Digonocryptus grossipes ( Brullé, 1846 )
Aguiar, Alexandre Pires & Ramos, Adriana C. B., 2011, 2846, Zootaxa 2846, pp. 1-98 : 41-43
publication ID |
11755334 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/662B87B3-3B49-FFDE-FF67-7B4CFC4B64B0 |
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
scientific name |
Digonocryptus grossipes ( Brullé, 1846 ) |
status |
|
Digonocryptus grossipes ( Brullé, 1846) View in CoL
Figs 33, 34, 143, 192, 232
Mesostenus grossipes Brullé, 1846:237 . ♀ Description.
Digonocryptus grossipes: Townes and Townes, 1966:126 View in CoL . Generic transfer.
Digonocryptus grossipes: Yu and Horstmann, 1998:241 View in CoL . Listed.
Description. FEMALE. Fore wing 9.5 mm.
Head. Ventral tooth of mandible slightly but distinctly longer than dorsal tooth. Clypeus apical area delimited by simple, smooth border, thus weakly isolated from main area of clypeus (except by its distinct color); clypeal margin with two teeth. Antenna with 24 flagellomeres; white band starting at flagellomere V; 8 flagellomeres at least 50% white.
Mesosoma . Mesopleuron with dense pilosity covering about 80% of cuticular surface, speculum somewhat pilose and mostly covered by mesopleural sculpturing ( Fig. 143). Subalar prominence large and round, suboval. Sulcus between sternaulus and scrobe absent. Posterior transverse carina of mesosternum represented by a few short rugosities crossing discrimen. Carinal triangle and lower metapleuron, and propodeum from anterior carina to petiolar foramen, with dense white pilosity covering about 90% of surface; lower metapleuron finely and densely rugulose. Propodeum: area in front of anterior transverse carina rugulose, matt, medially with traces of incomplete ridges extending from carina towards anterior margin. Propodeal apophyses present as small scale-like structures, part of posterior transverse carina, which is distinct, complete, medially somewhat triangular. Area between transverse carinae obliquely to longitudinally rugulose; area behind posterior transverse carina rugulose, somewhat transversely. Fore wing in Fig. 192; vein 3-Cu 1.40 length of 4-Cu. Hind wing in Fig. 232.
Metasoma. Postpetiole dorso-anteriorly very weakly convex; dorsolateral and median dorsal carinae weakly developed, inconspicuous; petiolar spiracles in dorsal view not prominent. Ovipositor 1.22 length of hind tibia. Apex of lower valve with 14 teeth.
Color. Black with yellow and orange areas. Lateral pattern as in Fig. 33. Orbital band forming complete ring, narrowest at malar space, width at supra-antennal area and temple about 0.2 interocular distance; covering about 0.7 of gena width. Supraclypeal area yellow, except narrowly from parantennal impression to supra-antennal area. Clypeus and clypeal sulcus entirely yellow (atypical). Mesosoma dorsally black, except as follows. Pronotum along anterior margin and collar with distinct yellow stripe from side to side, laterally on dorsal margin with large elongate yellow spot. Propleuron black. Scutellum and postscutellum entirely yellow. Propodeum as in Figs 33–34. All femora orange brown, progressively darker from fore to hind femur. All tibiae brownish yellow. Fore tarsus brown, lighter basally. Mid t1 mostly brownish yellow, its apical 0.2 and entire t2–5 brown. Hind t1–3 brownish yellow, t4–5 brown. Metasoma dorsally black, except as follows: Petiole and postpetiole basally orange brown; postpetiole apically with wide yellow stripe; T2–3 apical margin with wide yellow stripe, becoming slightly wider laterally; T4–7 apically with yellow stripe, on T4–6 stripe narrow and medially very thin, on T7 wide and regular, T8 without apical yellow stripe.
Morphological variation. Fore wing 8.5–13.5 mm. Ovipositor 1.22–1.31 length of hind tibia. Propodeal area in front of anterior transverse carina sometimes polished, smooth. Clypeus and clypeal sulcus black on all specimens except homotype; supraclypeal area often also narrowly to widely black medio-longitudinally. Hind coxa often (60%) nearly entirely black, sometimes (23%) gradually changing from basally orange to apically dark brown. Postpetiole normally with black instead of orange; usually (90%) at least one tergite of T3–5 with yellow stripe interrupted medially, sometimes also T6–7. Two specimens, one from Peru (Cusco) and another from Brazil (Nova Teutonia, SC; homotype designed by V. K. Gupta), differ from all other specimens in having mid and hind femora orange, tergites 2–7 with complete apical yellow stripes; clypeus yellow only on homotype specimen. Supraclypeal area entirely yellow to mostly dark brown; tegula varies from entirely yellow to mostly dark brown with yellow spot ventro-mesally. Area of propodeum between posterior transverse carina and petiole uniformly pilose for about 50% of the specimens, other specimens have distinct, medio-longitudinal, glabrous stripe. Morphological variations do not appear to be correlated with geographical distribution at any degree.
MALE. Very similar to female, but with the following variations. Smallest specimens with clypeal teeth weakly differentiated or not completely formed, and with orange tones replaced by more yellowish colors. Supraclypeal area always entirely yellow. Orbital band often interrupted between 6–8 h; on smallest male also interrupted at 9 h and 2–5 h; hind tibia at basal 0.2 whitish, otherwise brown or dark brown. Two specimens from Peru (Avispas) also with clypeus and clypeal sulcus entirely yellow and T4–8 entirely brownish yellow. Some specimens have hind coxa and femur yellowish brown; fore and mid coxae pale yellow, remaining of fore and mid legs light yellow; T1 on basal 0.3 and apical 0.3 yellow, centrally dark; T2 on apical 0.3, T3 on apical 0.5 and remaining tergites from nearly to entirely yellow. These males are very similar to males of D. thoracicus , except for color pattern of T1 and hind coxa (see description of D. thoracicus ).
Comments. Similar to D. thoracicus and D. domius . Can be separated from D. thoracicus by having the mesepimeron entirely black (vs. entirely yellow), coxae and trochanters orange (vs. coxae yellow with black marks and trochanters black), and speculum polished, smooth (vs. largely covered by sculpturing of mesopleuron). Readily differentiated from D. domius by having the clypeus margin with two teeth (vs. one); orbital band interrupted only at malar space (vs. at 9 h, 11 h, 4–5 h and 6–8 h), and the postscutellum yellow (vs. black). The present species presents also a distinct color pattern of yellow stripes on the metasoma (compare Figs 33, 35, 73).
Material examined. 18 females, 8 males. Homotype ♀ “ Nova Teutonia // Santa Catarina // III.1968 Brasil // Fritz Plaumann”; “HOMOTYPE// Mesostenus // grossipes Br // V.K.GUPTA 1983” [blue] ( AEIC) . ♀ “ Nova Teutonia // Santa Catarina // IV-16-68 Brazil // FritzPlaumann” ( AEIC) . ♀ “ Nova Teutonia // Santa Catarina // Jan.1968 Brazil // FritzPlaumann”; “ Digonocryptus // sp.34// Tow. 1964” ( AEIC) . ♀ and ♂ “ Avispas , Perú // 30m nr. Marcapata // Oct. 1–15, 1962 // Luis Peña”; ( AEIC) . ♀ “ Quincemil , Perú // 750m nr. Marcapata // Oct. 20–30, 1962 // Luis Peña”; ( AEIC) . ♀ “ Quincemil , Perú // 750m nr. Marcapata // Nov. 10–15, 1962 // Luis Peña” ( AEIC) . ♂ “ Quincemil , Peru // 750m nr. Marcapata // September,1962// Luis Peña”; “ Digonocryptus // sp.// det. S.Gupta ” ( AEIC) . ♂ “ Nova Teutonia // Santa Catarina // Jan.1968 Brazil // Fritz Plaumann” ( AEIC) . ♂ “ Nova Teutonia // Santa Catarina // Nov.1970 Brazil // Fritz Plaumann” ( AEIC) . ♂ “ Nova Teutonia // Santa Catarina // III.24.54 Braz// Fritz Plaumann” ( AEIC) . ♂ “ Avispas , Perú // 30m nr. Marcapata // Sept. 1962 // Luis Peña”; ( AEIC) . 2 ♀: “335”; “CRA// 1” ( MZUP) . ♀ “P.GROSSA (V.VELHA) PR // Reserva IAPAR Br 376// BRASIL 24.XI.1986 // Lev. Ent. PROFAU- PAR// MALAISE” ( DZUP) . ♀ “N.Teutônia-S.C.// Brasil-XII/1967// F.Plaumann leg.” ( DZUP) . ♀ “N.Teutônia- S.C.// Brasil- X/ 1967 // F.Plaumann leg.” ( DZUP) . ♀ “ Ponta Grossa-Pr// 20.07.1987 // Profaupar// Malaise” ( DZUP) . ♀ “P.GROSSA (V.VELHA) PR // Reserva IAPAR Br 376// BRASIL 05.I.1987 // Lev. Ent. PROFAUPAR// MALAISE” ( DZUP) . ♀ “ReprêsaRioGrande// Guanabara , Brazil // September, 1969// M. Alvarenga ” ( AEIC) . ♀ “N.Teutônia-S.C.// Brasil - X/ 1967 // F.Plaumann leg.” ( DZUP) . ♀ “ Riv.Ceosnipata // Sta. Isabel Cusco // Peru F. Woytkowski // Bain For XII.26 51”; “ Digonocryptus sp. // S. Gupta det.” ( AEIC) . ♀ “P.GROSSA (V.VELHA) PR // Reserva IAPAR Br 376// BRASIL 02.III.1987 // Lev. Ent. PROFAUPAR// MALAISE” ( DZUP) . ♀ “ Brasil Pará // Serra Norte // Est. Manganês // 15.V.1984 ”; “ Brasil Pará// M.F.Torres ”; “ Digonocryptus sp. M.C.Gonçalves det.1994” ( MPEG) . ♂ “ Brasil Pará // Serra Norte // Caldeirão // 5a10.VII.1986 ”; “Armadilha// Malayse”; “ Brasil Pará// J.Dias ”; “ Digonocryptus sp. M.C.Gonçalves det.1994” ( MPEG) . ♂ “ BRASIL: Pará // Belém-Mocambo // 23.VI.1978 ”; “Mata de terra firma// Armadilio de malaise”; “ Digonocryptus sp. M.C.Gonçalves det.1994” ( MPEG) .
Distribution. Guyana, Peru NR, Brazil NR (Atlantic Forest of PA, PR, SC).
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 |
Digonocryptus grossipes ( Brullé, 1846 )
Aguiar, Alexandre Pires & Ramos, Adriana C. B. 2011 |
Digonocryptus grossipes:
Yu, D. S. & Horstmann, K. 1998: 241 |
Digonocryptus grossipes:
Townes, H. & Townes, M. 1966: 126 |
Mesostenus grossipes Brullé, 1846:237
Brulle, M. A. 1846: 237 |