Lasioglossum (Dialictus) rozeni Gibbs

Gibbs, Jason, 2011, Revision of the metallic Lasioglossum (Dialictus) of eastern North America (Hymenoptera: Halictidae: Halictini), Zootaxa 3073, pp. 1-216: 167-171

publication ID

http://doi.org/ 10.5281/zenodo.1049595

publication LSID

lsid:zoobank.org:pub:B5AF6DF4-D3A7-4942-A94F-CC051D8074CF

DOI

http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5312166

persistent identifier

http://treatment.plazi.org/id/47F91AD3-6C94-40FE-BA3E-9D64884FD3FE

taxon LSID

lsid:zoobank.org:act:47F91AD3-6C94-40FE-BA3E-9D64884FD3FE

treatment provided by

Plazi

scientific name

Lasioglossum (Dialictus) rozeni Gibbs
status

new species

Lasioglossum (Dialictus) rozeni Gibbs   , new species

( Figures 180–184 View FIGURE 180 View FIGURE 181 View FIGURE 182 View FIGURE 183 View FIGURE 184 )

Holotype. Ƥ USA, Maryland, Talbot Co., N 38.8 W.076.2833, 7–8.v. 2005 (W. Steiner); [ PCYU] Taxonomy. Gibbs, 2010 b: Lasioglossum (Dialictus) cephalotes   (description, misdet.).

Diagnosis. Female L. rozeni   can be recognised by the following diagnostic combination: head wider than mesosoma ( Fig. 181 View FIGURE 181 ); gena wider than eye; labrum with weak basal tubercle, apical process flat, dorsal keel absent; mandible narrow without preapical tooth; pronotal ridge sharply angled and dorsolateral angle acute to orthogonal ( Fig. 181 View FIGURE 181 ); scopa absent; and metapostnotum rugoso-carinulate. ( Fig. 181 View FIGURE 181 ) They are most similar to L. platyparium   and L. cephalotes   . Female L. platyparium   have a strong basal tubercle on the labrum and a wide mandible that only converges to a point near the apex. Female L. cephalotes   also have a wide mandible and metapostnotum smooth with rugae if present limited to base.

Male L. rozeni   can be recognised by the following diagnostic combination: head wide, lower paraocular area with very dense tomentum ( Fig. 182 View FIGURE 182 B), and pronotal collar strong. They are similar to L. platyparium   , which has less dense facial tomentum and pronotal collar weak.

Description. FEMALE. Length 4.76–4.88 mm; head length 1.44–1.73 mm; head width 1.82–1.85 mm; forewing length 3.90–4.03 mm.

Colouration. Head and mesosoma very dull metallic greenish blue, nearly brown. Clypeus with apical 2 / 3 blackish brown. Antenna dark brown, flagellum with ventral surface reddish. Tegula pale translucent amber. Wing membrane subhyaline, venation and pterostigma amber. Legs brown, except tarsi reddish to brownish yellow. Metasoma reddish brown, terga and sterna with apical margins pale translucent brownish yellow.

Pubescence. Dull white. Sparse. Head and mesosoma with moderately sparse woolly hairs (1–1.5 OD), longest on genal beard, metanotum, and mesopleuron (2–2.5 OD). Face without tomentum. Frons and upper paraocular area with moderately dense hairs, most apparent when viewed from below. Pronotal collar without dense tomentum. Propodeum with sparse plumose hairs on lateral and posterior surfaces (2–2.5 OD). Mesofemoral and mesotibial combs dense but short relative to non-parasitic species. Metafemoral scopa reduced relative to nest-building species, only a few elongate hairs curved onto ventral surface. Penicillus reduced to a few thick bristles. Metasomal terga with moderately sparse, fine hairs. T 1 acarinarial fan visible only as a few appressed lateral hairs. T 2 –T 3 basolaterally and T 4 entirely with scattered tomentum. T 3 –T 4 with moderately dense elongate hairs. Sternal hairs, subappressed, not arranged as scopa (2–3 OD).

Surface sculpture. Face weakly imbricate, punctation extremely fine. Clypeus polished, punctation sparse (i= 1–3 d). Supraclypeal area with punctation sparse (i= 1–6 d). Lower paraocular and antennocular areas with punctation moderately dense (i= 1–1.5 d). Upper paraocular area and frons punctation dense (i<d). Ocellocular area punctation dense (i=d). Gena and postgena carinulate. Mesoscutum polished, punctation fine, sparse between parapsidal lines (i= 1.5–4 d), moderately dense laterad of parapsidal lines (i= 1–1.5 d) and dense on anterolateral portion (i≤d). Mesoscutellum similar to mesoscutum, punctation sparse (i= 1–3 d). Axilla punctate. Metanotum weakly imbricate. Preëpisternum and hypoepimeral area imbricate. Mesepisternum dorsal half weakly rugulose, ventral half imbricate. Metepisternum with upper two-fifths weakly carinulate and ventral portion imbricate. Metapostnotum irregularly carinulate. Propodeum with dorsolateral slope imbricate, lateral and posterior surfaces tessellate. Metasomal terga polished except apical impressed areas weakly coriarious, punctation uniformly close (i= 1–1.5 d), except apical impressed area nearly impunctate.

Structure. Head enormous, very wide (length/width ratio = 0.78–0.82). Eyes subparallel (UOD/LOD ratio = 1.00– 1.02). Labrum enlarged and flattened without distinct basal tubercle, apical process flat and wide without dorsal keel ( Fig. 6 View FIGURE 6 B). Mandible large, scythe-like, without preapical tooth, very narrow, tapering evenly to apex reaching to opposing mandibular base. Clypeus 1 / 5 below suborbital line, apicolateral margins convergent. Antennal sockets distant (IAD/ OAD = 0.8). Frontal line carinate, ending> 2 OD below median ocellus. IOD less than OOD. Median ocellus at upper ocular tangent. Gena huge, one and half times as wide as eye. Hypostomal carinae divergent towards mandible. Pronotal dorsolateral angle acute ( Fig. 181 View FIGURE 181 ). Pronotal ridge angled, uninterrupted. and protrochanter unmodified. Basitibial plate lower carinae absent. Inner metatibial spur pectinate with 3–4 short teeth. Metapostnotum truncate (MMR ratio = 1.41– 1.50), posterior margin weakly angled onto posterior surface. Propodeum with oblique carina very weak, lateral carina short, not reaching dorsal margin. T 5 medial specialized area reduced in size relative to non-parasitic species.

MALE. Similar to female except for the usual secondary sexual characters and as follows. Length 5.80 mm; head length 1.38–1.58 mm; head width 1.49–1.70 mm; forewing length 4.03 mm.

Colouration. Flagellum with ventral surface reddish brown. Tegula translucent brownish yellow. Legs brown, except tibial bases and apices, and tarsi brownish yellow.

Pubescence. Face with sparse tomentum. Lower paraocular area with dense tomentum obscuring surface. Gena without tomentum. S 2 –S 5 apicolateral portions with sparse plumose hairs (1 OD).

Surface sculpture. Clypeus uniformly punctate (i= 1–1.5 d). Supraclypeal area with punctation sparse (i= 1–3 d). Metanotum rugose. Metapostnotum completely rugoso-carinulate. Propodeum with dorsolateral slope rugose. Metasomal terga polished, punctation uniform (i= 1.5–2 d) except apical impressed areas impunctate.

Structure. Head wide (length/width ratio = 0.93). Eyes convergent below (UOD/LOD ratio = 1.27–1.34). Clypeus 1 / 2 below suborbital tangent, apicolateral margins subparallel. Antennal sockets distant (IAD/OAD> 1.7). Frontal line carinate, ending 2 OD below median ocellus. IOD subequal to OOD. Pedicel shorter than F 1. F 2 length 1.7–1.8 X F 1. F 2 – F 10 moderately elongate (length/width ratio = 1.43–1.55). Hypostomal carinae weakly divergent. Metapostnotum moderately elongate (MMR ratio = 1.29–1.35), posterior margin weakly angled onto posterior surface.

Terminalia   . S 7 with medial lobe wide, acuminate, apex rounded. S 8 with apicomedial margin strongly convex. Genital capsule as in Fig. 184 View FIGURE 184 . Gonobase with ventral arms thick, widely separated. Gonostylus small, dorsal setae elongate. Retrorse lobe elongate, weakly attenuated, reflexed apically.

Range. North Carolina, west to Mississippi and Minnesota ( Fig. 185 View FIGURE 185 ). USA: IL, MA, MD, NY, VA, WV.

Paratypes. USA: ILLINOIS: 1 Ƥ Hancock Co., N 40.3672 W091.4076, 22.viii. 2010 (R. Geroff); MARYLAND: 13 Pr. George’s Co., N 39.0352 W076.8739, 21.vii. 2004 (S. Kolski); 1 Ƥ Pr. George’s Co., N 39.0568 W076.8143, 2– 3.x. 2002 (E.J. Jackson); 4 ƤƤ Talbot Co., N 38.8 W.076.2833, 7–8.v. 2005 (W. Steiner); [ PCYU]; 1 Ƥ Montgomery Co., N 39.085 W 77.0067, 5–7.iv. 2010 (J. Whitaker); 1 Ƥ Talbot Co., N 38.8 W.076.2833, 7–8.v. 2005 (W. Steiner); [ CUIC]; MASSACHUSETTS: 13 Worcester Co., sand pit, 1.6 mi SW of Lake Denison, 1.ix. 2006 (M.F. Veit); [ PCYU]; NEW YORK: 433 Suffolk Co., Gardiners I., 19.viii. 2007 (R.G. Goelet); [ AMNH]; VIRGINIA: 1 Ƥ Loudoun Co., BRNP, N 39.0283 W 77.595. 22.viii. 2010 (M. Irwin, R. Circe); [ CUIC]; WEST VIRGINIA: 1 Ƥ Hampshire Co., Capon Bridge, Buffalo Gap Camp, 20.vii. 2001 (S. Droege); [ PCYU]; 2 ƤƤ Hampshire Co., N 39.2315 W 78.4638, 23.viii. 2009 (S.W. Droege); 1 Ƥ Hampshire Co., Lehew 16.viii. 2011 (S. Droege); 2 ƤƤ Hampshire Co., Lehew 17.viii. 2011 (S. Droege); 1 Ƥ Hardy Co., N 39.0942 W 78.5615, 1–11.iv. 2010 (J. Whitaker); 1 Ƥ Randolph Co., N 38.8528 W 79.5293, 11.iv. 2010 (J. Whitaker); [ CUIC].

Floral records. ASCLEPIADACEAE   : Cynanchum leave   , ASTERACEAE   : Cirsium   , Leucanthemum   , Solidago   , CORNACEAE   : Cornus   , SALICACEAE   : Salix nigra   .

Etymology. The species is named in honour of Jerome Rozen, Jr. for his many studies of cleptoparasitic bees.

Biology. Robertson, 1901: (possible host); Robertson, 1926: (possible host); Michener, 1978: (possible host).

Comments. Uncommon.

Lasioglossum rozeni   is believed to be a social parasite or cleptoparasite of nest-building L. ( Dialictus   ).

PCYU

The Packer Collection at York University

CUIC

Cornell University Insect Collection

NEW

University of Newcastle

AMNH

American Museum of Natural History