Anastatus (Anastatus) bifasciatus (Geoffroy)

Peng, Lingfei, Gibson, Gary A. P., Tang, Lu & Xiang, Jiawei, 2020, Review of the species of Anastatus (Hymenoptera: Eupelmidae) known from China, with description of two new species with brachypterous females, Zootaxa 4767 (3), pp. 351-401: 357-361

publication ID

http://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4767.3.1

publication LSID

lsid:zoobank.org:pub:urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:BAF472F8-CD4E-4518-A279-CCAA12F01737

DOI

http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3797187

persistent identifier

http://treatment.plazi.org/id/EF69D43A-FFBF-FFFF-FF74-FBC5FE85FA63

treatment provided by

Plazi

scientific name

Anastatus (Anastatus) bifasciatus (Geoffroy)
status

 

Anastatus (Anastatus) bifasciatus (Geoffroy)  

Figs 1 View FIGURE 1 , 2 View FIGURE 2

Cynips bifasciatus Geoffroy in Fourcroy 1785: 388   . Described: female.

Diplolepis bifasciata (Geoffroy)   ; Dalla Torre, 1898: 418.

Anastatus bifasciatus (Geoffroy)   ; Nikol’skaya, 1952: 490, fig. 477.

Anastatus (Anastatus) bifasciatus (Geoffroy)   ; Gibson, 1995: 105 (by implication); Narendran, 2009: 78, fig. 12.

Cinips bifasciata Fonscolombe, 1832: 294   . Described: female. Synonymy by Bouček, 1970: 80.

Pteromalus bifasciatus (Fonscolombe)   ; Nees ab Esenbeck, 1834: 426.

Eupelmus bifasciatus (Fonscolombe)   ; Förster, 1860: 122.

Anastatus bifasciatus (Fonscolombe)   ; Ruschka, 1921: 264

Anastatus eurycephalus Masi, 1919: 321–324   , figs 26(1–5), 27. Described: female. Synonym of A. bifasciatus (Fonscolombe)   by Bolívar y Pieltain, 1935: 280; synonymy by Bouček, 1970: 80.

Cerycium pretense Erdős, 1946: 138–139   , figs 4a–b. Described: male. Synonymy by Bouček, 1970: 80.

Cinips bombycum Fonscolombe, 1832: 295   . Described: male. Synonymy by Graham, 1992: 1101.

Diplolepis bombycum   ; Dalla Torre, 1898: 418.

Eupelmus subaeneus De Stefani, 1898: 251   . Described: female. Synonymy by Bouček, 1970: 80.

Pteromalus oomyzus Rondani, 1872: 202–203   . Described: male (see Bouček 1974: 261). Synonymy by Bouček, 1974: 261, 277.

Misocoris oomyzus   ; Rondani, 1877: 187, plate II, figs 55–58.

Misocoris oophagus Rondani, 1877: 187   , plate II, figs 61–63. Described: male. Synonymy by Bouček, 1974: 262, 277.

Pteromalus ovivorus Rondani, 1872: 203   . Described: female. Synonymy by Bouček, 1974: 262, 277.

Misocoris ovivorus   ; Rondani, 1877: 187, plate II, figs 59–60.

Cynips gemmarum Fonscolombe, 1832: 296   . Described: male. Synonymy by Bouček, 1970: 80.

Pteromalus gemmarum   ; Nees ab Esenbeck, 1834: 425.

Diagnosis. FEMALE. Macropterous ( Figs 1A, B View FIGURE 1 ). Fore wing with hyaline cross band behind marginal vein complete and with entirely white setae ( Fig. 1D View FIGURE 1 ); infuscate region basal of hyaline band with uniformly dark setae and about 2.5–3.0× wider than cross band ( Fig. 1D View FIGURE 1 ); basal region with basal cell, mediocubital fold, and cubital and vanal areas bare ( Fig. 1F View FIGURE 1 : bac, mcf, cua, vna). Head ( Fig. 1E View FIGURE 1 ) with scrobal depression distinctly separated from anterior ocellus, by distance at least equal to 2× longitudinal diameter of ocellus ( Fig. 1E View FIGURE 1 : osd). Antenna ( Fig. 1C View FIGURE 1 ) with fl2 slightly longer than pedicel ( Fig. 1C View FIGURE 1 , insert), but not all funiculars longer than wide, with at least apical two funiculars quadrate to slightly transverse ( Fig. 1C View FIGURE 1 ). Mesosoma ( Figs 1A, B View FIGURE 1 ), including procoxa ( Fig. 1B View FIGURE 1 ), entirely dark, with concave posteromedial part of mesoscutum similarly dark as rest of mesoscutum ( Fig. 1G View FIGURE 1 ) though under some angles of light with slight metallic luster; mesotibial apical spur infuscate ( Fig. 1I View FIGURE 1 ); mesotarsus usually (see further under Remarks) similarly infuscate as mesotibial apical spur and similar in colour to mesotarsal pegs ( Fig. 1B View FIGURE 1 ). Mesoscutum ( Fig. 1G View FIGURE 1 ) with convex anterior part of medial lobe extensively mesh-like coriaceous at least anteriorly, at most distinctly reticulate only posteriorly, and with concave posterior part of mesoscutum only very sparsely setose with dark hair-like setae; mesoscutal lateral lobe with bare, minutely mesh-like coriaceous band anterior of posteromedian carina relative to distinctly larger mesh-like coriaceous to coriaceous-imbricate or reticulate sculpture on outer inclined surface ( Fig. 1G View FIGURE 1 ). Profemur with ventral margin evenly curved, without distinct angulation or tooth apically ( Fig. 1H View FIGURE 1 ).

MALE. Antenna with scape ( Fig. 2E View FIGURE 2 ) extensively dark dorsally but yellow ventrolongitudinally; pedicel dark; flagellum ( Figs 2B, E View FIGURE 2 ) uniformly dark such that multiporous plate sensilla not contrasting in colour with surrounding cuticle, and consisting of five funiculars and clava, with clava ( Fig.2E View FIGURE 2 : clv) more than twice as long as combined length of funiculars. Head with frons mostly to entirely mesh-like coriaceous ( Fig. 2C View FIGURE 2 ), at most slightly roughened in part. Mesopleurosternum uniformly dark ( Fig. 2D View FIGURE 2 ) or at most with transepisternal line variably distinctly paler. Legs ( Fig. 2B View FIGURE 2 ) beyond trochanters with all femora and tibiae extensively dark but front leg with knee, inner surface and apex of tibia, and all but apical tarsomere pale; middle leg with knee, tibia apically, and all but apical tarsomere pale, and hind leg with knee and basal three or four tarsomeres pale. Fore wing ( Fig. 2F View FIGURE 2 ) with costal cell dorsally setose along entire leading margin ( Fig. 2G View FIGURE 2 ); basal cell at least uniformly setose along basal and mediocubital folds though variably setose within cell and setae often white and inconspicuous; disc with large, quadrangular speculum ( Fig. 2F View FIGURE 2 : spc), the ventral surface with only 1 or 2 lines of setae adjacent to parastigma, and comparatively inconspicuously closed posteriorly by line of white setae.

Species concept. Our concept of A. bifasciatus   is based on identified specimens from Croatia, Cyprus, France, Greece, Hungary, Iran, Italy and Switzerland in the CNC, including reared material from Stahl et al. (2018a).

Regional records. Reported from mainland China by Chu et al. (1935) and from Taiwan by Yie and Hsu (1967) under the name A. gastropachae   , which Noyes (2019) listed, incorrectly, as a junior synonym of A. bifasciatus   following Ishii (1938) (see under A. gastropachae   ). We did not examine voucher material from Chu et al. (1935) or Yie and Hsu (1967), but assuming their identifications of A. gastropachae   were correct, then evidence for the presence of A. bifasciatus   in China is completely lacking. However, because of past confusion between A. bifasciatus   and A. gastropachae   as well as between A. bifasciatus   and A. japonicus   (see below) we treat the name so that all three species can be distinguished reliably if A. bifasciatus   is eventually found in China. It is possible that the species occurs at least in the Palaearctic part of China if the records from Japan and South Korea are accurate (see below).

Distribution. Noyes (2019) recorded A. bifasciatus   from throughout the Palaearctic region, including Europe and the Middle East, northern Africa, and Japan and Korea in the eastern Palaearctic, as well as Kenya (Afrotropical), India (Oriental), and United States of America (Nearctic). However, as discussed by Hayat (1975: 268), the record of Narayanan et al. (1967) is a misidentification of A. japonicus   and subsequent inclusions of A. bifasciatus   in the Indian fauna, such as by Narendran (2009), are based on prior literature records rather than validating specimens. Likewise, Nearctic records, such as by Crossman (1925), are based on misidentifications of A. japonicus   and it remains to be confirmed whether A. bifasciatus   occurs outside the Palaearctic region.

Hosts. Noyes (2019) listed A. bifasciatus   as a parasitoid of about 30 species of Hemiptera   , Lepidoptera   , and Orthoptera plus, as a hyperparasitoid, two species of Braconidae   ( Hymenoptera   ). However, some of the listed host records are undoubtedly based on misidentification of the parasitoid.

This species is currently being investigated for potential augmentative biocontrol of an invasive agricultural pest, Halyomorpha halys (Stål, 1855)   ( Hemiptera   : Pentatomidae   ), in Europe ( Haye et al. 2014; Stahl et al. 2018a, 2018b). Its extensive putative host range, including Dendrolimus punctatus (Walker, 1855)   ( Lepidoptera   : Lasiocampidae   ) and other lepidopteran and hemipteran pest species, suggests potential for biocontrol in China as well.

Remarks. Females of A. bifasciatus   are similar to those of A. colemani   in sharing a complete fore wing hyaline cross band ( Figs 1D View FIGURE 1 , 3F View FIGURE 3 ) in combination with similar mesoscutal sculpture and setal patterns ( Figs 1G View FIGURE 1 , 3E View FIGURE 3 ). However, females of A. colemani   have a short but distinct spine-like projection ventrally on the profemur within about its apical third ( Fig. 3I View FIGURE 3 : arrow), setae within the fore wing basal region ( Fig. 3H View FIGURE 3 ), and the concave posteromedial part of the mesoscutum contrasting quite conspicuously in colour to the rest of the mesoscutum because of distinctly brighter metallic luster ( Fig. 3E View FIGURE 3 ). Females of A. bifasciatus   do not have a profemoral tooth ( Fig. 1H View FIGURE 1 ), have the basal region of the fore wing entirely bare ( Fig. 1F View FIGURE 1 ), and have the mesoscutum more-or-less uniformly dark with at most slight metallic luster ( Fig. 1G View FIGURE 1 ). Three females from Iran that we provisionally identify as A. bifasciatus   have entirely pale mesotarsi. However, all other examined A. bifasciatus   females have infuscate mesotarsi that are similar in colour to the mesotarsal pegs and mesotibia ( Fig. 1I View FIGURE 1 ). The few A. colemani   females examined have at least the basal four mesotarsomeres pale in distinct contrast to the pegs and tibia ( Fig. 3J View FIGURE 3 ). Females of both species have an infuscate mesotibial apical spur ( Figs 1I View FIGURE 1 , 3J View FIGURE 3 ).

Unfortunately, males of A. colemani   are unknown, but males of A. bifasciatus   are distinguished from males of all other treated species by flagellar structure. The clava ( Fig. 2E View FIGURE 2 : clv) is greatly elongate compared to other species and there are only five funiculars, which suggests that length of the clava is at least partly a consequence of fusion of the apical two funiculars with the clava. This difference in flagellar structure demonstrates that the redescription of the male of A. bifasciatus   by Tachikawa (1959) actually was a misidentification of A. japonicus   (see further under this latter species).

Kingdom

Animalia

Phylum

Arthropoda

Class

Insecta

Order

Hymenoptera

Family

Eupelmidae

Genus

Anastatus

Loc

Anastatus (Anastatus) bifasciatus (Geoffroy)

Peng, Lingfei, Gibson, Gary A. P., Tang, Lu & Xiang, Jiawei 2020
2020
Loc

Anastatus (Anastatus) bifasciatus (Geoffroy)

Narendran, T. C. 2009: 78
Gibson, G. A. P. 1995: 105
1995
Loc

Anastatus bifasciatus (Geoffroy)

Nikol'skaya, M. N. 1952: 490
1952
Loc

Cerycium pretense Erdős, 1946: 138–139

Boucek, Z. 1970: 80
Erdos, J. 1946: 139
1946
Loc

Anastatus bifasciatus (Fonscolombe)

Ruschka, F. 1921: 264
1921
Loc

Anastatus eurycephalus

Boucek, Z. 1970: 80
Pieltain, C. 1935: 280
Masi, L. 1919: 324
1919
Loc

Diplolepis bifasciata (Geoffroy)

Dalla Torre, K. W. 1898: 418
1898
Loc

Diplolepis bombycum

Dalla Torre, K. W. 1898: 418
1898
Loc

Eupelmus subaeneus

Boucek, Z. 1970: 80
De Stefani, T. 1898: 251
1898
Loc

Misocoris oomyzus

Rondani, C. 1877: 187
1877
Loc

Misocoris oophagus

Boucek, Z. 1974: 262
Rondani, C. 1877: 187
1877
Loc

Misocoris ovivorus

Rondani, C. 1877: 187
1877
Loc

Pteromalus oomyzus

Boucek, Z. 1974: 261
Boucek, Z. 1974: 261
Rondani, C. 1872: 203
1872
Loc

Pteromalus ovivorus

Boucek, Z. 1974: 262
Rondani, C. 1872: 203
1872
Loc

Eupelmus bifasciatus (Fonscolombe)

Forster, A. 1860: 122
1860
Loc

Pteromalus bifasciatus (Fonscolombe)

Esenbeck, C. G. 1834: 426
1834
Loc

Pteromalus gemmarum

Esenbeck, C. G. 1834: 425
1834
Loc

Cinips bifasciata

Boucek, Z. 1970: 80
Fonscolombe, E. L. J. H. B. 1832: 294
1832
Loc

Cinips bombycum

Graham, M. W. R. 1992: 1101
Fonscolombe, E. L. J. H. B. 1832: 295
1832
Loc

Cynips gemmarum

Boucek, Z. 1970: 80
Fonscolombe, E. L. J. H. B. 1832: 296
1832
Loc

Cynips bifasciatus Geoffroy in Fourcroy 1785: 388

Fourcroy, A. F. 1785: 388
1785