) is currently under revision (Tauber, C. A. in preparation). Although most

) is currently under revision (Tauber, C. A. in preparation). Although most of the taxonomic work on the genus Chrysopodes has focused on the adult stage, an extensive suite of morphological traits was shown to distinguish Chrysopodes larvae from those in other genera of Chrysopini (Tauber 2003). To date, species-specific Mikamycin IAMedChemExpress Mikamycin B LLY-507MedChemExpress LLY-507 larval characteristics have been described for two Chrysopodes (Neosuarius) species: Chrysopodes (Neosuarius) collaris (Schneider) and Chrysopodes (Neosuarius) porterinus (Nav ) (Tauber 2003, Monserrat and Freitas 2005). It is reasonable to expect that further comparative study of the larvae will provide important information for the systematics of Chrysopodes and increase the value of this group of natural enemies for ecological investigations and agricultural use. With the above in mind, we describe and provide images of the larvae of five additional species of Chrysopodes. All five species are in the subgenus Chrysopodes (Chrysopodes): C. (C.) divisus (Walker), C. (C.) fumosus Tauber Albuquerque, C. (C.) geayi (Nav ), C. (C.) lineafrons Adams Penny, and C. (C.) spinellus Adams Penny. Also, we present keys for identifying the larvae (all instars) of the five species. Prior to doing so, we make some minor corrections and important additions to an earlier list (Tauber 2003) of larval features that distinguish Chrysopodes. The genus-level features (i.e., those that are shared by larvae of all Chrysopodes species studied to date) are listed on the Appendix.Methods The specimens used in our study were reared from field-collected females. The rearing, preservation, descriptive procedures, and terminology are identical to those pub-Larvae of five horticulturally important species of Chrysopodes…lished previously (Tauber 2003, http://esa.publisher.ingentaconnect.com/content/esa/ aesa/2003/00000096/00000004/art00008). We suggest that readers refer to the illustrations and explanatory material in that paper when using the keys, descriptions and images here. Voucher specimens (adult females with their laboratory-reared offspring, and the larval specimens used in the study) are deposited in the Essig Museum, University of California, Berkeley, the insect collection at the Universidade Estadual do Norte Fluminense, Campos dos Goytacazes, and the research collections of the authors. The earlier study of Chrysopodes larval traits (Tauber 2003) was based on laboratoryreared specimens from eight species. Subsequently, two of these “species” were found to be the same; this species is included here [C. (C.) spinellus: Tauber Lots 2001:007, 2002:026]. In addition, three other species from the earlier study are included here [C. (C.) divisus: Tauber Lots 96:017, 96:018, 96:019, 99:020, 99:043, C. (C.) geayi: Tauber Lot 2001:003, previously referred to as “pulchella”, and C. (C.) fumosus: Tauber Lot 2002:021]. Two of the remaining lots from the earlier study will be described elsewhere [Tauber Lots 96:006, 99:037], and one [C. (N.) collaris] was described earlier (Tauber 2003). In our previous work, we have used two terms “submedian setae” (e.g., Mantoanelli et al. 2011) and “submesal setae” (e.g., Tauber et al. 2011) to refer to the dorsal abdominal setae that Tsukaguchi (1995) termed “submedian setae”. Here, to be consistent with Tsukaguchi, we use one term, “submedian setae”. It is noteworthy that bilateral asymmetry in setal numbers is common, and that specimens occasionally exhibit variation in the numbers and sizes of setae.) is currently under revision (Tauber, C. A. in preparation). Although most of the taxonomic work on the genus Chrysopodes has focused on the adult stage, an extensive suite of morphological traits was shown to distinguish Chrysopodes larvae from those in other genera of Chrysopini (Tauber 2003). To date, species-specific larval characteristics have been described for two Chrysopodes (Neosuarius) species: Chrysopodes (Neosuarius) collaris (Schneider) and Chrysopodes (Neosuarius) porterinus (Nav ) (Tauber 2003, Monserrat and Freitas 2005). It is reasonable to expect that further comparative study of the larvae will provide important information for the systematics of Chrysopodes and increase the value of this group of natural enemies for ecological investigations and agricultural use. With the above in mind, we describe and provide images of the larvae of five additional species of Chrysopodes. All five species are in the subgenus Chrysopodes (Chrysopodes): C. (C.) divisus (Walker), C. (C.) fumosus Tauber Albuquerque, C. (C.) geayi (Nav ), C. (C.) lineafrons Adams Penny, and C. (C.) spinellus Adams Penny. Also, we present keys for identifying the larvae (all instars) of the five species. Prior to doing so, we make some minor corrections and important additions to an earlier list (Tauber 2003) of larval features that distinguish Chrysopodes. The genus-level features (i.e., those that are shared by larvae of all Chrysopodes species studied to date) are listed on the Appendix.Methods The specimens used in our study were reared from field-collected females. The rearing, preservation, descriptive procedures, and terminology are identical to those pub-Larvae of five horticulturally important species of Chrysopodes…lished previously (Tauber 2003, http://esa.publisher.ingentaconnect.com/content/esa/ aesa/2003/00000096/00000004/art00008). We suggest that readers refer to the illustrations and explanatory material in that paper when using the keys, descriptions and images here. Voucher specimens (adult females with their laboratory-reared offspring, and the larval specimens used in the study) are deposited in the Essig Museum, University of California, Berkeley, the insect collection at the Universidade Estadual do Norte Fluminense, Campos dos Goytacazes, and the research collections of the authors. The earlier study of Chrysopodes larval traits (Tauber 2003) was based on laboratoryreared specimens from eight species. Subsequently, two of these “species” were found to be the same; this species is included here [C. (C.) spinellus: Tauber Lots 2001:007, 2002:026]. In addition, three other species from the earlier study are included here [C. (C.) divisus: Tauber Lots 96:017, 96:018, 96:019, 99:020, 99:043, C. (C.) geayi: Tauber Lot 2001:003, previously referred to as “pulchella”, and C. (C.) fumosus: Tauber Lot 2002:021]. Two of the remaining lots from the earlier study will be described elsewhere [Tauber Lots 96:006, 99:037], and one [C. (N.) collaris] was described earlier (Tauber 2003). In our previous work, we have used two terms “submedian setae” (e.g., Mantoanelli et al. 2011) and “submesal setae” (e.g., Tauber et al. 2011) to refer to the dorsal abdominal setae that Tsukaguchi (1995) termed “submedian setae”. Here, to be consistent with Tsukaguchi, we use one term, “submedian setae”. It is noteworthy that bilateral asymmetry in setal numbers is common, and that specimens occasionally exhibit variation in the numbers and sizes of setae.