Sphaeropthalma nana (Ashmead, 1896)

Boehme, Nicole F., Tanner, David A., Williams, Kevin A. & Pitts, James P., 2012, Faunal study of velvet ants (Hymenoptera: Mutillidae) and their activity patterns and habitat preference at Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge, Nye County, Nevada, USA, Zootaxa 3587, pp. 1-45 : 34

publication ID	https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.3587.1.1
publication LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:pub:91FCB387-5D4F-4F12-ABDC-B06D7F60A271
DOI	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5627562
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/038187E5-1629-FF88-FF09-EDF4FDA1FA4B
treatment provided by	Plazi
scientific name	Sphaeropthalma nana (Ashmead, 1896)
status

Treatment

Sphaeropthalma nana (Ashmead, 1896) , stat. resurr.

( Fig. 9 View FIGURES 2 – 11 )

Photopsis nanus Ashmead, 1896 : 181,

3. Lectotype (designated here): Arizona, Tucson ( NMNH); Pitts et al. 2004: 224, 3 (as type species of Micromutilla Ashmead).

Mutilla acontius Fox, 1899: 266 ,

3. Lectotype (designated here): New Mexico, Las Cruces ( ANSP), syn. nov. .

Mutilla Ashmeadii Fox, 1899: 289 . Replacement name for Photopsis nanus Ashmead, 1896, nec Mutilla nana Smith 1879 .

Micromutilla ashmeadii (Fox) : Krombein 1951: 752, 3.

Sphaeropthalma (Micromutilla) nana (Ashmead) : Schuster 1958: 16, 3.

Sphaeropthalma (Micromutilla) acontius (Fox) : Schuster 1958: 16, 3.

Sphaeropthalma (Micromutilla) acontia (Fox) : Krombein 1979: 1288, 3.

Photopsis nana Ashmead : Lelej & Brothers 2008: 35,

3 (as type species of Micromutilla Ashmead).

Diagnosis. MALE.This species can be recognized by its small size, the moderately emarginate mandibles (see Pitts 2007: Fig. 27), the small marginal cell, which is shorter than the stigma measured along the costal margin, the lack of mesosternal processes, the genitalia with an extremely short cuspis that barely surpasses the penial valve in lateral view, and the lack of plumose setae even along the margins of the metasomal tergites. Genitalia are illustrated in Fig. 9 View FIGURES 2 – 11 . FEMALE. Unknown.

Material examined. Type material. Lectotypes: Ph. nanus: Arizona, Tucson, type no. 3279 ( NMNH) ; M. acontius : New Mexico, Las Cruces, type no. 3279 ( ANSP) . Other material. Nevada, Nye Co., AMNWR: Nondune site 2: 1 ♂, LT, 26–28.V.2009, NFB ; Non-dune site 3: 2 ♂, LT, 4–6.VIII.2009, NFB ; Non-dune site 4: 1 ♂, LT, 21–23.VII.2009 , 1 ♂, LT, 17–19.VIII.2009, NFB ; Sand dune site 1: 1 ♂, LT, 21–23.VII.2009 , 1 ♂, LT, 18–23.IX.2009, NFB.

Distribution. USA (Arizona, California, Nevada and New Mexico).

Activity. Males were active from mid-summer through late-summer (late July through September).

Remarks. Sphaeropthalma nana was too rarely encountered to determine their habitat preference. Seven S. nana males were collected from late May through September at light traps. Twenty S. nana males were found at the NTS from July through August via light trapping ( Ferguson 1967).

For this study we have designated lectotypes from the available syntypes. We selected the lectotype of Photopsis nanus from the only specimen available. The label data are as follows [Tucson Ariz] [collection Ashmead] [Type No. 3279 U.S. N.M.]. The metasoma is broken off, but glued to point and genitalia extruded. The lectotype of Mutilla acontius was selected based on the quality of the specimen. The label data are as follows [Ckll. 2297 Las Cruces] [Type no. 4644] [ acontius ]. The genitalia are extruded and clearly visible.

According to article 59.3 of ICZN (1999), Photopsis nana Ashmead, 1896 (misspelled as nanus) is valid name, because the replacement name, Mutilla ashmeadii Fox, 1899 , has been used before 1961 only by Krombein in the catalogue ( Krombein, 1951). Furthermore Ph. nana is the type species of Micromutilla Ashmead, 1899. Lastly, using the other available name, Mutilla ashmeadii Fox, 1899 , could be confused with Morsyma ashmeadii Fox, 1899 , the type species of related genus Morsyma Fox, 1899. For stability and to lessen potential confusion, Photopsis nana is reinstated here.