Loboscelidia, Westwood, 1874
publication ID |
https://doi.org/10.5852/ejt.2023.887.2203 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:788AE14A-0698-4C42-819C-BC2412F76FCA |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8224866 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03BAC057-6E29-363D-97D6-FEDDFE378A12 |
treatment provided by |
Felipe (2023-08-07 19:45:58, last updated 2024-11-26 05:02:31) |
scientific name |
Loboscelidia |
status |
|
Loboscelidia View in CoL View at ENA do sp. nov.
urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:40BF901C-8D8D-4051-B7F6-1669ABD7E85A
Fig. 11 View Fig , 25G View Fig
Etymology
The specific name is derived from the Vietnamese word, ‘ do ’ for ‘red’, referring to the reddish body color.
Type material
Holotype VIETNAM • ♂; Bac Kan Province, Ba Be NP ; 22°24′43.34″ N, 105°36′54.76″ E; 4 Jul. 2014; K. Tsujii leg.; VNMN. GoogleMaps
Paratypes VIETNAM • 1 ♂; same collection data as for holotype; VNMN GoogleMaps • 1 ♂; Bac Giang Province, Tay Yen Tu NR ; 21°10′52.33″ N, 106°43′24.3″ E; 7 Jul. 2014; T. Mita leg.; VNMN GoogleMaps .
Description
Male ( Fig. 11A View Fig )
MEASUREMENTS. Body length 3.3–3.9 mm; forewing length 3.3–3.7 mm.
HEAD. Head ( Fig. 11B–D View Fig ) 1.9–2.3 times as long as high, 1.3 times as long as wide; inner ocular length 0.58–0.59 times as long as head width; frontal projection rectangular in frontal view ( Fig. 11B View Fig ); apical margin of frontal projection depressed ( Fig. 11C View Fig ); frons polished, with low ridge extending from vertex along inner orbit of eye ( Fig. 11C View Fig ); frons with indistinct carinae towards posterior ocelli ( Fig. 11C View Fig ); spraclypeal area without transverse carinae ( Fig. 11B View Fig ); temple 0.39–0.50 times as long as MOD ( Fig. 11C View Fig ); POL 0.85–1.1 times as long as MOD; OOL as long as MOD; LOL 0.17 times as long as MOD; behind ocelli without transverse depression ( Fig. 11C View Fig ); cervical expansion convex in lateral view ( Fig. 11D View Fig ); basal part of cervical expansion constricted weakly in dorsal view ( Fig. 11C View Fig ); scape 2.2–2.7 times as long as wide; scape with one longitudinal groove extending apical margin; scape with transparent flange, 0.85 times as long as tubular part of scape, 0.25 times wider than tubular part of scape; F1 1.8–2.0 times as long as wide; F2 1.7–2.1 times as long as wide; F11 3.4–3.9 times as long as wide; relative length of F1–F11: 1.0: 1.1: 1.1: 1.1: 1.1: 1.1: 1.1: 1.1: 1.2: 1.2: 1.6.
MESOSOMA. Pronotum 0.82 times as long as posterior width of pronotum ( Fig. 11F View Fig ); posterior width of pronotum 1.4 times as wide as anterior width and 1.1 times as wide as head width; dorsolateral surface of pronotum carinate ( Fig. 11A View Fig ); notauli of scutum slightly curved, reaching posterior margin ( Fig. 11G View Fig ); scutellum polished and inpunctured, with lateral carina ( Fig. 11G View Fig ); scrobal sulcus present, deeply depressed ( Fig. 11A View Fig ); metanotum with medial ridge, 0.44–0.47 times as long as scutellum ( Fig. 11G View Fig ); propodeal angle weakly developed; propodeum with transverse carina above foramen and not connected upper area.
WINGS. Forewing ( Fig. 11E View Fig ) with M curved; cu-a 0.29–0.40 times as long as R; A extending half of Cu+M; R1 0.60–0.71 times as long as R; Rs 2.7–3.3 times as long as R.
LEGS. Tibiae carinate; flange on forefemur 0.71–0.77 times longer, 1.0–1.3 times wider than tubular part of forefemur; flange on foretibia 0.63–0.75 times longer, 1.3–2.0 times wider than tubular part of foretibia; flange on midfemur 0.72–0.76 times longer, 1.0–1.5 wider than tubular part of midfemur; flange on midtibia 0.74–0.76 times longer, 0.89–1.0 times wider than tubular part of midtibia; hindcoxa 2.0 times as long as hind trochanter; postero-lateral margin of hind coxa with longitudinal carinae; basal part of hindfemur strongly producing; hindfemur basally stout, apparently wider than distal part; ventral margin of hindfemur flat; outer surface of hindtibia smooth; flange on hindfemur 0.60–0.85 times longer, 0.90–1.0 times wider than tubular part of hindfemur; flange on hindtibia 0.83–0.89 times longer, 1.8–2.0 times wider than tubular part of hindtibia; median tooth of tarsal claw far beyond half of tarsal claw (25G).
PILOSITY. Spraclypeal area with sparse erect simple setae ( Fig. 11B View Fig ); temple with sparse suberect simple setae ( Fig. 11C View Fig ); lower gena with sparse decumbent simple setae ( Fig. 11D View Fig ); frons with sparse decumbent simple setae ( Fig. 11C View Fig ); around spiracle of propodeum with sparse decumbent simple setae; forefemur and foretibia with dense decumbent simple setae; dorsal surface of forefemur, foretibia, midtibia and hindtibia with sparse suberect simple setae.
COLORATION. Body reddish brown; antenna reddish brown; legs reddish brown; flanges yellowish brown; ribbon-like setae whitish yellow.
Female
Unknown.
Distribution
Vietnam (Northern Vietnam) ( Fig. 27 View Fig ).
Remarks
Loboscelidia do sp. nov. resembles L. cuneata sp. nov., L. parallela sp. nov. and L. pecki Kimsey, 2012 in the following characteristics: reddish brown body color; rectangular frontal projection; F1 and F2 nearly twice as long as wide; transverse carina absent behind ocelli; flat ventral margin of the hindfemur. However, L. do sp. nov. can be distinguished by the following characteristics: frons with setae ( L. cuneata sp. nov. without setae); scape less than 3.0 times as long as wide (more than 3.0 times as long as wide in other species); femora with simple setae ( L. cuneata sp. nov. with cuneate setae); basal of cervical expansion weakly constricted (other two species parallel); R1 vein less than 0.80 times as long as R (as long as R in L. pecki ), and cu-a vein longer than 0.29 times as long as R (absent or slightly present in L. pecki ).
Kimsey L. S. 2012. Review of the odd chrysidid genus Loboscelidia Westwood, 1874 (Hymenoptera, Chrysididae, Loboscelidiinae). ZooKeys 213: 1 - 40. https: // doi. org / 10.3897 / zookeys. 213.2985
Fig. 11. Loboscelidia do sp. nov., holotype, ♂ (VNMN). A. Lateral habitus. B. Head, frontal view. C. Head, dorsal view. D. Head, lateral view. E. Forewing. F. Pronotum, dorsal view. G. Mesosoma, dorsal view. Scale bars: A, E–G = 0.5 mm; B–D = 0.2 mm.
Fig. 25. Hind tarsal claw of Loboscelidia Westwood, 1874. A. L. bachmaensis sp. nov. B. L. barbata sp. nov. C. L. cilia sp. nov. D. L. convexa sp. nov. E. L. cucphuongensis sp. nov. F. L. cuneata sp. nov. G. L. do sp. nov. H. L. flavipes sp. nov. I. L. fulgens Kimsey, 2012. J. L. glabra sp. nov. K. L. komedai sp. nov. L. L. mediata sp. nov. M. L. parallela sp. nov. N. L. piriformis sp. nov. O. L. squamosa sp. nov. P. L. vang sp. nov. Q. L. vietnamensis sp. nov.
VNMN |
Vietnam National Museum of Nature |
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 |
|
SubOrder |
Apocrita |
SuperFamily |
Chrysidoidea |
Family |
|
SubFamily |
Loboscelidiinae |
1 (by felipe, 2023-08-07 19:45:58)
2 (by ExternalLinkService, 2023-08-07 19:59:47)
3 (by felipe, 2023-08-08 12:59:56)
4 (by felipe, 2023-08-08 13:04:07)
5 (by ExternalLinkService, 2023-08-08 13:14:34)
6 (by ExternalLinkService, 2023-08-17 14:41:09)
7 (by plazi, 2023-11-09 17:36:58)