S. Mahunka szerk.: Folia Entomologica Hungarica 32/2. (Budapest, 1979)
2. The separation of the genera is possible also in the case of the "normal" siteroptoid females and males (see identification key below); 3. Should these differences be considered as allowing subgeneric separations within the genus Siteroptes , the "normal" (siteroptoid) females of Pediculaster were to be assigned to the subgenus Siteroptoides of the genus Siteroptes ; but then, according to the rules of nomenclature, the name Pediculaster Vitzthum, 1931, must be used instead of Siteroptoides Cross, 1965 * Pediculaster Vitzthum, 1931, genus bonum Pygmephorellus Cross et Moser, 1971, genus bonum Pediculaste r Vitzthum, 19 31 - Siteroptoides Cross, 1965 Identification key to the normal females 1 (2) Stigma long, slit-like, directed obliquely inward, towards middle of body. Only setae e absent among hysterosomatic hairs. .Anterior sternal plate with 5 (3+2) hairs. Posterior sternal plate with usually weakly developed apodemes Siteroptes Amerling, 1861 2 (1) The above combination of characters not present in several aspects. Stigma guttiform or rounded, nearly transversely situated. Number of hysterosomatic hairs complete, also hairs e and f present. Anterior sternal plate with 6 (3+3) hairs. 3 (4) Stigma guttiform, nearly touching medially. Genu of leg II with 3 hairs** Pediculaster Vitzthum, 1931 4 (3) Stigma small, nearly rounded, far removed from each other. Genu of leg II with 2 na * rs Pygmephorellus Cross et Moser, 1971 Identification key to the males 1 (2) Anterior sternal plate with 5 (3+2) pairs of setae. Genital segment dorsally with 2, ventrally with 1, posteromarginally without any, pairs of setae Siteroptes Amerling, 1861 2 (1) Anterior sternal plate with 6 (3+3) pairs of setae. Genital segment with more hairs. 3 (4) Chaetotaxy of leg II: 3-3-4+1-5+1; chaetotaxy of leg IV: 1-1-4+1-5 Pediculaster Vitzthum, 1931 4 (3) Chaetotaxy of leg II: 3-2-4+1-5+1; chaetotaxy of leg IV: 2-1-4+1-4 Pygmephorellus Cross et Moser, 1971 It should be noted that this key is based on the available data only and without any new comparative investigations having been made - therefore the description of relevant new taxa may essentially modify present concepts. ,eg chaetotaxy also with other differences, see SMILEY et MOSER, 1976.
