Research Article |
Corresponding author: Marko Prous ( mprous@ut.ee ) Academic editor: Hannes Baur
© 2016 Marko Prous, Veli Vikberg, Andrew Liston, Katja Kramp.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation:
Prous M, Vikberg V, Liston A, Kramp K (2016) North-Western Palaearctic species of the Pristiphora ruficornis group (Hymenoptera, Tenthredinidae). Journal of Hymenoptera Research 51: 1-54. https://doi.org/10.3897/jhr.51.9162
|
The Pristiphora ruficornis group, defined here based on the structure of the penis valve and the genetic data, includes morphologically and genetically highly similar species that remain taxonomically challenging. Study of most of the relevant type material, examination of female saws and male genitalia, some rearing experiments, and genetic data enabled us to solve most of the taxonomic problems involving northern European taxa. As a result, 17 species are recognised in northern Europe. The following synonymies are proposed: Pristiphora aterrima Lindqvist, 1977, syn. n. is synonymised with P. albitibia (Costa, 1859), P. brunniapex Lindqvist, 1960, syn. n. and P. coniceps Lindqvist, 1955, syn. n. both with P. subopaca Lindqvist, 1955, Nematus vitreipennis Eversmann in Kawall, 1864, syn. n. (nomen oblitum) with P. leucopus (Hellén, 1948) (nomen protectum), and Nematus (Pristiphora) ruficornis var. integer Hellén, 1948, syn. n. with P. ruficornis (Olivier, 1811). Lectotypes are designated for the following taxa: Nematus appendiculatus Hartig, 1837, Nematus cathoraticus Förster, 1854, Nematus (Pristiphora) bifidus Hellén, 1948, Nematus frigidus Boheman, 1865, Pristiphora adelungi Konow, 1902, Nematus vitreipennis Eversmann in Kawall, 1864, Nematus melanocarpus Hartig, 1840, Nematus wuestneii Stein, 1885, Pristiphora pusilla Malaise, 1921, and Nematus fraxini Hartig, 1837. An illustrated electronic key made with Lucid and a traditional dichotomous key are provided to facilitate identification of the species. In addition we report the first occurrence of distinctly asymmetrical penis valves in Pristiphora (in P. pusilla), a condition rarely observed in Hymenoptera.
Sawflies, lectotypes, new synonyms, nomenclature, taxonomy, identification key, phylogeny, asymmetrical genitalia, triose-phosphate isomerase, cytochrome oxidase subunit I, DNA barcoding
Pristiphora Latreille, 1810 contains several species groups, within which identification of species is difficult because of high similarity in external morphology, the need to study female saws and male genitalia, and the lack of reliable keys and recent revisions (
The host plant associations, details of larval morphology, and bionomy of only a few species of the ruficornis group have been recorded in detail. Because its larvae sometimes defoliate cultivated Ribes, particularly R. uva-crispa (gooseberry), biological observations on P. appendiculata are included in numerous publications, including many general and popular works on plant “pests” (e.g.
Larvae are cryptically coloured, with a largely green body (https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.3486341.v1). Only the head and coxae of the thoracic legs are more or less dark-marked. The dark pattern on the head of the final instar larva, composed of spots of brown pigment that to the naked eye appear confluent and blackish, is similar in all species of the ruficornis group: a stripe along the coronal suture, branching ventrally to run along upper edges of frons; upper frons more or less dark marked; an approximately vertical stripe on each orbit that does not connect with the coronal stripe. The anal tergum of the abdomen is entirely green in some species of the group of which the larva is known, but yellow in P. appendiculata, and extensively red in P. aphantoneura, P. luteipes, P. sootryeni (
Specimens examined or mentioned are deposited in the following collections:
BMNH
The
CEH Collection of Erik Heibo, Lierskogen, Norway
COL Collection of Ole Lønnve, Oslo, Norway
CVV Collection of Veli Vikberg, Turenki, Finland
SDEI
SMTP Swedish Malaise Trap Project, Station Linné, Öland, Sweden
TUZ
Names of the mentioned host plants follow The Plant List (http://www.theplantlist.org/).
Collecting data of the examined specimens is included in an excel file available at Dryad Digital Repository: https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.tj4t0
To photograph penis valves and lancets (valvula 1 or ventral part of saw), genital capsules and ovipositors were separated from the specimen and macerated in KOH (10–15%) for 6–10 hours at room temperature or treated with proteinase during DNA extraction (see below). Temporary or permanent slide preparations were made of dissected lancets and penis valves. For temporary slides, glycerine was used. After photographing, the lancets and penis valves were glued on a piece of cardboard, which was pinned with the corresponding specimen. For permanent slides, Euparal or PVA-mounting medium (mostly) was used (these specimens are labelled as ‘PR.XXXVV’, e.g. PR.440VV). PVA-mounting medium (
Photos were taken with a digital camera attached to a microscope. Composite images with an extended depth of field were created from stacks of images using the software CombineZP (Alan Hadley; http://www.hadleyweb.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/). Most of the lancets were photographed in two overlapping parts and a single image was created using the program Image Composite Editor (Microsoft).
Morphological terminology follows
DNA was extracted and purified with an EZNA Tissue DNA Kit (Omega Bio-tek) according to the manufacturer’s protocol and stored at -20 °C for later use. Typically, the middle right leg was used for DNA extraction, but for males the whole genital capsule was often additionally used to increase DNA yield and to free penis valves from muscles for photographing. One mitochondrial and one nuclear region were used in phylogenetic analyses. Primers used for amplification and sequencing are listed in Table
Primers used for PCR and sequencing, with information provided on respective gene fragment, primer name, direction (forward, F or reverse, R) and location (internal, i or external, o) according to each gene fragment, primer sequence, standard annealing temperature, utilization (PCR/ sequencing), and reference.
Gene Region | Primer name | F/R i/o | Primer sequence 5'–3' | Annealing temperature (°) | PCR/Sequencing | Reference |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
COI | SymF1 | F o | TTTCAACWAATCATAAARAYATTGG | 47 | PCR, seq | This study |
COI | SymF2 | F o | TTTCAACAAATCATAAARAYATTGG | 47 | PCR, seq | This study |
COI | sym- C1-J1718 | F i/o | GGAGGATTTGGAAAYTGAYTAGTWCC | 49 | PCR, seq | ( |
COI | symC1- J1751 | F i/o | GGAGCNCCTGATATAGCWTTYCC | 47 | PCR, seq | This study |
COI | C1-N1760 | R i/o | GGTARAAATCARAATCTTATATTAT | 47 | PCR, seq | ( |
COI | SymR1 | R i/o | TAAACTTCWGGRTGICCAAARAATC | 47 | PCR, seq | This study |
COI | SymR2 | R i/o | TAAACTTCTGGRTGTCCAAARAATCA | 47 | PCR, seq | This study |
COI | A2590 | R o | GCTCCTATTGATARWACATARTGRAAATG | 49 | PCR, seq | ( |
TPI | TPI_29Fi | F o | GYAAATTYTTYGTTGGNGGIAA | 52 | PCR, seq | This study |
TPI | TPI 111Fb | F o | GGNAAYTGGAARATGAAYGG | 56 | PCR, seq | ( |
TPI | TPI hym intF | F i | AARGGHGCNTTYACYGGNGA | 56 | Seq | ( |
TPI | TPI hym intR | R i | TCNGARTGDCCHADRATNACCCA | 52 | Seq | ( |
TPI | TPI385Fi | F o | GTRATYGCNTGYATYGGIGARA | 52 | PCR, seq | This study |
TPI | TPI 275Ri | R o | GCCCANACNGGYTCRTAIGC | 56 | PCR, seq | ( |
TPI | TPI706R | R o | ACNATYTGTACRAARTCWGGYTT | 52 | PCR, seq | This study |
PCR reactions were carried out in a total volume of 15–20 µl containing 1–2 µl of extracted DNA, 0.6–0.8 µl (3–4 pmol) of primers and 7.5–10 µl of 2x Multiplex PCR Plus Master mix (QIAGEN). The PCR protocol consisted of an initial DNA polymerase (HotStar Taq) activation step at 95 °C for 5 min, followed by 38–40 cycles of 30 s at 95 °C, 90 s at 47–56 °C depending on the primer set used, and 30–70 s (depending on the amplicon size) at 72 °C; the last cycle was followed by a final 30 min extension step at 68 °C. 3 µl of PCR product was visualised on a 1.4% agarose gel and then purified with FastAP and Exonuclease I (Thermo Scientific). 1.0–1.5 U of both enzymes were added to 12–17 µl of PCR solution and incubated for 15 min at 37 °C, followed by 15 min at 85 °C. Purified PCR products were sent to Macrogen (Netherlands) for sequencing. To obtain unequivocal sequences, both sense and antisense strands were sequenced, using the primers listed in Table
Sequences reported here have been deposited in the GenBank (NCBI) database (accession numbers KX602529–KX602627).
COI sequences were aligned manually, among which only some specimens of Pristiphora appendiculata showed differences in length caused by deletion of six base pairs (two amino acids). The exact position of this deletion was located by translating nucleotides into amino acids (using the invertebrate mitochondrial genetic code). The TPI sequences including introns of ruficornis group specimens were aligned using MAFFT 7 (
Sequence data were analysed using the maximum likelihood method (ML) with PhyML 3.0.1 (http://www.atgc-montpellier.fr/phyml/;
Some of the COI barcode sequences used here were obtained from BOLD (http://www.boldsystems.org/). In this case, DNA extraction, PCR amplification, and sequencing were conducted at the Canadian Centre for DNA Barcoding (CCDB) in Guelph, Canada using standardised high-throughput protocols (
Barcode distance calculations were based on p-distances (proportion of nucleotide differences) and were taken from the BOLD BIN (Barcode Index Number) database (http://www.boldsystems.org/).
The electronic identification key for the species of ruficornis-group was prepared in Lucid 3.5 Builder (http://www.lucidcentral.org/) and a zip file containing all the Lucid data files is available at Dryad Digital Repository (https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.tj4t0). If the licence for Lucid 3.5 is lacking, the free version of Lucid 3.3 can be used to run the key. Only species of the ruficornis group are included in the key, but there are additional characters that do not vary within the group, but which can be used to exclude other Pristiphora species. In case of ambiguities or polymorphisms in character states, we conservatively coded these to multiple states. The key contains 37 morphological features with 94 character states and 43 entities (species and groups, 20 for males and 23 for females). The first choice given in the key is between female and male, one of which has to be chosen to see all other characters. After that, characters can be chosen freely or one can use ‘Best’ and ‘Next Best’ tools in Lucid that suggests the most efficient sequence of characters for identification.
A traditional dichotomous key was constructed manually to emphasise the most reliable characters (usually penis valves or lancets).
Phylogenetic analyses of mitochondrial COI sequences (Fig.
Maximum likelihood tree of Pristiphora ruficornis group based on cytochrome oxidase subunit I(COI) sequences (1078 bp). Specimens that had at least the full barcode sequence (658 bp) were included in the analysis. Branches with multiple specimen identification labels represent identical sequences, only one of which was used in the analysis. Numbers on the nodes show approximate likelihood-ratio test (aLRT) support values and bootstrap proportions (%, BP). Support values for weakly supported branches (aLRT<0.9 and/or BP<70) are not shown. The inset shows the tree with outgroup species. The scale bar shows the number of estimated substitutions per nucleotide position. An asterisk (*) indicates the specimens that we have not studied. AUT, Austria; CAN, Canada; CHN, China; DEU, Germany; ESP, Spain; EST, Estonia; FIN, Finland; FRA, France; GBR, United Kingdom; ITA, Italy; MAR, Morocco; NOR, Norway; PRT, Portugal; SWE, Sweden; USA, United States of America. NUMTs?, possible nuclear mitochondrial pseudogenes.
Maximum likelihood tree of Pristiphora ruficornis group based on triose-phosphate isomerase (TPI) sequences (alignment length 842 bp). Branches with multiple specimen identification labels represent identical sequences, only one of which was used in the analysis. Numbers on the nodes show approximate likelihood-ratio test (aLRT) support values and bootstrap proportions (%, BP). Support values for weakly supported branches (aLRT<0.9 and/or BP<70) are not shown. The scale bar shows the number of estimated substitutions per nucleotide position.
3 Pristiphora bifida DEI-GISHym31507, sawsheath with large scopa (arrows) in dorsal view 4 P. appendiculata DEI-GISHym80025, sawsheath with large scopa (arrows) in apical view 5 P. albitibia DEI-GISHym31514, head in dorsal view showing short postocellar area (lines and arrows) 6 P. geniculata DEI-GISHym20961, head in dorsal view showing long postocellar area (lines and arrows) 7 P. appendiculata DEI-GISHym31500, smooth mesopostnotum (arrow) 8 P. albitibia DEI-GISHym31516, matt mesopostnotum (arrow) 9 P. ruficornis DEI-GISHym31185, dorsal view 10 P. subopaca DEI-GISHym20899, dorsal view 11 P. ruficornis DEI-GISHym31185, lateral view 12 P. subopaca DEI-GISHym20899, lateral view 13 P. beaumonti DEI-GISHym20766, lateral view 14 P. melanocarpa DEI-GISHym21031, abdomen in lateral view 15 P. luteipes DEI-GISHym18872, abdomen in lateral view 16 P. armata DEI-GISHym11092, tergum 8 in dorsal view with apical projection (arrow) 17 P. subopaca DEI-GISHym31560, tergum 8 in dorsal view without apical projection.
18 P. albitibia DEI-GISHym31514, thorax in lateral view 19 P. luteipes DEI-GISHym80038, thorax in lateral view 20 P. astragali holotype, thorax in lateral view 21 P. leucopus DEI-GISHym31556, lateral 22 P. leucopus DEI-GISHym4989, lateral 23 P. luteipes DEI-GISHym80038, lateral 24 P. luteipes DEI-GISHym80038, flagellum 25 P. ruficornis DEI-GISHym31185, flagellum 26 P. armata DEI-GISHym11092 27 P. subopaca holotype, pterostigma (arrow) 28 P. opaca holotype, pterostigma (arrow) 29 P. ruficornis DEI-GISHym31185, pterostigma (arrow) 30 P. appendiculata DEI-GISHym31500, claw 31 P. opaca holotype, claw 32 P. subopaca holotype, claw 33 P. armata DEI-GISHym11554, claw 34 P. bifida DEI-GISHym31507, claw 35 P. frigida
Lancets of P. melanocarpa showing variation in the shape of the tangium. Some of the specimens have rather distinct small outgrowth between tangium and laminum (arrow in Fig.
Lancets of P. melanocarpa and P. ruficornis showing variation in the shape of the tangium. Lancets shown here clearly lack small outgrowth between tangium and laminum, which can be seen at least in Figs
Penis valves of Pristiphora ruficornis group. 77 P. appendiculata DEI-GISHym31555 78 P. albitibia DEI-GISHym20956 79 P. ruficornis PR.462VV 80 P. melanocarpa PR.425VV 81 P. ruficornis DEI-GISHym19636 82 P. melanocarpa PR.409VV 83 P. armata PR.465VV 84 P. leucopus PR.466VV reared ex ovo from Tilia sp. 85 P. armata DEI-GISHym80020 86 P. leucopus GBIF-GISHym3246 (syntype of Nematus crassicornis Hartig).
Penis valves of Pristiphora ruficornis group. 87 P. bifida DEI-GISHym80000 (arrow indicates a dorsal depression of the pseudoceps) 88 P. frigida
Penis valves of Pristiphora ruficornis group and P. rufipes. 97 P. staudingeri PR.361VV 98 P. staudingeri PR.447VV 99 P. staudingeri PR.352VV 100 P. staudingeri PR.453VV 101 P. beaumonti DEI-GISHym21176 102 P. staudingeri DEI-GISHym21228 103 P. luteipes DEI-GISHym19681 104 P. rufipes DEI-GISHym15263.
Genetic data reveal five well separated subgroups within the ruficornis group, which correlate well with morphological and ecological data. According to phylogenetic analyses of COI sequences (Fig.
Because of the high similarity of the species in ruficornis group, the number of external characters that can be used for species identification is rather small. These include colour of trochanters, trochantelli, metafemur (Figs
Characters of the lancet that can be used for species identification are the shape of the tangium and serrulae, number of ctenidia, and the presence or absence of small spiny pectines. The tangium can have a distinct lobe (Figs
The clearest differences between species in the ruficornis group are found in the penis valves. Shape of the ventro-apical spine and pseudoceps usually show distinct and stable differences between most species. In P. frigida (Fig.
1 | a Mesopostnotum smooth (Fig. |
|
b Claws without subapical tooth (Fig. |
||
c Mesepisternum smooth (Fig. |
||
d Antenna usually ventrally paler than dorsally (Fig. |
P. appendiculata | |
– | aa Mesopostnotum matt (Fig. |
|
bb Claws with subapical tooth (Figs |
||
cc Mesepisternum smooth or matt (Figs |
||
dd Antenna uniformly black or ventrally paler than dorsally (Figs |
2 | |
2(1) | a Metafemur pale in most part (Figs |
3 |
– | aa Metafemur black in most part (Fig. |
4 |
3(2) | a Claws with large subapical tooth (Fig. |
|
b Antenna ventrally paler than dorsally (Figs |
||
c Metafemur whitish (Fig. |
P. leucopus in part | |
– | aa Claws with small subapical tooth (Fig. |
|
bb Antenna uniformly black (Fig. |
||
cc Metafemur yellowish (Fig. |
females of P. aphantoneura (on Lathyrus) and P. luteipes (on Salix) (see |
|
4(2) | a Claws with long subapical tooth close to apical one (bifid) (Fig. |
5 |
– | aa Claws with small or large subapical tooth clearly separated from apical one (Figs |
6 |
5(4) | a Hind trochanters, trochantelli, and tibia partly pale | |
b Antenna (usually?) ventrally at least slightly paler than dorsally (Figs |
||
c In males, antennae with numerous and clearly visible stout black setae among finer paler ones (Fig. |
||
d Apical serrulae of lancet short and protruding, and tangium long and narrow (Fig. |
||
e Penis valve without membranous fold near tip of ventro-apical spine and pseudoceps with distinct dorsal depression in middle or basal part (Fig. |
P. bifida | |
– | aa Hind trochanters, trochantelli, and tibia uniformly black or brown | |
bb Antenna uniformly black (Fig. |
||
cc In males, antennae with only some barely visible stout black setae among finer paler ones (Fig. |
||
dd Apical serrulae of lancet long and flat, and tangium short and broad (Fig. |
||
ee Penis valve with membranous fold near tip of ventro-apical spine and pseudoceps without dorsal depression in middle or basal part (Fig. |
P. frigida | |
6(4) | a ♀ | 7 |
– | aa ♂ | 17 |
7(6) | a Tangium of lancet with distinct lobe (Figs |
|
b Mesepisternum smooth (Fig. |
||
c Claws with small subapical tooth (rarely with large) (Fig. |
8 | |
– | aa Tangium of lancet without distinct lobe (Figs |
|
bb Mesepisternum smooth or matt (Figs |
||
cc Claws with small or large subapical tooth (Figs |
9 | |
8(7) | a Antenna ventrally distinctly paler than dorsally (Fig. |
P. ruficornis |
– | aa Antenna usually uniformly black (Fig. |
P. melanocarpa |
9(7) | a Inner surface of lancet with small spiny pectines (or dentes semicirculares) that reach sclerora (Figs |
10 |
– | aa Inner surface of lancet without small spiny pectines (Figs |
12 |
10(9) | a Mesepisternum smooth (Fig. |
|
b Lancet with numerous ctenidia (Figs |
||
c Apical serrulae of lancet short (Figs |
||
d Pterostigma basally dark brown and apically brown (Fig. |
P. albitibia | |
– | aa Mesepisternum at least slightly matt (Figs |
|
bb Lancet with numerous or few ctenidia (Figs |
||
cc Apical serrulae of lancet short or long (Figs |
||
dd Pterostigma uniformly yellow or brown (Fig. |
11 | |
11(10) | a Lancet with numerous ctenidia (Fig. |
|
b Apical serrulae of lancet long (Fig. |
P. sootryeni | |
– | aa Lancet with few ctenidia (Figs |
|
bb Apical serrulae of lancet short (Figs |
P. astragali | |
12(9) | a Lancet with few ctenidia (Fig. |
|
b Serrulae of lancet flat (Fig. |
||
c Antenna (usually?) ventrally slightly paler than dorsally (Fig. |
P. pusilla | |
– | aa Lancet with numerous ctenidia (Figs |
|
bb Serrulae of lancet flat or protruding (Figs |
||
cc Antenna uniformly black or ventrally paler than dorsally (Figs |
13 | |
13(12) | a Mesepisternum (usually?) strongly matt (Fig. |
|
b Antenna uniformly black (Fig. |
||
c Pterostigma (usually?) uniformly yellow or brown (Fig. |
||
d Arctic habitats | P. staudingeri | |
– | aa Mesepisternum (usually?) smooth or slightly matt (Figs |
|
bb Antenna uniformly black or ventrally paler than dorsally (Figs |
||
cc Pterostigma uniformly yellow to dark brown, or basally dark brown and apically brown (Figs |
||
dd Usually non-arctic habitats | 14 | |
14(13) | a Apical serrulae protruding (Figs |
|
b Antenna often ventrally paler than dorsally (Fig. |
15 | |
– | aa Apical serrulae flat (Figs |
|
bb Antenna uniformly black or ventrally paler than dorsally (Figs |
16 | |
15(14) | a Pterostigma usually basally dark brown and apically brown (Fig. |
|
b Ctenidia of lancet more distinct (Figs |
P. confusa | |
– | aa Pterostigma usually uniformly dark brown (Fig. |
|
bb Ctenidia of lancet less distinct (Figs |
P. armata (on Crataegus) and P. leucopus (on Tilia) in part (see the main text and |
|
16(14) | a Tangium of lancet without fold (Figs |
|
b Antenna uniformly black (Fig. |
||
c Pterostigma uniformly yellow (Fig. |
P. subopaca | |
– | aa Tangium of lancet with fold (Figs |
|
bb Antenna ventrally slightly paler than dorsally (Fig. |
||
cc Pterostigma (usually?) basally dark brown and apically brown (Fig. |
P. opaca | |
17(6) | a Tergum 8 with apical projection (Fig. |
|
b Antennae ventrally distinctly paler than dorsally or uniformly yellow (Figs |
||
c Claws with large subapical tooth (Fig. |
||
d Mesepisternum smooth (Fig. |
P. armata (on Crataegus) and P. leucopus (on Tilia) (see the main text and |
|
– | aa Tergum 8 without apical projection (Fig. |
|
bb Antennae uniformly black to uniformly yellow (Figs |
||
cc Claws with small or large subapical tooth (Figs |
||
dd Mesepisternum smooth or matt (Figs |
18 | |
18(17) | a Penis valve with membranous fold near or covering tip of ventro-apical spine (Figs |
|
b Claws with small subapical tooth (Fig. |
||
c Mesepisternum smooth (Fig. |
19 | |
– | aa Penis valve without membranous fold (Figs |
|
bb Claws with small or large subapical tooth (Figs |
||
cc Mesepisternum smooth or matt (Figs |
20 | |
19(18) | a Ventro-apical spine of penis valve less sharply bent (forming half circle) (Figs |
P. ruficornis |
– | aa Ventro-apical spine of penis valve more sharply bent (being almost L-shaped) (Figs |
P. melanocarpa |
20(18) | a Pseudoceps of penis valve short and broad (Fig. |
|
b Mesepisternum smooth (Fig. |
||
c Antennae uniformly black (Fig. |
||
d Pterostigma (usually?) basally dark brown and apically brown (Fig. |
P. albitibia | |
– | aa Pseudoceps of penis valve longer and narrower (Figs |
|
bb Mesepisternum smooth or matt (Figs |
||
cc Antennae uniformly black (Fig. |
||
dd Pterostigma uniformly yellow to uniformly dark brown (Figs |
21 | |
21(20) | a Penis valve with weakly bent and broad ventro-apical spine, and with narrow pseudoceps without distinct dorsal depression in middle part (Figs |
P. confusa |
– | aa Penis valve with different combination of characters (Figs |
22 |
22(21) | a Ventro-apical spine of penis valve narrow and with blunt tip (Figs |
|
b Antennae ventrally paler than dorsally (Fig. |
P. opaca | |
– | aa Ventro-apical spine of penis valve broad or narrow and with sharp tip (Figs |
|
bb Antennae uniformly black (Fig. |
23 | |
23(22) | a Ventro-apical spine of penis valve narrow (Figs |
|
b Antennae uniformly black (Fig. |
24 | |
– | aa Ventro-apical spine of penis valve broad (Figs |
|
bb Antennae uniformly black (Fig. |
25 | |
24(23) | a Mesepisternum smooth to slightly matt (Figs |
|
b Usually non-arctic habitats | P. luteipes | |
– | aa Mesepisternum usually strongly matt (Fig. |
|
bb Arctic habitats | P. staudingeri | |
25(23) | a Pseudoceps of left and right penis valve without distinct dorsal depression in middle part and with weakly bent ventro-apical spine (Figs |
|
b Antennae uniformly black (Fig. |
P. subopaca | |
– | aa Pseudoceps of left penis valve with distinct dorsal depression in middle part and with strongly bent ventro-apical spine (Fig. |
|
bb Antenna ventrally paler than dorsally (Fig. |
P. pusilla |
Nematus
albitibia
Costa, 1859: 21. Syntype(s) ♂ possibly in
Nematus
puncticeps
Thomson, 1863: 619. Syntypes ♀♂ in
Nematus
agilis
Zaddach in Brischke, 1884: 142. Primary homonym of Nematus agilis Cresson, 1880 [= Euura agilis (Cresson, 1880)]. 3 ♂♀ syntypes possibly destroyed (
Pristiphora
aterrima
Lindqvist, 1977: 92, syn. n. Holotype ♀ (DEI-GISHym20896) in
Externally, the most similar species are P. armata, P. confusa, P. leucopus, P. opaca, and P. subopaca, from which it is best distinguished by the structure of the saw (Figs
Based on COI barcode sequences, P. albitibia belongs to its own BIN cluster (BOLD:ACH1762) (Fig.
Vicia cracca L. (
Palaearctic. Specimens studied are from Estonia, Finland, Germany, Russia, and Sweden.
Tenthredo
fulvipes
Fallén, 1808: 113. Primary homonym of Tenthredo fulvipes Scopoli, 1763 [= Aglaostigma (Astochus) fulvipes (Scopoli, 1763)]. Lectotype ♀ (designated by
Nematus
aphantoneurus
Förster, 1854: 323–325. Lectotype ♀ (DEI-GISHym31561; designated by
Cryptocampus
distinctus
Costa, 1882: 198. Syntype(s) ♀ possibly in
Pristiphora
pygmaea
Lindqvist, 1964: 130. Holotype ♀ in
The most similar species is P. luteipes, from which it cannot be always distinguished morphologically.
Based on a COI barcode sequence of one confidently identified specimen (reared ex ovo from Lathyrus pratensis) from Finland (DEI-GISHym80037), it belongs to the same BIN cluster (BOLD:AAG3568) as P. bifida, P. confusa, P. luteipes, P. opaca, P. pusilla, P. staudingeri, and P. subopaca (Fig.
Lathyrus pratensis L. (
Palaearctic. Specimens studied are from Estonia, Finland, and Germany.
Pristiphora
pallipes
Serville, 1823: 75. Secondary homonym of Tenthredo pallipes Fallén, 1808 [= Pristiphora (Lygaeotus) carinata (Hartig, 1837)]. Lectotype ♀ (designated by
Pristiphora
pallipes
Lepeletier, 1823: 60. Primary homonym of Pristiphora pallipes Serville, 1823 [= Pristiphora (Pristiphora) appendiculata (Hartig, 1837)]. Lectotype ♀ (designated by
Tenthredo (Nematus) pallicornis T.W. Harris, 1835: 583. Type(s) not available. Nomen nudum.
Tenthredo (Nematus) labrata T.W. Harris, 1835: 583. Type(s) not available. Nomen nudum.
Nematus
flavipes
Dahlbom, 1835a: 25–26. Nomen oblitum. Holotype ♀ in
Nematus
appendiculatus
Hartig, 1837: 202–203. Nomen protectum. See
Nematus
fuscicornis
Hartig, 1837: 225. No syntypes were found in
Nematus enervis Herrich-Schäffer, 1840: 176. Replacement name for Pristiphora pallipes Lepeletier, 1823.
Nematus
cathoraticus
Förster, 1854: 325–326. Lectotype ♀ (GBIF-GISHym3214; here designated) in
Nematus
pallicornis
Norton, 1861: 160. 3 ♀ syntypes in
Nematus
pallicornis
var.
labratus
Norton, 1861: 160. Holotype ♀ possibly in
Pristiphora
grossulariae
Walsh, 1866: 123. Neotype ♀ (selected by
Nematus Peletieri [sic!] André, 1880: 111. Name for Pristiphora pallipes Lepeletier, 1823.
Nematus
hypobalius
Zaddach in Brischke, 1884: 154. Holotype ♀ possibly destroyed (
Nematus
pumilus
Zaddach in Brischke, 1884: 172. 2 ♂ syntypes possibly destroyed (
Nematus
Ghilianii [sic!] Costa, 1894: 73. Syntype(s) ♂ possibly in
Smooth mesopostnotum (Fig.
Based on COI barcode sequences, specimens of this species are divided between two BIN clusters (BOLD:AAG7866 and BOLD:AAU8684). Minimum distance between the clusters is 3.26%. However, one of the BINs might represent a cluster of nuclear mitochondrial pseudogenes (NUMTs). The COI sequence (1078 bp) we obtained from the specimen DEI-GISHym21073 was different (belonging to BOLD:AAG7866) from the one present in BOLD (BASYM3303-14, 652 bp; belonging to BOLD:AAU8684) (Fig.
Ribes spp. Ribes alpinum L. (
Palaearctic, Nearctic. Specimens studied are from Austria, Canada, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Russia, and Sweden.
Nematus
crassicornis
Hartig, 1837: 204–205. Primary homonym of Nematus crassicornis Stephens, 1829 [= Cladius (Cladius) pectinicornis (Geoffroy, 1785)]. 3 ♀♀ and 13 ♂♂ possible syntypes belonging to P. armata and P. leucopus in
Nematus
armatus
Thomson, 1863: 619. Seven possible female syntypes belonging to P. armata and P. leucopus in
Nematus
crataegi
Brischke, 1883: pl. I(7), 6. Syntype(s) possibly destroyed (
Nematus Fletcheri [sic!] Cameron, 1884: 26. Syntype(s) possibly in BMNH, not examined. Type locality: Worcester and Clydesdale, United Kingdom.
Nematus
melanostomus
Zaddach in Brischke, 1884: 140–141. Holotype ♀ possibly destroyed (
Nematus
ensicornis
Jacobs, 1884: XXIII. Syntype(s) ♀ possibly in
Nematus nigricollis Cameron, 1885: 66. Syntype(s) possibly in BMNH, not examined. Type locality: Worcester, United Kingdom.
The most similar species is P. leucopus. Differences between these two species were extensively discussed by
Based on COI barcode sequences, P. armata belongs to the same BIN cluster (BOLD:AAQ2302) as P. leucopus (Fig.
Crataegus species (
Western Palaearctic. Specimens studied are from Finland, France, Germany, Italy, and Sweden.
Pristiphora
astragali
Vikberg, 1978: 133–137. Holotype ♀ (PR.354VV) in
Based on the external morphology, the most similar species are P. confusa, P. opaca, P. pusilla, P. sootryeni, P. staudingeri, and P. subopaca, from which it is best distinguished by the structure of the lancet (Figs
Based on a COI barcode sequence of one confidently identified specimen of P. astragali from Abisko (Sweden; DEI-GISHym80042), it belongs to the same BIN cluster as P. sootryeni (BOLD:AAL8292), which in the BOLD database includes two other unidentified specimens from Manitoba, Canada (Fig.
Astragalus alpinus L. (
Western Palaearctic. Specimens studied are from Finland and Sweden.
Nematus (Pristiphora) bifidus
Hellén, 1948: 116–117. Lectotype ♀ (http://id.luomus.fi/GL.5214; here designated) in
Externally, perhaps the most similar species is P. frigida, from which it can be distinguished by having pale hind trochanters, trochantelli, and tibiae (black or brown in P. frigida). In addition, antennae of males have numerous and clearly visible stout black setae among finer paler ones (Fig.
Based on COI barcode sequences, P. bifida belongs to the same BIN cluster (BOLD:AAG3568) as P. aphantoneura, P. confusa, P. luteipes, P. opaca, P. pusilla, P. staudingeri, and P. subopaca (Fig.
Salix viminalis L. (
Western Palaearctic. Specimens studied are from Finland, Germany, Norway, and Sweden. According to the BOLD database, this species may also be present in North America. The identifications of North American specimens falling within BIN cluster BOLD:AAG3568 are however uncertain.
Pristiphora
confusa
Lindqvist, 1955: 40–41. Holotype ♀ (http://id.luomus.fi/GL.5209) in
Based on the external morphology, the most similar species are P. albitibia, P. armata, P. leucopus, P. opaca, P. pusilla, P. sootryeni, and P. subopaca. The species is best distinguished through the structure of male penis valve (Figs
Based on COI barcode sequences, P. confusa belongs to the same BIN cluster (BOLD:AAG3568) as P. aphantoneura, P. bifida, P. luteipes, P. opaca, P. pusilla, P. staudingeri, and P. subopaca (Fig.
Salix caprea L. (
Western Palaearctic. Specimens studied are from Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Sweden, and Switzerland.
Nematus
frigidus
Boheman, 1865: 568–569. Lectotype ♂ (
Pristiphora
Adelungi
[sic!] Konow, 1902: 162, 167–168. Lectotype ♀ (DEI-GISHym30151; here designated) in
Externally, perhaps the most similar species is P. bifida, from which it can be distinguished by having black or brown hind trochanters, trochantelli, and tibiae (pale in P. bifida). In addition, antennae of males have only some barely visible stout black setae among finer paler ones (Fig.
No data.
Unknown.
Western Palaearctic. Specimens studied are from Norway (Svalbard).
Nematus
vitreipennis
Eversmann in Kawall, 1864: 295, syn. n. Nomen oblitum. Note.
Nematus (Pristiphora) ruficornis var. leucopus
Hellén, 1948: 116. Nomen protectum. No syntypes were found in
The most similar species to P. leucopus is P. armata. Differences between these two species were extensively discussed by
Based on COI barcode sequences, P. leucopus belongs to the same BIN cluster (BOLD:AAQ2302) as P. armata (Fig.
Tilia cordata Mill. (
Western Palaearctic. Specimens studied are from Austria, Finland, Germany, Great Britain, Russia, and Sweden.
Pristiphora
luteipes
Lindqvist, 1955: 47–48. Holotype ♀ (DEI-GISHym20897) in
The most similar species is P. aphantoneura, from which it cannot be always distinguished morphologically.
Based on COI barcode sequences, P. luteipes belongs to the same BIN cluster (BOLD:AAG3568) as P. aphantoneura, P. bifida, P. confusa, P. opaca, P. pusilla, P. staudingeri, and P. subopaca (Fig.
Salix alba L., S. aurita L., S. babylonica L., S. repens L. S. rosmarinifolia L., S. phylicifolia L., S. viminalis L., S. purpurea L. (see
Western Palaearctic. Specimens studied are from Finland, France, Germany, Great Britain, Italy, Norway, Portugal, Spain, and Sweden.
Nematus
melanocarpus
Hartig, 1840: 27. Lectotype ♀ (GBIF-GISHym3349; here designated) in
Nematus
funerulus
Costa, 1859: 20–21. Syntypes ♂♀ possibly in
Nematus wuestneii Stein, 1885 [mandatory correction of incorrect original spelling N. Wüstneii]: 304. Lectotype ♀ (here designated) in BMNH, examined. Type locality: Chodov [Chodau], Czech Republic.
Pristiphora
ortinga
Kincaid, 1900: 349–350. Holotype ♀ (USNMENT00778199) in
The most similar species is P. ruficornis, which has paler antennae compared to P. melanocarpa. Females have the ventral side of antennae uniformly black (Fig.
Based on COI barcode sequences, specimens are divided between three BIN clusters (BOLD:AAG3540, BOLD:ACZ4465, BOLD:ACZ4466), two of them (BOLD:ACZ4465 and BOLD:ACZ4466) including also P. ruficornis (Fig.
Betula pendula Roth (
Holarctic. Specimens studied are from Canada, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Norway, and Sweden.
Pristiphora
opaca
Lindqvist, 1955: 42–43. Holotype ♀ (http://id.luomus.fi/GL.5204) in
Based on the external morphology, the most similar species are P. albitibia, P. confusa, P. pusilla, P. sootryeni, and P. subopaca. The species is best distinguished through the structure of male penis valve (Figs
Based on COI barcode sequences, P. opaca belongs to the same BIN cluster (BOLD:AAG3568) as P. aphantoneura, P. bifida, P. confusa, P. pusilla, P. staudingeri, and P. subopaca (Fig.
Unknown.
Western Palaearctic. Specimens studied are from Finland and Sweden.
Pristiphora
pusilla
Malaise, 1921: 11–12. Lectotype ♂ (
Pristiphora
amaura
Lindqvist, 1955: 43–45. Holotype ♀ (http://id.luomus.fi/GL.5205) in
Based on the external morphology, the most similar species are P. albitibia, P. astragali, P. confusa, P. opaca, P. sootryeni, P. staudingeri, and P. subopaca. The species is best distinguished through the structure of male penis valve (Figs
Based on COI barcode sequences, P. pusilla belongs to the same BIN cluster (BOLD:AAG3568) as P. aphantoneura, P. bifida, P. confusa, P. opaca, P. staudingeri, and P. subopaca (Fig.
Unknown.
Western Palaearctic. Specimens studied are from Finland, Norway, and Sweden.
Nematus
ruficornis
Olivier in
Pristiphora
testaceicornis
Serville, 1823: 75. Syntype(s) ♂ not found in
Pristiphora
testaceicornis
Lepeletier, 1823: 60. Primary homonym of Pristiphora testaceicornis Serville, 1823 [= Pristiphora (Pristiphora) ruficornis (Olivier, 1811)]. Syntype(s) ♂ not found in
Nematus (Nematus) robustellus Dahlbom, 1835b: 9. Type(s) not available. Nomen nudum.
Nematus
fraxini
Hartig, 1837: 204. Lectotype ♀ (GBIF-GISHym3285; here designated) in
Nematus
testaceicornis
Jacobs, 1884: XXIII-XXIV. Syntype(s) ♀ possibly in
Nematus (Pristiphora) ruficornis var. integer
Hellén, 1948: 116, syn. n. Primary homonym of Nematus integer Say, 1836. Holotype ♀ (http://id.luomus.fi/GL.5212) in
The most similar species is P. melanocarpa, which has darker antennae compared to P. ruficornis. Females have a distinctly paler ventral side of antennae (Fig.
Based on COI barcode sequences, specimens of P. ruficornis are divided between two BIN clusters (BOLD:ACZ4465 and BOLD:ACZ4466) that also include P. melanocarpa (Fig.
Betula pubescens ssp. czerepanovii (N. I. Orlova) Hämet-Ahti (rearings and ex ovo rearing experiments by VV).
Western Palaearctic. Specimens studied are from Finland, Germany, Portugal, and Sweden.
Pristiphora
sootryeni
Lindqvist, 1955: 46. Holotype ♀ in
Based on the external morphology, the most similar species are P. astragali, P. confusa, P. opaca, P. pusilla, P. staudingeri, and P. subopaca, from which it is best distinguished by the structure of the lancet (Fig.
Based on a COI barcode sequence of one confidently identified specimen from Kuusamo (Finland; DEI-GISHym80036), it belongs to the same BIN cluster as P. astragali (BOLD:AAL8292), which in the BOLD database includes two other unidentified specimens from Manitoba, Canada (Fig.
Oxytropis campestris (L.) DC. (
Western Palaearctic. Specimens studied are from Finland.
Nematus
Staudingeri [sic!] Ruthe, 1859: 306–307. Lectotype ♀ (designated by
Pristiphora
circularis
Kincaid, 1900: 350. Holotype ♀ (USNMENT00778165) in
Pristiphora
hyperborea
Malaise, 1921: 11. Lectotype ♀ (
Pristiphora asperlatus Benson, 1935: 35–38. Holotype ♀ in BMNH, not examined. Type locality: Mount Braeriach, Inverness, Scotland, United Kingdom.
Based on the external morphology, the most similar species are P. astragali, P. confusa, P. luteipes, P. opaca, P. pusilla, P. sootryeni, and P. subopaca. The combination of usually strongly coriaceous sculpture on the mesepisternum (Fig.
Based on COI barcode sequences, belongs to the same BIN cluster (BOLD:AAG3568) as P. aphantoneura, P. bifida, P. confusa, P. opaca, P. pusilla, and P. subopaca (Fig.
Salix herbacea L. and S. phylicifolia L. (
Western Palaearctic, Nearctic. Specimens studied are from Finland, France, Great Britain, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, and Switzerland. The species should be removed from the fauna of Denmark. Publications (e.g.
Pristiphora
subopaca
Lindqvist, 1955: 41–42. Holotype ♀ (http://id.luomus.fi/GL.5202) in
Pristiphora
coniceps
Lindqvist, 1955: 39–40, syn. n. Holotype ♀ (http://id.luomus.fi/GL.5207) in
Pristiphora
brunniapex
Lindqvist, 1960: 37–38, syn. n. Holotype ♀ in
Based on the external morphology, the most similar species are P. albitibia, P. confusa, P. opaca, P. pusilla, and P. sootryeni. The species is best distinguished through the structure of male penis valve (Figs
Based on COI barcode sequences, P. subopaca belongs to the same BIN cluster (BOLD:AAG3568) as P. aphantoneura, P. bifida, P. confusa, P. opaca, P. pusilla, and P. staudingeri (Fig.
Salix caprea L. (
Western Palaearctic. Specimens studied are from Finland and Sweden.
Taxonomy of the species belonging to the ruficornis group as defined here (Fig.
Even if most of the species treated here can be considered distinct, their identification unfortunately remains relatively difficult. For reliable results, lancets and penis valves should be studied. Nevertheless, we hope that the current revision removes most of the previous confusion about species identities, their names and the association of females and males, as well as enabling more reliable and confident identification of the species. One further issue that is worth following up is the identity of the species in North America, as barcoding has revealed close connections to Northern Europe (there are many identical or nearly identical barcodes between the continents; Fig.
Examination of most of the barcoded specimens from Europe revealed that most of the species within the Pristiphora ruficornis group cannot be unambiguously identified based on mitochondrial COI barcodes. Nevertheless, barcoding showed the presence of five well separated clusters within the ruficornis group, each containing a unique set of species (Fig.
The study was supported by the Swedish Taxonomy Initiative (contract number dha 153/2011). For loans and gifts of material, as well as giving advice and valuable information, we would like to thank Ruth Ahlburg, John Grearson, Christer Hansson, Erik Heibo, Mikk Heidemaa, Iiro Kakko, Manfred Kraus, Jean Lacourt, Ole Lønnve, Pekka Malinen, Henri Savina, Olga Schmidt, Stefan Schmidt, Andreas Taeger, Hege Vårdal, and staff of the Swedish Malaise Trap Project (particularly Mattias Forshage, Kajsa Glemhorn, Dave Karlsson and Pelle Magnusson). Valuable suggestions made by reviewers Akihiko Shinohara, David Smith, and Villu Soon helped to improve the manuscript.