Cecinothofagus gallaecoihue Nieves-Aldrey & Liljeblad

Nieves-Aldrey, José Luis, Liljeblad, Johan, Nieves, María Hernández, Grez, Audrey & Nylander, Johan A. A., 2009, Revision and phylogenetics of the genus Paraulax Kieffer (Hymenoptera, Cynipidae) with biological notes and description of a new tribe, a new genus, and five new species, Zootaxa 2200, pp. 1-40 : 20-24

Cecinothofagus gallaecoihue Nieves-Aldrey & Liljeblad sp. nov.

( Figs. 6 , 7 , 11 A & 11B)

Type material. Holotype Ƥ (in Museo Chileno de Historia Natural, Santiago de Chile, card mounted, CHILE, Osorno, 40º 31´26.09´´S 73º06´08.61´´O, 70 m; ex gall on Nothofagus dombeyi (Mirb.) Blume “coihue” ( Nothofagaceae ), gall collected 30.xii.1993. insect emerged i.94, H. Ibarra leg. Paratypes: 33, 1Ƥ same data as holotype. (males emerged xi, 1993). One paratype 3 in MCHN, the remaining paratypes in Museo Nacional Ciencias Naturales, Madrid ( Spain). Non-type material: 1 3, Chile, Lago Frio, Coyhaique, 21– 22.i.1961. L. Oena leg ( AEIG); 1Ƥ, Chile, Cautin, 10 km S. Pucon, Parque Nacional Volcán Villarrica, 15.xii.1984. S. & J. Peck leg ( CNC); 1 male, Chile, Ñuble pro. Las Trancas, 19.5 km ESE Recinto, 1250 m., 10.xii.1982. Trap in Nothofagus forest . A. Newton, M. Thayer leg. ( CNC); 1Ƥ, Chile, Ñuble, Los Trancos, 16- 19.i.1972, 1300m. I. Pena leg. ( CNC); 1Ƥ, Chile, P:N. Nahuelbuta, 1168m, 8.ii.2005, reared from galls Nothofagus sp. UCR AToL ( UCRC). Other material: 13, 1Ƥ of the type series were dissected for SEM observation. Puerto Varas-Ensenada, ex gall Aditrochus coihuensis on Nothofagus dombeyi ; collected 2.xii.2006, J.L. Nieves-Aldrey leg. 1 3 in ethanol (same data type material).

Etymology. Named after its biology, a species inhabiting a gall on “coihue”, the common name of its host plant Nothofagus dombeyi .

Diagnosis. A species closely allied with Cecinothofagus gallaelenga , from which it differs by the predominantly red-brown color, the denser and more regularly distributed mesoscutal pubescence, conspicuous anteriorly on the median lobe of the mesoscutum, mesopleural impression relatively long, almost reaching the ventral margin of the mesopleural triangle and the notauli not reaching the transcutal fissure. In addition, these two species are well differentiated by their biology: C. gallaecoihue attacks only bud galls of Aditrochus coihuensis on Nothofagus dombeyi .

Description. Body length 2.7 mm (N = 2) for females; 2.3 mm (range 2.2–2.3; N = 3) for males. Coloration of females, head and metosoma black, except lower face and apex of mandibles reddish; metasoma blackish or dark brown; antennal flagellum yellowish brown, legs dark brown or reddish brown, with apex of femora, tibiae and tarsi mostly dark yellowish. Forewing hyaline, veins light brown. Male similar in coloration to female, but varying from a much lighter coloration in one specimen to other predominantly black individuals.

Female. Head in dorsal view 2 times wider than long. Gena not expanded behind compound eye; in dorsal view almost as long as length of compound eye. POL 2 times longer than OOL, posterior ocellus separated from inner orbit of eye by about 2 times its diameter. Head in anterior view ( Fig. 6 A) more or less trapezoid, 1.2 times wider than high, lateral margin of gena not forming a continuous arch with outer margin of compound eye. Face with a few long setae, denser in lower face and almost lacking in median area on frons; facial strigae radiating from clypeus absent in median area; laterally well marked, reaching close o ventral margin of compound eye; strong vertical median carina present, running from ventral margin of clypeus almost reaching ventral margin of toruli ( Fig. 6 A). Upper face (frons) almost entirely smooth and shining; vertex with delicate, almost obsolete, coriaceous sculpture. Ocellar plate slightly raised; malar space about 0.2 times height of compound eye. Clypeus indistinct, ventral margin straight, not incised. Subocular impression present but not well marked. 5–7 regular vertical carinae present ventrolaterally on gena ( Fig. 6 H). Anterior tentorial pits conspicuous; epistomal sulcus and clypeo-pleurostomal lines indistinct. Antennal socket (torulus) situated a little below mid-height of compound eye; distance between antennal rim and compound eye 0.5 times length width of antennal socket including rim. Occiput dorsally pubescent with coriaceous sculpture, without dorsal occipital carina, but a sharp well marked genal occipital carina present ( Fig. 6 B). Posterior tentorial pits narrow, slit-like. Hypostomal sulci meeting at hypostoma. Distance between occipital and oral foramina 0.6 times height of occipital foramen.

Mouthparts ( Fig. 6 B). Mandibles strong, exposed; right mandible with three teeth; left with two teeth. Cardo of maxilla visible, maxillary stipes about 2.3 times longer than wide. Maxillary palp five-segmented. Labial palp three-segmented. Lateral margin of oral fosa with a band of 3–4 rows of white setae.

Antenna ( Fig. 6 E) Half as long as body, with 12 antennomeres; flagellum broadened towards apex; last flagellomere distinctly wider than penultimate; truncate at apex. Antennomeres with sparse setation, shorter than width of a basal flagellar segment. Placodeal sensilla indistinct, visible only on flagellar segments F7– F10. Relative length of antennal segments: 26:18:17:19:17:18:15:16:15:19:17:40; pedicel 1.4 times longer than wide; F1 1.8 times longer than wide. Ultimate flagellomere 2.1 times longer than wide, 1.3 times wider than penultimate and 2.3 times longer than F9, ending in a semicircular, truncate apex.

Mesosoma. Pronotum in anterior view almost glabrous medially but strongly pubescent laterally ( Fig. 6 C). Ratio of length of pronotum medially/length laterally 0.4. Pronotal plate distinct; dorsal part distinctly set off, anterolateral margin marked and moderately projecting laterad; no longitudinal rugae visible in lateral view along lateral margin of pronotal plate to lateral surface of pronotum, but some visible in anterior view. Admedian pronotal depressions oval/transverse, open laterally, separated by as much as median length of pronotum. Posterior pronotal plate more or less rectangular, smooth and with long setae, ventral and lateral margins marked. Lateral surface of pronotum smooth; with sparse, white pubescence.

Mesonotum. Mesoscutum ( Fig. 6 D) 1.2 times wider than long; shining, without marked sculpture, at most some superficial, delicately coriaceous sculpture present. Long setae running along margins of notauli and on anteriomedian and median area of mesoscutum. Median mesoscutal impression absent. Notauli percurrent, sinuate, not strongly converging posteriorly, not reaching transscutal fissure ( Fig. 6 D). Posterior separation of notauli at transscutal fissure relatively wide,>0.5 wider than separation at anterior margin of mesoscutum. Anteroadmedian signa visible. Mesoscutum and scutellum separated by a narrow transscutal fissure. Scutellar foveae indistinct, visible only as shallow, smooth and glabrous depression ( Fig. 6 D). Scutellum in dorsal view, more or less pentagonal; in lateral view strongly convex. Dorsal surface of scutellum coriaceous with some rugae more marked on lateral and posterior areas while almost absent in median area. Posterodorsal and posterior margins of axillula distinct. Mesopleuron ( Fig. 7 A) beneath mesopleural triangle smooth and glabrous. Mesopleural triangle distinctly impressed and densely pubescent; dorsal margin diffuse at anterior end, not reaching area near prepectus but reaching posterolateral margin of pronotum well below prepectus. Horizontal furrow in lower part of mesopleuron present, relatively wide and complete, almost reaching ventral margin of mesopleural triangle. Small band of almost obsolete longitudinal sculpture visible above horizontal furrow.

Metanotum ( Fig. 7 B). Metascutellum distinctly constricted medially. Area posterior to median constriction of metascutellum not divided by a median vertical bar. Metascutellum medially narrower than metanotal trough. Metanotal trough smooth, pubescent.

Metapectal-propodeal complex. Metapleural sulcus ( Fig. 7 A) meeting posterior margin of mesopectus at about mid height of metapectal-propodeal complex. Lateral propodeal carinae narrow, parallel ( Fig. 7 B).

Width of median propodeal area 0.7 times its length. Lateral and median propodeal areas smooth, pubescent. Nucha dorsally with some irregular rugae.

Legs. Profemur with a process of 4–5 rows of sharp, closely spaced, deep costulae visible as swelling on basal third of profemur ( Fig. 7 C). Tarsal claw with moderately bent apex; its base produced into a secondary small, blunt lobe, not distinctly developed as a secondary tooth.

Forewing ( Fig. 7 F). As long as body. Radial cell closed along anterior margin, about 3 times longer than wide; R1 slightly despigmented along radial cell; radius (Rs) straight, reaching anterior margin of wing. Areolet indistinct; vein Rs+M weakly visible, directed towards lower half of medial vein; M invisible. Fringe of long setae along apical margin of wing.

Metasoma. Metasoma ( Fig. 7 D) shorter than head plus mesosoma; in lateral view 1.4 times longer than high; laterally compressed. Abdominal petiole dorsally smooth, ventrally with deep longitudinal grooves. T1 crescent-shaped; not keeled dorsally. T2 covering about 1/3 of metasoma; anteromedian area of T2 with small patch of setae, without micropunctures. Projecting part of hypopygial spine 2.7 longer than high; apical pubescence of hypopigial spine projecting beyond apex, subapical setae longer than apical hairs, forming a small tuft.

Male. Similar to female except as described below (size and colouration already discussed). Male antenna ( Fig. 6 F) with 15 antennomeres. Flagellum not distinctly expanded towards apex. F2 slightly curved and slightly expanded towards apex in basal 2/3 ( Fig. 6 G); F3 not modified. Relative length of antennomeres: 15:8:15:20:18:17:15:15:14:14:13:13:12:12:18. Placodeal sensillae present on all flagellomeres. Metasoma ( Fig. 7 E) smaller than that of female; 1.5 times longer than high; T2 covering ¼ of metasoma. Anteromedian area of T2 with a group of not so dense setae.

Distribution. Chile and Argentina , following the distribution of the Nothofagus dombeyi (coihue or coigüe). The coihue is one of the most common South American Nothofagus species, being widely distributed over southern central Chile and southern Andes of Patagonia and Tierra del Fuego ( Hoffmann 1978).

Biology. An inquiline or parasitoid in galls induced by Aditrochus coihuensis Ovruski (Chalcidoidea, Pteromalidae ) on buds of twigs of Nothofagus dombeyi . ( Nothofagaceae ) ( Figs. 12 A–C).

Figures

FIGURE 6. Cecinothofagus gallaecoihue n. sp.: (A) Head anterior view. (B) Head posterior view. (C) Pronotum anterior view. (D) Mesosoma dorsal view. (E) Female antenna. (F) Male antenna and (G) detail of basal flagellomeres. (H) Head lateral view showing vertical carinae on gena.

FIGURE 7. Cecinothofagus gallaecoihue n. sp.: (A) Mesosoma lateral view. (B) Propodeum. (C) Foreleg. (D) Female metasoma lateral view. (E) Male metasoma. (F) Forewing.

FIGURE 11. Habitus of species of Cecinothofagus: (A) C. gallaecoihue, female. (B) C. gallaecoihue, male. (C) C. gallaecoihue from a gall. (D) C. ibarrai, male emerging from a gall. (E) C. ibarrai, female. (F) C. ibarrai, male. (G) C. gallaelenga, female.

FIGURE 12. Host galls of Cecinothofagus, induced by species of Aditrochus and Espinosa (Chalcidoidea, Pteromalidae) on species of Nothofagus: (A) Gall of Aditrochus coihuensis on Nothofagus dombeyi. (B) Section of gall. (C) A group of galls not showing the apical point. (D) Gall of an unidentified Aditrochus species on Nothofagus dombeyi. (E) Galls of Aditrochus fagicolus on Nothofagus pumilio. (F) Section of gall. (G) Gall of Espinosa nothofagi on Nothofagus obliqua. (H) Gall of an unidentified Espinosa species on Nothofagus obliqua.