Campoplex parassosae, Han & Achterberg & Chen, 2021
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.5066.1.1 |
|
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:6B3D85E9-31FE-4D08-8E15-BA8959DD1988 |
|
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5653933 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/039687B1-472F-6C7C-9DD1-1C0408F27E04 |
|
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
|
scientific name |
Campoplex parassosae |
| status |
sp. nov. |
Campoplex parassosae sp. nov.
Figs. 57–58 View FIGURE 57 View FIGURE 58
Material examined. Holotype: female, Zhejiang, Anji Longwangshan, 11.IV.1999, Wu Hong, No 200011824 ( ZJUH).
Description. Female ( Fig. 57 View FIGURE 57 ) holotype. Body length 5.5 mm, fore wing length 4.0 mm.
Head. Antenna with 29 flagellomeres; first flagellomere 1.1× longer than second flagellomere. Face ( Fig. 58E View FIGURE 58 ) granulose. Clypeus ( Fig. 58E View FIGURE 58 ) sparsely punctate, mat, slightly convex, apical margin truncated, thick medially. Malar space granulose, 0.5× basal width of mandible. Mandible without lamella, upper tooth equal to the length of lower tooth. Frons granulose, median carina absent. Vertex granulose. Interocellar distance ( Fig. 58F View FIGURE 58 ) equal to ocello-ocular distance and 1.9× distance between median and lateral ocelli. Temple granulose, subpolished, not swollen behind eyes. Occipital carina evenly arched, reaching hypostomal carina at mandible base.
Mesosoma. Pronotum granulose with sparse punctures dorsally, mat, trans-striate below. Mesoscutum ( Fig. 58G View FIGURE 58 ) granulose, scutellum and metanotum granulose. Mesopleuron ( Fig. 58B View FIGURE 58 ) granulose with sparse punctures, trans-striate below tegula, speculum smooth and shiny. Metapleuron granulose. Propodeum ( Fig. 58C View FIGURE 58 ) granulose; area basalis triangular, long and narrow; area superomedia granulose, long and narrow; area petiolaris trans-striate; area superomedia area confluent with area petiolaris, not depressed; medio-longitudinal carina and latero-longitudinal carina weak; propodeal spiracle small and round.
Wing. Fore wing ( Fig. 58A View FIGURE 58 ) areolet present and without stalk, emitting 2m-cu vein from its apical part. Marginal cell short, distal part of surrounding vein 2.0× longer than proximal one. Vein 1cu-a opposite M&RS. External angles of second discal cell acute (70°). Hind wing with nervellus inclivous, intercepted at lower 0.2.
Legs. Hind femur 5.0× longer than wide. Inner spur of hind tibia 0.5× as long as first tarsomere of hind tarsus. Tarsal claws pectinate basally.
Metasoma. First metasomal segment ( Fig. 58H View FIGURE 58 ) round in cross-section of basal 0.3, dorso-lateral carina present, with a shallow lateral groove. First tergite 3.1× longer than width of postpetiole. Postpetiole and second tergite granulose, subsequent tergites largely granulose. Second tergite 0.8× as long as first tergite, 1.6× longer than its apical width; thyridium round, its distance from basal margin of tergite 1.5× its diameter. Third tergite equal to its apical width. Sixth and seventh tergites without emarginations medially. Ovipositor sheath approx. 1.7× longer than hind femur, ovipositor ( Fig. 58D View FIGURE 58 ) gradually upcurved.
Colour. Black. Mandible except teeth, palpi, tegula, fore and mid trochanters and trochantellus, and hind trochantellus, whitish yellow; scape and pedicel blackish brown; all coxae blackish brown; fore and mid legs from trochantellus on yellowish brown except telotarsus brown; hind trochanter and femur blackish brown, tibia basally and apically infuscated, tarsus brown except basal tarsomere 0.8 yellowish brown; metasoma entirely black with apical segments slightly blackish brown.
Distribution. China (Zhejiang).
Comparative diagnosis. This species runs in the key by Maheshwary & Gupta (1977) to C. pusillus Gupta & Maheshwary, 1977 (now known as C. assosae Kittel, 2016 ), but differs from the latter by having apical margin of clypeus truncated, areolet present, and hind femur blackish brown.
Etymology. Name derived from “par” (Greek for “near”), and the specific name “assosae”, because this new species is similar to C. assosae .
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.