The Wharton Lab

Stipomoles Townes, 1970: 68-69, 76. Type species: Stipomoles vittatus Townes, 1970. Monobasic and original designation.

The genus is known from only a single valid species, Stipomoles vittipes Townes, 1970 but Townes (1970) also mentioned the existence of an additional, undescribed species from Chile.

In his description of the genus, Townes (1970) described the epicnemial carina as absent laterally, vestigial ventrally and noted that the absence of a lateral component was diagnostic relative to other genera of Pionini. The epicnemial carina is difficult to see ventrally, and traces of this structure were not visible on the three specimens (including a male and female paratype) examined.

Stipomoles vittatus is similar in some respects to species currently assigned to Coelorhachis in the Perilissini. The latter have a swelling distad a shallow, subapical, dorsal notch of the ovipositor but S. vittatus does not: with the apical half or more of the ovipositor evenly needle-like (Fig. 15).

Clypeus (Fig. 3) uniformly sparsely setose; with ventral margin broadly truncate medially, the margin relatively thin (Fig. ); epistomal sulcus distinctly impressed throughout; clypeus in profile weakly protruding. Face (Figs. 3-5) densely punctate but not granular; frons and vertex smooth, with a few, scattered setae; inner eye margins very weakly converging. Malar space short, distinctly less than half basal width of mandible; malar sulcus absent. Mandible (Fig. 5) long, narrowest subbasally, very gradually expanding distally; dorsal tooth narrower and shorter than ventral tooth; basal, transverse impression weak to absent. Maxillary palp a little shorter than height of head; female antenna slightly shorter than body; male antenna slightly longer than body. Hypostomal carina meeting occipital carina distinctly dorsad base of mandible; occipital carina complete. Epicnemial carina varying from completely absent to barely indicated midventrally and absent elsewhere. Notaulus a broad, weak depression on deep and steep anterior declivity, narrowing and barely indicated dorsally, not reaching level of tegula. Groove between propodeum and metapleuron narrow, not broadly u-shaped, difficult to see in lateral view; broad, u-shaped groove mid-dorsally between propodeum and metanotum readily visible in lateral view; pleural carina well-developed ventrally, extending to level of propodeal spiracle; propodeal carinae completely absent (Fig. 10); propodeum largely smooth, with some weakly rugose sculpture along apical margin. Apical margin of mid tibia not expanded into a distinct tooth similar to that of fore leg; apical comb on posterior side of hind tibia present, but not particularly well-developed; posterior hind tibial spur at least 6x longer than maximum width at base; tarsal claws on fore and hind legs pectinate. Fore wing areolet present (Fig. 8) or absent; stigma relatively broad. Hind wing (Figs 1, 9) with first abscissa of CU1 much longer than 1cu-a. T1 distinctly broadening from base to apex in female (Figs 10-12), more slender and gradually broadening in male (Fig. 14), without dorsal carinae; basal depression at dorsal tendon attachment shallow but appearing deeper because of inflated basal portion of T1; dorsal-lateral carina absent between spiracle and apex of T1; glymma (Fig. 13) large, deep, extending to depression at base of dorsal tendon attachment. S1 extending to spiracle in male and nearly so in female. T2 thyridium absent (Fig. 12); laterotergites of T2 and T3 not separated by creases from median tergite. Ovipositor (Fig. 15) straight, distinctly protruding, thickened basally, abruptly narrowed, needle-like apically, without dorsal, subapical notch; ovipositor sheath curved throughout, bluntly rounded apically; needle-like portion of ovipositor extends full length of curved, broadened portion of ovipositor sheath.

Known only from Chile.

This page was assembled by Bob Wharton as part of a larger collaborative effort on the genera of Ctenopelmatinae.

This work would not have been possible without the groundwork provided by Ian Gauld’s study of the Australian and Costa Rican faunas, and we are particularly grateful for his assistance in many aspects of this study. We also thank David Wahl of the American Entomological Institute and Andy Bennett of the Canadian National Collection for extended loans of the material used for this study and particularly John Heraty for sending valuable material from his Chilean expedition. Matt Yoder provided considerable assistance with databasing issues, and our use of PURLs (http://purl.oclc.org) in this regard follows the example of their use in publications by Norm Johnson. Heather Cummins, Andrea Walker, Patricia Mullins, Caitlin Nessner, Amanda Ladigo, and Cheryl Hyde graciously assisted with image processing, formatting, and literature retrieval. This study was supported by the National Science Foundation’s PEET program under Grant No. DEB 0328922 and associated REU supplement #s DEB 0723663, 0923134, and 1026618. Page last updated Jan, 2015.

This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant Number DEB 0328922 with REU supplements DEB 0723663, 0923134, and 1026618. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.