identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
03DC095CFFDC330ACAD8E7A68282FAC0.text	03DC095CFFDC330ACAD8E7A68282FAC0.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Cynipini	<div><p>Key to the Palaearctic Genera of Cynipini</p> <p>(in bold are genera involved into the analysis)</p> <p>1 Transscutal articulation medially indistinct or absent, mesoscutum emarginate and elevated posterolaterally above dorsoaxillar area, fused with mesoscutellum; mesoscutellum without foveae, with anterior scutellar depression (Figs 5, 36, 55, 68, 130); propodeum without or with weak, fragmented, indistinct lateral propodeal carinae (Figs 26, 38, 55, 72, 132); prominent part of ventral spine of hypopygium always short, pointed to the apex, never more than 2.0 – 4.0 times as long as broad, with some long subapical setae, which never form a tuft (Fig. 42, 59, 75 – 76, 136 – 137, 150); metasoma strongly compressed laterally (Fig. 58, 74, 135, 149)..................................................................... 2</p> <p>- Transscutal articulation present, straight, usually complete; mesoscutum never emarginate posterolaterally, not fused with mesoscutellum; scutellar foveae usually present, separated or not by a median carina (Figs 2 – 4); lateral propodeal carinae almost always present, distinct and delimiting shiny central (median) propodeal area, usually without surface sculpture; lateral propodeal areas usually sculptured (Figs 9 – 10); prominent part of ventral spine of hypopygium usually longer, needle-like, pointed or not to the apex; metasoma not or less compressed laterally (Figs 11 – 14)..................................................................................................................................................................................... 13</p> <p>2 Head and mesosoma with dense white setae (Figs 24, 31 – 33, 50, 77)........................................................................ 3</p> <p>- Head and mesosoma with sparse setae, if they are dense then only on lower face and head posteriorly (Figs 127 – 128, 138 – 139, 152-153, 169 – 171)....................................................................................................................................... 4</p> <p>3 Mesoscutum and mesoscutellum delicately coriaceous; notaulus superficial, complete or incomplete in anterior 1/3 (Fig. 36); forewing with or without dark spots (Figs 28, 35), body predominantly reddish brown..................................................................................................................................................................... Trichagalma, asexual females</p> <p>- Mesoscutum smooth or alutaceous, shiny, with two alutaceous (or delicately coriaceous) stripes or only rows of setae, indicating notauli; mesoscutellum coriaceous (Figs 57, 83, 97); forewing always without dark spots; mesosoma black or dark brown, metasoma black or brown....................................... Pseudoneuroterus, asexual females</p> <p>4 Notaulus deep, usually complete, reaching pronotum, mesoscutum and mesoscutellum always smooth, shiny, without surface sculpture; mesoscutellum laterally and posteriorly emarginate (Figs 161 – 162, 173).................................................................................................................................................................. Cerroneuroterus, asexual females</p> <p>- Notaulus absent or incomplete, extending to half length of mesoscutum, if traceable in the anterior half than mesoscutum and/or mesoscutellum entirely or at least partially alutaceous or delicately coriaceous (Figs 130, 144) (only sexual forms)..................................................................................................................................................... 5</p> <p>5 Malar sulcus always absent; hind tarsal claw simple, without basal lobe; in male antenna F1 strongly modified, expanded and flattened distally.................................................................................................................................... 6</p> <p>- Malar sulcus usually present or at least traceable (Figs 127, 138, 141); hind tarsal claw usually with basal lobe; in male antenna F1 slightly or not modified, never expanded and flattened, sometimes only curved or similar in shape to F2 (Fig. 143) (both generations)............................................................................................................ Neuroterus</p> <p>6 Females....................................................................................................................................................................... 7</p> <p>- Males.......................................................................................................................................................................... 10</p> <p>7 Prominent part of ventral spine of hypopygium with two subapical lateral lumps, spine tri-forked, each lump with 5- 8 long setae, extending far beyond apex (Fig. 125)...................................................................................... Latuspina</p> <p>- Prominent part of ventral spine of hypopygium always straight, pointed to the apex, without two subapical lateral lumps (Figs 75 – 76)..................................................................................................................................................... 8</p> <p>8 Gena broadened behind eye, visible in anterior view (Fig. 60)........................................................ Pseudoneuroterus</p> <p>- Gena not broadened behind eye, not visible in anterior view..................................................................................... 9</p> <p>9 Mesoscutellum uniformly alutaceous or smooth, without sculpture...................... Cerroneuroterus, sexual females</p> <p>- Mesoscutellum around its limits reticulate rugose, smooth and shiny in the central part............................................................................................................................................................................................ Trichagalma, sexual females</p> <p>10 Pedicel as long as scape, both strongly flattened and broad, at least twice broader than flagellomeres (Figs 113 – 114)....................................................................................................................................................................... Latuspina</p> <p>- Pedicel always shorter than scape, both less flattened and broad, less than twice broader than flagellomeres (Fig. 67)..................................................................................................................................................................................... 11</p> <p>11 Mesoscutum longer than broad, mesoscutellum uniformly alutaceous, propodeum with fragmented lateral propodeal carinae (Figs 68 – 69, 72)................................................................................................................... Pseudoneuroterus</p> <p>- Mesoscutum subequal, nearly as long as broad, mesoscutellum smooth, shiny or only partially in center alutaceous, propodeum without lateral propodeal carinae............................................................................................................ 12</p> <p>12 Mesoscutellum smooth, shiny, only central part (disk) alutaceous................................................... Cerroneuroterus</p> <p>- Mesoscutellum around its limits reticulate rugose, smooth and shiny in the central part........................ Trichagalma</p> <p>13 Fully winged.............................................................................................................................................................. 14</p> <p>- Apterous or brachypterous......................................................................................................................................... 27</p> <p>14 Mesoscutum transversely rugose, at least in anterior half, never with dense setae (Figs 3, 6, 236).......................... 15</p> <p>- Mesoscutum smooth, reticulate, punctate, or coarsely rugose, but never transversely sculptured, often with dense setae (Fig. 2)............................................................................................................................................................... 16</p> <p>15 Malar sulcus present, lower face with numerous striae radiating from clypeus (Fig. 7); mesoscutum subquadrate or only slightly longer than broad (Fig. 3); central propodeal area narrow, delimited by straight or slightly outwards curved lateral propodeal carinae; median longitudinal carina absent or very weak, hardly traceable (Fig. 9); forewing margin always without cilia in the asexual, ciliate in sexual forms............................................................. Callirhytis</p> <p>- Malar sulcus absent, lower face with few striae radiating from clypeus (Figs 8, 234); mesoscutum variable, sometimes 1.3-2.0 times as long as broad (Fig. 6, 236); central propodeal area broad, delimited by strongly outwards curved lateral propodeal carinae; median longitudinal carina present (Fig. 10); forewing margin always with long cilia................................................................................................................................. Plagiotrochus, asexual (part)</p> <p>16 Females...................................................................................................................................................................... 17</p> <p>- Males.......................................................................................................................................................................... 20</p> <p>17 Ventral spine of hypopygium short, broadest just before apex; subapical setae forming a broad dense tuft (Fig. 11).................................................................................................................................................................. Cynips, asexual</p> <p>- Ventral spine of hypopygium slender or short, needle-like or rounded apically; with or without a dense truncate tuft (Figs 12 – 14)............................................................................................................................................................... 18</p> <p>18 Ventral spine of hypopygium long, needle-like, prominent part more than 4.0 times as long as broad (Figs 12 – 13, 188)............................................................................................................................................................................. 19</p> <p>- Ventral spine of hypopygium shorter, tapering to a point or rounded apically, prominent part less than 3.5 times as long as broad (Fig. 14)................................................................................................................................................ 20</p> <p>19 Tarsal claws simple; antenna 2.0 times as long as head+mesosoma; lateral propodeal carina fragmented or absent, instead the smooth, shiny strongly curved outwards central propodeal area delimited by very dense white setae both sides of the central area (Fig. 15, 187)......................................................................................................... Aphelonyx</p> <p>- Tarsal claws with basal lobe; antenna less than 2.0 times as long as head+mesosoma; lateral propodeal carinae always present, parallel, subparallel or slightly curved.......................................................... Andricus, asexual (part)</p> <p>20 Lower face with striae radiating from clypeus to inner margin of eye, sometimes indistinct because of short malar space; malar sulcus always absent............................................................................................................................. 21</p> <p>- Lower face without striae, reticulate or coriaceous; malar sulcus present, except in Cynips, but then clypeus with lamella projected over mandibles.............................................................................................................................. 24</p> <p>21 Lateral propodeal carinae curved outwards, sometimes median longitudinal carina present; central propodeal area sometimes rugose; metasoma strongly compressed laterally.................................................................................... 22</p> <p>- Lateral propodeal carinae parallel or subparallel or slightly curved outwards, without median carina; central propodeal area never rugose (Fig. 16); metasoma more rounded, less compressed laterally................................. Andricus</p> <p>22 Mesoscutum coriaceous, rugose, or reticulate; mesopleuron coriaceus, alutaceous or weakly reticulate, usually forming a transverse band (Fig. 221); central propodeal area with median longitudinal carina (Fig. 223); ventral spine of hypopygium with sparse setae not forming a truncate apical tuft.......................................................... Plagiotrochus</p> <p>- Mesoscutum smooth or very delicately alutaceous (Fig. 203); mesopleuron smooth or uniformly very delicately sculptured (Fig. 204); central propodeal area without or rarely with median longitudinal carina (Fig. 205); ventral spine of hypopygium with sparse setae forming a truncate apical tuft (Fig. 206)..................................................... 23</p> <p>23 Striae radiating from clypeus extending to inner margin of eye, to half height of lower face or extending to antennal sockets or further into area between eye and antennal socket; vertex and occiput sculptured, sometimes dull coriaceous or rugose; scutellar foveae separated or not by weak median carina; ventral spine of hypopygium with short and sparse tuft of setae.............................................................................................................................. Dryocosmus</p> <p>- Indistinct and weak striae radiating from clypeus and extend into malar space and lower half of lower face only; vertex and occiput smooth or very delicately coriaceous (Figs 200 – 201); mesoscutellum usually uniformly smooth or weakly sculptured in central part and sometimes with some wrinkles along marginal carina; scutellar foveae separated by distinct median carina (Figs 203 – 204); ventral spine of hypopygium with longer and dense tuft of setae (Fig. 206)........................................................................................................................................................ Chilaspis</p> <p>24 Lateral propodeal carina weak, curved and thin or indistinct and fragmented, delimiting a smooth, shiny and glabrous area; metasoma strongly compressed laterally............................................................ Neuroterus anthracinus</p> <p>- Lateral propodeal carina distinct, usually parallel or diverging anteriorly and curved posteriorly, delimiting more or less sculptured area; metasoma less compressed laterally (Fig. 17).......................................................................... 25</p> <p>25 Malar sulcus absent; pronotum smooth and shiny laterally (Fig. 18); scutellar foveae confluent......... Cynips, sexual</p> <p>- Malar sulcus present (Fig. 19); pronotum sculptured laterally, matte, with lateral carinae, without smooth areas; scutellar foveae distinctly separated........................................................................................................................... 26</p> <p>26 Tarsal claws with basal lobe; clypeus subquadrate, with lamella projected over mandibles, elevated and straight anteriorly (Fig. 19); hind tarsomere II equal or only slightly shorter than V....................................... Trigonaspis, sexual</p> <p>- Tarsal claws simple; clypeus not elevated and emarginate anteriorly, not projected over mandibles; hind tarsomere II almost half as long as V....................................................................................................................... Biorhiza, sexual</p> <p>27 Tarsal claws with basal lobe............................................................................................... Trigonaspis, asexual (part)</p> <p>- Tarsal claws simple or with only indistinct basal lobe............................................................................................... 28</p> <p>28 Mesoscutum subquadrate, together with mesoscutellum nearly 2.0 times as long as broad; propodeum in the same plane as thorax or only slightly inclined (Figs 22 – 23)........................................................... Biorhiza, asexual (part)</p> <p>- Mesoscutum ovate, broadest at the tegulae, only slightly longer than broad; propodeum strongly inclined........... 29</p> <p>29 Notaulus deep, reaching mesocutellum; transscutal articulation distinct, scutellum with foveae or deep transverse groove (Fig. 21)........................................................................................................................ Biorhiza, sexual (part)</p> <p>- Notaulus absent or anteriorly traced only, transscutal articulation inconspicuous, mesoscutellum indistinctly separated from mesoscutum by a very shallow groove (Fig. 20)............................................. Trigonaspis, asexual (part)</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DC095CFFDC330ACAD8E7A68282FAC0	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Melika, George;Pujade-Villar, Juli;Abe, Yoshihisa;Tang, Chang-Ti;Nicholls, James;Wachi, Nakatada;Ide, Tatsuya;Yang, Man-Miao;Pénzes, Zsolt;Csóka, György;Stone, Graham N.	Melika, George, Pujade-Villar, Juli, Abe, Yoshihisa, Tang, Chang-Ti, Nicholls, James, Wachi, Nakatada, Ide, Tatsuya, Yang, Man-Miao, Pénzes, Zsolt, Csóka, György, Stone, Graham N. (2010): 2470. Zootaxa 2470: 1-79
03DC095CFFD23308CAD8E0A38600FA03.text	03DC095CFFD23308CAD8E0A38600FA03.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Trichagalma Mayr 1907	<div><p>Trichagalma Mayr, 1907, stat. rev.</p> <p>Figs 24–30; 36–42; 43–49.</p> <p>Type species: Trichagalma serratae (Ashmead). Designated by Mayr (1907) by monotypy, Trichagalma drouardi Mayr.</p> <p>Taxonomic status. Monzen (1929) synonymized T. drouardi to Dryophanta serratae Ashmead and proposed a new name combination, Trichagalma serratae (Ashmead). Abe (2006) synonymized Trichagalma to Neuroterus based on the closed lifecycle (Masuda 1972; Usuba 1995) and described the adults of the sexual generation. The main diagnostic characters of Neuroterus given in Melika et al. (1999) and Melika &amp; Abrahamson (2002) were used. However, in the current assessment of Cynipini groups, those diagnostic characters define not a genus but the Neuroterus – Pseudoneuroterus – Trichagalma complex of genera lacking or with an incomplete transscutal articulation. After reappraising these diagnostic characters, we re-establish the genus Trichagalma as in earlier treatments (Pujade-Villar et al. 2004).</p> <p>Diagnosis. Most closely related to Pseudoneuroterus; however, can easily be distinguished by predominantly brown body colour, by very dense white setae on the head and mesosoma and also by notauli which are superficial but always present, complete or hardly traceable in the anterior 1/3, and by a transverse head, the broadest part of which is on the level of upper margin of compound eyes. Superficially resembles also Cerroneuroterus but differs by superficially impressed notauli, and a coriaceous or reticulate rugose mesoscutellum. In overall habitus, Trichagalma also closely resembles Western Palaearctic Aphelonyx, however, in Aphelonyx the transscutal articulation is distinct, the projecting part of the ventral spine of the hypopygium is long, needle-like, 4.5 – 5.0 times as long as broad, with few short white setae; the forewing always without dark smoky spots. More diagnostic characters are given in the generic key above.</p> <p>Redescription. Asexual form. Body reddish brown; antenna black or dark brown, with black antennal sockets; head posteriorly, stripes along anteroadmedian and parapsidal signa, base of mesoscutellum (in some species), metascutellum, propodeum, mesopleural triangle, metapleuron black. Head and mesosoma with dense long white setae, obscuring sculpture of head and mesosoma; head trapezoid, broadest above transfacial line, broader than high in anterior view, gena distinctly broadened behind eye; height of compound eye 1.8 times as long as length of malar space; transfacial distance 1.5 times as long as height of eye; malar sulcus absent, only short weak striae radiating from clypeus that never reach eye margin. Antenna with 12 flagellomeres (sometimes indistinct suture indicates F13); F1 1.3 – 1.5 times as long as F2. Mesoscutum longer than broad, 1.5 times as long as mesoscutellum, delicately coriaceous, notauli very superficial, complete or very hardly traceable in anterior half or 1/3; median mesoscutal line absent, anteroadmedian and parapsidal signa broad, slightly raised, less pubescent. Mesoscutellum always longer than broad, with parallel sides, never emarginate laterally and posteriorly, never trapezoid, uniformly reticulate rugose or coriaceous; scutellar foveae absent, instead anterior transverse depression present which is nearly in same plane as mesoscutellum disk, with same sculpture on bottom, not or only very slightly deeper than disk. Metascutellum coriaceous, broader than height of metanotal trough. Propodeum bare, smooth, without lateral propodeal carinae. Forewing margin with long cilia, without or with smoky dark pigmented spots; radial cell 3.5 – 4.5 as long as broad. Tarsal claws simple, without basal lobe. Metasomal tergites 2 to 5 and 7 with white setae laterally; 2nd metasomal tergite dorsally occupying maximum 1/3 length of metasoma; prominent part of ventral spine of hypopygium very short, nearly as long as broad. Sexual form. Body black, antennae, palpi, tegulae and legs brownish yellow. Head and mesosoma almost smooth, without or with very few sparse white short setae. Head broader than mesosoma, vertex coriaceous, striae on malar space very weak, indistinct, incomplete, never reaching inner margin of eye. Antenna with 12 flagellomeres, F1 longest. Notauli absent; mesoscutellum reticulately rugose, with smooth central disk; propodeum uniformly very delicately sculptured, without lateral propodeal carinae. Forewing without smoky spots, margins with cilia. Tarsal claws simple, without basal lobe. Second metasomal tergite with few setae dorsolaterally; the prominent part of the ventral spine of the hypopygium slender, short, approximately 2.0 times as long as broad, subapical setae extend far beyond apex. Male differs from female by antenna which is with 13 flagellomeres, F1 incised and slightly swollened apically.</p> <p>Biology and Distribution. Currently three species are known: T. serratae, T. acutissimae and T. formosana. For one species, T. serratae, alternating sexual and asexual generations are known (Masuda 1972, Usuba 1995). Host oaks in Quercus subgen. Quercus section Cerris: Quercus acutissima Carruth. and Q. variabilis Blume.</p> <p>Trichagalma serratae (Ashmead, 1904). The holotype female with three labels: “ Dryophanta serratae ♀ Ash ”, “48.”, “ ♀ Type No. 7142 U. S. N. M.”. The metasoma of the holotype is separated from the head and mesosoma. The right forewing and hindwing are mounted on a glass slide. The holotype specimen has no label on which the type locality and collection data must have been described. According to Ashmead (1904), the holotype was mounted on card-board with its gall, but the gall is not mounted at present. Ashmead (1904) mentioned that the type locality is Sapporo, Hokkaido, northern Japan and that the host plant is Q. serrata. After the original description, however, the galls induced by this gallwasp have been recorded from Q. acutissima and Q. variabilis alone, and both plant species are not distributed in Hokkaido (Abe 2006). Descriptions of galls and details on the biology and lifecycle are provided by Abe (1992, 2006), and Yukawa &amp; Masuda (1996). Known from Japan (Honshu, Shikoku and Kyushu), China and South Korea (Abe 2006; Abe et al. 2007).</p> <p>Trichagalma acutissimae (Monzen, 1953), new comb. Currently known only from Japan. Originally described as Aphelonyx acutissimae by Monzen (1953). There is only one female adult specimen of T. acutissimae in the K. Monzen Collection. However, it is possible that this gallwasp species description was based on more than one specimen, judging from the description of the localities (Monzen 1954). According to the Recommendation 73 F (International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature 1999), the specimen labelled “Kunugihauratamafushi, 28/XI 1952, ♀, on campus, K. Monzen, Callirhitis [sic]” is hereby designated as the lectotype. “Kunugihauratamafushi” is a Japanese name of the gall induced by this gallwasp. “Kunugi” is a Japanese common name of Q. acutissima. “ha”, “ura” “tama” and “fushi” mean “leaf”, “underside”, “ball” and “gall” in Japanese, respectively. Dr. K. Monzen was a professor at Iwate University in 1952. The type locality, the campus of this university, is located in Morioka City, Iwate Prefecture, Japan. The head of the lectotype is lost. The gall is spherical, smooth, 5.0-7.0 mm in diameter, pale yellow, red or brownish-red with minute bark spots, monolocular, with larval chamber in the center, located on veins of both sides of the leaf of Q. acutissima and Q. variabilis (Yukawa &amp; Masuda 1996, picture C-094) (Figs 48 – 49). Galls begin to appear in early June; pupation takes place in October, adult eclosion occurs in November, and adults emerge from their galls in late November to December (Yukawa &amp; Masuda 1996). In this species, notauli are superficial, incomplete in the anterior 1/3 of the mesoscutum; the head is trapezoid, strongly transverse in anterior view, with the broadest part at the upper margin of compound eyes; the mesoscutum, especially between notauli, with distinct micropunctures; the mesoscutellum uniformly rugose reticulate, not emarginate around – all these characters allow us to transfer this species to Trichagalma.</p> <p>Comments. The presence of dark smoky pigmented spots on the forewing of Trichagalma serratae and T. formosana seems to be a specific and not a generic character. The same is true for nearctic Antron Kinsey and Atrusca Kinsey species, most of which have spots on the forewing, while some species lack them (e.g., Atrusca cava (Weld), A. luminata Kinsey, Antron plumbeum (Weld)).</p> <p>In the phylogenetic reconstruction by Liljeblad et al. (2008), Trichagalma serratae appears in one clade with Pseudoneuroterus macropterus. DNA sequence analysis (Fig. 2 in Rokas et al. 2003) also shows a distinct distance between Trichagalma serratae and (Pseudoneuroterus macropterus + Neuroterus saliens (Kollar)). Additional sequence data (J. Nicholls, unpublished data) suggest that Trichagalma serratae, together with the herein described T. formosana, forms a distinct, plesiomorphic lineage within the section Cerris galling genera.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DC095CFFD23308CAD8E0A38600FA03	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Melika, George;Pujade-Villar, Juli;Abe, Yoshihisa;Tang, Chang-Ti;Nicholls, James;Wachi, Nakatada;Ide, Tatsuya;Yang, Man-Miao;Pénzes, Zsolt;Csóka, György;Stone, Graham N.	Melika, George, Pujade-Villar, Juli, Abe, Yoshihisa, Tang, Chang-Ti, Nicholls, James, Wachi, Nakatada, Ide, Tatsuya, Yang, Man-Miao, Pénzes, Zsolt, Csóka, György, Stone, Graham N. (2010): 2470. Zootaxa 2470: 1-79
03DC095CFFD0330ECAD8E0E683BAFA3B.text	03DC095CFFD0330ECAD8E0E683BAFA3B.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Trichagalma formosana , Melika & Tang 2010	<div><p>Trichagalma formosana, Melika &amp; Tang, new species</p> <p>Figs 31–35, 36–42, 43–47.</p> <p>Type material. HOLOTYPE female: TAIWAN, Nantou Co., Cingjing Farm, Renai Township, ex Quercus variabilis, leg. Chang-Ti Tang, 2008.XI.7. adult em. 2008.XII.7. Eight PARATYPE females: 1 female: TAI- WAN, Taichung County, 36,5 K Central Cross Island Road, Kukuan, Heping Township, ex Quercus variabilis, leg. Chui-Mei Wang, 1. III. 2001. Seven female paratypes: TAIWAN, Taichung Co., 29K Central Cross Island Road, Heping Township, ex Quercus variabilis, leg. Chang-Ti Tang, 2009.XI.19. adult dissected from galls on 2009.XII.22. The holotype female is deposited in NMNS, 3 paratypes in NCHU; 2 paratypes in USNM; 3 paratypes in PDL.</p> <p>Etymology. The species is named after Formosa, a previous name for the island of Taiwan.</p> <p>Diagnosis. Closely related to Trichagalma serratae. In T. formosana, new species, the body is brown with darker brown marks; the clypeus is coriaceous, brown, with a median incision ventrally; the scape, pedicel and F1 – F2 brown, remaining flagellomeres dark brown; the head in anterior view is ovate, the broadest part of genae behind eyes is level with the transfacial line; the mesosoma in lateral view much higher; the forewing margin with very short dense cilia; the radial cell of the forewing 3.5 – 3.9 times as long as broad, R1 on a short distance running along the wing margin, while in T. serratae the body is rusty brown with black marks; the clypeus is uniformly microreticulate, black, without median incision ventrally (Fig. 24); the antenna entirely and uniformly black (Fig. 25); the head in anterior view is more trapezoid, the broadest part of genae behind eyes is above the level of transfacial line (Fig. 24); the mesosoma in lateral view shorter (Fig. 27); the smoky spots on forewing much darker and well-marked; the forewing margin with long cilia, the radial cell 4.3 – 4.5 times as long as broad, R1 reaching wing margin (Fig. 28).</p> <p>Description. ASEXUAL FEMALE (holotype). Body, legs uniformly brown; head posteriorly, antenna (except scape, pedicel, F1 – F2), mandibles, stripes along anterior parallel and parapsidal lines, scutellar foveae, preaxilla, lateral axillar area, axillula, metascutellum, central propodeal area dark brown to black; body with dense white setae; wing veins dark brown, with dark brown spots.</p> <p>Head coriaceous, with uniformly very dense white setae, 2.5 times as broad as long from above; 1.4 times as broad as high in anterior view and equal to width of mesosoma. Gena coriaceous, strongly broadened behind eye, broader than cross diameter of eye. Malar space coriaceous, with dense setae, 0.4 times as long as height of eye, without striae and malar sulcus. POL 1.2 times as long as OOL; OOL 3.3 times as long as diameter of lateral ocellus, 2.0 times as long as LOL; lateral ocelli slightly ovate, larger than median rounded ocellus. Transfacial distance 1.4 times as long as height of eye and 1.8 times as long as height of lower face (distance between antennal rim and ventral margin of clypeus); diameter of antennal socket slightly shorter than distance between them, distance between socket and eye margin 1.5 times as long as diameter of socket. Lower face coriaceous, with strongly elevated median area and dense setae. Clypeus rectangular, flat, above 2.0 times as broad as high, coriaceous, with deep anterior tentorial pits, distinct epistomal sulcus and clypeopleurostomal line; ventrally emarginate and slightly incised medially. Frons coriaceous, with deep smooth and shiny impression below median ocellus; vertex and occiput uniformly dull coriaceous; interocellar area elevated. Postocciput around occipital foramen impressed, with numerous striae extending to level of gula; posterior tentorial pits large, deep, elongate; hypostomal bridge at least 2.0 times as high as broad, lower part narrowed down to emarginate hypostomal carina; occipital foramen slightly shorter than height of hypostomal bridge, around 1.5 times shorter than height of oral foramen. Antenna with 12 flagellomeres (or 13, indistinct suture between F13 and F12 visible in the paratype), longer than head+mesosoma; pedicel nearly as long as broad, F1 4.1 times as long as pedicel, 1.3 times as long as F2, F2 1.1 times as long as F3, F4 slightly shorter than F3, F6 – F11 shorter than F5 and nearly equal in length; fused F12+F13 1.7 times as long as F11; placodeal sensilla on F3–F12, in numerous rows, absent on F1–F2.</p> <p>Mesosoma longer than high in lateral view, with uniform dense white setae. Pronotum uniformly coriaceous; with uniform dense white setae and irregular wrinkles, emarginate along lateral edge, followed by deep longitudinal invagination. Anterior rim of pronotum narrow, emarginate; propleuron with black stripe along lateral side, delicately coriaceous, with white setae, strongly concave in mediocentral part. Mesoscutum coriaceous, with distinct punctures in anterior 1/3; longer than broad (width measured across basis of tegulae); notauli complete, superficially impressed for full length; median mesoscutal line absent; anterior parallel and parapsidal lines not impressed, broad, smooth and shiny, extending to half of mesoscutum length, marked with black stripes. Transscutal articulation absent. Mesoscutellum slightly longer than broad, 1.5 times shorter than length of mesoscutum, uniformly coriaceous, overhanging metanotum; without distinct scutellar foveae, only transverse, slightly impressed area indicated by much darker colour present. Mesopleuron, including speculum, delicately coriaceous, shiny, with dense white setae, narrowly impressed along posterior edge; mesopleural triangle rugose, with dense white setae and numerous strong wrinkles. Metapleural sulcus reaching mesopleuron at half height; preaxilla coriaceous; lateral axillar area with parallel wrinkles, without setae; axillar carina broad, with longitudinal striae; axillula slightly ovate, smooth, with dense white setae and punctures; subaxillular bar narrow, smooth, shiny, in most posterior end narrower than height of metanotal trough. Metascutellum black, uniformly delicately punctate, slightly higher than height of smooth, shiny ventral impressed area; metanotal trough smooth, shiny, without setae. Lateral propodeal carinae absent, central propodeal area smooth, shiny, with central longitudinal delicate carina, delimited only by darker colour, without setae; lateral propodeal area uniformly coriaceous, with dense white setae; nucha very short, with few delicate longitudinal sulci dorsolaterally and laterally. Forewing longer than body, with dark brown veins and with dark irregular sclerotized pigmented spots, margin with very short dense cilia; radial cell 3.9 times as long as broad, R1 on a short distance running along wing margin, Rs nearly reaching wing margin; areolet large, triangular, well-delimited by distinct veins; projection of Rs+M reaching basalis in the lower third. Hind tarsomere I to V ratio as 1.0:0.6:0.3:0.1:0.5. Tarsal claws simple, without basal lobe.</p> <p>Metasoma shorter than head+mesosoma (in fresh alive specimens metasoma longer than head+mesosoma), higher than long in lateral view, smooth, shiny, without setae; only 2nd and 3rd metasomal tergites posterolaterally with white setae; 2nd tergite extending to 1/3 length of metasoma; prominent part of ventral spine of hypopygium extremely short, as long as broad ventrally, with dense long white setae, extending far beyond apex of spine; setae located only on both lateral sides of ventral spine, absent ventrally.</p> <p>Body length 4.5 – 4.7 mm (n=4). In freshly killed specimens body length 5.1-5.3 mm (n=2).</p> <p>Gall. The gall when young is juicy, soft, covered with small raised tubercles, and green with purple spots on areas exposed to direct sunlight (Figs 43, 45). The gall when mature reaches 15 mm in diameter, and is brown with a slightly irregular surface (Figs 44, 47). The mature gall is hollow, with a tough woody wall 1.5– 2.5 mm thick. The interior space contains a single larval chamber, attached to the wall by a stalk, which, however, dry out when the gall is mature (Fig. 46). The larval chamber is ovoid, up to 6 mm in length, and has a tough but thin wall. Galls may be found singly or in groups, most commonly on lateral buds of young shoots. Solitary galls are almost spherical, while closely clustered galls may be deformed. Old galls persist on the host tree.</p> <p>Biology. Only the asexual generation is known from galls on Quercus variabilis and Q. acutissima. Galls appear on the tree from early August. Under the laboratory conditions, adults emerged in December, in the nature they might overwinter in the gall and emerge in spring of the following year. Galls mostly remains on the tree for one year. Common, however, the infestation by inquilines and parasitoids is quite high what is strongly influence the emerging of the cynipid gall inducer wasps.</p> <p>Distribution. Taiwan (Taoyuan County, Fuhsing Township; Hsinchu County, Hsinfong Township and Jiashih Township; Taichung County, Central Cross Island Road, Heping Township; Nantou County, Renai Township). Same type of galls were found in Japan, and it is illustrated in Yukawa &amp; Masuda (1996) under C – 076. However, adults were never reared in Japan and thus the species was not described.</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DC095CFFD0330ECAD8E0E683BAFA3B	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Melika, George;Pujade-Villar, Juli;Abe, Yoshihisa;Tang, Chang-Ti;Nicholls, James;Wachi, Nakatada;Ide, Tatsuya;Yang, Man-Miao;Pénzes, Zsolt;Csóka, György;Stone, Graham N.	Melika, George, Pujade-Villar, Juli, Abe, Yoshihisa, Tang, Chang-Ti, Nicholls, James, Wachi, Nakatada, Ide, Tatsuya, Yang, Man-Miao, Pénzes, Zsolt, Csóka, György, Stone, Graham N. (2010): 2470. Zootaxa 2470: 1-79
03DC095CFFD6330ECAD8E3338285F801.text	03DC095CFFD6330ECAD8E3338285F801.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Trichagalma Mayr 1907	<div><p>Key to the asexual forms of Trichagalma</p> <p>1 Forewing without dark pigmented spots................................................................................................ T. acutissimae</p> <p>- Forewing with dark smoky pigmented spots............................................................................................................... 2</p> <p>2 Clypeus coriaceous, brown, with median incision ventrally (Fig. 31); scape, pedicel and F1 – F2 brown, remaining flagellomeres dark brown; forewing margin with very short dense cilia (Fig. 34); radial cell of forewing 3.5 – 3.9 times as long as broad, R1 on a short distance running along wing margin, Rs+M inconspicuous (Fig. 35)................................................................................................................................................................................ T. formosana</p> <p>- Clypeus uniformly microreticulate, black, without median incision (Fig. 24); antenna entirely and uniformly black (Fig. 25); forewing margin with long cilia, radial cell 4.3 – 4.5 times as long as broad, R1 reaching wing margin, Rs+M distinct, reaching basalis (Fig. 28).................................................................................................... T. serratae</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DC095CFFD6330ECAD8E3338285F801	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Melika, George;Pujade-Villar, Juli;Abe, Yoshihisa;Tang, Chang-Ti;Nicholls, James;Wachi, Nakatada;Ide, Tatsuya;Yang, Man-Miao;Pénzes, Zsolt;Csóka, György;Stone, Graham N.	Melika, George, Pujade-Villar, Juli, Abe, Yoshihisa, Tang, Chang-Ti, Nicholls, James, Wachi, Nakatada, Ide, Tatsuya, Yang, Man-Miao, Pénzes, Zsolt, Csóka, György, Stone, Graham N. (2010): 2470. Zootaxa 2470: 1-79
03DC095CFFD7330FCAD8E5AB869BF95A.text	03DC095CFFD7330FCAD8E5AB869BF95A.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pseudoneuroterus Kinsey 1923	<div><p>Pseudoneuroterus Kinsey, 1923</p> <p>Figs 50–55, 56–59, 60–67, 68–72, 73–76.</p> <p>Type species: Cynips macroptera Hartig, designated by Kinsey (1923).</p> <p>Taxonomic status. Originally Pseudoneuroterus was decribed as a subgenus of Neuroterus (Kinsey 1923), with only one known Western Palaearctic species, N. (P.) macropterus (Hartig). Melika &amp; Abrahamson (2002) treated it as Neuroterus and synonymized Repentinia Belizin &amp; Maisuradze, 1961 to Neuroterus. Pujade-Villar et al. (2004) raised Pseudoneuroterus to a rank of genus, with simultaneous synonymization of Repentinia Belizin &amp; Maisuradze and R. lencoranica Belizin &amp; Maisuradze, 1961 to P. macropterus. We place four species in this genus: P. macropterus, P. saliens, new comb., P. mazandarani, new species, and P. nichollsi, new species.</p> <p>Diagnosis. In Pseudoneuroterus, genae are broadened behind the compound eyes, visible in anterior view; the malar sulcus is always absent (Figs 50, 60, 77, 91); the hind tarsal claw is simple. In male antenna F1 is strongly modified, expanded and flattened distally (Fig. 67). More diagnostic characters are provided in the key and the redescription below.</p> <p>Redescription. Body black. Head rounded in anterior view, genae broadened behind eyes, visible in anterior view (Figs 50, 60, 77, 91); female antenna with 12 flagellomeres, F1 equal or only slightly longer than F2 (Figs 53, 63, 80, 95); male antenna with 13 flagellomeres, F1 curved and swollen, longer than F2 (Fig. 67). Height of eye 4.2 (in asexual female, Figs 50, 77, 91 – 92) to 5.3-5.4 (in sexual females and males, Figs 60 – 61, 64 – 65) times as long as length of malar space; transfacial distance nearly equal to height of eye; malar sulcus absent; mesoscutum slightly longer than broad, smooth, shiny, without notauli, with delicately coriaceous stripes along notauli in P. macropterus (Fig. 54) and with rows of setae indicating notauli in P. mazandarani (Fig. 83) and P. nichollsi (Fig. 97); mesoscutellum longer than broad, coriaceous (in asexual Pseudoneuroterus, Figs 57, 83, 97) or only slightly longer than broad, alutaceous in sexual P. saliens (Fig. 68). Mesoscutum 1.5 – 1.7 times as long as mesoscutellum; mesosoma longer than high in ventral view; metascutellum smooth, narrower or equal to height of metanotal trough; radial cell of the forewing 7.6 (in P.macropterus, Fig. 56) to 5.0 – 6.0 (in P. saliens, Fig. 73) times as long as broad; prominent part of the ventral spine of hypopygium 3.0 (asexual females, Figs 59, 86 – 87, 101) to 4.0-4.5 (in sexual P.saliens, Figs 75 – 76) times as long as broad; 2nd metasomal tergite in females occupying 1/2-2/3 length of metasoma (Figs 58, 74, 85, 100).</p> <p>Biology and Distribution. Pseudoneuroterus macropterus, known from the asexual generation only, is a widespread and locally common species extending from central Europe east to Iran and Azerbaijan (Maisuradze 1961). Pseudoneuroterus saliens is known from alternating sexual and asexual generations (Barbotin 1972), and is widespread across Central and Southern Europe, from the Iberian Peninsula to Iran (Nieves- Aldrey 2001; Melika 2006a) and North Africa (J. Pujade-Villar, unpublished data). Both species only gall several oaks in the section Cerris. Details on lifecycles, biology, and gall descriptions of P. macropterus and P. saliens are given in Melika (2006a). Descriptions, with data on distribution, biology, and life cycles of the two new species P. mazandarani and P. nichollsi are given below.</p> <p>Comments. Phylogenetic reconstructions strongly support Pseudoneuroterus as a monophyletic entity (Rokas et al. 2003; Liljeblad et al. 2008; Stone et al. 2009; Fig.1). Pseudoneuroterus saliens always falls out as a close sister taxon to P. macropterus in DNA sequence phylogenies (Rokas et al. 2003; Stone et al. 2009) with strong support.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DC095CFFD7330FCAD8E5AB869BF95A	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Melika, George;Pujade-Villar, Juli;Abe, Yoshihisa;Tang, Chang-Ti;Nicholls, James;Wachi, Nakatada;Ide, Tatsuya;Yang, Man-Miao;Pénzes, Zsolt;Csóka, György;Stone, Graham N.	Melika, George, Pujade-Villar, Juli, Abe, Yoshihisa, Tang, Chang-Ti, Nicholls, James, Wachi, Nakatada, Ide, Tatsuya, Yang, Man-Miao, Pénzes, Zsolt, Csóka, György, Stone, Graham N. (2010): 2470. Zootaxa 2470: 1-79
03DC095CFFD7330DCAD8E2218298FCD3.text	03DC095CFFD7330DCAD8E2218298FCD3.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pseudoneuroterus mazandarani Melika & Pujade-Villar & Abe & Tang & Nicholls & Wachi & Ide & Yang & Pénzes & Csóka & Stone 2010	<div><p>Pseudoneuroterus mazandarani Melika &amp; Stone, new species</p> <p>Figs 77–83, 84–90</p> <p>Type material. HOLOTYPE female: IRAN, Mazandaran Province, Sari (Shahid Zare park, Kiasar, Behshahr), ex Q. castaneifolia, May 2007. coll. G. Melika. PARATYPES: 20 females with the same label as the holotype. The holotype and 15 paratype females are deposited in PDL; 5 paratype females in USNM.</p> <p>Etymology. The species is named after Mazandaran Province of Iran, where it was collected.</p> <p>Diagnosis. Closely related to P. macropterus and P. nichollsi by genae distinctly broadened behind eyes, well visible in anterior view, however, in P. mazandarani the body is dark brown, the lower face always yellowish; the antenna and legs are light brown; small wasps, body length 1.8 – 2.1 mm. In the two above-mentioned species the body and antennae are black, the lower face is always black; coxae and part of femurs black; much larger wasps, body length 3.3 – 4.3 mm.</p> <p>Description. ASEXUAL FEMALE (holotype). Body dark brown, with slightly lighter metasoma, lower face and mandibles always light brown to yellowish; scape and pedicel yellow, flagellomeres and legs (except dark brown basal half of coxae) light brown; head, especially lower face, and mesosoma with dense white setae; wing veins brown, distinct.</p> <p>Head alutaceous, with white setae, denser on lower face and posteriorly, 2.2 times as broad as long from above; 1.2 times as broad as high and rounded in anterior view and equal to width of mesosoma. Gena alutaceous, slightly broadened behind eye, visible in anterior view, narrower than cross diameter of eye, impressed along outer margin of eye. Malar space alutaceous, without striae and malar sulcus, with dense setae, 0.3 times as long as height of eye. POL 1.3 times as long as OOL; OOL 2.5 times as long as diameter of lateral ocellus, 1.6 times as long as LOL; ocelli slightly ovate, equal in size and shape. Transfacial distance equal in length to height of eye and 1.4 times as long as height of lower face (distance between antennal rim and ventral margin of clypeus); diameter of antennal socket 1.6 times as long as distance between sockets, distance between socket and eye margin slightly larger than diameter of socket. Lower face alutaceous, with elevated coriaceous median area and dense setae. Clypeus rectangular, flat, over 2.0 times as broad as high, coriaceous, with deep anterior tentorial pits, distinct epistomal sulcus and clypeo-pleurostomal line; ventrally emarginate, without median incision. Frons alutaceous, with deep smooth and shiny impression below median ocellus; vertex and occiput uniformly alutaceous; interocellar area coriaceous. Postocciput around occipital foramen impressed, with numerous striae extending to level of gula; posterior tentorial pits large, deep, elongate; hypostomal bridge at least 2.0 times as high as broad, lower part narrowed down to emarginate hypostomal carina; occipital foramen slightly shorter than height of hypostomal bridge, around 1.5 times shorter than height of oral foramen. Antenna with 12 flagellomeres, longer than head+mesosoma; pedicel 1.4 times as long as broad, F1 2.2 times as long as pedicel, equal in length to F2; F3 nearly equal in length to F4 and F5 and slightly shorter than F2, subsequent flagellomeres shorter, F12 equal in length to F11; placodeal sensilla on all flagellomeres, including few visible distally on F1. Sensilla on all flagellomeres indistinct.</p> <p>Mesosoma longer than high in lateral view, with uniform dense white setae. Pronotum uniformly microreticulate, with uniform white setae, without wrinkles. Mesoscutum longer than broad (width measured across basis of tegulae), smooth or alutaceous, with deep punctures between notauli and between notaulus and parapside, both in posterior half; notaulus absent but indicated by impressed coriaceous stripes and rows of denser setae in entire length of mesoscutum; median mesoscutal line, anterior parallel and parapsidal lines absent. transscutal articulation inconspicuous, mesoscutum emarginate and elevated posteriorly, above dorsoaxillar areas only. Mesoscutellum slightly longer than broad, shorter than length of mesoscutum, with nearly parallel sides, flat, uniformly alutaceous, with sparse setae, overhanging metanotum; without distinct scutellar foveae, with anterior transverse, impressed area, bottom of which smooth and shiny, with some longitudinal parallel wrinkles. Mesopleuron, including speculum, smooth, shiny, with few setae and delicate parallel striae in the center; mesopleural triangle rugose, with dense white setae and some wrinkles. Metapleural sulcus reaching mesopleuron at half height; metapleuron smooth, preaxilla alutaceous; lateral axillar area coriaceous, without setae; axillar carina broad, with longitudinal striae; axillula slightly ovate, smooth, with white setae and some sparse punctures; subaxillular bar narrow, smooth, shiny, in most posterior end narrower than height of metanotal trough. Metascutellum smooth, slightly higher than height of smooth, shiny ventral impressed area; metanotal trough smooth, shiny, without setae. Lateral propodeal carinae absent, central propodeal area smooth, shiny, with some very delicate longitudinal irregular striae, without setae, delimited by dense white setae, uniformly covering lateral propodeal area; nucha very short, with few irregular wrinkles. Forewing longer than body, with distinct brown veins, margin with short dense cilia; radial cell 5.6 times as long as broad, R1 on a short distance running along wing margin, Rs nearly reaching wing margin; areolet large, triangular, delimited by indistinct veins; Rs+M inconspicuous, its projection reaching basalis in the lower third. Tarsal claws simple, without basal lobe.</p> <p>Metasoma shorter than head+mesosoma, 2.0 times as high as long in lateral view, smooth, shiny, without setae; prominent part of ventral spine of hypopygium short, 2.0 – 2.3 times as long as broad ventrally, with very few short setae, which not extend beyond apex of spine.</p> <p>Body length 1.8 – 2.1 mm (n=10).</p> <p>Gall. An integral swelling leaf gall, usually located at the base of the leaf midrib or on the main vein, irregularly shaped, multilocular (Figs 88 – 90). The gall is fleshy, reaching 10 – 15 mm in diameter, and up to 15 mm in length; the rounded larval chambers, 3 – 4 mm in diameter, irregularly embedded into the enlarged tissues of the leaf parenchyma. Young galls are green to pale green-yellowish and remain soft as they mature.</p> <p>Biology. Only the asexual generation is known to induce integral leaf galls on Q. castaneifolia C.A.Mey. The galls start to develop from May and mature in late May, adults emerge in June. This is an unusual seasonal phenology for an asexual generation, which in other Pseudoneuroterus and Neuroterus-Cerroneuroterus species develop in summer and the asexual galls mature in autumn.</p> <p>Distribution. Currently known from Iran (Mazandaran province, Sari). Common in the mentioned locality.</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DC095CFFD7330DCAD8E2218298FCD3	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Melika, George;Pujade-Villar, Juli;Abe, Yoshihisa;Tang, Chang-Ti;Nicholls, James;Wachi, Nakatada;Ide, Tatsuya;Yang, Man-Miao;Pénzes, Zsolt;Csóka, György;Stone, Graham N.	Melika, George, Pujade-Villar, Juli, Abe, Yoshihisa, Tang, Chang-Ti, Nicholls, James, Wachi, Nakatada, Ide, Tatsuya, Yang, Man-Miao, Pénzes, Zsolt, Csóka, György, Stone, Graham N. (2010): 2470. Zootaxa 2470: 1-79
03DC095CFFD53313CAD8E68B84A5FDCB.text	03DC095CFFD53313CAD8E68B84A5FDCB.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pseudoneuroterus nichollsi Melika & Pujade-Villar & Abe & Tang & Nicholls & Wachi & Ide & Yang & Pénzes & Csóka & Stone 2010	<div><p>Pseudoneuroterus nichollsi Melika &amp; Stone, new species</p> <p>Figs 91–96, 97–101, 102–105.</p> <p>Type material. HOLOTYPE female: IRAN, Lorestan, Kaka-Sharaf, ex Q. brantii; coll. M. Tavakoli, September 2008. PARATYPES: 13 female: 8 females with the same label as the holotype; 5 females: IRAN, Lorestan, Ghelaie, Lor 456, ex Q. brantii; coll. M. Tavakoli, September 2008. The holotype and 11 paratype females are deposited in PDL, 2 paratype females in USNM.</p> <p>Etymology. In recognition of the continuing contribution of Dr. James Nicholls (Institute of Evolutionary Biology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland) to research on oak gallwasps.</p> <p>Diagnosis. Most closely resembles P.macropterus, however, in P. nichollsi Rs +M distinct, reaching basalis in lower 1/3, veins around the areolet with smoky dark stripes; the metasoma is nearly 2.0 times as high as long, the prominent part of the ventral spine of the hypopygium is very short, as long as broad, while in P. macropterus Rs +M indistinct, never reach basalis, its projection pointed into lower half of the basalis, veins around the areolet without smoky dark stripes; the metasoma definitely less than 2.0 times higher than long, as the prominent part of the ventral spine of the hypopygium is longer, at least 3.0 times as long as broad. The galls are somewhat reminiscent of those of Andricus stonei Melika, Tavakoli &amp; Sadeghi, however, the latter is found on the section Quercus sensu stricto oak Q. infectoria Olivier and never with the section Cerris oaks Q. brantii Lindl. or Q. libani Olivier (Azizkhani et al. 2006).</p> <p>Description. ASEXUAL FEMALE (holotype). Body and antenna black, femurs black in basal 2/3, brown in distal 1/3; tibiae and tarsi dark brown. Head and mesosoma with uniformly dense long white setae.</p> <p>Head delicately coriaceous, 2.1 times as broad as long from above; 1.4 times as broad as high in anterior view and equal or very slightly broader than width of mesosoma. Gena delicately micropunctate, broadened behind eye, well visible in anterior view behind eye, 2.0 times narrower than cross diameter of eye. Malar space delicately micropunctate, with dense setae, without striae and malar sulcus, 0.3 times as long as height of eye. POL 1.5 times as long as OOL; OOL 3.0 times as long as diameter of lateral ocellus, 4.2 times as long as LOL; ocelli slightly ovate, equal in size and shape. Transfacial distance 1.3 times as long as height of eye and 1.9 times as long as height of lower face (distance between antennal rim and ventral margin of clypeus); diameter of antennal socket equal to distance between sockets, distance between socket and eye margin very slightly shorter than diameter of socket. Lower face coriaceous, with strongly elevated median area and dense setae. Clypeus rectangular, more than 2.0 times as broad as high, delicately coriaceous, with elevated central area, with deep anterior tentorial pits, distinct epistomal sulcus and clypeo-pleurostomal line; ventrally broadly emarginate, without median incision. Frons coriaceous, with deep smooth and shiny impression below median ocellus; vertex and occiput coriaceous; interocellar area slightly elevated. Postocciput around occipital foramen impressed, with numerous delicate striae extending to level of gula; posterior tentorial pits large, deep, elongate; hypostomal bridge at least 2.0 times as high as broad, lower part narrowed down, but gular sulci running separately, not fused, hypostomal carina emarginate; occipital foramen slightly shorter than height of hypostomal bridge, and around 2/3 of height of oral foramen. Antenna with 12 flagellomeres, longer than head+mesosoma; pedicel nearly 2.0 times as long as broad, F1 2.3 times as long as pedicel, slightly longer than F2, F2 1.2 times as long as F3, F4 slightly shorter than F3, subsequent flagellomeres shorter; F12 1.6 times as long as F11; placodeal sensilla on F4–F12, in numerous rows, absent on F1–F3.</p> <p>Mesosoma longer than high in lateral view, with uniform dense white setae. Pronotum uniformly alutaceous, with piliferous points; with uniform dense white setae. Anterior rim of pronotum narrow, emarginate; propleuron alutaceous, with piliferous points and white setae, strongly concave in mediocentral part. Mesoscutum delicately alutaceous or smooth, shiny; longer than broad (width measured across basis of tegulae); notaulus absent, indicated by rows of denser setae only; median mesoscutal line absent; anterior parallel and parapsidal lines indicated by broad, smooth and shiny area, without setae. Transscutal articulation absent, posterolateral sides of mesoscutum emarginate and elevated above dorsoaxillar areas. Mesoscutellum slightly longer than broad, flattened, trapezoid, with broader part in distal end, 1.8 times shorter than length of mesoscutum, uniformly alutaceous, overhanging metanotum; without scutellar foveae, with transverse, deeply impressed shiny, smooth area anteriorly. Mesopleuron, including speculum, delicately coriaceous, shiny, with dense white setae, narrowly impressed along posterior edge; mesopleural triangle rugose, with dense white setae. Metapleural sulcus indistinct, invisible, delimiting matte area with micropunctures; preaxilla coriaceous; lateral axillar area with parallel wrinkles, without setae; axillar carina broad, smooth, shiny without longitudinal striae; axillula slightly ovate, smooth, with dense white setae and punctures; subaxillular bar smooth, shiny, with parallel sides, in most posterior end narrower than height of metanotal trough. Metascutellum smooth, matte, without sculpture, slightly higher than height of smooth, shiny ventral impressed area; metanotal trough smooth, shiny, without setae. Lateral propodeal carinae absent, central propodeal area smooth, shiny, delimited only by setae; lateral propodeal area uniformly coriaceous, with dense white setae; nucha very short, with few delicate longitudinal sulci dorsally and dorsolaterally. Forewing longer than body, with dark brown veins and dark stripes along 2r and dark spot both sides of Cu 1 vein, margin with long dense cilia; radial cell 4.4 times as long as broad, R1 and Rs nearly reaching wing margin; Rs+M distinct, reaching basalis in lower 1/3, veins around large, triangular, well-delimited areolet, with smoky dark stripes. Tarsal claws simple, without basal lobe.</p> <p>Metasoma not longer than head+mesosoma (however, dorsally pointed backwards and seems to be much longer than head+mesosoma), 2.0 times as high as long in lateral view, smooth, matte, without setae; 2nd tergite extending to half length of metasoma; prominent part of ventral spine of hypopygium extremely short, as long as broad ventrally, with dense very short white setae, which only slightly extending beyond apex of spine.</p> <p>Body length 3.8 – 4.3 mm (n=14).</p> <p>Gall. A subterranean gall in clusters of 6 – 18. Commonly in a crowded mass clustered around the base of young shoots, at or only slightly above ground level (Figs 102 – 105). Sometimes 3-4 clusters grow together and encircle the young shoot. Unilocular. The gall cluster is usually globular, 10 – 25 mm in diameter, with 6 – 18 galls in one cluster. Young galls are pale yellow, later turning reddish-green and then brown or blackbrown as they mature. Individual galls are elongate, resembling pine-cone seeds, while those in groups may become cuboid due to crowding. Individual galls are 8 – 12 mm long, and 5 – 10 x 4 – 6 mm at their broadest apical part, narrowing continually towards the base by which they are attached to the twig. A crater or a scar on the bark marks the position occupied by the gall on the twig. The gall wall is thin, 1.5 – 2 mm thick, not woody and hard, and the mature gall can easily be cut. The gall parenchyma is juicy and soft when the gall is young, becoming slightly lignified when mature.</p> <p>Biology. Only the asexual generation is known to induce subterranean galls on Quercus brantii. The galls start to develop from mid-summer and mature in October-November. Adults emerge by the end of winter of the following year.</p> <p>Distribution. Currently known from Iran (Lorestan province, Kaka-Sharaf &amp; Ghelaie).</p> <p>Comments. This is the first root or subterranean gall found on the oak section Cerris, and the first known species in Cerroneuroterus and Neuroterus which induces root galls.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DC095CFFD53313CAD8E68B84A5FDCB	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Melika, George;Pujade-Villar, Juli;Abe, Yoshihisa;Tang, Chang-Ti;Nicholls, James;Wachi, Nakatada;Ide, Tatsuya;Yang, Man-Miao;Pénzes, Zsolt;Csóka, György;Stone, Graham N.	Melika, George, Pujade-Villar, Juli, Abe, Yoshihisa, Tang, Chang-Ti, Nicholls, James, Wachi, Nakatada, Ide, Tatsuya, Yang, Man-Miao, Pénzes, Zsolt, Csóka, György, Stone, Graham N. (2010): 2470. Zootaxa 2470: 1-79
03DC095CFFCB3313CAD8E19A8476F8ED.text	03DC095CFFCB3313CAD8E19A8476F8ED.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Latuspina Monzen 1954	<div><p>Latuspina Monzen, 1954, new status</p> <p>Figs 106–114, 115–120, 121–126.</p> <p>Type species: Neuroterus (Latuspina) stirps Monzen, 1954. Designated herein by monotypy.</p> <p>The original description does agree with a Neuroterus character set, except that the projecting part of the ventral spine of the hypopygium is not normally pointed at the apex, but “dilated like a spatula” (Monzen 1954). The difference in the ventral spine of the hypopygium is a characteristic rather of generic level than of subgeneric one. Thus, Latuspina is elevated to a genus rank and consequently, the placement of Latuspina into Neuroterus is incorrect.</p> <p>Diagnosis. The striking feature of Latuspina females is the prominent part of the ventral spine of the hypopygium with two subapical lateral lumps, spine tri-forked, each of lumps with 5-8 long setae extending far beyond apex. No other Cynipini possess with such a shape of the ventral spine of hypopygium. In the male antenna, the pedicel is as long as scape, both strongly flattened and broad, at least twice broader than the width of flagellomeres, while in all other male Cynipini, that lack entirely or possess an incomplete transscutal articulation, the pedicel is always shorter than scape, both less flattened and broad, and less than twice broader than flagellomeres. On the basis of these unique characters, we establish a new genus, Latuspina Monzen.</p> <p>The original description of Latuspina stirps (Monzen 1954) is very brief and insufficient for all taxonomic purposes and thus we provide a complete redescription below.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DC095CFFCB3313CAD8E19A8476F8ED	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Melika, George;Pujade-Villar, Juli;Abe, Yoshihisa;Tang, Chang-Ti;Nicholls, James;Wachi, Nakatada;Ide, Tatsuya;Yang, Man-Miao;Pénzes, Zsolt;Csóka, György;Stone, Graham N.	Melika, George, Pujade-Villar, Juli, Abe, Yoshihisa, Tang, Chang-Ti, Nicholls, James, Wachi, Nakatada, Ide, Tatsuya, Yang, Man-Miao, Pénzes, Zsolt, Csóka, György, Stone, Graham N. (2010): 2470. Zootaxa 2470: 1-79
03DC095CFFC83311CAD8E5AB8586FB13.text	03DC095CFFC83311CAD8E5AB8586FB13.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Latuspina stirps (Monzen 1954) Melika & Pujade-Villar & Abe & Tang & Nicholls & Wachi & Ide & Yang & Pénzes & Csóka & Stone 2010	<div><p>Latuspina stirps (Monzen, 1954), new comb.</p> <p>Figs 106–114, 115–120, 121–126.</p> <p>Type material: There are one female and two male adults of L. stirps in the K. Monzen Collection. One female adult, labelled “Kunugimikikotamafushi, 16/VII 1952, MORIOKA, K. MONZEN.” is hereby designated as the lectotype. The other two male specimens collected on 12. VII. 1952 in the same locality by the same collector are hereby designated as the paralectotypes. “Kunugimikikotamafushi” is a Japanese name of the gall induced by this gallwasp. “Kunugi” is a Japanese common name of Q. acutissima. “Miki”, “ko” “tama” and “fushi” mean “trunk”, “small”, “ball” and “gall” in Japanese, respectively.</p> <p>Material examined: 12 females and 3 males: JAPAN, Honshu, Nagoya, Higashiyama Park, glade grass, oak forest. V. Fursov, 28.IV.2004; emerged ex gall on Q. acutissima.</p> <p>Diagnosis. See genus Diagnosis above.</p> <p>Redescription. SEXUAL FEMALE. Head, mesosoma and metasoma uniformly and entirely black; palpi, mandibles yellow; legs yellow, except darker basis of coxae; scape, pedicel, F1 and F2 yellow, subsequent flagellomeres darker; eyes silvery blackish.</p> <p>Head transverse in anterior view, delicately coriaceous, with a very few white setae, which denser on lower face; 2.7 times as broad as long from above; 1.4 times as broad as high in anterior view and broader than mesosoma. Gena shiny, micropunctate, not broadened behind eye, more than twice narrower than cross diameter of eye, invisible in anterior view. Malar space microreticulate, without setae, 0.3 times as long as height of eye, without striae and malar sulcus. POL 1.1 times as long as OOL; OOL 2.0 times as long as diameter of lateral ocellus, 2.0 times as long as LOL; ocelli rounded. Transfacial distance 1.1 times as long as height of eye and 1.7 times as long as height of lower face (distance between antennal rim and ventral margin of clypeus); diameter of antennal socket slightly larger than distance between sockets, and nearly equal to distance between eye margin and socket. Lower face delicately uniformly coriaceous, with narrow elevated median area and very few setae. Clypeus small, shiny, distance between clypeus and margin of eye nearly 2.0 times as long as width of clypeus, with slightly elevated central coriaceous part, with very indistinct anterior tentorial pits, indistinct epistomal sulcus and clypeo-pleurostomal line; ventrally emarginate and not incised medially. Frons flat, micropunctate, with rounded impressed area below median ocellus; vertex and occiput very delicately micropunctate, shiny; interocellar area elevated, with stronger sculpture than vertex. Postocciput delicately coriaceous, shiny, around occipital foramen impressed, with few delicate striae extending to level of gula; hypostomal bridge nearly 2.0 times as high as broad, lower part narrowed down to emarginate hypostomal carina; occipital foramen slightly shorter than height of hypostomal bridge, around 1.5 times shorter than height of oral foramen. Antenna with 12 flagellomeres, as long as body; scape and pedicel strongly broadened, respectively both as long as broad, F1 2.6 times as long as pedicel, 1.25 times as long as F2, F2 slightly longer than F3, F1 and F2 slightly narrower than all subsequent flagellomeres; F4 slightly shorter than F3, F5 – F6 shorter than F4 and nearly equal in length; F7 – F11 shorter than F5 – 6 and nearly equal in length; F12 1.7 times as long as F11; all flagellomeres in short whitish dense setae; placodeal sensilla on F3–F12, in numerous rows, absent on F1–F2.</p> <p>Mesosoma slightly longer than high in lateral view, with very few setae. Pronotum shiny, delicately coriaceous; with some irregular wrinkles posterolaterally, emarginate along lateral edge. Mesoscutum smooth, shiny; as long as broad (width measured across basis of tegulae); notauli absent but indicated by narrow stripes of alutaceous sculpture, absent in posterior 1/3; parascutal and anteroadmedian signa, median mesoscutal line absent; mesoscutum elevated posterolaterally, above dorsoaxillar areas. Transscutal articulation absent. Dorsoaxillar area smooth, shiny, with few short setae. Mesoscutellum longer than broad, with parallel sides,1.5 times shorter than length of mesoscutum, uniformly coriaceous, overhanging metanotum, not emarginate laterally and posteriorly; without distinct disk. Scutellar foveae absent, replaced by deep and narrow transverse area, with coriaceous bottom. Mesopleuron coriaceous, speculum smooth, shiny; mesopleural triangle rugose, with strong irregular wrinkles, shiny. Metapleural sulcus reaching mesopleuron at upper 1/3 height; preaxilla delicately coriaceous, shiny; lateral axillar area with parallel wrinkles, without setae; axillar carina broad, with longitudinal striae; axillula slightly ovate, uniformly rugose, with few setae; subaxillular bar shiny, smooth, in most posterior end as high as height of metanotal trough. Metascutellum uniformly coriaceous, higher than height of smooth, shiny ventral impressed area; metanotal trough smooth, shiny, without setae. Propodeum uniformly dull coriaceous, with few setae, without lateral propodeal carinae, thus not divided into central and lateral propodeal areas, both uniformly dull coriaceous. Nucha very short, with few delicate longitudinal sulci. Forewing longer than body, with pale brown veins, margin with long dense cilia; radial cell 3.9 times as long as broad, R1 and Rs not reaching wing margin; areolet small, triangular, welldelimited; Rs+M inconspicuous pale yellow, well traceable, nearly reach basalis, slightly below lower half. Tarsal claws simple, without basal lobe.</p> <p>Metasoma shorter than head+mesosoma, higher than long in lateral view, smooth, shiny, without setae laterally; 2nd metasomal tergite extending dorsally to more than half length of metasoma; prominent part of ventral spine of hypopygium with two subapical lateral lumps, spine tri-forked, each lump with 5-8 long setae extending far beyond apex. Body length 1.8 – 2.1 mm (n=12). MALE. Similar to female but differs in following characters. Compound eye large, malar space 0.2 times as long as height of compound eye; transfacial distance 0.8 times as long as height of eye; diameter of antennal socket larger than distance between toruli and distance between inner margin of eye and torulus. Ocelli large, elongate, POL 3.6 times as long as OOL, length of lateral ocellus 2.0 times as long as OOL. Antenna with 13 flagellomeres, F1 strongly incised and swollened anteriorly; placodeal sensilla on all flagellomeres. Mesoscutellum smooth shiny, more elongate. Body length 1.8 – 2.0 mm (n=3).</p> <p>Biology and Distribution. Only the sexual generation is known, which induces gregarious, small subspherical galls (3 – 4 mm high and 2 – 2.5 mm in diameter), protruding from underneath the bark of Q. acutissima (Fig. 126). Adults overwinter in the gall, and emerge in June of the following year. Known from Japan: Honshu, Morioka, Iwate Prefecture (Monzen 1954) and Nagoya (authors); South Korea (galls collected by G. Melika, in Yeogi Mnt., vicinities of Suwon).</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DC095CFFC83311CAD8E5AB8586FB13	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Melika, George;Pujade-Villar, Juli;Abe, Yoshihisa;Tang, Chang-Ti;Nicholls, James;Wachi, Nakatada;Ide, Tatsuya;Yang, Man-Miao;Pénzes, Zsolt;Csóka, György;Stone, Graham N.	Melika, George, Pujade-Villar, Juli, Abe, Yoshihisa, Tang, Chang-Ti, Nicholls, James, Wachi, Nakatada, Ide, Tatsuya, Yang, Man-Miao, Pénzes, Zsolt, Csóka, György, Stone, Graham N. (2010): 2470. Zootaxa 2470: 1-79
03DC095CFFC93317CAD8E1D18432FE43.text	03DC095CFFC93317CAD8E1D18432FE43.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Neuroterus Hartig 1840	<div><p>Neuroterus Hartig, 1840</p> <p>Figs 127–133, 134–137, 138–145, 146–151, 152–157.</p> <p>Type species: Neuroterus politus Hartig, 1840. Designated by Ashmead (1903).</p> <p>Synonyms: Neuroterus Hartig, 1840. Type species: N. politus Hartig, designated by Ashmead (1903).</p> <p>Spathegaster Hartig, 1840. Type species: S. petioliventris Hartig, by original designation. Synonymized by Mayr (1881).</p> <p>Ameristus Foerster, 1869. Type species: N. politus, designated by Rohwer &amp; Fagan (1917). Synonymized by Mayr (1881).</p> <p>Dolichostrophus Ashmead, 1887. Type species: Cynips quercusirregularis Osten Sacken, 1861. Designated by Ashmead (1887). Synonymized by Dalla Torre (1893).</p> <p>Neuroterus subgenus Diplobius Kinsey, 1923. Type species: Cynips floccosa Bassett, 1881 by original designation. Synonymized by Melika &amp; Abrahamson (2002).</p> <p>Neuroterus subgenus Dolichostrophus Kinsey, 1923. Type species: Cynips irregularis Osten Sacken, 1861 by original designation.</p> <p>Neuroterus subgenus Neospathegaster Kinsey, 1923. Type species: Cynips vesicula Bassett, 1881 by original designation.</p> <p>Neuroterus subgenus Neuroterus Kinsey, 1923 designated as the nominal subgenus of Neuroterus.</p> <p>Neuroterus subgenus Spathegaster Kinsey, 1923. Type species: Spathegaster petioliventris Hartig by original designation.</p> <p>Neoneuroterus Monzen, 1954. Type species: N. kashiyamai Monzen by original designation. Synonymized by Melika &amp; Abrahamson (2002).</p> <p>Repentinia Belizin &amp; Maisuradze, 1961. Type species: R. lencoranica Belizin &amp; Maisuradze, 1961 by original designation (Maisuradze, 1961). Synonymized by Melika &amp; Abrahamson (2002).</p> <p>Diagnosis. Entire body with very few sparse short white setae. Head rounded in anterior view, never transverse or trapezoid, genae not or very slightly broadened behind compound eyes, usually invisible in anterior view (Figs 127, 138, 141, 152). Head not broader than width of mesosoma. In sexual females and especially males compound eyes are strongly enlarged and the transfacial distance short, equal or shorter than the height of the eye and the height of the eye about 3.0 times (in sexual females, Fig. 138) or 5 – 6.0 times (in males, Fig. 141) larger than the height of the malar space. Malar sulcus present, in some species indistinct but always traceable (Figs 127, 138, 141, 152). Both asexual and sexual female antennae with 13 flagellomeres (Figs 129, 140). Notauli absent or incomplete, present in the posterior 1/2 or 1/3 of the mesoscutum, always superficial (Figs 130, 145). If the superficial notauli nearly reaching the pronotum, than malar sulcus deep, distinct (N. tricolor (Hartig), asexual generation). Hind tarsal claws with a distinct basal lobe. Only in the case of the sexual generation of one Palaearctic species, N. tricolor, the tarsal claw is simple, but the female antenna with 13 flagellomeres. The prominent part of the ventral spine of the hypopygium at least 3.0-4.0 times as long as broad in ventral view (Figs 136 – 137, 150, 157). In the male antennae, F1 slightly or not modified, never expanded and flattened, sometimes only curved or similar in shape to F2, subequal or slightly longer than F2 (Fig. 143) (N. albipes (Schenck), N. anthracinus (Curtis), N. numismalis (Geoffroy in Fourcroy), N. quercusbaccarum (L.), N. tricolor). See also Diagnosis to Cerroneuroterus.</p> <p>Two species in the Western Palaearctic, N. anthracinus (Figs 152 – 157) and N. politus, have some distinct morphological peculiarities. The first differs from all other known species by a distinct and complete transscutal articulation, in which the boundary between the mesoscutum and mesoscutellum is straight (Fig. 155). In both species lateral propodeal carinae are distinct, complete, delimiting a smooth, shiny central propodeal area (Fig. 156). The transfer of N. anthracinus from Andricus to Neuroterus (Pujade-Villar et al. 1998) is supported by the recent phylogenetic reconstructions (Stone et al. 2009), while N. politus is isolated from congenerics in all phylogenetic reconstructions. At this point we retain all below mentioned species in Neuroterus pending further data and analysis. Yukawa &amp; Masuda (1996) recorded N. politus (= N. aprilinus (Giraud) in Japan and their figures C – 132 and C – 149 show the galls of sexual and asexual generations, respectively. However, although the galls illustrated in Yukawa &amp; Masuda (1996) are certainly very similar to those of N. politus, identification was made on the basis of galls only, and adults have yet to be examined. We thus regard it as better to assign these galls to an undescribed species until adult wasps have been reared and compared with western palaearctic N. politus.</p> <p>Twelve species of Neuroterus were listed for the Western Palaearctic, with detailed descriptions and data on lifecycles and distribution (Melika et al. 2000; Nieves Aldrey 2001; Melika 2006a). Our redelineation of Neuroterus in fact reflects Kinsey’s (1923) subgenus Spathegaster, into which he placed all the above-mentioned species except N. politus. We prefer the commonly established name Neuroterus and leave Spathegaster as a junior synonym. In our modified delineation, the genus Neuroterus comprises only 6 Western Palaearctic species (N. albipes, N. anthracinus, N. numismalis, N. politus, N. quercusbaccarum, and N. tricolor), all of which have alternating sexual and asexual generations only galling oaks in section Quercus s.s.</p> <p>Recently a list of the Eastern Palaearctic Neuroterus species, with some taxonomic comments, was given in Abe et al. (2007). All Neuroterus species described by Ashmead (1904), Dettmer (1934) and Monzen (1954) from Japan will be examined and discussed elsewhere, including Aphelomyx [sic!] crispulae Mukaigawa, Aphelomyx [sic!] glanduliferae Mukaigawa (Mukaigawa 1920a, b), as well as species of Dryophanta Förster described by Ashmead (1904) which we think may well be representatives of Neuroterus.</p> <p>Around eighty species of Neuroterus have been described from the Holarctic Region. Burks (1979) listed 52 species for America north of Mexico, the majority of which are restricted to the eastern United States. Recently a number of new species from the USA have been described (Melika &amp; Abrahamson 1997). The striking feature of all known Nearctic Neuroterus species is that with a single exception all are associated only with white oaks (section Quercus s.s.), and none are associated with the diverse North American red oaks (section Lobatae). The exception is N. chrysolepis Lyon from California, which induces galls on Q. chrysolepis Liebm. (section Protobalanus, a golden cup oak) (Lyon 1984). A preliminary examination of many Nearctic Neuroterus types indicates that some of them are synonymous (Melika &amp; Abrahamson 1997, 2002) and several species do not fit into the currently designated Neuroterus limits. Nearctic Neuroterus need a thorough revision, which is beyond the scope of the current study.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DC095CFFC93317CAD8E1D18432FE43	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Melika, George;Pujade-Villar, Juli;Abe, Yoshihisa;Tang, Chang-Ti;Nicholls, James;Wachi, Nakatada;Ide, Tatsuya;Yang, Man-Miao;Pénzes, Zsolt;Csóka, György;Stone, Graham N.	Melika, George, Pujade-Villar, Juli, Abe, Yoshihisa, Tang, Chang-Ti, Nicholls, James, Wachi, Nakatada, Ide, Tatsuya, Yang, Man-Miao, Pénzes, Zsolt, Csóka, György, Stone, Graham N. (2010): 2470. Zootaxa 2470: 1-79
03DC095CFFCF3315CAD8E71B8253FD1B.text	03DC095CFFCF3315CAD8E71B8253FD1B.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Cerroneuroterus Melika & Pujade-Villar 2010	<div><p>Cerroneuroterus Melika &amp; Pujade-Villar, new genus</p> <p>Figs 158–163, 164–168, 169–174, 175–177.</p> <p>Type species: Neuroterus lanuginosus Giraud, 1859. Designated herein.</p> <p>Etymology. The name of the genus indicates the host association with the section Cerris of the genus Quercus, and the close morphological similarity to the genus Neuroterus.</p> <p>Gender: Masculine.</p> <p>Diagnosis. Similar to Neuroterus but the malar sulcus always absent; also resembles Pseudoneuroterus but the head trapezoid, not rounded in anterior view. More diagnostic characters are given in the generic key and the Description below.</p> <p>Description In both asexual and sexual generations, malar sulcus always absent, tarsal claws simple, without basal lobe. Antennae of both sexual and asexual females, with 12 flagellomeres (Figs 160, 172). In asexual females head transverse, distinctly broader than high in anterior view and slightly broader than mesosoma; genae fully or partially visible in anterior view; lower face and head posteriorly with dense white setae; transfacial distance 1.2 – 1.3 times longer than height of eye (Figs 158, 169); notauli usually complete, well impressed along entire length, reaching pronotum; in some species (for example, C. folimargo (Monzen, 1954)) notauli less impressed in anterior half, but always strongly impressed in posterior half (Figs 161, 173); mesoscutellum posterolaterally emarginate and elevated above mesoscutellum; mesoscutum and mesoscutellum always entirely and uniformly smooth, shiny, mesoscutellum laterally and posteriorly emarginate, nearly as long as broad, broadest part in posterior half; scutellar foveae absent instead, anterior narrow transverse impression present, usually more impressed than disk of mesoscutellum (Figs 161, 162, 173); projecting part of ventral spine of hypopygium never more than 2.0 times as long as broad in ventral view (Figs 167 – 168, 176); 2nd metasomal tergite dorsally extending less than to half length of metasoma (Figs 166, 176). In sexual females and males, head more rounded; notauli absent, indicated by rows of setae only but then female antennae always with 12 flagellomeres and in male antenna F1 strongly modified, expanded and flattened distally; usually equal or slightly shorter than F2.</p> <p>Comments. Five Western Palaearctic species are transferred into the newly established genus: three species with the only sexual generation known: Cerroneuroterus aggregatus (Wachtl), new comb., C. cerrifloralis (Müllner), new comb., C. obtectus (Wachtl), new comb. and two species with the only asexual generation known: C. lanuginosus (Giraud), new comb. (Fig. 179) and a closely related C. gyulaigaraiae (Melika), new comb., recently described from Syria (Melika 2006b). Further research will probably match alternate generations among these species (Stone et al. 2009). This genus reflects Kinsey’s (1923) subgenus Neuroterus, except for the exclusion here of N. politus and P. saliens. Kinsey (1923) included in his Neuroterus subgenus three Eastern Palaearctic species, N. atamiensis, N. hakonensis, and N. nawai, all described by Ashmead (1904) from Japan, on the basis of adult wasps, without knowing the galls they induce. The taxonomic status of these Eastern Palaearctic taxa will be discussed elsewhere.</p> <p>Cerroneuroterus minutulus (Giraud), new comb. We also formally transfer to Cerroneuroterus an additional Western Palaearctic species, Neuroterus minutulus Giraud, on the basis of its host association with section Cerris oaks and the original description of asexual females. This species is cited in many regional faunas including Austria, Hungary, Italy (Dalla Torre &amp; Kieffer 1910; Ambrus 1974), Romania (Ionescu 1973), Bulgaria (Vassileva-Samnalieva 1984), and Ukraine (Transcarpathian region - Zerova, Diakontschuk &amp; Ermolenko 1988; Melika 2006a). Only asexual females are known, which induce tiny (1 mm across when mature), unilocular, egg-shaped leaf galls on veins, predominantly on the lower side of the lamina. The type material of N. minutulus however has been lost (MNHN, Paris, C. Villemant, pers. comm.). In fact, regional faunas mentioning this species are based on galls and not on adult wasps. Galls described by Müllner (1901) (see also comments in Kieffer 1897 – 1901) and which he thought to be asexual generation galls of Dryocosmus mayri Müllner, could be identical with those attributed to N. minutulus (galls are deposited in the NHMW, Vienna; examined and discussed in Pujade et al. (2003)) and thus it is not out of the question that N. minutulus might be the asexual generation of Dryocosmus mayri. Very young or parasitised galls of other oak gallwasp species may be very similar in size and location. Thus we prefer the more conservative approach of treating this species as one with uncertain status until adults are obtained for detailed morphological analysis. However, formally we transfer it to Cerroneuroterus, and thus C. minutulus (Giraud), new comb.</p> <p>Below some Eastern Palaearctic Cerroneuroterus species are discussed.</p> <p>Cerroneuroterus folimargo (Monzen, 1954), new comb. (Fig. 181). The asexual generation was described by Monzen (1954). Yukawa &amp; Masuda (1996) found the sexual generation experimentally, which induces tiny catkin galls (cf. Figs C – 097 and C – 086 in Yukawa &amp; Masuda, 1996). Both generations develop on Q. acutissima. Genae, broadened behind the eyes, visible in anterior view; the female antenna with 12 flagellomeres and the posteriorly deeply impressed notauli assign this species to Cerroneuroterus. The asexual spangle gall of this species is located on the end of a vein or spine of the leaf, on the underside, pale pinkish, conical, 2 mm in diameter and very similar to the gall of C. vonkuenburgi (Dettmer), but in C. folimargo, the gall is located always at the leaf edge, at the end of veins with only a single gall per leaf. The sexual generation is a tiny catkin gall, while in C. vonkuenburgi the sexual generation galls form woolly masses on catkins. The sexual generation galls are very similar to those of C. monzeni (Dettmer) as well as the asexual spangle galls, however, adults of the asexual generation differ from those of C. vonkuenburgi and C. monzeni (see the key to the asexual Cerroneuroterus species below). Asexual females emerge in April, overwintering in the gall and induce tiny catkin galls, adults of which emerge in late May. Associate with Q. acutissima and Q. variabilis, currently known only from Japan, also occurs in Taiwan.</p> <p>Cerroneuroterus monzeni (Dettmer, 1934), new comb. (Fig. 182). The sexual females, reared from catkin galls on Q. acutissima, were originally described by Dettmer (1934). Later, Monzen redescribed the sexual generation including males (Monzen 1954). Yukawa &amp; Masuda (1996) experimentally matched the sexual (photo C – 101) and the asexual (photo C – 092) generations. Galls of the sexual generation are on catkins of Q. acutissima, the galls are small, conical, yellowish, smooth, with few setae, thin walled, monolocular, 2mm in diameter. Small asexual spangle galls develop on the underside of leaves, similar in shape to those induced by the Western Palaearctic species N. numismalis, rounded and flattened with a central dimple, dark red, without fringe of hair around the gall (Fig. 179). The asexual females overwinter in the galls, emerge in March-April, and induce catkin galls from which the adults emerge in May of the same year. Known on Q. acutissima and Q. variabilis only from Japan (Dettmer 1934; Monzen 1954).</p> <p>Cerroneuroterus vonkuenburgi (Dettmer, 1934), new comb. (Figs 169 – 174, 175 – 177, 183). Neuroterus vonkuenburgi var. wakayamensis Monzen was recently synonymized to N. vonkuenburgi (Abe et al. 2007). Yukawa &amp; Masuda (1996) experimentally showed that this species does have a sexual generation, galls of which form large woolly masses on catkins (pictures C – 088 and C – 090, asexual galls and C – 096 and C – 102, sexual galls). Both generations associate with Q. acutissima and Q. variabilis; known from Japan (Ashmead 1904; Dettmer 1934; Monzen 1954; Yukawa &amp; Masuda 1996) and Taiwan (Taoyuan Co., Fuhsing Township; Hsinchu Co., Hsinfong Township and Jiashih Township; Taichung Co., Central Cross Island Road, Heping Township; Nantou Co., Cingjing Farm, Renai Township; all ex Quercus variabilis) (authors). It is a new record for Taiwan. Galls appear on the tree from early August, develop through the summer and in early November, when they are mature, individually or together with leaves fall to the ground. Under the laboratory conditions, adults emerged from late November. In Hsinchu County, Hsinfong Township, adults were observed to lay eggs on leaf or flower buds of Q. variabilis from late January of 2010.</p> <p>Comments. Neoneuroterus, a genus established by Monzen (1954), with two Japanese species, N. kashiyamai Monzen and N. bonehenrici (Dettmer) [the taxonomic position of which will be discussed elsewhere], was synonymized with Neuroterus (Melika &amp; Abrahamson 2002). Kovalev (1965) described three other Neoneuroterus species from the Far East of Russia, N. nephroideus, N. spumeus, N. vernicosus. All three of these species possess a distinct transscutal articulation, and on the basis of the given character set and examined types (by GM), were transferred to Trigonaspis Hartig (Melika &amp; Abrahamson 2002; Abe et al. 2007).</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DC095CFFCF3315CAD8E71B8253FD1B	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Melika, George;Pujade-Villar, Juli;Abe, Yoshihisa;Tang, Chang-Ti;Nicholls, James;Wachi, Nakatada;Ide, Tatsuya;Yang, Man-Miao;Pénzes, Zsolt;Csóka, György;Stone, Graham N.	Melika, George, Pujade-Villar, Juli, Abe, Yoshihisa, Tang, Chang-Ti, Nicholls, James, Wachi, Nakatada, Ide, Tatsuya, Yang, Man-Miao, Pénzes, Zsolt, Csóka, György, Stone, Graham N. (2010): 2470. Zootaxa 2470: 1-79
03DC095CFFC2331ACAD8E4C98282F856.text	03DC095CFFC2331ACAD8E4C98282F856.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Neuroterus (Kieffer 1904)	<div><p>Key to the Neuroterus and sexual forms of Cerroneuroterus species</p> <p>1 Female........................................................................................................................................................................... 2</p> <p>- Male............................................................................................................................................................................ 20</p> <p>2 Lateral propodeal carina distinct; wings always hyaline.............................................................................................. 3</p> <p>- Lateral propodeal carina absent or indistinct, sometimes interrupted, fragmented; wings often with fuscous patch around 1st abscissa of radius........................................................................................................................................ 6</p> <p>3 Notaulus complete, deeply impressed; transscutal articulation complete medially, mesoscutum not fused with mesoscutellum; antenna with 12 – 13 flagellomeres...................................................................................................... 4</p> <p>- Notaulus absent or very superficially impressed anteriorly; transscutal articulation absent or incomplete, absent medially; mesoscutum emarginate posteriorly and fused with mesoscutellum, antenna with 11 – 12 flagellomeres... 5</p> <p>4 Body darkish brown to black; mesoscutum and mesoscutellum with sparse setae; mesoscutum smooth and shiny, laterally faintly alutaceous; notaulus deep; scutellar foveae confluent, indistinctly delimited............................................................................................................................................................................. Neuroterus anthracinus, sexual</p> <p>- Body light brown to amber; mesoscutum and mesoscutellum with moderately dense setae; mesoscutum entirely coriaceous-alutaceous; notaulus shallow; scutellar foveae present, indistinctly separated............................................................................................................................................................................. Neuroterus anthracinus, asexual</p> <p>5 Tarsal claw with basal lobe; mesoscutum and mesoscutellum smooth and shiny; antenna with 11 flagellomeres................................................................................................................................................. Neuroterus politus, asexual</p> <p>- Tarsal claw simple; mesoscutum coriaceous; mesoscutellum coriaceous to rugulose; antenna with 12 flagellomeres............................................................................................................................................ Neuroterus politus, sexual</p> <p>6 Hind tarsal claw simple, without basal lobe................................................................................................................ 7</p> <p>- Hind tarsal claw with basal lobe................................................................................................................................. 15</p> <p>7 Notaulus absent or incomplete and superficially impressed........................................................................................ 8</p> <p>- Notaulus complete, deeply impressed posteriorly and superficial in anterior half...................................................... 9</p> <p>8 Notaulus superficial, incomplete; wings infuscate, especially in upper-distal half; basal half of metasoma reddish yellow; antenna with 13 flagellomeres.............................................................................. Neuroterus tricolor, sexual</p> <p>- Notaulus absent or indicated by line of setae; wings without infuscation, metasoma different; antennae with 12 flagellomeres (sexual females of Cerroneuroterus, and Pseudoneuroterus saliens)................................................. 10</p> <p>9 Malar sulcus present........................................................................................................ Neuroterus tricolor, asexual</p> <p>- Malar sulcus absent..................................................... Cerroneuroterus, asexual females (not included into the key)</p> <p>10 Mesoscutum and mesoscutellum alutaceous or weakly coriaceous.................................... Cerroneuroterus obtectus</p> <p>- Mesoscutum and mesoscutellum smooth and shiny................................................................................................... 11</p> <p>11 Legs brown; body darkish brown...................................................................................... Cerroneuroterus minutulus</p> <p>- Legs entirely or partially yellow, body or at least mesosoma black.......................................................................... 12</p> <p>12 Coxa and middle 3/4 part of femur brown, tips of femur, tibia and tarsus yellow; R 1 in forewing equal in length to 2r........................................................................................................................................ Cerroneuroterus cerrifloralis</p> <p>- Legs pale yellow; R 1 in forewing longer than 2r...................................................................................................... 13</p> <p>13 Pedicel equal in length to scape; F3 and subsequent flagellomeres less than 2.0 times as long as broad, last flagellomeres subquadrate (Fig. 32); mesoscutum and mesoscutellum glabrous, smooth and shiny, without piliferous punctures; propodeum weakly rugose and usually with distinct median carina............ Cerroneuroterus aggregatus</p> <p>- Pedicel shorter than scape; F3 and subsequent flagellomeres more than 2.0 times as long as broad; last flagellomeres longer than broad; mesoscutum and mesoscutellum different, sometimes with setae and/or sculptured or with piliferous punctures; propodeum without median carina................................................................................................... 14</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DC095CFFC2331ACAD8E4C98282F856	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Melika, George;Pujade-Villar, Juli;Abe, Yoshihisa;Tang, Chang-Ti;Nicholls, James;Wachi, Nakatada;Ide, Tatsuya;Yang, Man-Miao;Pénzes, Zsolt;Csóka, György;Stone, Graham N.	Melika, George, Pujade-Villar, Juli, Abe, Yoshihisa, Tang, Chang-Ti, Nicholls, James, Wachi, Nakatada, Ide, Tatsuya, Yang, Man-Miao, Pénzes, Zsolt, Csóka, György, Stone, Graham N. (2010): 2470. Zootaxa 2470: 1-79
03DC095CFFC03319CAD8E7A38413FEF3.text	03DC095CFFC03319CAD8E7A38413FEF3.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Aphelonyx Mayr 1881	<div><p>Aphelonyx Mayr, 1881</p> <p>Figs 184–188, 189–193, 194–199.</p> <p>Type species: Cynips cerricola Giraud, 1859. Type designated by Mayr (1881).</p> <p>Diagnosis. Very closely resembles asexual Andricus, differs in antennae being 2.0 times as long as the head+mesosoma, notauli are incomplete in the anterior 1/3 (Fig. 185), and tarsal claws are simple; in asexual Andricus, antennae are less than 2.0 times as long as head+mesosoma, notauli are usually complete, tarsal claws always with a basal lobe.</p> <p>Redescription. ASEXUAL FEMALE. Body length 4.7 – 5.2 mm, brown to light brown, with some darker spots on head and mesosoma; with dense long setae. Head coriaceous, slightly broader than high in anterior view. POL nearly equal OOL. Transfacial distance more than 1.5 times as long as height of lower face. Gena strongly broadened behind eye. Lower face rugose, with striae radiating from clypeus and extending into the area between antennal socket and inner margin of compound eye. Antenna with 12 flagellomeres, around 2.0 times as long as head+mesosoma. Mesosoma 1.5 times as long as high, with uniform dense white setae. Mesoscutum rugose and pustulate, notauli distinct and impressed in posterior 2/3; median mesoscutal line absent. Mesoscutellum as long or slightly longer than broad, rounded, strongly overhanging metanotum, with strong rugae. Mesopleuron, including speculum uniformly coriaceous, with dense setae. Propodeum shiny, smooth, without carinae, lateral propodeal carina fragmented or absent; smooth, shiny rounded central propodeal area delimited by very dense white setae both sides of central area. Forewing 1.4 times as long as body length, margin with short cilia; radial cell long and narrow, opened. Legs with dense white setae; tarsal claws simple. Metasoma slightly higher than long, laterally compressed, with very dense setae; ventral spine of hypopygium long, needle-like, nearly 4.5 – 5.0 times as long as broad, with sparse short white setae.</p> <p>Biology and Distribution. Three species are known, Aphelonyx cerricola (Giraud), A. persica Melika, Stone, Sadeghi &amp; Pujade-Villar and A. kordestanica, new species. Only an asexual generation is known for all three species. They induce bud galls that are very similar in structure and location, developing singly or in groups most commonly on lateral buds on young shoots only on section Cerris oaks. The mature gall is hollow, with a tough woody wall 1.5 – 3.0 mm thick; the interior space contains a single, free-rolling or only loosely attached larval chamber. No other Western Palaearctic Cynipini induce galls of this structure, although one Eastern Palaearctic species known from Taiwan, Trichagalma formosana [described above] induces a structurally similar gall. The galls develop through the summer and mature in October. Adult wasps overwinter in the gall and emerge in the following March-April. Aphelonyx cerricola is native and relatively common in central and southern Europe, but a recent invader in Britain (Crawley 1997); also found in Algeria and Greece (authors), Turkey (Dalla Torre &amp; Kieffer 1910) and Ukraine (Transcarpathia region only, Melika 2006a). Records of this species from Iran (Chodjai 1980) probably belong to the recently described species A. persica, currently known from Iran, Syria and Lebanon (Melika et al. 2004).</p> <p>Comments. Three Eastern Palaearctic species which were known as Aphelonyx (A. crispulae Mukaigawa, A. glanduliferae Mukaigawa and A. acutissimae Monzen) were erroneously assigned to Aphelonyx (Melika &amp; Abrahamson 2002, Abe et al. 2007) and are discussed above. Aphelonyx is a distinct monophyletic group in DNA sequence analyses, closely grouped with Dryocosmus cerriphilus Giraud, and together these cluster with Pseudoneuroterus. All three lineages are ancient compare to other non-Cerris galling Cynipini, diverging ca 10 – 13 million years ago (Stone et al. 2009; Fig.1).</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DC095CFFC03319CAD8E7A38413FEF3	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Melika, George;Pujade-Villar, Juli;Abe, Yoshihisa;Tang, Chang-Ti;Nicholls, James;Wachi, Nakatada;Ide, Tatsuya;Yang, Man-Miao;Pénzes, Zsolt;Csóka, György;Stone, Graham N.	Melika, George, Pujade-Villar, Juli, Abe, Yoshihisa, Tang, Chang-Ti, Nicholls, James, Wachi, Nakatada, Ide, Tatsuya, Yang, Man-Miao, Pénzes, Zsolt, Csóka, György, Stone, Graham N. (2010): 2470. Zootaxa 2470: 1-79
03DC095CFFC1331ECAD8E4EB85A4F92B.text	03DC095CFFC1331ECAD8E4EB85A4F92B.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Aphelonyx kordestanica Melika & Pujade-Villar & Abe & Tang & Nicholls & Wachi & Ide & Yang & Pénzes & Csóka & Stone 2010	<div><p>Aphelonyx kordestanica Melika, new species</p> <p>Figs 189–193, 194–199</p> <p>Type material. HOLOTYPE female: IRAN, Kordestan, Bane, ex Q. libani; coll. M. Tavakoli, September 2006. PARATYPE: 1 female with the same label as the holotype. The holotype and paratype females are deposited in PDL, Tanakajd, Hungary.</p> <p>Etymology. The species is named after Kordestan (= Kurdistan) Province of Iran, the type locality.</p> <p>Diagnosis. In A. kordestanica, the head and mesosoma are covered with sparse white setae, with the surface sculpture revealed; the mesoscutellum rounded, very dull rugose, without or with very few setae, the head and mesosoma uniformly reddish brown, without black marks. In A. cerricola and A. persica, the head and mesosoma have dense white setae, and the surface sculpture hidden; the mesoscutellum is slightly longer than broad, never dull rugose, with very dense white setae, with the coriaceous sculpture obscured; the head and especially the mesoscutum with some black marks.</p> <p>Description. ASEXUAL FEMALE (holotype). Body, including antennae and legs, uniformly reddish brown, with slightly darker mesosoma, especially dorsally. Mesosoma and metasoma laterally with relatively dense setae; wing veins dark brown.</p> <p>Head 2.3 times as broad as long dorsally; 1.4 times as broad as high in anterior view and equal or slightly broader than mesosoma (measuring without tegulae). Gena smooth, without setae, delicately alutaceous, strongly broadened behind eye, slightly broader than across diameter of eye. Malar space smooth, with very fine striae (often difficult to see), 0.4 times as long as height of eye, without malar sulcus. POL 1.2 times as long as OOL; OOL 2.7 times as long as diameter of lateral ocellus, 1.7 times as long as LOL; ocelli rounded. Transfacial distance 1.3 times as long as height of eye and 1.6 times as long as height of lower face (distance between antennal rim and ventral margin of clypeus); diameter of antennal socket 1.2 times as long as distance between sockets, distance between socket and eye margin nearly equal to diameter of socket. Lower face delicately coriaceous, with elevated rugose median area and relatively dense setae. Clypeus rectangular, flat, more than 2.0 times as broad as high, with elevated coriaceous central part, with deep anterior tentorial pits, distinct epistomal sulcus and clypeo-pleurostomal line; ventrally straight, narrowly emarginate, not incised medially, with long dense setae along ventral margin. Frons dull rugose, with rounded impressed area below median ocellus, with Y-like elevated area, extending downwards from two lateral ocelli and going in between antennal sockets; area above antennal socket aside of Y-like elevated part also impressed; vertex and occiput uniformly dull coriaceous; interocellar area elevated. Postocciput around occipital foramen impressed, coriaceous; posterior tentorial pits large, deep, elongate; hypostomal bridge 1.5 times as high as broad, lower part narrowed down to emarginate hypostomal carina; occipital foramen slightly shorter than height of hypostomal bridge, around 1.5 times shorter than height of oral foramen. Antenna with 12 flagellomeres, longer than head+mesosoma; pedicel slightly longer than broad, F1 nearly 6.0 times as long as pedicel, equal to length of F2, F2 1.3 times as long as F3, F3=F4, subsequent flagellomeres shorter, all further flagellomeres subsequently shorter, except F12 which longer than F11; placodeal sensilla absent on F1 – F3, few apically present on F4; F5 – F12 entirely covered by sensilla.</p> <p>Mesosoma longer than high in lateral view, with uniform dense white setae. Pronotum coriaceous; with dense white setae and some irregular wrinkles, emarginate along lateral edge. Mesoscutum nearly as long as broad (width measured across basis of tegulae), with very few sparse white setae, dull coriaceous, with distinct strong rugae in internotauli area, more delicately coriaceous aside notauli and anteriorly; parapsidal signa smooth, shiny, broad; anteroadmedian signa delicately reticulate, extending to half length of mesoscutum; notaulus incomplete, superficial but well visible because of smooth bottom, extending to the most 2/3 length of mesoscutum; median mesoscutal line absent; parascutal carina broad along tegula only. Transscutal articulation present, straight. Dorsoaxillar area with very dense setae, smooth. Mesoscutellum rounded, uniformly dull rugose, at least 1.5 times shorter than length of mesoscutum, strongly overhanging metanotum. Scutellar foveae absent, anteriorly mesoscutellum with transverse impressed area, with strong parallel rugae. Mesopleuron, including speculum, uniformly micropunctate, with dense white setae, narrowly impressed along posterior edge; mesopleural triangle delicately coriaceous. Metapleural sulcus reaching mesopleuron slightly above half height; preaxilla coriaceous; lateral axillar area with parallel wrinkles, without setae; axillar carina narrow, without longitudinal striae; axillula slightly ovate, smooth, with few short white setae and punctures; subaxillular bar narrow, smooth, shiny, in most posterior end 2.0 times shorter than height of metanotal trough. Metascutellum uniformly delicately coriaceous, shorter than height of smooth, shiny ventral impressed area; metanotal trough smooth, shiny, without setae. Lateral propodeal carinae absent, central propodeal area smooth, shiny, without setae; lateral propodeal area uniformly coriaceous, with very dense white setae; nucha very short, without longitudinal sulci. Forewing longer than body, with dark brown veins, margin without cilia; radial cell 4.3 times as long as broad, R1 running along wing margin and extending to 1/3 length of radial cell margin; Rs nearly reaching wing margin; areolet large, triangular, well-delimited by distinct veins; Rs+M distinct, nearly reaching basalis in lower third. Tarsal claws simple, without basal lobe.</p> <p>Metasoma as long as head+mesosoma, higher than long in lateral view, smooth, shiny, all tergites laterally with dense white setae; prominent part of ventral spine of hypopygium slender, needle-like, long, at least 5.4 times as long as broad ventrally, with sparse very short white setae, not extending beyond apex of spine.</p> <p>Body length 3.9 – 4.6 mm (n=2).</p> <p>Gall (Figs 198 – 199). A spherical bud gall may be found singly or in groups of 2 – 3, never more, developing most commonly on lateral buds on young shoots. The gall is unilocular, when mature is up to 8 – 12 mm in diameter, reddish-brown, with smooth surface, without velvety pubescence and small bumps, as in A. persica. The gall is hollow, with a tough woody wall 1.2 – 1.5 mm thick. The interior space contains a single larval chamber, which in the mature gall is unattached to the gall wall, and free-rolling. Old galls persist on the host tree.</p> <p>Biology. Only the asexual generation is known from galls on Quercus libani Olivier. The galls develop through the summer and mature in mid September – October. Adult wasps overwinter in the gall and emerge the following spring.</p> <p>Distribution. Iran, Kordestan Province, Bane, Zagros Mountains.</p> <p>Comments. DNA sequence for the mitochondrial cytochrome b gene, place this species closer to A. persica than A. cerricola. Sequence for the nuclear 28S D2 region is identical to the two other Aphelonyx species (J. Nicholls and G.N. Stone, unpublished data).</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DC095CFFC1331ECAD8E4EB85A4F92B	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Melika, George;Pujade-Villar, Juli;Abe, Yoshihisa;Tang, Chang-Ti;Nicholls, James;Wachi, Nakatada;Ide, Tatsuya;Yang, Man-Miao;Pénzes, Zsolt;Csóka, György;Stone, Graham N.	Melika, George, Pujade-Villar, Juli, Abe, Yoshihisa, Tang, Chang-Ti, Nicholls, James, Wachi, Nakatada, Ide, Tatsuya, Yang, Man-Miao, Pénzes, Zsolt, Csóka, György, Stone, Graham N. (2010): 2470. Zootaxa 2470: 1-79
03DC095CFFC7331CCAD8E4CE8285FE43.text	03DC095CFFC7331CCAD8E4CE8285FE43.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Chilaspis Mayr 1881	<div><p>Chilaspis Mayr, 1881, stat. rev.</p> <p>Figs 200–206.</p> <p>Type species: Andricus nitidus Giraud, 1859. Designated by Mayr (1881).</p> <p>Diagnosis. Chilaspis closely resembles the two genera Plagiotrochus and Dryocosmus. However, it differs from the first by a smooth mesoscutum and mesopleuron and differs from Dryocosmus by the characters given in the generic key. One Dryocosmus species in particular, D. caspiensis, described from Iran (Tavakoli et al. 2008) and known from the asexual generation only, very closely resembles Chilaspis in its morphology and coexists with it in the same localities and even on the same trees of Q. castaneifolia in different localities in Iran. However, in asexual female Chilaspis, the pedicel and scape are not broadened, only slightly or not broader than flagellomeres, all flagellomeres nearly of the same width; the mesoscutellum with wrinkles and rugae along lateral and posterior sides, while in D. caspiensis the pedicel and scape are very strongly broadened, at least 2.2–2.5 times broader than flagellomeres; flagellomeres broadened towards the apex, F8–F12 at least 2.0 times as broad as the first flagellomeres; the mesoscutellum with narrow strip of wrinkles and rugae along lateral and posterior sides.</p> <p>Both Cynips L. and Biorhiza Westwood, resemble Chilaspis in having smooth mesoscutum and mesopleuron, but they have a complete malar sulcus, and the malar space lack striae, and are not associated with section Cerris oaks. More details are provided in Pujade-Villar et al. (2003).</p> <p>Redescription. Body uniformly yellow or light brown. Surface sculpture absent or very weak, alutaceous or delicately coriaceous on some structures. Head transverse, broader than high, gena broadened behind eye, well-visible in anterior view; malar sulcus absent, malar space with very few indistinct and weak striae radiating from clypeus but never reaching eye margin and antennal sockets; vertex and occiput smooth or very delicately coriaceous. Compound eye, both in females and males, small, transfacial distance smaller or almost equal to height of eye. Antenna in asexual female with 11 – 12 flagellomeres, in sexual female – 12 – 13 flagellomeres, in male with 13 – 14 flagellomeres. Pedicel and scape not broadened, only slightly or not broader than flagellomeres, all flagellomeres of nearly same width. The head, mesoscutum and mesopleuron smooth and shiny; notaulus deep, complete, reaching pronotum; mesoscutellum delimited marginally by distinct sharp carina, smooth or with very weak, delicate sculpture; scutellar foveae distinct, with smooth, shiny or very delicately sculptured bottom, separated by more or less distinct median (central) carina; propodeum with two distinct propodeal carinae, laterally curved outwards delimiting smooth or delicately sculptured central area; metasoma strongly compressed laterally; ventral spine of hypopygium short, with sparse white setae reaching behind apex of spine.</p> <p>Comments. The genus is represented by two Western Palaearctic species, Chilaspis nitida (Giraud), comb. rev. distributed in Europe, on Q. cerris L. and C. israeli (Sternlicht), comb. rev. known from the Middle East into Iran, on Quercus castaneifolia C.A.Mey, Q. brantii Lindl. and Q. libani Olivier (Tavakoli et al. 2008). In recent phylogenetic reconstructions, C. nitida and C. israeli form a strongly-supported monophyletic clade with Plagiotrochus as a well-supported sister group, and well removed from other Dryocosmus (Stone et al. 2009; Fig.1). The earlier synonymization of Chilaspis to Dryocosmus was premature and did not adequately incorporate molecular or morphological character states in Aphelonyx, Pseudoneuroterus, Neuroterus and Cerroneuroterus (Ács et al. 2007). Examination of the species tree in Ács et al. (2007, their Fig. 3) shows their synonymization to be based on the fact that Chilaspis and Dryocosmus species are intermingled, with D. kuriphilus as a basal sister group. Later analyses that had other section Cerris-galling genera been included, show they should be not synonymised to Dryocosmus. Analyses of morphological character states in different “ Dryocosmus ” species were inadequately detailed, and a “lumper” approach was used -- the synonymization was based on two main characters: i) the absence of a surface sculpture on the mesoscutum and mesoscutellum, and ii) the short projecting part of the ventral spine of the hypopygium, without taking into account other important characters which are given in the diagnosis to Chilaspis and in the generic key above.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DC095CFFC7331CCAD8E4CE8285FE43	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Melika, George;Pujade-Villar, Juli;Abe, Yoshihisa;Tang, Chang-Ti;Nicholls, James;Wachi, Nakatada;Ide, Tatsuya;Yang, Man-Miao;Pénzes, Zsolt;Csóka, György;Stone, Graham N.	Melika, George, Pujade-Villar, Juli, Abe, Yoshihisa, Tang, Chang-Ti, Nicholls, James, Wachi, Nakatada, Ide, Tatsuya, Yang, Man-Miao, Pénzes, Zsolt, Csóka, György, Stone, Graham N. (2010): 2470. Zootaxa 2470: 1-79
03DC095CFFC4331DCAD8E6F1830FFD33.text	03DC095CFFC4331DCAD8E6F1830FFD33.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Dryocosmus Giraud 1859	<div><p>Dryocosmus Giraud, 1859</p> <p>Figs 207–213, 214–220, 221–228</p> <p>Type species: Dryocosmus cerriphilus Giraud, 1859. Original designation by monotypy (Giraud 1859).</p> <p>Diagnosis. See Diagnosis to Chilaspis and the generic key.</p> <p>Redescription. Body length 1.4 – 2.6 mm, yellow to dark brown; metasoma usually darker; with very few short setae. Head slightly broader than high in anterior view, nearly 2.0 times as broad as long from above; smooth, alutaceous to delicately coriaceous, without setae, with or without striae radiating from clypeus. Gena not (sexual generation) or broadened (asexual female) behind eye. POL slightly shorter or equal to OOL. Malar sulcus absent, malar space very short. Transfacial distance slightly longer than height of eye. Clypeus projecting over mandibles. Sexual female antenna with 12 – 13, asexual female with 11 – 12, male antenna with 13 flagellomeres, F 1 in male excavated and clearly expanded apically. Mesosoma convex and nearly as high as long in lateral view, with very few white setae. Mesoscutum smooth or alutaceous. Notaulus complete, deeply impressed; median mesoscutal line absent or in a form of very short triangle, anterior parallel and parapsidal lines absent. Mesocutellum smooth, or uniformly coriaceous; scutellar foveae absent or present (e.g. D. caspiensis Melika, Sadeghi, Atkinson, Stone &amp; Barimani), usually anterior transverse impression present, indistinctly delimited posteriorly from mesoscutellar disk, sometimes a narrow, weak central carina extending to mesoscutum, dividing anterior impressed area into two. Mesopleuron and speculum uniformly alutaceous or smooth. Lateral propodeal carinae strongly curved outwards medially; central propodeal area with or without median longitudinal carina, usually with some irregular wrinkles. Tarsal claws simple, without basal lobe. Forewing margin with cilia; sometimes fuscous around veins; radial cell 3.5 – 4.0 times as long as broad, opened. Metasoma compressed laterally, as long as high and higher than mesosoma (in D. kuriphilus Yasumatsu metasoma is more cylindrical); all tergites without setae and punctures (except D. kuriphilus, metasoma of which in uniform dense micropunctures, except 2nd metasomal tergite); prominent part of ventral spine of hypopygium short, with short and sparse setae, never forming apical tuft.</p> <p>Around 25 species of Dryocosmus are known world-wide, including 16 in the Nearctic Region (Burks 1979). However, some nearctic species have been placed in Dryocosmus erroneously (Dailey 1969; Dailey &amp; Sprenger 1973). It has been clearly shown, for example, that the nearctic species D. favus Beutenmüller, is phylogenetically distinct from palaearctic Dryocosmus and is more closely allied to Andricus (Ács et al. 2007). The remaining nearctic Dryocosmus either represent a morphologically convergent lineage otherwise distant from palaearctic Dryocosmus, or a related lineage separated from palaearctic relatives by a host oak shift.</p> <p>Most Dryocosmus species have alternating sexual and asexual generations. The seven Western Palaearctic species induce galls exclusively on Cerris section oaks, while all but two of the nearctic species induce their galls on red oaks (section Lobatae). The exceptions are the nearctic species Dryocosmus castanopsidis (Beutenmueller) and Dryocosmus rileypokei Morita &amp; Buffington, which gall chinquapins, Chrysolepis Hjelmq. (Beutenmueller 1917; Buffington &amp; Morita 2009), and the only known Eastern Palaearctic species, D. kuriphilus, which galls chestnuts, Castanea L. (details in Aebi et al. 2006; Abe et al. 2007). Details of the lifecycles, gall morphology, biology, geographic distribution, and detailed morphological descriptions of the species are given elsewhere (Dalla Torre &amp; Kieffer 1910; Melika et al. 2000; Pujade-Villar et al. 2003; Azizkhani et al. 2006; Melika 2006a; Tavakoli et al. 2008; Buffington &amp; Morita 2009).</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DC095CFFC4331DCAD8E6F1830FFD33	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Melika, George;Pujade-Villar, Juli;Abe, Yoshihisa;Tang, Chang-Ti;Nicholls, James;Wachi, Nakatada;Ide, Tatsuya;Yang, Man-Miao;Pénzes, Zsolt;Csóka, György;Stone, Graham N.	Melika, George, Pujade-Villar, Juli, Abe, Yoshihisa, Tang, Chang-Ti, Nicholls, James, Wachi, Nakatada, Ide, Tatsuya, Yang, Man-Miao, Pénzes, Zsolt, Csóka, György, Stone, Graham N. (2010): 2470. Zootaxa 2470: 1-79
03DC095CFFC53323CAD8E6318432FDE3.text	03DC095CFFC53323CAD8E6318432FDE3.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Dryocosmus jungalii Melika & Pujade-Villar & Abe & Tang & Nicholls & Wachi & Ide & Yang & Pénzes & Csóka & Stone 2010	<div><p>Dryocosmus jungalii Melika &amp; Stone, new species</p> <p>Figs 214–220, 221–228, 229–233.</p> <p>Type material. HOLOTYPE female: IRAN, Kohkiloye &amp; Boyer Ahmad, Yasuj, Jungali Park, ex Q. brantii; Lor 446, coll. G. Melika, 2007.V.15. PARATYPES: 24 females and 21 males. Twenty two females and 17 males with the same labels as the holotype; 2 females and 2 males: IRAN, Lorestan, Dorod, ex Q. brantii; Lor 459. coll. M. Tavakoli, Spring 2008. The holotype and 19 female and 16 male paratypes are deposited in PDL, 5 female and 5 female paratypes in USNM.</p> <p>Etymology. The species is named after the name of locality where it was collected, Jungali Park.</p> <p>Diagnosis. Belongs to the group of species with the mesoscutellum entirely and uniformly coriaceous or rugose. Most closely resembles D. mikoi Melika, Tavakoli, Stone &amp; Azizkhani in that both species are light brown to yellowish. In female D. jungalii, the compound eye is small, black, the transfacial distance longer than the height of the eye; the head and mesosoma are reddish brown, with darker metasoma, while in D. mikoi the compound eye is large, silvery, the transfacial distance nearly equal to the height of the eye, the body uniformly light brown to yellowish. In male D. jungalii, the mesoscutellum is smooth, shiny, without sculpture and the head is black, while in D. mikoi the mesoscutellum is uniformly coriaceous and the head is brown, never black. The galls of this species can be confused with those induced by Andricus crispator Tschek and/or Andricus istvani Melika, both of which occur in Iran and also develop only on Cerris section oaks (Q. brantii and Q. libani) (Tavakoli et al. 2008). However, galls of Andricus crispator usually occur in large numbers and the main axis of the gall is perpendicular to the leaf blade, thus the gall is higher than its diameter, while in Dryocosmus jungalii the galls are flat, longer along the leaf axis and project only from both sides of the leaf. Andricus istvani galls are multilocular and noticeably larger, 10 – 20 mm long, and remain soft as they mature.</p> <p>Description. SEXUAL FEMALE (holotype). Mesosoma, antennae, legs uniformly reddish brown; head brown, with much darker lower face, interocellar area and posterior part. Metasoma dark browm, especially dorsally; the anterior half of 2nd metasomal tergite laterally and ventral spine of hypopygium light brown.</p> <p>Head massive, rounded in anterior view, delicately coriaceous, with few white setae, 1.9 times as broad as long from above; 1.3 times as broad as high in anterior view, broader than mesosoma. Gena delicately coriaceous, not broadened behind eye, its width nearly 2.0 times less than cross diameter of eye, invisible in anterior view. Malar space delicately coriaceous, without setae, 0.5 times as long as height of eye, without striae and malar sulcus. POL nearly equal OOL; OOL 4.6 times as long as diameter of lateral ocellus, 1.5 times as long as LOL; ocelli slightly elongate. Transfacial distance 1.4 times as long as height of eye and 1.6 times as long as height of lower face (distance between antennal rim and ventral margin of clypeus); diameter of Antennal socket nearly 2.0 times as large as distance between sockets, and nearly equal to distance between eye margin and socket. Lower face delicately uniformly coriaceous, with strongly elevated median area and very few setae. Clypeus trapezoid, with ventral side broader, with slightly elevated central part, coriaceous, with very indistinct anterior tentorial pits, distinct epistomal sulcus and clypeo-pleurostomal line; ventrally emarginate and slightly incised medially. Frons coriaceous, with rounded impressed area below median ocellus, with Y-like elevated area, extending down from two alteral ocelli and passing between antennal sockets; area above antennal socket aside of Y-like elevated part also impressed; vertex and occiput very delicately coriaceous to nearly smooth; interocellar area elevated, with stronger sculpture than vertex. Postocciput around occipital foramen impressed; posterior tentorial pits large, deep, elongate; hypostomal bridge 1.5 times as high as broad, lower part where gular sulci merged very short; occipital foramen slightly shorter than height of hypostomal bridge, around 1.3 times shorter than height of oral foramen. Antenna with 12 flagellomeres (or 13, indistinct suture between F13 and F12 visible in some paratypes), as long or longer than body; pedicel longer than broad, F1 4.1 times as long as pedicel, 1.3 times as long as F2, F2 slightly longer than F3, F4 slightly shorter than F3, F6 – F7 shorter than F5 and nearly equal in length; F8 – F11 subsequently shorter, F12 darker than all other flagellomeres (if fused) than 1.7 times as long as F11; all flagellomeres with short whitish dense setae; placodeal sensilla on F3–F12, in numerous rows, absent on F1–F2.</p> <p>Mesosoma longer than high in lateral view, with very few setae. Pronotum coriaceous; with irregular wrinkles, emarginate along lateral edge. Mesoscutum smooth or very delicately alutaceous, shiny; longer than broad (width measured across basis of tegulae); notauli complete, deep; parascutal and anteroadmedian signa, median mesoscutal line absent; posterolaterally, above dosoaxillar area only slightly elevated. Transscutal articulation distinct, complete, not straight but semilunar. Mesoscutellum longer than broad, 1.5 times shorter than length of mesoscutum, overhanging metanotum, emarginate laterally and posteriorly; disk nearly as long as broad, uniformly dull rugose, with irergular wrinkles; scutellar foveae absent, instead indicated by deep transverse area, with smooth or very delicately coriaceous bottom. Mesopleuron, including speculum, uniformly coriaceous; mesopleural triangle rugose, with strong irregular wrinkles. Metapleural sulcus reaching mesopleuron at half height; preaxilla smooth, shiny; lateral axillar area with parallel wrinkles, without setae; axillar carina narrow, without longitudinal striae; axillula slightly ovate, uniformy punctate, without setae; subaxillular bar narrow, very indistinct and coriaceous. Metascutellum uniformly delicately punctate, slightly higher than height of smooth, shiny ventral impressed area; metanotal trough smooth, shiny, without setae. Lateral propodeal carinae complete, strongly curved outwards, delimiting a large smooth and shiny central propodeal area with numerous irregular wrinkles; lateral propodeal area uniformly delicately coriaceous, without setae; nucha very short, with few delicate longitudinal sulci. Forewing longer than body, with distinct brown veins, margin without cilia; radial cell 5.5 times as long as broad, R1 on a short distance running along wing margin, Rs nearly reaching wing margin; areolet small, triangular, well-delimited by distinct veins; Rs+M inconspicuous, its projection reaching basalis in lowest part. Tarsal claws simple, without basal lobe.</p> <p>Metasoma nearly as long as head+mesosoma, higher than long in lateral view, smooth, shiny, with very few short setae laterally on 2nd metasomal tergite which extending to half length of metasoma; prominent part of ventral spine of hypopygium extremely short, as long as broad ventrally, with few white subapical setae, extends beyond apex of spine.</p> <p>Body length 1.9 – 2.2 mm (n=4). MALE. Similar to female but differs in the following characters: head black, while entire body yellow. Compound eye large, malar space very short, 0.1 times as long as height of eye; transfacial distance 0.7 times as long as height of eye; diameter of socket nearly equal to distance between sockets; distance between socket and inner margin of eye slightly less than diameter of socket; ocelli large. Antenna with 13 flagellomeres, F1 strongly incised and swollen anteriorly. Transscutal articulation hardly traceable, indistinct in middle part. Mesoscutellum smooth shiny, elongate, disk distinctly longer than broad; mesopleuron smooth or alutaceous. Body length 1.8 – 2.1 mm (n=3).</p> <p>Gall (Figs 229 – 233). A leaf gall that develops on both sides of the leaf, on all areas of the leaf, but particularly the venation. Galls may be found singly or in groups of two-three along the midrib or main vein of the leaf; rarely the gall can be located at the edge of the leaf blade on the end of a lateral vein. Sometimes galls develop from the both sides of the midrib. This gall usually occurs gregariously, with 2 – 3 galls growing together such that it is impossible to separate them, resulting in noticeable deformation of the leaf. Each individual gall when mature is 1.5 – 2.0 mm long, oval and flattened or rarely rounded in shape, and projects onto both sides of the leaf. The gall is covered with short whitish hairs. Young galls are fleshy and yellowish green, and become pale brown or brown, woody as they mature. There is a single larval chamber.</p> <p>Biology. Only the sexual generation is known, inducing galls only on Q. brantii. The galls develop through the spring and mature by the end of May when adults emerge.</p> <p>Distribution. Currently known from Iran (Kohkiloye &amp; Boyer Ahmad province, Yasuj, Jungali Park and Baré-Af Tab &amp; Sisakht, 2250 m a.s.l.; Lorestan, Dorod).</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DC095CFFC53323CAD8E6318432FDE3	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Melika, George;Pujade-Villar, Juli;Abe, Yoshihisa;Tang, Chang-Ti;Nicholls, James;Wachi, Nakatada;Ide, Tatsuya;Yang, Man-Miao;Pénzes, Zsolt;Csóka, György;Stone, Graham N.	Melika, George, Pujade-Villar, Juli, Abe, Yoshihisa, Tang, Chang-Ti, Nicholls, James, Wachi, Nakatada, Ide, Tatsuya, Yang, Man-Miao, Pénzes, Zsolt, Csóka, György, Stone, Graham N. (2010): 2470. Zootaxa 2470: 1-79
03DC095CFFF83321CAD8E3698586F86B.text	03DC095CFFF83321CAD8E3698586F86B.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Plagiotrochus Mayr. Because 1881	<div><p>Plagiotrochus Mayr, 1881</p> <p>Figs 234–239.</p> <p>Type species: Cynips quercusilicis Fabricius, 1798. Designated by Ashmead (1903).</p> <p>Fioriella Kieffer, with only one known species, F. marianii Kieffer, was synonymized to Plagiotrochus (Melika et al. 2001).</p> <p>Diagnosis. The gena in the asexual female is broadened behind the eye; the clypeus with radiating striae, does not project as a distinct lamella between mandibles, the malar sulcus is absent (Fig. 234); the mesopleuron is shiny, with transversely delicately striate central part (Fig. 239); the propodeum forms an obtuse angle with the mesoscutellum (Fig. 239); lateral propodeal carinae are strongly curved outwards, with a more or less impressed, distinct median carina; the metasoma is compressed laterally; the ventral spine of the hypopygium is slender, short, with short sparse white setae not forming an apical tuft (Fig. 238). Plagiotrochus somewhat resembles Chilaspis, however the latter differs from the former by a smooth mesoscutum and mesopleuron. See also the generic key. There is one species, P. cardiguensis (Tavares) which has an incomplete transscutal articulation, and thus somehow resembles the Neuroterus – Cerroneuroterus group. However, all other morphological characters and molecular phylogenetic reconstruction place this species in a monophyletic Plagiotrochus clade with high support (Stone et al. 2009; Fig.1). Detail description of the genus and keys to the identification of Western Palaearctic species of Plagiotrochus are given in Nieves Aldrey (2001).</p> <p>Biology. Alternation of generations is known. The asexual generation usually induces stem galls, the cells of which are hidden under the bark of twigs, while the sexual generation usually induces catkin galls. Some species induce leaf galls. The genus Plagiotrochus includes 15 Western Palaearctic species (Bellido et al. 2000; Pujade-Villar &amp; Ros-Farré 1998; Pujade-Villar et al. 2000; Melika et al. 2001, 2006a; Nieves Aldrey 2001), of which one, Plagiotrochus csokai Melika &amp; Pujade-Villar, was recently described from Jordan (Melika et al. 2009). There are three Eastern Palaearctic species, P. semicarpifoliae (Cameron) from the NW Himalayas, known to induce acorn galls on Q. semicarpifoliae Smith (Bellido et al. 2000), and P. smetanai Melika &amp; Pujade-Villar and P follioti Pujade-Villar &amp; Melika from Nepal (Melika et al. 2009).</p> <p>Distribution. Majority of species are known from the Mediterranean region (Southern Europe, North Africa, Turkey, the Middle East) (Bellido et al. 2000; Pujade-Villar et al. 2000; Nieves Aldrey 2001). One species, P. marianii (Kieffer), was recorded from Slovakia and Hungary (Ambrus 1974; Melika et al. 2001; Melika 2006a), three species are known from the Himalayan area and one Western Palaearctic species, Plagiotrochus amenti Kieffer (= P. suberi Weld), has accidentally been introduced to the USA (California) (Weld 1926) and Argentina (Díaz 1973). The lifecycle of P. amenti has recently been closed experimentally by pairing of a sexual generation (P. amenti) with an asexual generation previously described as P. suberi Weld (Garbin et al. 2008). Introduced populations of this species in North America are purely parthenogenetic (Bailey &amp; Stange 1966; Zuparko 1996; Garbin et al. 2008), and as a result these two forms have been regarded as separate species pending proof of their relationship (Pujade-Villar &amp; Ros-Farré 1998). Other authors (Pujade- Villar 1998; Pujade-Villar &amp; Díaz 2001) have argued that even if P.amenti is confirmed to be the sexual form of P. suberi, there could be two effective biological species – an ancestral species with cyclical parthenogenesis, and a derived species with wholly parthenogenetic reproduction. Resolution of this debate requires population genetic and phylogenetic analysis (Pujade-Villar &amp; Díaz 2001). Geographic parthenogenesis, for example, is present in the Andricus mukaigawae complex (Abe 1986, 2007). The situation is also complicated by the records of P. abdominalis (regarded as a synonym of P. suberi) on Q. robur L. in Argentina, although this host oak association is probably incorrect (Pujade-Villar &amp; Díaz 2001).</p> <p>Comments. Earlier phylogenetic analysis has shown that Plagiotrochus belongs to a plesiomorphic lineage of Cynipini (Pujade-Villar &amp; Arnedo 1997; Liljeblad &amp; Ronquist 1998; Nylander 2004). The basal position of Plagiotrochus is supported by some morphological peculiarities of adults, and is also compatible with the apparent structural simplicity of the galls they induce. Plesiomorphic traits of P. semicarpifoliae (Cameron), known from the Himalayan area, suggest a Southeast Asian origin for Plagiotrochus, and all the species known from the Mediterranean region probably are derived forms and represent a secondary radiation (Bellido et al. 2000; Bellido &amp; Pujade-Villar 2001; Ács et al. 2007; Melika et al. 2009). Recent analysis also supports Plagiotrochus as the sister group of Chilaspis (Stone et al. 2009). The Black oaks of the section Cerris, mentioned in the Introduction, are further divided into two groups: a semi-deciduous Cerris group and an evergreen Ilex group (Manos et al. 2001; Manos &amp; Stanford 2001). Host shifts between Cerris and Ilex groups within the Black oaks are also inferred to have been extremely rare. Phylogenetic reconstructions for all datasets suggest a single switch from the Cerris group to the Ilex group by the common ancestor of the genus Plagiotrochus, followed by a single switch back to the Cerris group by P. amenti and P. marianii (Stone et al. 2009). Monophyly of Plagiotrochus and its positioning on the tree strongly supports the hypothesis of an Asian origin of Cynipini (Stone et al. 2009).</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DC095CFFF83321CAD8E3698586F86B	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Melika, George;Pujade-Villar, Juli;Abe, Yoshihisa;Tang, Chang-Ti;Nicholls, James;Wachi, Nakatada;Ide, Tatsuya;Yang, Man-Miao;Pénzes, Zsolt;Csóka, György;Stone, Graham N.	Melika, George, Pujade-Villar, Juli, Abe, Yoshihisa, Tang, Chang-Ti, Nicholls, James, Wachi, Nakatada, Ide, Tatsuya, Yang, Man-Miao, Pénzes, Zsolt, Csóka, György, Stone, Graham N. (2010): 2470. Zootaxa 2470: 1-79
