Neolarra, ASHMEAD
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.1206/0003-0082(2000)289<0001:PDOSCB>2.0.CO;2 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/A14D878F-FFE7-FFE0-82AB-FC61FD2984D6 |
treatment provided by |
Carolina |
scientific name |
Neolarra |
status |
|
Neolarra View in CoL belongs to the monotypic tribe Neolarrini and is restricted to North America including Mexico. In her revision of the genus, Shanks ( 1977) recognized 14 species and two subgenera. She reported that all known hosts were species in the panurgine genus Perdita View in CoL except for N. hurdi Shanks View in CoL , which, she stated, parasitized nests of Calliopsis (Micronomadopsis) larreae (Timberlake) View in CoL . She attributed this later association to me presumably because I had reported (Rozen, 1958: 54) a single individual of N. hurdi View in CoL examining a nest entrance of C. larreae View in CoL 18 miles west of Blythe, Riverside Co., California. I had no other indication that the Neolarra View in CoL individual was attacking C. larreae View in CoL ; no immatures of either presumed host or parasite were found. Rust ( 1988) reported no cleptoparasites in his study of the nesting biology of C. larreae View in CoL , and recently, at the same site I had worked in the 1950s, I discovered a large nesting site of an unidentified Perdita View in CoL around which numerous N. hurdi View in CoL adults were searching the sand. Hence, I conclude that Neolarra View in CoL is exclusively cleptoparasitic on species of Perdita View in CoL so far as is now known.
Neolarra (Neolarra) californica Michener View in CoL
Figures 1–3 View Figs
DIAGNOSIS: The pupae of the two species of Neolarra described here are nearly identical and can be separated only on the basis of slight differences in the production of their axillae and mesoscutellum. They are easily distinguished from pupae of other Nomadinae sensu lato because of the single, long, setalike apex of the larger tubercles on the vertex and on most of the metasomal terga. These hairlike structures are longer than the tubercles themselves in Neolarra . In most other known pupae of the Nomadinae, vertical (if present) and tergal tubercles are sharply pointed, without a setalike apex (see references in McGinley, 1989; RoigAlsina and Rozen, 1994; Rozen, 1989, 1992, 1994, and 1997a). The pupa of Holcopasites , described below, also has some cephalic tubercles with elongate apices, but some of these are hooked or zigzagged (fig. 5), unlike the straight or gently curved ones of Neolarra . The lack of tubercles on the mesoscutum, mesoscutellum, and the first metasomal tergum is also helpful in separating the genus in the pupal stage from pupae of many other Nomadinae.
HEAD: Integument without setae but with series of two small and several very small tubercles on each side; these tubercles each with elongate, setalike apex (fig. 1); elsewhere integument without tubercles but with some obscure patches of fine spicules that are not so dense or long as to appear velvety. Apex of clypeus without rounded, downwardprojecting swelling on each side of labrum as in Ammobatini; labrum somewhat shorter than maximum width, its apex narrowly curved in frontal view; pupal ocelli moderately defined but not tuberculate; flagellomere not distinctly swollen apically. Mandibles vaguely swollen subapically both adorally and medially.
MESOSOMA: Integument in many areas finely spiculate but spiculation not velvety; setae absent. Lateral angles and posterior lobes of pronotum moderately produced, corresponding to those of adult. Mesepisternum without tubercles; mesoscutum without rounded or sharp tubercles or even verrucae; axillae unmodified, not elevated; mesoscu
Fig. 4. Dorsal surface of mesothorax and metathorax, enlarged, lateral view, of pupa of N. (Phileremulus) vigilans .
Figs. 5, 6. Pupa of Holcopasites insoletus , right side, dorsal view, and entire body, lateral view, respectively, with sharply pointed tubercles of top of head and metasoma enlarged.
Scales (= 1.0 mm) refer to figs. 1 and 2, and to figs. 5 and 6, respectively.
tellum not produced, without tubercles; metanotum slightly produced, corresponding to that of adult. Tegula slightly produced, without tubercle(s); wings without tubercles. All coxae, trochanters, femora, and tarsi without tubercles; hind tibia with low, sharply point ed tubercles along outer surface.
METASOMA: Integument finely spiculate in some areas but spicules not long enough to be velvety; setae absent. T1 without transverse row of tubercles; T2–5 (female) and T2–6 (male) each with subapical row of tubercles, most of which bear single, elongate, setalike apex; T6 (female) and T7 (male) without tubercles. S3 and 4 (female) and S3– 5 (male) with a few very small apical tubercles (figs. 1, 2). Apex of metasoma produced as tapering, apically rounded, terminal spine as seen from above, below, or side (fig. 1). Spiracles present but obscure.
MATERIAL STUDIED: 1 female pupa, Cienega , Hidalgo Co., New Mexico, V161987 (J. G. Rozen); 1 male and 1 female pupa, same except V141987, from nest of Perdita luciae Cockerell (NEW HOST RECORD). Identified by comparison with adults collect ed at the same time .
REMARKS: These three pupae are nearly identical, displaying little variation (except for sex differences). They are reasonably wellpreserved, although their metasomas have become distended, as can be seen in figure 1.
Neolarra (Phileremulus) vigilans (Cockerell) Figure 4
DIAGNOSIS: See Diagnosis for Neolarra californica , above.
HEAD, MESOSOMA, METASOMA: As described for Neolarra californica except for following: Labrum about as long as maximum width. Axillae produced as distinct lobes (accommodating pointed axillae of adult); mesoscutellum more produced relative to mesoscutum as seen in lateral profile (fig. 4), but without tubercles.
MATERIAL STUDIED: male, 1 female pupa, Fort Robinson , Dawes Co., Nebraska, VIII 121971 (J. G., B. L., and K. C. Rozen) from Perdita zebrata Cresson ? nest area. Identified by adults collected at the same time and
by features of the developing imago within the pupal exoskeleton.
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 |
Neolarra
ROZEN, JEROME G. 2000 |
N. hurdi
Shanks 1978 |
N. hurdi
Shanks 1978 |
N. hurdi
Shanks 1978 |
Perdita
Smith 1853 |
Perdita
Smith 1853 |
Perdita
Smith 1853 |