Methocha areolata Lin, 1966

Narita, Keisuke & Mita, Toshiharu, 2021, A review of the subfamily Methochinae from Taiwan (Hymenoptera: Tiphiidae) with description of a new species and redescription of the known species, Zootaxa 4964 (2), pp. 303-329 : 307-308

publication ID

https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4964.2.4

publication LSID

lsid:zoobank.org:pub:DF8C0B29-134C-47F8-B1E6-EDBE179D617D

DOI

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4740946

persistent identifier

https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03F687D2-FFA5-E006-4C93-FC3EFACBF8C4

treatment provided by

Plazi

scientific name

Methocha areolata Lin, 1966
status

 

2. Methocha areolata Lin, 1966

Figs 12–22 View FIGURES 12–14 View FIGURES 15–22

Methocha areolata Lin, 1966: 188–190 . Type locality: Mt. Tsao-shan , Taipei. Figs 2C, 2H, 3C, 3H View FIGURES 1–3

Methocha taoi Lin, 1966: 187–188 . Type locality: Taipei. Figs 2B, 2G, 3B, 3G View FIGURES 1–3 . New Synonymy .

Material examined. Type materials. Holotype of M. areolata , ♂, Alt. 200 m, Mt. Tsao-shan , Taipei, 19.iii.1963, K. S. Lin leg. [ TARI] . Holotype of M. taoi , ♂, Taipei, x.1962, K. S. Lin leg. [ TARI] . Non-type materials. 1♂, Taipei, 14.ix.1914, Inamura leg. [ TARI] ; 1♂, Hsinchu (Malaise Trap), viii. 1968, S. C. Chiu leg. [ TARI] ; 1♂, Kuanhsi , Hsinchu (Malaise Trap), 16.viii.1968, collector unknown. [ TARI] ; 2♂, Kuanhsi , Hsinchu (Malaise Trap), 22.viii.1968, collector unknown. [ TARI] ; 1♂, Kuanhsi , Hsinchu 29.vii–4.viii.1969, collector unknown. [ TARI] ; 1♂, Pingtung, 19.vii.1983, R. Yamaho leg. [ ELKU] .

Diagnosis. This species can be distinguished from other Asian Methocha species by a combination of the following characters: the distally wide mandible, the incurved clypeal apex; the dorsally and laterally areolate propodeum; the faintly infuscate wings; the dorsally inconspicuously carinate hind coxa; the subapical tooth shorter than the apical one on the mandible; the flat or inconspicuously carinate surface between a pair of the strong carina of the T1; presence of a row of the stout setae on the posterior margin of the S2–S5 respectively; the costate T2–T4 anterior transverse depression of the T2–T4; the triangularly cleft distal apex of the S7.

Redescription. Male.

Head ( Figs 15, 16 View FIGURES 15–22 ). Head 0.7–0.8 times as long as wide in frontal view, temple weakly rounded in dorsal view; ocelli forming regular triangle, POL:AOL:DAO = 1.0:1.0:0.4–0.6; vertex sparsely punctate: 1.0–5.0 puncture diameters apart, with smooth interspaces; frons densely punctate: punctures 0–1.0 puncture diameters apart, impunctate and excavated above antennal sockets; antennal lobes developed; gena sparsely punctate; clypeus with dense small punctures, with apex projection, clypeal apex incurved; mandible not distally narrowed, lower tooth longer than upper one; maxillary palpus longer than length of pronotum, ratio of length to width of palpomeres II–VI: 2–4:1–3:8–12:8–10:10; flagellum inconspicuously flattened, ratio of length to width of flagellomeres I–III: 1.2–1.4:1.5–1.7:1.7–2.5.

Mesosoma ( Fig 14 View FIGURES 12–14 ). Pronotal disc usually punctate by sparse small or large punctures, anterior transverse carina inconspicuously developed or absent, with smooth interspaces or entirely smooth, lateral surface punctate: punctures usually denser and larger on dorsal surface, 1.0–5.0 puncture diameters apart, with smooth interspaces, lower part striated; mesoscutum punctate: punctures larger medially, 0.5–3.0 puncture diameters apart, with smooth interspaces, surface around anterior sixth sometimes coriaceous and rugulose; notauli marked by transversely striated wide depression, reaching posterior half to third of mesoscutum, posterior margin of depression effaced; mesoscutellum bulging, punctate: 1.0–5.0 punctures diameters apart, sometimes several punctures larger, lateral surface densely punctate, with smooth or faintly rugose interspaces; mesepisternum convex, sparsely punctate by small punctures, with smooth interspaces, narrow surface above episternal sulcus usually punctate as mesepisternum, but sometimes more densely punctate and rugulose; episternal sulcus deep; precoxal sulcus absent; metanotum elevated, smooth, laterally striated, anterior margin with deep crescentic depression; metapleural region smooth, transversely striated around anterior half to posterior fourth, sometimes striation weaker or absent; propodeum ( Fig 17 View FIGURES 15–22 ) dorsally entirely areolate, with smooth or inconspicuously granulate interspaces, with pair of strong longitudinal carina, but carina sometimes indistinct, laterally entirely areolate, with smooth interspaces, posteriorly entirely areolate, sometimes inconspicuously areolate, with smooth, sometimes more or less granulate interspaces.

Legs. Hind coxa dorsally carinate and inconspicuously rounded out in lateral view; all tarsal claws ( Fig 18 View FIGURES 15–22 ) strongly curved in apical half, tridentate, apical tooth sharp, subapical one truncate, shorter than apical one, basal one minute, shorter than half subapical one.

Metasoma. Metasomal terga smooth with sparse punctures, setose, AMW:MTL:PMW = 1.0:2.5–3.5:2.3–3.2; T1 ( Fig 19 View FIGURES 15–22 ) with pair of strong carina before spiracles, with pair of inconspicuous carinae between carinae, usually smooth and flat between carinae but sometimes median furrow developed, reaching posterior four-fifth; anterior transverse depression of T2–T4 costate, T5–T7 without carinae, smooth; posterior margins of S2–S5 with row of stout setae; S7 coriaceous, punctate, distal apex triangularly cleft; hypopygium setose, paramere ( Fig 20 View FIGURES 15–22 ) setose around apical two-third, both sides rounded, without projection; aedeagus ( Figs 21, 22 View FIGURES 15–22 ) with cylindrical, median membranous lobe exposed dorsally.

Color. Black, except apical half of mandible dark reddish brown, maxillary palpus brown, tegula brown, wings faintly infuscate, legs brown.

Measurements. BL7.0– 8.7 mm, HL 0.9–1.2 mm, HW 1.2–1.6 mm, WF 0.5–0.7 mm, EL 0.5–1.0 mm, ML 1.7–2.9 mm, MW 0.7–1.0 mm, FWL 4.5–5.1 mm.

Female. Unknown.

Distribution. Northern Taiwan.

Remarks. The differences between M. areolata and M. taoi are in the shape of the clypeal process and the sculptures of the propodeum ( Lin, 1966), but these characters are variable and unclear. There is no difference in the parameres and aedeagus; therefore, we regard M. taoi as a junior subjective synonym of M. areolata .

TARI

Taiwan Agricultural Research Institute

Kingdom

Animalia

Phylum

Arthropoda

Class

Insecta

Order

Hymenoptera

Family

Tiphiidae

Genus

Methocha

Loc

Methocha areolata Lin, 1966

Narita, Keisuke & Mita, Toshiharu 2021
2021
Loc

Methocha areolata

Lin, K. S. 1966: 190
1966
Loc

Methocha taoi

Lin, K. S. 1966: 188
1966
GBIF Dataset (for parent article) Darwin Core Archive (for parent article) View in SIBiLS Plain XML RDF