Caenochrysis invisa ( Linsenmaier, 1984 )
publication ID |
https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5642.6.1 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:3B7CA64C-AD05-47CB-B698-D89357A5ECD5 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/AE2DA93D-B53B-FFED-39C4-93591DE615B1 |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Caenochrysis invisa ( Linsenmaier, 1984 ) |
status |
|
Caenochrysis invisa ( Linsenmaier, 1984) stat. resurr.
( Figs 1D–F View FIGURE 1 )
Chrysis (Trichrysis) invisa Linsenmaier, 1984: 210 . Holotype ♀; Argentina: Tucuman (NMLU, examined). Synonym of
Caenochrysis armata ( Mocsáry, 1889) according to Kimsey & Bohart (1991: 301); Lucena et al. (2024: 16). Caenochrysis invisa ( Linsenmaier, 1984) : present paper: stat. resurr.
Material examined. Holotype of Chrysis invisa , ♀: Argentinien I.53 S.P. Colalao Tucuman Coll. Linsenmaier / NML_ENT GBIF_Chr0041155 ( NMLU) . Paratypes: 2♀♀: same data / NML_ENT GBIF_Chr0041152-41153 ( NMLU) ; 1♀: Argentina: Tuc. Horco Molle, c. 12km. W of Tucuman. 700m 17.III.1974 C.R. Vardy B.M. 1974-204 / NML_ENT GBIF_ Chr 0041154 ( NMLU) .
Both Chrysis invisa Linsenmaier, 1984 and Chr. aptata Linsenmaier, 1984 were synonymized with Caenochrysis armata ( Mocsáry, 1889) . However, Linsenmaier’s (1984) description of Cae. invisa and its type material does not match the description of Cae. armata , nor specimens identified as Cae. armata by Ducke and deposited at European collections. In particular, compared to the diagnosis of Cae. armata given above under Cae. aptata , Cae. invisa has the first flagellomere 1.4 × as long as the second ( Fig. 1D View FIGURE 1 ); the transverse frontal carina is weak, concolorous with the rest of the head, and irregularly arched with two short, barely visible branches ( Fig. 1D View FIGURE 1 ); the metasoma is uniformly green to blue, with a narrow dark black stripe at the base of the first and second terga ( Fig. 1E View FIGURE 1 ); the metasomal punctation is dense and uniform, with small punctures covering the entire tergum ( Fig. 1E View FIGURE 1 ). Caenochrysis invisa can also be distinguished from Cae. aptata as detailed above under Cae. aptata . Based on these characters, we consider Caenochrysis invisa ( Linsenmaier, 1984) stat. resurr. a valid species.
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 |
Caenochrysis invisa ( Linsenmaier, 1984 )
Rosa, Paolo & Brothers, Denis J. 2025 |
Caenochrysis armata ( Mocsáry, 1889 )
Lucena, D. A. A. & Gomes, R. S. & Zanella, F. C. V. & Almeida, E. A. B. 2024: 16 |
Kimsey, L. S. & Bohart, R. M. 1991: 301 |
Chrysis (Trichrysis) invisa
Linsenmaier, W. 1984: 210 |