Difference between revisions of "Phanuromyia"

Revision as of 17:09, 27 March 2017

Taxonavigation

Ordo: Hymenoptera
Familia: Platygastridae

Name

Phanuromyia Dodd – Wikispecies link – ZooBank link – Pensoft Profile

• Phanuromyia Dodd, 1914: 121. Original description. Type: Phanuromyia rufobasalis Dodd, by monotypy and original designation. Kieffer 1926^[1]: 16, 131 (description, keyed); Muesebeck and Walkley 1956^[2]: 384 (citation of type species); Masner, 1976: 79 (taxonomic status); Johnson 1991^[3]: 211 (description); Johnson 1992^[4]: 564 (catalog, catalog of world species); Johnson and Musetti 2003^[5]: 139 (description, synonymy, list of included species); Taekul et al. 2014^[6]: 30 (diagnosis, phylogenetic relationships within Telenominae); Veenakumari and Mohanraj 2014^[7]: 135, 146 (key to species of India, distribution).
• Issidotelenomus Pélov, 1975: 89. Original description. Type: Issidotelenomus obscuripes Pélov, by original designation. Kozlov and Kononova 1983^[8]: 137 (junior synonym of Telenomus Haliday); Johnson and Musetti 2003^[5]: 140 (junior synonym of Phanuromyia Dodd).

Diagnosis

The three genera Phanuromyia, Telenomus and Trissolcus Ashmead cannot be distinguished on the basis of any single, easily recognized morphological character. Rather, they are recognized by the preponderance of evidence from several characters: presence or absence of sculpture on the medial portion of the frons, length of setation between the ommatidia of the compound eyes, shape of the head, number of clavomeres in the female antenna, presence or absence of notauli on the mesoscutum, presence or absence of sculpture on the disk of the mesoscutellum, form of the sternaulus, shape of the first and second metasomal tergites, and sculpture of the second metasomal tergite. To distinguish Phanuromyia, focus should first be placed on the sternaulus. In the large majority of species this is expressed as a line of pits, beginning anteriorly on the mesepisternum near the dorsal apex of the acetabular carina and extending dorsally and posteriorly toward the mesopleural pit. In Telenomus and Trissolcus the sternaulus may have a single irregularly shaped pit, and its course is otherwise represented by fold or crease in the cuticle. Small individuals of Phanuromyia, however, also may have merely a poorly defined line of impression. Supplemental characters to distinguish Phanuromyia are eye setation very short or seemingly absent; frontal depression weakly expressed so that the head appears semiglobose in shape; frontal sculpture highly variable, ranging from smooth to sculptured throughout; female antenna with five clavomeres (defined morphologically, see Johnson 1984^[9]); notauli absent; mesoscutellar disk sculpture highly variable; T1 strongly transverse; T2 longer than wide; T2 often with distinctive coriaceous to reticulate microsculpture extending beyond the pits marking the position of the antecostal suture and the longitudinal striae arising between those pits. As Dodd (1914)^[10] noted, the ovipositor is often exserted a great distance and is easily seen, but this feature is relevant for only a minority of species.
Within Phanuromyia, we separate the galeata group purely as a practical grouping, and at this point we do not assert its monophyly. The group may be distinguished, first and foremost, by their unusually large body size: most specimens are greater than 2 mm in length. Beyond that, the body is distinctly elongate, T1 in the female is produced into a horn to house the ovipositor, T2 is strongly elongate, as often are the following tergites. The group is strictly Neotropical in distribution, extending from the Isthmus of Tehuantepec in the north to Misiones in southern Paraguay.

Key to assist recognition of Phanuromyia

Taxon Treatment

• Nesheim, K; Masner, L; Johnson, N; 2017: The Phanuromyia galeata species group (Hymenoptera, Platygastridae, Telenominae): shining a lantern into an unexplored corner of Neotropical diversity ZooKeys, (663): 71-105. doi

Other References

1. ↑ Kieffer J (1926) Scelionidae. Das Tierreich. Vol. 48. Walter de Gruyter & Co., Berlin, 885 pp.
2. ↑ Muesebeck C, Walkley L (1956) Type species of the genera and subgenera of parasitic wasps comprising the superfamily Proctotrupoidea (order Hymenoptera). Proceedings of the United States National Museum 105: 319–419. https://doi.org/10.5479/si.00963801.3359.319
3. ↑ Johnson N (1991) Revision of Australasian Trissolcus species (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae). Invertebrate Taxonomy 5: 211–239. https://doi.org/10.1071/IT9910211
4. ↑ Johnson N (1992) Catalog of world Proctotrupoidea excluding Platygastridae. Memoirs of the American Entomological Institute 51: 1–825. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23657
5. ↑ ^{5.0 5.1} Johnson N, Musetti L (2003) Redefinition of the genus Phanuromyia Dodd (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae). Journal of the New York Entomological Society 111: 138–144. https://doi.org/10.1664/0028-7199(2003)111[0138:ROTGPD]2.0.CO;2
6. ↑ Taekul C, Valerio A, Austin A, Klompen H, Johnson N (2014) Molecular phylogeny of telenomine egg parasitoids (Hymenoptera: Platygastroidea s.l.: Telenominae): evolution of host shifts and implications for classification. Systematic Entomology 39: 24–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/syen.12032
7. ↑ Veenakumari K, Mohanraj P (2014) Five new species of Phanuromyia Dodd (Hymenoptera: Platygastridae) from India. Entomologists Monthly Magazine 150: 135–147.
8. ↑ Kozlov M, Kononova S (1983) [[[Telenominae|Telenominae]] of the fauna of the USSR]. Nauka, Leningrad, 336 pp.
9. ↑ Johnson N (1984) Systematics of Nearctic Telenomus: classification and revisions of the podisi and phymatae species groups (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae). Bulletin of the Ohio Biological Survey 6(3): 1–113. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23887
10. ↑ Dodd A (1914) Further new genera and species of Australian Proctotrypoidea. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Queensland 26: 91–140. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23758