Scopesis macropus ( THOMSON , 1894)
publication ID |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14681817 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/039A87F0-FFFC-FFD8-FF07-F73C3931B41B |
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
scientific name |
Scopesis macropus ( THOMSON , 1894) |
status |
|
Scopesis macropus ( THOMSON, 1894) View in CoL (figs 7, 25, 41, 60, 80)
Original: Mesoleius (Scopesus) macropus THOMSON, 1894: 2030 , ♀ ♁.
Lectotype: (♁) green label [= Ringsjön/Scåne] (Lund), examined and designated by HORSTMANN
(2006: 82). D e s c r i p t i o n: ♀. Body length 8.5–10 mm. Flagellum with 40–44 segments; 1st
flagellar segment 4.2–4.3× as long as wide and 2.0× as long as 2 nd segment; 2 nd segment 2.1–2.3×, 3 rd segment 1.8–2.0× and preapical segment 1.5× as long as wide. Temple strongly and roundly narrowed behind eye. OED 1.3× ocellar diameter. Face granulated and with superficial punctures. Clypeus slightly convex and slightly bulging medially, with sparse rather coarse punctures, shining; apical margin concave, with small flat extensions laterally. Mandibular teeth of equal length. MI 0.5.
Mesoscutum finely granulate, dull. Notaulus weakly impressed. Mesopleuron finely rugose and superficially punctate ventrally, with rather strong striae reaching frontal margin of mesopleuron dorsally. Speculum finely granulate, rather dull. Area superomedia without lateral carina. Area petiolaris with medially obsolete carina. Lateral longitudinal and pleural carinae of propodeum complete. Hind femur 4.3–4.5× as long as wide. Inner apical spur of hind tibia 0.58× as long as hind metatarsus. Vein 2rs-m 0.7× as long as vein M between 2rs-m and 2m-cu. Vein 1cu-a postfurcal by 1× its width. Nervellus of hind wing slightly inclivous, intercepted in its apical 0.75. 1 st tergite 1.5–1.7× as long as wide, without latero-median carina. 2 nd tergite 1.2–1.4× as wide as long.
Color: black. Flagellum reddish, basal flagellomeres blackish. Palps brown or reddish-yellow. Mandible medially and apical 2/3 of clypeus reddish-yellow. Scape usually red ventrally. Tegula yellow or brown. Hind edge of pronotum and subtegular ridge reddish or brown. 1 st to 4 th tergites red. Coxae and trochanters black; trochantelli sometimes ± yellowish; legs otherwise red; tibia reddish-yellow; hind tibia black in apical 0.3; hind tarsus black. Pterostigma yellowish. ♁. Body length 8.5–11.0 mm. Flagellum with 38–41 segments; 1st flagellar segment 4.5–
5.0× as long as wide and 1.7× as long as 2 nd segment, 2 nd segment 2.4–2.5×, 3 rd segment 2.4× and preapical segment c 2× as long as wide. OED 1.3× ocellar diameter. Temple moderately and roundly narrowed behind eye. MI 0.3. Notaulus often ± distinct frontally. Mesopleuron punctate and granulate ventrally, partly and finely striate ventrally, ± shining; speculum almost smooth. Hind femur 4.5–4.6× as long as wide. Vein 2rs-m 0.6– 0.9× as long as vein M between vein 2rs-m and vein 2m-cu. 1 st tergite 1.9–2.2× as long as wide. 2 nd tergite about as long as wide.
Color: black. Flagellum reddish-yellow, brownish basally and/or dorsally. Palps, mandible except teeth, clypeus, face, ventral 1/2 of frontal orbit, ventral spots on scape and pedicel, sometimes spot on collar, wide hind edge and sometimes ventral edge of pronotum, sometimes anterolateral spot on mesoscutum, tegula, subtegular ridge, sometimes spot on ventral epicnemium, often mesepisternum, fore and mid coxae, apical margin of hind coxa, all trochanters and trochantelli yellow. Postpetiolus apically and 2 nd to 4 th tergites red, sometimes basal tergites mainly blackish, with ± distinct dark reddish shine. Legs reddish-yellow; hind tibia yellow, infuscate in apical 0.2–0.3; hind tarsus brownish. Pterostigma yellow or ochreous.
D i s t r i b u t i o n: West Palaearctic, studied material from Bulgaria, Germany, Sweden, and Switzerland.
Taxonomical remarks: As stated by HORSTMANN (2006: 82), the ♀ in coll. Thomson ("Madsr. 23.8.91") which had been designated as “ neotype ” by AUBERT (1966: 127) belongs to a different species, most probably to Sc. frontator . The differences between Sc. frontator and Sc. macropus are small in ♀♀ and sometimes variable. An unequivocal determination of ♀♀ is sometimes not possible.
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.