Macroseta on basitarsus IV blunt, 24 (22–27) long. Remarks . The original description was based on a single female and male collected on the kikuyu grass Pennisetum clandestinum (Poaceae) in New South Wales , Australia . Since then the species has been redescribed and illustrated several times, including the description of all the immature stages ( Ueckermann & Loots 1988 ). Setal measurements in the examined specimens were similar to those obtained by Kreiter et al . (2018) from Martinique , but slightly longer to that of the female holotype and clearly shorter to those reported by Lofego et al . (2009) from mites collected in the state of São Paulo , Brazil . Although the females from São Paulo were similar in dorsal length and width with those examined in this study, the lengths of dorsal setae were about 30–60% longer, especially j3 , J2 , z2 , z4 , s4 , S2 , S4 , and the sublaterals r3 and R1 . According to the previous literature, the details of the dorsal adenotaxy and poroidotaxy are contradictory. The number of “dorsal pores” varies from two ( Schicha 1981 , in the original description) to four ( Peralta & Tello 2019 ) or eight ( Ueckermann & Loots 1988 ). In some cases, the description in the text does not match with the illustrations; the drawing of the dorsal shield by Schicha shows clearly the presence of six solenostomes, with absence of the gland pore gd1 ; in Ueckermann & Loots (1988) only gd1 , gd2 and gd8 were depicted, and in Peralta & Tello (2019) the solenostomes gd1 and gd5 were not correctly placed on the dorsal shield, corresponding respectively to the poroids id1 and id6 . The redescription of the species by Lofego et al . (2009) did not mention the number of dorsal solenostomes, but the Figure 1 of that publication shows the complete set of seven dorsal solenostomes. We consider that these discrepancies are due to the misidentification of the dorsal pores and poroids rather than intraspecific variability. Another interesting feature not reported yet is the ornamentation of the female epigynal shield. All the females examined have the central-posterior area of the shield, between the lateral striae, covered by several striae forming a distinct V-shaped pattern, with an anterior and more weak triangular shape and three posterior and more pronounced triangles ( Figure 14A ). Usually this area is completely smooth in the Phytoseiidae , but apparently the ornamentation is characteristic in this species, since some authors depicted it in their drawings ( Ueckermann & Loots 1988 ; Lofego et al . 2009 ), although none of them mention it.