Macreupelmus aurantispina, Gibson, Gary A. P., 2016

Gibson, Gary A. P., 2016, Revision of the Neotropical genus Macreupelmus Ashmead (Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea: Eupelmidae), Zootaxa 4161 (1), pp. 81-115: 90-92

publication ID

http://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4161.1.3

publication LSID

lsid:zoobank.org:pub:5BBA7F64-D281-4CB0-B78C-CD1276452290

persistent identifier

http://treatment.plazi.org/id/C96087FF-A663-5B56-5BE4-FD4E9054F0E6

treatment provided by

Plazi

scientific name

Macreupelmus aurantispina
status

n. sp.

Macreupelmus aurantispina  n. sp.

Figs 8View FIGURES 1 – 10. 1 – 5, 24–33View FIGURES 24 – 33

Type material. Holotype ♀ (USNM). BOLIVIA: Santa Cruz Dept. | Florida Prov., Refugio Los Vol- | canes, 4 km N of Bermejo | 18º06'S, 63º36'W, 1045- | 1350m, 10 December 2011 | Norman E. Woodley / HOLOTYPE ♀ | Macreupelmus  | aurantispina  | GibsonGoogleMaps  . Holotype minutien-mounted through right acropleuron; entire, but right fore wing torn, small apical portion of left wing missing, and Gt6 partly detached from syntergum; uncontorted.

Paratypes. BRAZIL. ES [Espirito Santo], Pancas , Faz. Juliberto Stur—Area 1, 19º13'10.5"S 40º46'23.8"W, 31.I –7.II.2003, Malaise T 1, Taveres, Azevedo & eq. col., UFES nº 99414GoogleMaps  , CNC Photo 2016-14 (1 UFES). Rio de Janeiro, Mus. [undecipherable handwriting]  , CNC Photo 2016-13 (1 ZMUC). PERU. Monson Valley, Tingo Maria , 23.IX.1954, E.I. Schlinger & E.S. Ross (1 CASC)  .

Etymology. From the Latin words aurantium (orange) and spina (thorn) in reference to the orangish mesotibial spur of females.

Description. FEMALE (habitus: Fig. 24View FIGURES 24 – 33). Head ( Fig. 8View FIGURES 1 – 10. 1 – 5) with lower face and interantennal prominence green with coppery to reddish-violaceous lusters, at least on interantennal prominence ventrally between toruli and on lower face between torulus and malar sulcus, and sometimes more extensively; gena green but with distinct though variably large coppery to reddish-violaceous region posterior to malar sulcus ventrally, the region not extending to outer orbit ( Fig. 29View FIGURES 24 – 33); parascrobal region variably green to reddish-violaceous, with inner margin and lateral surface of depression sometimes purple ventrally; scrobal depression mostly green to partly violaceous-purple dorsally or extensively dark with similar metallic lusters as frons; frons dark with coppery luster at least mesally below anterior ocellus and often mostly dark with coppery or purple to reddish-violaceous lusters to level slightly behind posterior ocelli, but at least inconspicuously greenish along inner orbit ( Fig. 25View FIGURES 24 – 33); vertex and occiput mostly green to bluish-green with some coppery luster; vertex with dark setae mesally between inner orbits. Head with interorbital distance about 0.2–0.28× head width; OOL: POL: LOL: MPOD = 0.2–0.45: 0.7–1.1: 1.2–1.3: 1.0; distance between anterior ocellus and inner orbit about 0.8–1.3× MAOD; frons with anterior ocellus about 1.0–1.5× MAOD from dorsal limit of scrobal depression and with sulcus extending from anterior ocellus to within depression dorsally; frons distinctly roughened, punctulate-reticulate to reticulate-rugulose between posterior ocelli and scrobal depression compared to more uniformly meshlike reticulate vertex. Antenna ( Fig. 29View FIGURES 24 – 33) dark brown or pedicel and basal flagellomeres somewhat lighter orangish-brown, but extreme apex of scape and apical two clavomeres with micropilose sensory regions paler; scape robust-compressed, about 3.2–4.0× as long as medial width, and in lateral view apex of pedicel extending to or slightly beyond ventral margin when at right angle to scape ( Fig. 29View FIGURES 24 – 33).

Mesoscutum not or variably distinctly carinate mediolongitudinally from posterior of anteromedial lobe through about anterior half of posteromedial depressed region; scutellar-axillar complex with axillae and scutellum similarly coarsely meshlike reticulate but reticulations on scutellum aligned more longitudinally. Front leg orangish-brown to dark brown with tarsus or at least basitarsus apically often somewhat more distinctly orangish and knee sometimes very narrowly orangish. Middle leg ( Fig. 28View FIGURES 24 – 33) with trochantellus at least ventroapically and sometimes dorsally variably paler than femur, and femur apically pale, but tibia and tarsus variably extensively orangish-brown ( Fig. 33View FIGURES 24 – 33) to dark brown except for orangish tibial spur ( Fig. 32View FIGURES 24 – 33); posterior surface uniformly setose with comparatively long white setae over about apical half ( Fig. 28View FIGURES 24 – 33); tibia with 5–7 pegs in straight or only slightly offset row ( Fig. 32View FIGURES 24 – 33). Hind leg dark except apex of coxa and trochanter and trochantellus at least mostly white (trochanter and trochantellus sometimes darker ventrally); femur ( Fig. 27View FIGURES 24 – 33) dorsoapically with elongate, yellowish to orangish region not extending to apicolateral margin though sometimes virtually to dorsoapical margin, with the region at least obviously longer than wide and sometimes extending over about dorsoapical two-thirds, and tibia with similarly pale region basally. Fore wing ( Fig. 31View FIGURES 24 – 33) with dark setae continuously through hyaline basal cell and infuscate part of disc basal to anterior hyaline region, without any white setae on mediocubital fold distal to basal cell or on hyaline region along posterior margin of wing opposite anterior hyaline region; anterior hyaline region behind marginal vein tapered posterobasally and distant from mediocubital fold; costal cell dorsally entirely setose along length, with several rows basally becoming less apically ( Fig. 30View FIGURES 24 – 33). Propodeum ( Fig. 26View FIGURES 24 – 33) with plical region medially very short, with foramen broadly ∩-like incurved almost to V-like incised anterior margin, the transversetriangular panels otherwise mostly obliquely strigose.

Gaster ( Fig. 24View FIGURES 24 – 33) mostly brown dorsally, but under some angles of light with purple to reddish-violaceous lusters basally on Gt1 and laterally on Gt1–Gt5, with Gt6 and syntergum sometimes darker brown and Gt6 sometimes with slight greenish luster; Gt6 shallowly meshlike reticulate to imbricate. Ovipositor sheaths obviously longer than metatibia ( Fig. 24View FIGURES 24 – 33), about 1.2–1.33× metatibia length.

Distribution (Map 1A). Bolivia, Brazil, Peru.

Remarks. Females differ somewhat in leg color pattern, with the Brazilian paratypes having the mesotibia at least apically and the mesotarsus orangish in addition to a more or less distinctly orangish mesotibial spur ( Fig. 33View FIGURES 24 – 33). All females have the same fore wing color pattern and are very similar in structure except the Brazilian females also have a narrower interorbital distance, which is correlated with shorter POL and OOL distances relative to the MPOD and a shorter distance between the anterior ocellus and inner orbit compared to the MAOD. However, like other females, the mesotibial pegs are essentially in a single row ( Fig. 32View FIGURES 24 – 33) rather than an obvious patch, Gt6 is reticulate rather than granular, and the ovipositor sheaths are obviously longer than the metatibia ( Fig. 24View FIGURES 24 – 33).

Females of M. aurantispina  , M. crassicornis  and M. nigrispina  comprise a species trio differentiated from other Macreupelmus  by the presence of a very short propodeal plical region ( Figs 26View FIGURES 24 – 33, 58View FIGURES 52 – 62, 114View FIGURES 106 – 115) in combination with a fore wing that has dark setae continuously through the basal cell onto the basally infuscate part of the disc ( Figs 31View FIGURES 24 – 33, 54View FIGURES 52 – 62, 107View FIGURES 106 – 115). Females of all three species differ in mesofemoral color pattern. Those of M. crassicornis  have a short white region apically on the mesofemur that extends to both the dorsoapical and apicolateral margins ( Fig. 59View FIGURES 52 – 62). Females of M. nigrispina  have a similarly short white region, but it is obviously preapical, not extending to either the dorsoapical or apicolateral margins ( Fig. 109View FIGURES 106 – 115). Females of M. aurantispina  have a longer and more orangish to yellowish region that is preapical, although dorsally it sometimes extends virtually to the apical margin ( Fig. 27View FIGURES 24 – 33). Females of M. aurantispina  and M. nigrispina  are additionally similar in fore wing setal color pattern and mesofemoral setal pattern as stated in the key, and have somewhat longer ovipositor sheaths than M. crassicornis  females. In contrast, females of M. aurantispina  and M. crassicornis  have more similar propodeal structures, but differ additionally in the costal cell being entirely setose dorsally in M. aurantispina  and bare in M. crassicornis  . Setation of the costal cell is variable for M. nigrispina  , most often being setose basally and apically but broadly bare mesally, but sometimes entirely bare or with a single line of setae mesally.

UFES

Universidade Federal do Espirito Santo

CNC

Canadian National Collection of Insects, Arachnids, and Nematodes