Macroglenes herbaceus (Graham)

Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan, 2010, Revision of the Palearctic species of Macroglenes Westwood (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae), Zootaxa 2563, pp. 1-34 : 20

Macroglenes herbaceus (Graham)

(Fig. 13)

Pirene herbacea Graham, 1969: 346 –347.

Macroglenes herbaceus ; Hedqvist, 2003: 110.

Diagnosis. Body with conspicuous bluish-green metallic color; clypeal margin not incised (cf. Figs 1–2); only F5 large and provided with sensilla, F1–F3 compacted together (cf. Figs 5–6); mesosoma moderately convex (cf. Fig. 10); pecten mostly irregular and about 1/2 length of hind tibia, sometimes slightly more; forewing, ovipositor sheaths and hypopygium as in M. gramineus . Male with both eyes and antennal scape normal.

Material examined. HOLOTYPE (ɗ): U.K.: ‘ Type Hym: 1246 Pirene herbacea Graham, Hope Dept. Oxford’, ‘Whytham Wood BECKS., (2) 29. 6. 1951 M. W. Graham’, ‘ herbacea Holotype’, ‘ Pirene herbacea sp. n. Holotype ɗ, M. de V. Graham det. 1968’ ( OUMNH).

Addditional material. CZECH REPUBLIC: 1Ψ ‘ Bohemia c.: údolí Neutonice-Kováry, Bouček / 16. VI. 54 ’ ( NMPC); 1Ψ ‘Boh, Hradec Kr., Vëkoše, Bouček 8. 8. 56 ’ ( NMPC); 2Ψ, 4ɗ ‘Lužany n Plznĕ, Bohemia, 26. VII. 57 Hûrka’ ( NMPC); 2ɗ ‘Velký Vřeštov, Bohemia or., Bouček 9. 8. 56 ’ ( NMPC); 1ɗ ‘Řevničov, 14. 8. 55 ’, ‘ Bohemia, Bouček’ ( NMPC); 1Ψ ‘Ratibořické hory, Tábor., BOHEMIA, 14. 7. 45. Hoffer’ ( NMPC); 1Ψ, 2ɗ ‘Boh. or. Holovousy, Hostounský / 12. VII. 53 ’ ( NMPC); 1Ψ ‘Boh. Praha-Podhoř, Bouček / 13. 6. 54 ’ ( NMPC); 1Ψ ‘Cís. les: Kamerná, 20. VII. 51. Bčk.’, ‘ Bohemia, Bouček’ ( NMPC).? U.K.: 1ɗ ‘ Macroglenes oculatus W., Waterhouse Coll. 80-62’ ( BMNH).

Variation. In one examined male F4 was larger than usual; in some females the knees are less distinctly pale and the metallic tinge less obvious.

Comments. The females of M. herbaceus (Graham) are very similar to those of M. gramineus (Haliday) . They can be separated from the latter by the less developed hind tibial pecten, which is mostly irregular and about 1/2 the length of the hind tibia (Fig. 13), more conspicuous bluish-green metallic body color, and usually light-colored knees. However, they are rather difficult to separate from those of M. gramineus because the tibial pecten is not always easy to observe if the hind legs are not in an appropriate position; moreover, in old specimens, the metallic color is usually faint.

Distribution. Netherlands, Sweden, U.K. ( Noyes 2003); previously unrecorded from the Czech Republic.

Hosts. Unknown.