Choeras tiro ( Reinhard, 1880 )

Moghaddam, Mostafa Ghafouri, Rakhshani, Ehsan, Achterberg, Cornelis Van & Mokhtari, Azizollah, 2018, A study of the Iranian species of Choeras Mason (Hymenoptera: Braconidae: Microgastrinae), with the description of a new species, Zootaxa 4446 (4), pp. 455-476 : 467-469

publication ID	https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4446.4.3
publication LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:pub:914DEC27-3729-4988-9175-A571786810BA
DOI	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5954923
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/DB23A22F-FFC2-FFD8-FF5C-FE1CFB17C8A7
treatment provided by	Plazi
scientific name	Choeras tiro ( Reinhard, 1880 )
status

Treatment

Choeras tiro ( Reinhard, 1880)

[ Figs 7–8 View FIGURE 7 View FIGURE 8 ]

Microgaster tiro Reinhard, 1880: 357 .

Hypomicrogaster tiro ( Reinhard, 1880) ; Nixon 1965: 229.

Choeras tiro ( Reinhard, 1880) ; Papp 1983: 257.

Apanteles (Choeras) tiro ( Reinhard, 1880) View in CoL ; van Achterberg 2002: 54; Yu et al. 2016.

Apanteles tiro ( Reinhard, 1880) View in CoL ; Belokobylskij et al. 2003: 386.

Specimens examined. 2 ♀ ( DPPZ): IRAN, Kermanshah Province, Gheshlagh (34°19’N, 47°4′E, 1341m), 14.v.2015, Malaise trap on farmland, leg.: M. Zardouei Heidari GoogleMaps ; 5 ♀ and 2 ♂ (HNHM): 1 ♀ and 1 ♂, AUSTRIA, Burgenland, Frauehkirchen (47°50'N, 16°55'E), 23.vii.1989, leg.: Hadl, Det. J. Papp, 1990 GoogleMaps ; 1 ♀ and 1 ♂, ENGLAND, Kent, Bexley (51°27'N, 0°8'E), Em. 1.vii.1956, leg.: R.L.E. Ford, Pres by Com. Inst. Ent. , B. M 1956–1958, ex. Cnephasia chrysanthemana, Det. G. E. J. Nixon, 1958 View in CoL and subsequently by J. Papp, 1967 GoogleMaps ; 1 ♀, ISRAEL, Megiddo (32°34'N, 35°10'E), 15.v.1965, leg.: G. Erdos, Det. J. Papp, 1988 GoogleMaps ; 1 ♀, SPAIN, Madrid, El Escorial (40°35'N, 4°6'W), 15.vi.1987, leg.: J. A. Podlussany, Det. J. Papp, 1989 GoogleMaps ; 1 ♀, SWITZERLAND, Somazzo, TI, Torretta ( Ost ) 590m, 11–20.vii.1986, Light Funnel, leg.: Rezbanyai-Reser, Det. J. Papp, 1995.

Short diagnosis. Female ( Iran), length of body 3.0– 3.3 mm, length of antenna 2.7–2.9 mm, length of fore wing 2.7–2.9 mm.

Colour. Body colour paler than typical European specimens. Mesoscutum, mesoscutellum, metanotum, propodeum, propleuron, mesopleuron, metapleuron, T1–T2 and anterior margin of T3 entirely brownish orange ( Figs 7G View FIGURE 7 , 8A–8D View FIGURE 8 ). Metacoxa, metafemur, metatibia and tibial spurs orange ( Figs 7A, 7C, 7G View FIGURE 7 , 8E View FIGURE 8 ). Pterostigma with a pale spot at about anterior 0.4 and remainder brown ( Fig. 8A View FIGURE 8 ). Ovipositor sheath tricolored, basally yellow, then orange brown, and apically dark brown ( Fig. 8E View FIGURE 8 ).

Head. Subapical antennal flagellomeres longer than wide and not moniliform, flagellomeres normally setose except aberrant, smooth and shiny apical one, first flagellomere 1.1 × as long as second flagellomere, penultimate and apical flagellomeres (15th and 16th) 1.1 and 2.2 × as long as their width, respectively ( Fig. 7B View FIGURE 7 ). Face without medio-longitudinal ridge and/or prominence ( Fig. 7D View FIGURE 7 ).

Mesosoma . Mesosoma 1.4 × as long as wide ( Figs 7G View FIGURE 7 , 8A View FIGURE 8 ). Scutoscutellar sulcus with 9 or 10 carinae and/or pits ( Figs 8A–8B View FIGURE 8 ). Mesopleuron completely smooth and posteriorly largely glabrous. Metapleuron mostly smooth anteriorly and rugose with long setae posteriorly ( Fig. 7G View FIGURE 7 ). Propodeum shiny with surface smooth, rugose near irregular medio-longitudinal carina, transverse carina represented by some rugae, medio-posteriorly with four carinae ( Fig. 8B View FIGURE 8 ).

Legs. Tarsal claws slender and only setose. Metacoxa surpassing posterior margin of T2 ( Figs 7A, 7G View FIGURE 7 , 8E View FIGURE 8 ). Metafemur 1.2 × as long as metatibia ( Figs 7A View FIGURE 7 , 8E View FIGURE 8 ).

Wings. Fore wing: vein R1 nearly equal (0.9 ×) to pterostigma length and vein r of fore wing 0.7 × as long as vein 2 RS and straight, stub of vein r-m of fore wing usually medium-sized, vein r-m 0.9 × as long as 3RSa, vein r about 0.5 × pterostigma width. Hind wing: vein cu-a curved ( Fig. 8F View FIGURE 8 ).

Metasoma. T1 hardly narrowed posteriorly. T1 largely parallel-sided, largely strongly rugose, but posteriorly smooth and shiny. T2 transversely narrowed, rectangular, laterally with a very weak sloping sides, apically completely straight and medium-sized, T2 largely with strong rugae. T3 longer than T2 and smooth ( Figs 8C–8D View FIGURE 8 ). Ovipositor sheath comparatively wide basally and slightly broadening toward apex, smooth and with long whitish setae, especially apically, setose part 0.9 × as long as metatibia ( Fig. 8E View FIGURE 8 ).

Distribution in Iran: Qazvin ( Ghahari et al. 2011b) and Kermanshah provinces.

General distribution (Fig. 11D): Holarctic: Austria, Bulgaria, Canada (Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island), France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iran, Israel (new record), Poland, Romania, Russia (Sakhalin Oblast, Saratov Oblast), Slovakia, Spain (new record), Switzerland, United Kingdom.

Hosts. Unknown in Iran.

Biology. Unknown and only collected in May.

Male. Unknown in Iran.

Similar species. The most similar species is C. suffolciensis ( Morley, 1902) . Females of this species have an unusually widened pterostigma that is completely dark brown, without a pale blotch at its base, with antenna long and setae very noticeable and pilose, T1 slightly narrowed posteriorly and not noticeably wedge-shaped.

Notes. The aberrant apex of antenna, the curious appearance of the flagellum, the shape of T1 and pale blotch at base of the pterostigma are reliable characters to recognize this species. The differences in colour most likely are caused by the climatological differences between Iran and Europe. The identity of the Iranian specimen(s) reported by Ghahari et al. (2011b) could not be assessed because the depository was not mentioned.