Imeria CAMERON , 1903

The genus Imeria CAMERON, 1903 View in CoL View at ENA

T y p e s p e c i e s: Imeria albomaculata CAMERON, 1903 .

D i a g n o s i s: Body medium-sized, length 6-12 mm. Flagellum long and slender, bristle-shaped or slightly lanceolate. Head extremely thick, nearly cubital in dorsal view ( figs 17 View Figs 17-22 -28). Occiput between ocelli and occipital carina not or slightly slanting and very wide ( figs 17 View Figs 17-22 -28). Apical margin of clypeus thin, with median angle, laterally often ± curved upward ( figs 5 View Figs 5-10 -16). Malar space slightly shorter than width of mandibular base ( fig. 1 View Figs 1-2 ). Mandible strongly twisted, its apex turned about 20° to 70° from its base and the dorsal surface turned up into plane of clypeus, with two large teeth of almost equal size and rather wide gap between teeth ( figs 1-2 View Figs 1-2 ). Genal carina reaching mandibular base.

Epomia usually long. Collar simple, without lamella. Epicnemial carina sometimes ± elevated behind fore coxa. Mesoscutum about as long as wide. Scutellum strongly raised above postscutellum, with complete and sometimes lamelliform or dentiform lateral carina (fig. 3). Juxtacoxal carina largely absent but often indicated at frontal margin of metapleuron. Posterior transverse carina of mesosternum interrupted before mid coxa. Propodeum with nearly complete carination and narrow basal furrow behind postscutellum, fairly short ( figs 39-42 View Figs 39-42 ); area petiolaris much longer than basal horizontal part of propodeum medially. Area basalis present and carinated ( figs 41-42 View Figs 39-42 ) or replaced by a median longitudinal ridge ( figs 39-40 View Figs 39-42 ). Area superomedia slightly longer than wide or wider than long. Area dentipara usually sloping downward in a gentle curve, its posterolateral edge sometimes with short denticular apophysis. Hind coxa usually without, sometimes with weak scopa. Claws simple. Areolet pentagonal; vein 1cu-a interstitial or slightly postfurcal.

Metasoma oxypygous ( figs 1 View Figs 1-2 , 43 View Figs 43-47 ), at least 2 nd to 4 th sternites with median folds. Petiole about as wide as basally high. Postpetiole moderately widened, without separated median field, usually with fine sculpture, not aciculate. 2 nd tergite with wide impressed gastrocoelus and thyridium. Thyridium very large and much wider than interval between thyridia ( figs 44-51 View Figs 43-47 View Figs 48-52 ). 2 nd tergite usually slightly wider than long ( figs 44-50 View Figs 43-47 View Figs 48-52 ), rarely longer than wide ( fig. 52 View Figs 48-52 ). Apical tergites often weakly sclerotized and ± depressed or compressed (at least in prepared specimens, figs 46 View Figs 43-47 , 48 View Figs 48-52 ). Ovipositor sheath slender and stick-shaped, about 2× as long as apical depth of metasoma (fig. 4).

Color: Body usually black, rarely ± red, with extended ivory coloration. Flagellum at least in ♀ with ivory ring.

R e m a r k: The taxonomical treatment of Imeria CAMERON , Caenojoppa CAMERON and Elasmognathias ASHMEAD was a matter of discussion in the past due to different and changing opinions of the authors. Caenojoppa CAMERON and Elasmognathias ASHMEAD were synonymized by HEINRICH (1934), but he separated Imeria CAMERON as a different genus due to the structure of the area basalis (replaced by a median longitudinal ridge in Imeria but distinctly present as a carinated field in the other groups). TOWNES et al. (1961) have treated all three taxa as subgenera of Imeria . In a newer analysis, HEINRICH (1967) considered to treat all three taxa as different genera since he could not find any intergrades in his African and Oriental material.

In this study, Imeria is treated as a (rather homogenous) genus which can be easily identified and separated from other genera of Ichneumoninae by the specialized and unique structure of the mandible. Imeria sensu stricto differs clearly and constantly from Caenojoppa by several features such as the median carina of basal propodeum and slightly lanceolate flagellum in ♀ (see key below), and both taxa are treated as different subgenera here.

In the Oriental material at hand, some of the members of Caenojoppa and Elasmognathias show a mix of the features that were formerly used for a separation such as the presence of apophysis, length of notaulus and form of epicnemial carina; the morphological features are also ± variable in both sexes. As already proposed by HEINRICH (1934), I therefore treat Caenojoppa and Elasmognathias as synonyms here.