(Fig. 1)
Description. FEMALE. Body spindle shaped, 200 (180–220, n = 10), 45 (43‒46) thick, 45 (40‒50) wide. Gnathosoma 21 (19‒24) projecting obliquely downwards, chelicerae 21 (18‒22), seta d 8 (8‒9). Prodorsal shield 29 (27‒32), 35 (33‒35) wide, sub-triangular with a short anteromedian lobe 4 (4‒7), over gnathosomal base. Shield pattern composed of short and mainly faint lines which draw arches of inconspicuous cells placed on the median field. Tubercles sc are on rear shield margin 26 (23‒27) apart, sc setae 28 (27‒30). Leg I 37 (33‒39), tibia 8 (7‒9), tarsus 7 (6‒7), ω 8 (7‒9) distally slightly rounded, empodium simple, 5 (5‒6), 4 -rayed; seta bv 12 (10‒13), seta l ʹʹ 23 (20‒27), seta l ʹ 5 (4‒5), seta ft ʹ 15 (13‒17), seta ft ʹʹ 22 (20‒24). Leg II 32 (30‒35), tibia 7 (7‒8), tarsus 6 (6‒7), ω 8 (7‒8) distally just rounded, empodium simple, 5 (5‒6), 5 -rayed; seta bv 10 (10‒12), seta l ʹʹ 8 (6‒9), seta ft ʹ 6 (5‒6), seta ft ʹʹ 17 (17‒21). Coxae with elongated granules; 1 b setae absent, 1 a setae 17 (17‒27), 1 a tubercles 9 (9‒10) apart, 2 a setae 42 (38‒47), 2 a tubercles 23 (17‒25) apart. Prosternal apodeme 9 (8‒9). Opisthosoma dorsally rounded, with 41 (38‒44) broad dorsal semiannuli and 63 (57‒67) narrow ventral semiannuli. Microtubercles are rounded, fine on the dorsal side and large on the ventral side, placed on the rear margin of the annuli. Setae c 2 42 (38‒54) on ventral semiannulus 12 (12‒14), d 63 (58‒73) on ventral semiannulus 26 (23‒29); e 14 (14‒18) on ventral semiannulus 41 (37‒45); f 37 (31‒37) on ventral semiannulus 58 (55‒63). Last 4‒5 annuli with elongated and linear tubercles. Setae h 2 62 (60‒75) very thin at the apex, h 1 4 (3‒4). Genitalia 15 (14‒17), 17 (17‒23) wide, with 6‒7 striae; 3a 16 (15‒21) apart, 18 (14‒19).
MALE. Similar to female, 163 (150‒170, n = 3). Prodorsal shield 25; sc setae 23 (22‒24); opisthosoma with 35‒36 dorsal semiannuli and 51‒59 ventral semiannuli.
Host plant. Lepidium latifolium L. (Brassicaceae), commonly known as Virginia or broadleaved or perennial pepperweed, or tall whitetop.
Relation to the host. In May (spring), leaves of rosettes/bolting plants were distorted along the main vein and were slightly rolled according to their longitudinal axis. In June (late spring-early summer), attacked plants were more stunted and shorter than healthy ones but more leaves were observed (Fig. 2). Flowers appeared to be affected by the presence of mites: pink for non-infested plants and dull white for infested plants.
Type locality. Yesilhisar, Turkey, 38 ° 20 ' 15 N, 35 °02'06 E, about 1100 m elev.; 10 June 2006 (CABI code # TRLL 5), collected by E. Gerber and C. Tronci. Sample # TRLL 5 consists of dried stems and leaves.
Other localities and collections. Tyana (Nigde), Turkey, 38 ° 20 ’ 251 N, 35 °02’ 920 E, 1108 m elev.; 13 June 2006 (CABI code # TRLL 9), collected by E. Gerber and C. Tronci; Kayseri, Turkey, 21 June 2008 (BBCA code #TK‒0 2 ‒08), collected by M. Cristofaro; this mite species was collected again in Yesilhisar, Turkey, on 10 May 2007 (CABI code # TRLL 5) by E. Gerber. Samples # TRLL 9, #TK‒0 2 ‒0 8 and # TRLL 5 consist of dried stems and leaves.
Type material. Holotype: on a microscope slide with four other females (paratypes), 10 June 2006. Paratypes: 28 microscope slides prepared from material collected in the same locality and on the same date as holotype and in the other localities as mentioned above.
Etymology. The specific epithet comes from the combination of the genus (lepidi ‒ from Lepidium) and species name (‒ folii from latifolium) of the host plant.
Remarks. Preliminarily, this species was wrongly named as Aculops sp. (cfr. Hinz et al. 2008).
Differential diagnosis. No eriophyoids were previously known from Lepidium latifolium while Metaculus rapistri Carmona 1969 was collected on Rapistrum rugosum (L.) All. The new species differs from M. rapistri mainly by the prodorsal shield pattern, thinner anterior lobe, higher number of dorsal semiannuli, less number of striae on the female coverflap. However, M. lepidifolii is morphologically close to Metaculus syzygii Keifer 1962 from which it differs mainly by the length of the median line, appearance of the admedian lines, length of the sc setae, and ventral distribution of microtubercles.