Epyris enerterus Stein et Azevedo

Stein, Paulo R. W., Alencar, Isabel D. C. C., Barbosa, Diego N. & Azevedo, Celso O., 2011, Revision of Epyris afer (Magretti, 1884), comb. rev. (Hymenoptera: Bethylidae) with new synonymy and description of two new species, Zootaxa 3032, pp. 17-32 : 24-25

Epyris enerterus Stein et Azevedo , sp. nov.

( Figs 2–3 , 13–15 , 21–22 , 28 )

Epyris afer Magretti 1897 , 17: 319, part. (addition of Myanmar specimens to the syntype series of Epyris afer ).

Material examined. HOLOTYPE: Ƥ. BIRMANIA { MYANMAR}. Bhamò, [24.2667, 97.2333], VIII.1880, L. Fea. col. ( MCSN). PARATYPE: THAILAND, 1 Ƥ, Sakon Nakhon, Phu Phan N[ational] P[ark], dry evergreen near house no.1567, 16°48.628'N, 103°53.591'E, 522 m, Pan trap, 4–5.VI.2007, Winlon Kongnara col. T2486 ( QSBG).

Type condition. The right proleg of holotype is missing.

Distribution. Myanmar and Thailand.

Diagnosis. FEMALE. Mandible with pre-apical lower tooth, sensillae chaetica in lower margin of mandible present. Frons nearly 1.7 × wider than eye length. Head longer than wide. Distance of posterior ocellus to vertex crest 3.0 × DAO. Gena depressed. Notaulus with abrupt anteroposterior enlargement. MALE unknown.

Description. FEMALE. Body length 6.9 mm. LFW 3.8 mm.

Color. Head, mesosoma and procoxa dark castaneous nearly black. Scape dark castaneous with apex castaneous. Mandible, meso and metacoxae, trochanters, femora and metasoma dark castaneous. Pedicel, flagellum, palpi, tegula, tibiae and tarsi castaneous. Wing venation light castaneous. Wings subhyaline.

Head ( Figs 2, 3 ). Mandible ( Figs. 13–15 ) apex as wide as base, with four sharpened apical teeth, three lower wider than last one, pre-apical lower tooth present; sensillae chaetica in lower margin of mandible present. Clypeus shorter than wide, median lobe angulate; median carina present; apex of clypeus without setae; lateral lobe reduced. Transversal section of scape elliptical; first four antennal segments ratio 23:7:6:9, segment III 0.7 × longer than thick; antennal sensillae not visible. Antennal scrobe projected forward, dorsally sulcate. Toruli distant from each other 2.3 × their diameter. Eye almost reaching upper mandibular condyle, prominent, glabrous. Frons coriaceous; punctures large and deep, separated from each other by 1.0 × their diameter. WH 0.8 × LH; WF 1.7 × HE; WF 0.7 × WH; OOL 1.5 × WOT; VOL 1.4 × HE; distance of posterior ocellus to vertex crest 3.0 × DAO. Ocelli small, frontal angle of ocellar triangle acute. Temple parallel in dorsal view. Vertex straight in dorsal view. Crest without setae. Occipital carina present dorsally. Gena depressed ( Fig. 3 ). Hypostomal carina sinuous and polished.

Mesosoma ( Fig. 21 ). Pronotal collar coriaceous, without transversal groove. Pronotal disc 1.3 × longer than wide, coriaceous, subtrapezoidal, densely punctate, transversal carina in anterior margin absent. Mesoscutum coriaceous, lateral slightly elevate posteriorly. Notaulus not touching posterior margin of mesoscutum, convergent posteriorly, abrupt anteroposterior enlargement. Parapsidal furrow convergent posteriorly, shorter and as deep as notaulus, not reaching posterior margin of mesoscutum. Scutellum coriaceous, scutellar groove absent, scutellar pit oval. Propodeal disc 0.9 × as long as wide; anterior carina medially narrower than laterally; anterior corner foveashaped; five discal carinae present, median carina complete, inner discal carina complete, space between median and inner discal carina with longitudinal ridge, second pair of discal carina incomplete and short, space between inner and second pair of discal carina without ridge; lateral margin straight; sublateral carina absent, lateral carina present, space between sublateral and lateral carina with series of transversal ridges; posterior margin straight; posterior corner with suboval fovea; lateral of propodeum strigulate; declivity of propodeum coriaceous, with median carina. Mesopleuron ( Fig. 22 ) coriaceous; subtegular groove elongate, large anteriorly and narrow posteriorly; anterior fovea closed; sub-anterior fovea closed and small; mesopleural fovea closed; mesopleural pit present; mesopleural elevation present; lower fovea open, groove of inferior margin of lower fovea present throughout extension of margin; episternal furrow with inner margin striate. Epicnemium lateromedially enlarged. Pleurosternum with straight longitudinal groove.

Legs. Profemur 2.3 × longer than wide. Mesotibia spinose. tibia with sparse series of short setae in posterior face. Tarsomeres distally spinose, spines of protarsus short and cylindrical, spines of meso and metatarsi long and flattened. Tarsal claws bidentate, inner tooth shorter than apical tooth.

Wing. Forewing with metacarpus present, 0.1 × as long as stigma length; radial vein curved forward, 1.9 × longer than basal; basal vein slightly concave; transverse median vein angulated inferiorly. Hind wing with two basal and four apical hamuli.

Metasoma. Ventral surface of petiole ( Fig. 28 ) unsegmented, space between carinae of petiole wide. Tergum II longer than others; terga III–VI with sparse setae on dorsal surface.

Etymology. The specific Greek epithet refers to the shape of gena, which is depressed.

Discussion. This female specimen was identified by Magretti (1897) as E. afer . Indeed, they share some characters like the presence of pre-apical lower tooth and the sensillae chaetica in the lower margin of mandible, the ratio of propodeal disc 0.9 × as long as wide and the protarsomeres spines short and cylindrical. However, this specimen has VOL 1.4 × HE, the distance of posterior ocellus to vertex crest 3.0 × DAO and the gena depressed, whereas E. afer has VOL 0.6 × HE, the distance of posterior ocellus to vertex crest 1.0 × DAO and the gena flattened. Because of that we considered a different species.

Historically, the ventral region of body was unexplored in Bethylidae taxonomy. For this reason, similar species in dorsal and lateral view, but different in ventral view are considered the same. This was what happened to E. enerterus sp. nov. and E. afer . They share some dorsal and lateral similarities ( Figs. 19–22 ), however, when the head is examined ventrally ( Fig. 3 ), it is possible to observe the depressed gena. This character was not cited to Epyris until now, being observed only in species of Chlorepyris Kieffer , like C. subangulatus ( Rosmann & Azevedo, 2005) .

Figures

FIGURES 1 – 6. Head. 1. Epyris afer Ƥ, lectotype, dorsal view. 2 – 3. E. enerterus sp. nov. Ƥ, holotype. 2. Dorsal view; 3. Ventral view. 4. E. afer 3, paralectotype, dorsal view. 5 – 6. E. penatii sp. nov. 3, holotype. 5. Dorsal view; 6. Ventral view. (Scale bar = 200 µm)

FIGURES 7 – 18. Mandible. 7 – 9. Epyris afer Ƥ, lectotype. 7. Frontal view; 8. Ventral view; 9. Dorsal view. 10 – 12. E. afer 3, paralectotype. 10. Frontal view; 11. Ventral view; 12. Dorsal view. 13 – 15. E. enerterus sp. nov. Ƥ, holotype. 13. Frontal view; 14. Ventral view; 15. Dorsal view. 16 – 18. E. penatii sp. nov. 3, holotype. 16. Frontal view; 17. Ventral view; 18. Dorsal view. (Scale bar = 200 µm).

FIGURES 19 – 22. Mesosoma in dorsal view and mesopleuron. 19 – 20. Epyris afer Ƥ, lectotype. 19. Mesosoma; 20. Mesopleuron. 21 – 22. E. enerterus sp. nov. Ƥ, holotype. 21. Mesosoma; 22. Mesopleuron. (Scale bar = 200 µm)

FIGURES 27 – 30. Petiole in ventral view. 27. Epyris afer Ƥ, lectotype. 28. E. enerterus sp. nov. Ƥ, holotype. 29. E. afer 3, paralectotype. 30. E. penatii sp. nov. 3, holotype. (Scale bar = 200 µm)