Haba subtilis ( Mocsáry, 1914 )

Rosa, Paolo, Felsner, Christian, Heim, René, Greeff, Michael, Michez, Denis & Bernasconi, Marco Valerio, 2025, The Palaearctic types of Chrysididae (Insecta, Hymenoptera) deposited in the Linsenmaier collection. Part 5. Elampini: genus Holopyga Dahlbom, 1845, Zootaxa 5565 (1), pp. 1-66 : 61

Haba subtilis ( Mocsáry, 1914)

Holopyga subtilis Mocsáry, 1914: 4 . Holotype ♂; Uzbekistan: Tashkent (type depository: Budapest) (examined). Hedychridium (Hedychridium) subtilis : Linsenmaier 1959a: 44 (key), 47 (diagn.), 187 (cat.), 197 (fig. 58).

Haba subtilis : Kimsey & Bohart 1991: 177 (cat.)

Taxonomic placement of Chamaeholopyga Linsenmaier

Linsenmaier (1987) described the subgenus Holopyga (Chamaeholopyga) based on a Spanish species named H. (C.) parvicornis Linsenmaier, 1987 . Later, Linsenmaier (1999) described a second species from North Africa, Holopyga (C.) rubrinigra , while a third undescribed species from Israel was found during the reordering of the Linsenmaier collection ( Rosa et al. 2015b, 2022a). Finally, Rosa et al. (2022a) noticed that a fourth species was previously described as Hedychridium atratum Linsenmaier, 1968 .

The original description of Chamaeholopyga was considered too short and unclear, which is why Kimsey & Bohart (1991: 228), who did not examine any specimens, did not assess it in their revision of the world species: “ Linsenmaier (1987) described the genus Chamaeholopyga based on the new species C. parvicornis Linsenmaier (1987) . We have been unable to see this species and therefore cannot render judgment on the placement of this group”. Mingo (1994) was the first author to provide a short diagnosis of this subgenus explaining that the main diagnostic character is the distinct hind wing venation, with submarginal and basal nervures differing in length and bend, as shown in the drawings ( Mingo 1994: fig. 19b). Linsenmaier (1997) provided some additional information after finding more specimens of Chamaeholopyga parvicornis in the provinces of Madrid, Soria and Segovia. He provided drawings of the habitus ( Linsenmaier 1997: fig. 20), head in frontal view (fig. 21), propodeal posterior angles (fig. 22), and tarsal claws (figs 23–25), and suggested a strict relation of Chamaeholopyga with Pseudolopyga Krombein, 1969 . Finally, Strumia et al. (2010) considered Chamaeholopyga a valid genus in the checklist of the Chrysididae collected at the Natural Park of Las Batuecas—Sierra de Francia ( Spain), without any taxonomic comment.

The morphological analysis of the Palaearctic specimens confirms Linsenmaier’s (1997) intuition that Chamaeholopyga could be synonymous with the New World genus Pseudolopyga Krombein, 1969 . Members of this genus share the combination of the following characters: face flat to slightly concave, medially polished to slightly wrinkled; temples (or postocular region, the continuation of the gena to the posterior limit of the head) narrow and rounded; malar space as long as or less than 1 MOD; pronotum gently curved without anterior declivity or carinae; notauli deep, sulciform; mesopleuron rounded; posterior propodeal projection (= propodeal angles) small and spiniform, directed laterad; protibia unmodified, ecarinate; pro and mesotarsal claws with two subapical teeth; metatarsal claws dimorphic, with the female claw having one subapical tooth and the male two; forewing medial vein almost straight in P. parvicornis or strongly bent close to the subcostal vein in P. rubrinigra ; Rs stub shorter than or as long as the R1 stub; genitalia similar in shape to Hedychridium species. Finally, the Palaearctic species are small and darkly coloured like members of Pseudolopyga such as the male of P. rubrinigra and the undescribed Isreaeli species, or red-purple to blackish as in P. parvicornis and the female of P. rubrinigra , with some specimens exhibiting a non-metallic brownish metasoma. Overall, their general habitus is more similar to Hedychridium rather than Holopyga ; in fact, atrata was described as Hedychridium by Linsenmaier (1968), nearly 20 years before Chamaeholopyga was established. Indeed, Hedychridium is characterised by species with relatively flat face; head, in dorsal view, without deep scapal basin; narrow, round temples; mesopleuron rounded and a medial vein that is either almost straight or angled differently. Some major differences, such as the shape of the genitalia closer to Hedychridium in Palaearctic species, the medial vein, which is distinctly bent in H. rubinigra , but not in H. parvicornis and the distance between the posterior ocelli are diagnostic at the species level rather than the genus level.

Based on the features mentioned above, we propose that Chamaeholopyga Linsenmaier, 1987 should be considered a synonym (syn. nov.) of Pseudolopyga Krombein, 1969 . However, confirmation of this synonymy through molecular analysis is desirable.