The Wharton Lab

Zaplethocornia Schmiedeknecht, 1912: 2519. Type species: Ichneumon procurator Gravenhorst, 1820. Included by Schmiedeknecht (1913).

Nictula Burks, 1952: 88. Type species: Westwoodia fumipennis Provancher. Original designation. Synonymized by Townes (1970).

Parastadus Burks, 1952: 92. Type species: Erigloea opulenta Davis. Original designation. Synonymized by Townes (1970).

The following valid species were included by Yu et al. (2005):

Zaplethocornia exstinctor Aubert, 1985
Zaplethocornia filicornutor Aubert, 1976
Zaplethocornia fumipennis (Provancher, 1875)
Zaplethocornia kasparyani Hinz, 2000
Zaplethocornia longipes (Davis, 1897)
Zaplethocornia opulenta (Davis, 1897)
Zaplethocornia procurator (Gravenhorst, 1820)

The above description was based on two female specimens of Zaplethocornia procurator (one from France and one from Finland) and one female specimen of Zaplethocornia opulenta from South Carolina, all from the American Entomological Institute.

The female of Z. procurator has swollen flagellomeres in the middle of the antenna and this may also be true for Z. fumipennis, though I have not seen specimens of the latter.

This genus is defined relative to other perilissines by the moderately long, slender ovipositor without subapical notch, the relatively broad petiole (Figs 1, 2), and the relatively long, though weak, notaulus (Fig. 3). It belongs to a heterogeneous group characterized by Gauld (1997) as having a basal glymma unlike the more window-like glymma characteristic of Perilissus and related genera.

Based on the shape of the ovipositor and the apparent lack of tyloids, I suggest Zaplethocornia is more closely related to Lethades in the Pionini than to other perilissines.

Clypeus small (Figs 2, 3), with ventral margin thick and bluntly rounded, without lateral tooth ventrally; epistomal sulcus distinctly impressed throughout; clypeus protruding in profile. Malar space distinct, relatively short, at most half basal width of mandible. Mandible with ventral tooth slightly but distinctly longer than dorsal tooth. Ocelli small, lateral ocellus much shorter than distance between ocellus and eye. Maxillary palp varying from about as long as height of head to slightly shorter than head height; female antennae varying from slightly (opulenta_) to distinctly (_procurator) shorter than body; tyloid not visible on first flagellomere of the few specimens available for examination. Hypostomal carina joining occipital carina well above base of mandible; occipital carina complete. Dorsal end of epicnemial carina reaching anterior margin of mesopleuron. Notaulus shallow, weakly impressed, but distinct; narrow, extending posteriorad tegula (Fig. 4). Distinct u-shaped groove present between propodeum and metanotum in lateral view in opulenta, smaller, v-shaped notch present in procurator; pleural carina complete, well-developed; propodeal carinae (Fig. 5) well-developed, with hexagonal, completely carinate areola in procurator, but with lateral portions of transverse carinae absent and areola usually open anteriorly in opulenta. Apical margin of mid tibia rounded, not expanded into a distinct tooth similar to that on fore tibia; apical comb on hind tibia not developed; posterior hind tibial spur at least 7x longer than maximum width at base; tarsal claws simple, lacking pectination in procurator but at least basally pectinate in opulenta. Fore wing (Fig. 6) with areolet present; stigma not exceptionally narrow, Rs+2r arising at or near midpoint of stigma. Hind wing with first abscissa of CU1 longer than 1cu-a. T1 (Figs 1, 5) relatively short and broad, distinctly broadening posteriorly, dorsal carinae distinct at least to level of spiracle in procurator, essentially absent in opulenta; basal depression at dorsal tendon attachment distinct, moderately deep; sharp dorsal-lateral carina extending from spiracle to apex of T1 in procurator, weaker in opulenta and extending ventrad spiracle; glymma broad, deep, extending into median basal depression, the two glymmae not meeting on each side posterior to basal depression (glymma smaller and more rounded in opulenta). T2 thyridium absent; laterotergites of T2 and T3 completely separated by creases in procurator but only T2 laterotergites separated in the single specimen of opulenta available for examination. Ovipositor straight to very weakly upcurved, broad at base, abruptly narrowed and needle-like for most of length, without subapical notch; ovipositor sheath long (about equal in length to hind basitarsus), narrow, slender, parallel-sided, either truncate distally (opulenta_) or somewhat rounded (_procurator); no males seen.

This is a Holarctic genus, with described species from North America and both the Eastern and Western Palearctic (as far south as Turkey).

Hosts are apparently unknown.

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 for loan of material and useful feedback throughout our study and Gavin Broad for exchange of information on Perilissini. 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. Andrea Walker, Caitlin Nessner, Heather Cummins, Amanda Ladigo, and Cheryl Hyde graciously assisted with image capture, 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 nos DEB 0723663, 0923134, and 1026618. Page last updated June, 2011.

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.