Ipsiura aemula ( Linsenmaier, 1985 )

Rosa, Paolo & Brothers, Denis J., 2025, Nomenclatural and taxonomic updates on the Brazilian cuckoo-wasp catalogue (Hymenoptera, Chrysididae), Zootaxa 5642 (6), pp. 501-541 : 522-523

Ipsiura aemula ( Linsenmaier, 1985) stat. resurr.

( Figs 11A–C )

Neochrysis (Ipsiura) aemula Linsenmaier, 1985: 477 . Holotype ♀; Brazil: Santa Catarina, Seara [Nova Teutônia], Plaumann (NMLU, examined). Synonym of Ipsiura lilloi Bohart, 1985 according to Kimsey & Bohart (1991: 510); Lucena et al. (2016, 2024: 39). Reinstated by Linsenmaier 1997: 267.

Ipsiura aemula aemula : present paper: stat. resurr., comb. nov.

Neochrysis (Ipsiura) aemula ssp. agnata Linsenmaier, 1997: 267 . Holotype ♂. Brazil: Nova Teutonia, St. Caterina, xi.1960, leg. Plaumann (NMLU, examined).

Ipsiura aemula agnata : present paper, comb. nov.

Material examined. Holotype ♀ of Neochrysis (Ipsiura) aemula : Brasilien, Nova Teutonia 27°11’B–52°23’L Fritz Plaumann XI.1960 300-500m / ♀ Type Neochrysis Ipsiura aemula Lins. Linsenmaier det. 1985 / NML_ENT GBIF_ Chr0013510 ( NMLU). Paratypes, 2 ♀: Brasilien, Nova Teutonia 27°11’B–52°23’L Fritz Plaumann 22.VIII.1960 300-500m / ♀ Paratype Neochrysis Ipsiura aemula Lins. Linsenmaier det. 1985 / NML_ENT GBIF_Chr0013511 ( NMLU); 1 ♀: Brasilien, Nova Teutonia 27°11’B–52°23’L Fritz Plaumann 6.VIII.1960 300-500m / ♀ Paratype Neochrysis Ipsiura aemula Lins. Linsenmaier det. 1985 / NML_ENT GBIF_Chr0013509 ( NMLU). Holotype ♂ of Neochrysis (Ipsiura) aemula ssp. agnata : Brasilien Nova Teutonia XI.1960 27°11’–52°23’ Fritz Plaumann 300-500m / ♂ Allotype Neochrysis Ipsiura aemula Lins. Linsenmaier det. 1985 / ♂ Type Ips. aemula agnata det. Linsenmaier 1995 / NML_ENT GBIF_Chr0013513 ( NMLU). Allotype ♀: Brasilien Nova Teutonia XI.1955 27°11’–52°23’ Fritz Plaumann 300-500m / ♀ Paratype Neochrysis Ipsiura aemula Lins. Linsenmaier det 1985 / ♀ Alloype Ipsiura aemula agnata det. Linsenmaier 1995 / NML_ENT GBIF_Chr0013514 ( NMLU). Paratype ♀: Brasilien Nova Teutonia 22.VIII.1960 27°11’–52°23’ Fritz Plaumann 300-500m / ♀ Paratype Neochrysis Ipsiura aemula Lins. Linsenmaier det 1985 / ♀ Paratype Ips. aemula agnata det. Linsenmaier 1995 / NML_ENT GBIF_ Chr0013512 ( NMLU).

Linsenmaier (1997) resurrected Ipsiura aemula from the previous synonymy with I. lilloi as proposed by Kimsey & Bohart (1991), providing a diagnosis and illustrations to support this act. Lucena et al. (2016, 2024) ignored this resurrection and listed I. aemula in the synonymic list of I. lilloi . While PR has not examined the type of I. lilloi , the pictures and diagnosis provided by Lucena et al. (2016) reveal some significant differences between the two taxa.

Ipsiura aemula can be distinguished from I. lilloi by the shape of the transverse frontal carina, with its branches encircling the anterior ocellus starting close to the eyes ( Fig. 11B ); the anterior ocellus positioned more than 2 × MOD from the transverse carina; third flagellomere non-metallic; sculpture of frons weak and poorly defined ( Fig. 11B ); lateral margin of third tergum straight and inner four apical teeth of third tergum distinctly acute ( Fig. 11C ), whereas in I. lilloi the branches of the transverse frontal carina originate at a distance> 1 × MOD from the eye, resulting in a narrower and smaller frontal area enclosed between the branches; anterior ocellus positioned only slightly more than 1 × MOD; third flagellomere metallic; sculpture of frons deep and well defined; lateral margin of third tergum slightly concave before lateral angle, and four apical teeth short and slightly rounded. Based on these characters, we consider Ipsiura aemula stat. resurr. a valid species; however, further material is required to clarify the status of these species and the following taxon.

Linsenmaier (1997) also described I. aemula agnata from the same type locality as I. aemula . He designated the male allotype of I. aemula aemula as the holotype of I. aemula agnata and selected some female paratypes of I. aemula aemula as the allotype and the paratype for I. aemula agnata . This “subspecies” is most likely a valid distinct species, as tentatively suggested by Linsenmaier (1997) who was known for his conservative approach to taxonomy, often describing subgenera and subspecies rather than species, and many of those taxa were later elevated to genus and species rank (Rosa et al. 2015). Lucena et al. (2016, 2024) did not mention this taxon and its particular history. Although in previous years PR had access to Linsenmaier’s collection, databased the type localities and photographed some types, he did not revise this taxon because of the limited time at his disposal and being outside of his research on taxa from the Old World. The true status of I. aemula agnata is thus still to be assessed; we therefore prefer not to make any nomenclatural or taxonomic changes at this time, as unlikely as it may seem that two absolutely sympatric subspecies are involved.

Figures

FIGURE 11. Ipsiura aemula (Linsenmaier, 1985), holotype, ♀. A. Habitus, dorsal view; B. Head, dorsal view; C. Third tergum, dorsal view.