Scrapter, Lepeletier, 1841
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5852/ejt.2014.95 |
|
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:BE14FE18-E9AB-4C5A-B260-BD9C54464A2A |
|
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3861121 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/3E519972-9F41-2744-FF16-84F8FADDF90A |
|
treatment provided by |
Valdenar |
|
scientific name |
Scrapter |
| status |
|
Key to species of "euryglossiform" Scrapter View in CoL View at ENA
Due to their small size, the similarity of many species and the subtle, often gradual differences between some of them, identification can be very difficult, particularly in females. For males it is generally recommended to dissect genitalia and hidden sterna S7 and S8.
Females
The females of S. glareus and S. minutissimus sp. nov. are unknown.
1 Stigma bright yellow ( Fig. 11A View Fig ) …………………………………………… S. luteistigma sp. nov. – Stigma light to dark brown …………………………………………………………………………2
2 Apical tergal margins broadly brownish to yellowish translucent ( Figs 1B View Fig , 28B View Fig , 32E View Fig ); larger species ...……………………………………………………………………………………………3
– Apical tergal margins black or very narrowly brownish translucent; smaller species ……………5
3 Punctation on basal part of clypeus much finer than apically ( Fig. 28 View Fig C–D); foretibia entirely or predominantly yellowish to reddish brown ( Fig. 28A View Fig ) ………………………… S. sittybon Davies View in CoL
– Punctation on clypeus more evenly sized ( Figs 1 View Fig C–D, 32B); foretibia dominantly dark blackishbrown ( Figs 1A View Fig , 32A View Fig ) ………………………………………………………………………………4
4 Metasomal terga between punctures smooth and shiny ( Fig. 1B View Fig ); clypeus distinctly convex ( Fig. 1 View Fig C–D) …………………………………………………………………… S. acanthophorus Davies View in CoL
– Metasomal terga between punctures finely sculptured, slightly matt ( Fig. 32E View Fig ); clypeus more flat ( Fig. 32B View Fig ) ………………………………………………………………………… S. ulrikae sp. nov.
5 Scutum sparsely and finely punctured, looking almost impunctate and shiny ( Figs 6 View Fig E–F, 8E–F) ……6 – Scutum more densely and coarsely punctured ……………………………………………………8
6 Supraclypeal area, clypeus ( Fig. 6 View Fig C–D) and mesepisternum only partially and superficially reticulate, more shiny …………………………………………………………… S. exiguus sp. nov.
– Supraclypeal area apically, clypeus basally ( Fig. 8 View Fig C–D) and mesepisternum extensively and strongly reticulate, matt ………………………………………………………………………………7
7 Facial fovea slightly shorter than in S. gessorum sp. nov. ( Fig. 4 View Fig A–B); a variable species with respect to surface sculture and punctation ( Figs 3 View Fig C–F, 4A–D) ………… S. albitarsis (Friese) View in CoL
– Facial fovea slightly longer than in S. albitarsis View in CoL ( Fig. 8D View Fig ) ……………… S. gessorum sp. nov.
8 Clypeus and supraclypeal area matt, strongly reticulate, very sparsely, finely and shallowly punctate ( Fig. 10 View Fig C–D) ……………………………………………………… S. inexpectatus sp. nov.
– Clypeus and supraclypeal area more shiny, only partly or superficially sculptured, punctation usually stronger and denser …………………………………………………………………………9
9 Metasomal terga finely and densely punctate, between punctures completely smooth and shiny ( Fig. 18B View Fig ) …………………………………………………………………… S. nigerrimus sp. nov.
– Metasomal terga either impunctate or with more dispersed/coarser punctation; if punctation is similar (some specimens of S. punctatus sp. nov.) then terga at least basally with superficial sculpture and slightly matt ………………………………………………………………………………………10
10 Metasomal terga impunctate ( Figs 19E View Fig , 25E View Fig ); scutum distinctly reticulate and shallowly punctate ( Figs 19B View Fig , 25 View Fig C–D) ………………………………………………………………………………11
– Metasomal terga punctate, sometimes punctures minute ( Fig. 26E View Fig ); scutum either without reticulation or only very weakly reticulate ………………………………………………………12
11 Basal area of propodeum distinctly and largely carinate ( Fig. 19B View Fig ) …… S. nigritarsis sp. nov.
– Basal area of propodeum along anterior margin indistinctly carinate ( Fig. 25 View Fig C–D) ……………… ………………………………………………………………………………… S. pygmaeus sp. nov.
12 Scutum covered with large punctures ( Figs 23 View Fig C–D, 30C–D) …………………………………13 – Scutum covered with smaller punctures ( Figs 14 View Fig E–F, 15C–D, 16E–F, 21C–F, 26C–D) ………14
13 Basal area of propodeum shorter, medially only slightly longer than metanotum; few, short and indistinct carinae ( Fig. 23 View Fig C–D) ……………………………………………… S. punctatus sp. nov.
– Basal area of propodeum longer, medially about 1.5 times as long as metanotum; carinae longer and more distinct than in S. punctatus ( Fig. 30 View Fig C–D) ……………………………… S. spinipes sp. nov.
14 Punctation of metasomal terga minute, almost invisible ( Fig. 26E View Fig ) ……… S. roggeveldi sp. nov. – Punctation of metasomal terga much coarser and clearly visible ( Figs 14B View Fig , 15E View Fig , 16B View Fig , 21 View Fig G–H) …15
15 Head distinctly broader than long ( Figs 14 View Fig C–D, 16C–D) ………………………………………16 – Head about as long as broad ( Figs 15B View Fig , 21B View Fig ) …………………………………………………17
16 Clypeus, supraclypeal area and T1 mostly polished and shiny, only partially very finely and superficially sculptured, slightly matt ( Fig. 14 View Fig B–D) ……………………… S. minutuloides sp. nov.
– Clypeus, supraclypeal area and T1 (particularly anteriorly) mostly finely sculptured and matt ( Fig. 16 View Fig B–D) …………………………………………………………………… S. nanus sp. nov.
17 Metanotum apically more evenly rounded, without distinct carinate depression ( Fig. 15D View Fig ); fore tibia anteriorly largely yellowish-brown …………………………… S. minutus sp. nov.
– Metanotum apically with a carinate depression ( Fig. 21D, F View Fig ); fore tibia anteriorly blackish, only at the base with a small yellowish spot ……………………………… S. papkuilsi sp. nov.
Males
The males of S. gessorum sp. nov., S. inexpectatus sp. nov., S. minutuloides sp. nov., S. minutus sp. nov., S. nigerrimus sp. nov. and S. pygmaeus sp. nov. are unknown.
1 Antennal flagellum medially broadened, entirely orange ( Fig. 12B View Fig ); stigma bright yellow ( Fig. 12A View Fig ); S7 and S8 as in Fig. 12D, F View Fig …………………………………………… S. luteistigma sp. nov.
– Antennal flagellum not broadened, only partly yellowish; stigma darker …………………………2
2 Antenna long, last flagellar segment about twice as long as wide ( Fig. 24E View Fig ); S7 and S8 as in Fig. 24D, F View Fig ………………………………………………………………………… S. punctatus sp. nov.
– Antenna shorter, last flagellar segment at most 1.5 times as long as wide ……………………………3
3 Hind tibia inside apically broadened, pointed ( Fig. 22E View Fig ) or forming either a spine ( Figs 2E View Fig , 31E View Fig ) or a ± right angle ( Fig. 27G View Fig ) ………………………………………………………………………4 – Hind tibia unmodified, if apically broadened then without spine or ± sharp edge ……………7
4 Hind tibia inside apically forming a ± right angle ( Fig. 27G View Fig ); S4–S5 with conspicuously long apical hair fringes ( Fig. 27E View Fig ); S7 and S8 as in Fig. 27D, F View Fig ……… S. roggeveldi sp. nov.
– Hind tibia inside apically pointed ( Fig. 22E View Fig ) or forming a spine ( Figs 2E View Fig , 31E View Fig ) …………………5
5 Hind tibia inside apically pointed ( Fig. 22E View Fig ); scutum and metasomal terga finely punctate ( Fig. 22C View Fig ); S7 and S8 as in Fig. 22D, F View Fig ……………………………………………… S. papkuilsi sp. nov.
– Hind tibia inside apically with spine ( Figs 2E View Fig , 31E View Fig ); scutum and metasomal terga coarsely punctate ( Figs 2C View Fig , 31C View Fig ) ……………………………………………………………………………6
6 Hind tibia apically with longer spine ( Fig. 31E View Fig ); metasomal terga densely punctate ( Fig. 31C View Fig ); S7 and S8 as in Fig. 31D, F View Fig …………………………………………………… S. spinipes sp. nov.
– Hind tibia apically with shorter spine ( Fig. 2E View Fig ); metasomal terga sparsely punctate ( Fig. 2C View Fig ); S7 and S8 as in Fig. 2D, F View Fig ………………………………………………… S. acanthophorus Davies View in CoL
7 Hind basitarsus brown to blackish …………………………………………………………………8 – Hind basitarsus yellowish …………………………………………………………………………11
8 Hind tibia apically slightly swollen and curved ( Fig. 29E View Fig ); scutum between punctures smooth and shiny; S7 and S8 as in Fig. 29D, F View Fig ………………………………………… S. sittybon Davies View in CoL
– Hind tibia unmodified; scutum between punctures sculptured and matt ……………………………9
9 Basal half of T2–T4 densely covered with short, erect, silverish hair ( Fig 33C View Fig ); S7 and S8 as in Fig. 33 View Fig D–E …………………………………………………………………………… S. ulrikae sp. nov.
– Basal half of T2–T4 almost hairless ( Figs 17C, E View Fig , 20C View Fig ) …………………………………………10
10 Discs of metasomal terga impunctate, very finely and regularly sculptured ( Fig. 20C View Fig ); S7 and S8 as in Fig. 20 View Fig D–E ………………………………………………………… S. nigritarsis sp. nov.
– Discs of metasomal terga partly punctate, strongly to heavily and irregularly sculptured ( Fig. 17C, E View Fig ); S7 and S8 as in Fig. 17D, F View Fig …………………………………………… S. nanus sp. nov.
11 Hind tibia yellow with a brown spot on the back side ( Fig. 9A, C View Fig ); S7 and S8 as in Fig. 9 View Fig D–E …………………………………………………………………………………… S. glareus Davies
– Hind tibia mostly black ( Figs 5A View Fig , 7A View Fig , 13A View Fig ) ………………………………………………………12
The males of the following three species are very similar and can be best separated by S7 and S8.
12 S7 without membraneous apicolateral lobes (Fig. 13D); S8 as in Fig. 13E … S. minutissimus sp. nov. – S7 with membraneous apicolateral lobes (Figs 5D, 7D) ………………………………………13
13 S7 apically with emargination slightly broader and shallower (Fig. 5D) …… S. albitarsis (Friese) View in CoL – S7 apically with emargination slightly narrower and deeper (Fig. 7D) ……… S. exiguus sp. nov.
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.