Hexacharis flavipes Kieffer, 1907

Restrepo, Claudia X., Ortiz, - & Villar, Juli Pujade -, 2010, The validity of Hexacharis Kieffer with taxonomic notes on Anacharitinae genera (Hymenoptera: Cynipoidea: Figitidae), Zootaxa 2400, pp. 16-28 : 17-22

publication ID	https://doi.org/ 10.5281/zenodo.194064
DOI	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6210975
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/CD5D87E0-AC48-FFF9-ECF3-F8C1CB1BFB7B
treatment provided by	Plazi
scientific name	Hexacharis flavipes Kieffer, 1907
status

Treatment

Hexacharis flavipes Kieffer, 1907 . Revised status.

Hechacharis flavipes Kieffer, 1907: 142 (male) Aegilips flavipes (Kieffer) , Díaz, 1986: 112 –113 Studied material. Type material: Holotype male (without antenna) deposited in CAS, with the following labels: “Colo, 2/94” (white label), “5681” (white label, handwritten), “ Hexacharis flavipes Kieff (red label, handwritten), “California Academy of Sciences Type No. 10536” (white label), “ Holotype of Hexacharis flavipes Kieffer, 1907 det JP– V-2009 ” (red label). Additional material ( USA): (24 3 & 8 Ƥ). Alaska: C– 349, USA, Alaska Cantwell, Denali, Hwy, R+8, mi 8S–130, Taiga–Tundra 2300–3000, S. & J. Peck, 24. VII. 1984: 1 Ƥ (CNCI). Arizona: C–234, USA, AZ, Sta. Cruz Co. Patagonia. M. T. Sanarta Creck, B. Brown & E. Wilk, 14.VI.1994: 11 3, 2 Ƥ (4 3 & 1 Ƥ UB; 7 3 & 1 Ƥ CNCI); C–248, USA, AZ, Sta. Cruz Co. Patagonia. M. T., B. Brown & E. Wilk, 1– 5. V. 994: 8 3, 1 Ƥ (3 3 & 1 Ƥ UB; 5 3 CNCI); C–196, USA, AZ, Cochise Co. Carr Canyon. 800 m, M., 18. VIII. 1993: 1 Ƥ (UB); C–209, USA, AZ, Coconino Co. Jacob Lake, 13 m S., J. D. Pinto S. S., 16. VI. 1993: 2 Ƥ (1 Ƥ UB; 1 Ƥ CNCI); C–333, USA, Sta. Cruz Co. Patagonia. M. T, 31º53´N 10 º77´W., E. Wilk & B. Brown, 16. VI. 1994: 53 (33 UB; 23 CNCI). Oregon: C–360, USA, Oregon, Curry Co. Denmark, sweep Finnamore & Thorton, 3. VIII. 1985: 1Ƥ (CNCI).

Redescription. Coloration: Predominantly dark. Head and mesosoma entirely black, antenna and metasoma dark brown, legs yellowish, except the basal part of the hind coxae, which is dark brown.

Head: Smooth and shiny. Head in anterior view ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 c) triangular. Face densely setose, clearly convex. Mandibles robust and overlapping, with three teeth. In dorsal view, head distinctly wider than the mesosoma ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 a). Gena dilated behind compound eyes, occipital carina absent. Compound eyes protuberant laterally. Malar space length 0.9 to 1.1 times the height of the compound eye, malar area with marked coriaceous band ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 b, 1d). Clypeus extending beyond base of the mandibles; clypeus emarginate in middle; epistomal and clypeopleurostomal line indistinct. Clypeal pits strongly marked, rounded, as long as broad ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 c). Antennal foramen 1.3–1.5 times as broad as high, distance between toruly 1.0–1.3 times as long as distance between torulus and inner margin of eye ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 a). Ocelli subequal in size. OOL: 1.9–2.4 as long as the maximum diameter of the lateral ocellus; POL / OOL: 0.68–1.12; OOL / LOL: 2.73–3.98 ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 a).

Antenna: Female. ( Fig. 2 View FIGURE 2 b) Antenna of 13 segments, filiform, scape and pedicel smooth, with few scattered setae; flagellomeres setose, placodeal sensilla from F4; F1 1.0–1.3 times as long as F2; antennal formula: 11 (4): 4 (4): 13 (3): 12 (3): 11 (3.5) 10 (3): 10 (3): 10 (3): 9 (3): 8 (3): 8 (3), 7 (3), 8.5 (3). Male. ( Fig. 2 View FIGURE 2 c–2e) Antenna filiform, 14 segments, scape and pedicel smooth, with a few scattered setae, some flagellomeres with short setae, placodeal sensillae on F1-F12. F1 1.35–1.5 times as long as F2, F3 modified, curved dorsally, ventrally excavated on proximal one-thirds and expanded distally; antennal formula: 8 (4): 4 (4): 11 (3): 10 (3): 8 (3.5): 9 (3): 9 (3): 10 (3): 9 (3): 9 (3): 8 (3), 8 (3), 7.5 (3), 9 (3).

Mesosoma: Surface completely smooth and shiny, lateral margin of shield line in middle expands laterally with some scattered setae ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 a). Pronotum ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 c) narrow medially, width of about 0.20–0.25 times the lateral width. Pronotal carina poorly differentiated; pronotal plate sloping and convex, densely setose. Mesoscutum strongly convex, anterior margin continues pronotal carina immediately, giving the appearance of a hump in lateral view; notaulus incomplete, reaching 2/3 the mesoscutum length; parascutal sulcus present, until tegula, widening gradually posteriorly ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 a). Mesopleuron smooth and shiny with variable cross striations in middle; mesopleural triangle setose ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 b). Scutellum rounded, smooth and shiny with a few scattered setae ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 a), 1.15–1.3 longer than wide, circunscutellar carina present; scutellum vertical in lateral view below this carina. Undefined scutelar fovea; interfoveal carina incomplete. Propodeum rugged, densely setose, lateral carinae present and parallel, without sculpture between two propodeal carinae ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 d).

Legs: tarsal claws pectinated ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 g).

Forewing: Hyaline, setose and ciliated along anterior margin. Radial cell closed, 2.5 to 2.9 times as long as broad. Areola absent; projection of 2r distinct. Basal vein straight, swollen at distal end ( Fig. 2 View FIGURE 2 a).

Metasoma: Petiole 2.1 to 2.25 times as long as broad, fluted, smooth dorsally in the anterior half ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 f). Second metasomal tergum smooth and almost glabrous, as long as the sum of the following two; T3-T6 pointed proximally, glabrous and decreasing gradually in length ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 e).

Variability: Observed only in mesopleuron. In most specimens, the mesopleuron is smooth and shiny, sometimes with marked striation in the middle. In some specimens, this striation are so deep that they almost make up a weak ( Fig. 4 View FIGURE 4 b, 4c) or strong mesopleural groove ( Fig. 4 View FIGURE 4 d). Finally, in other specimens, these striation are reduced to a few short lengths located on the anterior of mesopleuron ( Fig. 4 View FIGURE 4 a). Morphological continuity is observed as ranging from almost absent to deeply etched striations in the middle of the mesopleuron, so we cannot consider this variation as distinct species level morphological differenences but as intraspecific variation.

Biology: Unknown.

Distribution: USA, probably Nearctic. Originally cited from Colorado ( Kieffer 1907). Additional specimens in this study from Arizona, Oregon, and Alaska.