Pimpla patirrufa, Pádua & Fernandes & Sääksjärvi, 2020

Padua, Diego G., Fernandes, Daniell R. R. & Saeaeksjaervi, Ilari E., 2020, Pimpla Fabricius, 1804 (Ichneumonidae, Pimplinae) from Uruguay: a replacement name, new records, and an identification key to the species, ZooKeys 1007, pp. 23-47 : 23

Pimpla patirrufa nom. nov. Figures 6A-F , 7A-C

Pimpla rufipes Brullé, 1846: 102. Lectotype: ♀, Uruguay (MNHN). Non Pimpla rufipes (Miller, 1759).

Coccygomimus rufipes ; Townes and Townes 1960: 338.

Coccygomimus rufipes ; Townes 1961: 173.

Coccygomimus rufipes ; Townes and Townes 1966: 27.

Diagnosis.

This species can be distinguished from the other Uruguayan species of the genus by the combination of the following character states: 1) wings hyaline with weak brownish staining; 2) mesosoma shining black; 3) metasoma black with more or less brown staining on apical rims; 4) laterotergite V 1.4-1.6 times as long as wide; 5) legs orange with fore coxae orange or black, fore and mid tarsi slightly duller orange to slightly dusky, hind tibia duller orange with rather weak blackish staining on apex, hind tarsus extensively blackish to black; 6) tergite II with larger and stronger punctures; 7) malar space 1.0-1.1 (0.85-1.0 in male) times as long as basal width of mandibles; 8) ovipositor 1.3-1.6 times as long as hind tibia; 9) ovipositor cylindric, apex of dorsal valve without teeth and ventral valve with gently convex teeth on tip.

Biological notes.

Parasitoid of Plusia sp. ( Noctuidae ) ( Porter 1970).

Distribution.

Argentina, Brazil, and Uruguay (Fig. 11F ).

Material examined.

Lectotype, Uruguay, Montevideo (♀, EY9414), examined by photo (Fig. 8A-C ). URUGUAY, Rocha, Branaa, Agricultura, 34°02'33.7"S, 53°50'03.1"W, 11.II.2015, Malaise trap II (E. Castiglioni and team leg.), 1♂, INPA; idem, but 12.I.2015, Malaise trap I, 3♂♂, INPA; idem, but Malaise trap II, 1♀ and 1♂, INPA; idem, but 12.III.2015, Malaise trap II, 1♂, INPA; idem, but 27.IV.2015, Malaise trap I, 1♂, INPA; idem, but 28.I.2015, Malaise trap II, 2♂♂, INPA; idem, but 29.XII.2014, Malaise trap II, 1♀, INPA; idem, but 30.XI.2015, Malaise I, 1♂, INPA; Cardoso, Campo Natural, 34°05'26.8"S, 53°52'14.4"W, 12.I.2015, Malaise trap I (E. Castiglioni and team leg.), 1♂, INPA; idem, but 26.II.2015, Malaise trap I, 1♂, INPA; idem, but 28.I.2015, Malaise trap I, 1♂, INPA; idem, but 29.XII.2014, Malaise trap I, 1♂, INPA; idem, but 29.XII.2014, Malaise trap II, 1♂, INPA; idem but 21.XII.2016, Malaise trap II, 1♂, INPA; Castillos, Llambi, Pasto-agricultura, 34°24'7.04"S, 54°08'1.48"W, 08.XII.2016, Malaise trap I (E. Castiglioni and team leg.), 1♂, INPA; idem, but 21.XII.2016, Malaise trap I, 1♀, INPA; idem, but 26.II.2015, Malaise trap II, 1♂, INPA; Don Bosco, Bosque-Campo, 34°05'02.6"S, 53°45'44.5"W, 10.VI.2015, Malaise trap I (E. Castiglioni and team leg.), 1♂, INPA; idem, but 11.II.2015, Malaise trap I, 1♂, INPA; idem, but 26.II.2015, Malaise trap I, 1♂, INPA; idem, but 28.I.2015, Malaise trap II, 1♂, INPA; idem, but 29.XII.2014, Malaise trap I, 2♂♂, INPA; idem, but 29.XII.2014, Malaise trap II, 1♂, INPA.

Etymology.

The new specific name " Pimpla patirrufa " is derived from the Spanish words "patas rufas", and refers to the Spanish transliteration of " Pimpla rufipes ", the original name proposed by Brullé. The name is to be treated as a noun in apposition.

Remarks.

Pimpla patirrufa nom. nov. is a replacement name for P. rufipes Brullé, 1846. The name " Pimpla rufipes " was already occupied by Pimpla rufipes (Miller, 1759). According to the International Code Zoological Nomenclature, Article 57 (ICZN 1999), we propose a replacement name for this primary junior homonym. This homonymy may have caused some confusion in the literature. Çoruh and Kesdek (2008), Özbek and Çoruh (2012), and Çoruh et al. (2014) cited P. rufipes Brullé, 1846 from Turkey and Horstmann (2001) cited this species from Germany, but these authors most probably wanted to refer to P. rufipes (Miller, 1759). Pimpla rufipes (Miller, 1759) is a widespread Old World species ( Yu et al. 2016). However, as Coccygomimus instigator (Fabricius, 1793) (currently junior synonym of P. rufipes (Miller, 1759), it was introduced at least five times between 1972 and 1978 to USA from Morocco, Yugoslavia, Iran, Poland and Romania ( Coulson et al. 1986). Zwakhals (2005) listed some morphological differences of P. rufipes (Miller, 1759) in comparsion with other European species of Pimpla . Some of these characteristics assure us that this species is not closely related to P. rufipes Brullé, 1846, as pubescence is whitish and the coxae and trochanter are reddish in Brullé’s species and pubescence is fuscous and the coxae and trochanter are black in Miller’s species. In addition, P. rufipes Brullé, 1846 has a distribution restricted to South America (Argentina, Brazil, and Uruguay).

Figures

Figure 6. Pimpla patirrufa nom. nov. A ♀, habitus, lateral view B ♂, habitus, lateral view C ♀, face, frontal view D ♀, metasoma, dorsal view E ♀, metasoma, ventral view (arrow pointing to laterotergite V) F ♀, ovipositor apex.

Figure 7. Pimpla patirrufa nom. nov. (Lectotype of Pimpla rufipes Brulle, 1846, ♀) A habitus, lateral view B face, frontal view C mesosoma and metasoma, dorsal view. Figures by Christophe Herve, MNHN.

Figure 8. Pimpla perssoni Gauld, 1991 A ♀, habitus, lateral view B ♂, habitus, lateral view C ♀, face, frontal view D ♀, metasoma, dorsal view E ♀, metasoma, ventral view (arrow pointing to laterotergite V) F ♀, ovipositor apex.

Figure 11. Distribution of Pimpla spp. in Uruguay A P. albomarginata Cameron, 1886 B P. caerulea Brulle, 1846 C P. cyanipennis Brulle, 1846 D P. golbachi (Porter, 1970) E P. perssoni Gauld, 1991 F P. patirrufa nom. nov. G P. semirufa Brulle, 1846 H P. tomyris Schrottky, 1902. Gray area = Rocha Department. Red circle = previous record. Blue circle = new record.