Liphanthus (Leptophanthus) tregualemensis Sharifi & Graham & Packer 2019, sp. nov.
Creators: name: Sharifi, Negar Mir
name: Graham, Liam
name: Packer, Laurence
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2019
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Insecta
Hymenoptera
Andrenidae
Liphanthus
Liphanthus tregualemensis

description: Liphanthus (Leptophanthus) tregualemensis Packer, sp. nov.
urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act: 1786A773-FF87-4B08-9757-3CE63069A74B
Figs. 109–111, 168, 181–182.
Diagnosis: The combination of two submarginal cells (Fig. 111) and vertex strongly convex is diagnostic for this species. Other species with two marginal cells have the vertex gently and evenly curved (Fig. 17, 27 & 59). Liphanthus tregualemensis also has the most sparsely punctured frontal area (Fig. 111) of any of its congeners with two submarginal cells.
Description: Holotype Female: Dimensions: Approximate body length: 4.04mm; head width: 1.15mm, wing length: 2.8mm, intertegular width: 0.68mm.
Coloration: Brown except yellow as follows: pronotal lobe, small spot on extreme base of pro- and mesotibiae. Ventral surface of F4–F11 apex of F3 and spots on F1 and F2 yellow-brown. Apical impressed areas of metasomal terga translucent.
Sculpture: Face devoid of miscrosculpture except supra-antennal depressions and and vertexal area weakly imbricate shiny; geneal and hypostomal areas weakly imbricate, shiny; yellow portion weakly imbricate, shiny; clypeus and lower paraocular area punctures variable in size, mostly large, shallow, irregularly spaced, mostly i<d; epistomal lobe impunctate; subantennal, supraclypeal, upper paraocular, frontal, vertexal, genal and hypostomal areas with shallow, sparse, scattered punctures. Mesosoma weakly imbricate, shiny; mesoscutum, scutellum and metanotum punctures shallow, obscure, irregularly spaced, i=1-5d; metapostnotum impunctate medially, weakly and irregularly punctate laterally; hypoepimeral area densely punctate above, i<d, irregularly below, i=0.5–2d; rest of mesopleuron sparsely punctate, i>2d; [both metapleural hidden by legs on sole specimen], sides of propodeum punctures minute, sparse i>3d. Metasomal terga shiny; T1–T2 almost lacking microsculpture, T3–T5 very weakly imbricate; T1 with minute scattered punctures; T2–T4 distinctly punctate, irregularly spaced, i=0.5–2d, sparser posteriorly; T5 punctures dense, i~d; apical impressed areas weakly imbricate, shiny; metasomal sterna weakly imbricate, shiny; punctures small, distinct irregularly spaced i=1–4d.
Pubescence: Generally white, sparse with short branches, <2 MOD, shorter on mesoscutum and metasoma dorsally; longer on sides of metasoma ~2 MOD; prepygidial fimbria pale brown, branched, long hairs ~2 MOD. Denser, branched; <1 MOD on lateral areas of metapostnotum. Tibial scopal hairs apically oriented, long, ~2.2 MOD.
Structure: Head: shorter than wide (67:74). Mandible length to basal depth (47:16); gradually narrowing to narrowly rounded apex. Labrum rectangular ~ 1.5 X as broad as long (34:21). Clypeus ~ 1.7 X as wide as long (58:35); apicolateral margin concave in frontal view, straight apicomedially. Outer subantennal suture weakly curved; epistomal lobe swollen; epistomal suture strongly curved below anterior tentorial pit, straight between inner subantennal sutures. Anterior tentorial pit at junction of outer subantennal and epistomal sutures. Frontal line distinct but weak. IAD~= AOD (15:16). Inner margin of compound eyes convergent below, UOD:LOD 74:65. Facial fovea weakly impressed, oval, length to width 16:5, subparallel to inner margin of compound eye. IOC slightly less than OOC 20:22; vertex strongly convex.). Scape 2.5 X as long as greatest width (25:10), shorter than pedicel and F1 combined (19); pedicel length and width subequal (10:9), F1 longer than wide (10:7), F2 shorter than wide, (6:9), remaining flagellomeres slightly longer than wide except F11 ~ 1.1 X as long as width (14:12.5).
Mesosoma: Mesoscutum ~1.3 X as wide as long (45:35), length of scutellum: metanotum: metapostnotum: 23:15:13. Marginal cell>0.9 X as long as distance between its apex to wing tip (61:65). Hind tibial spurs approximately straight, posterior spur longer than anterior. Tarsal claws with sharp triangular teeth.
Metasoma: Broadest before midlength of T3. Apical impressed areas short, ~1.1 MOD. Pygidial plate not visible in sole specimen.
Material Studied. Holotype female: CHILE, {Region VII}, Tregualemu, xii.1953, L.E. Peña. To be returned to the AMNH pending completion of ongoing studies of Liphanthus.
Etymology. The species is named after the type locality (see comments).
Comments. Based upon the strongly convex vertex in frontal view and the inner margins of the compound eyes divergent dorsally, this species is probably a member of the subgenus Liphanthus (Leptophanthus) Ruz and Toro, and we formally place it there based upon its morphological characteristics other than the number of submarginal cells.
The type locality is, or is close to, one of the few remaining areas of natural southern coastal forest remaining in Chile, home to some endangered species (Lander et al., 2009). Other interesting bees have been found in this area (e.g. Chilicola tregualemu Packer and Genaro, 2007).
The species with 3 submarginal cells that this species is most similar to is L. (Leptophanthus.) nitidus Ruz and Toro. Assuming it were to have 3 submarginal cells it keys out to this species using Ruz and Toro (1983). However, L. tregualemensis is smaller, has a much more convex vertex in frontal view and it has the punctures of T1 and T2 small, shallow and, especially on T1, sparse, i>2d; whereas L. nitidus has these larger, deep and dense, i~d.
description: Published as part of Sharifi, Negar Mir, Graham, Liam & Packer, Laurence, 2019, Fifteen new species of Liphanthus Reed (Hymenoptera: Andrenidae) with two submarginal cells, pp. 1-80 in Zootaxa 4645 (1) on pages 50-51, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4645.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/3345447