Pleurotroppopsis Girault, 1913

Cao, Huan-Xi, Dale-Skey, Natalie, Burwell, Chris J. & Zhu, Chao-Dong, 2022, Review of the genus Pleurotroppopsis Girault (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae) with interspecific phylogenetic relationships based on morphological characters, Zootaxa 5190 (4), pp. 451-484 : 454

publication ID	https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.5190.4.1
publication LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:pub:BAF2CA9A-A295-4E63-B3CD-E5B8FA24F57F
DOI	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7138413
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/457787EF-FF8C-FF8D-D4F5-FB57FC8EC639
treatment provided by	Plazi
scientific name	Pleurotroppopsis Girault, 1913
status

Treatment

Pleurotroppopsis Girault, 1913 View in CoL View at ENA

Pleurotroppopsis Girault, 1913: 149 View in CoL .

Type species Pleurotroppopsis maculatipennis Girault View in CoL , by original designation and monotypy.

Cotterellia Waterston, 1925: 388 .

Type species Cotterellia podagrica Waterston , by monotypy. Synonymized by Bouček, 1988: 710.

Atullya Surekha & Narendran, 1988: 191–192 View in CoL .

Type species Atullya femorata Surekha & Narendran , by original designation. Synonymized by Gumovsky, 2007: 11.

Diagnosis. Vertex and eyes setose. Upper face with a transverse frontal carina (e.g. Fig. 8a View FIGURE 8 ), reaching from eye to eye or not close to eyes, straight or sinuate; frontovertex usually with, occasionally without, a median groove below anterior ocellus ( Figs 3c View FIGURE 3 , 8a View FIGURE 8 ). Head with a postorbital groove delimited by a postorbital carina along posterodorsal margin of eye (e.g. Fig. 2e View FIGURE 2 ). Occiput with transoccipital ridge (e.g. Figs 6d View FIGURE 6 , 11a View FIGURE 11 ). Pronotum with collar more or less delimited by a carina along anterior margin, with distinct shoulders, and covered with dense setae (e.g. Fig. 2b View FIGURE 2 ). Shoulders of mesoscutum distinct; LLM with a round fovea behind pronotal collar (e.g. Figs 8b View FIGURE 8 , 10b View FIGURE 10 , 12c View FIGURE 12 ). Scutellum often with distinct sublateral grooves generally expressed as row of punctures (e.g. Fig. 2b View FIGURE 2 ). Dorsellum with lateral up-turned tooth strong and distinct, best visible in lateral view (e.g. Figs 2c View FIGURE 2 , 7e View FIGURE 7 ). Propodeum with strong and complete plicae and with a strong and complete median carina (e.g. Fig. 2c View FIGURE 2 ). Callus usually with numerous setae (e.g. Fig. 2c View FIGURE 2 ). Female petiole transverse (e.g. Fig. 2c View FIGURE 2 ). Female gaster with at least tergites Gt 4 –Gt 7 piliferouspunctate (e.g. Fig. 2f View FIGURE 2 ); female Gt 1 with a distinct median groove in anterior inclined part, and with a rounded, eyelike patch on each side close to base (e.g. Fig. 8c View FIGURE 8 ).

Remarks. The diagnostic characters given above are mainly based on females, though the above generic diagnosis usually also applies to males. However, in addition to their smaller body size males often differ from conspecific females because the typically diagnostic characters are reduced and indistinct in several aspects as follows. Flagellum: funiculars usually with long setae and stalked apically (e.g. Figs 2i View FIGURE 2 , 3f View FIGURE 3 ). Frontal carina: not as strong as in females because face usually not, or weakly, depressed below frontal carina. Dorsellum: usually less sculptured; lateral up-turned tooth reduced, indistinct. Petiole: longer. Gaster: much shorter and narrower than mesosoma; gastral tergites never piliferous-punctate; Gt 1 without inclined part and median groove anteriorly, without eye-like patches at base. In addition, males can also differ from conspecific females in the following characters. Vertex and eyes: vertex much more transverse and hence ocelli usually in an obtuse-angled triangle; vertex and eyes less setose. Fore wing: usually hyaline, not infuscate.