Hadronotus insulare Ashmead 1894

Hadronotus insulare species group Diagnosis (Based on Masner 1975, 1983) Eyes with dense setae; lateral ocelli not contiguous with orbits, away from orbits, sometimes more than MOD; clypeus small, corners not pointed; facial striae absent; hyperoccipital carina present; sculpture of frons, vertex and gena generally with polygonal cells bearing rugose sculpture; frontal depression margined by submedian carina; epomial carina generally absent; mesopleural carina generally present, short and indicated ventrally; marginalis shorter than stigmalis; postmarginalis either absent or shorter than stigmalis, rarely equal to stigmalis; T2 remarkably long, at least 4× as long as T3. No brachypterous forms. Hosts. Reduviidae (Hemiptera): Triatoma rubrofasciata, T. maculata (Erichson, 1848) and T. phyllosoma (Burmeister, 1835) have been recorded as hosts of H. triatomae; while Linshcosteus sp. was the only species found to be the host of H. linshcostei (Simmonds 1971; Bertram 1973; Masner 1975; Sankaran and Nagaraja 1975). Masner (1983) observed that the vast majority of specimens of H. insularis collected from Trinidad (West Indies) were found in yellow pan traps, indicating that the hosts were present close to the ground, possibly in hemipteran eggs laid on plant parts close to the soil. In stark contrast, he found males in large numbers in Malaise traps. Checklist of species in the Hadronotus insulare species group of the Oriental region H. altmannae sp. n. H. blaches (Kozlov and Lê) H. circus (Kozlov and Lê) H. cookeae sp. n. H. divergens sp. n. H. galdikasae sp. n. H. goodallae sp. n. H. gowatyae sp. n. H. hrdyae sp. n. H. irregularis sp. n. H. linshcostei (Masner) H. peludo sp. n. H. randhra sp. n. H. samantara sp. n. H. strongist (Kozlov and Lê) H. stupa sp. n. H. taraka sp. n. H. triatomae (Masner) H. urinius (Kozlov and Lê) H. westeberhardae sp. n. H. wintes (Kozlov and Lê) Key to females of the insulare species group of Hadronotus in the Orientalregion 1. Basal foveae on T1 absent; T1 smooth with setigerous punctae without longitudinal costae; T2 smooth with setigerous punctae; entire metasoma covered with long setae (Figures 9 (a), 26(h)); frontal depression with oblique carinae on either side of central keel and predominantly smooth with large reticulations lateroventrally; IOS> 1.8× eye length; OOL> 1.3× MOD (Figure 9 (f)) .................................. H. gowatyae sp. n. - Basal foveae on T1 present; T1 longitudinally costate; T2 never smooth, coarsely sculptured; metasoma partially covered with setae (eg Figure 26 (c–f)); frontal depression transversely carinate, with narrow smooth areas between carinae and with polygonal cells or reticulations lateroventrally; IOS ≤ 1.5× eye length; OOL at most subequal to MOD (eg Figures 1 (f), 4(f), 5(f), 7(f)) .................................................................... 2 2. Marginalis very short, indicated as a spot (Figures 4 (e), 7(e), 12(a), 19(d)); frontal depression triangular; submedian carina of frontal depression complete (Figures 3 (e), 4(f), 7(f), 12(e), 19(b)); mesopleuron predominantly transversely carinate (Figures 4 (c), 7(c), 12(c), 19(e)); body size generally small ...................................................................... 3 - Marginalis elongate (eg Figures 1 (e), 5(e), 8(e), 10(e), 22(e)); frontal depression generally ovoid (trigonal in H. divergens sp. n.); submedian carina of frontal depression incomplete (eg Figures 1 (f), 5(f), 8(f), 10(f), 22(f)); mesopleuron with depressions or foveae interspersed with transverse carinae (except in H. samantara, where it is entirely transversely carinate) (eg Figures 1 (c), 5(c), 8(c), 10(c), 22(c)); body size generally large ...................................................................................................................................... 5 3. Postmarginalis present; submarginalis of fore wing parallel to anterior margin of wing before reaching marginalis; fore wing at least 2.4× as long as wide (Figures 12 (a), 19 (d)); in dorsal view metascutellum bulging as a blunt tubercle and projecting over propodeum; propodeum without a medial notch (Figures 12 (f), 19(a)); metasoma longer than wide (Figures 26 (k), 27(b)) ............................................................................................. ........................................................................ H. triatomae Masner and H. linshcostei Masner - Postmarginalis absent; submarginalis of fore wing with a dip before reaching marginalis; fore wing at most 2× as long as wide (Figures 4 (e), 7(e)); metascutellum wide and not bulging, anteriorly foveate and posteriorly smooth, not projecting over propodeum; propodeum with a medial notch (Figures 4 (g), 7(g)); metasoma either as long as wide or wider than long (Figure 26 (c,f)) ............................................................................... 4 4. Central keel restricted to lower half of frontal depression; frontal depression wider than IOS, as inner orbits converge dorsally (Figure 7 (f)); anterior margin of T1 weakly convex; space between longitudinal costae on T1 smooth medially; propodeum deeply notched medially (Figure 26 (f)); transverse carinae on mesopleuron closely placed and space between them smooth (Figure 7 (c)); submarginalis dips weakly before reaching marginalis (Figure 7 (e)) ...................... ...................... H. galdikasae sp. n. - Central keel extending the entire length of frontal depression with the keel projecting vertically; frontal depression as wide as IOS (Figures 3 (e), 4(f)); anterior margin of T1 projecting medially and laterally; space between longitudinal costae on T1 with rugose sculpture; propodeum with a shallow notch medially (Figure 26 (c)); transverse carinae of mesopleuron spaced apart and space between them with rugose sculpture (Figure 4 (c)); submarginalis dips extensively before reaching marginalis (Figure 4 (e)) ....................................................................................................................... H. circus (Kozlov and Lê) 5. Vertex sharp; vertex (in frontal view) above dorsal margin of compound eye (Figure 16 (d)); temples absent (Figure 16 (b)); metasoma as long as wide (Figure 26 (o)) ................. ................................................................................................................ H. strongist (Kozlov and Lê) - Vertex not sharp; vertex in (frontal view) not raised above dorsal margin of compound eye, evenly rounded; temples distinct (eg Figures 1 (g), 5(g), 6(g), 8(g)); metasoma longer than wide (eg Figure 26 (a,d,g,l)) ..................................................................................... 6 6. Inner orbits on frons diverging dorsally in frontal view; frontal depression dorsally pointed (Figure 6 (f)); metapleuron entirely densely setose (Figure 6 (c)); basal foveae on T2 present; posterior tergites narrowing abruptly (Figure 26 (e)); entire lateral propodeal area setose (Figure 6 (g)) ............................ ............................ H. divergens sp. n. - Inner orbits on frons either converging dorsally or parallel to each other in frontal view; frontal depression dorsally arched (eg Figures 1 (f), 5(f), 8(f), 10(f), 22(f)); metapleuron partially setose, setae either dense or sparse (eg Figures 1 (c), 5(c), 8(c), 10(c), 22(c)); basal foveae on T2 absent; posterior tergites narrowing gradually (eg Figures 26 (a,d,g,i), 27(d)); lateral propodeal area generally without setae, if setae present, restricted to posterior margin (eg Figures 1 (g), 5(g), 8(g), 10(g), 22(g)) ........................ 7 7. IOS at most 0.8× eye length; hyperoccipital carina medially pointed in between posterior ocelli (Figures 1 (g), 24(d)) ............................................................................................. 8 - IOS at least 1.1× eye length; hyperoccipital carina evenly arched between posterior ocelli (eg Figures 5 (d), 8(d), 10(d), 22(g)) ................................................................................... 9 8. Submarginalis basally closer and distally distant from anterior margin of fore wing (Figure 1 (e)); posterior margins of T2–T4 distinctly raised (Figure 1 (a)); space between longitudinal costae on T1 rugose; T2 entirely with small shiny irregular areas between longitudinal costae; T3–T4 anteriorly rugose (Figures 1 (a), 26(a)); fore coxa brown, mid and hind coxae yellow (Figure 1 (c)). .......................... .......................... H. altmannae sp. n. - Submarginalis distant from anterior margin of fore wing the entire length (Figure 24 (e)); posterior margins of T2–T4 not raised; space between longitudinal costae on T1 almost smooth; space between longitudinal costae on T2 with irregular depressions, posteriorly almost smooth (Figure 24 (e)); T3 – T4 anteriorly foveate (Figures 24 (a), 27 (e)); all coxae brown (Figures 23 (a), 24(c)) ................................ H. wintes (Kozlov and Lê) 9. T2 with depressions sometimes interspersed with longitudinal costae medially (Figures 26 (I,J,L,M), 27(d)) ............................................................................................................... 10 - T2 with reticulations or areolae, sometimes interspersed with longitudinal costae (Figures 26 (d,g,n,p), 27(a)) .............................................................................................................. 14 10. T2 basally with elongate depressions, at least 5× as long as wide followed by polygonal depressions, at least 2–3× as long as wide; T1 with ill-defined longitudinal costae (Figure 26 (j)) ........................................... ........................................... H. irregularis sp. n. - T2 basally with short depressions, at most 2× as long as wide followed by depressions which are round or transverse in shape; T1 with percurrent longitudinal costae (Figures 26 (i,l,m,d)) ................................................