Smicromyrmini, Bischoff, 1920

Lelej, Arkady S. & Williams, Kevin A., 2023, Review of the tribe Smicromyrmini Bischoff, 1920 (Hymenoptera: Mutillidae), Zootaxa 5231 (2), pp. 101-140 : 106-108

Key to the genera and subgenera of the tribe Smicromyrmini

Males (unknown in Guineomutilla , Nuristanilla , and Smicromyrme ( Rhombotilla ))

1. Apterous........................................................................................... 2

- Alates.............................................................................................. 3

2. T1 long with distinct dorsal face, with lateral white spots. T2 black with medial subbasal white spot and two postero-lateral white spots. Tegula long, projecting over mesoscuto-scutellar suture.—Volsella short, half gonostylus length, ventrally with dense setae longer than basal gonostylus width (Ori)..................................... 10. Indratilla Lelej, 1993

- T1 short, without distinct dorsal face and lateral white spots. T2 ferruginous with black posterior third and posterior white fringe. Tegula short, scarcely projecting over mesoscuto-scutellar suture (Afr)............. 9. Gynandrotilla Arnold, 1946

3. S2 with short lateral felt lines, sometimes reduced to a few small punctures...................................... 4

- S2 without any trace of lateral felt lines.................................................................. 16

4. Mandible strongly widened apically, preapical inner teeth equal to or larger than apical tooth......................... 5

- Mandible not widened apically, preapical inner teeth distinctly smaller than apical tooth, second preapical tooth sometimes ( Pseudocephalotilla ) larger than apical tooth............................................................... 6

5. Inner eye margin with deep notch. Stigmatic cell 0.7 × distance between base of stigmatic cell and origin of RS on vein Sc. T2 width 1.2 × propodeal width (Ori)............................................... 26. Tsunekimyrme Lelej, 1995

- Inner eye margin with weak notch. Stigmatic cell 1.4 × distance between base of stigmatic cell and origin of RS on vein Sc. T2 width 1.5 × propodeal width (Afr, Ori, Pal).............................. 5. Dentilla Lelej in Lelej & Kabakov, 1980

6. Flagellomeres overlapped, F1–5 with row of tyloids or inner part of F1–7(10) with apophyses (Afr)................... 7

- Flagellomeres not overlapped, F1–5 without row of tyloids and inner part without apophyses......................... 9

7. Flagellomeres overlapped, F1–5 with row of tyloids. T7 with cuticular yellowish spot (Afr).. 2. Antennotilla Bischoff, 1920

- F1–7(10) with apophyses. T7 black, without cuticular yellowish spot............................................ 8

8. Double series of apophyses different: longer one ~6 × flagellomere diameter, shorter one equal to flagellomere length. Mandible bidentate, with strong subbasal tooth ventrally (Afr)............................... 4. Ctenoceraea Nonveiller, 1993

- Double series of apophyses more or less equal in length. Mandible tridentate, with ventral basal carina, without subbasal tooth (Afr)................................................................... 19. Psammotherma Latreille, 1825

9. Genital volsella with basal external lobe and long narrow cuspis; basivolsella with long setae....................... 10

- Genital volsella without basal external lobe or long narrow cuspis; basivolsella with setae short or absent.............. 14

10. Mandible bidentate at apex (Ori, Pal)............................................. 12. Mickelomyrme Lelej, 1995

- Mandible tridentate at apex............................................................................ 11

11. Mesopleuron beneath with one or two pairs of precoxal denticles or tubercles.................................... 12

- Mesopleuron beneath without precoxal denticles or tubercles................................................. 13

12. Hypostomal bridge without tooth; eye broadly oval; prementum evenly convex or weakly medio-longitudinally carinate; oblique metapleural suture running anterodorsally from endophragmal pit; mesopleron beneath with precoxal paired transverse/oblique carinae (may be toothed mesally) (Ori, Pal).............................................. 13. Nemka Lelej, 1985

- Hypostomal bridge with tooth; eye subcircular; prementum with posteromedian domelike elevation; oblique metapleural suture running horizontally from endophragmal pit; mesopleuron beneath with precoxal paired transverse tubercles and teeth (Afr)............................................................................. 25. Sulcotilla Bischoff, 1920

13. Mandible beneath with large subventral tooth, distance between subventral tooth and dorsal mandibular carina equal or more than basal mandibular width. Apex of volsellar cuspis curved inside (Pal)............ 23. Skorikovia Ovtchinnikov, 2002

- Mandible beneath with small subventral tooth, distance between subventral tooth and dorsal mandibular carina much less than basal mandibular width. Apex of volsellar cuspis narrowly straight (Afr, Pal)............................................................................................... 21. Rasnitsynitilla Lelej in Lelej & van Harten, 2006

14. Penis valve shortened, swollen apex curved down and oriented outside (Afr)........ 20. Pseudocephalotilla Bischoff, 1920

- Penis valve not shortened, apex not swollen and not oriented outside........................................... 15

15. F1 length equal its maximal width, and 0.6 × F2. Tegula not projecting or at most scarcely projecting over mesoscuto-scutellar suture (Afr, Ori, Pal)...................................................... 24. Smicromyrme Thomson, 1870

15a. Mandible beneath without subventral tooth, if with inconspicuous one then without excision (Pal)....................................................................................... 24.1. Subgenus Astomyrme Schwartz, 1984

- Mandible beneath with well developed subventral tooth separated by excision................................... 15b

15b. Mandible bidentate. Clypeus more or less flattened........................................................ 15c

- Mandible tridentate. Clypeus concave. (Afr, Ori, Pal).......................... 24.3. Subgenus Erimyrme Lelej, 1985

15c. Clypeus without preapical teeth (Ori, Pal).................................. 24.2. Subgenus Eremotilla Lelej, 1985

- Clypeus with two preapical teeth or tubercles (Pal)..................... 24.5. Subgenus Smicromyrme Thomson, 1870

15 (-). F1 length 0.5–0.6 × its maximal width, and 0.3–0.4 × F2. Tegula projecting over mesoscuto-scutellar suture for 1/5–1/4 of its length (Ori, Pal).................................................................. 22. Sinotilla Lelej, 1995

16. Mandible strongly widened apically, preapical inner teeth equal to or larger than apical tooth........................ 17

- Mandible narrowed apically, preapical inner teeth considerably smaller than apical tooth........................... 18

17. Mandible not excised beneath, without tooth or lobe near base. F1 length 0.7 × maximal width ( Fig. 5 ) (Ori, Pal)...................................................................................... 1. Andreimyrme Lelej, 1995

- Mandible excised beneath, with large subbasal lobe. F1 length 1.5–1.6 × maximal width (Afr, Ori, Pal).............................................................................................. 7. Ephutomma Ashmead, 1899

18. Mandible beneath without large subbasal tooth or lobe, at most with small projection in basal half................... 19.

- Mandible beneath with large subbasal lobe or tooth......................................................... 20

19. Flagellomeres overlapped. Penis valve shortened, apex curved down and oriented outside. T2 with central spot of pale setae (Afr)...................................................... 16. Paglianotilla Lelej in Lelej & van Harten, 2006

- Flagellomeres not overlapped. Penis valve not shortened, apex not oriented outside. T2 without central spot of pale setae (Ori)......................................................................... 14. Nordeniella Lelej, 2005

20. Brachypterous: forewing slightly projecting over T2. Distance between base of stigmatic cell and origin of RS on vein Sc equal or even less than stigmatic cell length. Propodeum dorsally with two medial sharp teeth (Ori).................................................................................................... 11. Karunaratnea Lelej, 2005

- Wings well developed: forewing touch metasomal apex. Distance between base of stigmatic cell and origin of RS on vein Sc more than stigmatic cell length. Propodeum dorsally without medial sharp teeth.................................. 21

21. Genital volsella without wide external basal lobe, inner and lower margins of volsella with setae not longer than volsellar cuspis............................................................................................. 22

- Genital volsella with more or less wide external basal lobe (basivolsella) with setae longer than volsellar cuspis......... 23

22. Vertex with raised subtriangular carinated platform (Afr)................................. 3. Corytilla Arnold, 1956

- Vertex without raised subtriangular carinated platform (Ori, Pal)............................ 6. Ephucilla Lelej, 1995

23. Mandible beneath usually not excised, with rounded subventral lobe. Thickened basivolsellar setae not reaching the apex of gonostylus (Afr, Ori, Pal)........................................................ 18. Promecilla André, 1902

- Mandible beneath deeply excised, with large subventral tooth. Thickened basivolsellar setae usually protruding beyond apex of gonostylus (in scutellaris species-group not longer than volsellar cuspis) (Afr, Ori, Pal)... 17. Physetopoda Schuster, 1949

Females (unknown in Antennotilla , Ctenoceraea , Gynandrotilla , Paglianotilla , Psammotherma , Tsunekimyrme )

1. T6 convex, without distinct pygidial plate, with glabrous shiny area widened posterad.............................. 2

- T6 with distinct flattened pygidial plate, carinated laterally, longitudinally striate, granulous or with glabrous shiny apical part, or entirely glabrous, shiny.............................................................................. 8

2. Scutellar scale more or less developed.................................................................... 3

- Scutellar scale totally lacking........................................................................... 6

3. Scutellar scale strongly developed. Mesosomal dorsum with parallel sides or slightly widened posterad.—F1 distinctly longer than F2. T6 not carinated even apically (Ori)....................................... 11. Karunaratnea Lelej, 2005

- Scutellar scale weak, but distinct. Mesosomal dorsum often narrowed posterad .................... 4

4. T6 with glabrous shiny medial part, not carinated laterad, considerably convergent basally with basolateral tufts of dense pale setae (Ori, Pal).................................................................... 22. Sinotilla Lelej, 1995

- T6 with elongated shiny glabrous pygidial plate, weakly carinate laterad......................................... 5

5. F1 equals its apical width and length of F2. T1 short, without lateral pale spots (Ori, Pal)......... 6. Ephucilla Lelej, 1995

- F1 longer than its apical width and 1.3 × longer than F2. T1 long with distinct dorsal face, with lateral white spots (Ori)................................................................................... 10. Indratilla Lelej, 1993

6. F1 1.6 × its maximum width. Mesosoma elongated, distinctly narrowed posterad.................................. 7

- F1 1.0–1.1 × its maximum width. Mesosoma not elongated, with more or less parallel sides or widened posterad (Ori).................................................................................. 14. Nordeniella Lelej, 2005

7. T1 with distinct anterior and dorsal surfaces, upper edge of the truncation projecting in the center above. T6 with pygidial plate convex, non sculptured, apical half weakly carinated laterally (Afr)..................... 8. Guineomutilla Suárez, 1977

- T1 gently sloping without dorsal surface and truncation. T6 with convex pygidial plate non sculptured and not carinated even in apical half (Afr, Ori, Pal)....................................................... 18. Promecilla André, 1902

8. T2 with central yellowish cuticular spot, without spots of pale setae (Pal)..................................................................................................... 15. Nuristanilla Lelej in Lelej & Kabakov, 1980

- T2 without pale cuticular spot, with one or three basal spots of pale setae, rarely (some Dentilla ) with basal band of pale setae ................................................................................................... 9

9. Scutellar scale lacking................................................................................ 10

- Scutellar scale more or less developed........................................................................ 11

10. Mandible wide, tridentate apically ( Fig. 7 ) (Ori, Pal)................................. 1. Andreimyrme Lelej, 1995

- Mandible falcate and edentate with acute apex (Afr)..................................... 3. Corytilla Arnold, 1956

11. Head widened posterad, posteriorly angulate. Pronotum dorsally with medial longitudinal depression (sulcus) laterally bordered by tubercles (Afr)............................................................. 25. Sulcotilla Bischoff, 1920

- Head not widened posterad, posteriorly rouded. Pronotum dorsally without medial longitudinal depression (sulcus)...... 12

12. Pygidial plate narrow, usually less than 0.3 × T6 width, narrowed and generally closed dorsally, at least 2 × higher than wide; usually with long setae laterally ( Fig. 113 )................................................................ 13

- Pygidial plate generally at least 0.5 × T6 width, usually open dorsally, its shape variable: elongate with more or less parallel lateral sides ( Fig. 109 ), broadly ovate (at most 1.7 × higher than wide, Fig. 115 ), or triangular in shape (widened dorsally, Fig. 111 ).............................................................................................. 14

13. Eye enlarged, minimal distance between eyes 1.1–1.3 × longitudinal eye diameter. Scutellar scale generally lowly produced (Afr, Ori, Pal)............................................................... 7. Ephutomma Ashmead, 1899

- Eye moderate in size, minimal distance between eyes 1.6–1.8 × longitudinal eye diameter. Scutellar scale usually erect, welldeveloped, nail-like (Afr, Ori, Pal).............................................. 17. Physetopoda Schuster, 1949

14. T2 with one or three spots of pale setae disposed in central horizontal line. T1 posterodorsdally with small medial spot of pale setae (Afr)............................................................ 20. Pseudocephalotilla Bischoff, 1920

- T2 with one or three spots of pale setae disposed basally. T1 posterodorsdally at most with fringe of pale setae.......... 15

15. Pygidial plate short-oval (Ori, Pal)..................................................... 13. Nemka Lelej, 1985

- Pygidial plate elongated, with parallel sides, or widened basally............................................... 16

16. T2 with three basal spots of pale setae disposed in horizontal line and with at most median apical patch of pale setae. Scutellar scale more than 2 × as wide as long (Ori, Pal)..................................... 12. Mickelomyrme Lelej, 1995

- T2 with one basal medial spot of pale setae, if lateral pale spots present, then they are disposed posterior to median patch, and with apical band or fringe of pale setae. Scutellar scale usually only slightly wider than its length.................... 17

17. Pronotum with protruding humeral part, distinctly wider than propodeum (Afr, Ori, Pal).............................................................................................. 5. Dentilla Lelej in Lelej & Kabakov, 1980

- Pronotum without protruding humeral part, usually narrower or at most scarcely wider than propodeum............... 18

18 (-). Basal medial spot of pale setae on T2 not enlarged: distance between spot and band of pale setae of tergum more than spot diameter (Afr, Ori, Pal).................................................... 24. Smicromyrme Thomson, 1870

18a. Metasomal segment 1 constricted posterad. Pygidial plate rhomboid with granulated sculpture (Pal)....................................................................................... 24.4. Subgenus Rhombotilla Nagy, 1966

- Metasomal segment 1 not constricted posterad. Pygidial plate another shape, longitudinally striate with striae reaching posterior margin or apically smooth............................................................................ 18b

18b. Pygidial plate triangular, conspicuously widened basally (Ori, Pal)............... 24.2. Subgenus Eremotilla Lelej, 1985

- Pygidial plate elongated, often with more or less parallel sides............................................... 18c

18c. Pygidial plate with striae reaching posterior margin (Pal)................ 24.5. Subgenus Smicromyrme Thomson, 1870

- Pygidial plate with striae not reaching posterior margin, apical portion smooth.................................. 18d

18d. Mesosoma with well developed anterodorsal and posterodorsal angles, dorsally more or less flattened, in lateral view (Pal)................................................................... 24.1. Subgenus Astomyrme Schwartz, 1984

- Mesosoma with rounded anterodorsal and posterodorsal angles, dorsally weakly arcuate, in lateral view (Afr, Ori, Pal).......................................................................... 24.3. Subgenus Erimyrme Lelej, 1985

18 (-). Basal medial spot of pale setae on T2 enlarged, distance between spot and band of tergum equal to spot diameter or less than it ................................................................................................. 19

19. Pygidial plate apically distinctly angulate, lateral carina distinctly widened apically. Clypeus without median basal tubercle (Afr, Pal)................................................. 21. Rasnitsynitilla Lelej in Lelej & van Harten, 2006

- Pygidial plate apically rounded, lateral carina not widened apically. Clypeus with median basal tubercle (Pal).................................................................................... 23. Skorikovia Ovtchinnikov, 2002

Figures

FIGURES 1–6. 1. Andreimyrme long Lelej, 1995, ♁, holotype, lateral habitus; 2–3. A. rong Williams in Okayasu et al., 2021, ♀, holotype, habitus (2. Dorsal view, 3. Lateral view); 4a, 4b. Antennotilla phoebe (Péringuey, 1899), ♁: (4a. Lateral view, 4b. Dorsal view); 5–6. Corytilla pallidipes Arnold, 1956, ♁ (5. Head, lateral view, 6. Lateral habitus). (Photographs by V. Loktionov (1), D. Brothers (4b), and K. Williams (2, 3, 4a, 5, 6)).

FIGURES 7–16. 7–10. Ctenoceraea pectinella Nonveiller, 1993, ♁, holotype (7. Antenna, 8. Forewing, 9. Genitalia, dorsal view, 10. Genitalia, lateral view); 11–12. Dentilla rasnitsyni Lelej in Lelej & van Harten, 2011, ♁, paratype (11. Lateral habitus, 12. Head, face view); 13–16. D. curtiventris (André, 1901): 13. Dorsal habitus, ♀, 14. Lateral habitus, ♀, 15. Lateral habitus, ♁, 16. Head, face view. (Photographs by K. Williams, 7–10 from Nonveiller 1993).

FIGURES 110–115. Smicromyrmini, ♀, pygidial plate (T6). 110.Andreimyrme rong Williams in Okayasu et al., 2021, holotype; 111. Dentilla curtiventris (André, 1901); 112. Ephucilla thalia (Mickel, 1933); 113. Ephutomma fletcheri (Turner, 1911); 114. Karunaratnea palatupanae Lelej, 2005, paratype; 115. Nemka viduata (Pallas, 1773). (Photographs by K. Williams andA. Lelej (114)).

FIGURES 104–109. Smicromyrme (s. str.) rufipes (Fabricius, 1787): 104. ♀, dorsal habitus, 105. ♀, lateral habitus, 106. ♁, lateral habitus, 107. ♁, f. nigra, lateral habitus, 108. ♁, head, face view, 109. ♀, pygidial plate. (Photographs by K. Williams).