Dolichogenidea infirmus Liu & Chen, 2019
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4710.1.1 |
|
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:DC6FD1A7-ADEA-4631-B4FB-FE1E2DC89777 |
|
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5587404 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03AC87CF-E158-FFE9-7FF9-5A1DFE84DF74 |
|
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
|
scientific name |
Dolichogenidea infirmus Liu & Chen |
| status |
sp. nov. |
Dolichogenidea infirmus Liu & Chen , sp. nov.
( Figs 31 View FIGURE 31 , 68 View FIGURE 68. 36–60 )
Description. Holotype. Female. Body length 1.9 mm, fore wing length 2.3 mm.
Head. Transverse in dorsal view, 2.0× as wide as long, weakly narrower than mesoscutum (23.0:25.0) ( Fig. 31h View FIGURE 31 ). Temple shiny with shallow punctuation, slightly constricted behind eyes from dorsal view. Face ( Fig. 31e View FIGURE 31 ) nearly quadrate, shiny, impunctate with fine hairy bumps, inner margins of eyes distinctly converged posteriorly. Posterior tangent to anterior ocellus virtually touching posterior pair of ocelli, distance between fore and a hind ocellus weakly slightly shorter than diameter of an hind ocellus, POL:OD:OOL = 3.5:1.5:3.5. Antenna shorter than body, penultimate antennomere 1.8× longer than wide.
Mesosoma. Length:width:height = 35.0:25.0:25.0. Disc of mesonotum ( Fig. 31c View FIGURE 31 ) shiny, densely punctate anteriorly which becoming sparser and shallower on posterior part. Scutellar sulcus abruptly curved at sides, narrow with carinae inbetween. Scutellum highly shiny and polished with some shallow punctures. Propodeum ( Fig. 31f View FIGURE 31 ) shiny, with less well-defined lozenge-shaped areolation which open at anterior end, costulae well-defined, three posterior fields polished and smooth, highly shiny, anterio-lateral parts almost without punctures. Mesopleuron highly polished and with sparse, small punctures anteriorly.
Legs. Hind femur relatively short (3.0× longer than wide). Spines on outer side of hind tibia relatively dense. Inner spur of hind tibia half of hind basitarsus, outer spur 1/3 length of hind basitarsus. Basitarsus of hind leg shorter than tarsomeres 2–4 (12.0:13.5).
Wings. Pterostigma 2.7× as long as its widest part ( Fig. 31b View FIGURE 31 ). Vein 1-R1 1.3× longer than pterostigma, 6.0× as long as its distance from apex of marginal cell. Vein r arising from middle of pterostigma, perpendicular to pterostigma, but a little inclined outward, nearly as long as width of pterostigma, r indistinctly longer than 2-SR, weakly angled at meeting, 2-M nearly half length of 2-SR and as long as 1-SR and 2-SR+M, m-cu as long as 2-SR. First discal cell of fore wing weakly wider than high (17.0:16.0). Second discal cell of hind wing 1.5× wider than high. Vein cu-a slightly incurved ( Fig. 31d View FIGURE 31 ).
Metasoma. Slightly shorter than mesosoma (32.0:35.0). T1 ( Fig. 31g View FIGURE 31 ) parallel-sided, weakly constricted posteriorly, 1.8× longer than hind width, very narrow (lateral margins almost as wide as its width), basal 2/5 concave and nearly polished, turned-over part quadrate, finely longitudinally strate aside and almost unsculptured in middle. T2 shiny, nearly smooth except weakly strigose laterally, weakly transverse or somewhat subtriangular, 2.6× wider than long in middle, weakly evenly curved apically. T3 1.2× longer than T2. Tergites posterior to T2 highly polished, and shiny. Hypopygium distinctly shorter than apex of metasoma. Ovipositor sheath 0.8× as long as hind femur, thin and parallel-sided, ovipositor much thickened towards base, tapering, curved.
Colour. Dark reddish brown, metasoma brighter ( Fig. 31a, g View FIGURE 31 ). Tegula yellowish brown. Palpi and spurs whitish. Antenna and ovipositor sheath yellowish brown. Labrum and mandible yellowish brown. Legs yellow, coxae light reddish brown and hind femur and tarsus infuscate. Wing membrane hyaline, brownish, vein 1-R1, C+SC+R, pterostigma, and other alar veins yellowish brown.
Variation. Body length 1.8–2.3 mm, fore wing length 2.3–2.5 mm. Some specimens have distinctly yellow T2 or reddish yellow T1–T3, the colour of tergites varied from yellow to reddish yellow to reddish brown; length of ovipositor sheath varied from 0.8× to as long as hind femur.
Host. Unknown.
Material examined ( ZJUH). Holotype: ♀, Mt. Longxi, Jiangle , Fujian, 1991.VII.1, Liu Changming, No. 20006544 . Paratypes: 1♀, Mt. Longxi, Jiangle , Fujian, 1991.VII.1, Liu Changming, No. 20006413 ; 1♀, Mt. Longxi, Jiangle , Fujian, 1991.IX.30, Liu Changming, No. 20007249 ; 2♀♀, Mt. Longxi, Jiangle , Fujian, 1991. VII.2, Liu Changming, No. 20006654, 20006630 ; 1♀, Mt. Longxi, Jiangle , Fujian, 1991.VII.16, Liu Changming, No. 20007051 ; 1♀, Mt. Wuyi , Fujian, 2007.VIII.22–25, Xie Cuihong, No. 200807135 ; 1♀, Mt. Wuyi , Fujian, 2007. VIII.22-25, Zeng Jie, No. 200806258 ; 1♀, Chebaling, Shixing , Guangdong, 2002.VII.27, Xu Zaifu, No. 20051951 ; 1♀, Jinding, Mt. Fanjing , Guizhou, 1993.VII.10, Chen Xuexin, No. 937516 ; 1♀, Mt. Tianmu , Zhejiang, 1984. VI.26, Chen Xuexin, No. 842644 ; 1♀, Mt. Gutian, Kaihua , Zhejiang, 1990.VII–VIII, Ma Yun, No. 905787 ; 1♀, Mt. Tongle, Yunan , Guangdong, 2003.VIII.12–13, Xu Zaifu, No. 20054333 ; 1♀, Dongbaifen, Mt. Huping, Shimen , Hunan, 2009.VII.14, Ma Li, No. 200902035 ; 2♀♀, Fengxi, Meizhou , Guangdong, 2003.VII.29, Chen Jujian, Nos. 20048750, 20048519 ; 1♀, Heishiding, Fengkai , Guangdong, 2003.VIII.15, Chen Jujian, No. 20048941 .
Distribution. Oriental [ China: Fujian, Guangdong, Guizhou, Hunan, Zhejiang].
Etymology. The specific name “ infirmus ” derived from the Latin, referring to tergites weak and indistinct.
Remarks. This species is similar to D. acratos (Nixon) , but differs in the following: anterior part of the mesopleurum sparsely, finely punctate (the latter coarsely rugose); posterolateral areas of propodeum almost polished (the latter with a considerable amount of coarse rugosities); and spiracle on propodeum separated from the junction of costula and lateral propodeal keel by more than twice of its longer diameter (the latter as long as its longer diameter).
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.