Coccus mondouriensis Das, Pramanik & Das, 2025

Coccus mondouriensis Das, Pramanik & Das , sp. nov.

urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:3DA55FF8-7A75-4FD7-83F0-650AB759F868

( Figs 1 View FIGURE 1 , 2 View FIGURE 2 and 3 View FIGURE 3 )

Material examined

Holotype. INDIA: West Bengal, / North 24- Parganas (N), / Mondouri , / ex Mangifera indica L. / 12.vi.2023, coll. A. Das, 1 adult ♀ mounted on slide ( ZSI, Registration No. 19676/H15)

Paratypes. Collection data same as for holotype, 5 adult ♀♀ mounted singly on 5 slides ( ZSI, Registration Nos. 19677/H15 to 19681/H15); and 10 adult ♀♀ mounted singly on 10 slides ( BCKV) . Total number of paratype specimens = 15.

Additional, non-type specimens. Collection data same as for holotype, 20 slide-mounted adult ♀♀ ( BCKV) .

Adult female description

Appearance in life ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 ): Body oval, moderately convex above, with the whole dorsal surface symmetrically reticulated on each side with dark brown lines forming various rectangular to polygonal cell-like patterns ( Figs 1 A, B View FIGURE 1 ). In young specimens this patterning is slight or absent, but is obvious in comparatively mature females; later, the cell-like pale areas become sclerotized and the entire dorsum becomes dark brown except for the marginal areas. Found on stems and leaves of Mangifera indica L., associated with the ant, Oecophylla smaragdina Fabricius ( Formicidae : Hymenoptera ) ( Fig. 1 D View FIGURE 1 ); a large number of ants were found attending the exposed scale insect colony ( Fig. 1 C View FIGURE 1 ).

Slide-mounted adult female (n=36, but measurements are based on the holotype and 9 paratypes) ( Figs 2 View FIGURE 2 and 3 View FIGURE 3 ). Body broadly oval ( Fig. 2 A View FIGURE 2 ), 1.7–2.8 mm long, 1.4–1.9 mm wide; length to width ratio 1.3–1.5: 1; anal cleft 380–520 μm long, roughly one-fifth of body length.

Dorsum. Derm membranous, marked by small, clear, circular-to-oval cell-like areolations ( Figs 2 K View FIGURE 2 , 3 L View FIGURE 3 ), widely spaced, maximum areolation width 7.5–12.5 μm, distributed over the whole dorsum, each areolation containing 1 microduct ( Fig. 3 L View FIGURE 3 1 View FIGURE 1 ). Dorsal setae spinose, neither thick nor thin, straight ( Figs 2 H View FIGURE 2 1 View FIGURE 1 , 3 I View FIGURE 3 1 View FIGURE 1 ) or very slightly curved ( Figs 2 H2 View FIGURE 2 , 3 I View FIGURE 3 2 View FIGURE 2 ), with apices pointed and basal sockets well developed, each 7.5–12 μm long; sparsely distributed over entire dorsum, slightly more frequent posteriorly. Dorsal submarginal tubercles ( Figs 2 G View FIGURE 2 , 3 J View FIGURE 3 ) numbering 2 on each side, each 15 μm wide in dorsal view. Preopercular pores and dorsal tubular ducts absent. Anal plates each triangular, each plate 115–150 μm long, 75–100 μm wide, with anterolateral margin (100–125 μm long), sub-equal in length to posterolateral margin (90–120 μm long); plates together roughly quadrate ( Figs 2 L View FIGURE 2 , 3 H View FIGURE 3 ); each plate with 4 apical and subapical setae. Anogenital fold with a total of 2 pairs of long anterior margin setae ( Fig. 2 M View FIGURE 2 ), each 70–85 μm long, and each side with 2 lateral margin setae ( Fig. 2 N View FIGURE 2 ), each 65–85 μm long. Anal ring elongate oval, maximum length 40‒55 μm, with 2 irregular rows of translucent pores, bearing 8 (rarely 7) long setae ( Fig. 2 J View FIGURE 2 ), each 170–220 μm long. Eyes ( Figs 2 E View FIGURE 2 , 3 M View FIGURE 3 ) present dorsally and submarginally, each situated within a clear circular area about 10 μm in diameter.

Margin. Stigmatic clefts deep, obvious, lacking sclerotization, each containing 3 spiracular setae ( Figs 2 R View FIGURE 2 1 View FIGURE 1 , 3 K View FIGURE 3 1 View FIGURE 1 ), each with a well-developed basal socket; median seta longest, slender and about 55–75 μm long, lateral setae smaller, generally sub-equal in length, each 20–35 μm long; a few spiracular clefts with 2 lateral spines uneven in length ( Figs 2 R2 View FIGURE 2 , 3 K View FIGURE 3 2 View FIGURE 2 ), 1 about twice as long as other; all spiracular setae straight or slightly curved apically, and with pointed or bluntly pointed apices. Marginal setae easily distinguishable from stigmatic spines, each seta 21–45 μm long, slender, with well-developed basal socket ( Figs 2 I View FIGURE 2 1–I View FIGURE 1 6 View FIGURE 6 , 3 G View FIGURE 3 1–G View FIGURE 1 5 View FIGURE 5 ); setae highly variable in structure, with various degrees of curvature between apically slightly wavy to sickle-shaped or abruptly bent; about 50% of setae simple with bluntly pointed apices, the rest weakly fimbriate or a few bifid apically. Distribution of marginal setae as follows: with 60–63 anteriorly between anterior spiracular furrows and, on each side, with 13–15 between anterior and posterior spiracular furrows, and 46–50 between posterior spiracular furrow and anal cleft.

Venter. Derm membranous; ventral tubular ducts absent; microducts not seen. Submarginal setae ( Figs 2 D View FIGURE 2 , 3 E View FIGURE 3 ) mostly forming a row parallel to margin, each 8–10 μm long, setose, very slender and straight with a pointed apex. Other ventral setae short, simple, straight and sharply-pointed apically, similar to submarginal setae, each 7–8 μm long, scattered sparsely throughout. Interantennal setae ( Fig. 2 T View FIGURE 2 ) numbering 2 or 3 pairs of variable lengths, each seta 40–95 μm long. Pregenital long setae ( Fig. 2 O View FIGURE 2 ) numbering 3 segmental pairs, each seta 70–125 μm long. Antennae well developed, each with 7 or 8 segments ( Figs 2 B View FIGURE 2 , 3 B View FIGURE 3 ), total length 240–375 μm; lengths of segments in an 8-segmented antenna (in μm): segment I, 30–40; II, 35–45; III, 45–65; IV, 35–55; V, 25–40; VI, 20–35; VII, 20–34, and VIII, 45–60. Clypeolabral shield ( Fig. 2 P View FIGURE 2 ) 85–110 μm long, 100–110 μm wide, without setae. Labium 40–50 μm long and maximum 45–55 μm wide. Legs well developed ( Figs 2 C View FIGURE 2 , 3 C View FIGURE 3 ); all legs with a sclerotized tibio-tarsal articulation; tarsal digitules slender, knobbed, extending beyond claw digitules claw lacking denticle; claw digitules broad, equal, expanded at apex; ( Fig. 3 C View FIGURE 3 ). Lengths of prothoracic leg segments (in μm): coxa 65–75, trochanter 45–57, femur 80–88, tibia 80–94, tarsus 48–58, claw 16–17, tarsal digitule 35–40, and claw digitule 25–30. Lengths of mesothoracic leg segments (in μm): coxa 72–85, trochanter 50–55, femur 88–95, tibia 85–95, tarsus 55–65, claw 17–18, tarsal digitule 35–40, and claw digitule 30–35. Lengths of metathoracic leg segments (in μm): coxa 85–100, trochanter 50–60, femur 90–105, tibia 85–98, tarsus 60–68, claw 20–24, tarsal digitule 35–50, and claw digitule 25–30. Spiracles all similar and sub-equal in size ( Fig. 2 S View FIGURE 2 ), each 18–25 μm wide across atrium. Spiracular disc-pores forming band 1 or 2 pores wide ( Figs 2 Q View FIGURE 2 , 3 D View FIGURE 3 ) between each spiracle and margin; each spiracular disc-pore 5–6 μm in diameter, with 5 or 6 loculi (mostly 5); each anterior spiracular pore band containing 16–20 pores, each posterior band containing 16–28 pores. Pregenital disc-pores often difficult to locate, present in a group of about 25–35 pores near or around anogenital fold ( Fig. 3 F View FIGURE 3 ), each pore 8–10 μm in diameter and with 7–9 (rarely 10) loculi, occasionally with 1 or 2 pores present medially on preceding 1 or 2 segments.

Etymology. The species epithet mondouriensis is formed from the name of the type locality, Mondouri, combined with the Latin suffix “- ensis ”, meaning “from Mondouri”.

Comments. Of the 13 Coccus species previously known from India, the adult female of C. mondouriensis sp. nov. is most similar to those of C. ophiorrhizae (Green) and C. longulus (Douglas) , both of which also lack dorsal and ventral tubular ducts. In addition to lacking tubular ducts, C. mondouriensis shares with C. ophiorrhizae the following character states: (i) absence of preopercular pores; (ii) anogenital fold with a total of 4 anterior margin setae, and 2 lateral margin setae on each side; and (iii) interantennal setae usually numbering 2 pairs. However, C. mondouriensis can easily be distinguished from C. ophiorrhizae by the presence of the following features (character states of C. ophiorrhizae in parentheses): (i) marginal setae variable in form, with apices either bluntly pointed or truncate, or weakly fimbriate to bifurcate (marginal setae only simple, without any with apices fimbriate, branched or bifurcate), and (ii) dorsal setae spinose, straight or very slightly curved (dorsal setae cylindrical).

According to the literature (Hamon & Williams 1984; Gill 1988; Tang 1990), Coccus longulus appears to be morphologically variable; in case it is a cryptic species complex, the following comparison is based only on the data for C. longulus given by Ben-Dov (1977), who studied the type specimens. Coccus mondouriensis is similar to C. longulus in lacking tubular ducts and discal setae on anal plate, and in having dorsal submarginal tubercles. However, it can be distinguished from C. longulus by the following features (character states of C. longulus in parentheses): (i) preopercular pores absent (with 4–14 preopercular pores); (ii) body broadly oval (body distinctly elongate oval, often with lateral margins almost parallel); (iii) dorsal setae spinose, straight or very slightly curved (simple and conspicuously curved); (iv) each anal plate with 4 apical and subapical setae (with 5 apical and subapical setae); (v) anogenital fold with a total of 4 anterior margin setae and 2 lateral margin setae on each side (with 6–9 anterior margin setae and 3 lateral margin setae on each side); and (vi) interantennal setae numbering 2 or 3 pairs (interantennal setae absent [based on Ben-Dov 1977: 90, fig. 1]).

Cao et al. (2022) described C. nanningensis Cao & Feng from China, feeding on Ficus carica ( Moraceae ). This species also resembles C. mondouriensis in having (i) similar types of marginal setae, and in lacking (ii) dorsal and ventral tubular ducts and (iii) preopercular pores. Coccus mondouriensis may be distinguished from C. nanningensis by the presence of the following features (data for C. nanningensis in parentheses): (i) dorsal setae spinose, straight or very slightly curved (dorsal setae setose, extremely fine and pointed), (ii) each anal plate with 4 apical and subapical setae, but lacking discal setae (each plate with 3 apical setae and a robust discal seta); (iii) anogenital fold with a total of 4 anterior margin setae and 2 lateral margin setae on each side (with 6 anterior margin setae and 3 lateral margin setae on each side); (iv) marginal setae numbering 60–63 between the two anterior spiracular furrows (39–45) and, on each side, 13–15 between anterior and posterior spiracular furrows (10–12), and 46–50 between posterior spiracular furrow and anal cleft (22–25); and (v) pregenital setae numbering 3 pairs (mainly 2 pairs). It is therefore considered that C. mondouriensis is a species new to science that is morphologically close to both C. ophiorrhizae and C. nanningensis . It is associated with the ant, Oecophylla smaragdina ; a large number of which were found attending the colony outside the ant’s nest.