Cyoceraphron harpe Salden & Peters 2023, sp. nov.
Creators: name: Salden, Tobias
name: Peters, Ralph S.
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2023
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Insecta
Hymenoptera
Ceraphronidae
Cyoceraphron
Cyoceraphron harpe

description: Cyoceraphron harpe sp. nov.
urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act: D0012769-E769-44D5-8848-1C20AA66DC5F
Fig. 92
Diagnosis
Scape as long as F1 and F2 combined; OOL:POL 1.14; OOL:LOL 1.45; posterior mesosomal comb distinct; Weber length 1.76 × mesoscutellum length; posterior mesoscutal width 1.35 × mesoscutellum width. Male genitalia: harpe sickle-shaped in ventral and dorsal view; harpe/gvc index 0.82; dorsomedial margins of harpes not touching at distodorsal margin of gvc, dorsomedial margin of harpe straight in approximately basal quarter, concave in approximately apical three quarters, apex of harpe pointed, oriented distomedially; ventral margin of harpe straight and with emargination on apical third, lateral margin straight and slightly curved distomedially in apical third; Weber length 2.42× genital length.
Etymology
The species name is derived from the harpē weapon, a sword with a sickle protrusion with great importance in Greek mythology, and refers to the sickle-shaped harpe of the male genitalia.
Material examined
Holotype
KENYA • ♂; Western Province, Kakamega Forest; 00°14′20.5 N, 34°51′52.8 E; 1634 m a.s.l.; 10 Aug. 2007; F. Hita Garcia leg.; Transect 17; primary rain forest; Winkler leaf litter extraction; ZFMK; ZFMK- HYM-00036992.
Description
Male
BODY LENGTH. 0.88 mm.
COLOUR. Head dark brown, mesosoma dorsally golden-yellowish and ventrolaterally dark brown, metasoma light brown-yellowish; scape and pedicel golden-yellowish, flagellum light brown-yellowish, gradually darkening from F1 to F9; legs yellowish except proximal third of meso- and metacoxa light brown; fore wing venation light brown, fore and hind wing disc slightly melanized.
ANTENNA. 11-segmented, flagellomeres cylindric; scape 3.3× as long as pedicel, scape as long as F1 and F2 combined, F1 2.6× as long as wide, F1 1.6× as long as pedicel, F1 1.2× as long as F2, F1 shorter than F7 and F8 combined, F1 shorter than F9, F6 2.0 × as long as wide, F6 shorter than F7 and F8 combined, F6 1.2 × as high as F9; numerous small multiporous plates on flagellomeres, sensillae on flagellomeres sickle-shaped and slightly shorter than width of flagellomeres.
HEAD. Head width 0.93 × head height; head width 1.91 × interorbital space; maximum eye diameter 1.29 × minimum eye diameter; head height 1.67 × maximum eye diameter. Dorsal margin of occipital carina ventral to dorsal margin of lateral ocellus in lateral view; preoccipital furrow present; preoccipital carina distinct. OOL:POL:LOL 1.00:0.88:0.69; OOL 2.29 × lateral ocellus size. White, thick setae on upper face absent; supraclypeal depression present; lateral margin of torulus raised; intertorular carina present; posterolateral processes of gena absent.
MESOSOMA, METASOMA. Mesosoma compressed laterally. Head width 1.13 × mesosoma width; Weber length 363 µm. Mesoscutum densely setose, setae curved backwards; median mesoscutal sulcus present; median mesoscutal sulcus adjacent to transscutal articulation; interaxillar sulcus present (= scutoscutellar sulcus not adjacent to transscutal articulation), scutoscutellar sulcus concave; dorsal axillar area setose, setae curved backwards; mesoscutellum setose, setae curved backwards. Mesoscutum width 1.95 × mesoscutellum width; posterior mesoscutal width 1.35 × mesoscutellum width; mesoscutellum length 1.65× mesoscutellum width; mesoscutellum length 1.22 × posterior mesoscutal width; Weber length 1.49 × mesoscutum width; Weber length 1.76 × mesoscutellum length. Anteromedian projection of the metanoto-propodeo-metapecto-mesopectal complex curved in lateral view with broad, blunt and lighter end, exceeding end of mesosoma; mesometapleural sulcus absent; posterior propodeal projection straight and light in ventrolateral view; posterior mesosomal comb distinct. Basal transverse carina of petiole (on syntergum) present; diffuse number of indistinct basal longitudinal carinae on syntergum; pairs of translucent patches on metasomal syntergum and synsternum, indistinct on syntergum.
FORE WING. Length 3.02 × width; stigmal vein shorter than 3× pterostigma marginal length.
MALE GENITALIA. Genital length 150 µm; Weber length 2.42 × genital length; gvc width 69 µm; genital length 2.18× gvc width; gvc width more than three quarters of gvc length; gvc width 1.10 × distal gvc width. Proximodorsal margin of gvc ascending proximomedially; distodorsal margin of gvc descending proximomedially (Fig. 92C); proximoventral margin of gvc ascending proximomedially; distoventral margin of gvc descending proximomedially (Fig. 92A); ventral area of gvc straight; dorsal area of gvc slightly convex (Fig. 92B); proximolateral margin of gvc ascending and slightly emarginated ventrally; distolateral margin of gvc convex (Fig. 92B). Harpe sickle-shaped in ventral and dorsal view; harpe/ gvc index 0.82; lateral articulation site of harpe with gvc flush (Fig. 92A, C); ventral margin of harpe straight and with emargination on apical third, dorsal margin straight (Fig. 92B), lateral margin straight and slightly curved distomedially in apical third, widest point of harpe at lateral articulation site with gvc (Fig. 92A, C); dorsomedial margins of harpes not touching at distodorsal margin of gvc, dorsomedial margin of harpe straight in approximately basal quarter, concave in approximately apical three quarters (Fig. 92C), apex of harpe pointed, oriented distomedially (Fig. 92A, C). Harpe with at least two lateral setae restricted to apical quarter, longest lateral setae less than one quarter as long as harpe, lateral setae oriented distolaterally and distoventrally; harpe with at least two apical setae, longest apical setae less than one quarter as long as harpe, apical setae oriented distomedially and distoventrally; harpe with at least seven median setae, longest median setae less than one quarter as long as harpe, median setae oriented distomedially and distoventrally. Aedeagus + gonossiculus more than one third as long as harpe, apex of aedeagus + gonossiculus acute (Fig. 92A, C) and dorsal to apex of harpe. Aedeagus + gonossiculus with at least one digital tooth, oriented dorsally. Genitalia weakly sclerotized with strongest sclerotization at aedeagus + gonossiculus and all margins of harpe.
Female
Unknown.
Variation
Unknown.
Biology
Host unknown, specimen collected from leaf litter.
Distribution
Afrotropical: Kenya.
Remarks
Comparison with similar species
Cyoceraphron harpe sp. nov. can be distinguished from all other treated species of Cyoceraphron by the sickle-shaped harpe. In body colouration, it is rather similar to C. dhahabudorsalis sp. nov., both species have a dark brown head, and a dorsally golden-yellowish and ventrolaterally dark brown mesosoma. However, C. harpe sp. nov. and C. dhahabudorsalis can be distinguished by the different harpe shape (see above), and by a more strongly laterally compressed mesosoma, longer flagellomeres, and a distinct posterior mesosomal comb in C. harpe (absent in C. dhahabudorsalis).
Cyoceraphron harpe sp. nov. might be conspecific with specimen ZFMK-HYM-00037093 from Gabon (deposited at ZFMK), in which the male genitalia were unfortunately lost. Cyoceraphron harpe is also similar to C. fuscopleuralis Dessart, 1978. We dissected the male genitalia from the examined male allotype of C. fuscopleuralis, which were damaged in this delicate procedure and became unidentifiable. The gvc is deformed, one harpe is lost and the second harpe is basally insufficiently recognisable. Thus, detailed comparison of male genitalia of C. harpe and C. fuscopleuralis was not possible. The drawing of parts of the genitalia in Dessart (1978: 279, fig. 14) is not sufficient. The holotype of C. fuscopleuralis is a female, and not useful in our mostly male genitalia-based species delimitation. With the identity of C. fuscopleuralis being dubious for the time being, we decided to describe C. harpe as new and provide a detailed description and diagnosis.
Condition of type material
In the holotype, the posterior part of the metasoma is missing, thus the body length measurement is not precise. The proximal part of the gvc is slightly deformed, thus the descriptions of the proximal margins of the gvc are not precise. The aedeagus + gonossiculus has one visible digital tooth. However, since the digital teeth are, to our knowledge, paired in all known ceraphronoids, there might have been a second one which was broken.
description: Published as part of Salden, Tobias & Peters, Ralph S., 2023, Afrotropical Ceraphronoidea (Insecta: Hymenoptera) put back on the map with the description of 88 new species, pp. 1-386 in European Journal of Taxonomy 884 (1) on pages 317-320, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2023.884.2181, http://zenodo.org/record/8177941