Amphibolips nigra Beutenmüller, 1911

Cuesta-Porta, Victor, Melika, George, Nicholls, James A., Stone, Graham N., Equihua-Martinez, Armando, Estrada-Venegas, Edith & Pujade-Villar, Juli, 2023, Revision of the Amphibolips ‘ niger’ group with the description of a new species (Hymenoptera: Cynipini), Zootaxa 5360 (4), pp. 451-486 : 471-474

Amphibolips nigra Beutenmüller, 1911

Figs 44–51 , 75

Amphibolips nigra Beutenmüller, 1911: 198 , agamic female.

Amphibolips nigra Beutenmüller, 1917: 348 , gall

Amphibolips (niger) niger Beutenmüller, 1911 ; Kinsey 1937: 443.

Type material. HOLOTYPE. Asexual female “7331, Durango, Mex., iss Feb.3.97” (white label), “ TYPE ” (red label). “Type No. 13728 U.S. N.M.” (red label), “ Amphibolips nigra Beut. ” (white label), “USNMENT 00802218” . PARATYPE “7331, iss Feb.1.97” (white label), “ Paratype No. 13728 U.S. N.M.” (red label), “ Acc : 22797.” (white label), “ Amphibolips nigra Beut. gift of U.S. N.M. Jun. 1921 ”. Despite the holotype is designated to be deposited in the AMNH in Beutenmüller’s original description, the type material was found in the USNM and was loaned to JP-V. The paratype is labelled to be permanently ceded to the USNM “gift to USNM ” but the holotype does not have such label.

Diagnosis. Amphibolips nigra belongs to the couplet of species characterized by the mesoscutum rugose, and the central and lateral pronotal area smooth with tiny piliferous points, as in A. pistrix . It differs from A. pistrix by the central ocellus conspicuously smaller than lateral ocelli; the mesoscutellar disc coarsely rugose, the propodeal carina present, the metapleural carina conspicuous, while in A. pistrix all ocelli are subequal, the mesoscutellar disc is alutaceous, the propodeal carinae are absent, and the metapleural carina is inconspicuous.

Re-description.

Asexual female ( Figs 44–51 ). Head and mesosoma black; mouthparts and antennae rufous-black, legs black; metasoma anteriorly dark rufous, posteriorly black; fore wings smoked with an infuscate band on anterior margin.

Head coarsely rugose, with sparse setae, denser on lower face and genae, rounded, transverse, 1.3× as broad as high and narrower than mesosoma in frontal view; 2.5× as broad as long in dorsal view. Gena rugose, broadened behind eye in frontal view, slightly shorter than transverse diameter of eye in lateral view. Malar space with striae radiating from clypeus, malar sulcus absent; eye 2.5× as high as length of malar space. Internal margin of eyes parallel. POL 1.6× as long as OOL, OOL equal to diameter of lateral ocellus and 1.2× as long as LOL, LOL 0.8× diameter of lateral ocelli, lateral ocelli round, frontal ocelli ovate and smaller than lateral ocelli. Transfacial distance slightly shorter to height of eye; toruli located at mid-height eye; diameter of antennal torulus 5.0× as long as distance between them, distance between torulus and compound eye 1.7× as long as diameter of torulus; lower face rugose, area between toruli and clypeus with distinct piliferous points. Clypeus rounded, nearly as broad as high, rugose, with few setae; ventrally rounded, not emarginate and without median incision; anterior tentorial pit large, rounded, distinct, epistomal sulcus distinct, clypeo-pleurostomal line well impressed. Frons faintly rugose with shiny smooth areas, less pubescent than lower face, interocellar area rugose. Vertex rugose, occiput and postocciput alutaceous; occipital carina present, postgena smooth or alutaceous, with or without setae; posterior tentorial pit large, elongated, area below impressed; occipital foramen slightly shorter or as high as height of postgenal bridge; hypostomal carina emarginate, continuing into postgenal sulci which strongly diverge toward occipital foramen, postgenal bridge anteriorly slightly broader than occipital foramen. Antenna shorter than head+mesosoma, with 14 flagellomeres, F14 partially divided, pedicel as long as broad; flagellomeres subsequently broadening towards apical end; F1 slightly shorter than scapus+pedicel and 1.2× as long as F2; F2 1.2× as long as F3; subsequent flagellomeres progressively shorter; F14 1.7× as long as F13; placodeal sensilla on F4–F14.

Mesosoma slightly longer than high, uniformly pubescent. Pronotum with faint irregular longitudinal striae from central to lateral part; propleuron sparsely pubescent and longitudinally carinated. Mesoscutum rugose, slightly broader than long (greatest width measured across mesoscutum level with base of tegulae). Notauli absent; anterior parallel line distinct, elevated into a strong carina, and extending to 1/2 of mesoscutum length; parapsidal line impressed; median mesoscutal line absent; parascutal carina broad, reaching pronotum. Mesoscutellum ovate, slightly longer than broad; disk of mesoscutellum, coarsely rugose, barely overhanging metanotum, with sparse long setae; circumscutellar carina inconspicuous. Mesoscutellar foveae big, about as broad as long, extended posterolaterally, with shiny delicately rugose bottom, divided by a strong elevated carina that broadens into a small triangle posteriorly. Mesopleuron sparsely pubescent, punctured and smooth, with scattered faint striae; speculum densely punctured; mesopleural triangle, with a few strong irregular striae and long white setae; dorsal and lateral axillar areas rugose, sparsely pubescent; axillula faintly rugose; subaxillular bar smooth, glabrous, triangular, narrowing posteriorly; metapleural sulcus reaching mesopleuron at 1/2, upper part of sulcus indistinct. Metascutellum glabrous, rugose, 2.0x as high as height of smooth, glabrous ventral impressed area; metanotal trough smooth, glabrous. Central propodeal area smooth, pubescent; propodeal carinae divergent and slightly bent on posterior margin; lateral propodeal area finely punctured and smooth, and densely pubescent. Nucha with strong longitudinal sulci dorsally and laterally. Tarsal claws with basal lobe.

Fore wing longer than body, smoked, with distinct dense cilia on margin, veins dark brown, radial cell open, 3.3× as long as broad; Rs not reaching wing margin, R1 distinct, not reaching wing margin, 2r rounded, not projected into radial cell; areolet big, triangular, closed and distinct. Rs+M visible, reaching basalis slightly below the mid-height or lower.

Metasoma shorter than head+mesosoma, slightly longer than high in lateral view; second metasomal tergum extending to 3/4 of metasoma in dorsal view, completely covered in setae laterally, glabrous and smooth dorsally, sparsely micropunctured in lateral view on anterior 2/3 and with a dense band of micropunctures on posterior 1/3; subsequent terga, densely pubescent and micropunctured. Hypopygium with micropunctures, prominent part of ventral spine of hypopygium 5.3× longer than broad in ventral view, with white setae ventrally. Body length 5.5–5.7 mm (n=2).

Gall. ( Fig. 75 ) Transversally ovate unilocular woolly twig gall (22 –50 mm in diameter; Beutenmüller 1917; Kinsey 1937). The pubescence is pale brown with orange tinges and densely packed. The transversal diameter of the gall is widened into a woolly ring. The larval chamber is covered by a thick layer of strongly lignified parenchyma around it and its base is attached to the twig. The structure is cylindrical to peanut-shaped (around 20 mm in height and 10 mm wide) projected perpendicular to the twig, it is central to the gall. The larval chamber is oval, fused within the parenchyma. The gall closely resembles A. ufo sp. nov. but the adults morphologically differ.

Host. Q. sideroxylla Liebm. (= Q. incarnata Trel. ), section Lobatae ( Kinsey 1937) .

Biology. Only the females are known. The mature gall was collected in January; adults emerged from January to April ( Kinsey, 1937).

Distribution. Mexico: Durango.

Comments. In the original description ( Beutenmüller 1911), the species is named Amphibolips nigra and only the adult is described. Later, Beutenmüller (1917), described the gall. The host plant was unknown until Kinsey (1937), when he also defined the ‘ niger ’ complex. It was then when Kinsey changed the name of the species to A. niger Beutenmüller, 1911 . The name used by Kinsey is considered erroneous and the original name given by Beutenmüller is valid. Regarding the species complex, it is a grouping with no taxonomic value, but we accept the ‘ niger ’ denomination for a peculiar group of Amphibolips species that Kinsey proposed.

Figures

FIGURES 44–48. Amphibolips nigra, asexual female. 44–45, head: 44, frontal view; 45, dorsal view. 46, mesosoma in lateral view. 47, dorsal view. 48, mesoscutellum. Figures 44 and 47 extracted from the Smithsonian Institution website (http://n2t. net/ark:/65665/3cb7a761c-9006-4da2-8b93-1781664039cd), taken by Matt Buffington.

FIGURES 49–51. Amphibolips nigra, asexual female. 49, habitus in lateral view. 50, metasoma in lateral view. 51, antenna. Figure 49 extracted from the Smithsonian Institution website (http://n2t.net/ark:/65665/3cb7a761c-9006-4da2-8b93- 1781664039cd), taken by Matt Buffington.

FIGURES 75–76. Galls: 75, A. nigra; 76, A. ufo sp. nov.