Eurytoma rosae Nees, 1834
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5252/z2011n3a3 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E487A7-AF52-2766-0639-FD9F6827F97C |
|
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
|
scientific name |
Eurytoma rosae Nees, 1834 |
| status |
|
Eurytoma rosae Nees, 1834 View in CoL
MATERIAL EXAMINED. — Ex Diplolepis nervosa / D. eglanteriae : Spain. Guadalajara, Hayedo de Tejera Negra, 24.VII.2005, J. L. Nieves leg (n = 3). — Madrid, El Escorial, 13.XI.2002, J. L. Nieves leg (n = 3). Ex D. mayri : Spain. Guadalajara, Retiendas, 24.I.2004, J. L. Nieves leg (n = 22, of which 2 specimens MNHN- EY 6416). — Madrid, Cotos de Monterrey, 24. VI.2003, J. F. Gómez leg (n = 31). — Same locality, 9.VIII.2002, J. L. Nieves leg (n = 3). — Soria, Cabrejas del Pinar, 14-15. II.04, J. F. Gómez leg (n = 5). — Soria, Embalse de la Cuerda del Pozo, 15.II.2004, J. F. Gómez leg (n = 4). Ex D. rosae : Spain. Guadalajara, Retiendas, 24.I.2004, J. L. Nieves leg (n = 1). — Madrid, El Escorial-La Herrería, 4.II.2004, J. F. Gómez leg (n = 2). — Soria, Cabrejas del Pinar, 14-15.II.2004, J. F. Gómez leg (n = 1). — León, San Esteban, 16.VII.2005, J. F. Gómez leg (n = 3).
DESCRIPTION
n = 78; body length 2 mm (range 1.3-3.5); body width 0.81 mm (0.5-1.33) ( Figs 5H View FIG ; 7H View FIG ; 14L View FIG ); body fusiform, elongated, slightly tapering anteriorly and a little more posteriorly; ratio L/W = 2.92; ventral margin of body segments convex; anterodorsal protuberances present from second thoracic segment to the tenth abdominal, protruding beyond the dorsal margin of body segments ( Fig. 7H View FIG ).
Antero-medial setae of the antennal area situated clearly below the antennae; ratio SA/LAA = 0.67; separation of antero-medial setae of vertex equal to the distance between antennae and with these setae situated relatively high on the upper face, closer to the anterior margin of vertex than to the antennae ( Fig. 10A View FIG ); dorsal-labral setae longer than clypeal setae; ventral margin of clypeus with a distinct suture; labrum with a pair of short lateral flaps and a medial part with deep divisions defining five ir- regular but clearly differentiated lobes; maxillary palps inconspicuous ( Fig. 12B View FIG ).
Mandibles with two teeth; apical tooth completely visible ( Fig. 12B View FIG ); ratio L/W 1T = 1.36; outer margin of first tooth strongly convex, with the tip moderately recurved; apex of the second tooth moderately recurved inwards and more or less acute; inner margin of mandible from the base of second tooth more or less straight, with the margin not interrupted ( Fig. 13H View FIG ).
BIOLOGY
The larva of this species preferentially attacks the cells of the inquiline species Periclistus brandtii (Ratzeburg, 1831) and P. caninae (Hartig, 1840) , and our unpublished molecular data confirm that the same species also attacks inquilines in oak cynipid galls. According to Nordlander (1973) and Redfern & Askew (1992) the larva of E. rosae feeds on more than one Periclistus larva by biting its way from one chamber to another, and thus in a strict sense, the larva should be referred as a predator rather than a parasitoid.In Spain, we found larvae of E. rosae to be predominantly associated with D. mayri galls containing cells of P. brandtii and with D. nervosa galls occupied by P. caninae ( Fig. 14K View FIG ). In both cases the mature parasitoid larva fed on the lining of the host larval chamber, as shown by the presence of chips of plant tissue adhering to the larval body of E. rosae and the deformation of the original inquiline larval cell ( Figs 14K View FIG ; 15A View FIG ). Lotfalizadeh et al. (2007b) have recently carried out a review of the species based on adult morphology and molecular data describing a new species, E. caninae Lotfalizadeh, Delvare & Rasplus, 2007 previously overlooked with E. rosae . Both species are reared from galls of Diplolepis in Palaearctic area although in our study E. caninae have not been considered.
REMARKS
The moderately inwards recurved shape of the second mandible tooth readily separates the larva of E. rosae from the larva of E. brunniventris , two species that, according to Claridge & Askew (1960), are otherwise undistinguishable on the basis of adult morphology.
| VI |
Mykotektet, National Veterinary Institute |
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.