Philotrypesis bicolor Kim & Park & Choi & Lee & Kim 2026, sp. nov.

Le résumé fourni par la source

Philotrypesis bicolor Park & Kim, sp. nov. Figure 9A–F Type material. Holotype. South Korea: ♀, Jeollanam-do, Shinan-gun, Docho-myeon Jukyeon-ri, 34°40'16.7"N, 125°58'44.23"E, 2.vi.2021, Il-Kwon Kim (by rearing from Ficus oxyphylla (= F. sarmentosa var. nipponica )); deposited in KNA. Paratypes. 4♀, same data as holotype. Etymology. The species is named for its contrasting bicolored body pattern. The specific epithet bicolor is derived from Latin, meaning “two-colored”, and refers to the distinct difference in coloration between the lighter and darker regions of the body. Diagnosis. This species is similar in morphology and coloration to Philotrypesis taida Wong & Shiao, 2018, described from China. However, this species can be distinguished from P. taida by: 1) funicular segments almost square and 2) ovipositor sheath distinctly shorter than body length. Description. FEMALE (holotype, Fig. 9A). Body length 2.28 mm excluding ovipositor sheaths. Ovipositor sheaths length 1.83 mm. Head pale orange-brown on frons to yellow on lower face with dark infuscate spots behind ocelli. Antenna with scape to pedicel orange-brown; funicle dark brown. Mesosoma and metasoma mostly fuscous brown, without metallic luster, except as follows: pronotum pale orange-brown, slightly dark infuscate medially; tegula and adjacent area whitish yellow; legs yellowish brown; ovipositor bright yellow except for darkened apex. Head (Fig. 9C). In frontal view 1.2× as wide as high, in dorsal view 1.9× as wide as long; entirely imbricate except frons smooth; length of eye 2.0× as long as gena; OOL: POL: LOL: OD = 0.8: 3.1: 1.5: 1.0. Scrobal region indistinct. Antenna (Fig. 9B) with scape cylindrical; 4.5 × as long as wide; pedicel 2.0× as long as wide; three anelli present; all funicular segments quadrate; clava with two visible clavomeres, 1.6× as long as wide. Mesosoma (Figs 9D–E). Pronotum to mesoscutum transversely imbricate; pronotum 2.2× as wide as long; mesonotum 2.0× as wide as long. Scutellum reticulate anteriorly to longitudinally reticulate-imbricate posteriorly; 1.5× as wide as long; notauli shallow, complete. Propodeum transversely reticulate-imbricate; prepectus reticulate on the medial area, but smooth near outer margin. Tegula smooth. Fore wing (Fig. 9F) 2.7× as long as wide; smv: mv: pmv: stv = 5.5: 3.4: 2.3: 1.0; hyaline with brown venation and dark brown setae on membrane. All coxae diagonally reticulate-imbricate; procoxa 2.3× as wide as long; mesocoxa 1.1× as wide as long; metacoxa 2.1× as wide as long. Metasoma without visible petiole; 3.9× as long as high in lateral view; minutely and shallowly reticulate; length of Gt8 1.4× as long as Gt9. MALE. Unknown. Distribution. South Korea. Host. Inferred primary host: Wiebesia confusa sp. nov. (based on co-rearing from host figs). Associated plant: Moraceae. Ficus oxyphylla (= F. sarmentosa var. nipponica) Remarks. The new species shows several clear differences from other East Asian species. In P. fujianensis Wong, 2022, P. guangdongensis Wong, 2022, P. spinipes Mayr, 1885, P. taida Wong & Shiao, 2018, P. taiwanensis Chen, 1999, and P. yunnanensis Wong, 2022, the ovipositor is conspicuously longer than the body, whereas in the new species it is shorter than the body. In P. distillatoria Grandi, 1926, the antennal segments are distinctly longer than wide, while in the new species they are subquadrate or nearly so. In P. jacobsoni Grandi, 1926, gastral tergites 8 and 9 are equal in length, whereas in the new species Gt8 is clearly longer than Gt9. P. okinavensis Ishii, 1934 also differs from the new species in having Gt8 and Gt9 of similar lengths as well as a distinctly different body coloration. Molecular identification was also performed to confirm the distinct status of the new species. Within the genus Philotrypesis, intraspecific variation generally does not exceed 3.5% (Table 4), whereas interspecific variation is typically at least 8% (Table 5). The new species differs from all congeners by more than 10% (Table 5). This clear gap between intra- and interspecific distances, combined with the diagnostic morphological characters described above, strongly supports its recognition as a distinct species.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.