Entedonomphale dei (Girault, 1922) Triapitsyn, 2005
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5281/zenodo.7909932 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7910393 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/6A2587D3-FFB7-1D2B-FE71-13E2FEE52460 |
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
scientific name |
Entedonomphale dei (Girault, 1922) |
status |
comb. nov. |
Entedonomphale dei (Girault, 1922) View in CoL , comb. n.
Figs 24, 25 View Figs 24, 25
Pirenoidea dei Girault, 1922: 107 View in CoL , 108. (Type locality: Brisbane , Queensland, Australia)
Pirenoidea dei Girault View in CoL : Dahms, 1983: 215.
Entedonastichus dei (Girault) View in CoL : Boucek 1988: 733; Loomans & van Lenteren 1995: 146–148, 197.
Diagnosis: Female. Head and mesosoma brown to dark brown and smooth, metasoma brown, antenna and legs pale to light brown. Antenna ( Fig. 24 View Figs 24, 25 ) attached just below lower ocular line, with scape expanded in basal half, sharply narrowing toward apex; F1 and F2 appressed, notably wider than long, F2 wider than F1; clava oval, with several sensilla. Notauli indistinct, opposite to what was stated in the original description of Pirenoidea by Girault (1922). Forewing disc with a few scattered setae behind marginal vein but more or less evenly setose beyond venation (setae very short), slightly infumated behind stigmal and marginal veins (dark spot not reaching wing’s posterior margin or base of marginal vein); longest marginal setae 1/2–3/5 maximal width of forewing ( Fig. 25 View Figs 24, 25 ). Disc of hind wing hyaline. Ovipositor short, barely exserted.
Male. Unknown.
Type material examined: Holotype female [ QMBA], apparently invalidly designated by Boucek (1988) as a lectotype (there is no reason whatsoever to believe that A.A. Girault described this species from more than one specimen), label data as follows: 1. “ Holotype T.8734 E.C.D.”; 2. “ Pirenoidea dei Gir. ^ type Clayfield Brisbane Sweeping herbage 8.4.13. H. Hacker ”.According to Dahms (1983), the second part of the second label refers to the male encyrtid mounted on the same slide under a different coverslip.The holotype specimen is in poor condition, broken into many parts, as follows: 4 broken off legs, clava, pedicel with F1, F2, head with right antenna, metasoma with left forewing, 2 legs (middle and hind).
Other material examined: AUSTRALIA: Queensland: Mt Glorious , 21.x.1982 – 13.i.1983, A. Hiller, 1^ [ QMBA] . NEW ZEALAND: Roaring Meg , 13.i.1981, J.S. Noyes, E.W. Valentine, 1^ (det. Z. Boucek) [ BMNH] .
Distribution: Australia (Queensland) and New Zealand.
Hosts: Unknown.
Comments: I was not able to find the voucher specimens of the species reported by Goodwin and Steiner (1996) from the Australian states of New South Wales and Northern Territory as E.? dei .
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 |
Entedonomphale dei (Girault, 1922)
Triapitsyn, Serguei V. 2005 |
Pirenoidea dei
DAHMS, E. C. 1983: 215 |