Opius macrocornis
| Notice: | This page is derived from the original publication listed below, whose author(s) should always be credited. Further contributors may edit and improve the content of this page and, consequently, need to be credited as well (see page history). Any assessment of factual correctness requires a careful review of the original article as well as of subsequent contributions.
If you are uncertain whether your planned contribution is correct or not, we suggest that you use the associated discussion page instead of editing the page directly. This page should be cited as follows (rationale):
Citation formats to copy and paste
BibTeX: @article{Wharton2013ZooKeys289, RIS/ Endnote: TY - JOUR Wikipedia/ Citizendium: <ref name="Wharton2013ZooKeys289">{{Citation See also the citation download page at the journal. |
Ordo: Hymenoptera
Familia: Braconidae
Genus: Opius
Name
Opius macrocornis Fischer – Wikispecies link – Pensoft Profile
- Opius macrocornis Fischer, 1965b: 298–300. Holotype male in AEIC (examined).
- Opius macrocornis: Fischer 1965d[1]: 419 (key); Fischer 1969[2]: 162–163 (key); Fischer 1971[3]: 84 (catalog).
- Opius (Pendopius) macrocornis: Fischer 1977[4]: 714–715, 727–728 (key, redescription); Fischer 1979b[5]: 484–486, 495 (key); Yu et al. 2005[6], 2012[7] (electronic catalogs).
Type locality
Peru, Quincemil, near Marcapata, 750 m.
Type material
Holotype. Male (AEIC), first label, first line: Quincemil, Peru second line: 750 m nr. Marcapata third line: Nov. 10-15, 1962 fourth line: Luis Pena Sept.
Diagnosis
Face very faintly punctate, otherwise smooth, polished throughout. Eye in lateral view 2.4–2.6 ? longer than temple; temples in dorsal view not or only weakly receding. Male antenna with 45 flagellomeres; setae on basal flagellomeres thick, dark. Mesoscutum with weak declivity; supramarginal carina absent or apparently so. Propodeum smooth, polished with shallow median trough anteriorly continuous with broader, weakly defined areola posteriorly. Fore wing 3RSa straight, about 1.6 ? longer than 2RS; m-cu postfurcal. T1 evenly curving into basal pit anteriorly, not distinctly declivitous, pit well-defined, delimited posterior-medially; surface smooth, polished; dorsal carinae parallel-sided for most of their length, distinctly converging near posterior margin, not sinuate, not transversely carinate between dorsal carinae. T2+T3 smooth, polished. Head, body, hind coxa and femur pale orange; antenna without pale subapical ring; wing darkly infumate.
Remarks
This species is known only from the male holotype and is very similar to Opius nimifactus, as noted by Fischer (1979b)[5]. Both species are characterized by greatly reduced propodeal sculpture (Figs 25–26), relatively smooth T1, and absence of any shagreening on T2. T1 anteriorly is more gradually sloping in Opius macrocornis, and Opius macrocornis is more uniformly pale orange: lacking the black tegula and dark margins of the mesoscutum that characterize Opius nimifactus. There is a patch of sculpture between the notaulus and the anterior-lateral margin of the mesoscutum in Opius nimifactus but this area is largely smooth in Opius macrocornis. The mesoscutum is also weakly declivitous in Opius macrocornis but flatter in Opius nimifactus. Fischer (1979b)[5] provides additional comparison of the two species. Both of these species were placed in the subgenus Pendopius by Fischer (1977[4], 1979b[5]) because of the absence of sculpture on T2. The shagreened sculpture on the metasoma appears to vary intraspecifically in opiines when there is sufficient material for comparison, and is often extremely weak in some of the species of the ingenticornis species group. We therefore do not consider the sculpture pattern alone to be adequate for characterizing subgenera or species groups, and treat it as variably present or absent in the ingenticornis species group. Both Opius macrocornis and Opius nimifactus fall within our concept of the ingenticornis species group, resembling species with relatively reduced sculpture and darker, thicker flagellar setae such as Opius curiosicornis.
Taxon Treatment
- Wharton, R; Daniels, S; Shirley, X; Restuccia, D; 2013: An opiine Braconidae (Hymenoptera) reared from Richardiidae (Diptera) and recognition of a new species group of Opius s. l. ZooKeys, 289: 65-101. doi
Other References
- ↑ Fischer M (1965d) Ueber neotropische Opiinae (Hymenoptera, Braconidae). Annalen Naturhistorische Museum Wien 68: 407-441.
- ↑ Fischer M (1969) Zusammenfassung der neotropischen Arten der pendulus-Gruppe des Genus Opius Wesm. (Hymenoptera, Braconidae). Zeitschrift fuer angewandte Entomologie 64: 162–179.
- ↑ Fischer M (1971) Index of Entomophagous Insects. Hymenoptera Braconidae. World Opiinae. Le Francois, Paris, 189 pp.
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 Fischer M (1977) Hymenoptera, Braconidae (Opiinae II-Amerika). Das Tierreich 96: 1-1001.
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 Fischer M (1979b) Neotropische Opiinae: Neue Arten der Gattungen Euopius Fischer und Opius Wesmael (Hymenoptera, Braconidae). Annalen des Naturhistorischen Museum in Wien 82: 479-516.
- ↑ Yu D, Van Achterberg K, Horstmann K (2005) World Ichneumonoidea 2004. Taxonomy, biology, morphology and distribution. Taxapad 2005. CD/DVD. Taxapad, Vancouver, www.taxapad.com
- ↑ Yu D, Van Achterberg C, Horstmann K (2012) Taxapad 2012 - World Ichneumonoidea 2011. Taxonomy, biology, morphology and distribution. On USB Flash drive.www.taxapad.com, Ontario.
Images
|
