Photomorphus (Photomorphina) archboldi Manley & Deyrup
Creators: name: Brabant, Craig M.
name: Williams, Kevin A.
name: Pitts, James P.
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2010
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Insecta
Hymenoptera
Mutillidae
Photomorphus
Photomorphus archboldi

description: Photomorphus (Photomorphina) archboldi Manley & Deyrup
(Fig. 1)
Photomorphus (Photomorphina) archboldi Manley and Deyrup, 1987. Florida. J. Entomol. Sci. 22:57–58. Holotype male: Archbold Biological Station, Lake Placid, Highlands County, Florida, April 28–30, 1984, M.A. Deyrup coll. [USNM].
Diagnosis of female: Females of P. archboldi are distinguished from other Photomorphina females by the following characters: mandible with a distinct ventral tooth basally, pygidium glabrous or weakly granulate, and entire body clothed with pale golden or silver setae (Fig. 1).
Description of female: Length. ~ 2.9–3.8 mm. Coloration and Setal Pattern. Body stramineous. Legs and antennae whitish. Short yellowish white brachyplumose setae throughout; longer whitish setae present on propodeum and T1. Tergites 1–5 with sparse fringe of dingy white plumose setae. Legs with white brachyplumose setae.
Head. Head rounded posteriorly, not as wide as mesosoma, moderately punctate. Head evenly rounded in lateral view; occipital region straight and gena evenly rounded. Eye ovate, distance from posterior mandibular articulation ~ 3X visible length of pedicel. Clypeus protruding anteriorly, posteromedially produced into low triangular tubercle with fringe of plumose setae projecting ventrally. Malar space parallel in frontal view. Antennal scrobes without dorsal carina. Antennal tubercle glabrous, except with carinate apical margin. Flagellomere 1 ~ 1X length of pedicel. Flagellomeres 2 and 3 ~ 1X length of pedicel or slightly longer. Flagellomeres 2−10 slightly produced apically on ventral side; appearing crenulate. Mandible bidentate apically, attenuated towards apex. Ventral mandibular margin with distinct round basal tooth. Genal carina absent. Hypostomal carinae lamellate medially.
Mesosoma. Mesosoma only slightly wider anteriorly than posteriorly, longer than broad; rectangular. Mesosoma densely punctate dorsally. Propleuron anterodorsally and mesopleuron medially running vertically punctate. Humeral angle dentate. Epaulet not prominent. No transverse carinae present on dorsum of propodeum, but appearing denticulate to tuberculate posteriorly on dorsum of propodeum. Tubercles randomly situated and slightly more prominent towards posterior; projecting posteriorly. Distinct scutellar scale absent. Mesosternum with low transverse tubercle present medially just anterior to mesocoxa. Metasternum tridentate; lateral teeth weakly developed; central tooth elongate, sulcate medially, appearing to have deep groove. Propodeum with distinct dorsal and vertical faces.
Metasoma. Segment 1 distinctly subsessile with segment 2. T1 with small sparse punctures. T2 with dense moderate punctures anteriorly. T2 with felt line; length 0.5X length of tergite. T3–5 shagreened. T6 with distinct pygidial area defined laterally by carinae; surface glabrous; convex. S2–5 with punctation similar to tergites.
Distribution. Southern Florida.
Material examined: USA, Florida, Hernando Co.: 0.2 mi. S Weeki Wache, 24.November.2002, P. Skelley & D. Almquist (1 Ψ, FSCA); Levy Co.: 3.8 mi. SW Archer, 1– 3.February.1988, P. Skelley (1 Ψ, FSCA); 4 mi. SW Archer, 9–16.June.2000, P. Skelley (1 Ψ, FSCA); Orange Co.: Apopka, Kelly Park, 26.May.2005 (1 Ψ, FSCA).
Remarks. The only two Photomorphina species found in Florida are P. archboldi and P. s p i n c i. Thus, the females of this species would most likely be confused with those of P. s p i n c i; the two species can be separated from each other by the characters listed in the diagnosis. Also, the tubercles are less prominent on the dorsum of the mesosoma than in P. spinci.
This sex association is based on distributional data and coloration. In males, P. archboldi is separated from P. s p i n c i easily by coloration, wherein the legs of P. archboldi are yellow, while those of P. s p i n c i are dark brown or black. As expected, where the two species overlap, females can be separated by coloration as well; the females we have associated with P. archboldi are entirely pale yellow like the males (Fig. 1), while P. spinci females are significantly darker, being reddish-brown (Fig. 3).
description: Published as part of Brabant, Craig M., Williams, Kevin A. & Pitts, James P., 2010, True females of the subgenus Photomorphina Schuster (Hymenoptera: Mutillidae), pp. 58-68 in Zootaxa 2559 on page 60, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.196992