Ceraphron tenuimeris, Salden & Peters, 2023
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5852/ejt.2023.884.2181 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:A128228C-185E-4D21-B23B-223C7C737C4C |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8193948 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/5F7C3B6D-AD11-40A1-BF0B-21440835DFEE |
taxon LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:act:5F7C3B6D-AD11-40A1-BF0B-21440835DFEE |
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
scientific name |
Ceraphron tenuimeris |
status |
sp. nov. |
Ceraphron tenuimeris sp. nov.
urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:5F7C3B6D-AD11-40A1-BF0B-21440835DFEE
Fig. 83 View Fig
Diagnosis
Metasoma brown except anterior third lighter; F1 2.8× as long as wide, F6 2.1× as long as wide; fore wing length 2.61–2.70 × (2.62) width. Male genitalia: harpe trapezoidal in ventral and dorsal view; harpe/gvc index 0.43; dorsomedial margins of harpes slightly converging and not touching at distodorsal margin of gvc, dorsomedial margin of harpe straight and virtually parallel to other harpe in approximately basal half, slightly concave and slightly diverging distolaterally in approximately apical half, apex of harpe pointed, oriented distolaterally; lateral margin of harpe slightly concave; aedeagus + gonossiculus as long as harpe.
Etymology
The species name is a composition of the Latin word ‘ tenues ’, which means ‘thin’, and the flagellomere, with reference to the thin flagellomeres.
Material examined
Holotype
KENYA • ♂; Western Province, Kakamega Forest; 00°19′49.9 N, 34°52′16.1 E; 1580 m a.s.l.; 7 Aug. 2007; F. Hita Garcia leg.; Transect 15; primary rain forest; Winkler leaf litter extraction; ZFMK; ZFMK- HYM-00036870 . GoogleMaps
Paratypes
KENYA • 2 ♂♂; Western Province, Kakamega Forest; 00°27′10.6 N, 34°51′48.7 E; 1676 m a.s.l.; 26 Jun. 2007; F. Hita Garcia leg.; Transect 4; primary rain forest; Winkler leaf litter extraction; ZFMK; ZFMK-HYM-00036871 , GoogleMaps ZFMK-HYM-00036872 GoogleMaps .
Description
Male (N = 3 in morphometric measurements)
BODY LENGTH. 1.14–1.38 mm (1.26 mm).
COLOUR. Head dark brown, mesosoma dark brown, metasoma brown except anterior third lighter; scape and pedicel light brown, flagellum brown, gradually darkening from F1 to F9; legs yellowish except coxae dark brown and proximal third light brown; fore wing venation light brown, fore and hind wing disc slightly melanized, fore wing at proximal part less melanized.
ANTENNA. 11-segmented, flagellomeres cylindric; scape 4.0× as long as pedicel, scape longer than F1 and F2 combined, F1 2.8× as long as wide, F1 1.7× as long as pedicel, F1 1.3× as long as F2, F1 shorter than F7 and F8 combined, F1 shorter than F9, F6 2.1 × as long as wide, F6 shorter than F7 and F8 combined, F6 1.2 × as high as F9; few small multiporous plates on flagellomeres, sensillae on flagellomeres sickle-shaped and shorter than width of flagellomeres.
HEAD. Head width 1.09–1.13 × (1.10) head height; head width 1.94–2.04 × (2.04) interorbital space; maximum eye diameter 1.27–1.41× (1.41) minimum eye diameter; head height 1.62–1.82 × (1.62) maximum eye diameter. Dorsal margin of occipital carina ventral to dorsal margin of lateral ocellus in lateral view; preoccipital furrow present; preoccipital carina present. OOL:POL:LOL 1.00:0.58– 0.64:0.50–0.55 (1.00:0.58:0.50); OOL 1.69–2.17 × (2.17) lateral ocellus diameter. White, thick setae on upper face distinct; supraclypeal depression present; lateral margin of torulus raised; intertorular carina present; posterolateral processes of gena present.
MESOSOMA, METASOMA. Mesosoma not compressed laterally. Head width 0.96 × (0.96) mesosoma width; Weber length 480–520 µm (520 µm). Mesoscutum densely setose, setae curved backwards; median mesoscutal sulcus present; median mesoscutal sulcus adjacent to transscutal articulation; interaxillar sulcus absent (= scutoscutellar sulcus adjacent to transscutal articulation), scutoscutellar sulcus concave; dorsal axillar area setose, setae curved backwards; mesoscutellum setose, setae curved backwards or straight. Mesoscutum width 1.67–1.79× (1.79) mesoscutellum width; posterior mesoscutal width 1.37– 1.54 × (1.54) mesoscutellum width; mesoscutellum length 1.33–1.57× (1.35) mesoscutellum width; mesoscutellum length 0.88–1.15 × (0.88) posterior mesoscutal width; Weber length 1.37–1.45 × (1.37) mesoscutum width; Weber length 1.67–1.81× (1.81) mesoscutellum length. Anteromedian projection of the metanoto-propodeo-metapecto-mesopectal complex curved in lateral view with blunt, lighter and bifurcated end, extending to end of mesosoma; mesometapleural sulcus present; posterior propodeal projection distinct, straight in ventrolateral view; posterior mesosomal comb absent. Basal transverse carina of petiole (on syntergum) present; at least six distinct, basal longitudinal carinae on syntergum; pairs of translucent patches on metasomal syntergum and synsternum.
FORE WING. Length 2.61–2.70 × (2.62) width; stigmal vein longer than 3× pterostigma marginal length.
MALE GENITALIA. Genital length 194–206 µm (206 µm); Weber length 2.44–2.52 × (2.52) genital length; gvc width 94–97 µm (94 µm); genital length 2.03–2.20× (2.20) gvc width; gvc width less than two thirds of gvc length; gvc width 1.30× distal gvc width. Proximodorsal margin of gvc slightly convex; distodorsal margin of gvc slightly descending proximomedially ( Fig. 83C View Fig ); proximoventral margin of gvc slightly concave; distoventral margin of gvc descending proximomedially ( Fig. 83A View Fig ); ventral area of gvc straight; dorsal area of gvc convex ( Fig. 83B View Fig ); proximolateral margin of gvc ascending ventrally; distolateral margin of gvc strongly descending ventrally ( Fig. 83B View Fig ). Harpe trapezoidal in ventral and dorsal view; harpe/gvc index 0.43; lateral articulation site of harpe with gvc virtually flush ( Fig. 83A, C View Fig ); ventral margin of harpe slightly concave, dorsal margin convex in basal third and straight in apical two thirds ( Fig. 83B View Fig ), lateral margin slightly concave, widest point of harpe at articulation site with gvc ( Fig. 83A, C View Fig ); dorsomedial margins of harpes slightly converging and not touching at distodorsal margin of gvc, dorsomedial margin of harpe straight and virtually parallel to other harpe in approximately basal half, slightly concave and slightly diverging distolaterally in approximately apical half ( Fig. 83C View Fig ), apex of harpe pointed, oriented distolaterally ( Fig. 83A, C View Fig ). Harpe with at least two lateral setae restricted to apical third, longest lateral setae half as long as harpe, lateral setae oriented distolaterally; harpe with at least three apical setae, longest apical setae half as long as harpe, apical setae oriented distomedially and distoventrally; harpe with at least four median setae restricted to apical third, longest median setae one quarter as long as harpe, median setae oriented distomedially and medioventrally. Aedeagus + gonossiculus as long as harpe, apex of aedeagus + gonossiculus pointed ( Fig. 83A, C View Fig ) and dorsal to apex of harpe. Genitalia moderately sclerotized.
Female
Unknown.
Variation
The end of the anteromedian projection of the metanoto-propodeo-metapecto-mesopectal complex is more strongly bifurcated in ZFMK-HYM-00036870 and more weakly bifurcated in ZFMK- HYM-00036871. The number of distinct, basal longitudinal carinae on the syntergum varies between six (ZFMK-HYM-00036872) and seven (ZFMK-HYM-00036870, ZFMK-HYM-00036871).
Biology
Host unknown, specimens collected from leaf litter.
Distribution
Afrotropical: Kenya.
Remarks
Comparison with similar species Ceraphron tenuimeris sp. nov. and C. salazar sp. nov. can be distinguished by the longer and thinner flagellomeres in C. tenuimeris . Their male genitalia can be distinguished by a different setal arrangement, especially the long median setae in C. salazar , a different dorsal margin at the harpe (convex and straight in C. tenuimeris and straight in C. salazar ) and a more weakly sclerotized harpe in C. salazar .
For more comparisons with similar species, see remarks under C. ivindoensis sp. nov.
Condition of type material
Holotype is immaculate.
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 |