104 Invasive Stink Bugs and Related Species (Pentatomoidea)
2.2.10.7.44.11 Cephaloplatus Group Gross (1976) proposed this group for a single Australian genus,
Cephaloplatus (Figure 2.19I), and indicated that a second undescribed genus from northern Australia
might belong here. That second genus, Linea McDonald (Figure 2.12C), has been described (McDonald
2003). Unfortunately, Linea was preoccupied; Birna McDonald has been proposed as a replacement name
(McDonald 2006). Gross (1976) further indicated, however, that Cephaloplatus (Figure 2.19I) might
be closely related to the genus Caystrus, the type genus for the tribe Caystrini (see Section 2.2.10.7.14).
Members of this group are oval to elongate-oval in shape, small to medium in size (7-14 mm), and a
general yellowish to yellowish-tan coloration. The juga are broad, extending beyond the apex of the tylus,
their apices rounded to obliquely truncate, and their lateral margins weakly reflexed. There is usually a
lateral tooth-like projection anterior to each compound eye. The ocelli are widely separated. The antero-
lateral pronotal margins are usually explanate, often slightly reflexed. The rostrum reaches the hind
coxae. The prosternum is depressed without a longitudinal carina, whereas the mesosternum has a weak
longitudinal raised line. The ostiolar rugae are reduced and auriculate in shape. The male parameres
vary from F-shaped to T-shaped, usually with a corresponding ridge on the wall of the pygophore. The
male aedeagus lacks a thecal shield. The female spermathecal duct has a dilation and sclerotized rod, and
the spermathecal bulb is ball-shaped with two small diverticula.
Although Gross (1976) discussed the possible relationship with the genus Caystrus (a member of the
Caystrini), he finally concluded that “ in so much as the Cephaloplatus group show any relationship with
any other group in this generic section of the family it is with the following Phyllocephala group” (= sub-
family Phyllocephalinae). Interestingly, many of the species of Cephaloplatus (Figure 2.19I) show a
general similar facies with some genera of the South American tribe Discocephalini (Discocephalinae),
especially the genera Dryptocephala and Pelidnocoris, but this is probably not a sign of relationship. The
genus Cephaloplatus has been revised recently (Gross 1970).
2.2.10.7.44.12 Mycoolona Group This monotypic group contains a single genus and species,
Mycoolona atricornis (Westwood), and was not formally treated by Gross (1976) as it does not occur
in South Australia. He felt that it was important to discuss this group, along with the Eysarcoris group
(= Eysarcorini), for completeness in studying relationships among the Australian pentatomines. He char-
acterized this species as a subelongate creature (9 mm in length), greenish grey in color with coarse
black punctures; antennal segments II through V are black. The male parameres are robust, triangular in
shape, each with the dorsal surface concave. The male aedeagus has a thecal shield.
Distant (1910b) originally placed Mycoolona near the genus Anaxarchus Stål (Figure 2.19J), a
genus that Gross (1976) speculated may belong in the Carpocoris group (= Carpocorini) (see Section
2.2.10.7.12). Based on general appearance, Gross (1976) stated that Mycoolona was similar to members
of the Halys group (= Halyini) or the Carpocoris group. He also indicated that it looks similar to some
species of the genus Ocirrhoe (Rhynchocorini), but Mycoolona lacks the sternal structures characteristic
of the rhynchocorines. The external structures associated with the scent gland apparatus are more simi-
lar to the carpocorines than to the halyines. But he further indicated that the male genitalia was different
from both groups.
2.2.10.7.45 The Generic Groups of Linnavuori (1982)
Linnavuori (1982), much like Gross (1975b, 1976), spent considerable space discussing the classification
and relationships among the various pentatomine groups, focusing on the African fauna. He also did not
want to add new names to the literature until a thorough phylogenetic analysis could be completed. He
did, however, use some tribal names if they were already in use by others and only used generic group
names for those genera that were difficult to place in the tribes known to him. His classification, in some
ways, closely resembles our current classification in that he considered the Asopinae, Phyllocephalinae,
and Podopinae to be subfamilies. What follows are brief discussions of his generic groups that have not
already been covered in our previous discussions of known tribes. The groups are in the same order that
Linnavuori (1982) treated them (Table 2.5).
2.2.10.7.45.1 Tyoma Group Although Linnavuori (1982) separated this group from the Aeschrus
group, he indicated that there was a close relationship between the two groups. Most current workers