Search

Distinguishing the Urothripine genera 1. Compound eyes each with at least 30 facets (Figs 40–41), all equal in size; antennal segment III slender, usually 3–4 times as long as wide and not narrowed sharply to base; mid and hind tarsi 2-segmented; fore tarsal hamus directed ventrally; metathoracic epimera each with a prominent lateral seta....................................................... 2 -. Compound eyes never with more than 15 facets (Figs 27–28), some dorsal facets much larger than others; antennal segment III almost globose, scarcely 2 times as long as wide and sharply narrowed to basal stem (sometimes fused to segment IV or to IV+ V); mid and hind tarsi 1-segmented; fore tarsal hamus, when present, directed laterally; metathoracic epimera with or without such a seta.................................................................................... 3 2. Head projecting over bases of first antennal segment (Fig 41); eyes almost holoptic but with no facets ventrally; head with genae narrowing to base; prosternal basantra present and transverse.................................... Octurothrips -. Head projecting strongly in front of eyes with antennae arising at apex (Fig. 40); compound eyes globose on dorsal and ventral surfaces; head sharply narrowed to base; prosternal basantra reduced to weak sclerites placed anterolaterally.... Habrothrips 3. Prosternal basantra transverse across anterior margins of ferna......................................... Trachythrips -. Prosternal basantra absent or reduced to small anterolateral sclerites............................................. 4 4. Anterior margin of head with prominent setae, rarely reduced to a single small pair (Figs 26–32)...................... 5 -. Anterior margin of head with no prominent setae (Figs 33–38)................................................. 6 5. Antennal segment III narrowed at apex and distinct from narrowed base of IV (Fig. 9); maxillary stylets close together medially in head..................................................................................... Bradythrips -. Antennal segment III broad at apex and close to broad base of IV, segments III– V weakly to closely fused; maxillary stylets about 0.3 of head width apart................................................................. Stephanothrips 6. Fore tarsus with hamus.......................................................................... Urothrips -. Fore tarsal hamus absent................................................................... Amphibolothrips

Octurothrips Priesner Octurothrips Priesner, 1931: 93. Type species Octurothrips pulcher Priesner. Known only from Australia, the single species in this genus has been found widely in the inland arid zone of the eastern part of this continent (Figs 41–42). Although all of the available specimens are apterae, the species shares many character states with Habrothrips curiosus, including the abdominal tergites with a groove down the midline. However, the head is remarkable with greatly enlarged, almost holoptic. compound eyes, with the genae extending forward laterally around the eyes, and the prosternal basantra large and transverse.

Trachythrips Hood Trachythrips Hood, 1930: 317. Type species Trachythrips watsoni Hood. Alone amongst the urothripine genera, the members of this genus have the pronotal basantra fully transverse across the anterior margins of the ferna, although the posterior margin of the basantra is not always fully sclerotised in some of the specimens examined. This character state of the basantra, paralleling the geographical distribution of the genus, suggests a single New World radiation with the 11 members of the genus restricted to the American continent and Caribbean islands, between California, Texas, Florida and southern Brazil. Structurally similar to each other, the species of this genus apparently are all wingless, with some differing from others in little more than colour patterns.

Stephanothrips Trybom Stephanothrips Trybom, 1912: 42. Type species Stephanothrips buffai Trybom. Baenothrips Crawford, 1948: 39. Type species Baenothrips guatemalensis Crawford, syn.n. Verrucothrips Stannard, 1952: 128. Type species Amphibolothrips (Verrucothrips) caenosa Stannard. Ramachandraiella Ananthakrishnan, 1964: 228. Type species Ramachandraiella minuta Ananthakrishnan. Transithrips Bournier, 1963: 81. Type species Transithrips asper Bournier. Bournieria Ananthakrishnan, 1966: 2. Type species Bournieria indica Ananthakrishnan. Four of the generic synonyms indicated above were discussed by Mound (1972: 92), but the validity of Baenothrips has not been questioned since Stannard (1952). The sole distinction between Baenothrips and Stephanothrips has been in the degree of separation between antennal segments III–V, being separate in the first genus but largely fused in the second. Baenothrips guatemalensis, the type species of that genus, is interpreted as having segments III–V distinct from each other (Fig. 5), although the separation between them is by no means clear. Among the various species placed in Baenothrips only asper and cuneatus have these segments clearly separate (Fig. 8). In the only known specimen of guatemalensis segments VII and VIII are fused with scarcely any trace of suture, and this is also true of chiliensis (Fig. 7). Very similar to these in structure and sculpture, the Australian species, moundi, has segment VIII clearly distinct (Fig. 6). A further problem is that in another Australian species, B. caenosus, antennal segments VII and VIII can be either fused or separate (Mound 1972). There is also a lack of clarity in distinctions between some described species. For example, Bhatti (2002) published a detailed morphological study of a paratype of asper, recognizing that specimens identified as asper from India do not represent that African species. The original illustration of asper by Bournier, as well as the illustrations of a paratype by Bhatti, indicate that, in this species from Angola, antennal segments III–V are clearly distinct from each other, much as in cuneatus (Fig. 8). In contrast, the antennae of Indian specimens labelled by Ananthakrishnan as asper (Ooty, vii.1970) have segments III–V broadly joined. Our interpretation is that antennal segment fusion has been subject to several reversals among the various species, and that this character state cannot be employed to distinguish natural groups. As a result, the genus Baenothrips is here considered a synonym of Stephanothrips, and that genus will now include 47 species. These comprise 26 species from the Asian tropics, nine from Australia, three from Africa, and four from southern USA, plus four from South America where they are possibly introduced (see above Geographic considerations). In addition, because the only known males of occidentalis were taken in Thailand (Okajima & Urushihara 1995b), it is probable that this pantropical species is also Asian in origin. Since several of the nine species from Australia are known only from the northern subtropical parts of this continent, it is clear that the distribution of species in this genus is primarily in association with the southeast Asian tropics. The new synonymy of Baenothrips with Stephanothrips results in the 15 new combinations listed in Table 1.

Mound, Laurence A., Lima, Élison Fabrício B., O'Donnell, Cheryle A. (2023): What is a genus-interpreting structural diversity among species of urothripine Phlaeothripinae (Thysanoptera). Zootaxa 5319 (1): 91-102, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5319.1.6, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5319.1.6

Urothrips Bagnall Urothrips Bagnall, 1909: 126. Type species Urothrips paradoxus Bagnall. Coxothrips Bournier, 1963: 75. Type species Coxothrips reticulatus Bournier. Synonymised by Ulitzka & Mound, 2014. Ananthakrishnaniella Stannard, 1970: 118. Type species Ananthakrishnaniella tarai Stannard. Synonymised by Bhatti, 1998: 178. Biconothrips Stannard, 1970: 121. Type species Biconothrips reedi Stannard. Synonymised by Ulitzka & Mound, 2014. Within the key to genera of urothripines presented by Mound (1972), one group of four genera was distinguished by the following three character-states: absence of elongate setae on anterior margin of head; presence of prominent external fore tarsal hamus; reduction of prosternal basantra (=praepectus) to a pair of small triangles placed laterally. However, there is considerable overlap in character states amongst the nine species involved under these four generic names, and Ulitzka and Mound (2014) decided to include all nine species within a single genus, Urothrips. The alternative to accepting a single genus to encompass the range of variation amongst these species would be to recognise more than four monotypic genera, each of which would be supported by a single autapomorphy with no obvious systematic significance. The problem of distinguishing genera based on characters that seem to vary progressively in fusion or size increases when all 12 of the species now listed in Urothrips are considered. In one of these species, U. lancangensis, the fore tarsal hamus is very small, and in U. calvus it appears to be quite undeveloped. Similarly, the only available specimen of U. bagnalli Trybom is uncleared but seems to have transverse basantra. At species level within the genus there appear to be further problems, in that populations of paradoxus in Africa differ in colour details, as is known amongst populations of reedi in Australia (Mound 1972).

Bradythrips Hood & Williams Bradythrips Hood & Williams, in Hood, 1925: 68. Type species Bradythrips hesperus Hood & Williams. The type species was based on a single wingless female collected in Guyana, on the north coast of South America. However, at the U.S. National Museum in Washington and in the collections of Universidade Federal do Piauí, Floriano, in Brazil, we have studied in addition to this holotype the following wingless females of B. hesperus: one from Panama, seven from Guyana, and more than 10 from Brazil along the Amazon River basin (States of Amazonas, Pará and Amapá). In contrast, the other five species that are now known in this genus are all from southeast Asia, including Malaysia, southern China, Philippines and Borneo, and specimens of hesperus have also been recorded from India, Borneo and the Solomon Islands (Okajima 1987). These records indicate that Bradythrips is likely to be a genus of the Asian tropics but with one species that has been inadvertently transported to South America, probably by sailing ships. A key to five of the six species of Bradythrips is available (Okajima & Urushihara 1995a), and of the two species with the pronotum and fore legs yellow, zhangi differs from hesperus in having the head more uniformly brown and the abdominal tergites with narrow longitudinal sculpture medially. All six species have antennal segments III–V clearly distinct from each other, in contrast to the condition in Stephanothrips species. The members of Bradythrips differ from those previously placed in Baenothrips in having the maxillary stylets close together medially in the head, and only a single pair of prominent setae on the anterior margin of the head (Fig. 26). Although B. hesperus has the metathoracic epimera bearing a small stout seta laterally, it appears that the other members of this genus lack this structure.

Amphibolothrips Buffa Amphibolothrips Buffa, 1909: 193. Type species Amphibolothrips grassii Buffa. Bebelothrips Buffa, 1909: 195. Type species Bebelothrips latus Buffa. Syn.n Conocephalothrips Bianchi, 1946: 499. Type species Conocephalothrips tricolor Bianchi. Syn.n. Buffa (1909) erected this genus for a single species, grassii, based on a single specimen from Lake Albano near Rome, in Italy. This species is currently recorded also from southern France and Spain. In the same paper, Buffa also erected Bebelothrips for a single species, latus, based on three females from Isola del Giglio, an island between the west coast of Italy and Corsica. The original specimens of both species are currently not known to exist, however Trachythrips flavicinctus Bournier from southern France is now considered a synonym of latus. The genus Bebelothrips has remained distinguished from Amphibolothrips based only on the differing number of antennal segments (Priesner 1964). However, despite the larger number of antennal segments, Stannard (1970) transferred Trachythrips marginatus Bournier from southern France to Amphibolothrips, and Mound (1972) similarly transferred Bebelothrips knechteli Priesner, a species that is recorded only from Romania and the Canary Islands. Bianchi (1946) erected Conocephalothrips for the single species tricolor, and this remains known only from two females collected on Oahu. The new genus was compared only to Urothrips and no mention was made of Amphibolothrips although the head of grassii, the only species of the genus known at that time, is similarly produced forward over the antennal bases (Figs 21–25). The antennal segments of grassii are more extensively fused than in tricolor, in which antennal segments III–V are distinct but broadly joined (Figs 1–3). The antennae of Bebelothrips latus, and also of the other two species now placed in Amphibolothrips, are intermediate in structure between grassii and tricolor. The body of the holotype of tricolor has too much pigment for basantra to be visible, but the species is unusual in having the dorsal pair of anal setae flattened and scale-like, and less than 10 microns long. It is not possible to know if the species tricolor is a natural inhabitant of the Hawaiian Islands, or if it has been introduced to Oahu from some other part of the world. In the northern part of North America almost nothing is known of the leaf litter thrips fauna, but the other four species here recognised in Amphibolothrips are all from the southern parts of Europe. However, despite the interpretation adopted here of the available data, there is a further problem in distinguishing Amphibolothrips from Urothrips. The distinction between these indicated above in the key to genera fails with just one of the 12 described species of Urothrips. The fore tarsal hamus of calvus from eastern China appears to be absent, although it is also very small in lancangensis from southern China. The new synonymy of Bebelothrips and Conocephalothrips with Amphibolothrips results in two new combinations as listed in Table 1.

Habrothrips Ananthakrishnan Habrothrips Ananthakrishnan, 1968: 137. Type species Habrothrips curiosus Ananthakrishnan. The single species in this genus is widely distributed in leaf-litter between India and northern Australia, and all known specimens of both sexes are macropterae (Figs 39–40). It shares with other urothripine species the long abdominal segments IX–X and the presence of a pair of prominent setae on the metathoracic epimera, but it exhibits several unusual features. The following can probably be considered plesiomorphic: compound eyes large and globose, mid and hind tarsi 2-segmented, and fore tarsal hamus directed ventro-medially. However, the following character states are more highly derived, and are unique among urothripines: head strongly projecting in front of eyes, and abdominal tergites with a median groove bearing two pairs of leaf-like setae that are presumably wing-retaining.

Liothrips pallipes (Karny) (Figs 3, 12, 20, 27) Gynaikothrips pallipes Karny, 1913: 110. Described from specimens found in a rolled leaf gall on Piper in Java, three further species are placed as synonyms of pallipes (Mound 2020), all from leaf galls on Piper spp and taken in Java, southern Japan, Taiwan and Philippines. Okajima (2006: 436) fully described and illustrated this species under the name kuwanai. It has been found in Queensland at the same site as chavicae, but possibly not on the same species of Piper. In contrast to that species, antennal segment VII is brown (Figs. 12), all tibiae and tarsi are clear yellow, the fore wings are weakly shaded and the major setae are all pale. However, the metanotal sculpture does not greatly differ between these two species (Figs 17, 20). Specimens studied. AUSTRALIA, Queensland: Redlynch, Crystal Creek, 4 females, 4 males in leaf roll on Piper canina, also 4 females, 2 males from leaf roll on Piper sp., 5.xi.2008, in ANIC (4 females, 3 males with similar data in QDPC); Gordonvale, Big Tree, 2 females from leaf gall on Piper sp., 3.x.2012, in ANIC; Cairns, Cathedral Fig Tree, 1 female, 1 male in Piper gall, 3.x.2012; Lake Barrine, 2 females, 1 male in Piper gall, 11,xii,2013, in QDPC. PAPUA NEW GUINEA, East Sepik Prov., Hayfield, 1 female, 1 male in village garden, 21.xi.2017, in ANIC. TIMOR LESTE, Baucau, 3 females, 2 males in Piper betle curled leaf, 15.vii.2000, in ANIC., Published as part of Mound, Laurence A., Dang, Lihong & Tree, Desley J., 2023, The genus Liothrips (Thysanoptera, Phlaeothripidae) in Australia, pp. 201-214 in Zootaxa 5306 (2) on pages 208-209, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5306.2.2, http://zenodo.org/record/8058695, {"references":["Karny, H. (1913) Beitrage zur Kenntnis der Gallen von Java. 5. Uber die javanischen Thysanopteren-cecidien und deren Bewohner. In: Karny, H. & Docters van Leeuwen-Reijnvaan, W und J., Bulletin du Jardin Botanique de Buitenzorg, 10, 1 - 126.","Mound, L. A. (2020) Liothrips species (Thysanoptera, Phlaeothripinae) from leaf-galls on Piper species in Southeast Asia and Australia. Zootaxa, 4830 (2), 383 - 391. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 4830.2.9","Okajima, S. (2006) The Suborder Tubulifera (Thysanoptera). The Insects of Japan. Vol. 2. The Entomological Society of Japan, Touka Shobo Co. Ltd., Fukuoka, 720 pp."]}

Mound, Laurence A., Dang, Lihong, Tree, Desley J. (2023): The genus Liothrips (Thysanoptera, Phlaeothripidae) in Australia. Zootaxa 5306 (2): 201-214, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5306.2.2, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5306.2.2

Liothrips timonii sp.n. (Figs 4, 14, 22, 28, 33, 36) Macropterous female. Body and femora dark brown, fore tibiae with yellow, mid tibiae yellow but brown on basal fifth, hind tibiae yellow but brown on basal third (Fig. 36), all tarsi yellow (Fig. 36); antennae largely yellow, segment I and basal half of II brown, VIII yellowish brown (Fig. 14); major setae brown; fore wing uniformly paler. Head elongate, about 2.43 times longer than width just behind eyes (Fig. 4); ocellar region swollen, fore ocellus on hump, posterior ocelli close to inner margin of eyes; eyes more than one-third as long as head; postocular setae slender and minute, not reach posterior margin of eyes; maxillary stylets not retracted to postocular setae; mouth cone long and pointed. Antennae slender and long (Fig. 14), segment III 5.0 times as long as wide, III with one sense-cone, IV with three; V–VI slightly constricted at base; VIII shorter than VII, broad at base. Pronotum with transverse lines on front half part and near posterior margin, five pairs of major capitate setae, anteromarginals as long as anteroangulars, accessory epimeral setae minute. Prosternal basantra absent, ferna developed, mesopresternum boat-shaped, broad medially (Fig. 28); metathoracic sternopleural sutures present. Metanotum with very narrow longitudinal reticulations medially, with linear markings in the reticles (Fig. 22), median setae slender. Fore wing parallel sided, with 8–12 duplicated cilia, three sub-basal setae capitate. Pelta triangular but with small lateral lobes, sculptured with simple reticulation, pair of campaniform sensilla present (Fig. 33); tergites II–VII each with two pairs of sigmoid wing-retaining; tergal lateral setae all capitate; tergite IX setae S1and S2 blunt at apex, about as long as tube, S3 shorter than tube. Tube much shorter than head, anal setae as long as tube. Measurements (holotype female in microns): Body length 2450. Head, length (median width) 265(175); postocular setae 15. Pronotum, length (median width) 150(250); major setae—am 45, aa 45, ml 65, epim 85, pa 70. Fore wing length 910; sub-basal setae 50, 70, 65. Tergite IX setae S1 175, S2 140. Tube, length 175; basal width 75; apical width 40. Antennal segments III-VIII, length (width) 95(25), 75(30), 65(25), 65(25), 50(20), 30(10). Male macroptera. Similar to female, but smaller, mid and hind tibiae largely yellow, with brownish at basal part; fore tarsal tooth absent; tergite IX setae S2 about half of length of S1, with apex capitate; sternite VIII pore plate extending laterally to pair of rounded areas laterally on tergite. Measurements (paratype male in microns): Body length 2280. Head, length (median width) 300(175); postocular setae 15. Pronotum, length (median width) 155(235); major setae—am 20, aa 35, ml 45, epim 75, pa 50. Fore wing length 820; sub-basal setae 55, 60, 70. Tergite IX setae S1 170, S2 55. Tube, length 175; basal width 60; apical width 35. Antennal segments III-VIII, length (width) 105(25), 75(30), 75(25), 75(25), 55(20), 30(10). Specimens studied. Holotype female, AUSTRALIA, Northern Territory, Humpty Doo, from Timonius lvs, 15.v.1999 (LAM 3712), in ANIC. Paratypes: 3 females, 4 males taken with holotype; Northern Territory: Darwin, Holmes Jungle, 10 females, 6 males in curled leaves of Timonius timon [Rubiaceae], 2.i.1996; Kakadu N.P., 5 females, 4 males from distorted leaves, 5.viii.1993 (in ANIC). Comments. This species is intermediate in structure between Liothrips and the genus Gynaikothrips. It is the only species of Liothrips to completely lack postocular setae, a condition here interpreted as a reversal. In contrast to Gynaikothrips, as diagnosed by Mound and Tree (2021), the metathoracic sternopleural sutures are developed, and the pronotum has a full set of five major setae.

Kellyia tenuis (Hood) comb.n. (Figs 41–46) Liothrips tenuis Hood, 1918: 133 This species remains known only from the holotype female (in U.S. National Museum of Natural History, Washington). This was taken by “sweeping in jungle at Nelson” in northern Queensland in 1914 (Fig. 46). At that time, this was a sugar-cane town that was renamed as Gordonvale in 1914 and since 1995 has become a southern district of the city of Cairns. The bold reticulate sculpture of the metanotum (Fig. 44) and the long head with long stylets very close together (Fig. 41), indicate that it is not a species of Liothrips, although it shares the typical character states of other members of the Liothrips -lineage including the antennal sense cone formula and absence of prosternal basantra. In view of the head, metanotum, and broadly transverse mesopresternum this species is here referred to the genus Kellyia. However, in contrast to the 13 described species in that genus antennal segment III is less elongate (Fig. 43), and the notopleural sutures on the pronotum are incomplete (Fig. 42). There are many specimens of Kellyia in ANIC at Canberra, but these remain unidentified due to complexities in variation within and between samples. Members of this genus live as opportunist invaders of abandoned galls and thrips domiciles on Acacia species (Crespi et al. 2004)., Published as part of Mound, Laurence A., Dang, Lihong & Tree, Desley J., 2023, The genus Liothrips (Thysanoptera, Phlaeothripidae) in Australia, pp. 201-214 in Zootaxa 5306 (2) on page 212, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5306.2.2, http://zenodo.org/record/8058695, {"references":["Hood, J. D. (1918) New genera and species of Australian Thysanoptera. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum, 6, 121 - 150.","Crespi, B. J., Morris, D. C. & Mound, L. A. (2004) Evolution of Ecological and Behavioural Diversity: Australian Acacia Thrips as Model Organisms. Australian Biological Resources Study, Canberra & Australian National Insect Collection, Canberra, 328 pp [http: // www. environment. gov. au / science / abrs / publications / thrips]"]}

Liothrips umbratus Hood (Figs 8, 15, 23, 34) Liothrips umbratus Hood, 1918: 132 This species was based on three females taken in 1913 by “sweeping in jungle at Nelson” (=Gordonvale, Cairns) in northern Queensland. The only other known specimens are the six females and one male listed below, and the images given here are of the specimens from Redlynch, Cairns. These were compared with the type specimens in the US National Museum collections at Washington in 1998. The head and tube lengths of the holotype in the original description were 0.307 mm and 0.312 mm. Specimens studied. AUSTRALIA, Queensland, Cairns, Redlynch, Freshwater Creek, 3 females from large leafed mesophyte in rainforest, 11.viii.1968 (J.A.L.Watson); Tully, 1 female from Chionanthus ramiflorus, 12.viii. 2004 in ANIC. Cape Tribulation, 1 female, 1 male from? Chionanthus leaves, 28.x.2004, in QDPC., Published as part of Mound, Laurence A., Dang, Lihong & Tree, Desley J., 2023, The genus Liothrips (Thysanoptera, Phlaeothripidae) in Australia, pp. 201-214 in Zootaxa 5306 (2) on page 210, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5306.2.2, http://zenodo.org/record/8058695, {"references":["Hood, J. D. (1918) New genera and species of Australian Thysanoptera. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum, 6, 121 - 150."]}

Liothrips urichi Karny (Figs 5, 24, 39) Liothrips urichi Karny, 1924: 160 This species does not occur in Australia; but is included here because there is a possibility that it may be considered for introduction for the biocontrol of an invasive weed. It was described originally from Trinidad on the leaves of Clidemia hirta (= Miconia crenata),a shrubby plant commonly known as Kosters curse in the family Melastomataceae. The plant is invasive of tropical pastures, and various attempts have been made to deploy L. urichi as a potential biocontrol agent. It was first introduced to Fiji in 1930, and aggregations of feeding larvae have, in sunny sites in Hawaii, been shown to reduce terminal growth of the plant but with a limited effect on flowering and fruiting (Reimer & Beardsley 1989). Unfortunately, when the plants are growing in shaded areas the thrips does not seem to flourish. L. urichi is one of the members of the genus with the maxillary stylets deeply retracted into the head and usually extending into the hind margin of the eyes (Fig. 5). Amongst such species, it is distinguished by the uniformly dark hind legs (Fig. 39), reticulate metanotal sculpture (Fig. 24), and elongate pointed mouth cone. In the male, sternite VIII is fully occupied by a pore plate, and tergite IX setae S2 are half as long as the S1 setae. Specimens studied. HAWAII, North Kulani Road, 7 females 6 males from Clidemia hirta [Melastomataceae], 1.v.2020 (T.Johnson), in ANIC; 5 females, one male on Miconia crenata, 01.iv.2021 (D. Comben), in QDPC (reared at Quarantine Laboratory from sample imported from Hawaii)., Published as part of Mound, Laurence A., Dang, Lihong & Tree, Desley J., 2023, The genus Liothrips (Thysanoptera, Phlaeothripidae) in Australia, pp. 201-214 in Zootaxa 5306 (2) on page 210, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5306.2.2, http://zenodo.org/record/8058695, {"references":["Karny, H. (1924) A new Liothrips from Trinidad. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series 9, 12 (67), 160 - 164. https: // doi. org / 10.1080 / 00222932308632927","Reimer, N. J. & Beardsley, J. W. (1989) Effectiveness of Liothrips urichi (Thysanoptera: Phlaeothripidae) introduced for biological control of Clidemia hirta in Hawaii. Environmental Entomology, 18 (6), 1141 - 1146. https: // doi. org / 10.1093 / ee / 18.6.1141"]}

Liothrips burwelli sp.n. (Figs 1, 10, 19, 26, 30) Macropterous female. Body and legs dark brown, except fore tibiae and tarsi brownish-yellow, mid and hind tarsi slightly paler; antennae yellowish brown, segment II yellow largely with brown base and margins, III almost clear yellow, IV–VIII increasingly from light brown to brown; major setae brown; fore wing brownish with brown area around sub-basal setae. Head about 1.18 times longer than width just behind eyes, slightly narrowed to base (Fig. 1); ocellar region subconical, posterior ocelli close to inner margin of eyes; eyes more than one-third as long as head; postocular setae acute at apex, longer than eye length; maxillary stylets not retracted to postocular setae, medially about 0.3 of head width apart; mouth cone long and pointed. Antennae relatively short (Fig. 10), segment III 1.6 times as long as wide, III with one sense-cone, IV with three; IV–VI sharply constricted at basal neck; segment VIII shorter than VII, not constricted at base. Pronotum almost smooth, with five pairs of major acute setae, anteromarginals developed but shorter than anteroangulars, epimerals the longest, about as long as posteroangulars, a pair of accessory epimeral setae well-developed, slightly shorter than epimerals (Fig. 1). Ferna wide apart, mesopresternum narrowly boat-shaped, eroded medially (Fig. 26); metathoracic sternopleural sutures developed. Metanotum longitudinally reticulate medially (Fig. 19), median setae slender. Fore wing parallel sided, with 12 duplicated cilia, three sub-basal setae slightly blunt at apex. Pelta reticulate, broadly triangular, with pair of campaniform sensilla (Fig. 30); tergites II–VII with two pairs of sigmoid wing-retaining setae (Fig. 30); tergal lateral setae all acute; tergite IX setae S1 and S2 pointed at apex, longer than tube, S3 about as long as tube. Tube slightly shorter than head, anal setae shorter than tube. Measurements (holotype female in microns): Body length 2650. Head, length (median width) 250 (210); postocular setae 120. Pronotum, length (median width) 165 (290); major setae—am 35, aa 55, ml 60, epim 150, accessory epim 100, pa 160. Fore wing length 1070; sub-basal setae 90, 85, 85. Tergite IX setae S1 235, S2 225. Tube, length 225; basal width 95; apical width 50. Antennal segments III–VIII, length (width) 75(35), 70(40), 60(35), 65(35), 55(30), 40(15). Male macroptera. Similar to female, but smaller; pronotal accessorial epimeral setae minute on the right side; fore tarsal tooth absent; tergite IX setae S1 and S3 longer than tube, S2 less than half of S 1 in length, with apex acute; sternite VIII anteromedially with small, irregular and poorly defined pore plate, or with no pore plate visible. Measurements (paratype male in microns):Body length 2300. Head, length (median width) 240 (180); postocular setae 100. Pronotum, length (median width) 150 (260); major setae—am 15, aa 35, ml 45, epim 145, accessory epim 55, pa broken. Fore wing length 920; sub-basal setae 60, 75, 75. Tergite IX setae S1 200, S2 70. Tube, length 200, basal width 75, apical width 40. Antennal segments III–VIII, length (width) 65(30), 55(35), 55(30), 50(30), 50(25), 30(15). Specimens studied. Holotype female, AUSTRALIA, Queensland, Brisbane, Moggill Creek, from Mallotus philippinensis leaves [Euphorbiaceae], 23.viii.1998 (CJ Burwell), in ANIC. Paratypes: 6 females, 3 males taken with holotype; Queensland, Mt Tamborine, 16 females, 3 males from Mallotus philippinensis leaves (with larvae), 21.iii.1968 (LA Mound 579), in ANIC. Brisbane, The Gap, 20 females, 2 males from leaf galls on Mallotus sp., 28.ii.2013; Brisbane, Ashgrove, 5 females, 6 males from Mallotus philippinensis leaf galls, 10.viii.2014, in QDPC. Comments. This species is similar to umbratus Hood, but that has the tube slightly longer than the head, antennal segments V–VI less sharply constricted at the base, and the pelta less broadly triangular. Moreover, the tarsi are brownish-yellow in burwelli whereas in umbratus they are clear yellow, the metanotal sculpture differs between these species, and burwelli is particularly unusual in having two pairs of epimeral setae (Fig. 1).

Liothrips brevifemur Girault nomen dubium (Fig. 40) Liothrips brevifemur Girault, 1928: 2 The single specimen on which this name is based was taken from the flowers of Phaseolus semierectus at Alderley, Brisbane, Queensland, 29.xii.1927 (in Queensland Museum, Brisbane). The specimen is crushed and largely destroyed under the edge of the coverslip of Girault’s type slide (Fig. 37). The original description states “bristles pale, very short, funnel shaped”, and this character state does not occur in any species of Liothrips. The rest of the five-line description includes no details that can be satisfactorily matched to any genus of Phlaeothripid in the area. The remaining specimens on the slide are all Megalurothrips usitatus [Thripidae]. Thus the name brevifemur Girault cannot be associated with any known species., Published as part of Mound, Laurence A., Dang, Lihong & Tree, Desley J., 2023, The genus Liothrips (Thysanoptera, Phlaeothripidae) in Australia, pp. 201-214 in Zootaxa 5306 (2) on page 203, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5306.2.2, http://zenodo.org/record/8058695

Liothrips -lineage in Australia Across much of Australia, leaf-feeding Phlaeothripinae of the Liothrips lineage are represented by several genera that are presumably endemic to this continent. In the arid zone there is a remarkable radiation associated with the leaf-like phyllodes of the many endemic Acacia species (Crespi et al. 2004), including Akainothrips, Katothrips, Kellyia and Kladothrips, together with a few even more structurally divergent taxa. In the more mesic habitats, particularly of the Eastern forests the leaf-feeding habitat is occupied by a series of species that are referred to the genus Teuchothrips, many of which remain undescribed. This appears to represent an endemic radiation out of Liothrips ancestors, although the two genera currently remain weakly diagnosed (Mound 2008). However, the genus Liothrips is here interpreted in the sense of Okajima (2006) as including only those species that lack a fore tarsal tooth in both sexes. As a result, Liothrips soror (Hood 1918), that remains known only from a single female bearing a fore tarsal tooth and taken in northern Queensland, is here recognised as Teuchothrips soror (Hood) comb. n. A further Australian species based only on a single female, Liothrips tenuis Hood, is here recognised as Kellyia tenuis (Hood) comb.n. Moreover, L. brevifemur Girault, was based on a single specimen of which only a few broken fragments remain on the type slide (Fig. 37), and this is here considered a nomen dubium. In a recent introduction to the Phlaeothripidae genera of Australia (Mound & Tree 2022) eight species were listed in the genus Liothrips. Of the seven species remaining after the removal of L. soror, two are known only from single specimens, and as a result, nothing is known of the biology or host plants of brevifemur or tenuis. In contrast, three new species are described below each based on colonies of specimens taken on plant species known to be widespread in northern Australia, Chionanthes spp, Timonius timon and Mallotus philippinensis. Moreover, three species are known to be widespread in tropical Asia, two inducing leaf-roll galls on Piper species and one living in association with Gynaikothrips galls on Ficus species. The final species has been known as a minor pest forming colonies under the bracts of bulbs of Lilium species, but it is here recorded widely in eastern Australia in native forest areas. The objective is to provide an identification system to the eight species of Liothrips now known from Australia, together with L. urichi that is not established here but has the potential for introduction to Australia for biocontrol purposes of a weedy plant., Published as part of Mound, Laurence A., Dang, Lihong & Tree, Desley J., 2023, The genus Liothrips (Thysanoptera, Phlaeothripidae) in Australia, pp. 201-214 in Zootaxa 5306 (2) on pages 201-202, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5306.2.2, http://zenodo.org/record/8058695, {"references":["Crespi, B. J., Morris, D. C. & Mound, L. A. (2004) Evolution of Ecological and Behavioural Diversity: Australian Acacia Thrips as Model Organisms. Australian Biological Resources Study, Canberra & Australian National Insect Collection, Canberra, 328 pp [http: // www. environment. gov. au / science / abrs / publications / thrips]","Okajima, S. (2006) The Suborder Tubulifera (Thysanoptera). The Insects of Japan. Vol. 2. The Entomological Society of Japan, Touka Shobo Co. Ltd., Fukuoka, 720 pp.","Hood, J. D. (1918) New genera and species of Australian Thysanoptera. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum, 6, 121 - 150.","Mound, L. A. & Tree, D. J. (2022) Tubulifera Australiensis - Thysanoptera-Phlaeothripidae genera in Australia. Lucidcentral. org, Identic Pty Ltd, Queensland. Available from: https: // keys. lucidcentral. org / keys / v 4 / thrips / tubulifera / (accessed 18 May 2023)"]}

Liothrips chionanthes sp.n. (Figs 18, 29) Macropterous female. Body and legs dark brown, except fore tibiae light brown, tarsi brownish-yellow, mid and hind tarsi slightly paler, also extreme apices of mid and hind tibiae; antennal segment I dark, II paler at apex, III-V almost clear yellow, VI brown in apical half, VII–VIII brown; major setae brown; fore wing shaded with brown area around sub-basal setae. Head about 1.2 longer than wide, slightly narrowed to base; ocellar region subconical, posterior ocelli close to inner margin of eyes; eyes about one-third as long as head; postocular setae acute or slightly blunt at apex, about as long as eye length; maxillary stylets not retracted to postocular setae, medially about 0.3 of head width apart. Antennal segment III almost 2.0 times as long as wide, III with one sense-cone, IV with three; IV–VI evenly narrowed to basal neck; segment VIII not constricted at base. Pronotum with little sculpture, with four pairs of bluntly pointed major setae, anteromarginals very small (Fig. 29). Prosternal basantra absent, ferna wide apart, mesopresternum of two triangles weakly connected medially; metathoracic sternopleural sutures developed. Metanotum narrowly reticulate medially (Fig. 18), median setae slender and minute. Fore wing parallel sided, with about 15 duplicated cilia, three weakly pointed sub-basal setae. Pelta weakly reticulate, broadly triangular, with pair of campaniform sensilla; tergites II–VII with two pairs of sigmoid wing-retaining setae; tergal lateral setae all acute; tergite IX setae S1 and S2 pointed at apex, shorter than tube. Tube shorter than head, anal setae shorter than tube. Measurements (holotype female in microns): Body length 3300. Head, length (median width) 290(225); postocular setae 95. Pronotum, length (median width) 200(375); major setae—am 10, aa 45, ml 75, epim 135, pa 100. Mesonotal lateral setae length 50. Metanotal median setae length 10. Fore wing length 1200; sub-basal setae 60, 80, 70. Tergite IX setae S1 250, S2 230. Tube, length 305; basal width 105; apical width 50. Antennal segments III–VIII, length (width) 90(40), 85(45), 60(40), 55(40), 65(30), 30(15). Male macroptera. Similar to female, but smaller; fore tarsal tooth absent; tergite IX setae S1 shorter than tube, S3 longer than tube, S2 less than half of S 1 in length, with apex pointed; sternite VIII with an irregular long and narrow pore plate. Measurements (paratype male in microns): Body length 2680. Head, length (median width) 265(205); postocular setae 85. Pronotum, length (median width) 175(315); major setae—am 10, aa 35, ml 60, epim 125, pa 105. Mesonotal lateral setae length 40. Metanotal median setae length 10. Fore wing length 950; sub-basal setae 60, 65, 70. Tergite IX setae S1 205, S2 80, S3 255. Tube, length 240; basal width 95; apical width 45. Antennal segments III–VIII, length (width) 80(35), 80(40), 75(40), 70(35), 50(25), 35(15). Specimens studied. Holotype female, AUSTRALIA, Queensland, Behana Gorge, 30km south of Cairns, 3.xi.2008 (LAM 5182) in ANIC. Paratypes: 2 females, 1 male taken with holotype; Queensland, Cairns, 1 male (with larvae) from Chionanthus, 14.ii.1998; Cooktown to Rossville, 2 females, 2 males from? Chionanthus, 11.xi.2010 (in ANIC). Comments. As indicated by the key above, this species is one of a group of at least three species that are particularly similar to each other in structure.Antennal segment III is intermediate in length between that of chavicae and umbratus. The metanotal sculpture is distinct from that of chavicae but it is similar to that of umbratus (Figs 17, 18, 23). This new species is very similar to umbratus, of which three specimens have also been collected from Chionanthus leaves., Published as part of Mound, Laurence A., Dang, Lihong & Tree, Desley J., 2023, The genus Liothrips (Thysanoptera, Phlaeothripidae) in Australia, pp. 201-214 in Zootaxa 5306 (2) on page 208, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5306.2.2, http://zenodo.org/record/8058695

Key to Liothrips species of Australia (Excluding the nomen dubium Liothrips brevifemur Girault) 1. Postocular setae not developed (Fig. 4) [mid and hind tibiae yellow with brown on basal third (Fig. 33); metanotum with very closely spaced longitudinal striae; mesopresternum transverse and complete] [in leaf galls on Timonius]....... timonii sp.n. -. Postocular setae well-developed and long.................................................................. 2 2. Mid and hind tibiae yellow, with no more than weak shading near base [metanotum with very closely spaced longitudinal striae (Fig. 20); mesopresternum transverse and complete] [in leaf galls on Piper spp]............................... pallipes -. Mid and hind tibiae brown, or bicoloured with up to distal half yellow........................................... 3 3. Maxillary stylets retracted to eyes or to postocular setae, close together medially in head their separation 0.1–0.2 of head width (Figs 5, 6)........................................................................................... 4 -. Maxillary stylets not retracted to postocular setae, their separation at least 0.25 of head width (Figs 1–3)................ 5 4. All tarsi yellow, mid and hind tibiae yellow on distal fifth or more; pronotal major setae dark brown; fore wing extensively shaded brown with dark median longitudinal line, sharply paler sub-basally; metanotal sculpture narrowly reticulate to almost striate (Fig. 25); mouth cone not extending beyond prosternal ferna [on bulbs of Lilium]...................... vaneeckei -. Mid and hind tarsi brown, mid and hind tibiae uniformly brown; pronotal major setae pale to weakly shaded; fore wing pale or weakly shaded; metanotal sculpture broadly reticulate (Fig. 24); mouth cone pointed, extending beyond prosternal ferna (on Miconia crenata)................................................................................. urichi 5. Tergite II close to lateral margin with irregular row of 8–12 discal setae in female (Fig. 32), fewer in male [leaf gall invader on Ficus spp.]................................................................................... takahashii -. Tergite II close to lateral margin with irregular row of 3–7 discal setae in female, sometimes none in male (Figs 33–35).... 6 6. Antennal segments III–VI evenly and increasingly light brown, not paler at their bases (Fig. 10); antennal segments V–VI sharply constricted to basal neck; mouth cone long and pointed; with 2 pairs of epimeral setae [head slightly longer than tube] [leaves of Mallotus philippinensis]............................................................. burwelli sp.n. -. Antennal segments III–VI largely yellow but with apices increasingly shaded; antennal segments V–VI evenly narrowing to basal neck; mouth cone rounded; with one pair of epimeral setae............................................... 7 7. Fore tibiae clear yellow; antennal segment VI entirely yellow; metanotal reticles narrow, almost striate (Fig. 17) [in leaf galls on Piper spp].................................................................................. chavicae - Fore tibiae shaded more or less; antennal segment VI brown on apical half; metanotal reticles relatively broad but longer than wide (Figs 18, 23)..................................................................................... 8 8. Metanotal median pair of setae well-developed, about as long as mesonotal lateral pair of setae (Fig. 23); tergite IX setae as long or longer than tube; pronotal am setae well-developed, 0.5 as long as epimeral setae (Fig. 9) [leaves of rainforest tree]............................................................................................... umbratus -. Metanotal median pair of setae minute, much smaller than mesonotal lateral pair of setae (Fig. 18); tergite IX setae S1 shorter than tube; pronotal am setae usually minute, less than 0.2 as long as epimeral setae (Fig. 29) [leaves of Chionanthus]............................................................................................. chionanthes sp.n., Published as part of Mound, Laurence A., Dang, Lihong & Tree, Desley J., 2023, The genus Liothrips (Thysanoptera, Phlaeothripidae) in Australia, pp. 201-214 in Zootaxa 5306 (2) on page 203, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5306.2.2, http://zenodo.org/record/8058695

Liothrips vaneeckei Priesner (Figs 6, 16, 25, 35, 37) Liothrips vaneeckei Priesner, 1920: 2011 Described originally from Europe in a glasshouse in the Netherlands, the Lily Thrips has apparently been widely distributed around the world by the commercial trade in lily bulbs. Okajima (2006) recorded the species from Honshu, Japan, and provided a detailed illustrated description of the species. It is one of the species with maxillary stylets deeply retracted and close together medially in the head (Fig. 6). Antennal segment IV is shorter than in many Liothrips species of similar body size and segment VIII is slightly longer, with VI and VII both constricted basally to a narrow neck (Fig. 16). The metanotal reticulation is narrow, almost producing striation (Fig. 25), and the pelta is recessed into the second abdominal tergite (Fig. 35). Hodson (1935) gave a detailed account of the life history of vaneeckei, recording substantial aggregations under the scales of commercial lily bulbs, and indicating a possibility that the species may have originated on a native Lilium species around Oregon in northwestern USA. Bailey (1939) reviewed the available information on distributions and the range of Lilium species on which the species had been found, including several orchid species. In Australia, it was first recorded by Malipatil et al. (2002) who also provided further references to published information on biology. However, because this insect lives below ground it is rarely found except on cultivated plants, and as a result there is no information on the potential host range away from commercial plantings. The adults listed below suggest that this species is widespread in eastern Australia, presumably living on the subterranean parts of native Australian plants, and that it has been here for many years. This is the first indication that this thrips may have a wider host range away from cultivated plants. Specimens studied. AUSTRALIA, Victoria, Warragul, 2 females, 1 male with larvae from Asiatic Lilium bulb, 2.v.2001 (D. Bruce), in ANIC, also 6 females, with identical data in QDPC. New South Wales, Budderoo National Park, Carrington Falls, 3 females in Malaise Trap, i.2022. Tasmania, Lake St Claire Rd, 2004 (in ANIC). Queensland, Toowoomba, 2 females, 2 males from lily bulbs in supermarket, 7.iv.2001; Brisbane Forest Park, 1 female from bark spray on Acacia melanoxylon, 25.xi.2008; Bunja Mts, 1 female in Malaise Trap, 24.iv.1986; Bribie Island, 1 female in Malaise Trap, 24.x.2010, in QDPC. ENGLAND, Sheffield, 1 female from Paphiopedilum, ii.1992, in ANIC., Published as part of Mound, Laurence A., Dang, Lihong & Tree, Desley J., 2023, The genus Liothrips (Thysanoptera, Phlaeothripidae) in Australia, pp. 201-214 in Zootaxa 5306 (2) on page 212, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5306.2.2, http://zenodo.org/record/8058695, {"references":["Priesner, H. (1920) Ein neuer Liothrips (Uzel) (Ord. Thysanoptera) aus den Niederlanden. Zoologische Mededeelingen Rijks Museet Leiden, 5, 211 - 212.","Okajima, S. (2006) The Suborder Tubulifera (Thysanoptera). The Insects of Japan. Vol. 2. The Entomological Society of Japan, Touka Shobo Co. Ltd., Fukuoka, 720 pp.","Hodson, W. E. H. (1935) The lily thrips (Liothrips vaneeckei) Priesner. Bulletin of Entomological Research, 26 (4), 469 - 474. https: // doi. org / 10.1017 / S 0007485300036804","Bailey, S. F. (1939) The lily thrips. Bulletin of the Department of Agriculture of California, 28, 479 - 482.","Malipatil, M. B., Mound, L. A., Finlay, K. J. & Semeraro, L. (2002) First record of lily thrips, Liothrips vaneeckei Priesner, in Australia (Thysanoptera: Phlaeothripidae). Australian Journal of Entomology, 42, 159 - 160. https: // doi. org / 10.1046 / j. 1440 - 6055.2002.00277. x"]}

Liothrips chavicae (Zimmermann) (Figs 2, 11, 17, 31, 38) Mesothrips chavicae Zimmerman, 1900: 14 Described from specimens found in a rolled leaf gall on Piper betle in Java, three further species are placed as synonyms of chavicae that were also taken in Java from leaf galls on different species of Piper (Mound 2020). The species thus has a wide distribution in high rainfall areas from west Malaysia to almost as far south as Brisbane in Queensland. Antennal segments III–VI are almost clear yellow but VII is variable between samples from almost yellow (Fig. 11) to entirely brown, and the fore tibiae and all tarsi are yellow. The mid and hind tibiae are mainly brown but with the apical sixth or less yellow (Fig. 38), the fore wings are generally pale with a median longitudinal shaded line, and the major setae are dark brown. The metanotal reticles are narrow, almost forming longitudinal striae (Fig. 17) (see also Mound 2020). Specimens studied. AUSTRALIA, Queensland, in Piper leaf galls, in QPDC: South Emmagen Creek, 3 females, 3 males, 8.x.2012; Cairns, Cathedral fig tree, 3 males, 3.x.2012; Flecker Botanic Gardens, 4 females, 11 male, 4.xi.2008; Josephine Falls, 2 females, 1 male, 2.x.2015; Witches Falls, Tamborine, 3 females, 2 males, 24.ix.2012; O’Reillys, 4 females, 10.x.2006, 2 females, 12.iii.2007, 1 female, 23.ix.2012; Noosa, Tea Tree Bay, 6 females, 3 males from leaf roll on Piper novaehollandiae, 14.iv.2007; Cooloola Nat. Pk, 20 females, 2 males in leaves, 6.iv.1987. SINGAPORE, Zoo, 5 females, 2 males, 25.ix.2007, Sentosa, 3 females, 11.ii.2006. AUSTRALIA, Queensland, in Piper leaf galls, in ANIC: Cairns Botanic gardens, 8 females, 7 males, 4.xi.2008; Redlynch, Crystal Creek, 4 females 3 males from leaf roll on Piper hederacea, 5.xi.2008; O’Reilly’s 2 females, 1 male from leaf roll on Piper novaehollandiae, 10.x.2006; Babinda, The Boulders, 1 female, 2.x.2015; Noosa Hill, 4 females from Piper novaehollandiae, 27.ix.1998. MALAYSIA, Bangi, UKM, 7 females, 3 males from Piper leaf galls, 8.xii.2017. TIMOR LESTE, Aileu, office of U.S. Dept of Agriculture, 5 females from Piper sarmentosa, 22.viii.2018., Published as part of Mound, Laurence A., Dang, Lihong & Tree, Desley J., 2023, The genus Liothrips (Thysanoptera, Phlaeothripidae) in Australia, pp. 201-214 in Zootaxa 5306 (2) on page 206, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5306.2.2, http://zenodo.org/record/8058695, {"references":["Zimmerman, A. (1900) Uber einige javanische Thysanopteren. Bulletin de l'Insitut Botanique de Buitenzorg Java, 7, 6 - 19.","Mound, L. A. (2020) Liothrips species (Thysanoptera, Phlaeothripinae) from leaf-galls on Piper species in Southeast Asia and Australia. Zootaxa, 4830 (2), 383 - 391. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 4830.2.9"]}

Liothrips takahashii (Moulton) (Figs 7, 13, 21, 32) Gynaikothrips takahashii Moulton, 1928: 313 Described on specimens taken on Ficus retusa in Taiwan, three further species are listed as synonyms of takahashii (ThripsWiki 2023) taken in Malaysia, Singapore and Sumatra. The species has also been recorded from southern Japan (Ryukyu Islands), Java and Taiwan by Okajima (2006), who also provided a full description and illustrations. The large number of discal setae in a row on the lateral margins of the second tergite (Fig. 32) currently appears to be particularly unusual to this species. It is commonly found in small numbers as an invader of leaf galls induced by Gynaikothrips species on Ficus leaves. Presumably it has been introduced to the American continent by the horticultural trade in such plants. Specimens studied. AUSTRALIA, Queensland, Cairns, 4 females, 4 males from leaf galls on Ficus microcarpa [Moraceae], 17.ix.2013, in QDPC (1 female in ANIC). TAIWAN, Taichung, 5 females, 2 males from Ficus benjamina and microcarpa, viii.2013, in ANIC (2 females, 3 males with same data in QDPC); Chiayi City, 1 female from Ficus microcarpa, 13.iii.2014, in QDPC. The following specimens are all in QDPC: MALAYSIA, Kuala Lumpur, 2 males from Ficus benjamina, 25.viii.2013, Selangor, Hulu Langat, 3 females from Ficus leaf gall, 6.viii.2012. SINGAPORE, 1 female from Ficus benjamina leaf gall, 11.ii.2016. THAILAND, Chiang Rai, 1 female, 2 males from Ficus leaf gall, 04.iii.2015. CHINA, Sichuan, Chengdu Botanic Gardens, 2 females from Ficus leaf galls, 10.viii.2012. USA, California, Long Beach, 1 male from Ficus ? nitida gall, 11.vii.2013. COSTA RICA, Heredia, 3 females from Ficus benjamina, 14.v.2014 (2 females with same data in ANIC)., Published as part of Mound, Laurence A., Dang, Lihong & Tree, Desley J., 2023, The genus Liothrips (Thysanoptera, Phlaeothripidae) in Australia, pp. 201-214 in Zootaxa 5306 (2) on page 209, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5306.2.2, http://zenodo.org/record/8058695, {"references":["Moulton, D. (1928) Thysanoptera of Japan: New species, notes, and a list of all known Japanese species. Annotationes zoologicae Japonensis, 11, 287 - 337.","Okajima, S. (2006) The Suborder Tubulifera (Thysanoptera). The Insects of Japan. Vol. 2. The Entomological Society of Japan, Touka Shobo Co. Ltd., Fukuoka, 720 pp."]}