Campoplex xuthomelonus, Han & Achterberg & Chen, 2021
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.5066.1.1 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:6B3D85E9-31FE-4D08-8E15-BA8959DD1988 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5815328 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/039687B1-470E-6C5E-9DD1-1D900B8A7B1C |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Campoplex xuthomelonus |
status |
sp. nov. |
Campoplex xuthomelonus sp. nov.
Figs. 83–84 View FIGURE 83 View FIGURE 84
Material examined. Holotype: female, Zhejiang, Tianmushan, 8.X.1982, Ma Yun, No 826113 ( ZJUH) . Paratypes: 1 female, Fujian, Wuyishan , 20.IX.1989, Wang Jiashe, No 964206 ; 1 female, Fujian, Wuyishan , 18.VIII.1984, Zhang Kechi, No 860667 ; 1 female, 1 male, Fujian, Wuyishan , 14.VII.1994, Chen Xuexin, No 943666, 943664 ; 1 male, Fujian, Wuyishan Qiliguadun , 18.IV.2009, Zengjie, No 201605323 ; 1 male, Fujian, Wuyishan Sangangguadun , 18.IV.2009, Wang Manman, No 201605775 ; 1 female, Guangdong, Shixing Chebaling , 25. V.2002, Xu Zaifu, No 201806165 ; 1 male, Guangxi Damingshan , 6.VIII.2011, Yan Chengjin, No 201108006 ; 2 males, Guizhou, Dushan , 6. V.1980, Zhou Shengzhen, No 860552, 860539 ; 1 female, Guizhou, Fanjinshan Jinding , 10.VII.1993, Chen Xuexin, No 937487 ; 2 females, Guizhou, Xishui , 26.IX.2000, Ma Yun, No 200102281, 200102738 ; 1 female, Hubei, Shennongjia Qianjiapin , 21. V.2012, Shi Kai, No 201204451 ; 1 female, Shanxi, Lishan Dahe , 20.VII.2012, Liu Zhen, No 201206019 ; 1 male, Sichuan, Chongqing, 24.VII.1980, He Junhua, No 801974 ; 1 female, Sichuan, Guanxian , 4.VIII.1980, He Junhua, No 802013 ; 1 female, Yunnan, Lijiang Ninglangladuhe , 19.VIII.2003, Li Tingjing, No 20046213 ; 1 female, Zhejiang, Hangzhou , 28. VI.1991, He Junhua, No 911187 ; 1 female, Zhejiang, Hangzhou , 21. V.1983, He Junhua, No 830292 ; 1 female, Zhejiang, Hangzhou , 12. VI.1958, Hu Cui, No 5855.7 ; 14 males, Zhejiang, Qingyuan Baishanzu, 22.IV.1994, Wu Hong, No 947063, 947029, 947070, 947071, 947028, 947072, 947073, 947025, 947073, 947025, 947074, 947076, 947075, 947067, 947069, 980639 ; 1 female, Zhejiang, Songyang , 7.VII.1992, Chen Hanlin, No 924533 ; 1 female, Zhejiang, Songyang , 27. VI.1994, Chen Hanlin, No 954191 ; 1 female, Zhejiang, Tianmushan , 16.X.1982, He Junhua, No 826303 ; 2 males, Zhejiang, Tianmushan , 27. V.1999, Zhao Mingshui, No 995361,995783 ; 1 female, Zhejiang, Tianmushan , 30.VII.1998, Zhao Mingshui, No 999236 ; 1 female, Zhejiang, Tianmushan , 27. VI.1998, Zhao Mingshui, No 999517 ; 1 female, Zhejiang, Tianmushan , 4.IX.1987, Chen Xuexin, No 877098 ; 1 male, Zhejiang, Tianmushan , 13. VI.1998, Chen Xuexin, No 980674 ; 1 female, Zhejiang, Tianmushan , 8.X.1982, Ma Yun, No 826113 ; 1 female, Zhejiang, Tianmushan , 17. VI.1983, Zhou Caie, No 830726 ; 1 female, Zhejiang, Tianmushan , 8.X.1982, Ma Yun, No 826113 ; 1 female, Zhejiang, Tianmushan , 17. VI.1983, Zhou Caie, No 830726 .
Description. Female ( Fig. 83 View FIGURE 83 ) holotype. Body length 6.3 mm, fore wing length 4.0 mm.
Head. Antenna with 34 flagellomeres; first flagellomere 1.35× longer than second flagellomere. Face ( Fig. 84E View FIGURE 84 ) strongly granulose. Clypeus ( Fig. 84E View FIGURE 84 ) mat, slightly convex, apical margin slightly curved. Malar space granulose, 0.6× basal width of mandible. Mandible with lamella. Frons granulose, median carina absent. Vertex granulose. Interocellar distance ( Fig. 84F View FIGURE 84 ) 1.45× ocello-ocular distance and 2.0× distance between median and lateral ocelli. Temple nearly smooth, subpolished. Occipital carina evenly arched, reaching hypostomal carina at mandible base.
Mesosoma. Pronotum granulose dorsally, trans-striate below. Mesoscutum ( Fig. 84G View FIGURE 84 ) granulose. Scutellum granulose with posterior rugose. Metanotum rugose-punctate. Mesopleuron ( Fig. 84B View FIGURE 84 ) granulose-punctate, transstriate below tegula, speculum smooth and shiny. Metapleuron ( Fig. 84B View FIGURE 84 ) granulose with sparse and minute punctures. Propodeum ( Fig. 84C View FIGURE 84 ) with anterior transverse carina close to base; area superomedia granulose; area petiolaris trans-striate; area superomedia confluent with area petiolaris, slightly depressed medially; all carina strong; propodeal spiracle small and oval.
Wing. Fore wing ( Fig. 84A View FIGURE 84 ) areolet present and with a short stalk emitting 2m-cu vein from its apical part. Marginal cell short, distal part of surrounding vein 1.8× longer than proximal one. Vein 1cu-a opposite M&RS. External angles of second discal cell acute (70°). Hind wing with nervellus inclivous, intercepted at lower 0.25 of its length.
Legs. Hind femur 4.5× longer than wide. Inner spur of hind tibia 0.52× as long as first tarsomere of hind tarsus. Tarsal claws pectinate.
Metasoma. First metasomal segment ( Fig. 84H View FIGURE 84 ) round in cross-section of basal 0.3, with weak dorso-lateral carina and a shallow lateral groove. Postpetiole and second tergite granulose. Second tergite 0.73× as long as first tergite, 1.7× longer than its apical width; thyridium oval, small, its distance from basal margin of tergite 3.0× its length. Third tergite 1.1× longer than its apical width. Sixth and seventh tergites without emarginations medially. Ovipositor sheath approx. 2.0× longer than hind femur, ovipositor ( Fig. 84D View FIGURE 84 ) gradually upcurved.
Colour. Black. Mandible except teeth, malar space, palpi and tegula, yellowish brown; all coxae and hind trochanter, black; remainder of leg yellowish brown with base and apex of hind tibia, apical segments of fore and middle tarsus and whole of hind tarsus, infuscated; metasoma entirely black.
Male. Propodeal carina stronger and surface structure of propodeum coarser; otherwise similar to female.
Variation. Propodeal lateral carina weak to strong, second metasomal tergite 1.7–2.0× longer than its apical width.
Distribution. China (Fujian, Guangdong, Guangxi, Guizhou, Hubei, Shanxi, Sichuan, Yunnan, Zhejiang).
Comparative diagnosis. This species runs in the key by Maheshwary & Gupta (1977) to C. anatolus Gupta & Maheshwary, 1977 , but differs from the latter by having the malar space yellowish brown, all propodeal carinae strong, and punctures of mesopleuron dorsally larger and denser than in C. anotolus .
Etymology. Name derived from “xuthos” (Greek for “yellowish brown”) and “melon” (Greek for “cheek”), because its malar space is yellowish brown.
V |
Royal British Columbia Museum - Herbarium |
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.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
SubFamily |
Campopleginae |
Genus |