Ooctonus sinensis Subba Rao, 1989

Triapitsyn, Serguei V., 2010, Revision of the Palaearctic species and review of the Oriental species of Ooctonus (Hymenoptera: Mymaridae), with notes on extralimital taxa 2381, Zootaxa 2381 (1), pp. 1-74 : 69-71

Ooctonus sinensis Subba Rao, 1989

( Figs 136–138 )

Ooctonus sinensis Subba Rao 1989: 140 (key), 141–142, 176 (illustrations); holotype female [BMNH], examined; type locality: Tien Fong Mountains , Hainan Island, Hainan, China .

Type material examined. Holotype female [ BMNH] on card labeled: 1. “ CHINA, Hainan I., Tien Fong Mts., 20.v.83, Bouček ”; 2. “ Ooctonus sinensis sp. nov. ♀ det. B.R. Subba Rao, 1988”; 3. [inside red-bordered circle] “Holo-type”; 4. “B.M. TYPE HYM 5.34–84”. Subba Rao (1989: 142) indicated the incorrect collection date of the holotype of O. sinensis as 20–x–1983 . Paratype male [ BMNH] on card labeled: 1. “TAPLEJUNG

DISTR., Old mixed forest above Sangu, c 6200’, 25–28.x.1961.”; 2. “BRIT. MUS. East Nepal Exp. 1961–62. R.L. Coe Coll. B.M.1962–177”; 3. “ Ooctonus sinensis sp. nov. ♂ det. B.R. Subba Rao, 1988”; 4. [inside yellow-bordered circle] “Para-type”; 5. “no. 9”. The male paratype specimen has 4 distal flagellomeres of one antenna missing .

Redescription. FEMALE (holotype). Length 2575 µm. Body ( Fig. 136 ) almost entirely black except eyes and ocelli dirty pink and gaster dark brown to black; scape light brown, pedicel mostly brown, flagellum dark brown; coxae black, remainder of leg segments light brown to brown except metafemur and metatibia dark brown.

Scape a little longer than clava, apical half or so of scape wider than its basal half. All funicle segments much longer than wide and more or less subequal in length (distal ones a little shorter), F1 notably longer than pedicel; mps apparently present at least on F4–F8 (impossible to verify without slide-mounting an antenna).

Mesosoma ( Fig. 137 ) with pronotum weakly reticulate; mesoscutum and scutellum with strong reticulate sculpture (the cells much larger on mesoscutum and posterior scutellum than on anterior scutellum, those on posterior scutellum more longitudinally elongate), midlobe of mesoscutum with a median groove about as wide posteriorly as width of a notaulus, anteriorly narrowing and almost extending to anterior margin of mesoscutum; metanotum sculptured basally, with posterior margin broadly rounded; propodeum strongly sculptured, with median carina long, and lateral carinae not parallel with median carina and not extending to anterior margin of propodeum.

Forewing approximately 3.0x as long as wide; disc with a slight brownish tinge throughout, densely setose but bare behind most of submarginal vein, with discal setae only just behind its apex along posterior margin of wing, slightly truncate apically.

Pro- and mesocoxae smooth, metacoxa with strong reticulate sculpture, metafemur also reticulate but not as strongly as metacoxa.

Petiole longitudinally striate, longer than metacoxa; gaster shorter than mesosoma; ovipositor not exserted beyond apex of gaster.

MALE. Subba Rao (1989) indicated (p. 142) the following regarding the male paratype of his O. sinensis from above Sangu, Taplejung District, Mechi Zone, Nepal: “ Male: With some hesitation, I am designating this specimen as the male of this species. Although the specimen has been collected from Nepal, except for its slight colour pattern of the legs, I cannot find any other morphological difference either in the sculpture or in other characters described for the female”. Subba Rao may be correct in his association of the two specimens, but in my opinion there is a greater likelihood that the male paratype and female holotype are not conspecific. As correctly noted by Subba Rao (1989) regarding their leg coloration, the metafemur of the female holotype is completely dark brown whereas the metafemur of the male paratype is mostly light brown (except partially brown to dark brown distally). One would expect that within the same species a female collected (in the northern hemisphere) at a lower latitude and elevation would not be darker than a male collected at a higher latitude and elevation, which is not the case for the two type specimens. There are also slight differences between the two specimens in the sculpture of the mesosoma ( Figs 137 and 138 , respectively), although generally they are indeed superficially quite similar (both are card-mounted, so some features are difficult to assess). Both specimens are quite large and of more or less similar size (body length of the male is about 2.8 mm). Until a male of O. sinensis is collected at the type locality in Hainan Island and compared with the paratype male from Nepal, the issue of their conspecificity will remain unresolved.

Diagnosis. Female O. sinensis differs from the other described Oriental Ooctonus by the combination of mesoscutum with a long median groove, metacoxa black, propodeum with lateral carinae not parallel and median carina not extending to anterior margin of propodeum, and a smooth petiole.

Distribution. ORIENTAL: China (Hainan), and possibly Nepal (see above).

Hosts. Unknown.

Acknowledgments

I thank Dominique Zimmermann and Herbert Zettel (International Research Institute of Entomology, NHMW) for inviting me to curate the Walter Soyka collection of microhymenoptera, for their kind assistance during my visit to Vienna, and also for the loan of specimens. My trip to Austria in June 2007 was very productive also largely due to collaboration of Csaba Thuróczy (Köszeg, Hungary). We shared the curation efforts of the NHMW collection of Mymaridae and also collected in the W. Soyka’s type locality in Hundsheim and other places in Lower Austria. C. Thuróczy kindly made available to me some of W. Soyka’s publications and also the digital photographs of the primary types of A.H. Haliday’s and F. Walker’s species of Ooctonus and some other mymarid genera in NTNU. John T. Huber (CNCI), Dmitri V. Logunov (MMUE), John S. Noyes and David Notton (BMNH), Torbjørn Ekrem (NTNU), Jerome Constant (ISNB), Steven L. Heydon (UCDC), Michael W. Gates (USNM), Jo Berry (NZAC), and Robert L. Zuparko (CAS and EMEC) arranged the loans of specimens from the respective collections. Marina V. Michailovskaya (Mountain-Taiga Station, Far Eastern Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Gornotayozhnoye, Primorskiy krai, Russia), my mother Elisaveta Ya. Shouvakhina, and my father-in-law Mikhail E. Tretiakov collected many interesting mymarids in Russia and made them available for this study. Sister Antonia (Toni) Pietryga (Hundsheim, Austria) graciously showed Csaba Thuróczy and me Walter Soyka’s collecting and former study rooms in the priest’s house in Hundsheim. John T. Huber and Gary A.P. Gibson (CNCI) made many useful suggestions for improvement of the manuscript. Vladimir V. Berezovskiy and Jennifer Walker (UCRC) provided technical assistance.

Figures

FIGURE 138. Ooctonus sinensis ♂ (paratype): mesosoma and petiole.

FIGURES 136, 137. Ooctonus sinensis ♀ (holotype): 136, habitus; 137, mesosoma.