Euodynerus (Pareuodynerus) rubrosignatus Gusenleitner, 1984

Selis, Marco, Fateryga, Alexander V. & Cilia, Giovanni, 2024, The genus Euodynerus Dalla Torre in Europe and the Maghreb (Hymenoptera: Vespidae: Eumeninae), Zootaxa 5537 (2), pp. 151-194 : 179-183

Euodynerus (Pareuodynerus) rubrosignatus Gusenleitner, 1984 , stat. nov.

( Figs 13K–M ; 15W )

Euodynerus quadrifasciatus rubrosignatus Gusenleitner, 1984: 165 , 168, ♀, ♂ (in subgenus Pareuodynerus ) — “Cyrenaica, Schachhart [Shahhat], 650 m ” (holotype female OLML [examined]).

Euodynerus notatus cyrenaicus Giordani Soika, 1986: 116 , ♀ [erroneously reported as male] — “ Cirenaica: R. Uff. Agrario ” (holotype MSNVE [examined]). Syn. nov.

Distribution. Libya, currently known only for the area of Shahhat ( Gusenleitner 1984; Giordani Soika 1986).

Notes. Both Gusenleitner (1984) and Giordani Soika (1986) independently described this taxon, respectively as a subspecies of E. quadrifasciatus and E. notatus , differentiating it only by the black pattern with a few reddish markings. Comparison of the holotype of E. notatus cyrenaicus ( Figs 13M, N ) with a paratype and pictures of the holotype of E. quadrifasciatus rubrosignatus ( Figs 13K, L ), all collected in Shahhat, showed very slight differences in pattern, apical margin of clypeus and length of setosity on head and mesosoma, all compatible with intraspecific variability; the synonymy between the two taxa comes naturally and is confirmed by DNA barcoding, that does not show the slightest genetic distance between the two sequenced specimens. Genetic data ( Fig. 10 ) also show that this taxon is clearly more related to E. notatus (average distance of 9.45%) rather than to E. quadrifasciatus (14.89%), a relationship confirmed by two morphological characters: length of setae on head and mesosoma and modified area of the female vertex. This taxon is however readily distinguished from both E. notatus and E. quadrifasciatus by the shape of S2, that is more strongly convex basally rather than evenly convex from base to apex. Taking into consideration morphological and genetic differences, constant differences in pattern and geographic isolation, it becomes evident that E. rubrosignatus deserves to be raised to species-level, representing a further case of Libyan endemism characterized by the reduced reddish pattern.

Figures

FIGURE 10. Phylogenetic tree (Neighbor-Joining) of Euodynerus (Pareuodynerus) based on the mitochondrial COI gene. Ancistrocerus gazella (Panzer) was used as an outgroup. Numbers adjacent to branches represent bootstrap support (values of <75 are omitted); only the species occurring in the considered area are highlighted. Countries are abbreviated using ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 codes.

FIGURE 13. A–J, Euodynerus quadrifasciatus (Fabricius). A, female from Estonia. B, H, female from Italy. C, female from Crimea, Russia. D, F, male from China (E. quadrifasciatus atripes Giordani Soika, syn. nov.). E, male from Italy. G, female from Khabarovsk Territory, Russia. I–J, male from Turkey (paratype of E.quadrifasciatus rufipes Gusenleitner, syn. nov.). K–N, E. rubrosignatus Gusenleitner, stat. nov., female from Libya. K–L, paratype of E. quadrifasciatus rubrosignatus Gusenleitner. M–N, holotype of E. notatus cyrenaicus Giordani Soika, syn. nov.

FIGURE 15. A–E, S2 in lateral view. F–I, propodeum in posterodorsal view (arrowheads indicating dorsal carinae). J–O, vestiture of mesosoma. P–Q, metanotum in anterior view. R–T, male hind tarsus in dorsal view. U–Y, female head in dorsal view (arrowhead in Y indicating foveae not placed in depression). A, F, J, Euodynerus bidentiformis (Giordani Soika). B, V, E. bidentoides (Giordani Soika). C, K, E. quadrifasciatus (Fabricius). D, E. caspicus (Morawitz). E, H, M, T, E. dantici (Rossi). G, P, S, U, E. posticus (Herrich-Schaeffer). I, Y, E. disconotatus (Lichtenstein). L, R, E. notatus (Jurine). N, E. curictensis Blüthgen. O, E. semisaecularis (Dalla Torre). Q, X, E. fastidiosus (de Saussure). W, E. rubrosignatus Gusenleitner.