Digonocryptus mettus Aguiar et Ramos 2011
Creators: name: Aguiar, Alexandre P.
name: Santos, Bernardo F.
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2012
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Insecta
Hymenoptera
Ichneumonidae
Digonocryptus
Digonocryptus mettus

description: Digonocryptus mettus Aguiar et Ramos, 2011
Morphological variation. The most relevant variation is compared in detail on Table 1. As sorted, tabulated data hints on a possible gradation and perhaps correlations between geographical distribution, specimen size, number of flagellomeres composing the white band of antennae, and the color of the hind trochanter.
Comments. The several new specimens examined allowed for an entirely new interpretation of this species in relation to D. propodeator Kasparyan et Ruíz, to which it is very similar. Type specimens could not be examined for D. propodeator, both by Aguiar and Ramos (2011) and for the present work. In spite of this, however, four specimens from Mexico examined for the present study match well the description of D. propodeator, while proving also to be consistently distinct from the set of specimens interpreted here as D. mettus. Based on this new set of specimens, it became clear that all differences indicated by Aguiar and Ramos (2011) between these two species are in fact useless to separate them. First, the number of teeth on the clypeus seems always equal to two on both species; the apparent single tooth of D. propodeator might be related to the fact that the teeth are very small and closely approximated, thus difficult to observe. A single tooth is mentioned only by Kasparyan and Ruíz (2005). Differences in the sculpturing of the mesopleuron and metapleuron, presence of ridges on the anterior transverse carina of propodeum, and fore wing length, all overlap or do not vary among the studied specimens.
Digonocryptus mettus can however be indeed defended as a distinct species based on the following differences. Both female and male have hind trochanter brown or light brown, rarely (1/20) somewhat dark brown, but never distinctly dark brown or black as in D. propodeator (also described and illustrated for the specimens studied by Kasparyan and Ruíz 2005); for the female only, white color present on variable extents on flagellomeres IV and XII–XV (see Table 1) vs. restricted to flagellomeres V–XI on D. propodeator. On both female and male the hind tibia apex has a dark brown mark which is larger laterally and mesally; for the female, the respective basitarsus on basal 0.2–0.3, and entire t5, are dark brown, contrasting with purely white remainder of tarsus. On D. propodeator the hind tibia has a dark brown to black mark at the basal apex only (both sexes); on the female, the hind basitarsus is light brown on basal 0.4–0.6, remainder of basitarsus, entire t2–3, and basal half of t4, brownish yellow (testaceous), t4 apical half and entire t5 dark brown. Males of both species share a nearly identical color pattern for the hind tarsus.
Considering the particular phylogeography of Central American groups, it is also relevant to note that D. mettus seems restricted to South America, while D. propodeator appears to be endemic to the Mexican region. The male of D. mettus from Mexico listed by Aguiar and Ramos (2011) might perhaps correspond to D. propodeator.
Material examined. 11 females, 7 males. 1 Ƥ from TRINIDAD, 13 km S Arima, 2 km N Talparo, Quasnell farm, rainforest, 22.VII–8.VIII.1993, Malaise trap, SPeck & JPeck, 93-45 (CNCI). 1 Ƥ from TRINIDAD, 1.III.1964, WRThompson. 2 Ƥ from TRINIDAD, Curepe, 22–25.XI.1977, Malaise trap; 1 Ƥ, same data except 28–30.XI.1977; 1 3, same data except 31.XI.1978; 2 Ƥ, same data except I.1979. 2 Ƥ 1 3 from TRINIDAD, Simla, nr. Arima, 250 m, 25.XI–3.XII.1977, Malaise trap, WRMMason; 1 3, same data except 3–10.XII.1977. 1 Ƥ 1 3 from ECUADOR, Pichincha, 47 km S Santo Domingo, Rio Palenque Station, 22–31.VII.1976, SPeck & JPeck (CNCI). 1 Ƥand 1 3 from BRAZIL, Bahia, Firmino Alves, Fazenda Bela Vista, 23.XI.2002, Malaise trap, JCardoso & JMaia; 1 3 from BRAZIL, Espírito Santo, Cariacica, Reserva Biológica Duas Bocas, 1–2.V.2005, YPT, APAguiar et al. (UFES).
Distribution. Trinidad NR, Ecuador, Brazil NR (Fig. 74).
description: Published as part of Aguiar, Alexandre P. & Santos, Bernardo F., 2012, Additions to the revision of Digonocryptus Viereck (Hymenoptera, Ichneumonidae, Cryptinae), with nine new taxa, new males, and distribution maps for all known species, pp. 1-41 in Zootaxa 3282 on pages 17-18, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.212568