Macreupelmus auranticrus, Gibson, Gary A. P., 2016

Gibson, Gary A. P., 2016, Revision of the Neotropical genus Macreupelmus Ashmead (Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea: Eupelmidae), Zootaxa 4161 (1), pp. 81-115 : 88-90

publication ID	https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4161.1.3
publication LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:pub:5BBA7F64-D281-4CB0-B78C-CD1276452290
DOI	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6087479
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/C96087FF-A66D-5B54-5BE4-FEB6908EF701
treatment provided by	Plazi
scientific name	Macreupelmus auranticrus
status	sp. nov.

Treatment

Macreupelmus auranticrus n. sp.

Figs 15–23 View FIGURES 15 – 23

Paratype. VENEZUELA. Aragua, Rancho Grande N.P., 1100m, 18.VIII-3.IX.1992, L. Masner, maxinet, cloud for., CNC Photo 2016-7 (1 CNC).

Etymology. From the Latin words aurantium (orange) and crus (leg) in reference to the partly orangish legs of females.

Description. FEMALE (habitus: Fig. 15 View FIGURES 15 – 23 ). Head ( Fig. 20 View FIGURES 15 – 23 ) with lower face and interantennal prominence mostly green to bluish-green, scrobal depression with scrobes extensively purple to reddish-violaceous, parascrobal region ventrally green to variably extensively blue to purple but dorsally it and scrobal depression from about level of dorsal limit of interantennal prominence and frons to level somewhat behind posterior ocelli darker with slight reddish-violaceous luster ( Fig. 16 View FIGURES 15 – 23 ); gena green or with variably extensive blue to purple lusters behind outer orbit; vertex green mesally to purple laterally behind outer orbit; vertex and temples with dark setae. Head with interorbital distance about 0.3× head width; OOL: POL: LOL: MPOD = 0.25–0.3: 1.0–1.1: 1.0: 1.0; distance between anterior ocellus and inner orbit slightly greater than MAOD, (about 1.1×); anterior ocellus about 1 MAOD from dorsal extent of scrobal depression, with sulcus extending between ventral margin and depression, but not within depression; frons ( Fig. 16 View FIGURES 15 – 23 ) granular laterally to more granular-imbricate mesally near mediolongitudinal groove below anterior ocellus compared to more reticulate to reticulate-imbricate ocellar triangle and vertex. Antenna ( Fig. 21 View FIGURES 15 – 23 ) with scape extensively orangish, though more brown basally to dark ventrally along carinate margin, and pedicel and flagellum brown except micropilose sensory regions of apical two clavomeres sometimes paler; scape robust-subcylindrical, about 4.8× as long as medial width, and in lateral view pedicel extending obviously beyond apical ventral margin when at right angle to scape ( Fig. 21 View FIGURES 15 – 23 , insert).

Mesoscutum distinctly carinate mediolongitudinally at least partly over anteromedial lobe and variably distinctly and extensively through posteromedial depressed region; scutellar-axillar complex with axillae meshlike reticulate but scutellum longitudinally reticulate-strigose. Front leg with coxa and femur similarly dark, but trochanter, tibia and tarsus lighter, more orangish. Middle leg beyond coxa orangish except mesotibial apical and mesotarsal pegs dark, trochantellus white except ventrobasally, and both femur apically and tibia basally white; femur with posterior surface uniformly setose with short white setae over about apical half; tibia with 7 pegs in two rows forming patch ( Fig. 22 View FIGURES 15 – 23 ). Hind leg variably extensively orangish with apex of coxa, trochanter, trochantellus, and tibia basally or dorsobasally white; femur dorsally orangish over entire length compared to darker brown outer surface over about ventral half; tibia (except for basal white region) orangish to darker orangish-brown than femur dorsolongitudinally. Fore wing ( Fig. 18 View FIGURES 15 – 23 ) with dark setae continuously through hyaline basal cell onto infuscate basal part of disc, without any white setae on basal or mediocubital folds, but with white setae in hyaline region along posterior margin opposite anterior hyaline region; anterior hyaline region behind marginal vein tapered posterobasally and not extending to mediocubital fold; costal cell dorsally entirely setose with several rows along length ( Fig. 17 View FIGURES 15 – 23 ). Propodeum ( Fig. 19 View FIGURES 15 – 23 ) medially elongate, with ∩-like incurved foramen distant from shallowly, broadly V-like angulate anterior margin; plical region minutely granular posteriorly but panels mostly reticulaterugose to obliquely strigose.

Gaster mostly brown dorsally, but under some angles of light with purple to reddish-violaceous lusters basally on Gt1 and laterally on Gt1–Gt4, with Gt5–syntergum variably darker brown or with slight bluish to purple lusters ( Fig. 23 View FIGURES 15 – 23 ); Gt6 more finely reticulate to reticulate-punctate within about basal half compared to more coarsely reticulate-rugulose apically or reticulate-imbricate with sculpture formed by broadly U-like ridges ( Fig. 23 View FIGURES 15 – 23 ). Ovipositor sheaths slightly shorter than metatibia ( Fig. 15 View FIGURES 15 – 23 ), about 0.85–0.9× metatibia length.

Distribution (Map 1C). Venezuela.

Remarks. Macreupelmus auranticrus forms a species complex along with M. laticlavius and M. brasiliensis . Females of the three are similar to those of M. granulosus in lacking the hyaline band with white setae between the basal cell and disc ( Figs 18 View FIGURES 15 – 23 , 43–45 View FIGURES 42 – 51 , 89 View FIGURES 87 – 95 , 99 View FIGURES 96 – 105 ) and in having a medially long propodeal plical region ( Figs 19 View FIGURES 15 – 23 , 41 View FIGURES 34 – 41 , 94 View FIGURES 87 – 95 ), but differ from the former in having Gt6 reticulate ( Figs 23 View FIGURES 15 – 23 , 51 View FIGURES 42 – 51 , 105 View FIGURES 96 – 105 ) rather than granular ( Fig. 95 View FIGURES 87 – 95 ) and the mesotibial apical pegs in a patch of two or more rows ( Figs 22 View FIGURES 15 – 23 , 48 View FIGURES 42 – 51 , 100 View FIGURES 96 – 105 ) rather than a single row. The former feature likely is symplesiomorphic within Macreupelmus , but the latter feature is more likely synapomorphic. The two known females of M. auranticrus are very similar to those of M. brasiliensis except for their paler legs (cf. Figs 15 View FIGURES 15 – 23 , 34 View FIGURES 34 – 41 ) and somewhat more extensively pale scapes (cf. Figs 21 View FIGURES 15 – 23 , 40 View FIGURES 34 – 41 ). It is possible that these differences represent only regional color forms of a single species, but the two M. auranticrus females differ also from typical M. brasiliensis females in their somewhat narrower scape such that when the pedicel and scape are at a right angle to each other the pedicel extends obviously beyond the ventral margin of the scape ( Fig. 21 View FIGURES 15 – 23 , insert).