Enicospilus combustus (Gravenhorst, 1829)

Shimizu, So, Broad, Gavin R. & Maeto, Kaoru, 2020, Integrative taxonomy and analysis of species richness patterns of nocturnal Darwin wasps of the genus Enicospilus Stephens (Hymenoptera, Ichneumonidae, Ophioninae) in Japan, ZooKeys 990, pp. 1-144 : 1

publication ID	https://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.990.55542
publication LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:pub:7B73642C-278D-40F8-9091-B26213C9A704
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/9225188C-7A6B-5AE5-A154-1AE9D52B2A16
treatment provided by	ZooKeys by Pensoft
scientific name	Enicospilus combustus (Gravenhorst, 1829)
status

Treatment

Enicospilus combustus (Gravenhorst, 1829) Figure 13 View Figure 13

Ophion combustus Gravenhorst, 1829: 701; type lost?

Specimens examined.

Total of 54 specimens (39♀♀14♂♂ and 1 unsexed): England (18♀♀2♂♂), Japan (19♀♀10♂♂ and 1 unsexed), Russia (1♂), unknown (2♀♀1♂).

Distribution.

Oriental and Palaearctic regions ( Yu et al. 2016); this is a predominantly Palaearctic species that may be restricted to there, although Lee et al. (2011) reported this species from the Oriental region, probably based on a misidentification.

JAPAN: [ Hokkaidô] ( Uchida 1928, 1935; present study); [ Honshû] ( Uchida 1935; present study); [ Tôhoku] Aomori ( Uchida 1928; present study), Yamagata*, and Fukushima ( Uchida 1928; present study); [Hokuriku] Niigata ( Uchida 1928; present study); [ Kantô-Kôshin] Tochigi ( Uchida 1928; present study), Nagano*, and Tôkyô ( Uchida 1928, 1930); [ Tôkai] Gifu ( Uchida 1928); [Kinki] Kyôto * and Hyôgo *; [ Chûgoku] Hiroshima*; [Shikoku] ( Uchida 1935); [ Kyûshû] ( Uchida 1935), Fukuoka*. *New records.

Bionomics.

Reared from one species of Noctuidae in Japan: Trachea tokiensis (Butler, 1884) ( Uchida 1928, 1930). Notodontid and noctuid moths are recorded as hosts, but reliable records are only from Noctuidae of the subfamily Hadeninae (e.g., Broad and Shaw 2016).

Differential diagnosis.

This species is usually very easily distinguished from all other Palaearctic Enicospilus species by the black mesosoma, thyridium, and posterior segments of metasoma, as in Fig. 13A View Figure 13 . Enicospilus combustus has sometimes been confused with E. multidens stat. rev., E. ramidulus , and E. shikokuensis ; moreover, some authors have treated E. combustus and E. ramidulus as a single species (e.g., Viktorov 1957; Townes et al. 1965; Gauld and Mitchell 1981). However, E. combustus is easily separated from E. shikokuensis by the separated proximal and distal sclerites of fore wing fenestra, as in Fig. 13F View Figure 13 (proximal and distal sclerites usually obviously confluent in E. shikokuensis , as in Fig. 44F View Figure 44 ), from E. multidens stat. rev. and E. ramidulus by the entirely more or less blackish mesosoma, as in Fig. 13A, E View Figure 13 (mesosoma entirely orange-brown in E. multidens stat. rev. and E. ramidulus , as in Figs 29A, E View Figure 29 and 39A, E View Figure 39 respectively). Moreover, this species is similar to E. sharkeyi sp. nov. in colour pattern (Figs 13 View Figure 13 , 43 View Figure 43 ), however, E. combustus can be readily distinguished from it by many characters, such as separated proximal and distal sclerites of fore wing fenestra, as in Fig. 13F View Figure 13 (proximal and distal sclerites confluent in E. sharkeyi sp. nov., as in Fig. 43F View Figure 43 ), larger central sclerite of fore wing fenestra, as in Fig. 13F View Figure 13 (central sclerite smaller in E. sharkeyi sp. nov., as in Fig. 43F View Figure 43 ), wider lower face, as in Fig. 13B View Figure 13 (narrower in E. sharkeyi sp. nov., as in Fig. 43B View Figure 43 ), etc.