Doğan, Salih ¹ and Doğan, Sibel ²

¹✉ Department of Biology, Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Erzincan Binali Yıldırım University, Erzincan, Türkiye.
²Vocational School of Health Services, Erzincan Binali Yıldırım University, Erzincan, Türkiye.

2024 - Volume: 64 Issue: 3 pages: 711-732

ZooBank LSID: 4C4816C3-0090-46EE-ABB4-09628294D8F2

Original research

Keywords

Abstract

Introduction

The family Stigmaeidae currently comprises over 640 species from 33 recognised genera (Fan et al. 2016, 2019; Beron, 2022; Khaustov et al. 2023; Doğan et al. 2024b). Of the Stigmaeidae, Eustigmaeus Berlese is one of the largest genera. There are 140 species (Supplementary Table 1) of this genus worldwide (Fan 2005; Fan et al. 2016, 2019; Beron 2020, 2022; Bizarro et al. 2020; Khaustov 2021a,b Khaustov et al. 2023; Bagheri and Mohammad-Doustaresharaf 2024), of which 33 (including two species described here) have been documented from Türkiye (Doğan, 2007, 2019; Doğan and Doğan 2020; Pekağırbaş et al. 2023; Doğan et al. 2024b).

The majority of Eustigmaeus are free-living predators; however, six-identified and one-unidentified species of Eustigmaeus are parasitic on sand flies as evidenced by the feeding scars on the hosts' bodies (Pekağırbaş et al. 2023). There is no obvious indication of host haemolymph in the digestive tracts of these mites, and it is unknown how they affect the host flies (Mortazavi et al. 2018).

We depict and describe two new species of Eustigmaeus from Türkiye: E. incisus n. sp. and E. paraincisus n. sp. A compendium of the valid species of Eustigmaeus is included in this paper. Eustigmaeus sphagneticolus Cooreman n. stat. described as a subspecies, E. ottavii sphagneticola, by Cooreman (1943) has been elevated to species level.

Material and methods

The Eustigmaeus species list (Supplementary Table 1) has been created by combining from the catalogues and checklists (Fan 2005; Fan et al. 2016, 2019; Stathakis et al. 2016; Beron 2020, 2022) and updated from recent publications (Bizarro et al. 2020; Khaustov 2021a,b; Khaustov et al. 2023; Bagheri and Mohammad-Doustaresharaf 2024). Each species' current name, converted in accordance with the masculine gender of the genus, with its authorship has been listed together with a bibliographic reference that contains the original description of the species along with its original name.

Using Berlese-Tullgren funnels, the mite specimens were extracted, cleared in 60% lactic acid, and mounted in Hoyer's medium on microscope slides (Fan and Zhang 2005; Walter and Krantz 2009). A Leica DM 4000B phase contrast equipped with a drawing tube was used to make the illustrations. The nomenclature of the idiosomal setation follows that proposed by Grandjean (1939) as adapted for Prostigmata by Kethley (1990). The terminologies of subcapitular, palp and the leg setations follow those proposed by Grandjean (1944, 1946). All measurements and the scale bars in the figures were taken in micrometers (μm) with the aid of the Leica Application Suite (LAS) Software Version 4.8. The holotype measurements are followed by the range of paratypes in parenthesis. The mite materials are deposited in EBYU (Acarology Laboratory of Erzincan Binali Yıldırım University, Erzincan, Türkiye).

Results

Family Stigmaeidae Oudemans, 1931

Genus Eustigmaeus Berlese, 1910

Type species — Stigmaeus kermesinus Koch, 1841 by original designation.

Eustigmaeus incisus n. sp.

ZOOBANK: 614493EF-BA61-42A1-9AC2-46E28568B69B

(Figures 1–4, 5A, C and 6–8)

Diagnosis

Female Dorsal shields ornamented with pits, 10–28 vacuoles present in pits; dorsal setae homeomorphic, pudgy and resembling thorny bush; humeral setae c₂ similar in shape to dorsal body setae; lateral incision of hysterosomal shield; a pair of almost rounded patterned areas located anterolaterad aggenital shield.

Description

Female (n=16 examined, n=6 measured) (Figs 1–4, 5A)

Length of idiosoma 319 (289–317), width 230 (209–220).

Dorsum — (Fig. 1). Dorsal shields ornamented with pits, 10–28 vacuoles present in pits. Fossettes on dorsal shields as illustrated. Propodosomal shield with four pairs of setae: vi, ve, sci and sce, and a pair of ocelli, 7 (7–11) in diameter. Lateral margins of hysterosomal shield incised, and this shield with six pairs of setae: c₁, d₁, d₂, e₁, e₂ and f₁. Suranal shield with two pairs of setae: h₁ and h₂. Dorsal setae pudgy and bushy. Lengths and distances of dorsal setae as follows: vi 18 (16–18), ve 18 (16–19), sci 18 (13–17), sce 17 (16–17), c₁ 19 (15–18), d₁ 16 (15–17), d₂ 16 (15–17), e₁ 19 (18–19), e₂ 16 (15–18), f₁ 27 (24–26), h₁ 21 (21–23), h₂ 20 (21–23), vi–vi 33 (31–40), ve–ve 85 (72–88), vi–ve 41 (36–42), sci–sci 137 (122–135), ve–sci 30 (26–30), sce–sce 181 (152–177), sci–sce 40 (28–39), c₁–c₁ 76 (58–77), d₂–d₂ 186 (164–189), c₁–d₁ 57 (50–56), c₁–d₂ 58 (51–56), d₁–d₁ 68 (60–67), d₂–d₁ 66 (52–67), e₂–e₂ 143 (129–142), e₁–e₁ 98 (53–99), e₂–e₁ 42 (36–43), f₁–f₁ 57 (52–59), e₁–f₁ 41 (39–41), e₂–f₁ 78 (72–83), h₁–h₁ 31 (26–38), h₂–h₂ 72 (62–76), and h₁–h₂ 17 (19–21).

Venter — (Fig. 2). Coxisternal shields undivided, and with three pairs of smooth intercoxal setae: 1a, 3a and 4a. Lengths and distances of these setae: 1a 9 (9–12), 3a 11 (9–15), 4a 8 (8–11), 1a–1a 25 (21–25), 3a–3a 37 (32–35), and 4a–4a 24 (22–25). Aggenital shield with three pairs of setae: ag₁, ag₂ and ag₃. Anogenital shields with three pairs of pseudanal setae: ps₁, ps₂ and ps₃. Lengths of these setae: ag₁ 7 (6–8), ag₂ 8 (7–8), ag₃ 10 (8–10), ps₁ 13 (12–16), ps₂ 12 (11–14), and ps₃ 11 (10–12). Aggenital and pseudanal setae slightly barbed, ps₁ thicker than other pseudanal setae, and distinctly barbed. Patterns on humeral shields similar to those of dorsal shields. Patterns on coxisternal, aggenital, pseudanal and suranal shields almost similar in shape as in Figure 2. Ovoid patterned area located between coxae III and IV and a pair of almost rounded patterned areas located anterolaterally on aggenital shield. Indentations and folds on anterior part of humeral shields present, but indistinguishable in some paratypes, setae c₂ 17 (17–19), similar in shape to dorsal setae.

Legs — (Figs 3 and 4). Faintly punctuated. Setal formulae of legs I–IV: coxae 2–2–2–2, trochanters 1–1–2–1, femora 6–4–3–2, genua 3(+1κ)–3(+1κ)–1–1, tibiae 5(+1φ+1φρ)–5(+1φρ)–5(+1φρ)–5(+1φρ), tarsi 13(+1ω)–9(+1ω)–7(+1ω)–7.

Leg I (Fig. 3A). 150 (147–171). Leg setation: Co 2 (1b, 1c) and needle-like leg supracoxal setae (el), Tr 1 (v′), Fe 6 (d, l′, l″, v′, v″, bv″), Ge 3 (d, l′, l″) + 1 κ, Ti 5 (d, l′, l″, v′, v″) + 1 solenidion φ + 1 solenidion φρ, Ta 13 (p′ξ, p″ξ, tc′ξ, tc″ξ, ft′ξ, ft″ξ, u′, u″, a′, a″, pl′, pl″, vs) + 1 solenidion ω, 17 (16–18). Setae d and l″ on femur, d on genu, d on tibia distinctly barbed; setae l′, v′, v″ on femur, l′ on genu, l″ on tibia pointed and smooth; setae tc′ξ, tc″ξ, ft′ξ, ft″ξ, p′ξ, p″ξ on tarsus smooth and weakly blunt-tipped; other setae on leg I pointed and barbed.

Leg II (Fig. 3B). 117 (113–131). Leg setation: Co 2 (2b, 2c), Tr 1 (v′), Fe 4 (d, l′, l″, bv″), Ge 3 (d, l′, l″) + 1 κ, Ti 5 (d, l′, l″, v′, v″) + 1 solenidion φρ, Ta 9 (p′ξ, tc′ξ, tc″, u′, u″, a′, a″, pl′, vs) + 1 solenidion ω, 12 (8–13). Setae d and l″ on femur, d on genu, d on tibia distinctly barbed; setae l′ on femur and genu, l″ on tibia pointed and smooth; setae p′ξ and tc′ξ on tarsus smooth and weakly blunt-tipped; other setae on leg II pointed and barbed.

Leg III (Fig. 4A). 114 (108–130). Leg setation: Co 2 (3b, 3c), Tr 2 (l′, v′), Fe 3 (d, l′, ev′), Ge 1 (d), Ti 5 (d, l′, l″, v′, v″) + 1 solenidion φρ, Ta 7 (tc′, tc″, u′, u″, a′, a″, vs) + 1 solenidion ω, 3 (3–3). Seta l′ on femur, setae d on genu and tibia distinctly barbed; ev′ on femur, l″ on tibia pointed and smooth; other setae on leg III pointed and barbed.

Leg IV (Fig. 4B). 146 (134–148). Leg setation: Co 2 (4b, 4c), Tr 1 (v′), Fe 2 (d, ev′), Ge 1 (d), Ti 5 (d, l′, l″, v′, v″) + 1 solenidion φρ, Ta 7 (tc′, tc″, u′, u″, a′, a″, vs), lacking solenidion ω. Setae d on femur, genu and tibia strongly serrate; other setae pointed and barbed.

Gnathosoma — (Fig. 5C). Length of subcapitulum 71 (63–71). Subcapitulum faintly punctuated. Length of chelicerae 92 (78–88). Palp faintly punctuated, length of palp 95 (85–93). Lengths and distances between subcapitular setae: m 11 (11–13), n 10 (9–11), m–m 20 (18–20), n–n 23 (19–26), and m–n 13 (10–12). Number of setae on palp segments: Tr 0, Fe 3 (d, l′, v″), Ge 2 (d, l″), Ti 3 (d, l′, l″) +1 claw, Ta 8 (fused eupathidia ul′ξ, ul″ξ and sulξ, eupathidion acmξ, ba, bp, lp, va) + 1 solenidion ω. All setae on palp femur barbed, other palp setae smooth. Palp supracoxal setae (ep) needle-like. Palp tibial seta l′ paw-like, not seta-like.

Male (n=2) (Figs 6–8)

Idiosoma oval, much smaller than female. Length of idiosoma 261–269, width 168–173.

Dorsum — (Fig. 6A). Dorsal ornamentations as in female. Fossettes on dorsal shields as illustrated. Eyes 8 in diameter. Hysterosomal shield completely divided into two shields; anterior shield with three pairs of setae c₁, d₁, and d₂; posterior shield with three pairs of setae e₁, e₂, and f₁. Suranal shield located dorsally. Dorsal setae as in female except setae e₁ nearly smooth, setae f₁ barbed towards the tip, and setae e₂, h₁ and h₂ weakly barbed. Lengths and distances of dorsal setae as follows: vi 14, ve 13, sci 10–11, sce 11–12, c₁ 9–11, d₁ 11, d₂ 11–12, e₁ 10, e₂ 10–11, f₁ 31–32, h₁ 18–20, h₂ 21–26, vi–vi 21–26, ve–ve 63–64, vi–ve 33, sci–sci 102–106, ve–sci 23, sce–sce 129–133, sci–sce 28–33, c₁–c₁ 52–54, c₂–c₂ 146–153, d₂–d₂ 133–136, c₁–d₁ 45–46, c₁–d₂ 43–47, d₁–d₁ 44–45, d₂–d₁ 49–50, e₂–e₂ 98–99, e₁–e₁ 58–64, e₂–e₁ 21–26, f₁–f₁ 43–50, e₁–f₁ 20–23, e₂–f₁ 44–49, h₁–h₁ 20–23, h₂–h₂ 39–42, and h₁–h₂ 7–8.

Venter — (Fig. 6B). Coxisternal shields fused. Lengths and distances of intercoxal setae: 1a 8–11, 3a 10–14, 4a 9–12, 1a–1a ?–21, 3a–3a 24–26, and 4a–4a 15–16. Lengths of aggenital and pseudanal setae: ag₁ 8–11, ag₂ 10–14, ps₁ 1–2, ps₂ 3–4 and ps₃ 7. Pseudanal setae ps₁ and ps₂ spine-like. Aggenital and pseudanal setae smooth. Setae c₂ barbed and 15 long. Patterns on coxisternal, aggenital and humeral shields similar to those of dorsal shields. Aedeagus prominent and partly protruding.

Legs — (Figs 7 and 8). Length of legs, from leg I to leg IV respectively: 163–167, 136–139, 127–131, and 148–152. Counts of setae and solenidia on legs I–IV as in female, except enlarged solenidion (ω♂) on all tarsi present. Setae d on femora of legs I, II, and IV and setae d on genu and tibia of leg IV barbed; all other setae smooth.

Gnathosoma. As in female. Subcapitulum 57–60 long. Length of chelicerae 74–76, length of palp 79–81. Lengths and distances between subcapitular setae: m 11–12, n 9–10, m–m 16–17, n–n 18–19, and m–n 8–9.

Type material

Holotype: ♀ from moss, Acemoğlu Gorge, the Karasu Valley, TÜRKİYE, 39°36′33″ N 39°9′13″ E, 1140 m a.s.l., 29 October 2022, col. Salih Doğan. Paratypes: 1♀ and 1♂, same data as holotype; 5♀♀ from oak litter, 39°36′32″ N 39°09′05″ E, 1120 m a.s.l., 27 January 2023; 3♀♀ from soil and 1♀ from oak litter, 39°36′16″ N 39°9′21″ E, 1195 m a.s.l., 25 February 2023; 5♀♀ and 1♂ from litter and soil under the hawthorn, 39°35′25″ N 39°01′00″ E, 1093 m a.s.l., 24 November 2023—the Karasu Valley, TÜRKİYE.

Etymology

The species name ''incisus'' is derived from the Latin noun ''incisio'' which means cut and incision and refers to the presence of incision on lateral margins of hysterosomal shield in both sexes.

Differential diagnosis

This new species resembles Eustigmaeus anauniensis (Canestrini, 1889), E. hashmii (Chaudhri, 1968), which was re-described by Stathakis et al. (2016) based on specimens from Greece, and E. kentingensis Tseng, 1982, by dorsum decorated with polygonal reticulate, dorsal setae thorny bush-like and setae c₂ similar in shape to other dorsal setae. However, it differs from them in that the hysterosomal shield is incised laterally vs hysterosomal shield is undivided in E. anauniensis, E. hashmii and E. kentingensis.

This new species is also similar to Eustigmaeus aminiae (Nazari and Khanjani, 2017) n. comb., E. bisetalis (Doğan, 2004), E. indiscretus (Dönel and Doğan, 2011) n. comb., by the hysterosomal shield incised laterally; however, it differs from them in the dorsal and ventral ornamentations. This new species can easily be distinguished from E. bisetalis by having homeomorphic dorsal body setae (heteromorphic in E. bisetalis). It differs from E. indiscretus in that the coxisternal shields are granulate (reticulate in E. indiscretus), and setae c₂ are similar in shape to dorsal body setae (not similar in shape to dorsal body setae in E. indiscretus). This new species can be distinguished from E. aminiae in that dorsal shields are prominently decorated with pits along the entire surface, palp tibial seta l′ is robust, paw-like (not seta-like), and coxisternal shields are covered with small grains (granulate) vs dorsal idiosoma has punctuations and its anterior and lateral margins bears pits, palp tibial seta l′ is seta-like, and coxisternal shields are marked with small points (punctuate) in E. aminiae. Additionally, a pair of rounded patterned areas in anterolateral parts of aggenital shield are present in the new species vs the patterned areas are absent in E. aminiae.

Eustigmaeus paraincisus n. sp.

ZOOBANK: 6939A1A2-2E77-4E9D-A367-0F5E2D5E6D01

(Figures 5B, D and 9–15)

Diagnosis

Female — Dorsal shields ornamented with pits, 9–33 vacuoles present on pits; dorsal setae homeomorphic, resembling a bush; humeral setae c₂ dissimilar to dorsal body setae; lateral incisions of hysterosomal shield present; a pair of almost rounded patterned areas located anterolaterally on aggenital shield.

Description

Female (n=6) (Figs 9–12)

Length of idiosoma 312 (312–335), width 234 (219–246).

Dorsum — (Fig. 9). Dorsal shields ornamented with pits, 9–33 vacuoles present on pits. Fossettes on dorsal shields as illustrated. Propodosomal shield with four pairs of setae: vi, ve, sci and sce, and a pair of ocelli, 10 (10–11) in diameter. Hysterosomal shield with incisions on its lateral margins, with six pairs of setae c₁, d₁, d₂, e₁, e₂ and f₁. Suranal shield with two pairs of setae: h₁ and h₂. Dorsal setae bushy. Setae c₂ longer and narrower than dorsal setae. Lengths and distances of dorsal setae as follows: vi 24 (21–22), ve 24 (22–24), sci 21 (16–21), sce 24 (21–23), c₁ 23 (20–22), d₁ 19 (18–21), d₂ 23 (19–22), e₁ 25 (24–25), e₂ 22 (19–23), f₁ 30 (29–32), h₁ 31 (28–30), h₂ 27 (24–26), vi–vi 29 (30–33), ve–ve 87 (80–84), vi–ve 39 (40–42), sci–sci 139 (130–135), ve–sci 33 (29–35), sce–sce 186 (173–182), sci–sce 39 (36–43), c₁–c₁ 76 (71–77), d₂–d₂ 197 (183–196), c₁–d₁ 60 (64–66), c₁–d₂ 66 (61–67), d₁–d₁ 76 (68–73), d₂–d₁ 67 (64–70), e₂–e₂ 157 (142–150), e₁–e₁ 106 (96–104), e₂–e₁ 50 (39–44), f₁–f₁ 60 (56–63), e₁–f₁ 39 (42–47), e₂–f₁ 88 (86–91), h₁–h₁ 41 (34–37), h₂–h₂ 62 (65–74), and h₁–h₂ 14 (16–18).

Venter — (Fig. 10). Coxisternal shields fused and with three pairs of intercoxal setae: 1a, 3a and 4a. Lengths and distances of these setae: 1a 13 (12–16), 3a 15 (13–14), 4a 12 (11–12), 1a–1a 27 (22–26), 3a–3a 36 (34–36), and 4a–4a 25 (22–26). Intercoxal setae smooth. Aggenital shield with three pairs of setae: ag₁, ag₂ and ag₃. Anogenital shields with three pairs of pseudanal setae: ps₁, ps₂ and ps₃. Lengths of these setae; ag₁ 8 (8–9), ag₂ 9 (8–10), ag₃ 12 (12–13), ps₁ 18 (16–19), ps₂ 17 (16–17) and ps₃ 15 (14–15). Aggenital and pseudanal setae slightly barbed, ps₁ thicker than other pseudanal setae, and distinctly barbed. Patterns on humeral shields similar to those of dorsal shields. Patterns on coxisternal, aggenital, pseudanal and suranal shields as in Figure 10. Oval patterned area located between coxae III and IV and a pair of rounded patterned areas located anterolaterally on aggenital shield. Indentations and folds on anterior part of humeral shields present in a few paratypes, setae c₂ 34 (29–34), longer and thinner than dorsal body setae, pointed and barbed.

Legs — (Figs 11 and 12). Faintly punctuated. Setal formulae of legs I–IV: coxae 2–2–2–2, trochanters 1–1–2–1, femora 6–4–3–2, genua 3(+1κ)–3(+1κ)–1–1, tibiae 5(+1φ+1φρ)–5(+1φρ)–5(+1φρ)–5(+1φρ), tarsi 13(+1ω)–9(+1ω)–7(+1ω)–7.

Leg I (Fig. 11A). 172 (144–173). Leg setation: Co 2 (1b, 1c) and needle-like leg supracoxal setae (el), Tr 1 (v′), Femur 6 (d, l′, l″, v′, v″, bv″), Ge 3 (d, l′, l″) + 1 κ, Ti 5 (d, l′, l″, v′, v″) + 1 solenidion φ + 1 solenidion φρ, Ta 13 (p′ξ, p″ξ, tc′ξ, tc″ξ, ft′ξ, ft″ξ, u′, u″, a′, a″, pl′, pl″, vs) + 1 solenidion ω, 22 (21–23). Setae d on femur and tibia distinctly barbed and pointed; l′, v′, v″ on femur, l′ on genu, l′, v′, v″ on tibia, pl′, pl″, vs on tarsus pointed and smooth; setae tc′ξ, tc″ξ, ft′ξ, ft″ξ, p′ξ, p″ξ on tarsus smooth and weakly blunt-tipped; other setae on leg pointed and weakly barbed.

Leg II (Fig. 11B). 142 (129–147). Leg setation: Co 2 (2b, 2c), Tr 1 (v′), Fe 4 (d, l′, l″, bv″), Ge 3 (d, l′, l″) + 1 κ, Ti 5 (d, l′, l″, v′, v″) + 1 solenidion φρ, Ta 9 (p′ξ, tc′ξ, tc″, u′, u″, a′, a″, pl′, vs) + 1 solenidion ω, 14 (13–14). Setae d on femur and tibia distinctly barbed and pointed; l′ on femur, v″ on tibia pointed and smooth; setae tc′ξ, p′ξ on tarsus smooth and weakly blunt-tipped; other setae on leg pointed and weakly barbed.

Leg III (Fig. 12A). 149 (134–145). Leg setation: Co 2 (3b, 3c), Tr 2 (l′, v′), Fe 3 (d, l′, ev′), Ge 1 (d), Ti 5 (d, l′, l″, v′, v″) + 1 solenidion φρ, Ta 7 (tc′, tc″, u′, u″, a′, a″, vs) + 1 solenidion ω, 4 (3–4). Setae d on femur, genu and tibia distinctly barbed and pointed; vs, tc′, tc″ on tarsus smooth; other setae on leg pointed and weakly barbed.

Leg IV (Fig. 12B). 168 (147–170). Leg setation: Co 2 (4b, 4c), Tr 1 (v′), Fe 2 (d, ev′), Ge 1 (d), Ti 5 (d, l′, l″, v′, v″) + 1 solenidion φρ, Ta 7 (tc′, tc″, u′, u″, a′, a″, vs), lacking solenidion ω. Setae d on femur, genu and tibia, l′ on tibia distinctly barbed and pointed; l″, v′, v″ on tibia, tc′, tc″ on tarsus smooth; other setae on leg pointed and weakly barbed.

Gnathosoma — (Fig. 5D). Subcapitulum 68 (66–69) long, faintly punctuated. Length of chelicerae 82 (81–83). Palp faintly punctuated, length of palp 87 (82–86). Lengths and distances between subcapitular setae: m 12 (11–12), n 9 (9–11), m–m 18 (18–19), n–n 22 (22–24), and m–n 11 (10–12). Number of setae on palpal segments: Tr 0, Fe 3 (d, l′, v″), Ge 2 (d, l″), Ti 3 (d, l′, l″) +1 claw, Ta 8 (fused eupathidia ul′ξ, ul″ξ and sulξ, eupathidion acmξ, ba, bp, lp, va) + 1 solenidion ω. All setae on palp femur barbed, other palp setae smooth. Palpal supracoxal setae (ep) needle-like. Palp tibial seta l′ paw-like, not seta-like.

Male — (n=1) (Figs 13–15)

Idiosoma oval, much smaller than female. Length of idiosoma 268, width 174.

Dorsum — (Fig. 13A). Dorsal ornamentations as in female. Fossettes on dorsal shields as illustrated. Ocelli 8 in diameter. Hysterosomal shield completely divided into two shields; anterior shield with three pairs of setae c₁, d₁, and d₂; posterior shield with three pairs of setae e₁, e₂, and f₁. Suranal shield located dorsally. Dorsal setae vi, ve, sci and sce weakly barbed, other setae smooth. Lengths and distances of dorsal setae as follows: vi 18, ve 14, sci 11, sce 14, c₁ 12, d₁ 9, d₂ 11, e₁ 8, e₂ 7, f₁ 32, h₁ 18, h₂ 23, vi–vi 27, ve–ve 62, vi–ve 33, sci–sci 102, ve–sci 24, sce–sce 133, sci–sce 30, c₁–c₁ 53, c₂–c₂ 154, d₂–d₂ 138, c₁–d₁ 50, c₁–d₂ 48, d₁–d₁ 48, d₂–d₁ 48, e₂–e₂ 99, e₁–e₁ 56, e₂–e₁ 26, f₁–f₁ 49, e₁–f₁ 20, e₂–f₁ 44, h₁–h₁ 28, h₂–h₂ 44, and h₁–h₂ 6.

Venter — (Fig. 13B). Coxisternal shields fused. Lengths and distances of intercoxal setae: 1a 11, 3a 12, 4a 9, 1a–1a 28, 3a–3a 28, and 4a–4a 19. Lengths of aggenital and pseudanal setae: ag₁ 9, ag₂ 12, ps₁ 2, ps₂ 4, and ps₃ 7. Pseudanal setae ps₁ and ps₂ spine-like. Aggenital and pseudanal setae smooth. Setae c₂ as in female, but not distinctly barbed, 15 long. Patterns on coxisternal, aggenital and humeral shields similar to those of dorsal shields.

Legs — (Figs 14 and 15). Length of legs, from leg I to leg IV respectively: 166, 131, 134, and 137. Counts of setae and solenidia on legs I–IV as in female except enlarged male solenidion (ω♂) on all tarsi present. All leg setae smooth.

Gnathosoma. As in female. Subcapitulum 57 long. Length of chelicerae 70, length of palp 77. Lengths and distances between subcapitular setae: m 12, n 6, m–m 16, n–n 17, and m–n 7.

Type material

Holotype: ♀ from oak litter, the Karasu Valley, TÜRKİYE, 39°12′14″ N 38°34′29″ E, 1065 m a.s.l., 28 October 2022, col. Salih Doğan. Paratypes: ♀ from oak litter, 39°12′12″ N 38°34′25″ E, 1085 m a.s.l., 27 November 2022; ♀ from soil, 39°12′35″ N 38°34′31″ E, 990 m a.s.l., 27 November 2022; ♀ from oak litter, 39°12′12″ N 38°34′29″ E, 1080 m a.s.l., 25 February 2023; ♀ from oak litter, 39°12′15″ N 38°34′32″ E, 1073 m a.s.l., 25 March 2023; 1♀ and 1♂ from moss, 39°13′33″ N 38°34′12″ E, 1180 m a.s.l., 26 October 2023—the Karasu Valley, TÜRKİYE.

Differential diagnosis

This new species is very similar to Eustigmaeus incisus n. sp. in having similar ornamentations on dorsal and ventral shields, lateral incisions of hysterosomal shield and dorsal body setae bush-like. However, it differs from E. incisus n. sp. in that setae c₂ are more slender, not similar in shape to other dorsal body setae vs c₂ are robust, similar in shape to others in E. incisus n. sp., dorsal body setae of female are relatively thinner and longer than those of E. incisus n. sp., and dorsal body setae of male are slenderer than those of E. incisus n. sp. For the differences between other closely related species, see the key to Eustigmaeus species with lateral incisions of hysterosomal shield and the ''differential diagnosis'' of E. incisus n. sp.

Etymology

The species name ''paraincisus'' is a combination of the Greek prefix para- which means resembling, close to or similar to, and species name incisus, indicating that this new species resembles Eustigmaeus incisus n. sp.

A key to Eustigmaeus species (female) with lateral incisions of hysterosomal shield

1. Dorsal body setae homeomorphic
...... 2

— Dorsal body setae heteromorphic
...... E. bisetalis (Doğan)

2. Coxisternal shields not reticulate
...... 3

— Coxisternal shields reticulate
...... E. indiscretus (Dönel and Doğan)

3. A pair of rounded patterned areas present anterolaterally on the aggenital shield, palp tibial seta l′ paw-like (not seta-like)
...... 4

— Patterned areas absent anterolaterally on the aggenital shield, palp seta l′ not modified
...... E. aminiae (Nazari and Khanjani)

4. Setae c₂ robust, similar in shape to dorsal body setae
...... E. incisus n. sp.

— Setae c₂ more slender, dissimilar in shape to dorsal body setae
...... E. paraincisus n. sp.

Discussion

Eustigmaeus sphagneticolus Cooreman n. stat. originally described as a subspecies, E. ottavii sphagneticola, by Cooreman (1943) has been elevated to species level due to the following characteristics: the dorsal body setae are relatively shorter and the dorsal propodosomal setae do not extend to the base of the following setae, and two pairs of aggenital setae (ag₁ and ag₂) based on the description and illustrations by Cooreman (1943, pp. 4–6, and figs 6–7) vs dorsal body setae (especially ve) are longer and the dorsal propodosomal setae extend to the base of the following setae, and three pairs of aggenital setae in E. ottavii (Berlese) according to re-descriptions and characteristic features of the species by Summers and Price (1961), Wood (1973), Stathakis et al. (2016) and Khaustov (2019). Additionally, the humeral callosities were not mentioned in the original description and illustration, and it is clear that Cooreman's populations do not belong to ottavii. Cooreman's sphagneticolus specimens seem to be very close to the genus Villersia Oudemans by the presence of three pairs of setae on the propodosomal shield, and setae d₂ are located on hysterosomal shield as in Villersia jamaliensis (Khaustov, 2014). In the type specimens of Paravillersia grata Kuznetsov, synonymised with Eustigmaues ottavii by Khaustov (2019), setae sce are also located on separate shields or only on the thin striated incisions of the propodosomal shield (on propodosomal shield in other species of Eustigmaeus), and other characters of Cooreman's sphagneticolus specimens are typical for Eustigmaeus, so it is more appropriate to keep Cooreman's species in Eustigmaeus as originally given.

Khaustov (2019) suggested that E. isfahaniensis Khanjani, Najaf-Abadi and Khanjani, a species described from Iran, potentially could be a synonym of E. ottavii (Berlese). Later, Bagheri and Mohammad-Doustaresharaf (2024) considered E. isfahaniensis as a synonym of E. ottavii.

Another species from Iran, Eustigmaeus nasrinae Khanjani and Ueckermann is probably conspecific with E. anauniensis (Fan et al. 2016). On the other hand, the original description of Eustigmaeus hooriaae Khan, Afzal and Bashir from Pakistan is inadequate and the counts of its anogenital, palp and leg setae are inaccurate. It is therefore necessary to examine the type materials of the above-mentioned species.

Raphignathus curtipilus Berlese, 1888 was moved to the genus Eustigmaeus in Stigmaeidae by Doğan et al. (2024a).

Liostigmaeus pulchellus Thor, 1930, previously included in Eustigmaeus, is most likely belongs to the genus Cheylostigmaeus Willmann in Stigmaeidae (with recommendation of A.A. Khaustov, 2024). Therefore, it has now been moved to Cheylostigmaeus.

The hysterosomal shield is partially detached in Eustigmaeus aminiae (Nazari and Khanjani) n. comb. and E. indiscretus (Dönel and Doğan) n. comb. (from Ledermuelleriopsis Willmann). We consider them intermediate species between the genera Eustigmaeus and Ledermuelleriopsis, and currently regard them as better placed in Eustigmaeus.

Acknowledgements

The mite materials were collected from a project (121Z986) that was supported by the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Türkiye (TÜBİTAK). We appreciate the financial assistance of TÜBİTAK. We are grateful to TR Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry for granting the legal approvals (E-21264211-288.04-4255389 and E-50411936-903.07.02-4372543) for the field surveys. Dr A.A. Khaustov (Tyumen State University, Tyumen, Russia) was kind enough to call to the authors' attention to the transfer of the species Liostigmaeus pulchellus Thor, 1930 to the genus Cheylostigmaeus. We are also grateful for the valuable contribution of the other reviewer to the manuscript.

acarologia_4716_Supplementary-table-1.pdf

References

1. Abonnenc E. 1970. Notes sur les Acariens parasites des Phlébotomes. Cahiers Office de la Recherche Scientifique et Technique d'Outre Mer (sér. Entomologie Medicale et Parasitologie), 8 (1): 89-94. (in French)
2. Akyol M. 2019. A new species of the genus Eustigmaeus (Berlese) (Acari: Stigmaeidae) from Manisa province, Turkey. Systematic and Applied Acarology, 24 (6): 971-976. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.24.6.2
3. Akyol M., Gül M.P. 2019. A new species of the genus Ledermuelleriopsis Willmann (Acari: Stigmaeidae) from Turkey. Acarological Studies, 1 (1): 16-19.
4. Bagheri M., Beyzavi G. 2013. Eustigmaeus ueckermanni, a new species of the genus Eustigmaeus Berlese (Acari: Stigmaeidae) from central Iran. Systematic and Applied Acarology, 18 (1): 30-34. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.18.1.3
5. Bagheri M., Mohammad-Doustaresharaf M. 2024. Eustigmaeus pseudosetiferus n. sp. (Acari: Trombidiformes: Stigmaeidae) from Iran. Persian Journal of Acarology, 13 (2): 233-241. https://doi.org/10.22073/pja.v13i2.84055
6. Bagheri M., Paktinat Saeej S., Miri T.N., Yazdanian M., Varandi F.R. 2014. A new species of the genus Eustigmaeus Berlese (Acari: Trombidiformes: Stigmaeidae) from North of Iran. Persian Journal of Acarology, 3 (3): 177-186. https://doi.org/10.22073/pja.v3i3.10150
7. Bagheri M., Saber M., Ueckermann E.A., Ghorbani H., Navaei Bonab R. 2011. Eustigmaeus setiferus n. sp. (Acari: Stigmaeidae) from Iran. International Journal of Acarology, 37 (Suppl. 1): 212-215. https://doi.org/10.1080/01647954.2011.553201
8. Banks N. 1910. New American mites (Arachnoidea, Acarina). Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington, 12: 2-12.
9. Barilo A.B. 1987. New species of mites of the family Stigmaeidae (Acariformes) from Uzbekistan. Zoologicheskii Zhurnal, 66 (7): 1096-1099. (in Russian)
10. Barilo A.B. 1989. New species of mites of the families Raphignathidae, Stigmaeidae, Cheyletidae from Central Asia. Zoologicheskii Zhurnal, 68 (10): 134-138. (in Russian)
11. Bei N.-X., Yin S.-G. 1995. A new species and a new record of the genus Ledermuelleria from China (Acari: Stigmaeidae). Acta Zootaxonomica Sinica, 20 (2): 185-188.
12. Berlese A. 1885. Acari, Myriapoda et Scorpiones hucusque in Italia reperta. Padova. Fasc. 22 No 1 and 4.
13. Berlese A. 1888. Acari, Myriapoda et Scorpiones hucusque in Italia reperta. Padova. Fasc. 50 No 4.
14. Berlese A. 1910. Acari nouvi. Manipulus V. Redia, 6: 199-234.
15. Beron P. 2020. Acarorum Catalogus VII. Trombidiformes, Prostigmata, Raphignathoidea. Fam. Barbutiidae, Caligonellidae, Camerobiidae, Cryptognathidae, Dasythyreidae, Dytiscacaridae, Eupalopsellidae, Homocaligidae, Mecognathidae, Raphignathidae, Stigmaeidae, Xenocaligonellididae. Pensoft & National Museum of Natural History & Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, 306 pp. https://doi.org/10.3897/ab.e55087
16. Beron P. 2022. Update 2020-2021 to Vol. VII. In: Acarorum Catalogus X. Trombidiformes Prostigmata. Superfamilia Labidostommatoidea (Labidostommatidae). Superfamilia Eupodoidea (Eupodidae, Dendrochaetidae, Rhagidiidae, Eriorhynchidae, Pentapalpidae, Penthalodidae, Penthaleidae, Proterorhagiidae, Strandtmanniidae). Superfamilia Tydeoidea. Ereynetidae. Superfamily Paratydeoidea. Paratydeidae. Superfamilia Anystoidea (Anystidae, Erythracaridae, Teneriffiidae, Pseudocheylidae, Stigmocheylidae). Superfamilia Caeculoidea (Caeculidae). Superfamilia Adamystoidea (Adamystidae). Superfamilia Pomerantzioidea (Pomerantziidae). Pensoft & National Museum of Natural History & Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia-Moscow, pp. 411-420. https://doi.org/10.3897/ab.e68612
17. Bizarro G.L., da Silva Noronha A.C., da Silva G.L., Ferla N.J., Johanna L. 2020. A new species of Eustigmaeus Berlese (Acari: Stigmaeidae) from Brazil. Acarologia, 60 (4): 825-830. https://doi.org/10.24349/acarologia/20204403
18. Canestrini G., Fanzago F. 1876. Nuovi Acari Italiani (Seconda serie). Atti della Societa Veneto Tretina di Scienze Naturali Residente in Padova, 5: 130-142. (in Italian)
19. Chaudhri W.M. 1965. New mites of genus Ledermuelleria. Acarologia, 7 (3): 467-486.
20. Chaudhri W.M. 1968. Three new mites of the genus Ledermuelleria (Stigmaeidae). Pakistan Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 5 (1): 9-17.
21. Cheng H., Fan Q.-H. 2008. A catalogue of the Chinese Raphignathoidea (Acari: Prostigmata). Systematic and Applied Acarology, 13: 256-278. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.13.3.14
22. Cooreman J. 1943. Note sur la faune des Hautes-Fagnes en Belgique. XII. Acariens (Trombidiformes). Bulletin du Musée royal d'Histoire naturelle de Belgique, 19 (64): 1-16.
23. Cooreman J. 1955. Notes sur quelques Acariens des Alpes françaises. Mémoires de la Société Royale Entomologique de Belgique, 27: 162-170. (in French)
24. Doğan S. 2004. Three new species and a new record of the genus Ledermuelleriopsis (Acari, Stigmaeidae) from Turkey. Biologia, Bratislava, 59  (2): 141-151.
25. Doğan S. 2005. Eustigmaeus mites from Turkey (Acari: Stigmaeidae). Journal of Natural History, 39 (11): 835-861. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222930400001558
26. Doğan S. 2007. Checklist of raphignathoid mites (Acari: Raphignathoidea) of Turkey. Zootaxa, 1454: 1-26. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.1454.1.1
27. Doğan S. 2019. Raphignathoidea (Acari: Trombidiformes) of Turkey: A review of progress on the systematics, with an updated checklist. Acarological Studies, 1 (2): 129-151.
28. Doğan S., Ayyıldız N. 2003. New species of Eustigmaeus Berlese, 1910 (Acari: Stigmaeidae) from Turkey. Journal of Natural History, 37 (17): 2113-2117. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222930210133282
29. Doğan S., Ayyıldız N., Fan Q.-H. 2003. Description of two new species and a newly recorded species of Eustigmaeus from Turkey (Acari: Stigmaeidae). Systematic and Applied Acarology, 8: 131-144. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.8.1.15
30. Doğan S., Doğan S. 2020. Newly recorded stigmaeid mites (Acariformes: Raphignathoidea: Stigmaeidae) for the fauna of Turkey. Acarological Studies, 2 (2): 94-118. (in Turkish) https://doi.org/10.47121/acarolstud.696796
31. Doğan S., Doğan S., Khanjani M. 2021. On some species of the genus Ledermuelleriopsis Willmann (Acariformes: Stigmaeidae) in Turkey. Systematic and Applied Acarology, 26 (2): 455-463. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.26.2.9
32. Doğan S., Doğan S., Fan Q.-H., Uğurlu Ş. 2024a. The usage of subgenera in taxonomy of the genus Raphignathus Dugès: a reaction to Khan et al. (2023), with the revised checklist of Raphignathidae. Systematic and Applied Acarology, 29 (1): 176-186. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.29.1.13
33. Doğan S., Doğan S., Uğurlu Ş., Polat N. 2024b. First description of deutonymph male of Eustigmaeus anauniensis (Canestrini) (Trombidiformes: Stigmaeidae). Erzincan University Journal of Science and Technology, 17 (1): 210-229. https://doi.org/10.18185/erzifbed.1390920
34. Doğan S., Dönel G., Özçelik S. 2011. A new eyeless mite species of the genus Eustigmaeus Berlese (Acari: Stigmaeidae) from Turkey. Turkish Journal of Zoology, 35 (2): 175-181. https://doi.org/10.3906/zoo-0906-11
35. Dönel G., Doğan S. 2011. The stigmaeid mites (Acari: Stigmaeidae) of Kelkit Valley (Turkey). Zootaxa, 2942: 1-56. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.2942.1.1
36. Ewing H.E. 1909. New species of Acarina. Transactions of the American Entomological Society, 35: 401-418.
37. Ewing H.E. 1917. New Acarina. Part II. Descriptions of new species and varieties from Iowa, Missouri, Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio. Bulletin American Museum of Natural History, 37: 149-172.
38. Fan Q.-H. 2005. Synopsis of the described Actinedida of the world, family Stigmaeidae. In: Hallan, J. (Ed.), Synopsis of the described Arachnida of the world, http://bug.tamu.edu/research/collection/hallan/acari/Family/Stigmaeidae.txt (accessed on January 2015).
39. Fan Q.-H., Zhang Z.-Q. 2004. Revision of raphignathoid mites (Acari: Prostigmata) in the collection of H. Habeeb. Zootaxa, 763: 1-28. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.763.1.1
40. Fan Q.-H., Zhang Z.-Q. 2005. Raphignathoidea (Acari: Prostigmata). Fauna of New Zealand, 52: 1-400. https://doi.org/10.7931/J2/FNZ.52
41. Fan Q.-H., Flechtmann C. H. W., De Moraes G. J. 2016. Annotated catalogue of Stigmaeidae (Acari: Prostigmata), with a pictorial key to genera, Zootaxa, 4176: 1-199. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4176.1.1
42. Fan Q.-H., Flechtmann C. H. W., De Moraes G. J. 2019. Emendations and updates to "Annotated catalogue of Stigmaeidae (Acari: Prostigmata), with a pictorial key to genera″, Zootaxa, 4647: 88-103. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4647.1.9
43. Faraji F., Ueckermann E.A., Bakker F. 2007. First record of Eustigmaeus jiangxiensis Hu, Chen and Huang (Acari: Stigmaeidae) from France with a key to the European species of Eustigmaeus Berlese, 1910. International Journal of Acarology, 33 (2): 145-151. https://doi.org/10.1080/01647950708684515
44. Flechtmann C.H.W. 1985. Eustigmaeus bryonemus sp. n., a moss-feeding mite from Brazil (Acari, Prostigmata: Stigmaeidae). Revista Brasileira de Zoologia, 2 (6): 387-391. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0101-81751984000200010
45. Gheblealivand S.S., Bagheri M., Ghorbani H. 2012. Eustigmaeus nahidae, a new species of the genus Eustigmaeus Berlese (Acari: Stigmaeidae) from northwest Iran. Systematic and Applied Acarology, 17 (2): 217-223. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.17.2.8
46. Grandjean F. 1939. Les segments post-larvaires de l′hysterosoma chez les Oribates (Acariens). Bulletin de la Société Zoologique de France, 64: 273-284.
47. Grandjean F. 1944. Observations sur les acariens de la famille des Stigmaeidae. Archives des Sciences Physiques et Naturelles, 26: 103-131. (in French)
48. Grandjean F. 1946. Au sujet de l′organe de Claparède, des eupathides multiples et des taenidies mandibulaires chez les Acariens actinochitineux. Archives des Sciences Physiques et Naturelles, 28: 63-87. (in French)
49. Habeeb H. 1958. New mites from New Brunswick. Leaflets of Acadian Biology, 18: 1-4.
50. Habeeb H. 1961. Walter Vincent Powers, noble fellow, 1895-1945. Leaflets of Acadian Biology, 22: 1-6.
51. Habeeb H. 1973. Notes on water-mites. V. Leaflets of Acadian Biology, 54: 1-2.
52. Haddad Irani-Nejad K., Lotfollahi P., Akbari A., Bagheri M., Ueckermann E.A. 2011. A new species of Eustigmaeus Berlese (Acari: Prostigmata: Stigmaeidae) from Northwestern Iran. Acarina, 19 (1): 87-90.
53. Halbert J.N. 1923. Notes on Acari, with descriptions of new species. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, London, 35: 363-392. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-3642.1923.tb01732.x
54. Hu S.-Q., Chen X.-W., Huang L. 1996. Mites of the genus Eustigmaeus from Jiangxi province (Acari: Stigmaeidae). Entomologia Sinica, 3 (4): 314-322. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7917.1996.tb00280.x
55. Hu S.-Q., Huang L., Chen X.-W. 1994. A new species of the genus Eustigmaeus from China (Acari: Stigmaeidae). Acta Arachnologica Sinica, 3 (2): 91-93.
56. Hu C.-Y., Liang L.-R. 1994. A new species of the genus Eustigmaeus Berlese (Acari: Stigmaeidae). Acta Arachnologica Sinica, 3 (2): 94-96.
57. Hu C.-Y., Zha G.-C., Zhu J.-T. 1994. Two new species and two new records of the genus Eustigmaeus Berlese from China (Acari: Stigmaeidae). Acta Arachnologica Sinica, 3 (2): 81-85.
58. Hu C.-Y., Zhu J.-T. 1994. A new species of the genus Eustigmaeus Berlese (Acari: Stigmaeidae). Acta Arachnologica Sinica, 3 (1): 65-67.
59. Kapaxidi E.V., Stathakis T.I., Papadoulis G.Th. 2013. New species and new records of the genus Eustigmaeus Berlese (Acari: Stigmaeidae) from Greece. International Journal of Acarology, 39 (5): 400-407. https://doi.org/10.1080/01647954.2013.794860
60. Kaźmierski A., Dończyk J. 2003. Two new free living mite species of Eustigmaeus (Actinedida: Raphignathoidea: Stigmaeidae) from Poland, with new data of some other rare species of the genus. Zootaxa, 198: 1-16. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.198.1.1
61. Kethley J. 1990. Acariformes, Prostigmata. In: Dindal, D.L. (Ed.), Soil Biology Guide, New York, USA, Wiley, pp. 667-756.
62. Khan B.S., Afzal M., Bashir M.H. 2010. A new predatory mite species of the genus Eustigmaeus (Stigmaeidae: Acari) from Punjab, Pakistan. Egyptian Academy Journal of Biological Sciences, 3 (2): 149-153. https://doi.org/10.21608/eajbsa.2010.15201
63. Khanjani M., Asali Fayaz B., Mirmoayedi A., Ghaedi B. 2011. A new species of the genus Eustigmaeus (Berlese) (Acari: Stigmaeidae) from western Iran. International Journal of Acarology, 37 (5): 455-460. https://doi.org/10.1080/01647954.2010.525526
64. Khanjani M., Firozfar A., Mirmoayedi A., Fayaz B.A. 2013. Eustigmaeus seemani n. sp. and description of male of E. segnis (Koch) (Acari: Stigmaeidae) and re-description of E. rhodomela (Koch) from Iran. International Journal of Acarology, 39 (7): 558-570. https://doi.org/10.1080/01647954.2013.839740
65. Khanjani M., Najaf-Abadi P.R., Khanjani M. 2014. A new species of the genus Eustigmaeus (Acari: Stigmaeidae) from Isfahan province, Iran. Persian Journal of Acarology, 3 (1): 17-26. https://doi.org/10.22073/pja.v3i1.10126
66. Khanjani M., Ueckermann E.A. 2002. The stigmaeid mites of Iran (Acari: Stigmaeidae). International Journal of Acarology, 28 (4): 317-339. https://doi.org/10.1080/01647950208684309
67. Khaustov A.A. 2014. A new species of the genus Paravillersia (Acari: Prostigmata: Stigmaeidae) from western Siberia, with supplementary description of Paravillersia grata Kuznetsov, 1978. Zootaxa, 3873 (1): 62-72. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3873.1.5
68. Khaustov A.A. 2016. Two new species and a new record of mites of the family Stigmaeidae (Acari: Prostigmata) collected from mosses in Russia. Acarologia, 56 (3): 321-339. https://doi.org/10.1051/acarologia/20162249
69. Khaustov A.A. 2019. Contribution to systematics of the genus Eustigmaeus (Acari: Stigmaeidae) of Russia. Acarologia, 59 (1): 152-173. https://doi.org/10.24349/acarologia/20194320
70. Khaustov A.A. 2021a. A new species and new records of Stigmaeidae (Acari: Prostigmata) from Western Siberia. Acarina, 29 (2): 169-188. https://doi.org/10.21684/0132-8077-2021-29-2-169-188
71. Khaustov A.A. 2021b. Contribution to the Stigmaeidae (Acari: Prostigmata) fauna of the Altai Republic, Russia. Acarina, 29 (1): 43-66. https://doi.org/10.21684/0132-8077-2021-29-1-43-66
72. Khaustov A.A., Kravchenko S.V., Kazakov D.V. 2023. Two new species and a new synonym of Eustigmaeus (Acari: Stigmaeidae) from Russia with COI barcode, Acarina, 31 (1): 77-99. https://doi.org/10.21684/0132-8077-2023-31-1-77-99
73. Khaustov A.A., Tolstikov, A.V. 2014. A new species and new records of the genus Eustigmaeus (Acari: Prostigmata: Stigmaeidae) from western Siberia. Zootaxa, 3861 (6): 531-553. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3861.6.2
74. Khaustov A.A., Tsurikov S.M. 2018. A new species of Eustigmaeus (Acari: Prostigmata: Stigmaeidae) from Vietnam. Persian Journal of Acarology, 7 (3): 235-244. https://doi.org/10.22073/pja.v7i3.39903
75. Koch C.L. 1836-1842. Deutschland Crustaceen, Myriapoden und Arachniden. Regensburg. (in German)
76. Kuznetsov N.N. 1977. New species of the family Stigmaeidae from Crimea. Zoologicheskii Zhurnal, 56: 635-638. (in Russian)
77. Kuznetsov N.N. 1978. New records of raphignathoid mites (Raphignathoidea, Acariformes). Biologicheskie Nauki, 12: 49-54. (in Russian)
78. Maake P.A., Ueckermann E.A., Childers C.C. 2016. Eustigmaeus floridensis n. sp., a new mite species of the genus Eustigmaeus Berlese, 1910 (Acari: Stigmaeidae) from citrus in Florida. Journal of Natural History, 50 (15-16): 975-987. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222933.2015.1091105
79. Mortazavi A., Hajiqanbar H., Lindquist E.E. 2018. A new family of mites (Acari: Prostigmata: Raphignathina), highly specialized subelytral parasites of dytiscid water beetles (Coleoptera: Dytiscidae: Dytiscinae). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 184 (3): 695-749. https://doi.org/10.1093/zoolinnean/zlx113
80. Nazari A., Khanjani M. 2017. A new species of the genus Ledermuelleriopsis (Acari: Stigmaeidae) from Markazi province, Iran. Persian Journal of Acarology, 6 (3): 193-201. https://doi.org/10.22073/pja.v6i3.30534
81. Oudemans A.C. 1923. Acarologische aanteekeningen LXXI. Entomologische Berichten, 6 (130): 145-155.
82. Oudemans A.C. 1928. Acarologische aanteekeningen XCI. Entomologische Berichten, 7 (161): 324-327.
83. Paktinat-Saeij S., Bagheri M., Castro T.M.M.G. de, Moraes G.J. de 2016. Two new species of Eustigmaeus Berlese (Acari: Trombidiformes: Stigmaeidae) from Brazil, with a key to the American species. Zootaxa, 4066 (5): 571-580. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4066.5.5
84. Pekağırbaş M., Karakuş M., Yılmaz A., Erişöz Kasap Ö., Sevsay S., Özbel Y., Töz S., Doğan S. 2023. Two parasitic mite species on Phlebotominae sand flies (Diptera: Psychodidae) from Türkiye: Biskratrombium persicum (Microtrombidiidae) and Eustigmaeus johnstoni (Stigmaeidae). Acarological Studies, 5 (1): 11-16. https://doi.org/10.47121/acarolstud.1209774
85. Rimando L.C., Corpuz-Raros L.A. 1997. Some Philippine Raphignathoidea (Acari). III. Revision of the genus Eustigmaeus Berlese sensu latu (Stigmaeidae). Philippine Entomologist, 11 (1): 1-24.
86. Schrank F.P. 1803. Favna Boica. Durchgedachte Geschichte der in Baiern einheimischen und zahmen Thiere. Dritten und lezten Bandes erste Abtheilung. Landshut, bei Philipp Krüll. Stein'schen Buchhandlung, Nürnberg, Germany, 272 pp. (in German)
87. Sellnick M. 1932. Eine neue Ledermülleria-Art (Acar.). Zoologischer Anzeiger, 99: 167-171.
88. Stathakis T.I., Kapaxidi E.V., Papadoulis G.Th. 2016. The genus Eustigmaeus Berlese (Acari: Stigmaeidae) from Greece. Zootaxa, 4191 (1): 1-102. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4191.1.1
89. Summers F.M. 1957. American species of Ledermuelleria and Ledermuelleriopsis, with a note on new synonymy in Neognathus (Acarina, Stigmaeidae, Caligonellidae). Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington, 59 (2): 49-60.
90. Summers F.M. 1959. Raphignathus tessellatus Ewing, 1909, a new synonym of Ledermuelleria clavata (Can. and Fanz., 1876). Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington, 61 (2): 85.
91. Summers F.M., Price D.W. 1961. New and redescribed species of Ledermuelleria from North America (Acarina: Stigmaeidae). Hilgardia, 31 (10): 369-387. https://doi.org/10.3733/hilg.v31n10p369
92. Swift S.F., Gerson U., Goff M.L. 1985. A new species of Eustigmaeus (Acari: Prostigmata: Stigmaeidae) from Kaua′I Island, Hawaiian Islands. International Journal of Entomology, 27 (4): 375-381.
93. Thor S. 1930. Beiträge zur Kenntnis der invertebraten Fauna von Svalbard. Skrifter om Svalbard og Ishavet, Nr. 27. Familie Raphignathidae. In: Hoel, A. Norges Svalbard-og Ishavs-undersøkelser, Jacob Dybwad, Oslo, Norway, pp. 99-101. (in German)
94. Trägårdh I. 1910. Acariden aus dem Sarekgebirge. Naturwissenschaftliche Untersuchungen des Sarekgebirges in Schwedisch-Lappland geleitet von Dr. Axel Hamberg, 4, Lief. 4: 375-586. (in German)
95. Tseng Y.H. 1982. Mites of the family Stigmaeidae of Taiwan with key to genera of the world (Acarina: Prostigmata). Phytopathologist and Entomologist of the National Taiwan University, 9: 1-52.
96. Ueckermann E.A., Smith Meyer M.K.P. 1987. Afrotropical Stigmaeidae (Acari: Prostigmata). Phytophylactica, 19: 371-397.
97. Walter D.E., Krantz G.W. 2009. Collecting, rearing and preparing specimens. In: Krantz, G.W., Walter, D.E. (Eds), A Manual of Acarology. The third edition. Texas Tech University Press, Lubbock, Texas, USA, pp. 83-96.
98. Willmann C. 1951. Untersuchungen über die terrestrische Milbenfauna im pannonischen Klimagebiet Österreichs. Sitzungsberichte österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Mathematisch-naturwissenschafiliche, Klasse, Abtheilung 1, 160 (1-2): 91-176. (in German)
99. Willmann C. 1956. Milben aus dem Naturschutzgebiet auf dem Spiglitzer (Glatzer). Schneegerg. Československá Parasitologie, 3: 211-273.
100. Wood T.G. 1966. Mites of the genus Ledermuelleria Oudms. (Prostigmata, Stigmaeidae) from New Zealand, with records of one species from some Southern Pacific Islands. New Zealand Journal of Science, 9: 84-102.
101. Wood, T.G. 1971. Stigmaeidae (Acari: Prostigmata) from the British Solomon Islands. Acarologia, 13 (1): 65-87.
102. Wood T.G. 1972. New and redescribed species of Ledermuelleria Oudms, and Villersia Oudms (Acari: Stigmaeidae) from Canada. Acarologia, 13 (2): 301-318.
103. Wood T.G. 1973. Revision of Stigmaeidae (Acari: Prostigmata) in the Berlese collection. Acarologia, 15: 76-95.
104. Zhang X.-M. 1993. Acari: Stigmaeidae. In: Huang C.-M. (Ed.), Animals of Longqi Mountain. Beijing, China Forestry Publishing House, China, pp. 770-774. (in Chinese)
105. Zhang Z.-Q., Gerson U. 1995. Eustigmaeus johnstoni, new species (Acari: Stigmaeidae), parasitic on phlebotomine sandflies (Diptera: Psychodidae). Tijdschrift voor Entomologie, 138: 297-301.

instructions