Aleiodes hirtus (Thomson, 1892)
publication ID |
https://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.919.39642 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:0CC5169A-2325-41AD-938F-179FCB056381 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/5B1094D6-D8D0-5EC9-9D98-A133001D9CD2 |
treatment provided by |
|
scientific name |
Aleiodes hirtus (Thomson, 1892) |
status |
|
Aleiodes hirtus (Thomson, 1892) Figs 409-410 View Figures 409, 410 , 411-424 View Figures 411–424 , 425-427 View Figures 425–427
Rogas hirtus Thomson, 1892: 1672; Shenefelt 1975: 1233.
Aleiodes (Neorhogas) hirtus ; Papp 1985a: 153, 155, 161 (lectotype designation and as synonym of A. pallidicornis ), 1991a: 75 (id.).
Aleiodes hirtus ; Papp 2005: 177 (as synonym of A. pallidicornis ).
Rhogas hirtus ab. coloratus Hellén, 1927: 23; Shenefelt 1975: 1233; Papp 2005: 177 (as synonym of A. pallidicornis ) (unavailable name; not Rogas coloratus Motschulsky, 1863).
Type material.
Lectotype of A. hirtus , ♂ (ZIL), "[Norway], Norl.", " hirtus m.", "Funne I Norrland, teste Papp J., 1983", “Lectotypus”, " Rogas hirtus Thms. 1891, ♂, Papp J., 1983", " Aleiodes pallidicornis HS ♂, det. Papp J., 1983".
Additional material.
Austria, Belgium, British Isles (England: V.C.s 26, 29, 32, 62; Scotland: V.C. 78; Ireland: V.C. H12), Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Netherlands (DR: Borger), Norway, Romania, Russia, Serbia, Slovakia, Switzerland, Ukraine, [? Mongolia]. Specimens in ZJUH, BZL, CMIM, CNC, FMNH, MRC, MSC, MTMA, NMS, RMNH, SDEI, UNS, USNM, UWIM, ZIL, ZSSM.
Molecular data.
MRS619 (UK), MRS882 (Romania), MRS883 (Romania).
Biology.
Unknown. Collected in June-August, presumably univoltine but the mode of overwintering is unclear. Most British sites are more or less damp and calcareous grasslands, approaching fens. We have not seen reared material, but the clypeus suggests that the mummy will form in the soil.
Diagnosis.
Maximum width of hypoclypeal depression 0.5-0.6 × minimum width of face (Fig. 419 View Figures 411–424 ); OOL of ♀ approx. 1.3 × as long as diameter of posterior ocellus (Fig. 420 View Figures 411–424 ; in ♂ approx.1.6 ×) and punctate-rugose; ventral margin of clypeus rather thick but rather strongly protruding forwards (Fig. 421 View Figures 411–424 ; stronger in in ♂: Fig. 426 View Figures 425–427 ); mesoscutal lobes largely smooth, only indistinctly punctulate and shiny; precoxal area finely punctate and often with some rugulae (Fig. 413 View Figures 411–424 ); vein 1-CU1 0.3-0.6 × vein 2-CU1 of fore wing (Fig. 411 View Figures 411–424 ); hind tarsal claws with rather conspicuous brownish pecten (Fig. 424 View Figures 411–424 ); length of inner spur of hind tibia 0.5-0.7 × hind basitarsus; palpi dark brown; basal half of metasoma at least partly reddish or orange and 1st tergite rather coarsely sculptured; setae of body of ♂ (but of ♀ mainly its head) conspicuous and dense (Fig. 426 View Figures 425–427 ); hind coxa black; hind femur largely or completely reddish or brownish; basal half of hind tibia usually (pale) yellowish or yellowish brown, but sometimes uniformly reddish and of ♂ ivory. In the past this species has been frequently misidentified as " Rogas dimidiator " or " Rogas gasterator ".
Description.
Redescribed ♂ (RMNH) from Germany (Graswang). Length of fore wing 6.2 mm, of body 8.0 mm. Entire body with long whitish setae.
Head. Antennal segments of ♂ 60, length of antenna 1.3 × fore wing, its subapical segments somewhat longer than wide; frons medially largely smooth, laterally with some fine curved rugae; OOL 1.6 × diameter of posterior ocellus, and punctate-rugose, POL approx. half as long as diameter of ocellus; vertex spaced rugose, shiny; clypeus punctate; ventral margin of clypeus rather thick but distinctly protruding forwards (Fig. 421 View Figures 411–424 ); width of hypoclypeal depression 0.55 × minimum width of face (Fig. 419 View Figures 411–424 ); length of eye 1.1 × temple in dorsal view (Fig. 420 View Figures 411–424 ), temples conspicuously setose (Figs 419 View Figures 411–424 , 426 View Figures 425–427 ); vertex behind stemmaticum rugose; clypeus near lower level of eyes; length of malar space 0.3 × length of eye in lateral view.
Mesosoma. Pronotum rugose and anteriorly oblique, without antescutal depression; mesoscutal lobes large smooth and shiny, only indistinctly punctulate and densely setose; precoxal area of mesopleuron punctulate and medially with some superficial rugulae; remainder of mesopleuron sparsely punctate; scutellum sparsely punctate and largely smooth, posteriorly with lateral rugae; propodeum rather convex and coarsely rugose, its medio-longitudinal carina only in anterior half of propodeum.
Wings. Fore wing: r 0.3 × 3-SR (Fig. 411 View Figures 411–424 ); 1-CU1 horizontal, 0.45 × 2-CU1; r-m 0.7 × 3-SR and as long as 2-SR; 2nd submarginal cell medium-sized (Fig. 411 View Figures 411–424 ); cu-a vertical, straight; 1-M straight posteriorly; 1-SR wide; surroundings of M+CU1, 1-M and 1-CU1 largely glabrous. Hind wing: marginal cell gradually widened (but less so basally: Fig. 412 View Figures 411–424 ), its apical width 2.5 × width at level of hamuli; 2-SC+R short longitudinal; m-cu narrowly indicated; M+CU:1-M = 9:7; 1r-m 0.7 × 1-M.
Legs. Tarsal claws with rather conspicuous and medium-sized brownish pecten (Fig. 424 View Figures 411–424 ); hind coxa pimply punctate and shiny; hind trochantellus robust; length of hind femur and basitarsus 3.8 and 6.0 × their width, respectively; length of inner hind spur 0.65 × hind basitarsus (0.6 × in ♀).
Metasoma. First tergite evenly convex, approx. as long as wide apically; 1st and 2nd tergites with medio-longitudinal carina and densely longitudinally rugose, but posterior quarter of 2nd tergite irregularly rugose and no median carina; medio-basal area of 2nd tergite minute (Fig. 415 View Figures 411–424 ); 2nd suture deep and moderately crenulate; basal half of 3rd tergite finely rugose, remainder of metasoma largely smooth; 4th and apical half of 3rd tergite without sharp lateral crease; 4th - 6th tergites with long setae and flat.
Colour. Black; legs (except black coxae, trochanters and trochantelli, 1st and 2nd metasomal tergites (but base of 1st tergite partly infuscate) and base of 3rd tergite orange brown; vaguely near base of femora, telotarsi, apex of hind femur, apical half of hind tibia, hind tarsus largely black or blackish; basal half of hind tibia pale yellow; palpi, tegulae, veins and pterostigma dark brown; wing membrane slightly infuscate.
Variation. Hind femur varies from apically black to entirely orange. Propodeum can be partly orangish in posterior part. Usually both sexes have hind trochanter (often also trochantellus) more or less infuscate and darker than the orange part of the hind femur, but this is scarcely evident in a series from S. Russia (MRC, NMS). Hind coxa varies from orange to black. Female is similar to the more distinctive male but is less conspicuously setose (Figs 419-421 View Figures 411–424 ) and its ovipositor sheath is wide, with long setae and apically truncate (Fig. 410 View Figures 409, 410 ). Precoxal sulcus smooth to superficially rugulose medially. A female and a male from Romania (NMS) are slightly different from British ones; ocelli approx. 1/5 larger and frons coarsely rugose posteriorly. This appears to be reflected by a small divergence in CO1 (2.75 %), but for the moment we treat them as belonging to A. hirtus . Antennal segments of ♀ 54(1), 55(2), 56(6), 57(6), 59(2), 60(2), 61(1), of ♂ 56(1), 58(1), 59(3), 60(3), 61(1). Apical tergites of male type (1-)2, setae rather sparse but long and glabrous stripe consequently not always evident and fringe present but poorly differentiated. A female from Mongolia (BZL) with completely black hind femur and base of hind tibia pale yellowish and with dark basal ring may be another very similar species.
Distribution.
*Austria, *Belgium, *British Isles (England, Scotland, Ireland), *Bulgaria, *Czech Republic, Finland, *France, *Germany, *Hungary, *Netherlands, Norway, *Romania, *Russia, *Serbia, *Slovakia, *Switzerland, *Ukraine.
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 |
Aleiodes hirtus (Thomson, 1892)
van Achterberg, Cornelis, Shaw, Mark R. & Quicke, Donald L. J. 2020 |
Rogas hirtus
Thomson 1892 |
Rogas coloratus
Motschoulsky 1863 |