identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
CFD65548029C533C886E1A40C9FAE357.text	CFD65548029C533C886E1A40C9FAE357.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ooencyrtus lucidus Triapitsyn & Ganjisaffar 2020	<div><p>Ooencyrtus lucidus Triapitsyn &amp; Ganjisaffar sp. nov.</p><p>Figs 2, 3, 4</p><p>Ooencyrtus californicus Girault: Noyes 2010: 402 (misidentification of specimens from Texas).</p><p>Type material.</p><p>Holotype female, deposited in UCRC, on slide (Fig. 2B) labeled: 1. "USA: California, Riverside Co. Riverside, T. M. Perring laboratory at UCR, F3 on bagrada bug eggs From colony, ii.2019, F. Ganjisaffar Originally from: UCR Ag. Ops. 33.966002N, 117.343198W Cards with fresh sentinel eggs of Bagrada hilaris (Burmeister) placed in squash field 26-29.x.2018 Parasitoids emerged 13-15.xi.2018, F. Ganjisaffar"; 2. "V. V. Berezovskiy 2019 in Canada balsam"; 3. [red] " Ooencyrtus lucidus Triapitsyn &amp; Ganjisaffar Holotype ♀"; 4. "Det. by S. V. Triapitsyn 2019"; 5. [barcode database label/unique identifier] " UCRC [bold] UCRC ENT 311771". The holotype (Figs 2C, 3) is in good condition, complete, dissected under 4 coverslips.</p><p>Paratypes. USA, California, Riverside County, Riverside, University of California at Riverside (UCR): Agricultural Operations, 33.966002N, 117.343198W, 304 m, cards with fresh sentinel eggs of Bagrada hilaris placed in squash field 26-29.x.2018, parasitoids emerged 13-15.xi.2018, F. Ganjisaffar [4 females on points, 4 females on slides (including 3 molecular vouchers of S. A. Andreason, UCRC ENT 311756, 311757, and 311769) and 1 male on slide (molecular voucher UCRC ENT 311770), UCRC]; T. M. Perring laboratory, from colony, third generation (F3) on bagrada bug eggs, ii.2019, F. Ganjisaffar, originated from the above collection [7 females (1 in BMNH, 1 in EMEC, 3 in UCRC, 1 in USNM, 1 in ZIN), 14 males (2 in BMNH, 2 in EMEC, 6 in UCRC, 2 in USNM, 2 in ZIN) on points and 5 females, 2 males on slides, UCRC].</p><p>Other (non-type) material examined.</p><p>USA: California, Merced County, Merced, 24.viii.1938, R. Rose, "Ex eggs of Acrosternum hilaris " [1 female, 1 male, USNM] (misidentified as O. californicus Girault by A. B. Gahan). Texas, Presidio County, Presidio, 14.viii.1941, L. W. Noble (from eggs of Chlorochroa sayi Stål) (misidentified as O. californicus by A. B. Gahan) [2 females, 1 male, UCRC; 6 females, 4 males, USNM].</p><p>Diagnosis.</p><p>There are no comprehensive keys for Ooencyrtus in North America and only 3 described species have been identified from California (Zuparko 2015, 2018). Therefore, to confirm that O. lucidus was not already collected in North America, the first author visited USNM in February 2019 and compared O. lucidus specimens with all the available types of Ooencyrtus species; no match was found. Morphologically, O. lucidus is most similar to the Nearctic species O. californicus, to which its female specimens key in both Noyes (2010) (to the Neotropical species) and Zuparko (2018) (to species in California). However, females of O. lucidus differ from O. californicus in having the scape at most 7.5 × as long as wide (average of 6.6 × as long as wide, Table 1) and the F1 is about 1.5 × as long as wide (Fig. 2C). For O. californicus the scape (Fig. 5C) is about 8.8 × as long as wide (as measured from the slide-mounted syntypes, with no significant difference between the four scapes measured; however, these measurements could very well be inaccurate because of the way the specimens were crushed, and the antennae were slide-mounted), and the F1 is a little more than 2.0 × as long as wide. In addition, the "base of abdomen encircled by a narrow golden band" described by Girault (1917: 22) for O. californicus is not present in O. lucidus . Unfortunately, the metasoma of both extant types of O. californicus is missing (see below under comments). Instead the base of the gaster has a distinct yellow spot medially. Furthermore, although it is a minor difference, F1 of the female antenna is about 0.5 × the length of the pedicel on average in O. lucidus (Table 1) whereas in the type specimens of O. californicus it is about 0.6 × the length of the pedicel. Thus, we are unable to positively attribute our specimens of O. lucidus to O. californicus based on the available, very limited comparable morphological data.</p><p>In Noyes (1985), O. lucidus keys to the New World species O. johnsoni (Howard), whose entire gaster is shining black, perhaps with a slight greenish tinge. The entire type series of the latter taxon, 2 females and 1 male syntypes, were examined by the first author at USNM; the females are on points, with some parts of them mounted on a slide, and the male is on a slide. It also does not fit any of the described Old World species keyed in the publications mentioned below in the diagnosis of O. mirus, and is presumed to be native to the USA.</p><p>Description.</p><p>Female (holotype and paratypes). Body length of dry-mounted, critical point-dried paratypes 825-1025 µm, and of slide-mounted paratypes 1045-1125 µm .</p><p>Color. Body (Fig. 2A) mostly shining black with some metallic reflections, particularly on mesosoma, except base of gaster always with a distinct yellow, dorsal spot medially (on gastral tergites 1-3) and often with either yellow or light brown areas laterally and ventrally (always separated from medial yellow spot by a brown area); antenna brown; legs mostly yellow to light brown except coxae brown to dark brown basally and protibia and tarsi brownish.</p><p>Sculpture. Head with faint, inconspicuous sculpturing; mesoscutum reticulate, with sculpture cells mostly wider than long; axilla and anterior 1/3 or so of scutellum with a rather weak cell-like sculpture, remainder of body smooth.</p><p>Pubescence. Frontovertex, pronotum, mesoscutum, axilla, and scutellum with short, dark setae except scutellum with a few pairs of long, dark setae in posterior half.</p><p>Head (Fig. 3A) about 1.2 × as wide as high. Minimum width of frontovertex about 0.3 × head width. Toruli just below level of lower eye margin. Ocelli in an obtuse triangle. Maxillary palpus 4-segmented, labial palpus 3-segmented. Mandible with 2 teeth and a broad truncation.</p><p>Antenna (Fig. 2C) with radicle about 3.2 × as long as wide, rest of scape slender, slightly wider in the middle, 5.7-7.5 × (5.9 × in the holotype) as long as wide; pedicel about 2.2 × as long as wide, notably longer than any funicular segment (F1 0.45-0.55 × length of pedicel, Table 1); funicle segments all longer than wide, F1-F3 usually subequal in length (F2 0.9-1.1 × length of F1, Table 1) although often F3 the shortest, F5 the longest funicular segment (Table 1), F1-F3 without mps, F4 with 1 mps, F5-F6 each with 2 mps; clava 3-segmented, 2.9-3.6 × (2.9 × in the holotype) as long as wide and about as long as combined length of F4-F6, each claval segment with several mps.</p><p>Mesosoma (Fig. 3B, C). Mesoscutum about 2.5 × as wide as long; scutellum a little shorter than wide and slightly longer than mesoscutum, placoid sensilla close to each other and about in the middle of scutellum.</p><p>Wings (Fig. 3D) not abbreviated, fore wing extending beyond apex of gaster. Fore wing 2.2-2.5 × as long as wide (2.3 × in the holotype), disc hyaline; costal cell about 12 × as long as wide; marginal vein punctiform; inconspicuous postmarginal vein much shorter than stigmal vein; linea calva closed posteriorly by 2 rows of short, inconspicuous setae; filum spinosum usually with 3 setae, rarely with 4 or 5 setae; longest marginal seta about 0.09 × maximum wing width. Hind wing 4.7-5.3 × as long as wide (4.9 × in the holotype), disc hyaline.</p><p>Legs. Mesotibial spur about as long as mesobasitarsus.</p><p>Gaster (Fig. 3C) longer than mesosoma. Ovipositor occupying 0.6-0.7 length of gaster, a little exserted beyond its apex, and 1.0-1.2 × (about 1.1 × in the holotype) as long as mesotibia.</p><p>Measurements (µm) of the holotype. Mesosoma 394; gaster 480; ovipositor 379; mesotibia 358. Antenna: radicle 48; rest of scape 179; pedicel 70; F1 35; F2 38; F3 30; F4 38; F5 45; F6 42; clava 129. Fore wing 852:369; longest marginal seta 33. Hind wing 603:123; longest marginal seta 48.</p><p>Male (paratypes). Body length of dry-mounted, critical point-dried paratypes 595-795 µm, and of slide-mounted paratype 940 µm . Head and mesosoma shining black with metallic reflections (Fig. 4B), gaster dark brown; legs mostly yellow or light brown except coxae brown to dark brown and tarsi brownish. Head with toruli slightly above lower eye margin. Antenna (Fig. 4C) with scape minus short radicle 3.7-4.0 × as long as wide (Table 2); funicle segments all longer than wide and more or less subequal in length (proximal segments a little shorter), F1-F3 apparently without mps, F4-F6 with at least 2 mps each; clava entire, 3.1-3.2 × as long as wide, with several mps; flagellar segments all with numerous long setae. Fore wing (Fig. 4D) 2.25-3.1 × as long as wide, with linea calva open posteriorly; hind wing 4.1-4.2 × as long as wide. Genitalia (Fig. 4A) length 171-182 µm .</p><p>Etymology.</p><p>Bagrada hilaris populations have declined in California. We believe that parasitoids like O. lucidus are responsible for this decline. “Lucidus” is an adjective derived from Latin, meaning "lucid, clear." It is chosen for this species name referring to the elucidation of why populations of B. hilaris have declined in California.</p><p>Distribution.</p><p>Nearctic region: USA (California and Texas).</p><p>Hosts.</p><p>Pentatomidae: Bagrada hilaris (Burmeister), Chinavia hilaris (Say), and Chlorochroa sayi Stål . In California, O. lucidus apparently switched from its native host(s), such as the green stink bug Chinavia hilaris, to parasitize eggs of the invasive bagrada bug.</p><p>Comments.</p><p>The following specimens of O. californicus have been examined. Lectotype female [USNM], here designated to avoid the existing ambiguity regarding the status of the type specimens of this species, on slide (Fig. 5A) labeled: 1. [red] "Type no. 20859 U.S.N.M."; 2. " Ooencyrtus californicus Girault. ♀ type.". Of the two crushed type female specimens (Fig. 5B) on this slide (because 4 scapes are present), only parts of 4 antennae and a slightly damaged fore wing (Fig. 5D) remain; the lectotype is constituted by the remains of one of them, circled in India ink, with the most intact antenna (Fig. 5C); remains of the other specimen are those of the paralectotype, and the single fore wing (Fig. 5D) can belong to either of them. The species was poorly described (Girault 1917: 22 [as Oenocyrtus californicus, sic]) from the unspecified number of “Types” under this catalog number in USNM; the type series was reared in Sacramento, California, USA from bug eggs on Pinus sabiniana (Douglas) D. Don ( Pinaceae). The whereabouts of the other specimens of the type series, if they ever existed, are unknown; however, it is quite likely that these two females were the only original “types” . Thus, all other identifications of this species could be regarded to be tentative at best: for instance, specimens belonging to perhaps three different species of Ooencyrtus stand under O. californicus in UCRC. Zuparko (2015: 44) commented on the difficulties of identifying this species and the poor condition of the “holotype” female of O. californicus in USNM, noting that a species similar to it was collected in several counties in California including Riverside County. To be fully recognizable (since the original syntypes are incomplete), O. californicus will need to be re-described and thoroughly illustrated based on fresh specimens collected in the Sacramento area of California on the original host plant. DNA sequences will need to be compared with those of O. lucidus and other species of Ooencyrtus . Until that happens (keeping in mind that the true O. californicus may never be re-collected and thus would be impossible to be properly recognized), this species is treated as a nomen dubium, and making positive identifications of any specimens as O. californicus is not currently feasible. Therefore, we chose to describe O. lucidus, for which many good quality specimens and DNA sequences are available, as a new species that can be easily and positively recognized using a combination of morphological features and genetic data. The other option, i.e. trying to match our specimens with the incomplete original syntypes of O. californicus for which desired DNA sequences are not available, is impossible given the latter nominal species cannot be positively identified.</p><p>Noyes (2010) reported 2 females of O. californicus (determined as such by A. B. Gahan) from Presidio, Texas, USA, reared from eggs of Chlorochroa sayi, but closer examination of the specimens from the same series revealed that they are conspecific with O. lucidus .</p><p>Also present in UCRC is a series of 9 females misidentified (probably by H. Compere) as O. californicus, reared 1.ix.1937 in Riverside, Riverside County, California, USA by J. D. Maple from eggs of Anasa tristis (De Geer) ( Hemiptera: Coreidae) and reported as O. californicus by Maple (1947: 105); these are neither O. californicus nor O. lucidus because their entire gaster is dark, without any yellow spot or band, and in this regard are more similar to O. johnsoni .</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/CFD65548029C533C886E1A40C9FAE357	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Pensoft via Plazi	Triapitsyn, Serguei V.;Andreason, Sharon A.;Power, Nancy;Ganjisaffar, Fatemeh;Fusu, Lucian;Dominguez, Chrysalyn;Perring, Thomas M.	Triapitsyn, Serguei V., Andreason, Sharon A., Power, Nancy, Ganjisaffar, Fatemeh, Fusu, Lucian, Dominguez, Chrysalyn, Perring, Thomas M. (2020): Two new species of Ooencyrtus (Hymenoptera, Encyrtidae), egg parasitoids of the bagrada bug Bagrada hilaris (Hemiptera, Pentatomidae), with taxonomic notes on Ooencyrtus telenomicida. Journal of Hymenoptera Research 76: 57-98, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/jhr.76.48004, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/jhr.76.48004
91F198735B3459CEA8599156D75C0BB6.text	91F198735B3459CEA8599156D75C0BB6.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ooencyrtus mirus Triapitsyn & Power 2020	<div><p>Ooencyrtus mirus Triapitsyn &amp; Power sp. nov.</p><p>Figs 6, 7, 8, 9</p><p>Type material.</p><p>Holotype female, deposited in UCRC, on slide (Fig. 7A) labeled: 1. "USA: California, Riverside Co. Riverside, UCR Quarantine Lab. 27.ii.2019, N. Power, from colony on bagrada bug, Bagrada hilaris (Burmeister). Of Pakistan origin via USDA-ARS Lab., Stoneville, Mississippi, USA. Received 3.xii.2015, S&amp;R # N-15-30 Ooencyrtus sp., females, ca. F44"; 2. "Mounted by V. V. Berezovskiy 2018 in Canada balsam"; 3. [red] " Ooencyrtus mirus Triapitsyn &amp; Power Holotype ♀"; 4. "Det. by S. V. Triapitsyn 2018"; 5. [barcode database label/unique identifier] " UCRC [bold] UCRC ENT 311772". The holotype (Figs 7B, D, E, 8A) is in good condition, complete, dissected under 4 coverslips.</p><p>Paratypes. USA: California, Riverside Co., Riverside, UCR Quarantine laboratory, N. Power, from colony on Bagrada hilaris of Pakistan origin (via USDA ARS laboratory, Stoneville, Mississippi, USA), received 3.xii.2015, S&amp;R # N-15-30: 3.ii.2017 [6 females on points and 2 females on slides, UCRC]; 13.ii.2017 [1 male on point and 2 males on slides, UCRC] (obtained by rearing females with a small dose of antibiotic at 30 °C); 8.iii.2017 [3 females, 7 males on points, UCRC]; 1-7.ii.2019, F. Ganjisaffar [3 females in 95% ethanol in the freezer (molecular vouchers UCRC_ENT 00506189- 00506191), UCRC]; 27.ii.2019, ca. F44 [30 females (2 in BMNH, 2 in EMEC, 22 in UCRC, 2 in USNM, 2 in ZIN), 18 males on points (2 in BMNH, 2 in EMEC, 10 in UCRC, 2 in USNM, 2 in ZIN) and 7 females, 2 males on slides, UCRC] (males obtained by rearing females at 36 °C).</p><p>Diagnosis.</p><p>This new species is close to a small group of species of Ooencyrtus which are similar to O. telenomicida (Vassiliev), as defined by Hayat et al. (2014), although its female legs are entirely yellow. Ooencyrtus mirus keys to O. telenomicida in Ferrière and Voegelé (1961), Trjapitzin (1989), Huang and Noyes (1994), Zhang et al. (2005), Hayat and Mehrnejad (2016), and Samra et al. (2018). Morphologically, females of O. mirus differ from those of O. telenomicida mainly in having at least the proximal half of the gaster yellow, with only the apex (from the cercal plates) being brown to dark brown (Figs 6, 7E). In O. telenomicida, the yellow or light brown is present as a narrow, transverse basal band (Figs 10A, C, 12A, B, 13C), and this band is practically never extending to the cercal plates. Otherwise, females of these two species are quite similar although there are some differences in the lengths of their funicular segments (Table 3). In the multivariate ratio analysis O. mirus is well separated from O. telenomicida using the shape PCA (Fig. 16B). However, the scatterplot of isosize against the first shape PC (Fig. 16A) shows that O. mirus is also slightly smaller than O. telenomicida . This plot thus shows a certain amount of allometric variation and part of the separation is probably based on size rather than shape, and this might be a case of allometric scaling rather than true separation. The next two analyses indicated the same aspect. The PCA ratio spectrum for PC1 (Fig. 16C) identified as most relevant the ratio between propodeum length and scape width (variables lying at the opposite ends of the spectrum are the most relevant), while at the same time this is also the most allometric ratio as shown by the allometry ratio spectrum (Fig. 16D).</p><p>The LDA ratio extractor, which is a tool for identifying the best ratios for separating two groups, found that the best ratio to separate the two species is scape width / F5 length, the ratios being almost non-overlapping (Table 8).</p><p>Because the commonly used morphometric parameters and ratios of O. telenomicida and O. mirus are so similar, the importance of their clear separation based on the presented genetic data can not be overestimated.</p><p>In Hayat et al. (2017), the female of O. mirus keys to O. utuna Hayat &amp; Zeya from southern India (Karnataka and Tamil Nadu), but the latter has a linea calva closed posteriorly by 1-2 lines of setae (the linea calva is open posteriorly in O. mirus).</p><p>Description.</p><p>Female (holotype and paratypes). Body length of dry-mounted, critical point-dried paratypes 595-1025 µm .</p><p>Color. Head and mesosoma (Fig. 6) mostly black with some metallic reflections, particularly on mesosoma, except mesopleuron with a strong violet luster; most of gaster yellow except brown to dark brown apically (from cercal plates); antenna brown; legs yellow.</p><p>Sculpture. Head with faint cell-like sculpture; mesoscutum reticulate, more so anteriorly; axilla reticulate; scutellum more strongly reticulate than mesoscutum or axilla (except sometimes almost smooth at apex), remainder of body more or less smooth.</p><p>Pubescence. Frontovertex, pronotum, mesoscutum, axilla, and scutellum with short, inconspicuous, not very dark setae except scutellum with a few pairs of long, dark setae.</p><p>Head (Fig. 7C) about 1.1 × as wide as high. Minimum width of frontovertex 0.26-0.28 × head width. Toruli just below level of lower eye margin. Ocelli in an obtuse triangle. Maxillary palpus 4-segmented, labial palpus 3-segmented. Mandible with 1 larger tooth, 1 very small, inconspicuous tooth and a broad truncation.</p><p>Antenna (Fig. 7B) with radicle about 2.8 × as long as wide, rest of scape slender, a little wider in the middle and narrowing towards apex, 5.6-6.9 × (6.3 × in the holotype) as long as wide; pedicel about 2.0 × as long as wide, longer than any funicular segment (F1 0.5-0.6 × length of pedicel, Table 3); funicle segments all longer than wide, F1 usually about as long as F2 and slightly shorter than following funicular segments (F2 0.9-1.1 × length of F1, Table 3), F3-F6 subequal in length although F3 usually slightly shorter than following funicular segments (Table 3), F1-F2 without mps, F3-F4 each with 1 mps, F5-F6 each with 2 mps; clava 3-segmented, 3.0-3.7 × (3.1 × in the holotype) as long as wide and almost as long as combined length of F4-F6, each claval segment with several mps.</p><p>Mesosoma (Fig. 7D, E). Mesoscutum about 2.8 × as wide as long; scutellum wider than long and a little shorter than mesoscutum, placoid sensilla close to each other and closer to posterior margin of scutellum. Propodeum smooth and very narrow medially, less than 0.1 × as long as scutellum.</p><p>Wings (Fig. 8A) not abbreviated, fore wing extending well beyond apex of gaster. Fore wing 2.3-2.5 × as long as wide (2.3 × in the holotype), disc hyaline; costal cell about 12 × as long as wide; marginal vein punctiform; postmarginal vein shorter than stigmal vein; linea calva open posteriorly; filum spinosum usually with 3 setae, sometimes with 4 or, rarely, with 2 setae; longest marginal seta about 0.1 × maximum wing width. Hind wing 4.5-6.7 × as long as wide (4.65 × in the holotype), disc hyaline.</p><p>Legs. Mesotibial spur about as long as mesobasitarsus.</p><p>Gaster (Fig. 7E) a little longer than mesosoma. Ovipositor occupying 0.6-0.7 length of gaster, at most barely exserted beyond its apex, and 0.9-1.0 × (0.9 × in the holotype) as long as mesotibia.</p><p>Measurements (µm) of the holotype. Mesosoma 400; gaster 431; ovipositor 321; mesotibia 351. Antenna: radicle 43; rest of scape 194; pedicel 68; F1 37; F2 40; F3 46; F4 49; F5 48; F6 46; clava 135. Fore wing 839:369; longest marginal seta 36. Hind wing 601:129; longest marginal seta 51.</p><p>Male (paratypes). Body length of dry-mounted, critical point-dried paratypes 660-890 µm, and of slide-mounted paratypes 950-960 µm . Head and mesosoma black with metallic reflections (Fig. 8B), gaster mostly dark brown to black except yellow to light brown or brown basally; antenna brown except scape light brown ventrally and often dark brown dorsally; legs yellow. Antenna (Fig. 9A) with scape minus short radicle 3.4-3.8 × as long as wide (Table 4); funicle segments all longer than wide, more or less subequal in length and each with several mps; clava entire, 3.6-3.8 × as long as wide, with several mps; flagellar segments all with numerous long setae. Fore wing (Fig. 9B) 2.2-2.4 × as long as wide; hind wing 4.6-4.8 × as long as wide. Genitalia (Fig. 9C) length 171-191 µm .</p><p>Variation (female and male body length, non-type specimens from the colony in UCR quarantine laboratory). The female body lengths, male body lengths, and paired differences, analyzed by the Shapiro-Wilks normality test in R (R Core Team 2018), all had normal distributions. The mean lengths were 849 μm for the females and 795 μm for the males, with a mean difference of 54 μm . A paired t-test in R showed that the males were significantly shorter in length than the females (P&lt;0.001).</p><p>Etymology.</p><p>The name is an adjective meaning “remarkable” or “amazing.” The name is given to this species because the authors find its biology to be quite remarkable.</p><p>Distribution.</p><p>Oriental region: Pakistan. The population in the quarantine laboratory in UC Riverside that served for the description of this species originated from the Toba Tek Singh District, Punjab, Pakistan.</p><p>Hosts.</p><p>Pentatomidae: Bagrada hilaris (Burmeister). We conducted host studies on O. mirus and found it to reproduce on the eggs of eight other species in Pentatomidae, one species in Rhopalidae, and one species in Coreidae ( Hemiptera), as well as on one species in Noctuidae ( Lepidoptera). Of all the potential host species we evaluated, only one, in Pyralidae ( Lepidoptera), was not utilized as a host, likely because its eggs were too small. These findings show O. mirus to be a generalist parasitoid, although it prefers and reproduces more successfully on B. hilaris than on the other hosts evaluated.</p><p>Biology.</p><p>Ooencyrtus mirus, a uniparental species, typically produces about 99% females. However, the percentage of males can be increased by providing new eggs to the same female wasps daily for more than two weeks. This depletes the supply of Wolbachia bacteria in the ovaries (Lindsey and Stouthamer 2017), and the eggs, all unfertilized, then produce males instead of females.</p><p>Comments.</p><p>This species was initially identified from digital images of both dry- and slide-mounted specimens as Ooencyrtus telenomicida sensu lato (J. S. Noyes and E. Guerrieri, personal communications). This determination was ambiguous, however, since O. telenomicida was not clearly defined prior to this communication, despite the availability of its numerous diagnoses and redescriptions (e.g., Ferrière and Voegelé 1961; Huang and Noyes 1994; Hayat and Mehrnejad 2016). Thus, until a neotype of O. telenomicida was properly designated, and respective DNA sequences were obtained, O. telenomicida was not defined. We emphasize the importance of obtaining DNA sequences from the neotype since the only specimen defining this species is morphologically very similar to other species in the complex. Samra et al. (2018) provided a diagnosis and DNA sequences for " O. telenomicida " reared from Lepidoptera, rather than Pentatomidae, eggs collected in Israel and Turkey, countries with a different climate from that in the type locality. Thus, their conspecificity with O. telenomicida from Eastern Europe, reared from eggs of Eurygaster integriceps, needed confirmation.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/91F198735B3459CEA8599156D75C0BB6	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Pensoft via Plazi	Triapitsyn, Serguei V.;Andreason, Sharon A.;Power, Nancy;Ganjisaffar, Fatemeh;Fusu, Lucian;Dominguez, Chrysalyn;Perring, Thomas M.	Triapitsyn, Serguei V., Andreason, Sharon A., Power, Nancy, Ganjisaffar, Fatemeh, Fusu, Lucian, Dominguez, Chrysalyn, Perring, Thomas M. (2020): Two new species of Ooencyrtus (Hymenoptera, Encyrtidae), egg parasitoids of the bagrada bug Bagrada hilaris (Hemiptera, Pentatomidae), with taxonomic notes on Ooencyrtus telenomicida. Journal of Hymenoptera Research 76: 57-98, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/jhr.76.48004, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/jhr.76.48004
26F65B6E9CB55AABB5CE1E0F3B57A64E.text	26F65B6E9CB55AABB5CE1E0F3B57A64E.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ooencyrtus telenomicida (Vassiliev 1904)	<div><p>Ooencyrtus telenomicida (Vassiliev, 1904)</p><p>Figs 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15</p><p>Encyrtus telenomicida Vassiliev, 1904: 117-108. Original type locality: Kupiansk, Kharkov oblast’, Ukraine (as “Kupjansk”, "Gouvern. Charkov" [then Kharkov Governorate of the Russian Empire]). Unspecified number of syntype females and males [type depository not indicated in the original description], lost (not examined).</p><p>Schedius flavofasciatus García Mercet, 1921: 315-318. Type locality (of the lectotype designated by Noyes 1981: 182, not examined): Cercedilla, Madrid, Spain. Synonymy by Ferrière and Voegelé 1961: 32.</p><p>Ooencyrtus telenomicida (Vassiliev): Romanova 1953: 239-247 (host associations and biology); Ferrière and Voegelé 1961: 28 (key), 30 (illustrations), 32-35 (illustrations, redescription, distribution); Noyes 1978: 11-12 (illustration, comparison with O. brunneipes Noyes); Trjapitzin 1989: 202-203 (key, distribution, hosts); Huang and Noyes 1994: 78-79 (diagnosis, hosts, distribution), 130 (illustrations); Hayat and Mehrnejad 2016: 200 (key), 207-209 (redescription, illustrations, hosts); Samra et al. 2018: 8 (key), 12-14 (illustrations, diagnosis, hosts, distribution).</p><p>Type material.</p><p>Neotype female [BMNH], here designated (see “Comments” below for the justification) to stabilize the usage of the name, on slide (Fig. 11A) labeled: 1. "Romania: Iaşi County, Ipatele 46.918781N, 27.442949E 317 m, 10.vi.2017, L. Fusu, O. A. Popovici, V. Chinan From eggs of Eurygaster sp. On wheat, egg mass # 32"; 2. [salmon] "DNA Voucher D # 6875 UCR, J. M. Heraty [Laboratory]"; 3. "Mounted by V. V. Berezovskiy 2019 in Canada balsam"; 4. [red] " Encyrtus telenomicida Vassiliev, 1904 Neotype ♀ = Ooencyrtus telenomicida (Vassiliev)"; 5. "Det. by S. V. Triapitsyn 2019"; 6. [barcode database label] " UCRC ENT 311776". The neotype (Figs 10A, C, 11B-F) is in good condition although lacking apex of one hind wing, dissected under 2 coverslips.</p><p>Material examined.</p><p>Romania, Iaşi County, <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=27.44295&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=46.91878" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 27.44295/lat 46.91878)">Ipatele</a>, 46.918781N, 27.442949E, 317 m, 10.vi.2017, L. Fusu, O. A. Popovici, V. Chinan (from eggs of Eurygaster sp. on wheat) [3 females, two from egg mass # 22, one from # 32, BMNH, UCRC, including one from egg mass # 22 as DNA voucher D # 6874 (UCRC ENT 311775); 2 females from egg mass # 22 as DNA vouchers OoIs 0101 and OoIs 0102, AICF; 1 female and 1 male from egg mass # 32 as DNA vouchers OoIs 0201 and OoIs 0202, AICF] . Russia: Krasnodarskiy kray, Slavyansk-na-Kubani (as [stanitsa] “Slavyanskaya” on the original label), Karpova, 1950 (from eggs of Eurygaster integriceps; air dried specimens remounted in UCRC on points and slides from a small vial) [9 females, 5 males, UCRC, ZIN] Orenburgskaya oblast’, Orsk, 5.vii.1935, G. Ya. Bey-Bienko (on Elytrigia sp.) [1 female, ZIN]. Stavropol’skiy kray: Karpova, Kamenkova 1950 (from eggs of Eurygaster integriceps; air dried specimens remounted in UCRC on points and slides from a small vial) [numerous females and males, AICF, UCRC, ZIN] . Spain, Madrid: Casa de Campo [park], 15-23.x.1978, J. S. Noyes [1 female, 2 males, UCRC] (determined by J. S. Noyes in 1979); Fuencarral-El Pardo, El Pardo, R. García Mercet [1 female, UCRC] (identified by R. García Mercet as Schedius flavofasciatus García Mercet) . Ukraine, Nikolaevskaya oblast’, 2.vi.1948 (from eggs of E. integriceps) [5 females, ZIN]. Taxonomic identifications of O. telenomicida from Russia and Ukraine were made by M. N. Nikol’skaya and/or V. A. Trjapitzin .</p><p>Description of the neotype female.</p><p>Color. Body (Fig. 10A) mostly very dark brown with some metallic reflections (mainly dark bluish and some greenish) on frontovertex, mesoscutum, and scutellum except tegula brown and base of gaster with a narrow, light brown band on the first gastral tergite; antenna brown except radicle dark brown; legs mostly yellow except meso- and metacoxa brown basally and tarsi partially light brown.</p><p>Sculpture. Head with stronger sculpture on frontovertex; mesoscutum and axilla reticulate; scutellum (Fig. 11D) more strongly reticulate but almost smooth at apex.</p><p>Pubescence. Frontovertex, pronotum, mesoscutum, axilla, and scutellum with short, inconspicuous, fine, light setae except scutellum with a pair of longer, dark setae.</p><p>Head (Fig. 11C) about 1.1 × as wide as high. Minimum width of frontovertex 0.25 × head width. Toruli just below level of lower eye margin. Ocelli in slightly obtuse triangle, distance from posterior ocellus to eye margin about equal to ocellus diameter. Maxillary palpus 4-segmented, labial palpus 3-segmented. Mandible with 1 larger tooth, 1 smaller tooth and broad truncation.</p><p>Antenna (Fig. 11B) with radicle 2.5 × as long as wide, rest of scape slender, slightly wider in the middle and narrowing towards apex, 6.3 × as long as wide; pedicel 2.0 × as long as wide, longer than any funicular segment (F1 0.6 × length of pedicel); funicle segments all longer than wide, F1 as long as F2 and slightly shorter than following funicular segments, F3, F4 and F6 about equal in length, and F5 the longest funicular segment, F1-F2 without mps, F3-F4 each with 2 mps, F5-F6 each with 3 mps; clava 3-segmented, 3.0 × as long as wide and almost as long as combined length of F4-F6, each claval segment with several mps.</p><p>Mesosoma (Fig. 10C). Mesoscutum about 2.3 × as wide as long; scutellum (Fig. 11D) slightly wider than long and a little longer than mesoscutum, placoid sensilla close to each other and closer to posterior margin of scutellum. Propodeum (Fig. 11D) smooth and very narrow medially, less than 0.1 × as long as scutellum.</p><p>Wings not abbreviated, fore wing extending well beyond apex of gaster. Fore wing (Fig. 11E) 2.4 × as long as wide, its disc hyaline; costal cell about 11 × as long as wide; marginal vein punctiform; postmarginal vein a little shorter than stigmal vein; linea calva almost closed posteriorly by a row of short, inconspicuous setae; filum spinosum with 3 setae on one wing and 5 on the other; longest marginal seta 0.09 × maximum wing width. Hind wing 5.4 × as long as wide, disc hyaline.</p><p>Legs. Mesotibial spur almost as long as mesobasitarsus (Fig. 11F).</p><p>Gaster (Fig. 10C) almost as long as mesosoma. Ovipositor occupying more than 0.9 length of gaster, not exserted beyond its apex, and almost 1.0 × as long as mesotibia.</p><p>Measurements (µm) of the neotype. Mesosoma 418; gaster 400; ovipositor 370; mesotibia 375. Antenna: radicle 45; rest of scape 200; pedicel 70; F1 40; F2 40; F3 50; F4 50; F5 60; F6 50; clava 140. Fore wing 900:370; longest marginal seta 33. Hind wing 725:135; longest marginal seta 48.</p><p>Taxonomic notes.</p><p>Female. Variation (non-type specimens from Romania, Russia, and Ukraine). Body length of dry-mounted, air-dried specimens 860-925 µm . Body (Figs 10B, 12A, B, 14B) mostly very dark brown with some bluish and greenish metallic reflections on mesoscutum, except tegula and mesopleuron brown and base of gaster usually with a complete, narrow, yellowish or light brown band (dorsally almost always at most on the first and second gastral tergites, usually only on the first) and often brown (but never yellow) between the yellow basal band and cercal plates dorsally, but occasionally base of gaster entirely dark (Fig. 10B) or, very rarely (observed only in one specimen from Ukraine) the yellow band extends almost to cercal plates (in the absence of molecular data for this historical specimen, it cannot be excluded that it might belong to another species); antenna brown except apex of pedicel a little lighter (light brown); legs mostly yellow except meso- and metacoxa often brown basally, tarsi partially light brown. Minimum width of frontovertex 0.25-0.28 × head width (Figs 13A, 14A). Antenna (Fig. 12C) with scape minus radicle 6.0-8.75 × as long as wide; F1 the shortest funicular segment, 0.5-0.65 × length of pedicel; F2 1.0-1.1 × length of F1 (Tables 5, 7), F1-F2 without mps, F3-F6 each with at least 2 mps; clava 2.6-4.1 × as long as wide. Fore wing (Fig. 13D) 2.2-2.7 × as long as wide; filum spinosum with 3-5 setae. Hind wing 4.2-4.4 × as long as wide, its disc hyaline. Ovipositor occupying 0.7-0.9 length of gaster (Fig. 13C), at most barely exerted beyond its apex, and 0.9-1.0 × as long as mesotibia.</p><p>Male (non-type specimens from Russia). Body length of dry-mounted, air-dried specimens 600-900 µm . Body (Fig. 15A) black with metallic reflections, particularly on mesosoma; antenna brown except scape light brown ventrally and dark brown dorsally; legs yellow except most of coxae and metafemur brown. Antenna (Fig. 15B) with scape minus short radicle 3.6-3.7 × as long as wide; funicle segments all longer than wide, more or less subequal in length (Table 6) and each with several mps; clava entire, 2.9-3.2 × as long as wide, with several mps; flagellar segments all with numerous long setae. Fore wing (Fig. 15C) about 2.3 × as long as wide; hind wing about 5.0 × as long as wide. Genitalia (Fig. 13B) length 175-200 µm .</p><p>Distribution.</p><p>Confirmed records of O. telenomicida are from Romania, Russia, Spain and Ukraine; those from other countries in the Palearctic and Oriental regions were summarized by Samra et al. (2018), but many of them will need to be verified using molecular methods.</p><p>Hosts.</p><p>Scutelleridae ( Hemiptera): Eurygaster integriceps Puton (Vassiliev 1904; Romanova 1953; Trjapitzin 1989), Eurygaster sp., as well as some Telenominae ( Scelionidae) primary egg parasitoids of E. integriceps, such as Telenomus spp. and Trissolcus spp. (Vassiliev 1904; Romanova 1953), keeping in mind that their species identifications were likely incorrect. Samra et al. (2018) listed some other Heteroptera ( Hemiptera) as hosts of O. telenomicida; however, identification of the parasitoids will need to be verified using molecular methods.</p><p>Biology.</p><p>Ooencyrtus telenomicida is a facultative hyperparasitoid of Eurygaster integriceps, being either a primary egg parasitoid (more so earlier in the season when unparasitized eggs of the host are readily available and prevalent) or a secondary parasitoid via the telenomine primary egg parasitoids, particularly later in the season when many of the host eggs are parasitized (Romanova 1953).</p><p>Comments.</p><p>According to V. A. Trjapitzin (personal communication), the entire type series of O. telenomicida, if such ever existed, has never been located and is certainly lost. The dire necessity of a proper recognition of this nominal species, which has been impossible with any confidence from some other members of the O. telenomicida species complex (e.g., according to Huang and Noyes (1994), from O. gonoceri Viggiani and O. acastus Trjapitzin), leaves no choice but to designate a neotype for O. telenomicida, complemented with the much needed DNA sequence data from it. That is done herein from the specimen reared from an egg of a species of Eurygaster Laporte, which is the genus from which the originally described O. telenomicida emerged. Furthermore, the insects were collected in northeastern Romania which is relatively close to the original collection site in Kharkov oblast’ of Ukraine. Importantly, the collections were made in the same general habitat (sylvo-steppe biome) as the originally described species. Morphologically, female specimens from Romania (Figs 10, 11; Table 7) are identical to those from Russia and Ukraine reared from eggs of Eurygaster integriceps in the late 1940s and early 1950s (Figs 12, 13A, C, D; Table 5). The neotype and especially a second specimen from the same collecting event ( ‘topotype’) grouped together with the specimens from Russia and Ukraine (Fig. 16A, B) in the shape PCA of the multivariate ratio analysis.</p><p>Based on this information, a genetic library of other members of the complex can be constructed, and their identity determined.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/26F65B6E9CB55AABB5CE1E0F3B57A64E	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Pensoft via Plazi	Triapitsyn, Serguei V.;Andreason, Sharon A.;Power, Nancy;Ganjisaffar, Fatemeh;Fusu, Lucian;Dominguez, Chrysalyn;Perring, Thomas M.	Triapitsyn, Serguei V., Andreason, Sharon A., Power, Nancy, Ganjisaffar, Fatemeh, Fusu, Lucian, Dominguez, Chrysalyn, Perring, Thomas M. (2020): Two new species of Ooencyrtus (Hymenoptera, Encyrtidae), egg parasitoids of the bagrada bug Bagrada hilaris (Hemiptera, Pentatomidae), with taxonomic notes on Ooencyrtus telenomicida. Journal of Hymenoptera Research 76: 57-98, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/jhr.76.48004, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/jhr.76.48004
