Allantus caucasicus Mocsáry, 1880,

Taeger, Andreas, 2013, The type specimens of Tenthredo Linnaeus, 1758 (Hymenoptera: Tenthredinidae) deposited in the Hungarian Natural History Museum, Zootaxa 3626 (2), pp. 201-244: 206-207

publication ID

http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3626.2.1

publication LSID

lsid:zoobank.org:pub:48930777-6ACC-4AFD-996D-117F9E8D4CEF

persistent identifier

http://treatment.plazi.org/id/015F3A43-6E0B-3F7B-FF21-5D29FB94529A

treatment provided by

Plazi

scientific name

Allantus caucasicus Mocsáry, 1880
status

 

Allantus caucasicus Mocsáry, 1880 

A valid species, Macrophya caucasica (Mocsáry, 1880)  , comb. nov.

TYPES. Allantus Caucasicus  [sic!] Mocsáry, 1880: 271. Syntype (s) Ƥ, “In Caucaso”. Lectotype Ƥ, hereby designated, deposited in NHMW ( Fig. 5View FIGURES 5 – 6. 5). Type locality: “Kaukas” [= Caucasus].

= Macrophya prasinipes  Konow, 1891: 46–47, syn. nov. Syntypes Ƥ, “Caucasus [...] Araxes-Thal”. Lectotype Ƥ, hereby designated, deposited in SDEI ( Fig. 6View FIGURES 5 – 6. 5). Type locality: “Cauc. Ordubad: Araxes-Thal” [= Aras valley, Ordubad, Azerbaijan].

= Allantus mocsaryi  Enslin, 1910: 347. Replacement name for Allantus caucasicus Mocsáry, 1880  .

= Tenthredo camilla  Enslin, 1912 b: 104. Replacement name for Allantus mocsaryi Enslin, 1910  .

DISCUSSION. Allantus caucasicus  was usually treated as a Tenthredo  ( Elinora  ) species. Taeger et al. (2010) listed it because of its secondary homonymy with Tenthredo caucasica Eversmann, 1847  as senior subjective synonym of Tenthredo (Elinora) ornata (André, 1881)  . Lacourt (1999) used Elinora caucasica  as the valid name for the same taxon. Zhelochovtsev & Zinovjev (1996) recorded it as Sciapteryx  , which is surely incorrect.

The identity of A. caucasicus  is surprising, because the taxon was never previously associated with Macrophya Dahlbom, 1835  . The species, formerly known as Macrophya prasinipes  , is hitherto only recorded from Armenia and Azerbaijan. The lectotypes of A. caucasicus  ( Fig. 5View FIGURES 5 – 6. 5) and M. prasinipes  ( Fig. 6View FIGURES 5 – 6. 5) are surely conspecific. The differences in colour of the mesepisternum fall within the known range of variability of the species. The type series of M. prasinipes  comprises three females. One paralectotype bears the same label data as the lectotype, the other one is labelled only “Araxes-Thal Kauk.”. Both paralectotypes have, unlike the lectotype, a yellow spotted scutellum. This character was not mentioned by Konow in the original description.