Scrapter hergi
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5852/ejt.2020.647 |
|
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:35836E71-F258-41CC-A4F6-37EAE851A016 |
|
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3852061 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03A287AD-FFF4-FF95-FF4C-2284FADFF8D0 |
|
treatment provided by |
Valdenar |
|
scientific name |
Scrapter hergi |
| status |
|
The females of S. glareus , S. hergi Kuhlmann sp. nov., S. minutissimus and S. willemstrydomi Kuhlmann sp. nov. are unknown.
1. Stigma bright yellow ( Kuhlmann 2014: Fig. 11a) …………………… S. luteistigma Kuhlmann, 2014
– Stigmalighttodarkbrown……………………………………………………………………………2
2. Apical tergal margins broadly brownish to yellowish translucent( Figs 3E View Fig , 8E View Fig ; Kuhlmann2014:figs 1b,
28b, 32e); body length 4.9–6.6 mm …………………………………………………………………3 – Apical tergal margins black or very narrowly brownish translucent; body length 4.3–5.6 mm ……7
3. Punctation on basal part of clypeus much finer than apically ( Kuhlmann 2014: fig. 28c–d); foretibia entirely or predominantly yellowish to reddish brown ( Kuhlmann 2014: fig. 28a)……… …………………………………………………………………………… S. sittybon Davies, 2005 View in CoL
– Punctation on clypeus more evenly sized ( Figs 3B View Fig , 8B View Fig ; Kuhlmann 2014: figs 1c–d, 32b); foretibia dominantly dark blackish-brown……………………………………………………………………4
4. Metasomal terga between punctures smooth and shiny ( Fig. 8E View Fig ; Kuhlmann 2014: fig. 1b)………5 – Metasomal terga between punctures at least finely sculptured and slightly matt ( Fig. 3E View Fig ; Kuhlmann 2014: fig. 32e)………………………………………………………………………………………6
5. Clypeus distinctly convex ( Kuhlmann 2014: fig. 1c–d); scutum with dense punctation ( Kuhlmann 2014: fig. 1e–f)……………………………………………………… S. acanthophorus Davies, 2005 View in CoL
– Clypeus almost flat ( Fig. 8B View Fig ); scutum with sparse punctation ( Fig. 8C View Fig )… S. nitens Kuhlmann sp. nov.
6. Clypeus between punctures smooth and shiny ( Kuhlmann 2014: fig. 32b); scutum superficially reticulate but shiny ( Kuhlmann 2014: fig. 32c–d)……………………… S. ulrikae Kuhlmann, 2014
– Clypeus between punctures superficially sculptured and slightly matt ( Fig. 3B View Fig ); scutum reticulate and matt ( Fig. 3C View Fig )…………………………………………… S. fynbosensis Kuhlmann sp. nov.
7. Scutum sparsely and finely punctured, looking almost impunctate and shiny ( Kuhlmann 2014: figs 6e–f, 8e–f)………………………………………………………………………………………8
– Scutum more densely and coarsely punctured…………………………………………………10
8. Supraclypeal area, clypeus ( Kuhlmann 2014: fig. 6c–d) and mesepisternum only partially and superficially reticulate, more shiny…………………………………… S. exiguus Kuhlmann, 2014
– Supraclypeal area apically, clypeus basally ( Kuhlmann 2014: fig. 8c–d) and mesepisternum extensively and strongly reticulate, matt……………………………………………………………9
9. Facial fovea slightly shorter than in S. gessorum ( Kuhlmann 2014: fig. 4a–b); a variable species with respect to surface sculpture and punctation ( Kuhlmann 2014: figs 3c–f, 4a–d)…………………… …………………………………………………………………………… S. albitarsis ( Friese, 1909)
– Facial fovea slightly longer than in S. albitarsis ( Kuhlmann 2014: fig. 8d) ………………………… ……………………………………………………………………… S. gessorum Kuhlmann, 2014
10. Clypeus and supraclypeal area matt, strongly reticulate, very sparsely, finely and shallowly punctate ( Kuhlmann 2014: fig. 10c–d)…………………………………… S. inexpectatus Kuhlmann, 2014
– Clypeus and supraclypeal area more shiny or just slightly matt, only partly or superficially sculptured, punctation usually stronger and denser………………………………………………11
11. Metasomal terga finely and densely punctate, between punctures smooth and shiny ( Fig. 2E View Fig ; Kuhlmann 2014: fig. 18b)………………………………………………………………………12
– Metasomal terga either impunctate or with more dispersed/coarser punctation; if punctation is similar (some specimens of S. punctatus ), then terga at least basally with superficial sculpture and slightly matt ……………………………………………………………………………………………………13
12. Scutum very densely (i = 0,5–1 d) punctate ( Kuhlmann 2014: fig. 18e–f), propodeum basally shallowly but broadly carinate ( Kuhlmann 2014: fig. 18f)…… S. nigerrimus Kuhlmann, 2014
– Scutum coarser (i = 1–2,5 d) punctate ( Fig. 2C View Fig ), propodeum basally only laterally with distinct but fine carination ( Fig. 2D View Fig )………………………………… S. bokkeveldensis Kuhlmann sp. nov.
13. Metasomal terga impunctate; scutum distinctly reticulate and shallowly punctate……………14
– Metasomal terga punctate, sometimes punctures minute…………………………………………15
14. Basal area of propodeum distinctly and largely carinate ( Kuhlmann 2014: fig. 19b)………………… ……………………………………………………………………… S. nigritarsis Kuhlmann, 2014
– Basal area of propodeum along anterior margin indistinctly carinate ( Kuhlmann 2014: fig. 25c–d)… ……………………………………………………………………… S. pygmaeus Kuhlmann, 2014
15. Scutum very coarsely punctate ( Fig. 9C View Fig ; Kuhlmann 2014: figs 23c–d, 30c–d)…………16
– Scutum finer punctate ( Figs 1C View Fig , 6 View Fig C–D, 5C; Kuhlmann 2014: figs 14e–f, 15c–d, 16e–f, 21c–f, 26c– d)…………………………………………………………………………………………………18
16. Propodeum basally broadly and distinctly carinate ( Fig. 9D View Fig ; Kuhlmann 2014: fig. 30c–d)……17
– Propodeum with few, short and indistinct carinae ( Kuhlmann 2014: fig. 23c–d)………………… ………………………………………………………………… S. punctulatus Kuhlmann nom. nov.
17. Basal area of propodeum shorter, medially only slightly longer than metanotum ( Fig. 9D View Fig )……… …………………………………………………………………… S. oubergensis Kuhlmann sp. nov.
– Basal area of propodeum longer, medially about 1.5 times as long as metanotum ( Kuhlmann 2014: fig. 30c–d)……………………………………………………………… S. spinipes Kuhlmann, 2014
18. Punctation of metasomal terga minute, almost invisible ( Kuhlmann 2014: fig. 26e)……………… ……………………………………………………………………… S. roggeveldi Kuhlmann, 2014
– Punctation of metasomal terga much coarser and clearly visible ( Figs 1C View Fig , 6 View Fig C–D, 5C; Kuhlmann 2014: figs 14b, 15e, 16b, 21g–h)…………………………………………………………………19
19. Head distinctly broader than long ( Figs 1C View Fig , 6 View Fig C–D, 5C; Kuhlmann 2014: figs 14c–d, 16c–d)……20 – Head about as long as broad ( Kuhlmann 2014: figs 15b, 21b)……………………………………24
20. Clypeus, supraclypeal area and T1mostly polished and shiny,only partially very finely and superficially sculptured, slightly matt ( Kuhlmann 2014: fig. 14b–d)………… S. minutuloides Kuhlmann, 2014
– Clypeus, supraclypeal area and T1 (particularly anteriorly) mostly finely sculptured and matt ( Figs 1C View Fig , 6 View Fig C–D, 5C; Kuhlmann 2014: fig. 16b–d)…………………………………………………21
21. Scutum densely (i = 0,5–1,5 d) punctate ( Figs 1C View Fig , 5C View Fig )…………………………………………22 – Scutum sparsely (i> 1,5 d) punctate ( Fig. 6 View Fig C–D; Kuhlmann 2014: fig. 16e–f)…………………23
22. Propodeum basally distinctly and broadly carinate ( Fig. 1D View Fig )… S. avontuuensis Kuhlmann sp. nov.
– Propodeum basally only indistinctly and shallowly carinate ( Fig. 5D View Fig )……………………………… ……………………………………………………………………… S.keiskiensis Kuhlmann sp.nov.
23. Propodeum basally distinctly and broadly carinate ( Kuhlmann 2014: fig. 16e–f)………………… …………………………………………………………………………… S. nanus Kuhlmann, 2014
– Propodeum basally finer and just very shallowly carinate, sometimes just laterally visible ( Fig. 6 View Fig E– F)…………………………………………………………… S. mellonholgeri Kuhlmann sp. nov.
24. Metanotum apically more evenly rounded, without distinct carinate depression ( Kuhlmann 2014: fig. 15d); fore tibia anteriorly largely yellowish-brown……… S. minutus Kuhlmann, 2014
– Metanotum apically with a carinate depression ( Kuhlmann 2014: fig. 21d, f); fore tibia anteriorly blackish, only at the base with a small yellowish spot……… S. papkuilsi Kuhlmann, 2014
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.