Glyptapanteles artonae (Rohwer, 1926)
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5852/ejt.2022.792.1647 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:18DB5F54-5CEB-498E-A6F1-E570E6A57833 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6308821 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/039487E7-EF7B-4A1F-A930-88B8FE50FE74 |
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
scientific name |
Glyptapanteles artonae (Rohwer, 1926) |
status |
|
Glyptapanteles artonae (Rohwer, 1926)
Diagnosis
As Austin & Dangerfield (1992) state that this species is unlikely to actually occur in the Australasian region and we were unable to find morphological characters that definitively separate this species from those in Australia, we do not diagnose it. However, the extremely dark femur of this species would distinguish it from most new species described in our study. There is a very low risk of this species being conspecific with any of the newly described species from Australia, due to it being unlikely to actually occur in the Australasian region.
Material examined
Holotype MALAYSIA • ♀; “ Kuala Lumpur F.M.S. ”, “ From B.A.R. Gater ”, “ Pars. On Artona catoxantha ”; USNM 40097 . Only images examined (available at the NMNH type database: http://n 2t.net/ark:/65665/30bd958a4-dc6a-446d-8279-4168f0a8e0cc).
Remarks
See Shenefelt (1972) for a compilation of extra-limital host records (some potentially incorrect).
Distribution (in the Australasian region)
Fiji (also peninsular Malaysia and Java). Fullaway (1957) is the only record of this species occurring in Fiji. However, Austin & Dangerfield (1992) were unable to find any such material in world collections and stated that this locality record may be based on a misidentification and the species may not occur in the Australasian 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.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |