Rediscovery of Pristepyris Kieffer (Hymenoptera, Bethylidae), a new synonym of Acrepyris Kieffer Author Azevedo, Celso O. Author Alencar, Isabel D. C. C. text Zootaxa 2009 2009-11-11 2287 1 45 54 https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.2287.1.2 journal article 10.11646/zootaxa.2287.1.2 1175-5326 5309295 Pristocera flavicornis ( Kieffer, 1910 ) comb. nov. Pristepyris flavicornis Kieffer 1910 , 3: 15 (male description); Kieffer 1914 , 41: 421 (key), 422 (description), Gordh & Móczár 1990 , 46: 139 (catalog); comb. nov. Description (extracted and adapted from the German description by Kieffer, 1914: 422 ). Length 6.5 mm . Color. Head and mesosoma black and brilliant; metasoma dark reddish brown; mandible red; antenna yellow; palpi yellow; trochanters, tarsi and fore tibia yellow, mid and hind tibiae light yellowish brown. FIGURES 11–15. Pristocera levicollis ( Kieffer, 1905 ) comb. nov. 11, head in dorsal view; 12, mandible; 13–15, mesosoma; 13, dorsal view; 14, lateral view; 15, ventral view. FIGURES 16–18. Pristocera levicollis ( Kieffer, 1905 ) comb. nov. 16, hypopigium, ventral view; 17–18, genitalia; 17, ventral view; 18, dorsal view. Head. Mandible with four or five apical teeth, triangular, large, progressively wider apicad. almost square. Antenna with fine hairs, scape arched, as long as pedicel and flagellomere I together, pedicel hardly longer than wide, 0.5x as long as flagellomere I, slightly longer than flagellomere II, flagellomeres IV–XIII 2.0x as long as wide. Eye glabrous. LH ~1.0x WH. Frons with coarse punctures, progressively less dense posterad, without punctures near vertex crest. Malar space almost absent. Distance from posterior ocellus to vertex crest 2.0x distance between posterior ocelli. VOL 0.5x HE. Maxillary palpus with five distal segments long and slender. Mesosoma. Pronotum and mesonotum with long, scattered, adjacent yellow hair. Anterior part of pronotum transverse, smooth, posteriorly truncate and laterally elongate; posterior part of pronotum one third as long as mesonotum, longitudinally rugose, truncate posteriorly, brighter and reaching tegula. Mesonotum transverse, smooth, with scattered setose punctures. Notaulus convergent posteriorly, transversely striated and wider than anteriorly. Parapsidal furrow narrower than notaulus. Scutellum smooth, scutellar groove curved. Propodeal disc elongate, weakly convex, emarginated laterally only, coarsely rugose, with longitudinal carina, which originates anteriorly in a large, circular area, posterior corner rounded. Lateral of propodeum with fine, longitudinal striae, separated from mesopleuron by broad, very deep, transversely striated groove. Mesopleuron roughly punctured. Wings almost hyaline, pterostigma elliptical, radial vein 1.5x as long as basal vein, basal vein reaching subcostal vein intersection. Femora thickened. Tibia not spinose. Fore tarsus with elongate segments. Claws with three teeth equally long. Metasoma. Fairly flat, shorter than mesosoma, hypopygium divided into two large and blunt lobes. Paramere projecting outward between last tergite and sternite as small appendices. Remarks . This species is known only from one male . It is supposed to be deposited at Hosemann Collection. It was collected by Cameroon . We were not able to find the type . However the original description is adequate to figure out the genus. Kieffer (1910) described this species with “ Mandibel 4- oder 5 zähnig ” (=mandible 4- or 5-toothed), and “ 8. Sternit bis auf den Grand in 2 stumpfe Lappen geteilt ” (=hypopygium divided into two large and blunt lobes). The three genera which fit into these characters are Dicrogenium Stadelmann , Pristocera Klug and Kathepyris Kieffer. However , the former is characterized by having a large acute genal spine ventrad; such condition is very unusual and Kieffer certainly would describe it if present in this species. In Kathepyris the cubital and subdiscoidal veins of the fore wing reach the apical margin. Kieffer used to describe this condition when present. So, we conclude that Pristepyris flavicornis belongs to Pristocera . Although we were able to figure out the generic identity, it is not possible to establish the species identity, because the genital characters, which are fundamental for the taxonomy of Pristocera , were not described by Kieffer (1910 , 1914 ).