Chrysoctonoides Huber & Triapitsyn
publication ID |
https://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.505.9472 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:2F7E0A3E-2DFE-4EC1-B706-8867FD210D76 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/A5549C89-9EEF-4351-8EFC-AFF43520FC84 |
taxon LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:act:A5549C89-9EEF-4351-8EFC-AFF43520FC84 |
treatment provided by |
|
scientific name |
Chrysoctonoides Huber & Triapitsyn |
status |
gen. n. |
Taxon classification Animalia Hymenoptera Mymaridae
Chrysoctonoides Huber & Triapitsyn gen. n. Figs 41-47, 48, 49, 50-52, 53-55, 56, 57, 58-66[Figs 58-66 reproduced from Lin et al. 2007]
Myrmecomymar : Lin et al. 2007: 39 (discussion of generic limits, possible new genus), 93 (photographs [figs 170-178]). Generic misidentification.
Type species.
Chrysoctonoides longisetosa Huber & Triapitsyn.
Derivation of genus name.
After the genus Chrysoctonus + eidos, Greek for shape, form, resembling, like; referring to the similarity of females and males to those of Chrysoctonus . Gender: feminine.
Diagnosis.
Female. Wingless (Figs 41, 45, 48, 50, 53-55). Head with eye small with about 11 ommatidia (Fig. 53); ocelli absent (Figs 44, 54, 55). Antenna with funicle 7-segmented and clava entire (Figs 43, 49). Mesosoma (Figs 45, 50, 55) with strong, erect setae on mesoscutum and scutellum, and scutellum without campaniform sensilla; tarsi 5-segmented; propodeum medially with numerous small tubercles and laterally with reticulate sculpture. Metasoma with narrow reticulate petiole slightly longer than wide.
Male. Fully winged (Fig. 56), with venation much longer than half wing length (Fig. 62). Antenna with flagellum 11-segmented but apical segment small and almost spine-like, each segment with a whorl of setae about twice as long as the segment (Figs 57, 66) Mesosoma (Figs 56, 60) with short, weak setae on mesoscutum and scutellum, and scutellum with campaniform sensilla (Fig. 60).
Chrysoctonoides differs from Chrysoctonus , the most similar-looking genus, as follows. Female: mesoscutum and scutellum each medially much longer than pronotum (each about the same length in Chrysoctonus ); median and lateral lobes of mesoscutum, and scutellum with strong setae (setae absent in Chrysoctonus ); fenestra small, somewhat triangular and occupying much less than half width of scutellum (fenestra large, oval, occupying most of scutellum in Chrysoctonus ). Male: Flagellum with each segment somewhat irregular-shaped, often slightly wider medially and with at most only 1 mps and 4 setae, the setae much longer than segment length (each segment with straight edges and parallel-sided, with several mps and setae, the setae much shorter than segment length in Chrysoctonus ). Both sexes: prosternum large, about as long as line of junction of propleura (small, much shorter than line of junction in Chrysoctonus ).
Description.
Female. Medium in length and wingless in the only included species. Head. Almost cuboidal, about 1.25 × as wide as long and about 1.2 × as wide as high; in lateral view projecting forward for about length of radicle beyond level of anterior margin of eye then, more ventrally, flat and receding to mouth (Figs 48, 49, 53). Preorbital sulcus clearly separated from eye, from apex of preorbital trabecula extending straight down side of face to just lateral to mouth opening. Face square. Subantennal sulci absent. Torulus almost touching transverse trabecula. Eye small (Figs 44, 49, 53), with about 12 ommatidia, in lateral view somewhat triangular, slightly longer than high. Malar space at least 1.3 × eye height. Malar sulcus absent. Gena width in lateral view at level of mid-height of eye about 2.6 × eye width, and gena merging smoothly but quite sharply with occiput. Vertex in lateral view slightly convex, horizontal, almost at right angle with face (separated from face by transverse trabecula), posteromedially separated from occiput by slightly curved carina. Ocelli absent (Figs 44, 54, 55). Occiput entire; foramen dorsal, almost at junction with vertex (Fig. 55) so head pendulous (Figs 48, 49, 53). Labrum with 5 setae. Mandibles each with 3 teeth, crossing when closed. Antenna. Scape about 5.7 × as long as wide, with radicle distinct, narrow, about 0.2 × scape length; pedicel about 0.34 × scape length, 2.0 × as long but wider than fl1; funicle 7-segmented (Figs 43, 49); clava unsegmented, about 0.4 × funicle length. Mesosoma. About 1.7 × as long as wide, 1.3 × as long as high, and 0.7 × wide as high. Pronotum in dorsal view (Figs 45, 54, 55) short, about 0.3 × mesoscutum length, entire, and with a low transverse carina at anterior margin of collar. Pronotal spiracle level with anterior apex of notaulus. Propleura abutting medially, their line of junction much less than length of prosternum. Prosternum somewhat triangular, apparently divided posteriorly by median suture less than half prosternum length. Mesoscutum with straight, strongly diverging notauli. Transscutal articulation straight. Scutellum almost as long as mesoscutum (20: 23), without campaniform sensilla but with two setae in their position (Figs 45, 55) and fenestra a small, somewhat triangular oval behind the setae. Axilla normal, triangular. Prepectus narrow, slightly wider dorsally than ventrally. Mesopleuron almost vertical, about 0.6 × as long as high; the mesepimeron almost as wide as mesepisternum. Metanotum extremely narrow, without defined dorsellum. Propodeum in lateral view flat, strongly sloping, about 1.2 × as long as scutellum, not clearly separated from metapleuron. Propodeal spiracle small, at extreme anterolateral corner of propodeum and about its diameter from metanotum. Wings. Apparently absent (extremely micropterous). Legs. Metacoxae (Fig. 61, fore leg) distinctly reticulate. Metasoma. Petiole narrow (Fig. 63), slightly longer than wide (14:10). Gaster about 1.2 × as long as high; cerci with long setae. Spiracle on gt6 absent. Ovipositor arising almost at base of gaster, slightly longer than gaster length and slightly exserted beyond gaster apex; ovipositor sheath with 1 subapical seta.
Male. Medium in length and fully winged (Fig. 56). Colour. Body fairly uniformly light brown, the gaster slightly darker in about apical half; legs beyond coxae and antenna slightly lighter than body. Head about 1.3 × as wide as long and about 1.5 × as wide as high. Eye large (Figs 56, 57), with about 75 ommatidia, in lateral view almost round, about as long as high. Malar space about 0.3 × eye height. Gena in lateral view at level of top and bottom of eye about 0.5 × eye width. Ocelli present, with LOL about 0.66 × POL, and OOL about 1.0 × POL. Antenna. Flagellum 11-segmented (Figs 56, 57, 66); scape 6.1 × as long as wide, with radicle about 0.18 × scape length and distinct; pedicel about 0.36 × scape length and 1.25 × as long as fl1; flagellomeres each with several extremely long setae and some flagellomeres uneven in width, either slightly wider or slightly narrower medially. Mesosoma. About 1.8 × as long as wide, 1.7 × as long as high, and 1.3 × wide as high. Scutellum about as long as mesoscutum (Fig. 60), with the usual campaniform sensilla submedially and also with two short, slender anterolateral setae; fenestra wide and occupying most of scutellum, with its margin anterior to the campaniform sensilla. Metanotum normal, with slightly defined rhomboidal dorsellum. Propodeum in lateral view flat, strongly sloping. Wings. Fully winged (Figs 56, 62). Fore wing about 4.6 × as long as wide, with microtrichia not evenly covering wing surface. Venation about 0.6 × wing length. Parastigma + stigmal vein about 1.8 × length of submarginal vein. Hind wing normal; venation about 0.4 × wing length. Legs. Calcar fringed internally with several setae (Fig. 64). Metasoma. Gaster about 1.5 × as long as high. Genitalia (Fig. 61) with aedeagus extending well beyond parameres and apparently without aedeagal apodeme (this may have been broken off during dissection).
Hosts and habitat.
Hosts are unknown. The habitat is rainforest litter.
Distribution.
Australian Region.
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.