Anaphes (Anaphes) csabai Triapitsyn, 2021

Triapitsyn, S. V., 2021, Review of the genus Anaphes Haliday, 1833 (Hymenoptera: Mymaridae) in Russia, part 1: subgenus Anaphes s. str., Far Eastern Entomologist 432, pp. 1-48 : 12-17

Anaphes (Anaphes) csabai Triapitsyn , sp. n.

http://zoobank.org/NomenclaturalActs/ 76D6FB95-F6DC-4AEB-8B4F-B5AA0BC67EE4

Figs 13–26

TYPE MATERIAL. Holotype female [ CAS] on slide ( Fig. 15 ): Russia: Sakhalinskaya oblast’, Kuril Islands , Shiashkotan Island, inland of SW Zakatnaya bukhta [Sunset Bay],

48°46.83’N 154°01.85’E, 29.VII 2000 (D.J. Bennett), SA-00-DJB-033C ( IKIP 2000 ). Paratypes: Russia: Sakhalinskaya oblast’, Kuril Islands : Kharimkotan Island, Northwest corner :

in frontal view, 18) mesosoma, 19) wings, 20) ovipositor, 21) metatibia and metatarsus.

49°08.67’N 154°27.44’E, 28.VII 2000 ( T. R. Anderson): KH-00-ATR-027 ( IKIP 2000 ) [1 ♀,

2 ♂ on points, CAS ], KH-00-ATR-028 ( IKIP 2000 ) [1 ♀, 1 ♂ on points, CAS]; 49°08.93’N

154°28.09’E, 28.VII 2000 (D.J. Bennett), KH-00-DJB-030 ( IKIP 2000 ) [1 ♂ on point,

CAS]; 49°08.75’N 154°27.64’E, 28.VII 2000 (D.J. Bennett), KH-00-DJB-029 ( IKIP 2000 )

[ 36 ♀, 6 ♂ on points, CAS (34 ♀, 5 ♂), UCRC (2 ♀, 1 ♂); 2 ♀ on slides, CAS, UCRC] ;

49°08.60’N 154°28.10’E, 28.VII 2000 (D.J. Bennett), KH-00-DJB-032C (IKIP-00) [2 ♀ on points, CAS]. Onekotan Island , inland and S of bukhta Nemo [Nemo Bay] , 49°36.57’N

154°49.24’E, 27.VII 2000 ( T. R. Anderson), ON-00-ATR-023 ( IKIP 2000 ) [1 gynandromorph on slide, CAS]. Raikoke Island , inland from eastern side , 48°17.90’N 153°15.67’E, 30.VII

2000 ( T. R. Anderson), RK-00-ATR-049 ( IKIP 2000 ) [1 ♀ on point, CAS]. Shiashkotan Island ,

inland of SW Zakatnaya bukhta [Sunset Bay], 48°46.83’N 154°01.85’E, 29.VII 2000 (D.J.

Bennett), SA-00-DJB-033C ( IKIP 2000 ) [1 ♀, 1 ♂ on points, CAS; 1 ♀ on slide, UCRC; 2 ♂

on slides, CAS, UCRC].

DESCRIPTION. FEMALE (holotype). Body black, scape, pedicel and F1 brown and remainder of flagellum dark brown, coxae dark brown and remainder of legs light brown to brown. Head ( Fig. 17 ) with reticulate sculpture, more pronounced on vertex and occiput;

mesosoma with conspicuous reticulate sculpture, stronger on metanotum and propodeum;

coxae and base of first gastral tergum reticulate. Antenna ( Fig. 16 ) with scape (excluding radicle) 3.5× as long as wide, almost smooth (faintly sculptured); pedicel at least a little longer than any funicular, F2 2.7× as long as wide, F3 the longest funicular, F2 without mps and

F3–F6 each with 2 mps; clava large, with 6 short mps, 2.8× as long as wide, a little longer than combined length of F4–F6. Mesosoma ( Fig. 18 ) as long as metasoma ( Fig. 20 ). Fore wing ( Fig. 19 ) 5.1× as long as wide, with disc notably infuscate (brown); longest marginal seta about 0.8× maximum wing width; marginal space separated from medial space by 1 line of setae. Hind wing ( Fig. 19 ) 18× as long as wide, with disc infuscate; longest marginal seta

2.8× maximum wing width, disc with 2 irregular rows of setae apically. Metatarsomere 1

distinctly longer than metatarsomere 2 ( Fig. 21 ). Ovipositor ( Fig. 20 ) occupying 0.85× length of gaster (and thus not extending forward under mesosoma), not exserted beyond apex of gaster posteriorly, and as long as metatibia.

Measurements (µm) of the holotype. Body (of the dry-mounted specimen prior to slidemounting) 820; mesosoma 375; metatibia: 321; metasoma 375; ovipositor 318. Scape (minus radicle) 133; pedicel 73; F1 24; F2 57; F3 67; F4 62; F5 58; F6 55; clava 197. Fore wing

999:197; longest marginal seta 152. Hind wing 923:51; longest marginal seta 145.

Variation (paratypes). Body length (dry-mounted specimens, Fig. 13 ) 0.76–0.89 mm.

Slide-mounted specimen: antenna with scape (excluding radicle) 3.3× as long as wide, F2

3.2× as long as wide, clava 3.0× as long as wide; fore wing 5.4× as long as wide; hind wing

20× as long as wide, longest marginal seta 3.1× maximum wing width; ovipositor occupying about 0.8× length of gaster.

MALE (paratypes). Body length (dry-mounted specimens, Fig. 14 ) 0.63–0.86 mm. Body black, scape and pedicel brown and flagellum dark brown, legs light brown to brown except coxae dark brown. Antenna ( Fig. 22 ) with flagellum 10-segmented, scape 3.0–3.3× as long as wide. Fore wing ( Fig. 23 ) 5.0× as long as wide. Genitalia ( Fig. 24 ) length 212–222 µm.

GYNANDROMORPH (paratype). This specimen has male genitalia ( Fig. 26 ) and both female and male antennae, flagellum of the latter being only 8-segmented, with F1 very short and the apical segment clava-like ( Fig. 25 ).

DIAGNOSIS. This species, which was identified as “ Anaphes n. sp. 1” by J. T. Huber in

2003, is very similar to A. alaskae Annecke & Doutt, 1961: 47–49 , described from one female holotype (Figs 27–30) and 2 male paratypes (one of which is an allotype), all deposited in

EMEC, and collected at Point Barrow , North Slope Borough, Alaska, USA (Annecke &

Doutt, 1961). In A. (Anaphes) csabai , the female antenna ( Fig. 16 ) consistently bears 2 mps

on F3–F6, whereas that of A. (Anaphes) alaskae has 2 mps on F6 and either 1 mps on F4–F5

(Annecke & Doutt, 1961) (that is probably incorrect as F3 of its holotype antenna appears to bear an mps, Fig. 27) or 1 mps on F3–F5 (Figs 32–33) (Huber, 1992). Both species have a similar sculpture on the mesosoma ( Figs 18 , 28, 31). Ultimately, a genetic comparison bet-

ween these two nominal species using molecular methods would be needed to confirm their current separation based on the number of mps on these funiculars, which could potentially be subject of intraspecific variability.

ETYMOLOGY. This species is named after Csaba Thuróczy as an acknowledgment for his contributions to the taxonomy of the European Anaphes and hospitality during my first visit to Kőszeg, Hungary, in September 2002.

HOSTS. Unknown.

COMMENTS. Anaphes alaskae was redescribed by Huber (1992: 44–45), who also identified female specimens from Northwest Territories and Yukon, Canada. Huber &

Thuróczy (2018: 24) and Huber et al. (2020: 65) listed it under the nominotypical subgenus as A. (Anaphes) alaskae ; the former publication provided information on the types and the latter provided information on its taxonomic history and distribution. To facilitate its recognition, illustrated here are the antennae (Figs 32–33) and mesosoma (Fig. 31) of the slide-mounted female specimen of A. (Anaphes) alaskae in CNC, determined as A. alaskae in

1987 by J. T. Huber ( Canada: Northwest Territories, Victoria Island , 71°17’N 114°W, 8–

10.VII 1975 (G. & M. Wood), “pan traps on south facing tundra slope”). Also illustrated here is the holotype of A. alaskae (Figs 27–30).

Figures

Figs 13–15. Anaphes (Anaphes) csabai sp. n. 13) Habitus of female in dorsal view (paratype, Raikoke Island, Kuril Islands, Sakhalinskaya oblast’, Russia), 14) habitus of male in lateral view (paratype, Kharimkotan Island, Kuril Islands, Sakhalinskaya oblast’, Russia), 15) holotype slide.

Figs 16–21. Anaphes (Anaphes) csabai sp. n., female (holotype). 16) Antenna, 17) head

Figs 22–26. Anaphes (Anaphes) csabai sp. n. (paratypes, Kuril Islands, Sakhalinskaya oblast’, Russia: 22–24, Shiashkotan Island; 25, 26, Onekotan Island). 22) Male antenna, 23) male wings, 24) male genitalia, 25) head and antennae of the gynandromorph, 26) genitalia of the gynandromorph.