Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-22dnz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-29T08:32:27.725Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

SOME PRO- AND MESOTHORACIC STRUCTURES IMPORTANT FOR PHYLOGENETIC ANALYSIS OF HYMENOPTERA, WITH A REVIEW OF TERMS USED FOR THE STRUCTURES1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

Gary A.P. Gibson
Gary A.P. Gibson
Affiliation:
Biosystematics Research Institute, Agriculture Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1A 0C6
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The character-state distribution of various external and internal pro- and mesothoracic structures of Hymenoptera is described. Structures discussed are the transscutal articulation, axillae, notauli, median mesoscutal sulcus, parapsidal lines, pronotal lobe, postspiracular sclerite, prepectus, netrion, epicnemium, basalare, pronotal-mesothor-acic attachment mechanism, and 2 mesothoracic muscles, viz. mesotrochanteral depressor and second-phragmal flexor. Ancestral state and transformation of the characters are hypothesized, and shared derived states of higher taxa are determined. Hypotheses of synapomorphy are based on the shared derived states, and these hypotheses used to test previous hypotheses of relationship and classification. Relationships of Symphyta to Apocrita and of Aculeata to Terebrantes are discussed, and various aspects of classification of Symphyta and Terebrantes are examined. Finally, prior use of terms is reviewed for the thoracic structures studied. A single set of terms is selected for use throughout the order based on original use of each term and on hypotheses of homology.

Résumé

L'auteur décrit les profils de distribution des diverses structures internes et externes du prothorax et du mésothorax. Il s'agit notamment de l'articulation transscutale, des axilles, des notaulices, du sulcus mésonotal médian, des rainures parapsidales, du lobe pronotal, du sclérite postspiraculaire, du prépectus, du nétrion, de l'epicnemium, de la basalaire, de l'attache pronotum–mésothorax et des deux muscles mésothoraciques (le dépresseur mésotrochantéral et le second flexeur phragmien. On pose l'hypothèse d'un état ancestral servant de départ à une transformation des caractères et on dégage les états dérivés des taxons supérieurs. Des hypothèses de synapomorphie sont échafaudées sur les états dérivés, puis utilisées pour vérifier les hypothèses antérieures sur les plans de la phylogenèse et de la taxinomie. Les rapports entre les Symphytes et les Apocrites et entre les Aculéates et les Térébrants sont examinés. Enfin l'auteur passe en revue la terminologie antérieure des structures thoraciques étudiées et retient un seul jeu de termes à utiliser pour l'ensemble de l'ordre d'après l'usage original de chaque terme et d'après des hypothèses d'homologie.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 117 , Issue 11 , November 1985 , pp. 1395 - 1443
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alam, S.M. 1951. The skeleto-muscular mechanism of Stenobracon deesae Cameron (Braconidae, Hymenoptera) — An ectoparasite of sugarcane and juar borers of India. Part I. Head and Thorax. Aligarh Musl. Univ. Publs (Zool. Ser.) 3: 76 pp. + 9 pls.Google Scholar
Arora, G.L. 1953. The external morphology of Diprion pini (L.) (Symphyta-Hymenoptera). Res. Bull. E. Panjab Univ. 25: 1–21.Google Scholar
Audouin, J.V. 1824. Recherches anatomiques sur le thorax des animaux articulés et celui des insectes hexapodes en particulier. Ann. Sci. nat. 1: 97–135, 416–432.Google Scholar
Benson, R.B. 1938. On the classification of sawflies (Hymenoptera Symphyta). Trans. R. ent. Soc. Lond. 87: 353–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benson, R.B. 1955. Classification of the Orussidae, with some new genera and species (Hymenoptera: Symphyta). Proc. R. ent. Soc. Lond. (B) 24: 13–23.Google Scholar
Bird, R.D. 1926. The external anatomy of the adult of Hoplocampa halcyon Nort. (Hymenoptera, Tenthredinoidea). Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 19: 268–277 + 2 pls.Google Scholar
Bohart, R.M., and Menke, A.S.. 1976. Sphecid wasps of the world, a generic revision. Univ. Calif. Press, Berkeley. 695 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bracken, D.F. 1961. The external morphology of two eastern species of the genus Anoplonyx (Hymenoptera: Tenthredinidae), with special reference to Anoplonyx luteipes (Cresson). Can. Ent. 93: 573–593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brothers, D.J. 1975. Phylogeny and classification of the aculeate Hymenoptera, with special reference to Mutillidae. Kans. Univ. Sci. Bull. 50: 483–648.Google Scholar
Bucher, G.E. 1948. The anatomy of Monodontomerus dentipes Boh., an entomophagous chalcid. Can. J. Res. (D) 26: 230–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crampton, G.C. 1909. A contribution to the comparative morphology of the thoracic sclerites of insects. Proc. Acad. nat. Sci. Philad. 61: 3–54 + 4 pls.Google Scholar
Crampton, G.C. 1914 a. Notes on the thoracic sclerites of winged insects. Ent. News 25: 15–25.Google Scholar
Crampton, G.C. 1914 b. On the misuse of the terms parapteron, hypopteron, tegula, squamula, patagium and scapula. J. N.Y. ent. Soc. 22: 248–261.Google Scholar
Daly, H.V. 1963. Close-packed and fibrillar muscles of the Hymenoptera. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 56: 295–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daly, H.V. 1964. Skeleto-muscular morphogenesis of the thorax and wings of the honey bee Apis mellifera (Hymenoptera: Apidae). Univ. Calif. Publ. Ent. 39: 77 pp.Google Scholar
Daly, H.V. 1965. Skeleto-muscular morphogenesis in the thorax of the Hymenoptera. Proc. XII Int. Cong. Ent., p. 151.Google Scholar
Dessart, P. 1962. Contribution à l'étude des Hyménoptères Proctotrupoidea [I]. Notes sur quelques Ceraphronidae africains et tableau dichotomique des genres. Bull. Ann. Soc. r. ent. Belg. 98: 291–311.Google Scholar
Dhillon, S.S. 1966. Morphology and ecology of Athalia proxima Klug. Aligarh Musl. Univ. Publ. (Zool. Ser.) 7: 165 pp.Google Scholar
Domenichini, G. 1969. Materiali per la morfologia comparata degli Hymenoptera Chalcidoidea. Memorie Soc. ent. ital. 48: 583–608.Google Scholar
Duncan, C.D. 1939. A contribution to the biology of North American vespine wasps. Stanford Univ. Publ (Biol. Sci.) 8(1): 272 pp.Google Scholar
Elliott, E.A. 1922. Monograph of the hymenopterous family Stephanidae. Proc. zool. Soc. Lond. 92: 705–831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Enslin, E. 1913. Die Tenthredinoidea Mitteleuropas. Dt. ent. Z., Beiheft, 1912, pp. 1–98.Google Scholar
*Escherich, K. 1906. Ueber die Biologie der Ameisen, Zool. Zentbl. 13: 405–440.Google Scholar
Forbes, W.T.M. 1940. A note on entomologists' Greek. Bull. Brooklyn ent. Soc. 35: 136–137.Google Scholar
Gordh, G. 1975. The comparative external morphology and systematics of the neotropical parasitic fig wasp genus Idarnes (Hymenoptera: Torymidae). Kans. Univ. Sci. Bull. 50: 389–455.Google Scholar
Grandi, G. 1921. Ricerche sul Gen. Philotrypesis Först. (Hymenoptera – Chalcididae). Boll. Lab. Zool. gen. agr. Portici 15: 33–190.Google Scholar
Grandi, G. 1929. Studio morphologico e biologico della Blastophaga psenes (L.). Boll. Lab. Ent. R. Ist. sup. agr. Bologna 2: 147 pp.Google Scholar
Grissell, E.E. 1983. Boharticus, N. Gen., with a review of Rhopalicus Foerster and Dinotiscus Ghesquiere (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae). Pan-Pacif. Ent. 59: 78–102.Google Scholar
Hopper, H.P. 1959. The pronunciation and derivation of the names of the genera of the family Ichneumonidae found in America north of Mexico. Proc. ent. Soc. Wash. 61: 155–171.Google Scholar
James, H.C. 1926. The anatomy of a British phytophagous chalcidoid of the genus Harmolita (Isosoma). Proc. zool. Soc. Lond. 1: 75–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
*Kirby, W., and Spence, W.. 1826. An Introduction to Entomology, or Elements of the Natural History of Insects. Vol. 3. London.Google Scholar
*Kokouyew, N. 1898. Fragments Braconologiques. Trudȳ russk. ént. Obshch. 32: 291–317.Google Scholar
Königsmann, E. 1977. Das phylogenetische System der Hymenoptera. Teil 2: Symphyta. Dt. ent. Z. (N.S.) 24: 1–40.Google Scholar
Königsmann, E. 1978 a. Das phylogenetische System der Hymenoptera. Teil 3: “Terebrantes” (Unterordung Apocrita). Dt. ent. Z. (N.S.) 25: 1–55.Google Scholar
Königsmann, E. 1978 b. Das phylogenetische System der Hymenoptera. Teil 4: Aculeata (Unterordung Apocrita). Dt. ent. Z. (N.S.) 25: 365–435.Google Scholar
Krombein, K.V., Hurd, P.B., Smith, D.R., and Burks, B.D.. 1979. Catalog of Hymenoptera in America north of Mexico. Vols 1 and 2. Smithsonian Inst. Press. 2209 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lubbock, J. 1879. On the anatomy of ants. Trans. Linn. Soc. Lond. (Zool.) 2: 141–154 + 2 pls.Google Scholar
MacLeay, W.S. 1830. Explanation of the comparative anatomy of the thorax in winged insects, with a review of the present state of the nomenclature of its parts. Zool. Zh. 5: 145–179 + 2 pls.Google Scholar
Maki, T. 1938. Studies on the thoracic musculature of insects. Mem. Fac. Sci. Agric. Taihoku imp. Univ. 24: 343 pp. + 17 pls.Google Scholar
Märkl, H. 1966. Peripheres Nervensystem und Muskulatur im Thorax der Arbeiterin von Apis mellifera L., Formica polyctena Foerster und Vespa vulgaris L., und der Grundplan der Innervierung des Insektenthorax. Zool. Jb. (Anat.) 83: 107–184.Google Scholar
Masner, L. 1968. A new genus of Scelionidae (Hymenoptera) with austral disjunctive distribution. N.Z. J. Sci. 11: 652–663.Google Scholar
Masner, L. 1979. Pleural morphology in scelionid wasps (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae) — An aid to higher classification. Can. Ent. 111: 1079–1087.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matsuda, R. 1970. Morphology and evolution of the insect thorax. Mem. ent. Soc. Can. 76: 431 pp.Google Scholar
Mayr, G.L. 1861. Die europäschen Formiciden. Nach der analytischen Methode beareitet. C. Gerold, Wien. 80 pp.Google Scholar
Michener, C.D. 1944. Comparative external morphology, phylogeny, and a classification of the bees (Hymenoptera). Bull. Am. Mus. nat. Hist. 82: 157–326.Google Scholar
Middlekauff, W.W. 1983. A revision of the sawfly family Orussidae for North and Central America (Hymenoptera: Symphyta, Orussidae). Univ. Calif. Publ. Ent. 101: 46 pp.Google Scholar
Peck, O., Bouček, Z., and Hoffer, A.. 1964. Keys to the Chalcidoidea of Czechoslovakia (Insecta: Hymenoptera). Mem. ent. Soc. Can. 34: 120 pp.Google Scholar
Pratt, H.D. 1940. Studies on the Ichneumonidae of New England (Hymenoptera). Part 1. The external morphology of Arotes amoenus Cresson. J. N.Y. ent. Soc. 48: 155–188 + 7 pls.Google Scholar
Pringle, J.W.S. 1957. Insect Flight, Univ. Press, Cambridge. 133 pp.Google Scholar
Rasnitsyn, A.P. 1969. [Origin and evolution of Lower Hymenoptera.] Trudȳ paleont. Inst. 123: 196 pp. (In Russian)Google Scholar
Rasnitsyn, A.P. 1975. [Higher Hymenoptera of the Mesozoic.] Trudȳ paleont. Inst. 147: 130 pp. (In Russian)Google Scholar
Rasnitsyn, A.P. 1980. [Origin and evolution of Hymenoptera.] Trudȳ paleont. Inst. 174: 190 pp. (In Russian)Google Scholar
Reeks, W.A. 1937. The morphology of the adult of Diprion polytomum (Hartig). Can. Ent. 69: 257–264.Google Scholar
Reid, J.A. 1941. The thorax of the wingless and short-winged Hymenoptera. Trans. R. ent. Soc. Lond. 91: 367–446.Google Scholar
Richards, O.W. 1956 a. An interpretation of the ventral region of the hymenopterous thorax. Proc. R. ent. Soc. Lond. (A) 31: 99–104.Google Scholar
Richards, O.W. 1956 b. Hymenoptera. Introduction and keys to families. R. ent. Soc. Lond., Hndbks. Ident. Brit. Insects 6(1): 94 pp.Google Scholar
Richards, O.W. 1972. The thoracic spiracles and some associated structures in the Hymenoptera and their significance in classification, especially of the Aculeata. pp. 1–13 in Entomological Essays to Commemorate the Retirement of Professor K. Yasumatsu (1971), Tokyo. 389 pp.Google Scholar
Riek, E.F. 1970. Hymenoptera. pp. 867–959 in The insects of Australia. CSIRO, Melbourne University Press, Carlton. 1029 pp.Google Scholar
Ritchie, A.J., and Peters, T.M.. 1981. The external morphology of Diplolepis rosae (Hymenoptera: Cynipidae, Cynipidae). Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 74: 191–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rohwer, S.A. 1918. Idiogastra, a new suborder of Hymenoptera with notes on the immature states of Oryssus. Proc. ent. Soc. Wash. 18: 89–98.Google Scholar
Ross, H.H. 1937. A generic classification of the nearctic sawflies (Hymenoptera, Symphyta). Illinois biol. Monogr. 34: 173 pp.Google Scholar
Saini, M.S. 1983. Comparative topography of mesoalinotum and formation of trans-scutal fissure in order Hymenoptera. Dt. ent. Z. (N.S.) 30: 69–75.Google Scholar
Saini, M.S., Dhillon, S.S., and Aggarwal, R.. 1982. Skeletomuscular differences in the thorax of winged and non-winged forms of Camponotus camelinus (Smith) (Hym., Formicidae). Dt. ent. Z. (N.S.) 29: 447–458.Google Scholar
Salman, K.A. 1929. The external morphology of Pepsis elegans Lepeletier (Hymenoptera: Psammocharidae). Trans. Am. ent. Soc. 55: 119–153.Google Scholar
Shcherbakov, D.E. 1980. [Morphology of the pterothoracic pleura of Hymenoptera. 1. Groundplan.] Zool. Zh. 59: 1644–1653. (In Russian)Google Scholar
Shcherbakov, D.E. 1981. [Morphology of the pterothoracic pleura of Hymenoptera. 2. Modifications of the Groundplan.] Zool. Zh. 60: 205–213. (In Russian)Google Scholar
Smart, J. 1958. The tergal depressor of the trochanter muscle in the Diptera. Proc. X Int. Cong. Ent., Vol. 1, pp. 551–555.Google Scholar
Smith, D.R. 1979. Suborder Symphyta. pp. 3–137 in Krombein, K.V., Hurd, P.B., Smith, D.R., and Burks, B.D. (Eds.), Catalog of Hymenoptera in America north of Mexico. Vol. 1. Smithsonian Inst. Press. 1198 pp.Google Scholar
Snodgrass, R.E. 1909. The thorax of insects and the articulation of the wings. Proc. U.S. natl. Mus. 36: 511–595.Google Scholar
Snodgrass, R.E. 1910. The thorax of the Hymenoptera. Proc. U.S. natl. Mus. 39: 37–91 + 16 pls.Google Scholar
Snodgrass, R.E. 1927. Morphology and mechanism of the insect thorax. Smithson. misc. Coll. 80(1): 108 pp.Google Scholar
Snodgrass, R.E. 1935. Principles of insect morphology. McGraw Hill Book Co., New York. 667 pp.Google Scholar
Snodgrass, R.E. 1942. The skeleto-muscular mechanisms of the honey bee. Smithson. misc. Coll. 103(2): 120 pp.Google Scholar
Tait, N.N. 1962. The anatomy of the sawfly Perga affinis Kirby (Hymenoptera: Symphyta). Aust. J. Zool. 10: 652–683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomson, C.G. 1873. Opuscula entomomologica. Fasc. V. Försök till gruppering och beskrifning af Crypti, pp. 453–532 + 1 pl.Google Scholar
Thomson, C.G. 1876. Skandinaviens Hymenoptera. 4. Innehallande Slagtet Pteromalus Svederus. Lund. 192 pp.Google Scholar
Togashi, I. 1970. The comparative morphology of the internal reproductive organs of the Symphyta (Hymenoptera). Mushi 43 (suppl.): 114 pp.Google Scholar
Tonapi, G.T. 1958. A comparative study of spiracular structure and mechanisms in some Hymenoptera. Trans. R. ent. Soc. Lond. 110: 489–520 + 12 pls.Google Scholar
Townes, H. 1950. The Nearctic species of Gasteruptiidae. Hymenoptera. Proc. U.S. natl. Mus. 100: 85–145.Google Scholar
Tulloch, G.S. 1929. The proper use of the terms parapsides and parapsidal furrows. Psyche, Camb. 36: 376–378.Google Scholar
Tulloch, G.S. 1935. Morphological studies of the thorax of the ant. Entomologica am. 15: 93–130.Google Scholar
Ulenberg, S. A. 1983. Morphological description of Apocrypta perplexa Coquerel, the type-species of the genus (fig wasp parasites; Hymenoptera, Chalcidoidea, Torymidae). Proc. K. ned. Akad. Wet. (C) 86: 63–94.Google Scholar
Weber, H. 1925. Der thorax der Hornisse. Zool. Jb. (Anat. und Ontol. der Tiere) 67: 1–100 + 4 pls.Google Scholar
Weber, H. 1927. Die Gliederung der Sternalregion des Tenthredinidenthorax. Z. wiss. InsektBiol. 22: 161–198 + 6 pls.Google Scholar
Wong, H.R. 1963. The external morphology of the adults and ultimate larval instar of the larch sawfly, Pristiphora erichsonii (Htg.) (Hymenoptera: Tenthredinidae). Can. Ent. 95: 897–921.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wong, H.R. 1968. A revision of the tribe Pristolini (Hymenoptera: Tenthredinidae). Can. Ent. 100: 1049–1057.Google Scholar