Carinostigmus vesulcatus Bashir & Ma, 2020
|
publication ID |
https://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.987.55317 |
|
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:BF3D3038-2C5A-4EC4-BAB4-7700D0DFB374 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/0FDD9981-3372-4E78-8C16-BB9D7ECC7353 |
|
taxon LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:act:0FDD9981-3372-4E78-8C16-BB9D7ECC7353 |
|
treatment provided by |
|
|
scientific name |
Carinostigmus vesulcatus Bashir & Ma |
| status |
sp. nov. |
Carinostigmus vesulcatus Bashir & Ma sp. nov. Figs 4 View Figure 4 , 5d, e View Figure 5
Type material.
Holotype: ♀, China: Yunnan: Jinghong: Menghai: Bulang Mountain, 21°57'N, 100°27'E, 17-VI.21.V.2018, No. 2019000099, Malaise trap (YNAU). Paratypes: 2♂♂, China: Yunnan: Dehong: Nabang, 24°26'N, 98°35'E, 15.V.2009, No. 201005191, coll. Jie Zeng, No. 201005205, coll. Manman Wang (YNAU); 1♂, China: Yunnan: Dehong: Yinjiang: Tongbiguan, 24°42'N, 97°55'E, 18.V.2009, No. 201005224, coll. Manman Wang (YNAU); 1♀, China: Yunnan: Nujiang: Fugong: Yueliang Village, 25°49'N, 98°51'E, 27.V.2007, coll. Feng Yuan (CAS); 1♀, China: Yunnan: Kaiyuan: Nandong, 23°40'N, 103°15'E, 16.VII.2003, coll. Qiang Li (YNAU).
Diagnosis.
This species resembles C. congruus (Walker, 1860) in sharing: median and lower frons microstriate, with a sturdy frontal median longitudinal carina (Fig. 4a View Figure 4 ); upper frons with fine and coarse punctures, frontal carina distinct anteriorly, not reaching anterior ocellus (Fig. 4b View Figure 4 ); ocellar triangle flat, gena with several sturdy oblique transverse rugae medially, lower gena with weak striations; outer-orbital sulcus broad; notaulus deeply grooved (Fig. 4j View Figure 4 ); propodeal enclosure triangular, with sturdy longitudinal rugae anteriorly, slender dense, longitudinal rugae laterally (Fig. 4k View Figure 4 ); pygidial area oval shaped (Fig. 4h View Figure 4 ). It can be differentiated from C. congruus by labrum, in female, pentagonal, longer than wide (Fig. 4a View Figure 4 ), in male, wider as long, deeply emarginated apically forming two rounded lobes (Fig. 4d View Figure 4 ); clypeus slightly convex; free margin of clypeal lobe nearly truncate medially, teeth inconspicuous (Fig. 4a View Figure 4 ); inter-antennal tubercle without T-shaped at apex (Fig. 4b View Figure 4 ); inner-orbital sulcus narrowed, inconspicuously foveolate (Fig. 4a View Figure 4 ); occipital carina foveolate (Fig. 4b View Figure 4 ); anterior pronotal ridge strongly marked (Fig. 4f View Figure 4 ); in female, fovea absent on scutum posterior margin (Fig. 4f View Figure 4 ); admedian line conspicuous in female, inconspicuous in male; parapsidal line conspicuous, and metanotum with inconspicuous rugae medially (Fig. 4f View Figure 4 ). Carinostigmus congruus (Walker) has the following characters: labrum triangular, broadly rounded at apex; clypeus strongly convex at middle; free margin of clypeal lobe slightly emarginate medially, with two distinct lateral small teeth ( Krombein 1984: fig. 9); inter-antennal tubercle with T-shaped at apex ( Krombein 1984: fig. 15); inner-orbital sulcus broad, distinctly foveolate ( Krombein 1984: fig. 3); occipital carina not foveolate; pronotal collar ridged weakly marked; in female, fovea present on scutum posterior margin; admedian and parapsidal lines inconspicuous, and metanotum smooth medially ( Krombein 1984: fig. 39).
Description.
Female (Figs 4a-c, f-k View Figure 4 , 5d View Figure 5 ): Based on holotype, if any variation in paratypes described in square brackets.
Measurements.
♀, BL 4.6 [4.5-4.9] mm;
HW:HLD:HLF = 60:38:40;
HWmax:HWmin = 60:31;
HW:EWd:IOW:EW:OOW:TW:OCW:EL = 60:14:1:16:2:22:1:41;
AOD:WAS:IAD = 5:5:10;
POD:OOD:OCD:IODc:IODv:IODmin = 4:12:14:28:36:28;
LS:LP:LFI:WFI:LFII:WFII = 18:7:8:3:8:3;
LC:WC = 25:5;
PL:PW:LTI:WTI = 45:6:30:23.
♂, BL 4-4.6 mm;
HW:HLD:HLF = 65:35:43;
HWmax:HWmin = 65:31;
HW:EWd:IOW:EW:OOW:TW:OCW:EL = 65:18:1:18:2:20:1:40;
AOD:WAS:IAD = 3:3:8;
POD:OOD:OCD:IODc:IODv:IODmin = 4:10:12:20:36:20;
LS:LP:LFI:WFI:LFII:WFII = 20:8:8:2:8:2;
LC:WC = 23:5;
PL:PW:LTI:WTI = 46:6:27:25.
Color pattern. Body black with shiny aspect, except the following: mandible yellowish, apically dark; labrum yellowish with ivory marked medially; palpi pale; scape and pedicel extensively yellowish; flagellomeres I-III yellowish, remaining darker; pronotal lobe ivory with yellowish spot; tegula fulvous; forewing veins dark brown; legs fulvous except mid and hind femur reddish brown; pale setae on clypeal margin and on mandible.
Head. Mandible tridentate apically; setae on mandible sparsed, long, longer than labrum length. Labrum pentagonal, rounded toward apex (Fig. 4a View Figure 4 ). Clypeus slightly convex, with coarse punctures; setae on margin of clypeus sparsed, long as labrum length; free margin of clypeal lobe nearly truncate, sinuous, not forming reflexed teeth (Fig. 4a View Figure 4 ). Median and lower frons microstriate, with a sturdy frontal median longitudinal carina (Fig. 4a View Figure 4 ), inter-antennal tubercle short, less than midocellus diameter (Fig. 4b View Figure 4 ); upper frons smooth, with fine and coarse punctures, frontal carina distinct anteriorly, not reaching anterior ocellus (Fig. 4b View Figure 4 ). Ocellar triangle nearly flat, finely punctate [impunctate]; vertex behind ocelli, finely punctate [impunctate]; gena with several sturdy transverse rugae medially; lower gena with weak striations. Occipital carina broad and foveolate as Fig. 4b View Figure 4 ; inner-orbital sulcus narrow as flagellomere I width, with inner marginal carina distinct, inconspicuously foveolate (Fig. 4a View Figure 4 ); outer-orbital sulcus broad as pedicel width, hind marginal carina distinct, inconspicuously foveolate.
Mesosoma. Pronotal collar smooth, strongly elevated mesally, ridged inconspicuous anteriorly, weakly marked, lateral angles blunt (Fig. 4f View Figure 4 ). Scutum with fine punctures, sparsely distributed, several slender transverse striations anteriorly (Fig. 4j View Figure 4 ); admedian line conspicuous, extending to one third of scutum length; notaulus deeply grooved and foveolate, extending to only anterior of scutum length (Fig. 4j View Figure 4 ); parapsidal line inconspicuous (Fig. 4f View Figure 4 ). Scutellum dull aspect densely micropunctated; metanotum with dense, slender, longitudinal rugae laterally, weak medially (Fig. 4f View Figure 4 ). Mesopleuron with fine punctures, sparsely distributed; omaulus and hypersternaulus narrowed as pedicel width, inconspicuously foveate [distinctly foveolate]; scrobal sulcus absent (Fig. 4g View Figure 4 ). Propodeal enclosure shallowly impressed, triangular, with sturdy longitudinal rugae anteriorly, slender dense, longitudinal rugae laterally (Fig. 4k View Figure 4 ); propodeum posteriorly with oval median groove, slender dense transverse rugae anteriorly, smooth medially (Fig. 4k View Figure 4 ); propodeal side presenting obliques and regular striae, sparsely distributed (Fig. 4g View Figure 4 ).
Legs. Outer surface of hindtibia without spines.
Metasoma. Petiole dorsal surface sub quadrate (cross section), basal width narrower than apically (Fig. 4c View Figure 4 ), side smooth. Gaster segments III-V [IV-VI] with fine sparsed punctures, rest impunctate (Fig. 4i View Figure 4 ). Pygidial area punctate anteriorly, oval shaped (Fig. 4h View Figure 4 ).
Male (Figs 4d, e View Figure 4 , 5e View Figure 5 ). Same as female except mandible ivory, reddish brown apically; labrum, scape beneath and pedicel ivory, remaining scape and flagellomeres fulvous; flagellomeres without tyloids; forewing veins brown to dark brown; legs ivory to fulvous; setae on margin of clypeus and on mandible fulvous and short, less than pedicel length; mandible bidentate apically; labrum notched, deeply emarginated at apex; clypeus slightly microstriate, convex, impunctate; gena with several sturdy oblique transverse rugae near eye; fovea present on scutum posterior margin; parapsidal line inconspicuous.
Distribution.
China (Yunnan).
Etymology.
The name vesulcatus , is derived from the Latin words ve - (= without) and sulcatus (= sulcate), referring to the scrobal sulcus absent.
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.