Metapelmatidae revised status, 1988

Burks, Roger, Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan, Fusu, Lucian, Heraty, John M., Jansta, Petr, Heydon, Steve, Papilloud, Natalie Dale-Skey, Peters, Ralph S., Tselikh, Ekaterina V., Woolley, James B., van Noort, Simon, Baur, Hannes, Cruaud, Astrid, Darling, Christopher, Haas, Michael, Hanson, Paul, Krogmann, Lars & Rasplus, Jean-Yves, 2022, From hell's heart I stab at thee! A determined approach towards a monophyletic Pteromalidae and reclassification of Chalcidoidea (Hymenoptera), Journal of Hymenoptera Research 94, pp. 13-88 : 13

Metapelmatidae revised status

Metapelma Bouček, 1988. Type genus: Metapelma Westwood, 1835.

Diagnosis.

Antenna with 11 flagellomeres, including 3 clavomeres. Eyes ventrally divergent. Clypeus with truncate apical margin. Labrum subquadrate, exposed. Mandibles with a ventral tooth and a dorsal weakly emarginate truncation or with 3 teeth. Subforaminal bridge with postgenal bridge separating secondary posterior tentorial pits from hypostoma; hypostomal carina convergent. Axilla transverse, approximated medially. Mesoscutellum with apex rounded; axillular groove or carina present. Frenum absent. Acropleuron enlarged, convex and pad-like, covering most of mesopleural area but separated from metacoxa by mesepimeron and metapleuron (Fig. 117 ). All legs with 5 tarsomeres; protibial spur stout and curved; basitarsal comb longitudinal; ventral membranous area anterior to mesocoxal attachment absent; mesotibial spur stout; mesotarsus with 1 row of pegs anteroventrally (Fig. 118 ). Metasoma with separate Mt8 and Mt9 in females, without syntergum.

Discussion.

Next-generation molecular data (Cruaud et al., submitted) consistently place Metapelma Westwood far from its former position in what is now Neanastatidae , instead most frequently as the sister group of Macromesidae + Cleonymidae . There is only minor, and not consistently diagnostic, resemblance between these three groups, and therefore Metapelmatidae revised status is restored from synonymy as a separate family. The difference between Metapelmatidae and Neanastatidae is subtle but present, in that Neanastatidae do not have the mesopleural area separated from the metacoxa by the mesepimeron and metapleuron. Eopelma also differs in several respects, including having fewer flagellomeres with an undivided clava, and does not bear any resemblance to Metapelma . Eupelmidae differ in ways explained by Gibson (1989, 1995), but notably by having a membranous area anterior to the mesocoxal attachment ventrally. Male Eupelminae additionally do not have an expanded acropleuron and all the associated modifications of the mesosoma and mid legs.

Figures

Figures 115 - 120. 115, 116 Keirana sp. (Megastigmidae, Keiraninae) 115 wing 116 metasoma lateral view 117, 118 Metapelma sp. (Metapelmatidae) 117 mesosoma lateral view 118 apex of mesotibia and mesotarsus 119, 120 Neanastatus sp. (Neanastatidae) 119 mesosoma lateral view 120 mesosoma ventral view.