Pseudepipona valentinae Fateryga, 2022

Fateryga, Alexander V., 2022, Revision of the Pseudepipona herrichii-group of the eumenine wasps (Hymenoptera: Vespidae: Eumeninae) with the description of two new species from China and Russia, Zootaxa 5154 (2), pp. 101-126 : 121-123

Pseudepipona valentinae Fateryga , sp. nov.

( Figs 22–24 , 28 , 39 , 57–63 )

Holotype. RUSSIA. Amur Province: “Приамурье, с. Дим, W Поярково” [Priamurye, Dim , W Poyarkovo], 16.VII.1975, 1 ♀, leg. A.S. Lelej [ FSCV] ( Figs 57–60 ).

Paratypes. RUSSIA. Amur Province: “Приамурье, окр. с. Натальино, р. Зея” [Priamurye, Vicinity of Natal’ino, Zeya River ], 12.VII.1975, 1 ♂, leg. N. V. Kurzenko [ FSCV] ( Figs 61–63 ); “Амурская обл. Натальино, р. Зея ” [Natal’ino, Zeya River], 18. VI.1976, 1 ♂, leg. Kuznetsov [ FSCV]; “Амурская обл. окр. БлаговеЩенск” [Vicinity of Blagoveshchensk], 31.VII.1983, 1 ♂, leg. N. Moroz [ FSCV]. Primorkiy Territory : “Приморская опытная станция. На красном клевере” [Primorskaya Experimental Station, on red clover ( Trifolium sp. )], 21.VIII.1947, 1 ♀, leg. Yu. Karnaukh [ FSCV]; ibid., 22.VIII.1947, 4 ♀, leg. Z. Neupokoyeva [ FSCV]; “Приморье, окр. ПреобраЖен. уроч. Тагин-гоу” [Vicinity of Preobrazheniye, Tagin-Gou Landmark], 10.IX.1979, 1 ♂, leg. T.G. Romankova [ FSCV] . CHINA. Heilongjiang: “д. Лангаши, МанчЖур.” [Manchuria, Langashi], 10–20. VI .1905, 1 ♂, leg. Serebryannikov [ ZISP] . Shanxi: “ Monasterium Utai ”, 1 ♀ [ ZISP] .

Observations on iNaturalist. CHINA. Beijing: [with a prey], V.2019, 1 ♀, Home Mountain (https://www. inaturalist.org/observations/102650425, as Pseudepipona herrichii ) .

Diagnosis. Females of this species can be distinguished from other members of the P. herrichii -group by the following combination of characters: clypeus as wide as long, entirely black or with two small basal pale-yellow spots; scutellum with a relatively thin apical band rather equal to or slightly thicker than that on the metanotum; propodeum with a weakly developed transverse carina between the shelf and concavity forming laterally blunt angles; propodeal valvula rounded posteriorly; T1 without three small longitudinal carinae. In the males, the clypeus is also as wide as long; cuspis lacking the dorsal process; base of the digitus attached directly to the top of the cuspis apex; aedeagus lacking the median expansion; ventral lobe of the aedeagus large and long.

Description. Female. Body length (from head to apical margin of T2) 9.5– 12 mm; fore wing length 9.5– 11 mm.

Head about 1.1× as wide as long in frontal view. Clypeus as wide as long; its apical emargination very shallow, much less than 0.1× as deep as wide, taking about 1/4 of clypeal width, apical teeth blunt. Cephalic fovea as broad as distance between lateral ocelli, weakly impressed; distance between lateral ocellus and occiput 1.8× as distance between lateral ocelli. Pronotal carina well developed, forming right angles at anterolateral corners of pronotum. Epicnemial carina developed. Scutellum convex. Metanotum with irregular horizontal surface impressed medially and flat vertical posterior surface with right angle between them. Propodeum with weakly developed transverse carina between shelf and concavity forming laterally blunt angles. Propodeal valvula rounded posteriorly. T1 1.6× as wide as long in dorsal view, bluntly roundly angled in lateral view, without three small longitudinal carinae. T2 evenly convex in lateral view. S 2 in lateral view evenly convex, in ventral view with longitudinal furrow at base.

Clypeus dull, sparsely punctate and longitudinally rugose, interstices exceeding puncture diameter, with distinct microsculpture. Frons and vertex with deeper and coarser punctures than those on clypeus, interstices reaching puncture diameter; punctures on gena slightly sparser. Pronotum dorsally with punctures similar to those on vertex; lateral parts of pronotum with punctures arranged in longitudinal rows with sharp interstices between them. Sculpture on scutum coarser than that on dorsal surface of pronotum. Tegula nearly smooth, with few minute punctures. Punctures on yellow parts of dorsal mesepisternum and scutellum as well as posterior face of metanotum similar in size to those on dorsal surface of pronotum but interstices somewhat larger, exceeding puncture diameter. Black part of dorsal mesepisternum and scutellum as well as ventral mesepisternum and mesepimeron with coarser punctures similar to those on scutum. Dorsal face of metanotum, dorsal and dorsolateral surfaces of propodeum with coarse reticulate sculpture with sharp interstices. Metapleuron and lateral surface of propodeum longitudinally rugose and with sparse shallow punctures. Propodeal concavity transversally rugose, without distinct punctures. T1 except basal part with punctures similar to those on dorsal surface of pronotum but interstices exceeding puncture diameter; basal part of T1 rather smooth, with few punctures. T2–T5 with distinct sparse punctures similar in size to those on clypeus but much deeper, interstices surpassing puncture diameter, dull, with reticulate microsculpture. T6 mostly with microsculpture only. Sculpture of S1 similar to that of most part of T1. Basal part of S2 before transverse furrow dull, with microsculpture only. Sculpture of distal part of S2 after transverse furrow and S3–S5 coarser than that of corresponding terga. S6 with microsculpture and sparse shallow punctures.

Frons with rather hooked setae reaching in length diameter of scapus at apex, hind margin of gena, propleuron, coxae, dorsal surface of pronotum, T1, S1, and S2 with similar but two times shorter setae. Lateral edges of propodeum with setae similar to those on frons but straighter. Most other body parts bare or with very minute setae.

Basal color black. The following parts pale-yellow: two small basal spots on clypeus (sometimes reduced), small spot on frons between antennal sockets, bands along inner margins of eyes from clypeus to ocular sinuses, spots on genae, basal band on pronotum, large spot on dorsal mesepisternum, tegulae and parategulae, apical band on scutellum, apical band on metanotum, small lateral spots on propodeum (sometimes reduced), apical bands on T1–T5, apical spots laterally on S2 and S3. Lower face of scapus, legs from femora onwards, lateral parts of T1 and entire S2 reddish. Wings strongly fuscous.

Male. Body length (from head to apical margin of T2) 6–9.5 mm; fore wing length 6.5–8.5 mm.

Structure as in female but mandible with notch and nearly quadrate preapical tooth, apical emargination of clypeus deep, approximately 0.8× as deep as wide, taking about 1/3 of clypeal width, apical teeth acute. F11 rather blunt, curved, approximately of equal width at base and at top, reaching apical margin of F8. Male genitalia as in Figs 22–24 . Paramere comparatively narrow; cuspis without dorsal process; base of digitus attached at cuspis apex. Aedeagus without median expansion; ventral lobe of aedeagus large and long.

Sculpture similar to that in female but clypeus not rugose. T6 and S6 punctured similarly to previous segments. T7 mostly with microsculpture only; S7+8 with microsculpture and sparse shallow punctures.

Setae as in female.

Coloration mostly as in female but mandible, labrum, clypeus, and lower face of scapus pale yellow. Underside of flagellum and entire F10 and F11 ferruginous.

Etymology. The species is dedicated to my wife, Valentina V. Fateryga.

Distribution. Russia (Amur Province, Primorkiy Territory), China (Beijing, Heilongjiang, Shanxi) ( Fig. 28 ).

Remarks. This species is very similar, in external view, to P. herrichii (cf. Figs 38, 39 ). It, however, strongly differs by the structure of the male genitalia (viz. the absence of both the dorsal process of cuspis and the median expansion of the aedeagus) from all the remaining members of the P. herrichii -group. The species can be also distinguished from both P. herrichii and P. aldrichi by a longer clypeus in both the female and the male.

Bionomics. Females hunt for caterpillars ( Fig. 39 ). Adult feeding was recorded in the Primorkiy Territory on flowers of Trifolium sp. (Fabaceae) (see Paratypes).

Figures

FIGURES 7–24. Male genitalia of Pseudepipona spp. 7–9, P. aldrichi (Fox, 1892); 10–12, P. herrichii (de Saussure, 1856); 13–15, P. kozhevnikovi (Kostylev, 1927); 16–18, P. tingjingliae Fateryga, sp. nov.; 19–21, P. tricarinata (Kokujev, 1913); 22–24, P. valentinae Fateryga, sp. nov. 7, 10, 13, 16, 19, 22, left paramere and volsella in lateral view from inside (bd, base of digitus; ca, cuspis apex; dp, dorsal process of cuspis); 8, 11, 14, 17, 20, 23, aedeagus in dorsal view (me, median expansion); 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, 24, aedeagus in lateral view (vl, ventral lobe). Scale bar 1 mm.

FIGURES 25–28. Distribution of Pseudepipona spp. 25, P. aldrichi (Fox, 1892); 26, P. herrichii (de Saussure, 1856); 27, P. kozhevnikovi (Kostylev, 1927); 28, P. tingjingliae Fateryga, sp. nov. (black dots), P. tricarinata (Kokujev, 1913) (white dots), and P. valentinae Fateryga, sp. nov. (grey dots).

FIGURES 38–39. Females of Pseudepipona spp. 38, P. herrichii (de Saussure, 1856) from the Crimea (on water), photo by the author; 39, P. valentinae Fateryga, sp. nov. from Beijing (with a prey), photo by Home Mountain from the iNaturalist web-site (https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/102650425), distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons BY-NC 4.0 license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/).

FIGURES 57–63. Pseudepipona valentinae Fateryga, sp. nov. 57–60, ♀, holotype (Russia: Amur Province); 61–63, ♂, para- type (Russia:Amur Province). 57, 62, habitus in dorsal view; 58, 63, habitus in lateral view (pv, propodeal valvula); 59, 61, head in frontal view; 60, labels. Scale bars 1 mm.