Protodryinus eocenicus Olmi & Guglielmino
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5281/zenodo.209799 |
|
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6180390 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/CA5A4823-FFBB-FFB2-FF4C-F99EFEE8FEE4 |
|
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
|
scientific name |
Protodryinus eocenicus Olmi & Guglielmino |
| status |
sp. nov. |
Protodryinus eocenicus Olmi & Guglielmino , sp. nov.
( Figs 2–5 View FIGURES 1, 2. 1 View FIGURE 3 View FIGURE 4 View FIGURE 5 )
Diagnosis. As for genus.
Material examined. HOLOTYPE: female, in Baltic amber. Type horizon: Late Eocene (40–50 mybp), Baltic amber (Succinite). The locality where the piece was originally found is unknown. The type specimen will be deposited in SNMS, though actually it is in JVC (the buying process is being dealt with).
Description. Female. Fully winged ( Figs 2 View FIGURES 1, 2. 1 , 3 View FIGURE 3 D); length 5.0 mm. Colour apparently black, except tarsi brown. Antenna 10-segmented, long and slender, apparently covered with dense short hairs, slightly thickened distally, without tufts of long hairs on segments 5–10; antennal rhinaria apparently present from 5th to 10th segment; in 10th segment two rhinaria are present; one rhinarium per segment is present in segments 5-9; antennal segments in following proportions: 9:6:28:26:24:19:14:13:12:14; antenna shorter than body, more than four times as long as head (approximately 180:39 = 4.62) (length of head dorsally measured from occipital carina behind ocelli to distal apex of mandible). Head laterally and dorsally visible; dorsal surface of head completely reticulate rugose; clypeus apparently with anterior margin rounded, not emarginated; occipital carina incomplete, present behind vertex, laterally do not reaching eyes, not present on temple and ventral side of head; occiput excavated; eye normally bulging, much shorter than head (22:39); ocellar triangle distinctly visible; POL = 4; OL = 3; OOL = 10; OPL = 4; TL = 9; greatest breadth of posterior ocellus about as long as OL; frontal line absent. Maxillary palpus 6-segmented. Labial palpus 3-segmented. Pronotum ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 A) hairless, dull, completely granulated, excavated, crossed by strong transverse impression, without disc; dorsal region of pronotum much shorter than head (7:39); pronotal tubercle reaching tegula. Epicnemium present. Scutum ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 B) shiny, hairless, strongly punctate, unsculptured among punctures, much longer than dorsal pronotal region (25:7). Notauli complete ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 B), posteriorly separated; minimum distance between notauli longer than antennal segment 2 (9:6). Scutellum shorter than scutum (9:25), apparently strongly punctate. Metanotum convex, smooth, apparently unsculptured, shorter than scutellum (5:9). Propodeum ( Figs 3 View FIGURE 3 B, C) completely sculptured by many transverse keels, longer than scutellum (24:9), with dorsal surface much shorter than posterior surface (9:15); posterior surface without longitudinal keels. Mesopleuron and metapleuron reticulate rugose. Meso-metapleural suture complete. Fore wing ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 D) apparently completely darkened, with three basal cells completely enclosed by pigmented veins (costa, median and submedian); pterostigma ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 D) much longer than broad (32:10); marginal cell open; stigmal vein composed of strongly pigmented straight and short proximal part and less pigmented long distal part; stigmal vein ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 D) forming an angle between proximal and distal less sclerotized part; distal less sclerotized part much longer than proximal part (38:9), not reaching margin of fore wing. Hind wing not visible, hidden under fore wing. Mesosoma shorter than metasoma (70:94), longer than head (70:39). Petiole very short, much shorter than metasoma (2:94). Foreleg segments in following proportions: 16 (coxa): 7 (trochanter): 45 (femur): 39 (tibia): 13 (tarsal segment 1): 10 (tarsal segment 2): 7 (tarsal segment 3): 5 (tarsal segment 4): 12 (tarsal segment 5). Enlarged claw slightly shorter than protarsal segment 5 (9:12). Protrochanter ( Fig. 4 View FIGURE 4 A) large, not slender, not curved, longer than broad (7:4), without long proximal stalk and distal broadened apex. Segment 3 of protarsus apparently produced into hook. Rudimentary claw ( Figs 4 View FIGURE 4 B, 5) present. Arolium much shorter than enlarged claw (2:9); inner side of enlarged claw not visible, because of closed chela. Segment 5 of protarsus with inner side not visible, with basal part about as long as distal part. Segment 5 of protarsus less than twice as broad as enlarged claw. Midleg segments in following proportions: 15 (coxa): 5 (trochanter): 38 (femur): 41(tibia): 18 (tarsal segment 1): 7 (tarsal segment 2): 6 (tarsal segment 3): 5 (tarsal segment 4): 8 (tarsal segment 5). Hind leg segments in following proportions: 27 (coxa): 8 (trochanter): 40 (femur): 50 (tibia): 21 (tarsal segment 1): 12 (tarsal segment 2): 9 (tarsal segment 3): 5 (tarsal segment 4): 5 (tarsal segment 5). Tibial spurs 1, 1, 2.
Male. Unknown.
Hosts. Unknown.
Etymology. From Baltic amber.
Remarks. Protodryinus eocenicus sp. nov., at first sight, for the general aspect of the body, the shape of the pronotum (with dorsal surface excavated) ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 A) and propodeum (with dorsal surface much longer than posterior surface) ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 C) and the presence of a rudimentary claw ( Figs 4 View FIGURE 4 B, 5), seems to be a species of Dryininae . However, the following characters contradict the first impression: 1) the shape of the protrochanter (protrochanter large, less than twice as long as broad (7:4) (i.e. plesiomorphic) ( Fig. 4 View FIGURE 4 A), not slender, not curved, without long proximal stalk and distal broadened apex); 2) the shape of the stigmal vein (stigmal vein composed of strongly pigmented straight and short proximal part and less pigmented long distal part) ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 D); 3) the shape of the pterostigma (pterostigma very large and broad, less than four times as long as broad: 32:10) ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 D); 4) the shape of the protarsomere 5 (with basal part about as long as distal part) ( Figs 4 View FIGURE 4 B, 5). The above four characters and mainly the shape of protrochanter are not present in Dryininae . The typical shape of protrochanter in Dryininae (very long and slender protrochanter, with a long stalk and a rounded and broad distal apex) ( Fig. 6 View FIGURE 6 ) is a peculiar synapomorphy common also to Gonatopodinae , Transdryininae and Palaeoanteoninae. This character, together with the extraordinary length of the foreleg, increases the raptorial ability of Dryininae and Gonatopodinae females. In P. eocenicus the foreleg is very long, as in Dryininae and Gonatopodinae , but the trochanter is short and squat. In addition, in Dryininae the pterostigma ( Fig. 6 View FIGURE 6 ) is always more than four times as long as broad, the stigmal vein ( Fig. 6 View FIGURE 6 ) is always composed of a proximal and distal part, both at least partly well pigmented, and the protarsomere 5 has always a basal part much shorter than distal part. The shapes of pterostigma, stigmal vein, protrochanter and segment 5 of protarsus characterize Anteoninae and never can be found in Dryininae and Gonatopodinae . The combination of the above characters cannot be found in any subfamilies of Dryinidae . For the above reasons, Protodryinus gen. nov., belongs to Protodryininae subfam. nov., with characters of transition between Anteoninae and Dryininae .
Protodryininae can be included in the key to Dryinidae subfamilies females presented by Olmi & Guglielmino (2010) as follows:
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.