Corrigenda
Print
Corrigenda
Corrigenda: North-Western Palaearctic species of Pristiphora (Hymenoptera, Tenthredinidae). Journal of Hymenoptera Research 59: 1–190. https://doi.org/10.3897/jhr.59.12656
expand article infoMarko Prous§, Katja Kramp, Veli Vikberg|, Andrew Liston
‡ Senckenberg Deutsches Entomologisches Institut, Müncheberg, Germany
§ University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia
| Unaffiliated, Turenki, Finland
Open Access

It has come to our attention that we used the term “scopa” incorrectly throughout our revision of north-west Palaearctic Pristiphora species (Prous et al. 2017, p. 12 et seq.), and in the associated electronic identification key available at figshare (http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.5235805). The term is in frequent use for assemblages of stiff hairs, on the legs or abdominal sterna, used for transporting pollen in bees (Huber and Sharkey 1993). Our intention, in sawflies, was to denote an invagination or concavity at the tip of the sawsheath (e.g. Figs 75, 104–107, 111, 115, 121 in Prous et al. 2017) that distinguishes such sawsheaths from unmodified ones (e.g. Figs 98–99 in Prous et al. 2017), or from those having a “carina” (e.g. Figs 66–69 in Prous et al. 2017). The meaning of “scopa” (from Latin “broom”) in the context of Symphyta, consistent with most recent literature, is a paired, latero-posteriorly projecting structure at the tip of the sawsheath (Ross 1937: 76, Smith 1988: 229, 1992: 4). The “scopa” of sawflies sometimes bears a clearly defined setose area, often conspicuous in Diprionidae, termed “scopal pad” by Ross (1955) and Smith (1988). A potential source of further confusion is the use by some authors of “scopa” for the scopal pad alone (e.g. Hara and Shinohara 2015). In future, it might be preferable to restrict the use of the word scopa to the bees, and refer to the respective structures of sawfly sawsheaths as “latero-posterior projections” and “setose fields”.

On page 82, under Pristiphora parva (Hartig, 1837) we incorrectly designated a specimen (DEI-GISHym31699) as the lectotype of Lygaeonematus ambiguus var. flavater Enslin, 1916. We overlooked the collection date of the specimen (1918-05-03). The specimen was therefore not a syntype, and the lectotype designation is thus invalid (ICZN 1999, Article 74.2). No syntype specimen is known. Accordingly, the sentence “Lectotypes are designated for 43 taxa” in the abstract should read “Lectotypes are designated for 42 taxa”.

Acknowledgements

We thank Spencer Monckton (York University, Toronto) for drawing our attention to our unfortunate usage of the term “scopa” and Stephan M. Blank (Senckenberg Deutsches Entomologisches Institut, Müncheberg) for clarifying the meaning of the term.

References

  • Hara H, Shinohara A (2015) The Gilpinia abieticola Species Group (Hymenoptera, Diprionidae). Bulletin of the National Museum of Nature and Science, Series A (Zoology) 41: 21–41.
  • Huber JT, Sharkey MJ (1993) Chapter 3. Structure. In: Goulet H, Huber JT (Eds) Hymenoptera of the world: An identification guide to families. Agriculture Canada, Publication, Ottawa, 13–59.
  • ICZN (1999) International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. Fourth Edition. The International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature, London, 306 pp.
  • Prous M, Kramp K, Vikberg V, Liston A (2017) North-Western Palaearctic species of Pristiphora (Hymenoptera, Tenthredinidae). Journal of Hymenoptera Research 59: 1–190. https://doi.org/10.3897/jhr.59.12656
  • Ross HH (1955) The taxonomy and evolution of the sawfly genus Neodiprion. Forest Science 1: 196–209.
  • Smith DR (1988) A synopsis of the sawflies (Hymenoptera: Symphyta) of America south of the United States: introduction, Xyelidae, Pamphiliidae, Cimbicidae, Diprionidae, Xiphydriidae, Siricidae, Orussidae, Cephidae. Systematic Entomology 13: 205–261. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3113.1988.tb00242.x
  • Smith DR (1992) A synopsis of the sawflies (Hymenoptera: Symphyta) of America south of the United States: Argidae. Memoirs of the American Entomological Society 39: 1–201.