Feather mites of the genus Proterothrix Gaud (Astigmata: Proctophyllodidae) from parrotbills (Passeriformes: Paradoxornithidae) in China.

Three new species of the feather mite genus Proterothrix (Proctophyllodidae: Pterodectinae) are reported from parrotbills (Passeriformes: Paradoxornithidae) in China. We describe Proterothrix paradoxornis n. sp. from Paradoxornis webbianus (type host) and Par. alphonsianus, P. longicaula n. sp. from Par. gularis, and P. sarahbushae n. sp. from Par. verreauxi (type host) and Par. alphonsianus. These are the first records of mites of the Pterodectinae from the Paradoxornithidae. Within Proterothrix, the new species constitutes a distinct complex, characterized by the presence of a long, whip-like aedeagus and spindle-shaped setae e on tarsi I in males.

The probable association of feather mites of the genus Ingrassia (Analgoidea: Xolalgidae) with the blue penguin Eudyptula minor (Aves: Sphenisciformes) in Australia.

A new feather mite species, Ingrassia eudyptula n. sp. (Xolalgidae: Ingrassiinae), is described from the blue penguin Eudyptula minor (J.B. Forster, 1781) in Australia. This is the first description of a feather mite species from representatives of the avian order Sphenisciformes, which had previously been considered free from feather mites due to their strongly modified plumage and highly aquatic lifestyle. We suggest that most probably this mite species or its ancestor moved onto penguins from a shearwater species (Procellariiformes: Procellariidae) via shared nesting burrows in seabird colonies. In support of this argument, we illustrate similarities between I. eudyptula n. sp. and the closely related I. dubinini Cerny, 1967 from shearwaters (Puffinus spp.).

Extracting aquatic mites from stream substrates: a comparison of three methods.

Aquatic mites (Hydrachnida, Oribatida, Halacaroidea) are diverse, and can reach high densities in the substrates of streams and rivers. Although they are a ubiquitous component of these habitats, their small size means that they are often overlooked. Using substrate samples from streams in tropical Queensland, I compared the thoroughness and time-based efficiency of three methods of extraction: sorting live samples without magnification (live-picking); exhaustive sorting of preserved samples using a dissecting microscope (microscope-picking); and kerosene-flotation of preserved samples followed by sorting with a dissecting microscope (kero-float). Live-picked samples yielded significantly fewer individuals and species than other methods, and were biased towards larger species. Oribatids and halacarids were not found when live-picking was used. Live-picking and kero-float methods provided similar numbers of mites per minute of sampling effort, whereas microscope-picking had a lower efficiency than kero-float. A combination of live-picking and kerosene-floatation is recommended for thorough surveys of stream acarofauna.

Indirect sperm transfer in arthropods: behavioral and evolutionary trends.

Arachnids, myriapods, and wingless hexapods exhibit a fascinating diversity of sperm transfer behaviors. Modes of sperm transfer can be categorized by the degree of contact between male and female during transfer, with direct transfer (copulation) involving the greatest contact, paired-indirect transfer an intermediate degree, and dissociated transfer the least. Internal fertilization, spermatophores, and copulation are sometimes assumed to have evolved after invasion of land, but all have evolved many times in the marine habitat. Behaviors associated with indirect sperm transfer include those having close parallels with direct transfer (provision of nuptial gifts) as well as unique phenomena (spermatophore trampling by rival males). The morphology and physiology of indirectly transferred spermatophores have been shaped by environmental factors (e.g. humidity) as well as biological ones (e.g. clutch size of females), and they may provide useful phylogenetic characters. Unanswered questions about indirect transfer include the following: Are females of dissociated species able to choose their partners? What determines size and number of spermatophores? Do speciation rates differ between taxa with direct versus indirect transfer?