Valid Names Results
Dactylopius Costa, 1829 (
Dactylopiidae)
Nomenclatural History
- Diaprosteci
Costa
1828: 7.
.
unavailable name that is placed
- Dactylopius
Costa
1829: 16.
Type species: Dactylopius coccus Costa
by subsequent designation
ICZN1983:77
.
accepted valid name
Notes: Opinion 1247 of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN, 1983) set aside previous designations of type species for Dactylopius and designated Dactylopius coccus Costa, 1829 as the type-species. The above Opinion placed Dactylopius Costa, 1829 on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology, and Dactylopius coccus Costa, 1829 on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology.
- Diaprostocetus
Westwood
1840: 447;.
.
misspelling of genus name
- Diaprostecha
Targioni Tozzetti
1868: 697;.
.
misspelling of genus name
- Diaprostechus
Targioni Tozzetti
1868: 725;.
.
misspelling of genus name
- Diasprostetus
Signoret
1868: 842;.
.
misspelling of genus name
- Diasprotecus
Signoret
1868: 511;.
.
misspelling of genus name
- Dactylopus
Signoret
1875c: 499;.
.
misspelling of genus name
- Diasprostethus
Signoret
1877: 658;.
.
misspelling of genus name
- Diaprostecie
Cockerell
1902: 454;.
.
misspelling of genus name
- Diaprostecus
Waterhouse
1902: 410;.
.
misspelling of genus name
Remarks
- Systematics: This genus currently accommodates species of cochineal scales, family Dactylopiidae. However, during the latter decades of 19th century and early 20's, many species, which belong to the mealybug family, Pseudococcidae, have been described in this genus. The history, taxonomy and nomenclature of this confusion has been extensively discussed by Ferris (1955a), Morrison & Morrison (1966), De Lotto (1974a), Miller (1974), Danzig & Kerzhner (1981), and Opinion 1247 (ICZN, 1983).
The molecular studies of Cook and Gullan (2004) and Gullan and Cook (2007) have all placed the genus Dactylopius sister to the Acanthococcid eriococcid clade, whereas the cladistic study based on the adult male morphology (Hodgson & Hardy 2013) found the Dactylopiidae to be sister to the Gondwanan clade. Adult male Dactylopius species differ from those in the acanthococcine-group as follows: (i) postoccipital ridge absent; (ii) setae on ocular sclerite absent; (iii) interocular ridges present; (iv) prosternal median ridge absent; (v) postmesospiracular setae present; (vi) alar lobes absent; (vii) hamulohalteres absent, and (viii) presence of very short glandular pouch setae. Adult male Dactylopius species differ from those in the Gondwanan-group as follows: (i) abdomen not attenuated; (ii) postoccipital ridge absent; (iii) interocular ridge present; (iv) antenna with short, plump fleshy setae, and (v) the sensoria on each side of each trochanter oval, more or
less in a triangle. (Hodgson, 2020)
- Structure: Adult female body ovoid to globular, 3–5 mm long, wingless, purple red, covered with secreted white cottony wax filaments or powdery wax; the covering becomes denser with maturity. Cochineal insects ‘bleed’ bright red when crushed, due to carminic acid in the body. Adult male alate, much smaller than
adult female. (Pacheco da Silva, et al., 2022) Dactylopius species are characterized by the presence of truncate dorsal setae and clusters of quinquelocular pores associated with tubular ducts on the body of the females (first and second instars and adults), and by the absence, in all instars, of microducts and a cellular anal ring bearing setae. (Mazzeo, et al., 2019)
- Biology: All described species of this genus are known to develop only on host plants of the Cactaceae.
- Economic Importance: Chavez-Moreno et al. (2010) studied five species of Dactylopius collected in thirteen states of Mexico and two provinces of Argentina and analyzed using high-performance liquid chromatography with a photodiode array detector. This analysis allowed each species to be identified on the basis of differences in their metabolic profiles. Cluster analysis and principal component analysis differentiated the species by localities and host plant. These two multivariate data analysis techniques were complementary and confirmed the grouping of all analyzed Dactylopius samples. For all species, carminic acid, identified by reference to a commercial sample, was the major compound present in significant amounts, making all five species potential sources of colorant. In addition, each species could be differentiated by the presence of other minor compounds.
- General Remarks: Definition and characters by Ferris (1955a), De Lotto (1974a), Perez Guerra & Kosztarab (1992) and by Gill (1993). Detailed diagnosis of males in Hodgson, 2020.
Keys
Associated References
- Ashmea1891:
taxonomy, pp. 95
- Atkins1886:
taxonomy, pp. 285,288
- BenDov2006b:
catalog, taxonomy, pp. 211
- BotterCl2015:
SEM, pp. 1-8
- ChavezTeCa2011:
distribution, pp. 64
- ChavezTeFr2010:
chemistry, pp. 671-679
- ChavezTeFr2010:
taxonomy, pp. 1041-1049
- Cocker1902k:
taxonomy, pp. 453-454
- Comsto1881a:
taxonomy, pp. 345
- Costa1829:
taxonomy, pp. 16
- DanzigKe1981:
taxonomy, pp. 79-83
- DeHaroCl1995:
description, economic importance, host, taxonomy, pp. 1-19
- DeLott1974a:
description, taxonomy, pp. 167-170
- Fernal1903b:
catalog, pp. 80-82
- Ferris1919a:
taxonomy, pp. 19
- Ferris1937:
taxonomy, pp. 5
- Ferris1955a:
description, taxonomy, pp. 85-86
- Ferris1957c:
taxonomy, pp. 85
- Gill1993:
description, taxonomy, pp. 146-148
- Green1896e:
taxonomy, pp. 17
- Green1912a:
description, taxonomy, pp. 79-93
- Green1922:
taxonomy, pp. 357
- GullanCo2001:
taxonomy, pp. 91-99
- Hodgso2020:
description, diagnosis, taxonomy, pp. 67-68
- Howell1976:
taxonomy, pp. 188
- HumphrCaFl2022:
biological control, pp.
- ICZN1983:
taxonomy, pp. 77-80
- KozarDr1998f:
catalog, pp. 169
- MacGreSa1984:
taxonomy, pp. 217
- Mamet1949:
catalog, taxonomy, pp. 7
- Mann1969:
distribution, host, life history, pp. 1-158
- Maskel1887a:
taxonomy, pp. 89
- Maskel1894b:
taxonomy, pp. 86
- Miller1974b:
taxonomy, pp. 146-153
- MorrisMo1966:
taxonomy, pp. 54-55
- PachecSuCl2022:
diagnosis, taxonomy, pp. 390
- PerezGKo1992:
description, taxonomy, pp. 1-87
- PortilVi2006:
distribution, host, taxonomy, pp. 249-255
- Signor1875c:
taxonomy, pp. 339-340
- SimmonBe1966:
biological control, distribution, pp. 183-189
- VanDamMa2012:
description, distribution, economic importance, taxonomy, pp. 33,35
- Willia1969a:
taxonomy, pp. 324
11 Species
