Anaphes (Anaphes) regulus Walker, 1846

Triapitsyn, S. V., 2021, Review of the genus Anaphes Haliday, 1833 (Hymenoptera: Mymaridae) in Russia, part 1: subgenus Anaphes s. str., Far Eastern Entomologist 432, pp. 1-48 : 38-41

Anaphes (Anaphes) regulus Walker, 1846

Figs 81–89

Anaphes regulus Walker, 1846: 52 .

Anaphes (Anaphes) regulus Walker : Graham, 1982: 208–209 (taxonomic history, synonymy,

designation of lectotype and paralectotype, redescription of the lectotype); Huber & Thuróczy, 2018: 27 (list, type information, synonyms), 45 (key), 94 (illustration); Triapitsyn et al., 2020: 570 (records from Finland, distribution) .

Anaphes regulus Walker : Huber , 1992: 76 (list); Thuróczy & O’Connor, 2015: 56 (records from Ireland, paralectotype images (as corrected by Huber & Thuróczy, 2018: 27) [as

Anagrus regulus Walker ]).

MATERIAL EXAMINED. Russia: Sakhalinskaya oblast’: Kuril Islands: Kharimkotan

Island, Northwest corner, 49°08.75’N 154°27.64’E, 28.VII 2000 (D.J. Bennett) [2 ♀, CAS] .

Matua Island, inland of Dvoynaya bukhta [Double Bay], 48°03.12’N 153°14.60’E, 3.VIII

1999 (B.K. Urbain) [1 ♀, CAS]. Onekotan Island , North rim of Chernoye ozero [Black

Lake], 49°35.50’N 154°50.86’E, 24.VII 1999 (B.K. Urbain) [1 ♀, UCRC]. Sakhalin Island, 6

km E of Sokol, near Belaya River (D.J. Bennett, T. R. Anderson): 16.VII 2001 [2 ♀, CAS] ;

31.VII 2001 [1 ♀, CAS] .

EXTRALIMITAL MATERIAL EXAMINED. Belgium : Liège, Wanze, Antheit, Corphalie, 25.VIII–8.IX 1989 ( R. Detry) [1 ♀, ISNB]. Republic of Korea: Gyeonggi-Do ,

Suwon-si, Seodun-dong, Seoul National University , 17.IX 2002 (J.-W. Kim) [1 ♀, UCRC] .

DIAGNOSIS. FEMALE (specimen from Belgium). Body length (slide-mounted specimen)

0.77 mm. Antenna ( Fig. 81 ) with scape (excluding radicle) 3.6× as long as wide, almost smooth; F2 slightly shorter than pedicel and 3.1× as long as wide, F3–F6 longer than pedicel,

F4 the longest funicular, F2 without mps, F3–F6 each with 2 mps; clava with 6 mps, 3.1× as long as wide, 1.1× as long as combined length of F5 and F6. Fore wing ( Fig. 82 ) 6.2× as long as wide; longest marginal seta 1.0× maximum wing width; marginal space separated from medial space by 1 complete line of setae. Hind wing about 20× as long as wide; longest marginal seta 3.6× maximum wing width, disc with 1 irregular row of setae apically. Metatarsomere 1 slightly shorter than metatarsomere 2 ( Fig. 84 ). Ovipositor ( Fig. 83 ) occupying

0.9× length of gaster (and thus not extending forward under mesosoma), not exserted beyond apex of gaster posteriorly, and 0.95× length of metatibia.

In the specimens from Kuril Islands ( Fig. 86 ) (body length of dry-mounted females

0.56–0.71 mm), antenna ( Fig. 87 ) with scape (excluding radicle) 3.1–3.4× as long as wide,

F2 3.3–3.6× as long as wide, clava 3.2–3.3× as long as wide and 1.2× as long as combined length of F5 and F6; fore wing ( Fig. 88 ) 5.8–6.3× as long as wide, longest marginal seta 1.3–

1.4× maximum wing width; hind wing about 19× as long as wide, longest marginal seta 3.7–

3.8× maximum wing width; ovipositor ( Fig. 85 ) occupying 0.7–0.8× length of gaster and

0.95× length of metatibia ( Fig. 89 ).

MALE. Known (Foerster, 1847 [as Anaphes autumnalis Foerster, 1847 ]) but its true identity is uncertain.

DISTRIBUTION. Russia *; Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Germany,

Iceland, Ireland, Netherlands, Poland, Republic of Korea *, United Kingdom. Some of these records (Noyes, 2019) need to be confirmed.

metatarsus.

HOSTS. Identifications of the parasitoids from the published host records (i.e. from eggs of Ceutorhynchus assimilis (Paykull, 1792) (Curculionidae) and Tipula autumnalis Loew,

1864 ( Diptera : Tipulidae ) (Thuróczy & O’Connor, 2015; Noyes, 2019) (both host names are now outdated), needs to be verified, because specimens of this species are particularly difficult to determine with any confidence, so misidentifications are likely.

COMMENTS. I also examined the following specimens that possibly are A. (Anaphes)

regulus rather than A. (Anaphes) ovipositor , in which F4 of the female antenna has either 1

mps on both antennae or 1 mps on one antenna and 2 mps on the other: Belgium: Liège,

Wanze, Antheit, Corphalie, 3–17.VIII 1990 ( R. Detry) [1 ♀, ISNB]. Russia: Moskovskaya oblast’, Noginskiy rayon, Fryazevo, 7–15.VII 2000 (M.E. Tretiakov) [1 ♀, UCRC] .

antenna (Matua Island), 88) fore wing (Matua Island), 89) metatibia and metatarsus (Matua

Island).

I find A. (Anaphes) regulus to be almost indistinguishable from A. (Anaphes) stygius , so their possible conspecificity will need to be further investigated using a combination of molecular methods and a thorough morphometric analysis. By itself, A. (Anaphes) regulus is not well defined, despite the available redescription of its lectotype by Graham (1982: 208–

209), at least in part because the lectotype female is a dry-mounted specimen (Huber &

Thuróczy, 2018: 94, fig. 85). The dry-mounted paralectotype female of this species was illustrated by Thuróczy & O’Connor (2015: 56, figs 2–4 [as a lectotype of “ Anagrus regulus

Walker”]), from which an antenna and a pair of wings were remounted onto a microscopic slide by C. Thuróczy.

Figures

Figs 81–84. Anaphes (Anaphes) regulus, female (Corphalie, Antheit, Wanze, Liège, Belgium). 81) Antenna, 82) fore wing, 83) ovipositor, 84) metafemur, metatibia and

Figs 85–89. Anaphes (Anaphes) regulus, female (Kuril Islands, Sakhalinskaya oblast’, Russia). 85) Ovipositor (Matua Island), 86) habitus in lateral view (Kharimkotan Island), 87)