Rhaconotus Ruthe, 1854

Belokobylskij, Sergey A. & Zaldívar-Riverón, Alejandro, 2021, Reclassification of the doryctine tribe Rhaconotini (Hymenoptera, Braconidae), European Journal of Taxonomy 741, pp. 1-168 : 119-122

publication ID	https://doi.org/ 10.5852/ejt.2021.741.1289
publication LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:pub:932D3C8F-6F22-4103-ABCE-47F1E4E8FF43
DOI	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4651611
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/AF1D4E27-AD0F-5F6A-FDEB-E053387E3AAC
treatment provided by	Plazi
scientific name	Rhaconotus Ruthe, 1854
status

Treatment

Genus Rhaconotus Ruthe, 1854 View in CoL View at ENA

Rhaconotus Ruthe, 1854: 349 View in CoL .

Hedysomus Foerster, 1863: 238

(type species Hedysomus elegans Foerster, 1863 , by monotypy; MHBG; examined).

Hormiopterus Giraud, 1869: 478

(type species Hormiopterus olivieri Giraud, 1869 , by monotypy; MNHN; examined).

Rhadinogaster Szépligeti, 1908: 223

(type species Rhadinogaster testacea Szépligeti, 1908 , by monotypy; HNHM; examined).

Aptenobracon Marsh, 1965: 675 View in CoL syn. nov.

(type species Aptenobracon formicoides Marsh, 1965 View in CoL , by monotypy and original designation; USNM; examined: Fig. 46 View Fig ).

Pararhacon Belokobylskij, 2005 :208 (as subgenus) (type species Rhaconotus (Pararhacon) haeselbarthi Belokobylskij, 2005 View in CoL , by monotypy and original designation; SSMG; examined).

Rhaconotus View in CoL – Nixon 1941: 473. — Granger 1949: 126. — Marsh 1965: 694; 1976: 389; 2002: 180. —

Shenefelt & Marsh 1976: 1334. — Belokobylskij & Tobias 1986: 46. — Belokobylskij 1990 a: 145;

1994: 340; 2001: 102. — Belokobylskij & Chen 2004: 319. — Chen & Shi 2004: 35. — Yu et al.

2016. — Jasso-Martínez et al. 2019: 165. Hedysomus – Shenefelt & Marsh 1976: 1335. — Yu et al. 2016. Hormiopterus – Shenefelt & Marsh 1976: 1335. — Yu et al. 2016. Rhadinogaster – Shenefelt & Marsh 1976: 1335. — Yu et al. 2016. Aptenobracon View in CoL – Yu et al. 2016. — Jasso-Martínez et al. 2019: 165. Rhaconotus (Pararhacon) – Yu et al. 2016.

Type species

Rhaconotus aciculatus Ruthe, 1854 View in CoL .

Description ( Figs 44–48 View Fig View Fig View Fig View Fig View Fig )

HEAD. Head not depressed, high, rather transverse. Ocelli arranged in obtuse triangle with base larger than sides. Frons not concave and without median keel or furrow. Eyes glabrous or sometimes with very short and sparse setae. Occipital carina dorsally complete, obliterate below and not joining ventrally with hypostomal carina at least at short distance. Malar suture absent. Clypeal suture distinct and complete. Hypoclypeal depression medium size or small, subround or oval. Postgenal bridge present and narrow. Palps usually rather long; maxillary palps 6-segmented, labial palps 4-segmented, its third segment not shortened. Scapus more or less wide, relatively long, without apical lobe and basal constriction, its ventral margin (lateral view) not longer than dorsal margin. First flagellar segment subcylindrical, usually at least weakly longer than second segment. Apical segment acuminate apically and without spine.

MESOSOMA. Mesosoma not or only weakly depressed and relatively long. Pronotum dorsally more or less distinctly convex, usually with distinct pronotal carina; pronope absent; propleural dorsoposterior flange long and wide. Mesonotum not highly and gently roundly elevated above pronotum. Median lobe of mesonotum without median longitudinal furrow and without anterolateral corner. Notauli usually distinct and complete, sometimes shallow posteriorly. Prescutellar depression relatively long or rarely short, always with distinct median carina. Lateral longitudinal wing-like flanges on the level of prescutellar depression rather wide and high. Scutellum convex, often with distinct lateral carinae. Metanotum with short, wide and usually pointed median tooth (lateral view). Sternaulus (precoxal sulcus) more or less deep, narrow, long, often weakly sinuate. Prepectal carina distinct and complete, rather high below. Postpectal carina absent. Metapleural flange short, wide, rounded apically. Propodeum often with basolateral areas delineated by carinae, always without areola and other areas; lateral tubercles and propodeal bridge absent.

WINGS. Predominantly full-winged, but rarely strongly or completely reduced. Pterostigma of fore wing rather narrow and long. Radial vein (r) arising mostly from middle of pterostigma, but sometimes weakly before or behind it. Radial (marginal) cell usually not shortened, but rarely weakly or distinctly shortened. Both radiomedial veins (2-SR, r-m) present. Second radiomedial (submarginal) cell long or medium-sized, rarely shortened. Recurrent vein (m-cu) basically postfurcal, only sometimes interstitial or weakly antefurcal. Discoidal (discal) cell petiolate anteriorly, petiole (1-SR) short. Nervulus (cu-a) postfurcal. Brachial (subdiscal) cell gently curvedly closed postero-apically on or often before recurrent vein (m-cu), without antero-posterior corner. Parallel vein (CU1a) always interstitial. Transverse anal veins (2A, a) absent. Hind wing with three hamuli. Radial vein (SR) arising from costal vein (2-SC+R) rather distant from basal vein (1r-m). Submedial (subbasal) cell short. First abscissa of mediocubital vein (M+CU) 0.3–0.5 times as long as second abscissa (1-M). Recurrent vein (m-cu) present and weakly sclerotised or rarely absent.

LEGS. Fore and middle tibiae with distinct slender spines arranged almost in single row. Middle tarsal segments relatively long. Hind coxa with distinct basoventral corner and tubercle. Fore and middle femora with distinct and wide dorsal protuberances. Hind femur relatively narrow, with low and wide dorsal protuberance. Hind basitarsus 0.6 times as long as second–fifth segments combined. Claws short and simple.

METASOMA. Metasoma always with five dorsally visible, hardly sclerotised and almost entire or sometimes at least basally sculptured tergites, with distinctly separated laterotergites (epipleura). First tergite not petiolate, middle length and rather narrow or wide. Acrosternite of first segment short, about 0.20–0.25 times as long as first tergite, its apical margin situated before level of spiracles. Dorsope of first tergite deep and rather wide; present weak and directed down short basolateral process; spiracles situated in basal 0.3 of tergite. Second tergite movably connected with first tergite; without basal area; apical lenticular area usually absent or weakly delineated by furrow anteriorly. Second suture deep, complete and regularly curved. Third tergite without transverse depression or furrow. Fifth tergite more or less distinctly enlarged, usually longer than previous tergite, covered following apical segments (in normal condition). Ovipositor sheath often shorter than metasoma.

Diagnosis

This is the type genus of the tribe Rhaconotini , and it characterises by having the following combination of morphological features: mesosoma of female always with only five dorsally visible tergites, fifth tergite almost always enlarged, at least basally sculptured and entirely or predominantly covered following apical tergites (in males sometimes apical metasomal tergites more or less distinctly projected); first and second tergites never immobile fused; recurrent vein (m-cu) of fore wing almost mostly postfurcal and falling into the second radiomedial (submarginal) cell (except subgenus Pararhacon ); second radiomedial vein (r-m) present; parallel vein (CU1a) always interstitial (very rarely wings strongly shortened or absent); propodeum always without delineated areola, but often with basolateral areas.

Composition

Hosts

Coleoptera : Acmaeodera pulchella (Herbst, 1801) , Acmaeoderella zeravshanica Volkovitsh, 1987 ; Anthaxia lgockii Obenberger, 1917 , A. viridis (Linnaeus, 1758) , Sphenoptera sp. ( Buprestidae ); Caryedon sp., C aryedon serratus (Olivier, 1790) ( Chrysomelidae : Bruchinae ); Conotrachelus sp., Hypolixus sp., Lixus concavus Say, 1831 , L. lukjanovitschii Ter-Minasian, 1966 , Trichobaris texana Le Conte, 1876 (Curculionidae) ; Mordellistena sp. ( Mordellidae ).

Lepidoptera : Chilo auricilius Dudgeon, 1905 , Сh. partellus (Swinhoe, 1885) , Ch. saccharifagus (Bojer, 1856) , Ch. suppressalis (Walker, 1863) , Scirpophaga excerptalis (Walker, 1863) , S. incertulas (Walker, 1863) , S. nivella (Fabricius, 1794) (Crambidae) ; Oecocecis guyonella Guinee, 1870 ( Gelechiidae ); Busseola fusca (Fuller, 1901) (Noctuidae) ; Maliarpha separatella Ragonot, 1888 (Pyralidae) .

Distribution

Afrotropical, Australasian, Nearctic, Neotropical, Oriental and Palaearctic regions.

Remarks

This is the largest genus of the tribe Rhaconotini , within which the most species of Rhaconotinus , Rhaconotus , Troporhaconotus and partly Ipodoryctes were previously described. The recent molecular phylogenetic study for the tribe Rhaconotini ( Jasso-Martínez et al. 2019) consistently showed that this genus should be only restricted to species of Rhaconotus with five dorsally visible metasomal tergites.

The apterous North American genus Aptenobracon Marsh, 1965 (with type species A. formicoides : Fig. 46 View Fig ) was deeply nested in the phylograms of the above phylogenetic study together with the New World Rhaconotus species. Brachyptery (reduction of the wings plate and venation) has been already recorded in the genus Rhaconotus for two species, Rh. brachypterus (Hesse, 1934) and Rh. hispanicus Belokobylskij, 2001 , where such reduction of the wing was associated with transformation of metasomal structures (decreased mesothorax and enlarged prothorax and metathorax together with propodeum). The above phylogenetic affinities lead us to conclude that all diagnostic characters for Aptenobracon are only due to its loss of wings. We therefore consider Aptenobracon Marsh, 1965 syn. nov. as a junior synonym of Rhaconotus Ruthe, 1854 .

Study of rather numerous reared material for both sexes from Israel [3 ♀♀,Tarum, 25.II.1972,A.Goldstein leg., from Caryedon sp.; 2 ♂♂, Israel, II–III.1972, B.T. Southgate, “ex pods Prosopis farcta (Fabaceae) , IV.1972 ”; 1 ♀, Natiu Ha- lamed Hey, 11.IV.1972, A. Goldstein leg., ex Caryedon sp. ( Chrysomelidae : Bruchinae ) (all in BMNH); 1 ♀, 1 ♂, Yizre’el, 40 km SE of Haifa, 6.IV.1971, D. Gerling leg. (ZISP); 1 ♂, Sede Terumot, 7 km S of Bet Shean, 29.X.1971, F. Goldstein leg., from Caryedon sp. (ZISP); 1 ♀, Israel, 25.II.1972, A. Belinsky leg., from Caryedon sp. (ZISP)], Iraq [1 ♀, Abu-Ghraib, Baghdad, IV.1979, M. Abdul Rassoul leg. (ZISP); 1 ♂, Hawiga, Kirkuk, 26.IV.1977, M. Abdul Rassoul leg. (ZISP)] and Iran [4 ♀♀, 4 ♂♂, Yazd Province, Yazd, coll 5.IV.2008 on Prosopis farcta (Fabaceae) , A. Muhammadi leg.; 1 ♀, 7 ♂♂, Fars Province, Darab, coll 5.IV.2008 on Prosopis farcta (Fabaceae) , A. Muhammadi leg.] revealed that Rhaconotus asiaticus Belokobylskij, 1990 syn. nov. (was originally described only for females) is a junior synonym of Rh. kerzhneri Belokobylskij, 1985 , which was originally described only for males. Both sexes of this species are characterised by having a weakly shortened radial (marginal) cell of fore wing, but males additionally have a sharp sexual dimorphism, viz. the presence of double smoothed lateral areas on the second–fourth metasomal tergites (always absent in females).

The second metasomal tergite of several Rhaconotus species have transverse more or less lenticular apical area delineated anteriorly the transverse and usually curved sulcus (by different level of its development) and posteriorly by deep second suture. The anterior sulcus of the second tergite is a strongly variable structure (can be deep or shallow to very shallow), inclusive within a single species. The molecular phylogenetic study for the tribe Rhaconotini showed that the members of Rhaconotus s. str. with and without apical area on the second tergite are intermingled with other members of the genus ( Jasso-Martínez et al. 2019).

Kingdom	Animalia
Phylum	Arthropoda
Class	Insecta
Order	Hymenoptera
Family	Braconidae
SubFamily	Doryctinae
Tribe	Rhaconotini