Traumatomutilla borba ( Cresson, 1902 )

Bartholomay, Pedro R., Williams, Kevin A., Cambra, Roberto A. & Oliveira, Marcio L., 2022, Revision of the Traumatomutilla indica species-group (Hymenoptera: Mutillidae), Zootaxa 5108 (1), pp. 1-97 : 16-18

Traumatomutilla borba ( Cresson, 1902)

( Figs 3A–C )

Mutilla borba Cresson, 1902: 53 , lectotype [designated by Cresson (1916)], ♀, Brazil, [Mato Grosso], Chapada [dos Guimarães] (CMNH), examined.

Ephuta (Traumatomutilla) borba: André, 1902: 54 .

Traumatomutilla borba: André, 1904: 40 .

Diagnosis. FEMALE. Mesonotum narrower than distance between pronotal spiracles, lateral face of propodeum not evenly sculptured, scutellar scale well-defined and extending to propodeal spiracles, T2 conspicuously longer than broad and wider posteriorly than anteriorly. MALE. Unknown.

Description. FEMALE. Body length 10–15 mm. Head. Posterior margin virtually straight. Occipital carina evenly arched and equally wide throughout. Vertex width 0.8 × pronotal width. Eye almost circular, its length in frontal view virtually equal to distance from its ventral margin to mandibular condyle. Sculpture partially concealed by dense setae, densely and coarsely foveolate-punctate where visible; sculpture sparser on gena and malar space; with well-defined medial longitudinal carina extending from vertex to front. Genal carina present. Mandible oblique, tapering slightly towards apex, with small subapical tooth. Dorsal scrobal carina well-defined, separated from antennal tubercles and lateral scrobal carina.Antennal tubercle irregularly rugose. Flagellomere 1 2.1 × pedicel length; flagellomere 2 1.35 × pedicel length. Mesosoma . Dorsal thoracic length slightly shorter than mesosomal width. Mesosomal dorsum sculpture partially concealed by dense setation, densely and coarsely areolate-punctate where visible with somewhat rounded intervals; medial longitudinal carina present on mesonotum and dorsal face of propodeum, interrupted near scutellar area.Anterior face of pronotum defined, virtually as long as pronotal collar; with indistinct and coarse longitudinal striations at base and dense coarse and confused punctures dorsad; dorsal face rounded into anterior face in lateral view. Humeral carina well-defined, broadly separated from slightly projected and sharp epaulet, anterolateral corners of pronotum subangulate in dorsal view. Pronotal spiracle slightly projected from lateral margin of pronotum, rounded. Lateral face of pronotum densely punctate with dense interspersed micropunctures; with indistinct swelling anteroventral in relation to pronotal spiracle; mesopleuron sculpture mostly concealed by dense setation, micropunctate anteriorly and densely coarsely foveolate-punctate along mesopleural ridge where visible; metapleuron sculpture concealed by dense setation on ventral half, completely asetose, smooth on dorsal half. Lateral face of propodeum sparsely and coarsely foveolate-punctate with smooth shinning intervals never wider than surrounding sculpture. Ratios of width of humeral angles, pronotal spiracles, widest point of mesonotum, narrowest point of mesonotum and propodeum posterior to propodeal spiracles, 60:69:69:52:53. Lateral margin of mesonotum constricted anterior to propodeal spiracle, diverging anterad, mesonotum with expanded lateral margins. Propodeal spiracle projected from lateral margin of mesosoma; post-spiracular area absent. Scutellar scale present, transverse, arched, reaching propodeal spiracles; scabrous intervals absent on scutellar area. Propodeum convex, dorsal face virtually as long as and rounded into posterior face. Metasoma. Ratios of width of T1, width of T2 and length of T2, 40:87:95. Disc of T2 densely and coarsely foveolate-punctate to punctate with dense interspersed micropunctures; foveolations slightly sparser and micropunctures absent laterally and over integumental spots. T3–5 sculpture predominantly concealed by dense setation, densely and coarsely foveolate-punctate to simply punctate with interspersed micropunctures where visible; T6, except pygidial plate, densely and coarsely punctate. S1 surface cuneiform, densely, coarsely and confusedly foveolate-punctate around sub-sharp longitudinal medial carina equally high throughout. S2 densely foveolate-punctate, more sparsely so posteromediad; anteromedial crest-fold indistinct. S3–4 sculpture mostly concealed by dense setation, densely and finely foveolate-punctate with interspersed micropunctures where visible; S5–6 densely foveolate-punctate. Pygidial plate subpyriform, defined by lateral carinae at apical fourth of plate; surface with transverse coarse and irregular rugosities; interstice granulose.

MALE. Unknown.

Coloration and variations: FEMALES. Integument black except flagellomeres and mandibles partially reddish-brown, and T2 with four subelliptical to subovate yellowish integumental spots. Body setae predominantly silvery-white varying in density except following areas with black setae varying in density: front, vertex, dorsal half of gena; dorsal half of lateral face of pronotum, mesopleuron, and metapleuron; pronotal dorsum, mesoscutum medially, propodeal dorsum medially; T1 medially, disc of T2 (except integumental spots), fringe of T2–5 sublaterally, T6 (except pygidial plate) medially, S1–5, and fringe of S2–3. Tibial spurs yellowish-white. MALES. Unknown.

Distribution. Brazil.

Material examined. (2♀) Type material. Lectotype, ♀, Brazil, [Mato Grosso], Chapada [dos Guimarães], Nov. [November] ( CMNH); Paralectotype, ♀, same label data as lectotype ( CMNH) .

Remarks. Numerous specimens in various collections may have been erroneously identified as T. borba , since the reference specimens used thus far are remarkably different from the type. We have not seen any specimens that resemble T. borba outside of the type series (two specimens). There seem to be two possible explanations for this: 1. This is a rare species with restricted distribution to the Chapada dos Guimarães area, as seems to be the case with T. aemulata ( Cresson, 1902) ; 2. This may simply be a slender version of T. spectabilis ( Gerstaecker, 1874) with yellow spots, which would mirror the situation with T. grossa ( Gerstaecker, 1874) and T. abrupta ( Gerstaecker, 1874) , discussed below. There is, however, one conspicuous structural difference between the type series of T. borba and T. spectabilis . The scutellar scale is well defined and reaches the propodeal spiracles laterally in T. borba , which contrasts with the generally poorly defined to indistinct scutellar armature of T. spectabilis .

Figures

FIGURES 3A–C. Traumatomutilla borba (Cresson, 1902), lectotype, ♀, line 2 mm; A. Dorsal habitus; B. Lateral habitus; C. Type labels.