Pseudoanthidium tenellum, (MOCSARY, 1880)
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.1093/zoolinnean/zlab062 |
|
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:CF1BB523-4E43-486B-9A4F-E510F1854B9B |
|
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5823107 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/AE06D043-FFE2-FF82-FCF4-93D0FE9EFF51 |
|
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
|
scientific name |
Pseudoanthidium tenellum |
| status |
|
PSEUDOANTHIDIUM TENELLUM ( MOCSÁRY, 1880) View in CoL
( FIGS 2A View Figure 2 , 10C View Figure 10 , 11D View Figure 11 , 12D View Figure 12 , 13D View Figure 13 , 19 View Figure 19 , 20 View Figure 20 , 21A, C, E View Figure 21 )
Anthidium tenellum Mocsáry, 1880: 48–50 View in CoL , ♀ ♂. Type locality: in Latin ‘ Hungaria centrali et meridionali’ [central and southern Hungary], in Hungarian ‘ Budapest mellett a Gellérthegyen , Siófoknál és Grebenácz körül’ [next to Budapest, on Gellérthegyen, near Siófok and around Grebenácz, Hungary]. Lectotype, ♀, designated by B. Tkalců 1984, published here, ‘ Grebenác 1878’ [now Serbia], ‘ Anthidium tenellum Mocs. View in CoL det. Mocsáry’, ‘497/202.’, ‘ Lectotypus Anthidium tenellum Mocs. (Tkalců, 1984) View in CoL ’, [red label] (blank), ‘ Hungarian Natural History Museum Hymenoptera Coll. Budapest’ [blue label] (HNHM) ( Fig. 19 View Figure 19 ).
Anthidium eversmanni Radoszkowski, 1886: 54–55 View in CoL , ♂, synon. nov. Type locality: ‘Orenbourg’ [ Russia: Orenburg Prov., Orenburg]. Lectotype, ♂, by present designation: ‘Coll. Radosz.’, ‘ floripetum ♂. Evers.’, ‘ eversmanni View in CoL ’, ‘Zool. Mus. Berlin’, ‘ Lectotypus ♂ Anthidium eversmanni Radoszkowski, 1886 View in CoL design.
Fateryga et Proshchalykin 2020’ [red label] (ZMHB) ( Fig. 20 View Figure 20 ).
Material examined: 15 females, 60 males (see Supporting Information, Table S1 for specimen data).
Distribution: Austria, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, China (Xinjiang), Crimea, Hungary, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Romania, Russia (European part, Urals,Western Siberia), Serbia, Slovakia, Tajikistan, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Ukraine and Uzbekistan ( Fig. 6D View Figure 6 ). The reference in Tkalců (1975) to a distribution for this species in southern Europe and northern Africa, and with a collection locality in Ain Zaatout, Algeria, is probably an error.
Host-plant associations: Asteraceae Hungary Centaurea scabiosa subsp. sadleriana (Janka) Asch. & Graebn.( Mocsáry, 1880) Tajikistan Pulicaria salviifolia Bunge (male visits) ( Popov, 1967); Plumbaginaceae Crimea Limonium scoparium (Pall. ex Willd.) Stankov (male visit) (personal observation, A. V. Fateryga).
Remarks: Pseudoanthidium tenellum was described in the same publication as P. nanum ( Mocsáry, 1880) . For the reasons cited in the Remarks section for P. nanum , we propose the use of 1880 as the official publication date of the name P. tenellum , in other words, P. tenellum ( Mocsáry, 1880) .
A lectotype is designated for P. eversmanni ( Radoszkowski, 1886) (ZMHB) . This taxon was determined to be a junior synonym of P. tenellum ( Fig. 20 View Figure 20 ).
Diagnosis female: The female of P. tenellum may be distinguished from other members of this complex by the following combination of characters: punctation on terga comparatively coarse, as large or larger than punctation on mesonotum; largest punctures on black part of scutellum greater in diameter than the largest punctures on T 2; maculations on European specimens creamy white to pale yellow but lemon yellow in Central Asian specimens ( Fig. 21A, C, E View Figure 21 ).
The female of P. tenellum is similar to P. cribratum and P. rozeni ; for more information concerning the differentiation of these three species, see the section entitled ‘Diagnosis female’ for P. rozeni . In their zone of overlap, differentiating females of P. tenellum from those of P. cribratum and, in some cases, from those of P. stigmaticorne may be challenging.
Diagnosis male: The male of P. tenellum may be distinguished from other members of this complex by the following combination of characters: gonostylus over 1.5 times wider at widest point than at base ( Fig. 10C View Figure 10 ); notch at apex of gonostylus less deep than opening of notch is wide ( Fig. 10C View Figure 10 ); exterior and interior margin of gonostylus regularly curved ( Fig. 10C View Figure 10 ); notch at apex of gonostylus more or less centred ( Fig. 10C View Figure 10 ); lateral comb on S5 mitten-shaped ( Fig. 11D View Figure 11 ); posterior, premarginal brush on S3 with hairs unhooked at tips ( Fig. 12D View Figure 12 ); hairless zone on S3 between posterior premarginal brush of hairs and anterior zone of dense, velvety pilosity slightly shiny to matte and trapezoidal, without median extension anteriorly along midline ( Fig. 12D View Figure 12 ); posterior margin of S2 strongly depressed, overhung by long fringe across entire width ( Fig. 13D View Figure 13 ); hairs on ventral surface of trochanter 3 shaggy and uneven, not velvety. T6 and T7 predominantly orange or yellow.
The male of P. tenellum is most similar to P. rozeni ; for more information concerning the differentiation of these two species, see the section entitled ‘Diagnosis male’ for P. rozeni .
Geographic variation: Populations in Europe, as well as in Siberia, are characterized by pale yellow to cream-coloured markings on the head, thorax and metasoma. Moreover, the posterior half of T5, as well as the entirety of T6 and T7, are a translucent orange in males. Populations from Central Asia, including Turkmenistan, Tajikistan and Xinjiang, on the other hand, have lemon-yellow coloured markings on the head, thorax and metasoma. In these same populations, the posterior half of T5, as well as T6 and T7, are yellow. The population we examined from Kazakhstan is intermediate, with lemon-yellow coloured markings on the head, thorax and metasoma, similar to those of Central Asian specimens, but with the posterior half of T5, as well as T6 and T7 orange, similar to those of European specimens. The lateral comb on S5 is mitten-shaped and the apical notch of the gonostylus is V-shaped and wider than deep in most populations of P. tenellum .
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
|
Kingdom |
|
|
Phylum |
|
|
Class |
|
|
Order |
|
|
Family |
|
|
Genus |
Pseudoanthidium tenellum
| Litman, Jessica R., Fateryga, Alexander V., Griswold, Terry L., Aubert, Matthieu, Proshchalykin, Maxim Yu., Divelec, Romain Le, Burrows, Skyler & Praz, Christophe J. 2022 |
Anthidium eversmanni
| Radoszkowski O 1886: 55 |
Anthidium tenellum Mocsáry, 1880: 48–50
| Mocsary S 1880: 50 |