Microphorella maculata, Brooks & Cumming, 2025
publication ID |
https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5661.4.1 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:F9498ECE-DED3-46F1-A7D3-1E726D1D11A0 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16606000 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/039A87AB-FFF4-FFF5-FF42-FB6C214EF729 |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Microphorella maculata |
status |
sp. nov. |
Microphorella maculata sp. nov.
urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:77F34E7F-4253-4073-82B1-311067F9AE59
( Figs 86–91 View FIGURES 86–89 View FIGURES 90–91 , 105 View FIGURES 104–105 )
Type material. HOLOTYPE, ♂ ( Fig. 86 View FIGURES 86–89 ) from Oak Grove [33°23'N 116°47'W], San Diego County, California, labelled: “ OAK GROVE | 9/5/45 CAL| ALMELANDER”; “ALMelander| Collection| 1961”; “ CNC | 1155850”; “ HOLOTYPE | Microphorella | maculata | Brooks & Cumming” [red label] ( USNM). GoogleMaps
Diagnosis. The male of this species is readily distinguished from other known Nearctic Microphorella by its spot-like CuA+CuP wing vein ( Figs 88, 89 View FIGURES 86–89 ), narrow silver face and concolourous clypeus with rounded lower margin projecting to the lower eye level ( Fig. 87 View FIGURES 86–89 ). Additional diagnostic features include the following: antennal postpedicel with long, narrow apex bearing long setulae ( Fig. 87 View FIGURES 86–89 ); white setae on the head (lower postoculars), legs (mainly coxae) and abdomen (sternite 8, hypopygium) ( Fig. 86 View FIGURES 86–89 ); halter pale yellow; hind trochanter with small tubercle bearing minute seta; surstylus with long setae; ventral epandrial process strongly bent ( Figs 90, 91 View FIGURES 90–91 ).
Description. Male ( Figs 86–91 View FIGURES 86–89 View FIGURES 90–91 ): Wing length 1.7 mm. Head ( Figs 86–87 View FIGURES 86–89 ): Silvery pruinose, dark bronze dorsally (concolourous with thorax), face and clypeus silvery pruinose; slightly narrower than thorax in dorsal view; ovoid in lateral view (higher than broad); slightly narrower than high in anterior view; larger setae brown, lower postocular setae white. Ocellar triangle conspicuous. Occiput weakly concave on upper median part. Eyes covered with short ommatrichia; medial edge of eye with small emargination adjacent to antenna; ommatidia subequal in size. Frons about 2× broader than high, widening above. Face slightly narrowed in middle, about 2× width of anterior ocellus. Face and clypeus with concolourous silvery pruinosity. Clypeus not distinctly separated from face, narrower than high, slightly widened ventrally, projecting to lower eye level with rounded ventral margin. Setae of head well differentiated (larger dorsal setae similar in size to anterior dorsocentrals): 1 pair of inclinate fronto-orbitals arising slightly ventral to median ocellus; 1 pair of lateroclinate anterior ocellars; 1 pair of small posterior ocellars; 1 pair of inner verticals (sometimes referred to as postocellars); 2 pairs of outer verticals; postocular setae uniserial, longer ventrally. Antenna ( Fig. 87 View FIGURES 86–89 ) inserted above middle of head in profile; scape short, funnel-shaped, blackish-brown; pedicel about 2× longer than scape, spheroidal with subapical circlet of setulae, blackish-brown; postpedicel about 4× longer than pedicel, about 2.5× longer than wide, bulb-shaped with long narrow apex bearing long setulae, blackish-brown, lighter apically; arista-like stylus apical, about 1.0× length of postpedicel, blackish-brown, with minute hairs. Palpus blackish-brown, relatively small, narrowly ovate, about 2.5× longer than wide, with 1 long white preapical seta. Proboscis brown, short, projecting ventrally. Gena very narrow. Thorax ( Fig. 86 View FIGURES 86–89 ): Silvery pruinose in lateral view, dorsum dark bronze with reddish and dark green tinges, larger setae dark brown. Mesoscutum moderately arched, prescutellar depression apparently present. Proepisternum with a few tiny white setae on upper and lower parts. Postpronotal lobe with 2–3 small setae. Mesonotum longer than wide. Acrostichal setae absent; setae on each side of mesonotum: 6 dorsocentrals, posterior seta longer, 1 presutural supra-alar (posthumeral), apparently 4 small postsutural supra-alars, 2 notopleurals, 1 postalar, area laterad anterior dorsocentrals with a few small setae. Scutellum broadly crescent-shaped with 1 long seta per side. Mesopleuron bare. Halter pale yellow. Legs: Slender; silvery pruinose with brown background colour, knees pale; prominent setae white or pale brown; femora tibiae and tarsi mainly covered with tiny white or pale brown setae; tarsomeres 1–4 of all legs progressively shorter apically with tarsomere 5 slightly longer than 4 and slightly flattened dorsoventrally; tarsal claws, pulvilli and empodium normally developed on all legs. Foreleg: Coxa with white setae on anterior surface, stronger and longer apically; femur and tibia subequal in length, tarsus slightly longer; femur with some erect white setae basiventrally; tarsomere 1 subequal to combined length of tarsomeres 2–3, base broad and short, notched and narrowed below, with series of tiny ventral spine-like setae. Midleg: Coxa with a few prominent white setae on anterior surface; femur slightly shorter than tibia, tibia subequal in length to tarsus; apex of tibia with 1 strong brown ventral seta; tarsomere 1 subequal to combined length of tarsomeres 2–4. Hindleg: Posterior surface of hindleg lacking silvery pruinescence; coxa with 2 prominent white setae on lateral surface; trochanter ventrally with small tubercle bearing minute seta; femur, tibia and tarsus subequal in length; femur strongly bowed outwardly (in dorsal view), with anteroventral row of 5–6 setae on apical half, longest seta as long as femur width; tarsomere 1 slightly shorter than combined length of tarsomeres 2–4. Wing ( Figs 88, 89 View FIGURES 86–89 ): CuA+CuP modified as a spot, otherwise as in description of M. acroptera . Abdomen ( Fig. 86 View FIGURES 86–89 ): Concolourous with thorax, with short intermixed dark and pale setae (very weak on sternites); segment 7 bare. Segments 5–7 narrowed and laterally compressed to form cavity on right side for hypopygium. Sternite 5 apparently with broad glabrous ventral projection, subtriangular and symmetrical with small dentiform process midway along lateral margin. Sternite 8 subquadrate with long white setae on posterior margin and several short white setae proximally, slightly wider than segment 7; tergite 8 vestigial. Hypopygium ( Figs 90, 91 View FIGURES 90–91 ): Dark brown with white setae; lateroflexed to right; inverted with posterior end directed anteriorly; large, at least half as long as abdomen; asymmetrical. Right and left epandrial lamellae not connected dorsally behind cerci. Left epandrial lamella ( Fig. 90 View FIGURES 90–91 ) shorter than hypandrium and partially overlapping its left side, posterior margin with projecting surstylar lobes and ventral epandrial process, ventral edge broadly rounded and fused with hypandrium but margin distinct; ventral epandrial process articulated at base, basal half broad, strongly bent near mid-length with a pair of ventrolateral setae, apical half narrower with pointed tip. Left surstylus divided into dorsal and ventral lobes separated by shallow rounded cleft through which left postgonite lobe protrudes. Dorsal lobe of left surstylus weakly developed, with 2 long setae and 1 smaller adjacent seta. Ventral lobe of left surstylus broad and long, with apicodorsal subrectangular lobe bearing 1 long seta and medially projecting apicoventral lobe bearing a pair of funnel-shaped processes. Right epandrial lamella ( Fig. 91 View FIGURES 90–91 ) shorter than hypandrium and partially overlapping its right side, longer than high, ventral edge fused with hypandrium, margin distinct anteriorly but fading into hypandrium posteriorly; ventral epandrial process absent. Right surstylus divided into dorsal and ventral lobes separated by U-shaped cleft through which right postgonite lobe protrudes. Dorsal lobe of right surstylus with subtriangular process bearing 1 seta on rounded tip and 2 long marginal setae proximally. Ventral lobe of right surstylus projecting dorsomedially behind postgonite lobe, large and broad, longer than dorsal lobe of surstylus, with pair of basal setae laterally, 1 thick preapical seta on posterior margin and similar preapical seta medially. Hypandrium large and ovoid, longer than epandrium in lateral view, bare except for pair of short posterior setae. Left postgonite lobe large, bifurcate (best seen in dorsal view), inner lobe shorter with broadly rounded apex and flattened prensiseta medially, outer lobe tapered to pointed tip ( Fig. 90 View FIGURES 90–91 ). Right postgonite lobe ( Fig. 91 View FIGURES 90–91 ) similar in size to left lobe, large, bifurcate (best seen in dorsal view), inner lobe shorter with subtriangular apex and flattened prensiseta basally, outer lobe with broadly rounded apical margin. Phallus ( Fig. 90 View FIGURES 90–91 ) J-shaped, deeply bifurcate with long acuminate process extending to full length of tubular, ridged phallus. Ejaculatory apodeme of moderate size, keel-like, subtriangular. Hypoproct large and irregular in shape, left and right lobes asymmetrical, with a few apical setae. Cercus simple and flap-like, dorsoventrally flattened, with several dorsal setae and 1 seta midway along lateral margin.
Female. Unknown.
Distribution and seasonal occurrence. This new species is only known from Oak Grove in San Diego County in southern California, where the holotype was collected in May of 1945 ( Fig. 105 View FIGURES 104–105 ).
Etymology. This species name is derived from the Latin for spot, in reference to the spot-like appearance of the CuA+CuP wing vein ( Figs 88, 89 View FIGURES 86–89 ).
Remarks. This very distinctive species is provisionally included in the M. acroptera species group because of the apparent presence of a male hind trochanter tubercle. However, the tubercle is very reduced and lacks an apical spine-like seta. Future studies may determine that M. maculata sp. nov. is not closely related to the other species in the species group.
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.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |