Ceraphron pilosiharpis, 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.8193938 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/1EB72ACB-B452-4BD6-A007-8540EA2C82EF |
taxon LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:act:1EB72ACB-B452-4BD6-A007-8540EA2C82EF |
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
scientific name |
Ceraphron pilosiharpis |
status |
sp. nov. |
Ceraphron pilosiharpis sp. nov.
urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:1EB72ACB-B452-4BD6-A007-8540EA2C82EF
Fig. 76 View Fig
Diagnosis
Scape as long as F1 to F3 combined; preoccipital carina distinct; OOL 1.64 × lateral ocellus diameter; anteromedian projection of the metanoto-propodeo-metapecto-mesopectal complex curved in lateral view with blunt, lighter and bifurcated end, exceeding end of mesosoma. Male genitalia: harpe trapezoidal in ventral and dorsal view and indented apically in lateral view; harpe/gvc index 0.50; dorsomedial margins of harpes almost touching at distodorsal margin of gvc, dorsomedial margin of harpe straight and virtually parallel to other harpe in basal third, slightly concave and diverging distolaterally in apical two thirds, apex of harpe pointed, oriented distomedially; harpe with at least four apical setae, longest apical setae slightly longer than as long as harpe, apical setae distinctly crossing and oriented distolaterally, distomedially and distoventrally; median setae distinctly crossing and longest median setae as long as harpe; genital length 1.39× gvc width.
Etymology
The species name is a composition of the anatomical term ‘harpe’ and the Latin word ‘ pilosus ’ which means ‘hairy’, with reference to the distinct setae of the harpes.
Material examined
Holotype
KENYA • ♂; Western Province, Kakamega Forest; 00°14′52.3 N, 34°52′5.3 E; 1607 m a.s.l.; 21 Aug. 2007; F. Hita Garcia leg.; Transect 18; primary rain forest; Winkler leaf litter extraction; ZFMK; ZFMK- HYM-00036984 . GoogleMaps
Description
Male
BODY LENGTH. 1.06 mm.
COLOUR. Head dark brown, mesosoma brown, metasoma brown; scape and pedicel yellowish, flagellum light brown, gradually darkening from F1 to F9; legs yellowish except proximal half of pro- and mesocoxa brown, proximal third of metacoxa 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 4.3× as long as pedicel, scape as long as F1 to F3 combined, F1 1.9× as long as wide, F1 1.6× as long as pedicel, F1 1.5× as long as F2, F1 shorter than F7 and F8 combined, F1 shorter than F9, F6 1.4 × as long as wide, F6 shorter than F7 and F8 combined, F6 1.2 × as high as F9; numerous medium-sized multiporous plates on flagellomeres, sensillae on flagellomeres sickle-shaped and shorter than width of flagellomeres.
HEAD. Head width 1.20 × head height; head width 1.93 × interorbital space; maximum eye diameter 1.37 × minimum eye diameter; head height 1.61 × maximum eye diameter. Dorsal margin of occipital carina ventral to dorsal margin of lateral ocellus in lateral view; preoccipital furrow present; preoccipital carina distinct. OOL:POL:LOL 1.00:0.56:0.56; OOL 1.64 × lateral ocellus diameter. White, thick setae on upper face present; supraclypeal depression present; lateral margin of torulus raised; intertorular carina present; posterolateral processes of gena absent.
MESOSOMA, METASOMA. Mesosoma not compressed laterally. Head width 1.02 × mesosoma width; Weber length 369 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 sparsely setose, setae curved backwards or straight. Mesoscutum width 1.84 × mesoscutellum width; posterior mesoscutal width 1.48 × mesoscutellum width; mesoscutellum length 1.52 × mesoscutellum width; mesoscutellum length 1.03 × posterior mesoscutal width; Weber length 1.28 × mesoscutum width; Weber length 1.55 × mesoscutellum length. Anteromedian projection of the metanoto-propodeo-metapecto-mesopectal complex curved in lateral view with blunt, lighter and bifurcated end, exceeding end of mesosoma; mesometapleural sulcus indistinct; posterior propodeal projection straight and light in ventrolateral view; posterior mesosomal comb absent. Basal transverse carina of petiole (on syntergum) present; at least seven, basal longitudinal carinae on syntergum; translucent patches indistinct.
FORE WING. Length 3.04 × width; stigmal vein longer than 3× pterostigma marginal length.
MALE GENITALIA. Genital length 156 µm; Weber length 2.36× genital length; gvc width 113 µm; genital length 1.39× gvc width; gvc width less than three quarters of gvc length; gvc width 1.22× distal gvc width. Proximodorsal margin of gvc convex; distodorsal margin of gvc descending proximomedially ( Fig. 76C View Fig ); proximoventral margin of gvc concave; distoventral margin of gvc slightly descending proximomedially ( Fig. 76A View Fig ); ventral area of gvc straight; dorsal area of gvc convex ( Fig. 76B View Fig ), slightly indented distomedially; proximolateral margin of gvc ascending ventrally; distolateral margin of gvc descending ventrally ( Fig. 76B View Fig ). Harpe trapezoidal in ventral and dorsal view and indented apically in lateral view; harpe/gvc index 0.50; lateral articulation site of harpe with gvc not flush ( Fig. 76A, C View Fig ); ventral margin of harpe concave, dorsal margin straight in basal half and convex in apical half ( Fig. 76B View Fig ), lateral margin convex, widest point of harpe at basal third ( Fig. 76A, C View Fig ); dorsomedial margins of harpes almost touching at distodorsal margin of gvc, dorsomedial margin of harpe straight and virtually parallel to other harpe in basal third, slightly concave and diverging distolaterally in apical two thirds ( Fig. 76C View Fig ), apex of harpe pointed, oriented distomedially ( Fig. 76A, C View Fig ). Harpe with at least four lateral setae restricted to apical half, longest lateral setae one third as long as harpe, lateral setae oriented distolaterally and distoventrally; harpe with at least four apical setae, longest apical setae slightly longer than as long as harpe, apical setae distinctly crossing and oriented distolaterally, distomedially and distoventrally; harpe with at least five median setae, longest median setae as long as harpe, median setae distinctly crossing and oriented distomedially, distoventrally and medioventrally. Aedeagus + gonossiculus three quarters as long as harpe, apex of aedeagus + gonossiculus pointed ( Fig. 76A, C View Fig ) and oriented dorsal to apex of harpe. Genitalia moderately sclerotized with strongest sclerotization at distal margin of gvc and all margins of harpe.
Female
Unknown.
Variation
Unknown.
Biology
Host unknown, specimen collected from leaf litter.
Distribution
Afrotropical: Kenya.
Remarks
Comparison with similar species
The male genitalia of C. pilosiharpis sp. nov. and C. longulus Sundholm, 1970 ( Fig. 103 View Fig ) are very similar in ventral and dorsal view. Information about the setae of the harpe of C. longulus is only indicated in Sundholm 1970 (363: fig. 139). According to his drawing, C. longulus has rather short and less distinct setae than C. pilosiharpis . There is no information, whether the harpe of C. longulus is indented apically or not. However, C. pilosiharpis and C. longulus are clearly distinguished by, for example, the flagellomeres being distinctly shorter in C. pilosiharpis , the stigmal vein in comparison to the pterostigma marginal length being longer in C. pilosiharpis , and the colouration of the profemur and -tibia being darker in C. longulus .
For more comparisons with similar species, see remarks under C. breviharpis sp. nov.
Condition of type material
In the holotype, the right F5 to F9, and the right protibia and protarsus are missing.
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 |