Tracheliodes trochantericus ( Herrich-Schaeffer, 1841 ), 2022

Divelec, Romain Le, 2022, A taxonomic review of the Tracheliodes quinquenotatus (Jurine, 1807) species complex and some new records of rare European Tracheliodes A. Morawitz, 1866 (Hymenoptera, Crabronidae), Zootaxa 5099 (2), pp. 244-260 : 258-259

Tracheliodes trochantericus ( Herrich-Schaeffer, 1841) stat. rev.

( Figs 1C, 1F, 1I , 2C, 2F, 2I , 3C, 3F, 3I , 4F , 9 , 10 )

Ceratocolus? trochantericus Herrich-Schaeffer, 1841: 46 , pl. 14. Holotype: ♀, Spain (no depository indicated, lost). Neotype, here designated: ♀, Spain, Barcelona (Pérez coll., MNHN). Fig. 9 .

Crossocerus festivus Marquet, 1881: 188 . Lectotype, here designated: ♀, France, Cette (Sète) (MZL). New synonym. Fig. 10 .

Spelling and Synonymy. Herrich-Schaeffer (1841) spelled this species name “ trochanteribus” on page 46 of the original description and “ trochantericus ” in the associated identification key on page 45. The spelling “ trochanteribus ” has no meaning and is incorrect. Acting as first reviser (Article 24.2.2 of the Code), I hereby select trochantericus as the valid name.

Frei-Gessner et al. (1882: 395) and Kohl (1915: 324) synonymized Ceratocolus trochantericus Herrich-Schaeffer and Crossocerus festivus Marquet with C. quinquenotatus Jurine. De Beaumont (1952) confirmed the synonymy of Crossocerus festivus with T. quinquenotatus . However, both C. trochantericus Herrich-Schaeffer and C. festivus are distinct from T. quinquenotatus . Tracheliodes trochantericus is the oldest name of the two and, therefore, the valid name. The species identity, however, cannot be ascertained by the examination of the type, which was lost together with the entire Herrich-Schaeffer’s collection. The original description and illustrations refers to a species of the quinquenotatus complex. Because only one species occurs in France and Spain, the interpretation of this name is easy. Since it is described from Spain without further details I designate as neotype a specimen from Barcelona ( Spain) in Pérez’s collection (MNHN).

Diagnosis. The lateral teeth of clypeus free margin are 1 to 1.5 (usually about 1.2) × as wide as long ( Fig. 1C , 2C ). The clypeus bears a small conical process pointing forwards in its middle, if reduced (rarely) only a convex swollen surface remains on clypeus. The punctation of the upper frons (on sloping part) is remarkedly close and coarser than in the other discussed species ( Fig. 4F ). The orbital fovea usually is straight and narrower than in T. quinquenotatus . The following are yellow to yellow-whitish: most of mandibule (entirely in males), rarely more than a small basal and apical spot on scape front surface, rarely a spot on lower gena, usually a tiny spot on top of inner orbit, pronotal collar, tegula, scutellum, rarely a median spot on tergum I, a pair of more or less wide lateral spots on tergum III, rarely a pair of lateral spots on tergum V, fore and mid tibiae and apical parts of associated femora and trochanter, upper two thirds of hindtibia, fore and mid tarsi.

Type material examined. Neotype Ceratocolus trochantericus : Ceratocolus ? trochantericus Herrich- Schaeffer // Neotype desig. Le Divelec, R. 2019 // = Tracheliodes trochantericus (H.-Schaeffer) stat. rev. —Le Divelec, R. det. 2019 // Amaranthe colored pastille (October) // Barcelone // Museum Paris—Coll. J. Pérez 1915 // MNHN Paris EY33137. Lectotype Crossocerus festivus : ♀. Cette (Sète) // Crossocerus festivus Marquet in coll. Marquet // Tracheliodes quinquenotatus Jur. ♀ —J. de Beaumont det. 1952 // Crossocerus festivus Marquet, 1881 Lectotype desig. Le Divelec R. 2019 // = T. trochantericus (H.-Schaeffer) stat. rev. —Le Divelec, R. det. 2019 // GBIFCH00667148. Paralectotypes Crossocerus festivus : ♀. Cette (Sète) // Crossocerus festivus Marquet in coll. Marquet // Tracheliodes quinquenotatus Jur. ♀ —J. de Beaumont det. 1952 // Paralectotype // = T. trochantericus (H.-Schaeffer) stat. rev. —Le Divelec, R. det. 2020 // GBIFCH00667592; ♀. Montp (Montpellier) // Crossocerus festivus Marquet in coll. Marquet // Tracheliodes quinquenotatus Jur. ♀ —J. de Beaumont det. 1952 // Paralectotype // = T. trochantericus (H.-Schaeffer) stat. rev. —Le Divelec, R. det. 2020 // GBIFCH00667164; ♀. VIAS // Crossocerus festivus Marquet in coll. Marquet // Tracheliodes quinquenotatus Jur. ♀ —J. de Beaumont det. 1952 // Paralectotype // = T. trochantericus (H.-Schaeffer) stat. rev. —Le Divelec, R. det. 2020 // GBIFCH00667678.

Additional material examined. Algeria: Oran 2♀ 1895 ( WNHM) [mislabeled?]. France: Agde 29.VIII.1958 1♀ ( MNHN) , 01.VIII.1961 1♂ ( MNHN) , 05.VIII.1961 1♀ ( MNHN) ; Apt 22.VIII.1985 1♀ ( MNHN) , 11.VIII.1986 1♀ ( MNHN) , 12.VIII.1986 1♂ ( MNHN) ; Arles 1♂ ( RLD) ; Avignon ( Folard ) 29.IX.1892 1♀ ( MNHN) ; Beaumes 15.VI.1964 1♀ ( MNHN) ; Collias 02.VII.1953 3♀ 1♂ ( MNHN) , 18.VII.1958 2♂ ( MNHN) , 20.VII.1958 2♀ ( MNHN) ; Eygalières 14.VI.1990 2♀ ( RLD) , 29.V.1991 2♂ ( RLD) , 07.VI.1991 1♀ ( RLD) , 02.VII.1991 1♀ ( RLD) , 18.VII.1991 1♀ 1♂ ( RLD) ; Fréjus 16.VIII.1930 2♂ ( MNHN) , IX.1934 5♂ ( MNHN) , IX.1935 1♀ ( MNHN) ; La Foux d’Allos VIII.1934 1♀ ( MNHN) ; La Môle VIII.1982 1♂ ( MNHN) , VIII 1986 3♀ ( MNHN) ; Le Barcarès 21.VIII.1968 1♀ ( MNHN) , 06.VII.1970 1♂ ( MNHN) ; Le Boulou 05.VI 2♀ ( MNHN) ; Le Grau du Roi 30.VI.1988 1♀ ( MNHN) ; Leucate 06.VIII.1966 1♀ ( MNHN) , 15.VIII.1985 1♀ ( MNHN) , 28.V.1986 1♂ ( MNHN) , 26.VI.1986 1♀ 1♂ ( MNHN) , 17.VII.1987 1♂ ( MNHN) , 22-23.IX.1988 15♀ 6♂ ( MNHN) , 01-11.VI.1989 40♀ 22♂ ( MNHN) , 12.VI.1989 1♂ ( MNHN) ; Montpellier VIII.1864 1♂ ( MNHN) , X.1912 1♀ ( MNHN) , 26.IX.1917 2♀ ( MNHN) , VI.1919 1♀ ( MNHN) , 24.VIII.1919 1♀ ( MNHN) , 2♀ 1♂ ( MNHN) ; Opoul 16-18.VI.1989 3♀ 4♂ ( MNHN) ; Palavas-le-Flots VII.1904 1♂ ( MNHN) ; Robion 26.VIII.1971 1♀ ( RLD) ; Saint-Aygulf 12.VIII.1930 1♀ 1♂ ( MNHN) , 18.VIII.1930 1♂ ( MNHN) , 19.VIII.1930 2♂ ( MNHN) ; Sorgues 03.IX.1936 2♀ 1♂ ( MNHN) ; uncertain locality 1♀ 1♂ ( MNHN) . Italy (Sardinia): Arzachena 04.VI.1953 1♀ ( MSNM) ; Cagliari 1♀ ( MSNM) ; Porto Torres 11.VI.1952 1♀ ( MSNM) ; Posada 25.V.1953 2♀ 2♂ ( MSNM) ; Sassari 13.VI.1952 4♀ 1♂ ( MSNM) ; San Pietro Island 1♀ ( MSNM) , San Pietro Island ( Carloforte ) 20-26.VI.1956 1♀ ( MSNM) , 20-26.VI.1956 1♀ ( NHMW) .

Portugal: Canha 1♀ ( RLD) ; Chiclana 1♂ ( MZL) ; Quarteira 1♂ ( NHM) . Spain ( Mainland ): Barcelona X 2♀ 4♂ ( MNHN) , 9♀ 3♂ ( NHMW) ; Chiclana de la Frontera 25.V.1952 1♂ ( MZL) ; Gerona 1♂ ( NHM) ; Godella 11.VI.1920 1♀ ( MZL) ; Granada 1-21.VI.1909 1♀ ( MNHN) ; Madrid 24.VIII.1952 1♀ ( MZL) ; Tarifa 26.V.1961 5♀ 2♂ ( MZL) ; uncertain locality 2♀ ( NHMW) . Spain (Balearic Islands): Palma de Mallorca 6♀ 2♂ ( MNHN) . Switzerland: Peney 1♀ ( MHNG) [mislabeled].

Distribution: France mainland, Spain (including Balearic Islands) and Sardinia. The specimen from Peney ( Switzerland) (Tournier coll., MHNG) is mislabeled and was collected with a lot more individuals of strictly Mediterranean species (de Beaumont 1945, 1952). I also believe that the two specimens from Oran ( Algeria) (Schmiedeknecht coll., WNHM) are mislabeled because, despite a rich material from North Africa, I could not find any other specimen from there. Furthermore, members of the quinquenotatus complex seem to be allopatric. If T. herinaceus is the only clearly established species in North-Africa, I also could not find any region where the two European sister species, T. quinquenotatus and T. trochantericus , co-occur. The French Alps seems to be the natural frontier between the distribution of both species but more material is needed from the franco-italian frontier in order to know if there is an overlap in their distribution. Thus, to the west of French Alps T. trochantericus is the only occurring species while T. quinquenotatus is to the east. I have no records of T. trochantericus from mainland Italy and Corsica so its occurrence in Sardinia might seem strange. However, Sardinia was previously attached to the current southern France and Spain so Sardinian populations may came from there ( Rosenbaum et al. 2002). More studies would be needed to explain the distribution of T. quinquenotatus and T. trochantericus on the Thyrrhenian islands.

Figures

FIGURE 1. Female clypeus. A-C—Clypeus in front view; D-F—Clypeal process in dorsal view; G-I—Clypeal process in lateral view; A, D, G—Tracheliodes herinaceus; B, E, H—Tracheliodes quinquenotatus; C, F, I—Tracheliodes trochantericus.

FIGURE 2. Male clypeus. A-C—Clypeus in front view; D-F—Clypeal process in dorsal view; G-I—Clypeal process in lateral view; A, D, G—Tracheliodes herinaceus; B, E, H—Tracheliodes quinquenotatus; C, F, I—Tracheliodes trochantericus.

FIGURE 3. A-C—Female prepectus; D-F—Metanotum and propodeum of females; G-I—Metanotum and propodeum of males; A, D, G—Tracheliodes herinaceus; B, E, H—Tracheliodes quinquenotatus; C, F, I—Tracheliodes trochantericus.

FIGURE 4. A-B—Female right mandibule; C-D—Male right mandibule; E-F—Female frons in dorsal view; G-H—Female pronotum; I-J—Male pronotum; A, C, E, G, I—Tracheliodes quinquenotatus; B, D, H, J—Tracheliodes herinaceus; F—Tracheliodes trochantericus.

FIGURE 9. Neotype of Ceratocolus? trochantericus Herrich-Schaeffer. A—Habitus in dorsal view; B—Habitus in profil with labels; C—Face in front view. Black scale = 1mm.

FIGURE 10. Lectotype of Crossocerus festivus Marquet. A—Habitus in dorsal view with labels; B—Habitus in profil; C— Face in front view. Black scale = 1mm.