Ichneumonopsis hancocki, Freidberg & Kovac & Shiao, 2017
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5852/ejt.2017.317 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:8F998964-785F-489C-836C-65D56B6CDED4 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3846687 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/0189FDE4-39B5-4F52-9C15-7777015C5006 |
taxon LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:act:0189FDE4-39B5-4F52-9C15-7777015C5006 |
treatment provided by |
Carolina |
scientific name |
Ichneumonopsis hancocki |
status |
sp. nov. |
Ichneumonopsis hancocki View in CoL sp. nov.
urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:0189FDE4-39B5-4F52-9C15-7777015C5006
Figs 1 View Fig , 3 View Figs 2–4 , 5–6 View Figs 5–6 , 8 View Figs 7–9 , 11 View Figs 10–12 , 15–17 View Figs 13–17
Diagnosis
This species is similar to I. burmensis , differing from it primarily in its smaller size, darker colouration (e.g., face of male mostly or entirely black, compared with predominantly yellow in I. burmensis ) and in all three femora being extensively spinose in both sexes (only forefemur with only about four spines in I. burmensis ). It is also similar to I. taiwanensis sp. nov. in its relatively small size, but it differs from this species by the more restricted dimidiate wing pattern and by all femora being spinose (wing pattern extended-dimidiate and only forefemur spinose in I. taiwanensis sp. nov.).
Etymology
This species is named after D.L. Hancock, a friend and prolific tephritidologist, who contributed much to the knowledge on Gastrozonini , including useful revisions of this group (Hancock 1999; Hancock & Drew 1999).
Material examined
Holotype
MALAYSIA: ♂, Selangor, “Old Gombak Road”, on stump of freshly cut bamboo shoot of Gigantochloa scortechinii , 17 Oct. 2003, P. Dohm leg., pinned directly and in good condition [ M03/1096 ] ( SMF).
Paratype
MALAYSIA: 1 ♀, State of Selangor, Ulu Gombak, W Malaysia, 4 Jun. 1970, James E. Tobler leg. [Genus and sp. prob. new, det D.E Hardy 1985. // Related to Ichneumonopsis ] original label, written with pencil on paper ( CAS).
Description
Only differences from I. burmensis are noted.
Head
COLOURATION. Ocellar and orbital spots united; frontal, genal and occipital dark spots similar to those of I. burmensis , although some of these less obvious in female paratype; male face with one lateral spot, and entire large bulging triangular central area black; parafacial spots lacking; female face only with ventral margin blackish, extending slightly dorsomedially as small triangle.
Thorax
COLOURATION. Dark dorsocentral vitta divided into two parts: short and wide oval presutural spot clearly separated from postsutural vitta-like section; these sections both unite along scutoscutellar suture and at level of supra-alar seta, thus enclosing (pair of) yellow oval spots between dorsocentral and median vittae; median vitta distinctly broadened posteriorly, particularly in posterior quarter where it merges
with black transverse scutoscutellar band. Pleural pattern as in I. burmensis , although dark extension “into” forecoxa lacking and forecoxa entirely yellow.
Legs
All femora spinose both anteroventrally and posteroventrally (spines mixed with regular setae), although posteroventral row with generally longer spines, and rows of spines denser and longer in male than in female, extending in male along distal half of femur or more, whereas in female extending along distal 0.33 almost to middle of femur. Male (only approximate numbers as spines tend to grade to regular setae): forefemur: 11–12 spines posteroventrally and 9–10 spines anteroventrally; midfemur: 20 and 15, respectively; hindfemur: 20 and 20, respectively; in addition ventral surface of midfemur and hindfemur centrally with additional setae or spines interspaced between two major rows. Female: spines considerably shorter than in male and more difficult to count, especially as tibiae are folded over respective femora, hiding some spines. Female’s numbers appear to be half of male numbers or even fewer. Colouration: forecoxa entirely yellow; forefemur with incomplete brownish ring at distal 0.4; foretibia, and also other tibiae, entirely brown or brownish; foretarsus, and also other tarsi, brownish, except metatarsi yellow; midfemur at nearly distal half with incomplete ring, more distinct at posterior aspect; hindfemur brown to blackish at approximately basal half, more obvious ventrally, with yellow gap dorsally; similar, but smaller and paler incomplete ring at distal 0.33 of femur.
Wing
VENATION. Posterodistal lobe of cell bcu 1.5–2.0 times as long as vein A 1 +Cu 2.
PATTERN. Marginal band uniformly yellow, not particularly darker around apical section of vein R 4+5.
Abdomen
As for genus; terminalia not dissected.
Measurements (length in mm)
Male: body: 11.0; wing: 10.2; female: body, including oviscape: 16.8; wing: 10.0; oviscape: 7.3.
Distribution
West Malaysia.
Comments
Being singletons, the holotype and paratype were not dissected. The I. hancocki sp. nov. male was collected by Patrick Dohm on a freshly cut bamboo shoot of Gigantochloa scortechinii . The bamboo shoot was about 2.5 – 3.5 m high and the upper part of the shoot (ca 80 cm long) was cut off and placed on the ground. The I. hancocki sp. nov. male alighted at the cut surface of the upright bamboo stump about half an hour after the apex of the shoot was cut off.
SMF |
Germany, Frankfurt-am-Main, Forschungsinstitut und Naturmuseum Senckenberg |
SMF |
Forschungsinstitut und Natur-Museum Senckenberg |
CAS |
California Academy of Sciences |
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 |