Digonocryptus pontagus Aguiar et Ramos

Aguiar, Alexandre P. & Santos, Bernardo F., 2012, Additions to the revision of Digonocryptus Viereck (Hymenoptera, Ichneumonidae, Cryptinae), with nine new taxa, new males, and distribution maps for all known species, Zootaxa 3282, pp. 1-41 : 20-23

Digonocryptus pontagus Aguiar et Ramos , sp. nov.

( Figs 27–33 , 80 )

Description. Holotype FEMALE. Fore wing 11.4 mm.

Head ( Figs 27 , 31–32 ). Ventral tooth of mandible approximately as long as dorsal tooth. Clypeus apical area delimited by smooth border; clypeal margin with two distinct teeth. Antennae with 26 and 27 flagellomeres; white band starting at flagellomere IV apical 0.2; 6 flagellomeres at least 50% white.

Mesosoma ( Figs 27–28 , 32 ). Pronotum latero-dorsally weakly punctulate, otherwise strongly rugose, except collar smooth or weakly sculptured; epomia long, stout; dorsally with shallow transverse depression between collar and posterior wall. Mesonotum somewhat markedly, densely alutaceous, of matt, powdery texture; centrally and posteriorly, in between notauli, changing to densely rugulose; sulcus between mesonotum and scutellum deep, distinctly crenulate. Scutellum covered by small punctures separated by about half their diameter. Mesopleuron scarcely pilose, 90% of cuticular surface visible; entirely and conspicuously striate-rugose. Subalar prominence somewhat elongate, but rounded, not keeled. Speculum swollen. Sulcus between sternaulus and scobe faint but distinct under tangent illumination. Sternaulus crenulate, posteriorly more irregularly. Posterior transverse carina of mesosternum present as largest crenulation of discrimen, accompanied laterally by a few oblique rugosities. Lower metapleuron striate-rugose. Propodeum: area in front of anterior transverse carina finely colliculate (minute, low, rounded elevations; looks alutaceous under low magnification), centrally with two ridges extending from carina to anterior margin, thus approximately U-shaped; area within U-shaped carinae moderately deepened, surface alutaceous; a blunt tooth or acuminate border forms on each end of the “U”. Propodeal apophyses long, stout thorns, apex rounded and slightly curved. Posterior transverse carina entirely absent. Propodeum behind anterior transverse carina strongly rugose, near carina more oblique, near petiolar foramen more transverse. Fore wing vein 3-Cu 1.37 times the length of 4-Cu.

Metasoma ( Figs 27 , 32–33 ). Petiole dorso-apically and postpetiole dorsally, on area between median dorsal carinae, shallowly but distinctly concave. Dorsolateral and median dorsal carina distinct, complete, weak basally; petiolar spiracles in dorsal view not prominent. Apex of lower valve with 15 teeth. Ovipositor 0.97 length of hind tibia.

Color. Dark brown with slight reddish hue (120,051,051). Lateral color pattern in Figs 27 , 32 . Head more lightly colored than body, scape and first two flagellomeres brown, third flagellomere from basally brown to apically dark brown, other flagellomeres black, except for white band. Labrum light brown. Eye margin between 9–10 h with small yellowish spot. Propodeum as in Figs 27–28 , 32 , apophyses white, except basally. All femora colored as body, but fore femur lighter, hind femur more intensely red. Fore tibia dorsal half light brown, ventral half pale yellow. Mid tibia lateral half beige (199,167,133), mesal half dark brown. Hind tibia basal 0.2 translucent brown, remaining dark brown. Fore t1–2 brown, t3–5 dark brown. Mid t1–3 white, except t1 basal end brown, t3 apex with brown spot on each side; t4–5 dark brown. Hind t1–5 white, except t5 apical 0.3 dark brown. Metasoma dorsally somewhat lighter than mesosoma, T1 more red, T2 as mesosoma, T3–8 lightest (162,077,051).

MALE ( Figs 29–30 ). Generally quite similar to the female, except as follows. Propodeal apophyses much lower, although still somewhat pointy and whitish. Antenna with 32 flagellomeres, white band starting at flagellomeres X–XI, then with 3-5 white flagellomeres, at least the 3 central ones fully white; flagellomeres basad of white stripe much longer than those apicad of it (combined length over twice as long). Whitish on entire supraclypeal area, pronotal collar largely, subalar prominence, most of scutellum, particularly laterally, fore and mid coxae mostly.

Morphological variation. Fore wing 9.5–12.0 mm. Ovipositor 0.93–0.97 length of hind tibia. Antenna in one paratype with 28 flagellomeres; white band often (9/12) starting at flagellomere IV apical 0.05–0.60, V–X always fully white, XI sometimes (7/12) white on basal 0.05–0.45. Mid t1 basal 0.3 and t3 apical 0.2 sometimes dark brown. Specimen from Nova Teutonia with metasoma slightly darker than mesosoma. Female from Rio de Janeiro more reddish than others specimens.

Comments. This species is here tentatively classified as Digonocrytpus. On the holotype, the petiolar spiracle is at the apical 0.41, thus distinctly beyond middle, which is somewhat atypical for the genus; the range for the paratype specimens is 0.39–0.45 (n=6). In all specimens, the lower valve of the ovipositor is apically only slightly dilated, barely overlapping the upper valve ( Fig. 33 ). All other features, however, including ovipositor structure, fit best the definition of Digonocryptus .

The brown coloration covering most of the body of this species makes it similar only to D. teleborus , from which it can however be promptly distinguished particularly by having a long, thorn-shaped and mostly white propodeal apophysis (vs. scale-shaped, low, triangular, basally pale yellow), and two small but distinct clypeal teeth (vs. absent or inconspicuous, incompletely developed).

Male. The interpretation of the present series of males as D. pontagus and not as the similar D. teleborus needs a defense, since it is not straightforward. In fact, there is one female of the similar D. teleborus reported herein which was collected in the same locality as the males of D. pontagus , only about a month earlier (on 11.VIII.1986 vs. 15.IX–24.XI for the males). They share a blackish hind tibia which is basally white, scape and pedicel are light brown, contrasting with black flagellomere I (vs. brown and not contrasting in female D. pontagus ) and the white stripe on the pronotal collar of the males seems to find some equivalence on yellowish areas on the pronotal collar of the mentioned female. Such similarities suggest the possibility these specimens could be conspecific.

Both the males and the mentioned female also deviate a little from the typical pattern of D. pontagus and D. teleborus , respectively, in each case towards the other species, in a kind of local, ecomorphological convergence (probably not only mimicry, since it occurs on both sides) which is not uncommon within Cryptini (personal observation). In this case, the female has an overall body color darker and nearly without orange, as in typical D. pontagus , and males have hind tibia blackish with basal end white, more typical of D. teleborus . The studied males do have however much more in common with features observed for the female of D. pontagus : clypeal tooth small but distinct (vs. indistinct), mid t2–4 whitish (t1–3 on female vs. whole tarsus brown in D. teleborus ), propodeal apophysis short but pointy and white, contrasting with color of propodeum (vs. scale-shaped and brown, concolorous with propodeum); posterior transverse carina fully absent (vs. clearly indicated medially); and presence of delicate vertical rugulosities on supraclypeal area (vs. absent).

As pointed in the item Morphological variation, there are also some marked color differences on all males in relation to the female, but these are also different in relation to the female of D. teleborus .

Etymology. The specific epithet is a free combination of letters, inspired on the name of the type locality.

Material examined. 17 females, 9 males. Ƥ from BRAZIL, Ponta Grossa, Vila Velha, PR, Reserva IAPAR Br376, 19.I.1987, Lev. Ent. PROFAUPAR, Malaise trap ( DZUP). Pinned, complete specimen, in good shape. Paratypes: 1 Ƥ from ECUADOR, Tena, Libertad, 10–13.V.1963, Pena ( CNCI). Ƥ from BRAZIL, Minas Gerais, Poços de Caldas, Morro São Domingos, 29.II.1968, JBecker, ORoppa & OLeoncini ( MNRJ). 1 Ƥ from BRAZIL, Espírito Santo, Cariacica, Reserva Biológica de Duas Bocas, Pt. 7, 25–26.IV.2005, yellow pan traps, APAguiar et al.; 1 Ƥ, same data except Pau Amarelo, Pt. 7, 26–28.X.2005; 1 Ƥ, same data except Pt. 15, 23–25.X.2005; 1 Ƥ, same data except Pt. 18; 1 Ƥ, same data except Conceição do Castelo, Ribeirão do Meio, trail near lake, 17–24.III.2007, Malaise trap, APAguiar et al. ( UFES). 1 Ƥ from BRAZIL, Rio de Janeiro, Parque Estadual do Desengano, Trilha, Pt. 6, 17–20.IV.2002, Malaise trap, AMPenteado-Dias et al.( DCBU); 1 Ƥ, same data except Pt. 6, 20–23.IV.2002; 1 Ƥ, same data except Teresópolis, Parque Nacional da Serra dos Órgãos, Pt. A4, 31.X–5.XI.2004, Malaise trap, ALBG Peronti et al. ( UFES).1 Ƥ from BRAZIL, São Paulo, Salesópolis, Estação Biológica Boracéia, Trilha dos Pilões, Pt. B10, 3–6.IV.2001, yellow pan traps, STPAmarante et al. ( MZUP). 5 33 from BRAZIL, Paraná, Ponta Grossa, V[ila] Velha, PR, Reserva IAPAR, BR 376, 15.IX.1986, Malaise trap, PROFAUPAR; 1 Ƥ, same data except 29.IX.1986; 1 Ƥ, same data except 6.X.1986; 1 Ƥ, same data except 3.XI.1986; 2 33, same data except 3.XI.1986; 1 Ƥ, same data except 10.XI.1986; 2 33, same data except 24.XI.1986; 1 Ƥ, same data except 9.III.1987; 1 Ƥ, same data except 23.III.1987; 1 Ƥ, same data except 30.III.1987; 1 Ƥ, same data except 8.VI.1987 ( DZUP). 2 Ƥ from BRAZIL, Santa Catarina, Nova Teutônia, 9.II.1939, FPlaumann ( BMNH); 1 Ƥ, same data except 2.III.1947 ( AEIC).

Distribution. Brazil (MG, ES, RJ, SP, PR, SC) ( Fig. 80 )

Figures

FIGURES 27 – 30. Digonocryptus pontagus Aguiar et Ramos, sp. nov. 27 – 28, Holotype female: 27, Habitus; 28, Propodeum, dorsal. Drawings by Gláucia Marconato. 29 – 30, Paratype male: 29, Habitus; 30, Propodeum, dorsal.

FIGURES 31 – 33. Digonocryptus pontagus Aguiar et Ramos, sp. nov. Paratype female. 31, Ventral portion of the head, front. 32, Habitus. 33, Ovipositor tip.

FIGURES 80 – 87. Distribution maps for species of Digonocryptus. 80, D. pontagus Aguiar et Ramos. 81, D. propodeator Kasparyan et Ruíz. 82, D. pulchripes (Cameron). 83, D. rufigaster (Szépligeti). 84, D. rufozyrix Aguiar et Ramos. 85, D. sautatus Aguiar et Ramos. 86, D. silopoeus Aguiar et Ramos. 87, D. sipius Aguiar et Ramos.