Notanisus Walker, 1837

Gibson, Gary A. P., 2015, The presence of Notanisus Walker (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae) in North America and revision of the oulmesiensis species group, Zootaxa 3948 (3), pp. 422-450 : 423-424

Notanisus Walker, 1837

Synonymy. See Gibson (2003) or Noyes (2014). Graham (1969: 37) provided features in a key to differentiate both sexes of Pannoniella from Notanisus , but Bouček (1991: 204) synonymized Pannoniella and Amarisca under Notanisus . Antsingia Risbec (1952) was synonymized under Notanisus by Rasplus in Bouček (1991), and Gibson (2003) synonymized Anacallocleonymus Yang (1996) .

Recognition. Gibson (2003) provided keys to the tribes of Cleonyminae and the five world genera of Cleonymini— Callocleonymus Masi , Cleonymus Latreille , Dasycleonymus Gibson , Notanisus and Zolotarewskya Risbec. He stated that the petiole is at least subquadrate in Notanisus , but this description is inexact for N. sexramosus and N. clavatus Bouček , in which the body of the petiole is distinct and quadrangular but transverse ( Figs 8 , 14 ) ( Bouček 1961, fig. 1). The key of Bouček and Rasplus (1991) readily differentiates Notanisus from the two other genera of Cleonymini in the Palaearctic region, Callocleonymus and Cleonymus , though not all species of the genera in other regions. The presence of N. kansensis in North America also makes correct keying of Notanisus difficult using Bouček and Heydon (1997). Females will not key correctly through couplet 55 because of their very short postmarginal vein ( Figs 35, 36 ) and the absence of complete notauli ( Fig. 33 ). Macropterous females of N. sexramosus have the postmarginal vein about 1.1× the length of the stigmal vein ( Fig. 7 ), but because of the absence of complete notauli will also key through the second half of couplet 55 to couplet 154. They will then key to couplet 170 where they will not key further because of the mixture of features listed in each half of the couplet. However, females of Notanisus are distinguished easily from other keyed genera by the apical funicular being produced into at least a short projection below the base of the clava in combination with the clava either being tapered apically into a curved, somewhat finger-like projection ( Figs 6 , 19 , 27 , 43 ) or with a terminal, setose, spiniform projection ( Figs 31 , 59 , 68 , 83 ). If specimens are taken through the first half of couplet 55 to couplet 62, only one feature given, pronotum longer than mesoscutum, differentiates both sexes of Notanisus from Cleonymus . A second feature, bare versus setose eyes, differentiates only females of the two genera in North America (but not all world species), whereas the female feature given is valid only for brachypterous females of N. sexramosus . Males of N. sexramosus are distinguished by their ramose flagellum, the basal six funiculars being anelliform but each with an extremely long ramus ( Fig. 10 ). Males of N. kansensis likely also have a ramose flagellum (but see further below).

Figures

FIGURES 1 – 8. Notanisus sexramosus ♀. 1, lateral habitus, macropterous form (2014 - 1). 2 – 5, brachypterous form (2014 - 2): 2, dorsal habitus; 3, head, frontal; 4, mesosoma, dorsolateral; 5, scutellar-axillar complex and wings. 6, antenna (2014 - 2) [insert: preclaval and claval segments, lateral (2014 - 1)]. 7, fore wing (2014 - 1). 8, apex of scutellum – base of gaster and metacoxae, dorsal (2014 - 2).

FIGURES 9 – 15. Notanisus sexramosus ♂. 9, head and pronotum, dorsolateral (2014 - 47). 10, head and antenna, lateral (2014 - 3). 11, lateral habitus (2014 - 3). 12, mesosoma, dorsal (2014 - 4). 13, fore wing (2014 - 4). 14 and 15, petiole and base of gaster (2014 - 4): 14, dorsal; 15, ventral (dashed line in Fig. 14 delimits posterior body from anterior neck of petiole).

FIGURES 29 – 36. Notanisus kansensis, ♀ holotype. 29, lateral habitus. 30, head, frontal. 31, antenna [insert: apical two funiculars and clava, lateral]. 32, mesopleuron, metapleuron, metacoxa and petiole, lateral. 33, pronotum and mesonotum, dorsolateral. 34, scutellum – petiole and metacoxae, dorsal. 35, fore wing apex. 36, fore wing.

FIGURES 16 – 20. Notanisus brevipetiolus, ♀ holotype. 16, dorsal habitus. 17, dorsolateral habitus. 18, propodeum, petiole and metacoxae, dorsal. 19, antenna, lateral. 20, fore wing.

FIGURES 27 and 28. Notanisus gracilis, ♀ holotype. 27, fore wing. 28, antenna.

FIGURES 37 – 45. Notanisus longipetiolus ♀. 37 – 41, holotype: 37, lateral habitus; 38, pronotum and mesonotum, dorsolateral; 39, head and pronotum; 40, scutellar-axillar complex; 41; mesepimeron and metapleuron. 42, propodeum – base of gaster and metacoxae, dorsal (2014 - 45). 43 – 45, holotype: 43, antenna, lateral; 44, fore wing; 45, fore wing apex (dashed lines delimit dorsal bare region).

FIGURES 53 – 61. Notanisus oulmesiensis ♀. 53, lateral habitus (2014 - 41). 54, head and pronotum (2014 - 39). 55, pronotum and mesonotum, dorsolateral (2014 - 39). 56, mesosoma including coxae, lateral (2014 - 41). 57, axillar-scutellar complex (2014 - 39). 58, propodeum and coxae, dorsal (2014 - 39). 59, antenna, lateral (2014 - 40). 60, fore wing (2014 - 39); 61, fore wing apex (2014 - 39) (arrow points to dorsal bare region).

FIGURES 62 – 70. Notanisus vanharteni, ♀ holotype. 62, lateral habitus. 63, pronotum and mesonotum, dorsolateral. 64, head and pronotum. 65, scutellar-axillar complex. 66, mesepimeron, metapleuron, metacoxa and petiole, lateral. 67, propodeum, petiole and metacoxae, dorsal. 68, antennae (upper antenna lateral). 69, fore wing. 70, fore wing apex (dashed lines delimit dorsal bare region).

FIGURES 77 – 85. Notanisus yemenensis, ♀ holotype. 77, lateral habitus. 78, dorsal habitus. 79, head, antennae and pronotum. 80, pronotum and mesonotum, dorsolateral. 81, scutellar-axillar complex. 82, propodeum. 83, apical five funiculars and clava, lateral. 84, fore wing. 85, fore wing apex (dashed lines delimit dorsal bare region except for single seta).