Bracon (Bracon) longicollis Wesmael 1838
Creators: name: Papp, Jenő
name: Xviii, Budapest
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2012
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Insecta
Hymenoptera
Braconidae
Bracon
Bracon longicollis
Bracon longicollis var. depressiusculus (szépligeti)

description: Bracon (Bracon) longicollis Wesmael, 1838
Figs 18 A-J, 19A-D, 20A-J
Braco longicollis Wesmael, 1838: 28 ♀♁ (type material: 9 ♀♀ + 2 ♁♁), type locality: “environs de Liège” (Belgium), ♀ lectotype (and eight ♀ + two ♁ paralectotypes, present designations) deposited in the Institute royal des Sciences naturelles de Belgique, Brussels; examined.
Bracon brevicauda Thomson, 1894: 1831 ♀ (type material: one ♀), type locality: “Vestergötland” (Sweden), ♀ lectotype (designated by Papp l.c.) in Zoological Museum, Lund; examined.
Bracon crassicauda Thomson, 1894: l 835 ♀ (type material: one ♀), type locality: “Örtofta nära Lund” (Sweden), ♀ lectotype (designated by Papp l.c.) in Zoological Museum, Lund; examined.
Bracon fraudator Marshall, 1885: 34 ♀ (type material: one ♀), type locality: “Clober, Scotland ”, depository of the series (or the holotype) unknown (Barcelona, Genova, London, Norwich, Plymouth); synonymized on the basis of the description and specimens (2 ♀♀) identified by Nixon as B. fraudator, seen in Museum London.
Braco subcylindricus Wesmael, 1838: 30 ♀ (type material: one ♀), type locality “environs de Bruxelles ” (Belgium), ♀ holotype (present designation) deposited in the Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, Brussels; examined, syn. nov.
Bracon subcylindricus Szépligeti 1901: as valid species 184 (in key, in Hungarian) and 1904 (1901): 163 (in key, in German).
Bracon longicollis – Szépligeti 1901: 262 (♀ ♁) (in key, in Hungarian); 1904 (1901): 162 (♀), 164 (♁) (in key, in German).
Bracon (Orthobracon) longicollis – Fahringer 1927: 265 (♀), 276 (♁) (in key) and 400 (redescription), assigned to “Sektion Orthobracon ”. — Telenga 1936: 160 (♀), 168 (♁) (in key), 241 (redescription) (in Russian); 363 ((♀), 371 (♁) (in key, in German), assigned to Section Striobracon. — Shenefelt 1978: 1639 (assigned to subgenus Orthobracon, literature up to 1974). — Tobias 1986: 129 (in key, in Russian, assigned to subgenus Bracon). — Tobias & Belokobylskij 2000: 136-137 (in key, in Russian). — Papp 2008: 1777 (distinction from B. rugulosus Szépligeti).
Bracon brevicauda – Szépligeti 1901 and 1904 (1901): not mentioned). Fahringer 1927: as valid species 264 (in key) and 375 (redescription), assigned to “Section Orthobracon ”. — Telenga 1936: 161 (in key), 243 (redescription) (in Russian) and 363 (in key, in German) as valid species under the name “ B. brevicaudis ”. — Papp 1969b: 200 (synonymization, formal lectotype designation). — Shenefelt 1978: 1639 (as synonym of B. longicollis after Papp l.c., literature up to 1969).
Bracon crassicauda – Fahringer 1927: as valid species 265 (in key) and 375 (redescription), assigned to “Section Orthobracon ”. — Telenga 1936: as valid species 176 (in key), 299 (redescription) (in Russian) and 379 (in key, in German). — Papp 1969b: 202 (synonymization, formal lectotype designation). — Shenefelt 1978: 1639 (as synonym of B. longicollis after Papp l.c., literature up to 1969).
Bracon subcylindricus – Fahringer 1927: as valid species 266 (in key) and 466 (redescription), assigned to “Sektion Orthobracon ”. — Telenga 1936: as valid species 160 (in key), 242 (redescription) and 363 (in key, in German). — Tobias 1958: as valid species 103 (in key, in Russian); 1986: 129 (as synonym of B. longicollis with question-mark). — Shenefelt 1978: as valid species 1648 (literature up to 1971).
Designation of the ♀ lectotype of Bracon longicollis
(First label, printed) “ Coll. Wesmael ”; (second label, printed) “2033”; (third label) “ Braco longicollis mihi ♀ (handwritten) “dét. C. Wesmael ” (printed); (fourth label, printed red) “ Type ”; fifth label is with the locality “ Belgique / Liège / M. Robert ” and the sixth label is the lectotype card (fifth and sixth labels were attached by me). Lectotype is in good condition: (1) micropinned on a fairly thick pin, pin itself in polyporus stage; (2) right flagellum missing; (3) hind half of mesoscutum invisible because here pierced.
Designation of the eight ♀ and two ³ paralectotypes of Bracon longicollis
The labels are similar to those of the lectotype except the third Wesmael’s det.-label of five ♀♀ and two ♁♁, they are with the name “ Braco longicollis mihi ♀ var. 1.” Female paralectotypes are in fairly good condition: (1) micropinned like the lectotype; (2) three ♀ paralectotypes named by Wesmael as Braco longicollis: flagelli missing of two ♀♀, left fore wing missing of one ♀, left flagellum intact of one ♀ (with 32 antennomeres); (3) three ♀ and one ♁ paralectotypes named by Wesmael as Braco longicollis var. 1. (however, not representing the variety: propodeal carina present, i.e. not true varieties): left flagellum of one ♀ missing, right flagellum deficient; two ♀♀ and one ♁: one flagellum each intact (two ♀♀ with 26 and 27, one ♁ with 30 antennomeres, respectively), one flagellum each either missing or deficient; left hind leg of one ♀ missing; (4) two ♀ and one ♁ named by Wesmael as Braco longicollis var. 1. (true varieties): one ♀ with intact pair of flagelli (28 antennomeres), one ♁ with intact left flagellum (29 antennomeres) and right fore (except coxa + first trochanters) and left hind legs (except coxa + first trochanter) missing, one ♀ with missing (left) and deficient (right) flagelli, right fore leg (except coxa) missing. Male paralectotypes are in good (one ♁) and fairly poor (one ♁) condition: micropinned like the ♀ types, one ♁ with intact flagelli (30 antennomeres), one ♁ (true “var. 1.”, in poor condition) with left flagellum intact (29 antennomeres), right flagellum deficient, right fore and left hind legs (except coxa and first trochanter) missing, wings also missing.
Designation of the ♀ lectotype of Bracon brevicauda
(First label, printed) “V.G.”; (second label attached by me) “ Sweden ” (printed) “Vestergötland” (my handwriting); (third label with red frame, handwritten) “brevicauda”; fourth label is my lectotype card, fifth label is with the actual name B. longicollis Wesmael given by me. The lectotype is in very poor condition: (1) pinned by mesoscutum; (2) missing: head, metasoma, wings (except left hind wing), right three legs (except middle coxa).
Taxonomic remark
The lectotype specimen is identifiable (or recognisable) by the smooth propodeum with a mediolongitudinal carina characteristic to B. longicollis.
Designation of the ♀ lectotype of Bracon crassicauda
(First label, handwritten) “Ört.”; (second label attached by me) “ Sweden ” (printed) “Örtofta nära Lund” (my handwriting); (third label with red frame, handwritten) “crassicauda”; fourth label is my lectotype card; fifth label is with the actual name B. longicollis Wesmael given by me. -- Lectotype is in fairly
good condition: (1) glued on a small pointed card by coxa 2-3 and ventral side of metasoma; (2) head glued on the first label; (3) right flagellum missing, left flagellum damaged (i.e. with five flagellomeres).
Taxonomic remark
Lectotype is similar to B. longicollis Wesmael, medio-longitudinal carina of propodeum indistinct.
Designation of the ♀ lectotype of Bracon subcylindricus
(First label, printed) “Coll. Wesmael”; (second label, printed) “2035”; (third label) Braco subcylindricus mhi ♀ (handwritten) “dét. C. Wesmael” (printed); (fourth label, printed red) “Type”; fifth label is with the locality “ Belgique / Bruxelles / leg. Wesmael”; sixth label is the holotype card, seventh label is with the actual name B. longicollis Wesmael (labels 5-7 were attached by me). -- Holotype is in very poor cndition: (1) micropinned by mesosoma, pin fairly thick; (2) head and metasoma glued on the elderpith stage; (3) both antennae deficient, right flagellum with 16 and left flagellum with 23 flagellomeres; (4) ovipositor sheath broken in two parts glued also on the stage.
The following species-names are also junior synonyms of B. longicollis (details see in Papp 2008: 1774, Shenefelt 1978: 1639, Telenga 1936: 242): B. depressiusculus Szépligeti, 1904, B. firmus Ruthe in litt., (?) B. ramosus Niezabitowski, 1910, B. neglectus Szépligeti, 1904, B. rugulosus Szépligeti, 1901, B. spurnensis Hincks, 1951 and Baryproctus niger Voinovskaja-Krieger, 1930. B. rugulosus Szépligeti was treated (Papp l.c.) as valid species. Repeatedly examined the long series of B. longicollis I admit that the synonymization of B. rugulosus with Wesmael’s senior name B. longicollis is the reasonable taxonomic point of view (as I did it previously Papp 1969b: 200). This species is highly variable considering the measurements of its head (in dorsal view), alar venation, tergites 1-3, the size and strength of the sculpture of tergites 1-4(-5) and the colour pattern of body. The designations, depositories etc. of the types of B. depressiusculus, B. neglectus, B. rugulosus and B. spurnensis are mentioned in Papp 2008: 1774.
Material examined
203 ♀♀ + 89 ♁♁ from 23 countries: SCOTLAND: 7 ♀♀ + 4 ♁♁ from seven localities. ENGLAND: 8 ♀♀ + 3 ♁♁ from eleven localities. THE NETHERLANDS: 2 ♀♀ + 2 ♁♁ from four localities. FRANCE: 1 ♁. SWEDEN: 8 ♀♀ + 3 ♁♁ from eight localities. DENMARK: 2 ♀♀ + 2 ♁♁ from four localities. GERMANY: 17 ♀♀ + 2 ♁♁ from fifteen localities. AUSTRIA: 2 ♀♀ from two localities. BOHEMIA: 9 ♀♀ + 1 ♁ from eight localities. HUNGARY: 102 ♀♀ + 51 ♁♁ from 139 localities. SLOVAKIA: 8 ♀♀ + 3 ♁♁ from nine localities. ROMANIA: 13 ♀♀ + 2 ♁♁ from ten localities. ITALY: 3 ♀♀ from three localities. CROATIA: 1 ♀ + 1 ♁ from two localities. MONTENEGRO (=Crna Gora): 1 ♁. SERBIA: 1 ♀. BULGARIA: 3 ♀♀ + 3 ♁♁ from five localities. TURKEY: 2 ♀♀ from two localities. Iran: 1 ♀. AFGHANISTAN: 2 ♀♀ from one locality. EUROPEAN RUSSIA: 1 ♁. TURKMENISTAN: 1 ♁. MONGOLIA: 3 ♀♀ + 2 ♁♁ from five localities. KOREA: 9 ♀♀ + 10 ♁ from fifteen localities.
Redescription of the ♀ lectotype of Bracon longicollis (Fig. 18 A-J)
LENGTH. Body length is 3.9 mm.
ANTENNAE. As long as body and with 33 antennomeres. First flagellomere twice and penultimate flagellomere 1.75 times as long as broad. Flagellum attenuating.
HEAD. In dorsal view transverse (Fig. 18A), almost 1.9 times as broad as long, eye almost twice longer than temple and just protruding, temple receded, occiput weakly excavated. Ocelli fairly large, OOL twice as long as POL. Eye in lateral view almost 1.5 times as high as wide and almost twice wider than temple, temple ventrally widening (Fig. 18B). Horizontal diameter of oral opening 1.2 times longer than shortest distance between opening and eye; cheek weakly converging (Fig. 18C). Head polished.
MESOSOMA. In lateral view 1.6 times as long as high, polished. Notaulix distinct, fairly and evenly deep, smooth. Propodeum with a medio-longitudinal carina, along it rugulose-subrugulose, otherwise propodeum polished (Fig. 18D).
LEGS. Hind femur somewhat thick, 2.6 times as long as broad medially (Fig. 18E). Claw strongly downcurved and with a somewhat pointed basal lobe (Fig. 18F).
WINGS. Forewing as long as body. Pterostigma (Fig. 18G) three times as long as wide, issuing r just proximally from its middle; r just shorter, i.e. 0.9 times as long as width of pterostigma; second submarginal cell long, 3-SR 1.25 times longer than 2-SR, SR1 1.76 times longer than 3-SR and reaching tip of wing. First discal cell less high: 1-M 1.6 times as long as m-cu, 1-SR-M bent and 1.5 times as long as 1-M (Fig. 18H).
TERGITES. First tergite (Fig. 18I) slightly longer than broad behind, rugo-scrobiculte, margin of scutum crenulate. Second tergite three times broader behind than long laterally, suture between tergites 2-3 bisinuate and uneven; third tergite medially as long as second tergite laterally. Second tergite medially rugose, laterally rugo-rugulose, third tergite rugulose to uneven, further tergites smooth and shiny (Fig. 18I). Hypopygium pointed, ovipositor sheath less long, in lateral view as long as hind tibia (Fig. 18J).
COLOUR. Antenna, head and mesosoma black; ground colour of metasoma yellow, first tergite entirely and wide median streak on further tergites black. Mandible yellow, palpi faint brownish yellow. Tegula yellow. Legs yellow, middle and hind coxae black, femora 2-3 basally brownish to brown, fifth tarsomeres brownish. Wings subhyaline (or faintly fumous), pterostigma and veins light brownish.
Redescription of the ♀ paralectotypes (8 ♀♀) (Fig. 19 A-B)
Similar to the ♀ lectotype. Body 2.8-3.8 mm long (2.8: 1 ♀, 3: 2 ♀♀, 3.6: 1 ♀, 3.7: 1 ♀, 3.8: 3 ♀♀). Antenna with 26-32 antennomeres (4 ♀♀). Head in dorsal view transverse, 1.7 to almost 1.9 times as broad as long (1.71: 1 ♀, 1.76: 3 ♀♀, 1.8: 1 ♀, 1.87: 3 ♀♀). Propodeum medially rugulose to rugose, carina missing (2 ♀♀ “var. 1.” by Wesmael, Fig. 19A). Hind femur variably thick, 2.3 to 3.1 (Fig. 19B) times as long as broad (2.27: 1 ♀, 2.6: 2 ♀♀, 2.77: 3 ♀♀, 2.94: 1 ♀, 3.1: 1♀). Pterostigma 3.3 times (2 ♀♀) as long as wide, r issuing from its middle (2 ♀♀). First tergite somewhat (1.05 times) broader behind than long (2 ♀♀) or as long as broad behind (3 ♀♀). Hind femur nearly entirely black (2 ♀♀) to almost entirely yellow (3 ♀♀).
Redescription of the ³ paralectotypes (1 ³ nominate form and 1 ³ var. 1. sensu Wesmael) (Figs
19C-D; 20A)
Similar to the ♀ types. Body 2.5 (1 ♁) and 3 mm (1 ♁) long. Antenna somewhat longer than body and with 30 (1 ♁) and 29 (var. 1.) antennomeres. Head in dorsal view 1.7 times as broad as long (Fig. 19C). Propodeum polished, i.e. without carina and sculpture (var. 1.), or carina hardly distinct (1 ♁). Hind femur less thick, 3.3 times as long as broad somewhat distally (Fig. 19D). First tergite 1.3 times (1 ♁) and just longer (var. 1.) than broad behind. Second tergite somewhat longer than third tergite (Fig. 20A). Femora entirely yellow.
Variable features of the ♀ (203 ♀♀) (Figs 18A, E; 19B; 20 B-G)
Body 2.4-5, usually 2.8-4.5 mm, long.Antenna somewhat shorter than to as long as body (rarely somewhat longer) and with 22-36, usually 26-34, antennomeres. Flagellomeres 1.8-2 times, less usually 1.3-1.6 times (rarely subcubic 1.1-1.2 times), as long as broad. - Head in dorsal view 1.7-2, usually 1.8-1.9, times as broad as long (Fig. 18A); head rarely 1.7 times as broad as long and temple moderately rounded (Fig. 20B) or head twice as broad as long and temple strongly receded (3 ♀♀, Fig. 20C). Mesosoma 1.9-2 times as long as high (3 ♀♀). Propodeum weakly sculptured above lunule, medio-longitudinal carina missing (18 ♀♀, Fig. 20C); or propodeum almost entirely rugose with strong medio-longitudinal carina (9 ♀♀, Fig. 20D). Hind femur 2.6-2.7 times, rarely 2.9-3.3 times, as long as broad medially (Figs 18E; 19B). Fore wing: pterostigma 3-3.3 times, usually 3-3.1 times, as long as wide. Second submarginal cell unusually long, 3-SR 1.5-1.6 times as long as 2-SR (3 ♀♀, Fig. 20E). First tergite large, as long as broad behind or slightly broader behind than long (18 ♀♀, Fig. 20G). Sculpture of second tergite restricted medially (Fig. 20F), further tergites (very) weakly uneven (16 ♀♀) or polished (42 ♀♀), or rugulose-subrugulose (21 ♀♀). Ovipositor sheath long, as long as hind tibia + basitarsus (3 ♀♀). Albanic form (32 ♀♀): margin of tergites (beyond first tergite) and legs yellow, reddish yellow, testaceous. Pterostigma yellow (2 ♀♀). Melanic form (19 ♀♀): metasoma almost entirely blackish to black, at most second tergite laterally rusty.
Variable features of the ³ (89 ³³) (Figs 19 C-D; 20A, C, F, H-J)
Similar to the two ♁ types. Body 2.2-3.5 mm, usually 2.8-3.2 mm, long. Antenna slightly longer than to as long as body and with 26-43, usually 29-37, antennomeres. Flagellomeres (1.6-)1.8-2(-2.2) times longer than broad (rarely 1.3-1.4 times). Head in dorsal view 1.7-1.9, usually 1.7-1.75, times as broad as broad as long, rarely temple (8 ♀♀) less rounded, i.e. head subcubic (Fig. 19C). Propodeum rarely weakly sculptured (8 ♁♁, cf. Fig. 20C). Hind femur 2.8-3.3 times as long as broad (12 ♁♁, Figs 19D; 20H). First tergite subparallel-sided and rarely 1.3 times as long as broad behind (Fig. 20I) or more broadening posteriorly (Fig. 20J); second tergite usually longer than third tergite (Fig. 20A), less usually just longer than third tergite or (rarely) tergites 2-3 equal in length. Sculpture of second tergite restricted to antero-medially (Fig. 20F) and further tergites (3-4, 3-5) just uneven to polished. Albanic and melanic colour forms like in ♀.
Bracon longicollis var. depressiusculus (Szépligeti)
Originally the taxon depressiusculus was described by Szépligeti as a species of the genus Bracon (Szépligeti 1904: 182). A revision of the Bracon species by Thomson led to the recognition that the taxon depressiusculus represents but a variety of the species of B. longicollis (Papp 1969b: 200). This taxonomic assignment is accepted as a deliberate standpoint (contrary to that by Papp 2004: 173), subsequently the distinction of the variety is presented:
description: Published as part of Papp, Jenő & Xviii, Budapest, 2012, A revision of the Bracon Fabricius species in Wesmael's collection deposited in Brussels (Hymenoptera: Braconidae: Braconinae), pp. 1-154 in European Journal of Taxonomy 21 on pages 42-48, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2012.21, http://zenodo.org/record/3858161