Glyptapanteles drioplanetus Fagan-Jeffries & Austin, 2021

Fagan-Jeffries, Erinn P., Austin, Andrew D. & Investigators, Citizen Science Participants Of Insect, 2021, Four new species of parasitoid wasp (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) described through a citizen science partnership with schools in regional South Australia, Zootaxa 4949 (1), pp. 79-101 : 89-93

Glyptapanteles drioplanetus Fagan-Jeffries & Austin sp. nov.

( Fig. 5 )

urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:A33DD298-01DD-47EC-AFFA-AF369D00B898

Material examined. Holotype: South Australia: ♀ Macclesfield Primary School, Bush Block , -35.17084 138.84025, 14.x.2019 – 6.xi.2019, E. Fagan-Jeffries & Macclesfield PS yr 5–7 class, M/T, EFJ2020MT9, Extraction 1033 ( SAMA: 32-45153, BOLD: AUMIC549-20 ).

Paratypes: South Australia: ♀ Douglas Scrub , -35.18438 138.59952, 27–28.ix.2010, GS Taylor, S. Mantel M /T, 2010 001, Extraction 79 ( SAMA:32-45154, BOLD: AUMIC507-18 ) . Western Australia: ♀ Gleneagle State Forest , 29/xi/2005, M.S. Harvey, M/T, Extraction 117 ( WAM: WAME10965 , BOLD: AUMIC019-18 ) .

Diagnosis. This species can be separated from the currently described species of Glyptapanteles from Australasia in the following ways:

• From G. afiamaluanus ( Fullaway, 1941) , from Samoa, by the absence of a medial carina on the propodeum.

• G. artonae ( Rohwer, 1926) probably does not occur in the Australasian region ( Austin & Dangerfield 1992), but G. drioplanetus can be separated from G. artonae by having T1 considerably more narrow.

• G. aucklandensis ( Cameron, 1909) was described from a single male from Auckland, NZ , and the type is missing the abdomen. The type is therefore not particularly helpful in providing diagnostic characters, however we feel comfortable determining that it is a different species to G. drioplanetus as there is generally very little overlap in the microgastrine fauna between Australian and New Zealand .

• From G. deliasa ( Austin & Dangerfield, 1992) , from Australia, by the absence of a faint medial carina or striation on the propodeum.

• From G. demeter (Wilkinson, 1934) , from New Zealand, by having the mesosoma not dorsally-ventrally flattened.

• From G. fullawayi Austin & Dangerfield, 1992 , from Samoa, by having approximately 9–10 small pits in the scutoscutellar sulcus.

• From G. mnesampela Austin, 2000 , from Australia, by having T2 dark and the absence of a white gena spot.

• G. phytometrae ( Wilkinson, 1928) . Whilst we were unable to examine the type, as this species is only recorded from Samoa, Sumatra and Fiji, we feel it is extremely unlikely to be the same species.

• From G. operculinae ( Fullaway, 1941) , from Samoa, by having T1 narrowing posteriorly less significantly, not strongly wedge-shaped.

• G. taylori ( Wilkinson, 1928) probably does not occur in the Australasian region ( Austin & Dangerfield 1992), but G. drioplanetus can be separated by having T2 triangular, with straight rather than curved lateral sides.

Description. FEMALE. Colour. Head, antenna and mesosoma all dark; all tergites and most of metasoma including hypopygium and ovipositor sheaths dark, non sclerotised areas of T1–2 and anterior sternites pale; (fore-, mid-, hind coxa) pale, pale, dark; (fore-, mid-, hind- trochanter) pale, pale, pale with darker area distally femora (fore-, mid-, hind femur) pale, pale, pale transitioning to dark distally; tibiae (fore-, mid-, hind tibia) pale, pale darkening slightly distally, pale darkening significantly distally; tarsi (fore-, mid-, hind tarsi) light brown, light brown, dark; tegula and humeral complex pale; pterostigma uniformly dark; fore wing veins mostly dark.

Body length. Head to apex of metasoma: 2.3 mm (2.4–2.8 mm).

Head. Antenna approximately equal to body length; OOL/POD 1.4 (2.0); POL/ POD 2.2 (2.3); antennal flagellomere 2 length/width 2.8 (3.5–3.7); antennal flagellomere 14 length/width 1.6 (2.4).

Mesosoma. Anteromesoscutum relatively smooth and shiny, very shallowly, and regularly punctate; number of pits in scutoscutellar sulcus approximately 11, but very irregular in size and definition. Scutellar disc very smooth, with only very shallow pits. Propodeum extremely smooth, no discernible sculpturing or carinae other than very shallow pits associated with scattered setae.

Wings. Fore wing length 2.4 mm (2.3–2.9 mm); length of veins r/2RS 1.4 (1.1–1.4); length of veins 2RS/2M 1.3 (1.0–1.5); length of veins 2M/(RS+M)b 0.9 (1.1–1.5); pterostigma length/width 2.4 (2.3–2.5).

Legs. Hind tibia inner spur length/hind basitarsus length 0.6 (0.4–0.5).

Metasoma. T1 length / T1 width at posterior margin 3.0 (2.4–2.9); narrowing slightly posteriorly (in Douglass Scrub paratype nearly parallel sided) irregularly punctate in posterior half; T2 width at posterior margin / T2 length 1.7 (1.6), subtriangular, smooth in centre, border with T3 shallowly crenulate; T3 sculpture smooth and shiny with scattered setae concentrated in posterior half; ovipositor sheaths length/hind tibial length 0.16 (0.3–0.18); ovipositor gently curved.

MALE. Unknown.

Etymology. This species is named by the 2020 Year 5/6/7 students of Macclesfield Primary School, who agreed upon a name that means ‘bush wanderer’; drio- from the Greek ‘drios’ for copse or thicket, and planetus from the Greek verb ‘planao’: to wander. The species epithet is an adjective.

Distribution. This species is currently only known from two sites in South Australia, and from a single locality in south-western WA.

Host. Unknown.

Molecular information. This species constitutes the BIN BOLD:ADL3660, and is 2.66% divergent from the nearest neighbour on the BOLD.

Remarks. This species, when analysed alongside all available COI sequences of Glyptapanteles , Protapanteles , Sathon ( Mason 1981) , Lathrapanteles and Cotesia on BOLD, is closely related to species of Protapanteles , including P. alaskensis Ashmead, 1902 ( Fig. 6 ). The morphological distinction between Glyptapanteles and Protapanteles appears to be difficult to define. According to Fernández-Triana et al. (2020), “In Glyptapanteles , T1 is either parallel-sided anteriorly and then strongly narrowing posteriorly, or its sides are gradually to strongly converging posteriorly when compared to Protapanteles which has T1 parallel-sided throughout, except for a strongly rounded apex, and propodeum sculpture that is usually, but not always, more rugose and carinated than in Glyptapanteles .” However, several species of Glyptapanteles , including the paratypes of G. drioplanetus , have T1 of similar shape to that of Protapanteles , and many of the undescribed Glyptapanteles in Australia have a rugose propodeum. As Protapanteles is currently not documented from Australia, and is mostly confined to the Holarctic region (Fernández-Triana et al. 2020), we place G. drioplanetus in Glyptapanteles , but note that it is likely closely aligned with several species of Protapanteles and may need to be reclassified when a better understanding of the generic boundaries for the Microgastrinae is developed.

Figures

FIGURE 5. Glyptapanteles drioplanetus holotype A) Dorsal habitus B) Fore wing C) Lateral habitus D) Dorsal head E) Anterior head F) Scutellar disk and propodeum.

FIGURE 6. FastTree analysis of COI gene fragments showing the relationship of G. drioplanetus to the genera Glyptapanteles, Protapanteles, Cotesia, Sathon and Lathrapanteles available on the BOLD. A) Complete phylogeny, with the clade enlarged in B shown in a black rectangle. B) Clade containing G. drioplanetus, with the clade enlarged in C shown in a black rectangle. C) G. drioplanetus (indicated with a bracket) and the most closely related COI sequences, which are identified by the BOLD as the genus Protapanteles.