Phoenoteleia canalis Dodd, 1929

Lahey, Zachary, Musetti, Luciana, Masner, Lubomir & Johnson, Norman F., 2021, Revision of Phoenoteleia Kieffer (Hymenoptera, Scelionidae, Scelioninae), Journal of Hymenoptera Research 87, pp. 575-611 : 575

publication ID

https://dx.doi.org/10.3897/jhr.87.59794

publication LSID

lsid:zoobank.org:pub:F16C4490-086F-4D88-A0BA-FDF13E995C4D

persistent identifier

https://treatment.plazi.org/id/E11912A8-26EB-5574-BBD8-C7C854460959

treatment provided by

Journal of Hymenoptera Research by Pensoft

scientific name

Phoenoteleia canalis Dodd
status

 

Phoenoteleia canalis Dodd View in CoL

Figures 5-6 View Figures 5, 6 , 7-9 View Figures 7–9 , 17-20 View Figures 17–20 , 21-24 View Figures 21–24 , 25-28 View Figures 25–28 , 29-32 View Figures 29–32

Phoenoteleia canalis Dodd, 1929: 35 (original description); Galloway, 1976: 101 (type information); Johnson, 1992: 461 (cataloged, type information).

Description.

Claval formula: 1-2-2-2-1; 1-2-2-2-2. Number of clavomeres: 5. Color of antenna in female: radicle and A1-A7 light brown, A8-A12 brown. Color of A7 of female: distinctly lighter than clavomeres. Color of antenna in male: unknown. Color of head: mostly orange, interocellar space and most of vertex brown. Color of mesosoma: reddish-brown. Color of metasoma: reddish-brown. Color of legs: light yellow-brown, fore legs darkest. Setation of frons: short, sparse. Sculpture of frons: punctate-rugose dorsally, transversely striate ventrally. Sculpture of vertex: punctate-rugose. Excavation on posteromedial vertex: absent. Sculpture of posteromedial vertex: same as remainder of vertex. Sculpture of gena: longitudinally striate. Length of LOL: <1 OD. Length of POL: <two times as long as LOL. Sculpture of dorsal pronotal area: areolate-rugose. Sculpture of lateral pronotal area: rugose. Sculpture of netrion: transversely striate. Notaulus: absent. Mesoscutal humeral sulcus: not clearly differentiated from surrounding surface sculpture. Mesoscutal suprahumeral sulcus: not clearly differentiated from surrounding surface sculpture. Sculpture of mesoscutum: areolate-rugose. Parapsidial line: absent; present. Setation of mesoscutellum: present. Sculpture of mesoscutellum: granulate throughout. Form of metascutellum: twice as wide as long, unsculptured, lateral corner acute. Sculpture of propodeum: rugose. Setation of plical area: present. Median area of the lateral propodeal area: present. Sculpture of mesofemoral depression: transversely rugose. Setation of mesepisternum ventral to mesofemoral depression: sparse. Sculpture of mesepisternum ventral to mesofemoral depression: smooth dorsomedially, otherwise punctate-rugose. Setation of dorsal metapleural area: absent. Sculpture of dorsal metapleural area: smooth anteriorly, rugose posteriorly. Setation of ventral metapleural area: present posteriorly. Sculpture of ventral metapleural area: smooth. Length of horn on T1: reaching apex of mesoscutum; reaching middle of mesoscutum. Sculpture of horn on T1: rugose basally, otherwise faintly transversely aciculate. Sculpture of T1 posterior to armilla: rugose medially, longitudinally striate laterally, interstices rugose. Sculpture of T2: longitudinally striate, interstices rugose. Sculpture of T3: longitudinally striate throughout most of length, interstices rugose, posteromedially granulate. Sculpture of T4: longitudinally striate laterally, faintly granulate medially; longitudinally striate laterally, granulate medially. Sculpture of T5: weakly longitudinally striate laterally, faintly granulate medially; weakly longitudinally striate laterally, punctate medially. Sculpture of T6: faintly granulate; punctate. Length of T6 in female: 1.5 times maximum width; 1.25 times maximum width. Relative length of hind basitarsus in female: 2.5 times as long as remaining tarsomeres; 2 times as long as remaining tarsomeres. Relative length of hind basitarsus in male: unknown.

Diagnosis.

Phoenoteleia canalis is separated from its congeners by the rugose frons, concolorous T5 and T6, and the horn which is areolate-rugose basally and aciculate throughout most of its length.

Material examined.

Holotype, female: Australia: QLD, Dunk Island , VIII-1927, H. Hacker, QM TYPE Hy /3293 (deposited in QM) . Other material: Brunei: OSUC 332072 (CNCI); OSUC 332088 (OSUC); Indonesia: OSUC 181592, 332115-332117, 491273 (ROME); OSUC 331984, 331985, 332067, 332069, 332081-332083, 332096, 332118 (BMNH); OSUC 332068, 332073-332078, 332080, 332084, 332085, 332115 (CNCI); OSUC 332070, 332079, 332086; Malaysia: OSUC 149608, 202439 (AEIC); OSUC 332087, 332089-332092, 332094, 332095, 332119-332122, 491275 (CNCI); OSUC 332093, 491274 (OSUC); Papua New Guinea: OSUC 331968, 331969, 331972-331978, 331980-331983 (CNCI); OSUC 331970, 331971, 331979 (OSUC); Thailand: OSUC 361388 (OSUC); OSUC 361389 (CNCI).

Comments.

Dodd (1929) described P. canalis for a single female specimen collected on Dunk Island in Queensland, Australia. The holotype is in relatively good condition, despite the mesosoma and metasoma having become separated. The head, however, has been missing for over 40 years ( Galloway 1976), precluding our ability to examine what is perhaps the most important tagma for species level identification of Phoenoteleia . Dodd’s description of the cephalic characters of P. canalis provides enough detail to reliably separate it from P. halua sp. nov., P. kuboa sp. nov., and P. rufa , and its constellation of somal characters is incongruent with the remainder of the species treated in this revision.

Our concept of P. canalis is that it is a highly variable, widespread species. We documented morphological variation between P. canalis populations from Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, and Thailand (Figures 21 View Figures 21–24 - 32 View Figures 29–32 ). The most glaring morphological difference is the length of the horn, a character we have found to be highly variable in the type species of the genus ( P. rufa ). Specimens of P. canalis ranged in color from reddish-purple to light orange-brown. Dodd (1929) described the color of this species as bright red-brown, but images of the holotype suggest that its color has faded considerably over the past century. Such fading could explain the variation in color between specimens.

While this article was in press, a collaborator (Dr. Ovidiu Popovici, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, Iași, Romania) provided the first author with images of two female Phoenoteleia specimens that match our concept of P. canalis . One of the specimens is part of a long series from Sulawesi collected by Dr. John Noyes, and the other is from Australia. The Australian specimen is the second Phoenoteleia known to us from that continent and is virtually identical to a female we examined from Milne Bay Province in Papua New Guinea (OSUC 331983; Figures 24 View Figures 21–24 , 28 View Figures 25–28 , 32 View Figures 29–32 ).

Transcribed data labels for these specimens are included below. Both specimens are deposited in the OPPC.

Australia: Queensland; Daintree; James Cook University, rainforest site; 16°06'11.53"S, 145°27'13.08"E; alt. 19m; 19.viii-9.ix.2014; leg. D. Rentz & P. Tripotin (MT).

Sulawesi: Utara; Dumoga-Bone N.P. Toraut; 220m; 9-16.v.1985, leg. J.S. Noyes [voucher specimen used by Popovici et al. 2017 to illustrate the mouthparts of Phoenoteleia ].

Kingdom

Animalia

Phylum

Arthropoda

Class

Insecta

Order

Hymenoptera

Family

Scelionidae

Genus

Phoenoteleia

Loc

Phoenoteleia canalis Dodd

Lahey, Zachary, Musetti, Luciana, Masner, Lubomir & Johnson, Norman F. 2021
2021
Loc

Phoenoteleia canalis

Dodd 1929
1929