Miracorium Lucena & Melo, 2018

Genus † Miracorium Lucena & Melo, 2018

Type species: † Miracorium tetrafoveolatum Lucena & Melo, 2018 .

Included species: † Miracorium amica sp. nov. and † M. tetrafoveolatum Lucena & Melo, 2018 .

Amended diagnosis

The genus was described originally from male characters only. Herein, we described the first female and extend the generic diagnosis to include sexually dimorphic characters exclusive to females as the following: scapal basin well excavated, borders smoothly round, without carina or sharp edges; head lacking occipital carina; pronotum shorter than scutum in mid-line, gradually declivitous anteriorly, crossed transversely by discrete anterior groove, anterior margin of pronotal flange projecting backwards, posterior margin concave, without transverse groove, posterolateral lobe well developed and reaching tegula, lacking posterolateral and posteromedial pits; labial and maxillary palpomeres with three and four articles, respectively, in females (three and five articles in males); female metanotum 0.8 × as long as scutellum along mid-line, anterior border deepened transversely with medial septum, lateral margin depressed, disc evenly raised (male metanotum as long as scutellum along mid-line, with an anterior pair of medial deep foveae followed by a pair of even larger and deeper posterolateral foveae); dorsal surface of propodeum short, shelf-like, with some distinct enclosures of irregular size, posteriorly bordered by transverse carina, disc slightly depressed; posterolateral corner produced into pointed, short process; posterior surface suddenly sloped, medially crossed by longitudinal median carina; forewing with broad costal cell; tarsal claw simple.

† Miracorium amica sp. nov.

( Fig. 7)

ZooBank registration: LSID: urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:

Description

Holotype female ( DZUP Bur-564). Body length, ~ 2.9 mm. Head: Pyriform, front not protruding, somewhat flattened; frons with discrete medial longitudinal groove, briefly interrupted below; eye bulging, occupying much of lateral head; upper limit surpassing posterior margin of lateral ocellus, inner margin converging on upper frons, continuing parallel dorsally at ocellar area; LID 0.8 × eye width; gena narrow; maxillary palpomeres with four countable articles on right side; malar space ~0.4 × eye height, crossed by longitudinal groove; ocelli inserted smoothly, without well-marked small sulci around them, lateral ocelli closer to inner eye margin and median ocellus than to each other; occipital carina indistinct, apparently absent; scapal basin well excavated, borders smoothly round, without carina or sharp edges; scape length 4.6 × maximum width; flagellum fusiform, with intermediate articles broader than long, F1 longer than combined length of F2 + F3, F4–F6 progressively shortened, F4–F6 with ventral flattened areas; inner margin of antennal sockets touching; mandible apparently thin and delicate; integument finely punctulate, denser on upper frons and vertex; with short, suberect setation; eye glabrous.

Mesosoma: Convex, not flattened dorsally, shortened anteroposteriorly; pronotum relatively short, subequal with scutum in mid-line, gradually declivitous anteriorly, crossed transversely by discrete anterior groove, anterior margin of pronotal flange projecting backwards, posterior margin concave, without transverse groove, posterolateral lobe reaching tegula, lacking posterolateral and posteromedial pits; notaulus deeply impressed, parallel sided posteriorly, parapsidal line faintly marked posteriorly; scutellum slightly longer than half length of scutum in mid-line, evenly convex, simple; mesopleuron evenly convex, without transverse sulcus, anterior border lacking carina; metanotum 0.8 × scutellum in mid-line, anterior border deepened transversely, with medial septum, lateral margin depressed, disc evenly raised; metapleural carina distinguishable, crossing laterodorsal propodeal surface; propodeum with distinguishable lateral, dorsal, and posterior surfaces; dorsum short, shelf-like, posteriorly limited by transverse carina, with some distinct enclosures of irregular size, disc slightly depressed; posterolateral corner produced into a short process; posterior surface suddenly sloped, medially crossed by longitudinal median carina; tarsal claw simple; metabasitarsus without two rows of spines; dorsum of metafemur evenly convex, without anterior expansion; costal cell broad, first abscissa of M diverging slightly before 1cu-a, gently and smoothly curved submedially; Rs+M arising apically on M; medial cell indicated only by spectral veins; R1 as long as stigma; Rs long, smoothly curved, nearly reaching costal margin; wing membrane entirely setose; dorsal sclerites with distinct white bands, particularly on pronotum, scutum, and scutellum.

Metasoma: Four exposed terga, internalized segments partly exposed, composing a thin, delicate, metasomal tube; lateral terga sharp, without carinae delimiting the lateral fold; sterna convex and undivided medially.

Type material

Holotype female in amber piece DZUP Bur-564. The specimen is well preserved and intact. Syninclusion: a spider.

Etymology

From Latin meaning ‘female’. The word is a feminine noun and is treated here as a noun in apposition to the genus name.

Remarks

The new species undoubtedly belongs to † Miracorium based on several characters, particularly wing venation, simple tarsal claw, and structure of mesosomal sclerites. A few other distinctive characters prevent us from treating it as the opposite sex of † M. tetrafoveolatum . The new species and † M. tetrafoveolatum exhibit substantial differences in metanotal sculpturing (with four large and deeply impressed foveae in the male of † M. tetrafoveolatum , which are lacking in † M. amica ), the general shape of the head (rather pyriform and frontally flattened in the female herein described), sculpturing of the propodeum, and several sexually dimorphic characters, as follows: scape (longer than 4 × its maximum width in † M. amica , and ~2.5–3.5 × longer than its maximum width in † M. tetrafoveolatum ), malar sulcus (present in † M. amica , indistinct or absent in † M. tetrafoveolatum ), sulcus along medial line of frons (present in † M. amica , absent in † M. tetrafoveolatum ), mandible (apparently lacking subapical tooth in † M. amica , with two subapical teeth in † M. tetrafoveolatum ), maxillary palpomeres (with four articles in † M. amica , five in † M. tetrafoveolatum ), anteromedial portion of pronotum (crossed transversely by groove in † M. amica , lacking groove in † M. tetrafoveolatum ), posterior propodeal angle (with acute process in † M. amica , short and bluntly angulate in † M. tetrafoveolatum ). Thus, we believe these morphological differences between the sexes indicate that they do belong to distinct species.