Lyroda centralafricana Schmid-Egger & Al-Jahdhami, 2021
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4915.2.7 |
|
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:52E9A70B-41DE-41F1-B04E-69984F7BB4E8 |
|
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4464876 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03A187E6-FFCB-FFF9-71BA-DA6FFB25FB2A |
|
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
|
scientific name |
Lyroda centralafricana Schmid-Egger & Al-Jahdhami |
| status |
sp. nov. |
Lyroda centralafricana Schmid-Egger & Al-Jahdhami sp. nov.
( Figs 3, 4 View FIGURES 1–8 , 15–18 View FIGURES 15–18 , 23, 25 View FIGURES 23–28 )
Holotype: CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC: 1 Ƌ, 24.iv. 2010 ,75 km N Sibut , 6022 ’ N 18059 View Materials ’E (leg. J. Halada, coll. OLL) . Paratypes: CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC: 2 ƋƋ , 2 ♀ ♀, 8.iv. 2010, 70 km NNE Bangui, 4057 ’ N 18046 View Materials ’E; 1 ♀, 13.xii. 2008, 40 km S Nola , 3023 ’ N 16010 View Materials ’E; 1 Ƌ, 12.xii. 2008, 35 km NE Nola 3046 ’ N 16013 View Materials ’E; 1 Ƌ, 1.v. 2010, 10 km NNE Mbaiki , 3056 ’ N 18000 View Materials ’ E; 1 Ƌ, 40 km N Berberati , 4032 ’ N 15056 View Materials ’E; 1 Ƌ, 30.iii. 2010, 60 km SE Bouar, 5042 ’ N 16000 View Materials ’E; ZAMBIA: 2 ƋƋ, 2.i. 2003, 50 km W Chingola (all specimens leg. J. Halada, in coll. OLL) .
Diagnosis: Lyroda centralafricana is similar to L. aethiopica and L. salalah . It can be recognized by a laterally polished propodeum without punctuation, which is distinctly microsculptured in the other species. Also, propodeal dorsum is surrounded by a shiny and less sculptured margin, whereas the propodeal dorsum is evenly sculptured in L. aethiopica and L. salalah . However, this character is not easy visible especially in males, and in one female the shiny margin is restricted to the apex of propodeal dorsum. The best recognition character is the clypeal lamella of the male. It is distinctly larger than in L. aethiopica and L. salalah , with two distinct teeth in the middle. In both other specimens is only a single tooth or protuberance medially.Also, last three abdominal segments in females, and last four segments in males are orange red in all type specimens, whereas segment 6 is always black in remaining species, apart of one male of L. aethiopica from RSA.
Description of holotype male: Body length: 8.0 mm. Colour: black with the following parts orange red: Mandible except dark apex, apical foretarsomere, abdominal segments 4–7. Face up to midocellus, pronotum, mesonotum apically and laterally, scutellum and metanotum with golden pubescence, this of lower face very dense. Remaining mesosoma with silver pubescence. T 1–3 with apical silver bands of pilosity. T 6–7 with golden pubescence. S2–7 each with 2–3 long yellow bristles. Wings transparent, with bluish shimmer. Morphology: ACM with large lamella, as large as distance between antennal bases, measured on outer margin of antennal base. Lamella medially with two small teeth. Pronotum with lateral and medial tubercle, as in remaining species. Mesosoma above grainlike sculptured, mesosoma laterally and mainly propodeum laterally shiny. Propodeal dorsum with distinct medial carina, laterally with crosswise wrinkles, apex shiny.
Variation of male paratypes: Body length 6.2 – 9.0 mm. Red colour of abdomen variable. In some specimens T4 basally black, in other T3 apically red.
Description of female: Body length 7.0–9.8 mm. Agree in general aspects with the male, with the following differences: ACM: lateral set with three teeth, intermediate set without teeth, medial set with two large and rounded teeth. Clypeus below with some long bristles. Fore basitarsus with 6–8 yellow spines, and with a row of long (compared with L. aethiopica ) white setae in-between. Pubescence of face and mesosoma silver instead of golden. Abdominal segments 4–6 orange red. T6 with large pygidial area, surrounded by black carina and covered with short yellow setae.
Distribution: Central African Republic, Zambia.
Etymology: The species is named after the country of origin, the Central African Republic.
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.