Camelosphecia, Boudinot & Perrichot & Chaul, 2020
publication ID |
https://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.1005.57629 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:B9954463-1D57-46C3-AB90-751157C9D0B5 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/5E38E92B-51D4-4B0B-B8DA-FAE77F7764B9 |
taxon LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:act:5E38E92B-51D4-4B0B-B8DA-FAE77F7764B9 |
treatment provided by |
|
scientific name |
Camelosphecia |
status |
gen. nov. |
† Camelosphecia gen. nov. Figs 1A View Figure 1 , 2A View Figure 2 , 13 View Figure 13 , 14 View Figure 14 , 15 View Figure 15 , 16 View Figure 16
Type species.
† Camelosphecia fossor sp. nov., by present designation.
Constituent species.
† Cs. fossor sp. nov., † Cs. venator sp. nov.
Diagnosis.
Identifiable as members of the † Camelomecia clade by the bowed mandibles with elongate masticatory margins, projecting clypeus, and absence of clypeal chaetae, frontal carinae, and facial projections, as outlined in the key above.
Both sexes specifically differentiated from † Camelomecia by: (1) the conspicuously-developed mandibular teeth on the masticatory margin (versus teeth present as mere crenulation or absent altogether); (2) fore wing 1cu-a crossvein distant proximally from divergence of free M and Cu by at least one of its own lengths (the phrase "markedly prefurcal" is used to describe this condition throughout this work; versus 1m-cu proximal to M+Cu split by less than one 1m-cu length, or 1m-cu usually at or distal to split, as observed in all known † Camelomecia and † Haidomyrmecinae , for example); and (3) crossvein 2m-cu absent (versus 2m-cu present or absent).
Females further differentiated from those of † Camelomecia as follows: (4) occipital carina of female extending to hypostoma (versus not); (5) compound eyes of female massively enlarged, filling entire lateral portion of head in profile view and rendering malar space virtually absent (versus compound eyes smaller, malar space well-defined); (6) teeth of masticatory mandibular margins conspicuously developed (versus present as crenulation or absent altogether); (7) disc (main central region) of labrum in the female bearing massive, long, thick chaetae (versus such chaetae absent); (8) anterior clypeal margin bidentate medially (versus margin edentate); (9) notauli on mesoscutum absent (versus present); (10) fore femora powerfully enlarged (versus weak and thin); (11) protarsomeres I and II margined with an array of differentiated psammochaetae (versus such chaetae absent); (12) posterolateral corners of propodeum armed (versus denticles absent or present); (13) abdominal poststernite IV short relative to posttergite.
Males, as so far known for both genera, are further differentiated from † Camelomecia in having: (14) eyes medially binocular, i.e., with clypeus nearly concave and compound eyes massively, medially bulging such that medial-most ommatidia of each eye are directed toward one another.
Etymology.
The root of the generic name, camelo -, is made in reference to † Camelomecia , the camel-faced ants; the second part of the name, - sphecia emphasizes the waspiness of these intermediate formicoids.
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 |