Aphanogmus, Thomson, 1858

Salden, Tobias & Peters, Ralph S., 2023, Afrotropical Ceraphronoidea (Insecta: Hymenoptera) put back on the map with the description of 88 new species, European Journal of Taxonomy 884 (1), pp. 1-386 : 11-14

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.8190300
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/C33B177D-E915-FFF1-FF60-FB48FA91F95E
treatment provided by	Felipe
scientific name	Aphanogmus
status

Treatment

Key to male Aphanogmus View in CoL View at ENA from the Afrotropical mainland

1. Median mesoscutal sulcus absent; basal transverse carina of petiole (on syntergum) present ( tenuicornis View in CoL species group) ( Dessart 1963a: 410, fig. 45) ................................................................ 2

– Median mesoscutal sulcus present; basal transverse carina of petiole (on syntergum) present ( fumipennis View in CoL species group) (e.g., Fig. 20D View Fig ; Evans et al. 2005: 50, fig. 2; 52, fig. 9) ....................... 4

– Median mesoscutal sulcus absent; basal transverse carina of petiole (on syntergum) absent ( clavicornis View in CoL species group) (e.g., Fig. 4D View Fig ; Dessart 1963a: 405, fig. 31) ........................................ 24

2. OOL:POL ≤ 1.11; preoccipital furrow, with small interocellar pit; anteromedian projection of the metanoto-propodeo-metapecto-mesopectal complex present (e.g., Fig. 36D View Fig ); longest lateral seta more than half as long as harpe ( Figs 36 View Fig , 38A, C View Fig ) ........................................................................... 3

– OOL:POL 1.49; preoccipital furrow, without interocellar pit; anteromedian projection of the metanoto-propodeo-metapecto-mesopectal complex absent ( Fig. 37D View Fig ); longest lateral seta less than one quarter as long as harpe ( Fig. 37A, C View Fig ) ............................................................ A. kikuyu sp. nov.

3. Scape as long as F1 and F2 combined ( Fig. 38D View Fig ); harpes taken together pagoda-shaped in ventral and dorsal view ( Fig. 38A, C View Fig ) .............................................................................. A. pagoda sp. nov.

– Scape longer than F1 and F2 combined ( Fig. 36D View Fig ); harpes taken together bell-shaped in ventral and dorsal view ( Fig. 36A, C View Fig ) ............................................................................... A. campanula sp. nov.

4. Harpe bilobed [ Figs 20 View Fig , 22–24 View Fig View Fig View Fig (dorsolateral lobe very short), 26–29, 31–32, 34–35, 99; Buffington & Polaszek 2009: 65, fig. 6; Dessart 1971: 97, fig. 13] ........................................................................ 5

– Harpe not bilobed ( Figs 21 View Fig , 25 View Fig , 30 View Fig , 33 View Fig ; Dessart 1963a: 394, fig. 12; Polaszek & LaSalle 1995: 139, fig. 24) ............................................................................................................................................. 19

5. Meso- or metapleuron with distinct longitudinal striations (e.g., Fig. 24D View Fig ) .................................... 6

– Meso- or metapleuron without or with very indistinct longitudinal striations (e.g., Fig. 28D View Fig ) ..... 12

6. Scape longer than F1 and F3 combined (e.g., Fig. 99D View Fig ) .................................................................. 7

– Scape shorter than F1 and F3 combined (e.g., Fig. 24D View Fig ) ................................................................. 9

7. Dorsolateral lobe of harpe not finger-shaped ( Buffington & Polaszek 2009: 65, fig. 6; Dessart 1971: 97, figs 13–14) .................................................................................................................................. 8

– Dorsolateral lobe of harpe finger-shaped ( Fig. 99A, C View Fig ; Dessart 1971: 97, figs 11–12) ..................... ................................................................................................................. A. reticulatus ( Fouts, 1934) View in CoL

8. Flagellomeres trapezoidal (Dessart 1971: 96, figs 6, 8); male genitalia as in Dessart (1971: 97, figs 13–14) ............................................................................................... A. fijiensis ( Ferrière, 1933) View in CoL

– Flagellomeres moniliform ( Buffington & Polaszek 2009: 64, fig. 3b); male genitalia as in Buffington & Polaszek (2009: 65, fig. 6) ............................................ A. dictynna ( Waterston, 1923) View in CoL

9. Scape as long as or longer than F1 and F2 combined, F1 ≤ 2.3 × as long as pedicel; OOL:POL ≥ 0.65 ................................................................................................................................................. 10

– Scape shorter than F1 and F2 combined, F1 3.7 × as long as pedicel; OOL:POL ≤ 0.50 ( Fig. 34D View Fig ). ...................................................................................................................................... A. taji sp. nov.

10. Metacoxa light brown or yellowish; scape light brown or light brown-yellowish; mesometapleural sulcus absent ....................................................................................................................................11

– Metacoxa brown; scape brown; mesometapleural sulcus present (but indistinct) in dorsal third of mesometapleuron ( Fig. 31D View Fig ) .................................................................................. A. rafikii sp. nov.

11. F1 1.4 × as long as wide ( Fig. 32D View Fig ); dorsolateral lobe of harpe about third as long as ventral lobe ( Fig. 32C View Fig ) ............................................................................................................ A. robustus sp. nov.

– F1 3.5× as long as wide ( Fig. 24D View Fig ); dorsolateral lobe of harpe very short ( Fig. 24C View Fig ) ...................... ................................................................................................................................. A. kisiwa sp. nov.

12. Preoccipital furrow, with interocellar pit (e.g., Fig. 22D View Fig ) .............................................................. 13

– Preoccipital furrow, without interocellar pit ................................................................................... 14

13. Scape as long as F1 and F2 combined, sensillae on flagellomeres not sickle-shaped ( Fig. 23D View Fig ); median mesoscutal sulcus not adjacent to transscutal articulation ...................... A. kakakili sp. nov.

– Scape longer than F1 and F2 combined, sensillae on flagellomeres erect and sickle-shaped ( Fig. 22D View Fig ); median mesoscutal sulcus adjacent to transscutal articulation ............................ A. guenteri sp. nov.

14. Metacoxa brown or yellow, not transparent (e.g., Figs 29 View Fig , 35 View Fig ) ...................................................... 15

– Metacoxa light yellow and transparent ( Figs 26–28 View Fig View Fig View Fig ) ..................................................................... 17

15. Scape light brown-yellowish or yellowish; F1 shorter than F9; F6 at least 1.3× as wide as F9 ( Figs 20 View Fig , 35 View Fig ); Weber length ≤ 1.76 × genital length ( Figs 20 View Fig , 35 View Fig ) ................................................................. 16

– Scape light brown; F1 as long as F9; F6 as wide as F9 ( Fig. 29D View Fig ); Weber length ≥ 1.96 × genital length ( Fig. 29 View Fig ) .......................................................................................................... A. nikii sp. nov.

16. Harpe/gvc index 0.37; dorsolateral lobe of harpe triangular in lateral view ( Fig. 35A–C View Fig ) ................ ............................................................................................................................... A. ukanda sp. nov.

– Harpe/gvc index 0.63; dorsolateral lobe of harpe finger-shaped in lateral view ( Fig. 20A–C View Fig ) .......... .......................................................................................................................... A. dimidiatus sp. nov.

17. Dorsolateral lobe/ventral lobe index ≥ 0.65; dorsolateral length of harpe/harpe index ≥ 0.81 (e.g., Fig. 28A–C View Fig ) .................................................................................................................................... 18

– Dorsolateral lobe/ventral lobe index 0.18; dorsolateral length of harpe/harpe index 0.61 ( Fig. 27A– C View Fig ) ............................................................................................................................. A. ndefu sp. nov.

18. Harpe/gvc index 0.34; dorsolateral lobe of harpe triangular in lateral view ( Fig. 28A–C View Fig ) ................ .................................................................................................................................... A. ngai sp. nov.

– Harpe/gvc index 0.47; dorsolateral lobe of harpe finger-shaped in lateral view ( Fig. 26A–C View Fig ) .......... ......................................................................................................................... A. morriconei sp. nov.

19. Harpe/gvc index ≤ 0.77 ................................................................................................................... 20

– Harpe/gvc index 1.23 ( Polaszek & LaSalle 1995: 139, fig. 24) ............... A. trasides Polaszek, 1995

20. Scape and pedicel light brown or lighter; scape longer than F1 and F2 combined; F1 shorter than F9; posterior mesosomal comb distinct (e.g., Fig. 30D View Fig ); harpe/gvc index ≥ 0.68 (e.g., Fig. 30A–C View Fig ) ....21

– Scape and pedicel brown; scape as long as F1 and F2 combined; F1 as long as F9; posterior mesosomal comb absent ( Fig. 25D View Fig ); harpe/gvc index 0.77 ( Fig. 25A–C View Fig ) .............. A. maua sp. nov.

21. Head dark brown, mesosoma dark brown, metasoma brown; flagellum brown (e.g., Fig. 33D View Fig ) ... 22

– Head light brown-amber, mesosoma light brown-amber, metasoma light brown; flagellum light brown ( Figs 21 View Fig , 30 View Fig ) ......................................................................................................................... 23

22. Dorsomedial margin of harpe concave from base to apex ( Fig. 33C View Fig ); harpe slightly curved in ventral direction ( Fig. 33B View Fig ) ................................................................................................ A. simbai sp. nov.

– Dorsomedial margin of harpe convex and slightly diverging in basal third, slightly concave and slightly converging in apical two thirds; harpe distinctly curved in ventral direction ( Dessart 1963a: 394, figs 12–13; Mikó 2012c) ............................................................ A. fumipennis Thomson, 1858 View in CoL

23. Dorsomedial margin of harpe convex in apical third with indentation below apex, harpe without median setae on basal two thirds ( Fig. 30A, C View Fig ) ................................................ A. pilosicoxa sp. nov.

– Dorsomedial margin of harpe concave in apical third without indentation below apex, harpe with distinctly crossing median setae on basal two thirds ( Fig. 21A, C View Fig ) ............... A. fraterculus sp. nov.

24. Preoccipital furrow present, but not distinct and not widened, with interocellar pit (like in A. clavicornis, Dessart 1963a: 405 View in CoL ; Figs 30–31 View Fig View Fig ) ............................................................................ 25

– Preoccipital furrow distinct and widened, with or without interocellar pit (e.g., Fig. 5D View Fig ; resembling female of A. tenuicornis, Dessart 1963a: 409 View in CoL , fig. 36) ................................................................... 26

– Preoccipital furrow present, but not distinct and not widened, without interocellar pit (e.g., Fig. 4D View Fig ; like in A. fumipennis, Dessart 1963a: 394 View in CoL , fig. 9) ........................................................................... 28

25. Dorsal margin of harpe straight ( Fig. 13B View Fig ) ................................................................. A. njia sp. nov.

– Dorsal margin of harpe straight in basal third and concave in apical two thirds ( Fig. 7B View Fig ) ................ .................................................................................................................. A. kakamegaensis sp. nov.

26. Preoccipital furrow, with interocellar pit; ventromedial margin of harpe convex and/or concave in basal three quarters (e.g., Fig. 8A View Fig ) .................................................................................................. 27

– Preoccipital furrow, without interocellar pit ( Fig. 5D View Fig ); ventromedial margin of harpe straight and parallel to other harpe in basal three quarters ( Fig. 5A View Fig ) ........................... A. ikhongamurwi sp. nov.

27. Harpe with plateau on apex in lateral view ( Fig. 2B View Fig ), not finger-shaped apicoventrally in ventral and dorsal view ( Fig. 2A, C View Fig ) .................................................................................... A. abaluhya sp. nov.

– Harpe without plateau on apex in lateral view ( Fig. 8B View Fig ), finger-shaped apicoventrally in ventral and dorsal view ( Fig. 8A, C View Fig ) ................................................................................. A. lateritorum sp. nov.

28. No or only indistinct pairs of translucent patches on metasomal syntergum and/or synsternum; posterior mesoscutal width ≥ 1.29 × mesoscutellum width ............................................................ 29

– Distinct pairs of translucent patches on metasomal syntergum and synsternum; posterior mesoscutal width 1.24 × mesoscutellum width ( Fig. 4D View Fig ) ........................................................ A. idakho sp. nov.

29. Metacoxa concolourous with metafemur and -tibia ( Figs 3 View Fig , 6 View Fig , 9–11 View Fig View Fig View Fig , 14–15 View Fig View Fig ) ................................ 30

– Metacoxa lighter than metafemur and -tibia ( Fig. 12D View Fig ) ..................................... A. nehbergi sp. nov.

30. Harpe not rectangular in ventral and dorsal view ( Figs 3 View Fig , 6 View Fig , 9–10 View Fig View Fig , 14–15 View Fig View Fig ); dorsal margin of harpe without protrusion ( Figs 3 View Fig , 6 View Fig , 9–10 View Fig View Fig , 14–15 View Fig View Fig ) ................................................................................... 31

– Harpe rectangular in ventral and dorsal view ( Fig. 11A, C View Fig ); dorsal margin of harpe at its middle with pointed protrusion ( Fig. 11B View Fig ) ........................................................................... A. mashariki sp. nov.

31. Harpe not triangular apicoventrally in ventral, lateral and dorsal view; longest apical setae of harpe at most one quarter as long as harpe ............................................................................................... 32

– Harpe triangular apicoventrally in ventral, lateral and dorsal view ( Fig. 14A–C View Fig ); longest apical setae of harpe one third as long as harpe ( Fig. 14A–C View Fig ) ................................................... A. vestrii sp. nov.

32. Ventromedial margin of harpe not convex in basal half, harpes not overlapping and apices of harpes sometimes close, but not touching .................................................................................................. 33

– Ventromedial margin of harpe convex in basal half and concave in apical half, with harpes overlapping in basal half and apices of harpes touching ( Fig. 15A View Fig ) .............................................. A. yala sp. nov.

33. Harpe finger-shaped apicoventrally in lateral view; apical margin of harpe not strongly sclerotized ......................................................................................................................................................... 34

– Harpe not finger-shaped but broadened apicoventrally in lateral view; apical margin of harpe strongly sclerotized ( Fig. 6A–C View Fig ) ........................................................................................ A. isiukhu sp. nov.

34. Fore wing length ≥ 2.63 × width; ventral margin of harpe without emargination at its middle ..... 35

– Fore wing length ≤ 2.52 × width ( Fig. 9D View Fig ); ventral margin of harpe with distinct emargination at its middle ( Fig. 9B View Fig ) .............................................................................................. A. mangimelii sp. nov.

35. Mesoscutellum distinctly projecting ( Fig. 3D View Fig ); ventromedial margin of harpe straight in basal two thirds and converging distomedially; longest ventral seta less than one third as long as harpe ( Fig. 3A, C View Fig ) ....................................................................................................................... A. ashitakai sp. nov.

– Mesoscutellum not projecting ( Fig. 10D View Fig ); ventromedial margin of harpe concave in basal two thirds; longest ventral seta more than half as long as harpe ( Fig. 10A, C View Fig ) ....................... A. mariae sp. nov.