Bracon (Glabrobracon) titubans Wesmael, 1838

Papp, Jenő & Xviii, Budapest, 2012, A revision of the Bracon Fabricius species in Wesmael’s collection deposited in Brussels (Hymenoptera: Braconidae: Braconinae), European Journal of Taxonomy 21, pp. 1-154 : 104-108

publication ID	https://doi.org/ 10.5852/ejt.2012.21
publication LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:pub:993FCC8B-F8B1-42DD-B776-CA8435E08112
DOI	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3858910
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/F8008D0E-FFE2-FF9A-06D7-4A2DFC2EF975
treatment provided by	Valdenar
scientific name	Bracon (Glabrobracon) titubans Wesmael, 1838
status

Treatment

Bracon (Glabrobracon) titubans Wesmael, 1838 View in CoL

Fig. 51 View Fig A-L

Braco titubans Wesmael, 1838: 43 ♀ (type material: 2 ♀♀), type locality: “environs de Bruxelles ” ( Belgium), ♀ lectotype (and one ♀ paralectotype, present designations) in the Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, Brussels; examined.

Braco fuscipennis Wesmael, 1838: 40 View in CoL ♀ (type material: 2 ♀♀), type locality: “environs de Bruxelles ” ( Belgium), ♀ lectotype (and one ♀ paralectotype, present designations) in the Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, Brussels; examined, syn. nov.

Braco tarsator Thomson, 1894: 1837 View in CoL “♁ ♀ ” (type material: 2 ♀♀, ♁ not seen), type locality: “Funnen vid Pålsjö i Skåne ” ( Sweden), ♀ lectotype (and one ♀ paralectotype, present designation) in Zoologisk Museum, Lund; examined, Papp 1969b: 203 (as new synonym).

Bracon terebrator Szépligeti, 1901: 265 View in CoL (in key), 279 (description) (in Hungarian); 1904 (1901): 177 (in key), 181 (description) (in German), (type material: 1 ♀), type locality: “ Budapest ” ( Hungary), ♀ lectotype in Magyar Természettudományi Múzeum, Budapest; examined.

Bracon titubans View in CoL – Szépligeti 1901: 263 (in key, in Hungarian); 1904 (1901): 176 (in key, in Gemran) ♀. Bracon (Bracon) titubans View in CoL – Tobias 1986: 129 (in key, in Russian).

Bracon (Orthobracon) titubans View in CoL – Fahringer 1927: 274 (in key), 417 (redescription), assigned to “Section Orthobracon ”, ♀. — Telenga 1936: 172 (in key), 280 (redescription) (in Russian) and 375 (in key, in German), ♀. — Papp 1971: 203 (synonymy, redescription, taxonomy). — Shenefelt 1978: 1649 (literature up to 1974).

Bracon fuscipennis View in CoL – Szépligeti 1901: as valid species 265 (in key, in Hungarian); 1904 (1901): as valid species 178 (in key, in German), ♀.

Bracon (Orthobracon) fuscipennis View in CoL – Fahringer 1927: as valid species 271 (♀), 279 (♁) (in key) and 394 (redescription), assigned to “Section Orhobracon ”, ♀ ♁. — Telenga 1936: as valid species 175 (♀), 178 (♁) (in key), 290 (redescription) (in Russian) and 377 (♀), 381 (♁) (in key, in German), ♀ ♁. — Shenefelt 1978: as valid species 1634 (literature up to 1974).

Bracon tarsator View in CoL – Szépligeti 1901: as valid species 264 (in key, in Hungarian); 1904 (1901): as valid species 179 (in key, in German), ♀ ♁.

Bracon (Orthobracon) tarsator View in CoL – Fahringer 1927: as valid species 274 (♀), 281 (♁) (in key) and 424 (redescription), assigned to “Section Orthobracon ”, ♀ ♁. — Telenga 1936: as valid species 171 (♀), 178 (♁) (in key), 273 (redescription) (in Russian) and 373 (♀), 381 (♁) (in key, in German), ♀ ♁. — Shenefelt 1978: as valid species 1649 (literature up to 1969).

Bracon (Lucobracon) terebrator View in CoL – Fahringer 1927: as valid species 253 (♀, in key), 370 (redescription), assigned to “Section Lucobracon ”, ♀. — Telenga 1936: as valid species 174 (♀, in key), 286 (redescription) (in Russian) and 376 (♀, in key, in German), ♀. — Shenefelt 1978: as valid species 1625 (literature up to 1936). — Papp 2004: 182 (synonymization, type designation and depository), 2008: 1797 (synonymization).

Designation of the ♀ lectotype of Bracon titubans View in CoL

(First label, printed) “ Coll. Wesmael ”; (second label, printed) “2056”; (third label) “ Braco ♀ titubans mihi” (handwritten) “dét. C. Wesmael ” (printed); (fourth label, printed red) “ Type ”; (fifth label, with my handwriting) “ Belgique / Bruxelles / VII leg. Wesmael ” (above) “teste J. Papp 1987” (reverse); sixth label is the lectotype card (labels 5-6 attached by me). Lectotype is in good condition: (1) micropinned; (2) left flagellum deficient.

Designation of the ♀ paralectotype of Bracon titubans

Labels identical those of the lectotype except paralectotype card. -- Paralectotype is in good condition: (1) micropinned; (2) left flagellum apically deficient; (3) missing: right flagellum, right fore leg (except coxa + trochanters) and tarsi of hind pair of legs.

Designation of the ♀ lectotype of Bracon fuscipennis

(First label, printed) “Coll. Wesmael”; (second label, printed) “2053”; (third label) “ Braco ♀ fuscipennis mihi” (handwritten) / “dét. C. Wesmael” (printed); (fourth label, printed red) “Type”; (fifth label, with my handwriting) “ Belgique / Bruxelles / VIII leg. Wesmael” (above) “teste J. Papp 1987” (reverse); sixth label is the lectotype card, seventh label is with the actual name Bracon titubans Wesmael given by J. Papp. Lectotype is in good condition: (1) right flagellum deficient; (2) left hind wing distally undulate-form creased; (3) missing: tarsomeres 2-5 of left middle and hind pair of legs (except coxae + trochanters).

Remark

The lectotype, herewith designated, was originally considered by Wesmael as “var. 1. ♀ ” of his species. This specimen is in much better condition than the paralectotype (see below) which is the nominate form after Wesmael (l.c.).

Designation of the ♀ paralectotype of Bracon fuscipennis

Labels identical to those of the lectotype except paralectotype card. -- Paralectotype is in poor condition: (1) left flagellum deficient; (2) missing: right antenna and metasoma.

Designation of the ♀ lectotype of Bracon tarsator

(First label, handwritten) “Pål” (=Pålsjö), Sweden; second label is the lectotype card; third label is with the actual name Bracon titubans given by J. Papp. - Lectotype is in good condition: (1) specimen glued direct to the pin; (2) flagelli apically deficient.

Designation of the ♀ paralectotype of Bracon tarsator

Labels identical with those of the lectotype except paralectotype card. -- Paralectotype is in good condition: (1) flagelli deficient; (2) missing: right middle leg (except coxa and trochanter) and tarsomeres 2-5 of left hind leg.

Material examined

49 ♀♀ + 13 ♁♁ from 14 countries: ENGLAND: 4 ♀♀ + 1 ♁ from five localities. THE NETHERLANDS: 8 ♀♀ + 1 ♁ from eight localities. FRANCE: 1 ♀. GERMANY: 1 ♀. SLOVAKIA: 2 ♀♀ + 1 ♁ from three localities. HUNGARY: 18 ♀♀ + 6 ♁♁ from 21 localities. ROMANIA (Transsylvania): 4 ♀♀ + 1 ♁ from five localities. BULGARIA: 3 ♀♀ + 3 ♁♁ from six localities. NORTH ITALY: 1 ♀. GEORGIA: 1 ♀. ARMENIA: 1 ♀. AFGHANISTAN: 1 ♀. MONGOLIA: 1 ♀. KOREA: 3 ♀♀ from three localities.

Redescription of the ♀ lectotype of Bracon titubans ( Fig. 51 View Fig A-H)

LENGTH. Body 3 mm long.

ANTENNAE. Right antenna somewhat shorter than body and with 27 antennomeres; left antenna deficient: with 8 antennomeres. First flagellomere twice and penultimate flagellomere 1.6 times as long as broad.

HEAD. In dorsal view less transverse ( Fig. 51A View Fig ), 1.75 times as broad as long, eye 2.4 times longer than temple, temple restricted, occiput moderately excavated. Oral opening: its horizontal diameter 1.25 times as long as shortest distance between opening and compound eye ( Fig. 51B View Fig ). Head polished.

MESOSOMA. In lateral view 1.4 times as long as high, polished. Propodeum polished, lunule emitting a keel up to its half, keel with oblique rugulae ( Fig. 51C View Fig ).

LEGS. Hind femur 2.8 times as long as broad medially ( Fig. 51D View Fig ). Claw downcurved, its basal lobe large and fairly pointed ( Fig. 51E View Fig ).

WINGS. Forewing about as long as body. Pterostigma ( Fig. 51F View Fig ) 2.6 times as long as wide and issuing r proximally from its middle, r 0.8 times as long as width of pterostigma. Second submarginal cell fairly long, 3-SR 1.25 times longer than 2-SR, SR1 straight, 1.65 times as long as 3-SR and reaching tip of wing; 1-R1 1.6 times as long as pterostigma. First discal cell high, 1-M 1.7 times longer than m-cu, 1-SR- M bent and 1.5 times longer than 1-M ( Fig. 51G View Fig ).

TERGITES. First tergite ( Fig. 51H View Fig ) as long as broad behind, evenly and clearly broadening posteriorly, scutum laterally with a pair of carinula, its margin crenulate, scutum posteriorly rugulose-uneven. Second tergite 2.6 times as broad as long and slightly longer than third tergite, suture between them slightly bisinuate and subcrenulate. Second tergite medially with fine longitudinal striation, further tergites polished. Ovipositor sheath as long as hind tibia + half basitarsus.

COLOUR. Scape and pedicel brownish yellow, flagellum dark brown. Head dark brown with faint rusty tint. Mesosoma blackish. Oral part yellow, palpi pale yellow. Tegula yellow. First tergite dark brown, second tergite yellow, medially brown. Further tergites brown, laterally straw yellow. Legs yellow. Wings hyaline, pterostigma brown, veins yellowish brown.

Variable features of the ♀ (49 ♀♀) ( Fig. 51 View Fig I-K)

Body 2.8-3.2 mm long. Antenna with 26-28, usually with 27, antennomeres. Temple in dorsal view slightly more restricted ( Fig. 51I View Fig ). Hind femur 2.8-3.3 times as long as broad medially ( Fig. 51J View Fig ). Pterostigma usually wide, 2.6-2.8 times as long as wide. Second submarginal cell long, 3-SR 1.6 times as long as 2-SR ( Fig. 51K View Fig ). 1-M less long, 1.6 times as long as m-cu. Ovipositor sheath either long: as long as hind tibia + tarsomeres 1-3 combined or short: more or less shorter than hind tibia. Body more or less (dark) rusty brown.

Variable features of the ³ (13 ³³)

Body 2.6-3 mm long. Antenna with (25-)28-34 antennomeres. Temple, second submarginal cell and hind femur variable similar those of the ♀. Tergites 1-3 medially to nearly entirely rugo-rugulose. Body and mesosoma black to blackish.

Hosts

COL. Chrysomelidae : Gastroidea polygoni Linnaeus , G. viridula DeGeer.

Distribution

Europe, Mongolia. In Europe frequent to sporadic.

Taxonomic position

Within the subgenus Glabrobracon the species Bracon titubans Wesmael is nearest to B. nigriventris Wesmael (Palaearctic Region) and B. (Lucobracon) larvicida Wesmael (Europe, Kazakhstan, Mongolia) considering their corporal structure, they are distinguished by a few features not easy to recognize:

1 (2) First discal cell of forewing elongate ( Fig. 16G View Fig ), marginal cell approaching tip of wing and second submarginal cell relatively wide ( Fig. 16F View Fig ), oral opening less large ( Fig. 16B View Fig ) (subgeneric features of Lucobracon ). Temple in dorsal view rounded ( Fig. 16A View Fig ). Claw moderately downcurved ( Fig. 16E View Fig ). Propodeum medially either uneven ( Fig. 16C View Fig ) or rugulose ( Fig. 16J View Fig ). First tergite broadening posteriorly ( Fig. 16H View Fig ). Second tergite usually with lighter colour. ♀: 2.8-3.8 mm, ♁: 2.5-3.8 mm ............................................ B. (Lu.) larvicida Wesmael, 1838

2 (1) First discal cell of forewing subquadrate ( Figs 28G View Fig ; 51G View Fig ), marginal cell reaching tip of wing and second submarginal cell less wide ( Figs 28F View Fig ; 51F View Fig ), oral opening usual in size ( Figs 28B View Fig ; 51B View Fig ) (subgeneric features of Glabrobracon ). Temple either rounded ( Fig. 28A View Fig ) or restricted ( Fig. 51I View Fig ). Claw downcurved ( Figs 28E View Fig ; 51E View Fig ). Propodeum polished, above lunule with short rugae ( Figs 28C View Fig ; 51C View Fig ). Metasoma black(ish) to rusty brown, second tergite usually yellow to brownish.

3 (4) Temple in dorsal view rounded ( Fig. 28A View Fig ). Firts tergite beyond pair of spiracles subparallel-sided, tergite itself relatively large ( Fig. 28J View Fig ). Tergites (beyond first tergite) relatively wide, second terghite 3-3.2 times as wide behind as long ( Fig. 29F View Fig ). Pterostigma usually less wide, 3-3.3 times as long as wide ( Fig. 28F View Fig ). Body frequently with black to blackish colour. ♀ ♁: 3-3.4 mm ........................... ....................................................................................................... B. (Gl.) nigriventis Wesmael, 1838

4 (3) Temple in dorsal view restricted ( Fig. 51A View Fig ). First tergite beyond pair of spiracles with broadening sides, tergite itself usual in size ( Fig. 51H View Fig ). Tergites (beyond first tergite) relatively less wide, second tergite 2.6-2.8 times as wide behind as long ( Fig. 51H View Fig ). Pterostigma usually wide, 2.6-2.8 times as long as wide ( Fig. 51F View Fig ). Body rarely with black to blackish colour. ♀: 2.8-3.2 mm, ♁: 2.6-3 mm ............................................................... B. (Gl.) titubans Wesmael, 1838

Part 2. Nees sensu Wesmael’s Bracon species redescribed by Wesmael in 1838

In Wesmael’s monograph (1838) seven Bracon species, originally described by Nees (1811, 1834), are included as occurring in Belgium. Every species by Nees (except B. intercessor here dealt with as senior synonym of B. laetus ) has been redescribed by Wesmael similar to the species created by him. It is well-known that the Nees Collection (insects, lichens etc.) was housed in the Alexander König Museum (Bonn) and was, at the end of the Second World War, destroyed. To make clearly and unambiguously recognizable, the designations of the neotype for the species by Nees sensu Wesmael were evident for every species included in Wesmael’s monograph (except B. mediator and B. obscurator ). This taxonomic action is judged by the consideration that Wesmael was the first reviser of Nees’ Bracon species and, consequently, denoted here as Nees sensu Wesmael’s Bracon species. From among the series of the six valid species and one synonymous species names ( anthracinus Nees, 1834 jun. syn. = delibator Haliday, 1833 ), housed in Wesmael’s Collection, one specimen each was selected as the neotype (present designations) for the seven (6 + 1) species in question. Furthermore, the neotypes and the attached specimens in Wesmael’s Collection served for the subsequent redescriptions of the seven (6 + 1) Nees sensu Wesmael’s Bracon species. Under the valid seven species names a total of 20 synonymous names are listed, done by nine authors (the number of the synonymous names by them are given in brackets): Fahringer (1), Greese (2), Marshall (1), Nees (1), Panzer (1), Szépligeti (4), Telenga (2), Thomson (3) and Wesmael (5).

The redescribed seven (6 + 1) Nees sensu Wesmael’s Bracon species are as follows: B. caudiger , B. delibator (=anthracinus), B. exhilarator , B. fulvipes , B. immutator , B. osculator , B. variator ; and status of B. intercessor var. laetus .

Remarks

1) Two species by Nees: B. mediator Nees, 1834 and B. obscurator Nees, 1811 were also redescribed in Wesmael’s monograph and I have the privilege to examine their series in Wesmael’s Collection. The specimens of the two species are in rather poor condition inappropiate for either neotype designation or for redescription.

2) The names B. oostmaeli Wesmael, 1838 and B. regularis Wesmael, 1838 are junior synomyms of B. abbreviator Nees, 1834 ( Thomson 1894: 1815, Papp 2008: 1743).

Kingdom	Animalia
Phylum	Arthropoda
Class	Insecta
Order	Hymenoptera
Family	Braconidae
Genus	Bracon