Eumenes consobrinus de Saussure, 1855
Grandinete, Yuri Campanholo, Noll, Fernando Barbosa & Carpenter, James, 2018, Taxonomic Review of Eumenes Latreille, 1802 (Hymenoptera, Vespidae, Eumeninae) from the New World, Zootaxa 4459 (1), pp. 1-52: 12-15
treatment provided by
|Eumenes consobrinus de Saussure, 1855|
Eumenes consobrinus de Saussure, 1855 , 3: 140.
Type data: Holotype male at MRSN.
Type locality: “Le Brésil ” (see section comments and diagnosis below).
de Saussure, 1875, 254: 100.
Zavattari, 1912, 78A (4): 123.
Giordani Soika, 1978, 29: 18.
MacLachlan, 1980, 53: 617, 619 (key).
Eberhard, 1990, 63: 342–343 (mating behavior).
West-Eberhard et al., 1995: 573.
Eumenes consobrina ; Smith, 1857, 5: 29 (cat.).
Dalla Torre, 1894, 9: 22 (cat.).
Dalla Torre, 1904, 19: 22 (cat.).
Casolari & Casolari Moreno, 1980, (4): 130 (list).
Eumenes iturbide de Saussure, 1857 , (2) 9: 271.
Type data: Holotype female at MHNG (n° 8851) (examined).
Type locality: “Le Mexique, Meztitlan” ( Mexico).
de Saussure, 1875, 254: 98.
Dalla Torre, 1894, 9: 26 (cat.).
Dalla Torre, 1904, 19: 23 (cat.).
Zavattari, 1912, 78A (4): 123.
Eumenes pedalis Fox, 1894 , (2) 4: 109. NEW SYNONYMY
Type data: Lectotype male at ANSP (examined).
Type locality: “ Lower California El Taste ” ( Mexico).
Dalla Torre, 1904, 19: 24 (cat.).
Bequaert, 1938, 33: 68 (notes on types), 70 (list).
Bohart, 1948, (4) 24 (9): 314 (designation of lectotype).
Type data: Lectotype female and paralectotype male, by present designation, at KUNHM (examined).
Type locality: Holotype and paralectotype: “ Thomas’ Ranch, Oak Creek Canon , 6000 ft., 20 miles southwest of Flagstaff , in Coconino Co., Arizona ”.
Isely, 1917, 10: 363.
Bequaert, 1938, 33: 67, 69 (note on types).
Bohart, 1951: 885.
Eumenes crassicornis Isely, 1917 , 10: 348 (key), 362. NEW STATUS.
Type data: Holotype male at USNM (n° 21384).
Type locality: “ Goldstream , British Columbia, Dominion of Canada ”.
Bequaert, 1938, 33: 66, 69 (note on type).
Bequaert, 1944, 71: 77 (key), 79.
Bohart, 1948, (4) 24 (9): 314.
Eumenes pachygaster Isely, 1917 , 10: 348 (key), 362. NEW STATUS.
Type data: Holotype female at USNM (n° 21385).
Type locality: “ Mountain View , Santa Clara Co., Calif.” ( USA).
Bequaert, 1938, 33: 67, 69 (note on type).
Bohart, 1948, (4) 24 (9): 314.
Eumenes iturbide pedalis ; Bohart, 1948, (4) 24 (9): 314.
Bohart, 1951: 885 (cat.).
Krombein, 1979: 1508 (cat.).
Ruiz C. et al., 1993, 88: 87 (list).
Eumenes iturbide iturbide ; Bohart, 1951: 885.
Linsley, 1962, 55: 153.
Krombein, 1967: 376.
Krombein, 1979: 1507 (cat.).
Ruiz C. et al., 1993, 88: 86 (list).
Eumenes consobrinus pedalis ; Giordani Soika, 1978, 29: 24.
Rodríguez-Palafox, 1996: 479 (list).
Eumenes consobrinus consobrinus ; Rodríguez-Palafox, 1996: 479 (list).
Distribution: Canada (BC); Costa Rica; Guatemala; Mexico (Baja California Sur, Guerrero, Hidalgo, Michoacán, Morelos, Nuevo Leon, Oaxaca, Puebla); Panama; U.S.A. (AZ, CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, OR, UT, WA, WY).
Comments and diagnosis: The type specimen of Eumenes consobrinus de Saussure, 1855 , was not examined, but according to our study we confirm the type specimens of E. iturbide de Saussure, 1857 , and E. globulosiformis Viereck, 1908 , as synonyms of that species. The redescription here was based on an E. iturbide female. According to Giordani Soika (1978: 23), the type locality of E. consobrinus is unknown, although it was described from Brazil (“Le Brésil ”), but Giordani Soika noted that the locality is certainly wrong.
Eumenes consobrinus and E. bollii are the only species that do not have a pronotal carina on the dorsal face of the pronotum. However, the former species can be easily distinguished by the following features: integument predominantly black, with yellow marks mainly on clypeus, inter-antennal region, dorsal face of pronotum, mesepisternum, metanotum, and apex of T1–T6; long pubescence along body, mainly on scape, frons, occipital region, mesosoma, and T1; coarse and moderately dense punctation on frons, vertex, dorsal surface of mesosoma, mesepisternum, and posterior face of propodeum; dorsal face of T1 and T2 with punctation coarse but slightly sparser; T1 not swollen in dorsal view; and angle of the base of T2, in lateral view, rising up abruptly, with a sinuosity on the distal third of it.
We examined all the type specimens of synonyms of E. consobrinus consobrinus (not the primary type of E. consobrinus ) and E. consobrinus pedalis , and a total of 53 non-type specimens (27 females and 26 males, and all male genitalia were extracted and examined) identified as E. consobrinus and we conclude they are one species, although we found a range of intraspecific variation within the species. This leads us to propose E. pedalis Fox, 1894 , E. crassicornis Isely, 1917 , and E. pachygaster Isely, 1917 , as synonyms of E. consobrinus . This variation is described below, along with the main reasons for these synonymies.
Female. Color, head: Black with yellow marks as follows: two small spots on basal portion of clypeus; a triangular sport right above the inter-antennal region; a small spot on upper half of the gena, adjacent to the compound eye. Brownish marks on apex and tooth of the mandibles and on apex of the labrum. Mesosoma: Black, with yellow marks as follows: small spot on humeral region; a stripe on center region of the dorsal face of the pronotum; entirely tegula; a broad transverse stripe on middle region of metanotum; small marks on distal region of femura; mostly tibiae and tarsi. Metasoma: Black with yellow marks as follows: transverse stripe on apex of T1- T4; spot on apex of T5 and T6; transverse stripe on apex of S2–S6. Wings: Hyaline, with costal, medial, submedial cells slightly yellowish; pterostigma darkened; veins brownish.
Pubescence: Body covered with long and golden pubescence. Head: long pubescence on the basal half and sides of clypeus, becoming shorter on center and apex. Scape, frons, vertex, occipital region and gena with long pubescence. Gena with shorter pubescence. Surface of F1 and F2 (mostly external surface) with scattered and microscopic erect bristles. Mesosoma: Anterior face of coxae (mainly the fore coxa) and all mesosoma with long pubescence, slightly shorter than that on frons and occipital region. Anterior surface of mid and hind coxae with long pubescence but shorter than on fore coxae. Trochanter and basal half of fore femur with scattered erect bristles. Metasoma: T1 with long pubescence (as in mesosoma) on basal half that becomes shorter towards the apex; T2 with short pubescence (as on distal half of T1), although the first third of the sclerite the pubescence is slightly longer; T3–T6 and S2–S6 with short pubescence (as or slightly shorter than on distal half of T2), except for some long bristles on apex.
Surface of integument, head: Clypeus with coarse and homogeneously distributed punctation; frons, vertex and gena with coarse punctation, on the first two regions moderately dense and on the latter sparser. Mesosoma: Covered by coarse and moderately dense punctation (as on frons), although on posterior face of propodeum it is denser, forming small carinae between each puncture. On anterior portion of the lateral face of the propodeum the punctation is reduced, almost absent. Metasoma: T1 with coarse punctation but sparser (as on clypeus); T2 with coarse and moderately dense punctation on basal half that becomes denser towards the pre-apical region, while on the apex (before the lamella) it becomes weaker and sparser. Laterally the punctation becomes weak and sparser. S2 with some coarse punctures on basal half becoming weaker and sparser towards apex. T3–T6 and S3–S6 with reduced punctation or at least some coarse punctures on T3 and S3.
Structure, head: Apex of the labrum rounded; clypeus as long as wide with the apex concave and forming two projections with carinae on the apex of each one. Inter-antennal region wider than the antennal socket, pointed centrally, with a weak longitudinal carina from the tubercle to the basal suture of the clypeus, but not touching it. Lateral ocelli closer to each other than to the compound eyes; occipital carina complete, angled on middle region of the gena and very close to the compound eyes next to the mandibles. Mesosoma: Dorsal face of pronotum without pronotal carina, although it is present on the lateral face; pronotal fovea present; posterior projection of the tegula weakly developed, rounded; parategula flattened laterally, lamelliform; posterior face of the propodeum strongly concave on basal half. A carina on the basal half of the lateral side of the fore coxa. Metasoma: T1 at least three times longer than wide, not swollen in dorsal view ( Fig. 30 View Figure ), slender, with the lateral margins of the distal half weakly concave and the lateral margins of the apex divergent. T2 as long as wide in dorsal view ( Fig. 46 View Figure ), with an apical lamella well developed which runs until the lateral sides of the sclerite. In lateral view, the basal angle of T2 rises up abruptly ( Fig. 59 View Figure ), turning into a strong concavity on the middle portion of it and then lowering again forming a clear sinuosity on the pre-apical region of the T2.
Male: Clypeus narrower than females; F11 long, without longitudinal carina on dorsal surface, with the apex pointed surpassing the apical edge of F8 ( Fig. 80 View Figure ). Ventral surface with microscopic bristles. S7 apically flat with moderately long bristles at the edge. Color, pubescence, punctation and structure (except for those cited above) same as in females, including the variation.
Male genitalia: Aedeagus as in figure 96a, b. Two varying features found in the aedeagus were: the concavity of the posterior margin of the ventral lobe more or less strong, the same occurring in the middle region in dorsal view. Paramere (fig. 96c) with long bristles in the middle region of gonostyle; digitus long, becoming slender towards the apex, with moderately long bristles at the base and slightly shorter towards apex (fig. 113); long bristles on ventral edge of volsella and scattered short bristles; distal lobe truncate, without evident bristles; cuspis with scattered erect bristles.
Variation: Yellow marks as follows: apical third of the clypeus entirely yellow; small spot on inter-antennal region; a stripe along all the anterior region of the pronotum; a big spot on the upper half of the mesepisternum, right next to the mesepimeron; small and narrow band on each side of mesoscutum, adjacent to the edge of it, right in front of tegula; spots on each side of scutellum; spots on each side of the upper region of the posterior face of propodeum, which vary in size, sometimes occupying most of the region; spots on each side of T1, varying in size; marks laterally on T2, which may be a spot or a band that goes towards the dorsal surface, being almost contiguous. Some specimens have the apical third of T2 with whitish pubescence, better observed in oblique view. We also observed a range of variation in the punctation: some specimens have the punctation of T1 sparser, as on T2, which also may have weak punctures even sparser, mainly towards the lateral face. In some specimens, the integument on T1 and T2 is more polished and shiny or with violaceous reflections mainly on lateral surface. In terms of structure, some specimens have T1 more swollen in dorsal view and slightly shorter, with the lateral margins, in dorsal view, varying to more or less concave, sometimes almost subparallel; T 2 in dorsal view sometimes broader; basal angle of T2, in lateral view, rising up strongly, almost perpendicular, to less strong, but still obtuse. The sinuosity on the distal third of T 2 may be also very strong or less sinuous. The apical projections of the clypeus from the males may have strong or weaker carinae. The lectotype of E. pedalis Fox, 1894 has the pubescence of T1 and T2 (in lateral view) slightly shorter than in the nominotypical taxon, and are the only specimens collected in Lower California ( Mexico). As we did not have access to the male genitalia and any other specimens (Fox, 1894, saw seven specimens), this may be additional variation within the species. We also examined a few specimens from California that showed the same pattern as E. crucifera and E. verticalis , with the punctation of T2 and sparse and yellow marks more developed, especially on the metasoma.
All the variation cited above was found within females and/or males, across the range of distribution of the species, from Panama to southwestern Canada. We observed what might be a consistent pattern in some populations: most specimens analyzed from California, Wyoming, Washington (one being the type specimen female of E. pachygaster , from California) and Canada (the type specimen male of E. crassicornis ) have T2 generally broader in dorsal view with the punctation sparser, slightly weaker, and T1 more swollen in dorsal view. The specimens from California mainly presented the yellow marks more developed along the body. The specimens from Mexico and the central-southwest region of USA generally present less yellow marks along the body, coarse and dense punctation, and T1 less swollen in dorsal view, but there was one female from Oregon which also presented this variation. Various specimens across the distribution present combinations of the variation cited above. We extracted the genitalia from all male specimens that we studied and compared these males with all the features that we found in females (including the geographical region) and we did not find any significant differences, at most there were some small differences in the aedeagus. Considering this fact, there is no set of features in females or males that could allow us to separate different populations and consequently different species from E. consobrinus . Thus, we conclude that is taxonomically more prudent to treat E. consobrinus as a single species with intraspecific variation.
Type material. The holotype female of Eumenes iturbide is in good condition and bears the labels: ‘Meztill \ t. t.’ ‘[Red Label] ♀ Holo- \ TYPE \ E. iturbide \ Sauss.’ ‘ MHNGAbout MHNG \ ENTO \ 00008851’. The lectotype female of Eumenes globulosiformis Viereck, 1908 is in good condition and bears the labels: ‘Oak Creek Canon \ Ariz. 6000 ft. Aug \ F. H. Snow’ ‘1716’ ‘[Red Label] Eumenes ( Alpha ) \ globulosiformis \ Type Vier’. The paralectotype male of Eumenes globulosiformis Viereck, 1908 is in good condition and bears the labels: ‘S. Arizona. \ F. H. Snow. \ Aug. 1902.’ ‘228’ ‘[Red Label] Eumenes ( Alpha ) \ globulosiformis \ Type Vier’.
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.