Apanteles albinervis (Cameron 1904)

Type locality. MEXICO. Holotype. ♂ , BMNH (examined).
Description. Male. Body color: body mostly dark except for some sternites
which may be pale. Antenna color: scape, pedicel, and flagellum dark. Coxae color
(pro-, meso-, metacoxa): dark, dark, dark (?). Femora color (pro-, meso-, metafemur):
anteriorly dark/posteriorly pale, dark, dark. Tibiae color (pro-, meso-, metatibia):
pale, anteriorly pale/posteriorly dark, anteriorly pale/posteriorly dark. Tegula
and humeral complex color: tegula pale, humeral complex half pale/half dark. Pterostigma
color: mostly pale and/or transparent, with thin dark borders. Fore wing
veins color: mostly white or entirely transparent. Antenna length/body length: antenna
about as long as body (head to apex of metasoma); if slightly shorter, at least
extending beyond anterior 0.7 metasoma length (?). Body in lateral view: not distinctly
flattened dorso–ventrally. Body length (head to apex of metasoma): 2.3–2.4
mm. Fore wing length: 2.5–2.6 mm. Ocular–ocellar line/posterior ocellus diameter:
2.0–2.2. Interocellar distance/posterior ocellus diameter: 1.7–1.9. Tarsal claws: simple
(?). Metafemur length/width: 3.0–3.1. Metatibia inner spur length/metabasitarsus
length: 0.4–0.5. Anteromesoscutum: mostly with shallow, dense punctures (separated
by less than 2.0 × its maximum diameter). Mesoscutellar disc: mostly smooth.
Number of pits in scutoscutellar sulcus: 9 or 10. Maximum height of mesoscutellum
lunules/maximum height of lateral face of mesoscutellum: 0.6–0.7. Propodeum
areola: completely defined by carinae, including transverse carina extending to spiracle.
Propodeum background sculpture: partly sculptured, especially on anterior 0.5.
Mediotergite 1 length/width at posterior margin: 1.4–1.6. Mediotergite 1 shape:
slightly widening from anterior margin to 0.7–0.8 mediotergite length (where maximum
width is reached), then narrowing towards posterior margin. Mediotergite 1
sculpture: with some sculpture near lateral margins and/or posterior 0.2–0.4 of mediotergite.
Mediotergite 2 width at posterior margin/length: 2.8–3.1. Mediotergite
2 sculpture: mostly smooth. Length of fore wing veins r/2RS: 1.7–1.9. Length of
fore wing veins 2RS/2M: 1.4–1.6. Length of fore wing veins 2M/(RS+M)b: 0.5–0.6.
Pterostigma length/width: 3.6 or more. Point of insertion of vein r in pterostigma:
about half way point length of pterostigma. Angle of vein r with fore wing anterior
margin: more or less perpendicular to fore wing margin. Shape of junction of veins
r and 2RS in fore wing: distinctly but not strongly angled.
Female. Unknown.
Molecular data. No molecular data available for this species.
Biology/ecology. Nothing is known of its hosts.
Distribution. Known only from the male holotype, which was collected in “Mexico”.
There is no suggestion that this species occurs in Costa Rica or ACG.
Comments. The history of the name “Apanteles albinervis” needs clarification.
Cameron (1904) described the species “Urogaster albinervis” from Mexico. Urogaster
was later synonymized under Apanteles by Szépligeti (1904), but Cameron’s species
was not formally transferred to it until Shenefelt (1972)’s World Catalogue of Hymenoptera.
In the meantime, Tobias (1964) had described a species from Kazakhstan
as “Apanteles albinervis” –later found to be widely distributed in the Palearctic region (Yu et al. 2005) and not related at all to the Mexican species. Acting as the
first reviser, Shenefelt realized the problem of a secondary homonym, but mistakenly
assigned a replacement name for the oldest (Cameron 1904) instead of the youngest
(Tobias 1964) name. As a result, Apanteles albinervican Shenefelt, 1972 became a
replacement name for Urogaster albinervis Cameron, 1904, while A. albinervis Tobias,
1964 remained unchanged (Shenefelt 1972). Article 24.2.5 of the International
Code of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN 1999) regulates “Unnecessary action by
a First Reviser” and states that “if it is shown subsequently that the precedence of
names, spellings or acts can be objectively determined, the action of the First Reviser
is nullified”. Thus we consider here Apanteles albinervican Shenefelt, 1972 an invalid
replacement name for Apanteles albinervis (Cameron, 1904) and reinstate the latter
name. For details of the revised status of the Tobias species see section “Species excluded
from Apanteles”.
Another unrelated use of the name “Apanteles albinervis”, was by Ashmead (1905),
who described a species from the Philippines as “Urogaster albinervis”. That became a
primary homonym of U. albinervis Cameron; however, a replacement name