Opius cablus Wharton, 2013

Taxonomic History / Nomenclature
Opius cablus Wharton, 2013 ZooKeys 349: 16-18, 33-35.
Remarks
This species is known only from the two females reared from a tephritid host infesting stems of an unknown plant.

Holotype: Female, deposited in USNM.

Diagnosis and Relationships
Members of the Opius baderae species group (to which this species belongs) will key to Opius (Opius) in the subgeneric keys of Fischer (1972), 1977, (1999) because of the completely concealed labrum, unsculptured precoxal sulcus, and absence of a midpit on the mesoscutum. They differ from the type species of Opius (i.e., Opius s.s.) in lacking a basal lobe ventrally on the mandible, and thus would key to Phaedrotoma Foerster in the classification of van Achterberg and Salvo (1997) and Li et al. (2013) and the key to genera in Fischer (1999). In members of the baderae group the propodeum is also almost completely unsculptured. Within the baderae species group, this species is nearly identical to the larger-bodied O. baderae, but there are slight differences in the color of the propleuron and the ovipositor is longer relative to the body length.
Description
Habitus (Figs 1-2). Eyes in dorsal view (Fig. 3) slightly bulging beyond temples, temples weakly receding. Clypeus (Fig. 5) 1.26–1.4 x wider than high, very weakly punctate throughout; completely concealing labrum when mandible closed, ventral margin of clypeus evenly convex, slightly overlapping dorsal margin of mandible when mandible closed. Antenna with 38 and 42 flagellomeres. Malar sulcus (Fig. 4) distinctly impressed throughout. Mesosoma 1.2 x longer than high. Pronotum laterally (Fig. 4) with vertical groove weakly crenulate dorsally, distinctly crenulate ventrally, weakly sculptured medially. Propodeum (Figs 6-7) mostly unsculptured, with small weakly rugulose patch posterior-medially. Fore wing (Figs 1, 2, 9) 3RSa 1.85–1.95 x longer than sinuate to strongly sinuate 2RS; (RS+M)a weakly sinuate, nearly straight. T1 (Figs 6-7) 2.25–2.35 x wider at apex than at base, 1.1 x longer than apical width; smooth, unsculptured basally, striate to finely strigose over apical 0.5; dorsal carina distinct basally, extending to apex but weaker and largely obscured by sculpture posteriorly. Ovipositor (total length) 2.25 x longer than mesosoma; ovipositor sheath 1.8–1.85 x longer than mesosoma. Color (Figs 1-8): Head as in O. baderae . Mesosoma black to dark red-brown except propleuron almost completely light brown, paler ventrally; tegula and basal wing sclerite pale yellow to white; mesopleuron with pale brown to brown band extending between fore and mid coxae; axillae and lateral 0.2–0.3 of metanotum dark yellow to yellow-orange; mesoscutum variegated as in O. baderae, with 3 black bands on yellow-orange background. T1 black, T2–T6 dark reddish brown to black, T3–T6 with narrow hyaline margin posteriorly; T4–T6 also with median white band anteriorly. Fore and mid tibiae and all femora pale yellow, hind femur with pale brown subapical spot; hind tibia mostly yellow, dark brown over basal 0.2, with some weak infumation apically on posterior face. Body length 2.7–3.1 mm; wing length 3.3–3.6 mm; mesosoma length 1.0 mm.
21959_mximage
1.Opius cablus habitus
22004_mximage
2. Opius cablus lateral hab...
21793_mximage
3. Opius cablus head and me...
21792_mximage
4. Opius cablus head latera...
22003_mximage
5.Opius cablus face
21794_mximage
6. Opius cablus propodeum a...
21795_mximage
7. Opius cablus propodeum a...
21796_mximage
8. Opius cablus metasoma do...
22013_mximage
9.Opius cablus wings
 
Distribution
Type locality: Guatemala, Sacatepequez, Volcan de Agua, trail from Cuidad Viejo.
Distribution
No referenced distribution records have been added to the database for this OTU.
Biology / Hosts
A parasitoid of a Tephritidae reared from stem galls of an unidentified plant. The tephritid puparia from which the holotype and paratype emerged are mounted with each of the separately point-mounted specimens. The puparia are distinctly different from the puparia of the E. xanthochaeta that yielded the type series of O. baderae. They are smaller, black, and consistent with known species of Trupanea. No flies emerged from this sample of stem galls, but dissection of an unemerged puparium revealed remains of a tephritid that was probably a species of Trupanea. The plant had no reproductive structures and could not be identified.
Map

There are no specimens currently determined for this OTU, or those specimens determined for this OTU are not yet mappable.

Label data
Holotype labels:
Guatemala: Sacatepequez:
Volcan de Agua, trail
from Ciudad Viejo,
19. X. 1990, A.L.Norrbom

Second label:
reared ex. stem of
undetermined plant (90G13)
probably ex. puparium
of Tephritidae sp., possibly
Trupanea sp.

Acknowledgements
This page was assembled largely by Bob Wharton and Andrew Ly. It is part of a revision of New World, mostly neotropical, opiines reared from non-frugivorous Tephritidae conducted by Wharton and Norrbom (2013). We are particularly grateful to Danielle Restuccia, Patricia Mullins, Trent Hawkins, Lauren Ward, and Gabriella Vasquez, who did all of the imaging and especially Danielle for preparing the plates. Paul Marsh initially made much of this material available to the senior author. Matt Yoder and Istvan Miko provided guidance on databasing issues associated with our use of mx and HAO respectively. We thank David Wahl (AEIC), Norm Penny and Bob Zuparko (CAS), Andrew Bennett and Henri Goulet (CNC), Max Fischer and Dominique Zimmermann (NHMW), and Paul Marsh and Robert Kula (Systematic Research Laboratory, USDA; USNM) for facilitating loans and general assistance associated with examination of holotypes and other material in their care. This work was supported largely by NSF DEB 0949027, with REU supplement 1313933 (to Wharton) and partly by NSF/PEET DEB 0328922 (also to Wharton). Page last updated January, 2014.

This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant Numbers DEB 0949027 and DEB 0328922 with REU supplement 1313933.
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.