diff --git a/data/03/A2/87/03A287ADFFF2FF97FF4C237BFADFFC26.xml b/data/03/A2/87/03A287ADFFF2FF97FF4C237BFADFFC26.xml deleted file mode 100644 index 3c505d8e902..00000000000 --- a/data/03/A2/87/03A287ADFFF2FF97FF4C237BFADFFC26.xml +++ /dev/null @@ -1,482 +0,0 @@ - - - -Nine new species and new records of euryglossiform Scrapter Lepeletier & Serville (Hymenoptera: Colletidae) from South Africa - - - -Author - -Kuhlmann, Michael -B99AE0ED-FA89-4DFE-A658-1C8DF37F9FAB -Zoological Museum, University of Kiel, Hegewischstrasse 3, D- 24105 Kiel, Germany -Email: thyrafriehs@yahoo.de - - - -Author - -Friehs, Thyra -CE708D50-8FB6-444B-90B2-4B696ADE74C9 -Zoological Museum, University of Kiel, Hegewischstrasse 3, D- 24105 Kiel, Germany - -text - - -European Journal of Taxonomy - - -2020 - -2020-05-18 - - -647 - - -1 -33 - - - -journal article -https://doi.org/10.5852/ejt.2020.647 -39f7fe40-f980-44e4-b0cf-4ad557bbd71f -2118-9773 -3836052 -35836E71-F258-41CC-A4F6-37EAE851A016 - - - - - -Males - - - -The males of - -S. avontuurensis -Kuhlmann - -sp. nov. -, - -S. bokkeveldensis -Kuhlmann - -sp. nov. -, - -S. fynbosensis -Kuhlmann - -sp. nov. -, - -S. gessorum - -, - -S. inexpectatus - -, - -S. keiskiensis -Kuhlmann - -sp. nov. -, - -S. minutuloides - -, - - - -S. minutus - -, - -S. nigerrimus - -, - -S. nitens -Kuhlmann - -sp. nov. -, - -S. oubergensis -Kuhlmann - -sp. nov. -and - -S. pygmaeus - -are unknown. - - - - - -1. Antennal flagellum medially broadened, entirely orange ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 12b); stigma bright yellow ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: Fig. 12a); S7 and S8 as in -Kuhlmann (2014 -: fig. 12d, f)………………… ……………………………………………………………………… - -S. luteistigma -Kuhlmann, 2014 - - - - - -– -Antennal flagellum not broadened, only partly yellowish; stigma darker……………………………2 - - - - -2. Third hind tarsus triangular broadened ( -Fig. 10E -)………… - -S. willemstrydomi -Kuhlmann - -sp. nov. - - - - -– -Third hind tarsus unmodified………………………………………………………………………3 - - - - -3. Antenna long, last flagellar segment about twice as long as wide ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 24e); S7 and S8 as in -Kuhlmann (2014 -: fig. 24d, f)………………………… - -S. punctulatus -Kuhlmann - -nom. nov. - - - - -– -Antenna shorter, last flagellar segment at most 1.5 times as long as wide……………………4 - - - - -4. Hind tibia inside apically broadened, pointed ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 22e) or forming either a spine ( -Fig. 7E -; -Kuhlmann 2014 -: figs 2e, 31e) or a ± right angle ( -Fig. 4G -; -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. -27g -)……5 - - - - -– -Hind tibia unmodified, if apically broadened then without spine or ± sharp edge……………10 - - - - -5. Hind tibia inside apically forming a ± right angle ( -Fig. 4G -; -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. -27g -)……………6 - - - - -– -Hind tibia inside apically pointed ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: Fig. 22e) or forming a spine ( -Fig. 7E -; -Kuhlmann 2014 -: figs 2e, 31e)………………………………………………………………………7 - - - - -6. Body about -5 mm -long; hind tibia forming a distinct right angle ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. -27g -); S7 and S8 as in -Kuhlmann (2014 -: fig. 27d, f)………………………… - -S. roggeveldi -Kuhlmann, 2014 - - - - - -– -Body longer; hind tibia forming a shallow right angle ( -Fig. 4G -); S7 and S8 as in -Fig. 4F, H -…… ………………………………………………………………………… - -S. hergi -Kuhlmann - -sp. nov. - - - - -7. Hind tibia inside apically pointed ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 22e); scutum and metasomal terga finely punctate ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 22c); S7 and S8 as in -Kuhlmann (2014 -: fig. 22d, f)……………………………………………………………………… - -S. papkuilsi -Kuhlmann, 2014 - - - - - -– -Hind tibia inside apically with spine ( -Fig. 7E -; -Kuhlmann 2014 -: figs 2e, 31e)………………8 - - - - -8. Scutum and metasomal terga coarsely punctate ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: figs 2c, 31c)……………9 - - - - -– -Scutum coarsely and metasomal terga finely punctate ( -Fig. 7C -)… - -S. mellonholgeri -Kuhlmann - -sp. nov. - - - - -9. Hind tibia apically with longer spine ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 31e); metasomal terga densely punctate ( -Kuhlmann2014 -:Fig.31c);S7and S8as in -Kuhlmann(2014 -:fig.31d,f) … - -S. spinipes -Kuhlmann, 2014 - - - - - -– -Hind tibia apically with shorter spine ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 2e); metasomal terga sparsely punctate ( -Kuhlmann2014 -:fig.2c);S7and S8 as in -Kuhlmann(2014 -:fig.2d,f)… - -S.acanthophorus -Davies, 2005 - - - - -10. Hind basitarsus brown to blackish………………………………………………………………11 - - - -– -Hind basitarsus yellowish…………………………………………………………………………14 - - - - -11. Hind tibia apically slightly swollen and curved ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 29e); scutum between punctures smooth and shiny; S7 and S8 as in -Kuhlmann (2014 -: fig. 29d, f)… - -S. sittybon -Davies, 2005 - - - - - -– -Hind tibia unmodified; scutum between punctures sculptured and matt………………………12 - - - - -12. Basal half of T2–T4 densely covered with short, silverish hair ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 33c); S7 and S8 as in -Kuhlmann (2014 -: fig. 33d–e)…………………… - -S. ulrikae -Kuhlmann, 2014 - - - - - -– -Basal half of T2–T4 almost hairless ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: figs 17c, e, 20c)…………………………13 - - -13. Discs of metasomal terga impunctate, very finely and regularly sculptured ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 20c); S7 and S8 as in -Kuhlmann (2014 -: fig. 20d–e)………………………… - -S. nigritarsis -Kuhlmann, 2014 - - - - - -– -Discs of metasomal terga partly punctate, strongly to heavily and irregularly sculptured ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -:fig.17c,e);S7 and S8as in -Kuhlmann(2014 -:fig.17d,f)……………… - -S. nanus -Kuhlmann, 2014 - - - - - -14. Hind tibia yellow with a brown spot on the back side ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 9a, c); S7 and S8 as in -Kuhlmann (2014 -: fig. 9d–e)…………………………………………… - -S. glareus -Davies, 2005 - - - - - -– -Hind tibia mostly black ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: figs 5a, 7a, 13a)………………………………………15 - - - -The males of the following three species are very similar and can be best separated by S7 and S8. - - - -15. S7 without membraneous apicolateral lobes ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 13d); S8 as in -Kuhlmann (2014 -: fig. 13e)…………………………………………………………… - -S. minutissimus -Kuhlmann, 2014 - - - - - -– -S7 with membraneous apicolateral lobes ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: figs 5d, 7d)……………………………16 - - - - -16. S7 apically with emargination slightly broader and shallower ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 5d)………… …………………………………………………………………………… - -S. albitarsis -( -Friese, 1909 -) - - - - - -– -S7 apically with emargination slightly narrower and deeper ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 7d)……………… ………………………………………………………………………… - -S. exiguus -Kuhlmann, 2014 - - - - - - \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/03/A2/87/03A287ADFFF4FF95FF4C2284FADFF8D0.xml b/data/03/A2/87/03A287ADFFF4FF95FF4C2284FADFF8D0.xml deleted file mode 100644 index 991864e66f9..00000000000 --- a/data/03/A2/87/03A287ADFFF4FF95FF4C2284FADFF8D0.xml +++ /dev/null @@ -1,604 +0,0 @@ - - - -Nine new species and new records of euryglossiform Scrapter Lepeletier & Serville (Hymenoptera: Colletidae) from South Africa - - - -Author - -Kuhlmann, Michael -B99AE0ED-FA89-4DFE-A658-1C8DF37F9FAB -Zoological Museum, University of Kiel, Hegewischstrasse 3, D- 24105 Kiel, Germany -Email: thyrafriehs@yahoo.de - - - -Author - -Friehs, Thyra -CE708D50-8FB6-444B-90B2-4B696ADE74C9 -Zoological Museum, University of Kiel, Hegewischstrasse 3, D- 24105 Kiel, Germany - -text - - -European Journal of Taxonomy - - -2020 - -2020-05-18 - - -647 - - -1 -33 - - - -journal article -https://doi.org/10.5852/ejt.2020.647 -39f7fe40-f980-44e4-b0cf-4ad557bbd71f -2118-9773 -3836052 -35836E71-F258-41CC-A4F6-37EAE851A016 - - - - - -Females - - - -The females of - -S. glareus - -, - -S. hergi -Kuhlmann - -sp. nov. -, - -S. minutissimus - -and - -S. willemstrydomi -Kuhlmann - -sp. nov. -are unknown. - - - - - - -1. Stigma bright yellow ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: Fig. 11a) …………………… - -S. luteistigma -Kuhlmann, 2014 - - - - - -– -Stigmalighttodarkbrown……………………………………………………………………………2 - - - - -2. Apical tergal margins broadly brownish to yellowish translucent( -Figs 3E -, -8E -; -Kuhlmann2014 -:figs 1b, - - - -28b, 32e); body length -4.9–6.6 mm -…………………………………………………………………3 - -– -Apical tergal margins black or very narrowly brownish translucent; body length -4.3–5.6 mm -……7 - - - - -3. Punctation on basal part of clypeus much finer than apically ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 28c–d); foretibia entirely or predominantly yellowish to reddish brown ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 28a)……… …………………………………………………………………………… - -S. sittybon -Davies, 2005 - - - - - -– -Punctation on clypeus more evenly sized ( -Figs 3B -, -8B -; -Kuhlmann 2014 -: figs 1c–d, 32b); foretibia dominantly dark blackish-brown……………………………………………………………………4 - - - - -4. Metasomal terga between punctures smooth and shiny ( -Fig. 8E -; -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 1b)………5 - - -– -Metasomal terga between punctures at least finely sculptured and slightly matt ( -Fig. 3E -; -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 32e)………………………………………………………………………………………6 - - - - -5. Clypeus distinctly convex ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 1c–d); scutum with dense punctation ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 1e–f)……………………………………………………… - -S. acanthophorus -Davies, 2005 - - - - - -– -Clypeus almost flat ( -Fig. 8B -); scutum with sparse punctation ( -Fig. 8C -)… - -S. nitens -Kuhlmann - -sp. nov. - - - - -6. Clypeus between punctures smooth and shiny ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 32b); scutum superficially reticulate but shiny ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 32c–d)……………………… - -S. ulrikae -Kuhlmann, 2014 - - - - - -– -Clypeus between punctures superficially sculptured and slightly matt ( -Fig. 3B -); scutum reticulate and matt ( -Fig. 3C -)…………………………………………… - -S. fynbosensis -Kuhlmann - -sp. nov. - - - - -7. Scutum sparsely and finely punctured, looking almost impunctate and shiny ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: figs 6e–f, 8e–f)………………………………………………………………………………………8 - - - - -– -Scutum more densely and coarsely punctured…………………………………………………10 - - - - -8. Supraclypeal area, clypeus ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 6c–d) and mesepisternum only partially and superficially reticulate, more shiny…………………………………… - -S. exiguus -Kuhlmann, 2014 - - - - - -– -Supraclypeal area apically, clypeus basally ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 8c–d) and mesepisternum extensively and strongly reticulate, matt……………………………………………………………9 - - - - -9. Facial fovea slightly shorter than in - -S. gessorum - -( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 4a–b); a variable species with respect to surface sculpture and punctation ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: figs 3c–f, 4a–d)…………………… …………………………………………………………………………… - -S. albitarsis -( -Friese, 1909 -) - - - - - -– -Facial fovea slightly longer than in - -S. albitarsis - -( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 8d) ………………………… ……………………………………………………………………… - -S. gessorum -Kuhlmann, 2014 - - - - - -10. Clypeus and supraclypeal area matt, strongly reticulate, very sparsely, finely and shallowly punctate ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 10c–d)…………………………………… - -S. inexpectatus -Kuhlmann, 2014 - - - - - -– -Clypeus and supraclypeal area more shiny or just slightly matt, only partly or superficially sculptured, punctation usually stronger and denser………………………………………………11 - - - - -11. Metasomal terga finely and densely punctate, between punctures smooth and shiny ( -Fig. 2E -; -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 18b)………………………………………………………………………12 - - - - -– -Metasomal terga either impunctate or with more dispersed/coarser punctation; if punctation is similar (some specimens of - -S. punctatus - -), then terga at least basally with superficial sculpture and slightly matt ……………………………………………………………………………………………………13 - - - - -12. Scutum very densely (i = 0,5–1 d) punctate ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 18e–f), propodeum basally shallowly but broadly carinate ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 18f)…… - -S. nigerrimus -Kuhlmann, 2014 - - - - - -– -Scutum coarser (i = 1–2,5 d) punctate ( -Fig. 2C -), propodeum basally only laterally with distinct but fine carination ( -Fig. 2D -)………………………………… - -S. bokkeveldensis -Kuhlmann - -sp. nov. - - - -13. Metasomal terga impunctate; scutum distinctly reticulate and shallowly punctate……………14 - - - -– -Metasomal terga punctate, sometimes punctures minute…………………………………………15 - - - - -14. Basal area of propodeum distinctly and largely carinate ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 19b)………………… ……………………………………………………………………… - -S. nigritarsis -Kuhlmann, 2014 - - - - - -– -Basal area of propodeum along anterior margin indistinctly carinate ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 25c–d)… ……………………………………………………………………… - -S. pygmaeus -Kuhlmann, 2014 - - - - - -15. Scutum very coarsely punctate ( -Fig. 9C -; -Kuhlmann 2014 -: figs 23c–d, 30c–d)…………16 - - - - -– -Scutum finer punctate ( -Figs 1C -, -6 -C–D, 5C; -Kuhlmann 2014 -: figs 14e–f, 15c–d, 16e–f, 21c–f, 26c– d)…………………………………………………………………………………………………18 - - - - -16. Propodeum basally broadly and distinctly carinate ( -Fig. 9D -; -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 30c–d)……17 - - - - -– -Propodeum with few, short and indistinct carinae ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 23c–d)………………… ………………………………………………………………… - -S. punctulatus -Kuhlmann - -nom. nov. - - - - -17. Basal area of propodeum shorter, medially only slightly longer than metanotum ( -Fig. 9D -)……… …………………………………………………………………… - -S. oubergensis -Kuhlmann - -sp. nov. - - - - -– -Basal area of propodeum longer, medially about 1.5 times as long as metanotum ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 30c–d)……………………………………………………………… - -S. spinipes -Kuhlmann, 2014 - - - - - -18. Punctation of metasomal terga minute, almost invisible ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 26e)……………… ……………………………………………………………………… - -S. roggeveldi -Kuhlmann, 2014 - - - - - -– -Punctation of metasomal terga much coarser and clearly visible ( -Figs 1C -, -6 -C–D, 5C; -Kuhlmann 2014 -: figs 14b, 15e, 16b, 21g–h)…………………………………………………………………19 - - - - -19. Head distinctly broader than long ( -Figs 1C -, -6 -C–D, 5C; -Kuhlmann 2014 -: figs 14c–d, 16c–d)……20 - - -– -Head about as long as broad ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: figs 15b, 21b)……………………………………24 - - - - -20. Clypeus, supraclypeal area and T1mostly polished and shiny,only partially very finely and superficially sculptured, slightly matt ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 14b–d)………… - -S. minutuloides -Kuhlmann, 2014 - - - - - -– -Clypeus, supraclypeal area and T1 (particularly anteriorly) mostly finely sculptured and matt ( -Figs 1C -, -6 -C–D, 5C; -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 16b–d)…………………………………………………21 - - - - -21. Scutum densely (i = 0,5–1,5 d) punctate ( -Figs 1C -, -5C -)…………………………………………22 - - -– -Scutum sparsely (i> 1,5 d) punctate ( -Fig. 6 -C–D; -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 16e–f)…………………23 - - - - -22. Propodeum basally distinctly and broadly carinate ( -Fig. 1D -)… - -S. avontuuensis -Kuhlmann - -sp. nov. - - - - -– -Propodeum basally only indistinctly and shallowly carinate ( -Fig. 5D -)……………………………… ……………………………………………………………………… - -S.keiskiensis -Kuhlmann - -sp.nov. - - - - -23. Propodeum basally distinctly and broadly carinate ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 16e–f)………………… …………………………………………………………………………… - -S. nanus -Kuhlmann, 2014 - - - - - -– -Propodeum basally finer and just very shallowly carinate, sometimes just laterally visible ( -Fig. 6 -E– F)…………………………………………………………… - -S. mellonholgeri -Kuhlmann - -sp. nov. - - - - -24. Metanotum apically more evenly rounded, without distinct carinate depression ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 15d); fore tibia anteriorly largely yellowish-brown……… - -S. minutus -Kuhlmann, 2014 - - - - - -– -Metanotum apically with a carinate depression ( -Kuhlmann 2014 -: fig. 21d, f); fore tibia anteriorly blackish, only at the base with a small yellowish spot……… - -S. papkuilsi -Kuhlmann, 2014 - - - - - - - \ No newline at end of file