Ecrizotes filicornis (Thomson, 1876)

Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan, Andriescu, Ionel & Manic, Gheorghe, 2024, The Afrotropical and West-Palaearctic species of Ecrizotes Förster (Hymenoptera: Pirenidae), European Journal of Taxonomy 970, pp. 1-37 : 15-17

Ecrizotes filicornis (Thomson, 1876)

Fig. 4

Henicetrus filicornis Thomson, 1876: 191 ; lectotype ♀, designated by Graham 1969: 332, ZMUL, not examined.

Ecrizotes filicornis – Schmiedeknecht 1909: 273; new combination.

Diagnosis

Female

All funiculars at least slightly longer than wide or quadrate, Fu1 length about 1.1× width, Fu3 not smaller than either Fu2 or Fu4 ( Fig. 4E ); ventral margin of clypeus weakly convex ( Fig. 4D ); head in frontal view with gena buccate ( Fig. 4C ); hind tibia length about 6.6× width; gaster longer than combined length of head and mesosoma and strongly compressed laterally ( Fig. 4A ); tip of hypopygium incised (cf. Figs 3G , 6F ); ovipositor sheath length about 0.4 × length of hind tibia.

Male

All tibiae normal, hind tibia length about 5.5× width ( Fig. 4B ). Funicular segments quadrate, except Fu1 longer than wide ( Fig. 4F ). Fore wing with upper side of basal cell having one irregular row of setae plus several additional ones near basal vein.

Material examined

CZECH REPUBLIC • 1 ♀; “ Bohemia or. Hradec Králové / 29.VII.1945. Bouček leg. // Ecrizotes Förster filicornis Thoms. ”; NMPC • 1 ♀; “ Krásná Lipa (Ústí n. L.) / 12.7.56, Bohemia Dlabola”; NMPC • 1 ♀; “ Bohemia centr., Veltrusy // P. Mikula, 26.V.64 ”; NMPC • 1 ♂; “ Bohemia, Krkomše / Lysečiny / VIII.1964. J. Macek ”; NMPC .

UNITED KINGDOM • 1 ♀; “ Burnham Beeches / Bucks. England / Bouček 26.v.80 // Ecrizotes filicornis (Thoms.) / det. Z. Bouček 1980”; NHMUK • 1 ♀; “Chobham Comm. / Surrey, England / Bouček 4.6.71 // ♀ Ecrizotes filicornis (Thoms.) / det. Z. Bouček, 1981”; NMPC • 1 ♂; “ Chobham Comm. / Surrey , England / Bouček 6.6.71 ”; NMPC .

Distribution

Czech Republic, Hungary, Netherlands, Sweden, United Kingdom ( UCD Community 2023).

Hosts

Unknown.

Taxonomic comments

Alongside E. longicornis , the species is easily recognizable by the long antennae, with all funiculars at least slightly longer than wide. From the female of the latter species the female of E. filicornis differs mostly in having shorter antennae, with less elongated funicular segments ( Fig. 4E ).

Figures

Fig. 4. Ecrizotes filicornis (Thomson, 1876). A, C–E, G–H. ♀ (NMPC). B, F. ♂ (NMPC). A. Habitus, lateral view. B. Habitus, lateral view. C. Head, frontal view. D. Clypeus. E. Antennae (arrow indicates Fu3). F. Antenna. G. Mesosoma, dorsal view. H. Fore wing, dorsal view.

Fig. 3. Ecrizotes caudatus (Thomson, 1876). A–G. ♀ (NMPC). A. Habitus, lateral view. B. Head, frontal view. C. Fore wing, dorsal view. D. Clypeus. E. Antenna (arrow indicates Fu3). F. Mesosoma, dorsal view. G. Gaster, lateral view (arrow indicates hypopygium). H–I. Female specimen (NMPC), compared by Z. Bouček with the lectotype of H. caudatus (see text; arrow indicates Fu3).

Fig. 6. Ecrizotes incisus Mitroiu sp. nov., holotype, ♀ (NHMUK). A. Habitus, lateral view. B. Head, frontal view. C. Antennae (arrow indicates Fu3). D. Mesosoma, dorsal view. E. Fore wing, dorsal view. F. Gaster, lateral view (arrow indicates hypopygium).