Miscophus johni Mokrousov, 2004

Schmid-Egger, Christian & Straka, Jakub, 2019, Miscophus Jurine, 1807 (Hymenoptera, Crabronidae) in Central, Northern, and Eastern Europe, Zootaxa 4571 (3), pp. 334-346 : 342-345

Miscophus johni Mokrousov, 2004

( Figs. 10 , 14 , 20 , 29 )

Miscophus johni Mokrousov, 2004:503 , female, male. Holotype: male. Russia: Nizhniy Novgorod Oblast': Dzerzhinsk (ZMMU). Male paratype examined.

Diagnosis. The female of M. johni belongs to the Miscophus bicolor group and is unique among Central European species in the combination of black abdomen, red mandible and apical clypeal margin; marked shiny mesopleuron and propodeal dorsum. It has diagonal striation in lateral fields, with shiny interspaces. Apical margin of terga I–IV has a small impunctate area, similar to that of M. spurius . At the first glance, the species resembles the Central European species M. concolor apart from the red abdomen base in M. concolor . Miscophus johni differs also in a more shiny mesopleuron and propodeal dorsum. Shiny apical margin of clypeus is half as large in M. johni as in M. concolor . Red mandible, fine punctation of frons and scutum resemble M. ater ; and M. johni can be distinguished by the shiny mesopleuron and propodeal dorsum which is punctured or finely microsculptured in most M. ater individuals. Punctation of terga reaches the apical margin in M. ater and M. concolor .

Males are characterized by a large and barely rounded medial lamella of ACM, an all shiny and impunctate mesopleuron and a small impunctate area on apical margin of terga II–IV. Propodeal dorsum has a few diagonal striae, interspaces are large and shiny. It bears some similarities to M. albufeirae . The latter has a larger medial clypeal lamella, finer striation on propodeal dorsum and a denser punctation on lower mesopleuron.

Description of a female from the Czech Republic. Body length 4.3 mm. All black with the following light red: mandible (lower margin black), ACM, apico-medial part of clypeus. Scape brownish. Wings slightly infumate, veins black. Lower face with very fine and dense punctation, similar to M. ater , upper frons and vertex shiny, vertex with large interspaces. Gena shiny, with very indistinct microsculpture. Pronotum, scutum and scutellum shiny, with fine and indistinct punctation, more shiny than in M. ater . Shiny interspaces of scutellum larger than those ofscutum. Mesopleuron in upper half extremly shiny, episcrobal area of mesopleuron without punctures, area below with a few punctures, lower mesopleuron with fine microsculpture/punctures, lower part of mesopleuron with punctures. Propodeal dorsum shiny with medial keel and four diagonal carinae (as large as medial keel) in lateral field, with some irregular striae meso-apically. Propodeum laterally and posteriorly shiny with weak horizontal striae; propodeal side separated anteriorly from dorsum by marked and elevated edge. Terga with close and fine punctation, punctures 0.5–1 diameter apart, interspaces shiny, leaving a small impunctate zone on apex of terga (similar to M. spurius ). Apical margin of terga I–III laterally with weak band-like pilosity. Forebasitarus with three outer spines. Medial and apical spine somewhat longer than tarsal width, half as long as tarsomere II. Basal spine is half as long as apical spine.

Female variation: Both Russian females are smaller than the female from the Czech Republic (body length 3.8/ 3.9 mm). One of these females has five propodeal striae on each side, the other has some addional transverse striae in the apical half of the propodeal dorsum. The clypeus is all black in one female. Length of apical spine of forebasitarsus is also variable and smaller (the spine is as long as apical width of forebasitarsus in one female).

Description of males from the type area. Body length 3.2/ 3.4 mm. Black, scape and tegulae brown. Mandible light reddish, basal half dark reddish-brown. Medial lamella of clypeus larger than the remaining arealeading to eyes, widely rounded, with an angle of about 140° medially. Frons shiny, with indistinct punctures, interspaces above shiny. Scutum and scutellum punctured, punctures 1–2 diameters apart, interspaces shiny. Head in lateral view convex, frons visible below eyes (similar to M. albufeirae ). Propodeum with three to five diagonal striae on each side. Mesosoma laterally bright shiny. Mesopleuron unsculptured, only with very weak and indistinct punctures in lower forth. Episcrobal area of mesopleuron, not separated from lower mesopleuron. Propodeum laterally with some fine, horizontal striae. Terga with dense punctation, punctures 0.5–1 diameter apart, punctation on last terga indistinct. Apical margin of terga II–IV with impunctate area, on tergum II medially as large as hindocellar diameter, laterally smaller.

Geographic distribution. Czech Republic, Russia

Material examined: CZECH REPUBLIC: 1 ♀ 29.–30.vii.2008, Moravia, Sandpit Bzenec-Přivoz II, Bzenec env. ( JSPC). Barcoding identification number: BC ZSM HYM 23682 . RUSSIA: 2 ♀♀, 1 ♂, 23.v.2006 ; 1 ♂, 12.vi.2001 (paratype), Nizhni Novgorod Prov., Dzerzhinsk, industrial zone, 56.29N 43.93E (leg. et coll. Mokrousov) .

Comment: Genetic barcoding of an unknown Miscophus female from the Czech Republic results in a species not known from Central Europe. Comparison of M. johni from the type area (including the male paratype) confirms its identity to this species. Miscophus johni is described here in detail to enable its further identification. This species can also be expected in other parts of Central Europe.

We had an oportunity to examine four males and two females from the type area of M. johni and one male from nearby identified as M. johni by Mokrousov. Two males (including a paratype) clearly belong to the taxon characterized here as M. johni . The female from the Czech Republic also belongs to this taxon. Three remaining males from Russia are very small M. ater (3.0– 3.9 mm). Another issue concerns the holotype of M. johni , since we were not able to examine it. It is a male and we cannot exclude the possibility that it is M. ater according to the description and figures of Mokrousov (2004). Because the two species are mixed in material from the type locality, further examination of the species is required.

Figures

FIGURES 6–11. 6. Miscophus minutus ♀, propodeum. 7. Miscophus spurius ♀, propodeum. 8. Miscophus postumus ♀, propodeum. 9. Miscophus cappadocicus ♀, propodeum. 10. Miscophus johni ♀, propodeum. 11. Miscophus albufeirae ♀, foreleg.

FIGURES 12–17. 12. Miscophus bicolor ♀, mesopleuron. 13. Miscophus concolor ♀, mesopleuron. 14. Miscophus johni ♀, mesopleuron. 15. Miscophus niger ♀, mesosoma dorsal view. 16. Miscophus ater ♀, mesosoma and head dorsal view. 17. Miscophus spurius ♀, abdomen.

FIGURES 18–22. 18. Miscophus eatoni ♀, propodeum. 19. Miscophus concolor male, propodeum. 20. Miscophus johni ♀, foreleg. 21. Miscophus albufeirae ♀, propodeum. 22. Miscophus eatoni ♀, head.

FIGURES 29–30. 29. Miscophus johni ♀, head lateral view. 30. Miscophus concolor male, last sternites lateral view.