Rhogogaster scalaris Klug 1817

Rhogogaster scalaris (Klug, 1817), species revocata

(Figs 1a –c, h, 2c–g, 3f, k–n, t, 4d–h, 5a, b, j, l, 6a, b, j)

Tenthredo (Allantus) scalaris Klug, 1817: 194 –195. Lectotype ♀, designated by Blank & Taeger (1998), examined by AT (MFNB, http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1157599). Type locality: “ Deutschland ”.

Rhogogaster viridis auct., nec Linnaeus

Tenthredo pictipes Förster, 1850: 287 –288. Holotype ♀ lost. Type locality: “in der Nähe von Aachen”.

Rhogogaster viridis var. melanonota Enslin, 1912: 93. Syntype (s) lost. Type locality not given (Europe).

Rhogogaster viridis var. melanota, misspelling: Enslin 1918: 722

Rhogogaster viridis var. nigroscutellata Forsius, 1918 (04.V.): 150. Syntype (s) ♂ (not examined, but photos taken by Kari Kaunisto, ZMUT, see http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1340006). Type locality: “ Finland, Kirchspiel Karislojo”.

Rhogogaster viridis var. lapponica Enslin, 1918 (01.VII.): 722. Syntype (s) lost. Type locality: “Lappland”.

Rhogogaster chlorosoma podkumokensis Muche, 1973: 85. Lectotype ♂, hereby designated (NFMB, http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/ m9.figshare.1352078). Type locality: Russia: Kislovodsk, syn. nov.

Tenthredo (Rhogogaster) carpatica Zhelochovtsev & Zinovjev, 1988: 221. Lectotype ♂ hereby designated ( ZMUM, http:// dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1275152). Type locality: Ukraine: Hora Rivna (= Polonina Runa, = Polonina Rovna), Srednij Kamenec, 1250–1340 m a.s.l. (ca. 48.80°N, 22.81°E), syn. nov.

Rhogogaster poloninicus Bokotej, 1959, nom. nud.

Discussion. The synonyms listed under R. viridis (auct.) by Taeger et al. (2010) were re-evaluated according to their original descriptions or types. As a result, several names are no longer associated with scalaris or viridis. They are treated instead as species incertae sedis: see below. The color pattern of the legs of specimens from northern North America is somewhat different from that of European specimens. Therefore, the Nearctic R. ruga MacGillivray, 1923 (July) and R. respectus MacGillivray, 1923 (December) which were synonymized by Ross (1943) with viridis (auct.), are not treated here, and are excluded currently from the synonymy of scalaris.

The specimen which has been claimed to be the holotype of Tenthredo pictipes (http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/ m9.figshare.1380114, Taeger & Blank 2011), is not the type, as the original description was based on a specimen without front legs, whereas the illustrated specimen is complete. Förster (1850) described a very dark form with largely black upper head, black occiput and black mesonotum. So far, such dark forms are only known in R. scalaris.

The description of the variety melanonota (Enslin 1912: 93)1 also fits this very dark form of scalaris.

Specimens that agree with the description of the variety nigroscutellata (Forsius 1918:150)2 from Lapland were examined (Fig. 2 g) and are currently associated with R. scalaris.

The specimen claimed to be a type of the variety lapponica in the ZSM disagrees with the original description of Enslin (1918) 3. The specimen bears green markings on the mesonotum and the scutellum, and therefore it cannot be considered to be a type of lapponica. Specimens from Lapland that fit Enslin’s description were examined and are currently associated with R. scalaris.

1. Enslin (1912: 93) “... der Brustrücken [kann] vollkommen schwarz werden, so dass nur noch das Schildchen grün bleibt = var. nov. melanonota ”

2. Forsius (1918: 150) “Bei ♂ var. nov. nigroscutellata ist das Schildchen schwarz, und nur die Seitenlappen des Mesonotums tragen einen kleinen, grünen Fleck. Ich kenne diese Varietät nur aus Finland, Kirchspiel Karislojo (ipse)”. 3. Enslin (1918: 722–723) “In Lappland kommen sehr dunkle Formen vor, die ich var. nov. lapponica nenne. Diese Tiere gleichen im allgemeinen der var. melanota [sic!], doch dehnt sich bei ihnen die schwarze Färbung noch weiter aus, so daß größtenteils auch das Schildchen schwarz ist und auch der Hinterkopf fast ganz schwarz erscheint.”

Rhogogaster chlorosoma podkumokensis was synonymized with chlorosoma by Lacourt (1999) without explanation. However, the shape of the penisvalve agrees with R. scalaris, and the plantar lobes are smaller than in chlorosoma. The taxon was described based on 13♀ 10 ♂. Muche labeled one male as type, and other specimens as paratypes, but did not publish this information. Therefore, the type specimens are to be considered as syntypes. The specimen labeled by Muche as “ Typus ” is hereby designated as lectotype.

Zhelochovtsev & Zinovjev (1988) keyed “ Tenthredo (Rhogogaster) carpatica Bokotey [= Bokotej]”, but because this species had not previously been described, they became authors of the species name. The description comprises only the insufficient information in this key. Regarding the genitalia, it is only stated that they are different from R. dryas (= R. viridis). On 11th October 2001 Dr Lajos Zombori (Budapest) gave the following important information via e-mail (English slightly modified): “I phoned J. Bokotey (who now lives in Hungary) and he told me that he wanted to describe a new Rhogogaster species, on the basis of a series of over one hundred specimens. He never did this, although a name, R. poloninicus sp. nov., was published in 1963 without any description of the animals, and only the locality was mentioned. At this time, however, Zhelochovtsev suggested to him to name it carpaticus. At a congress in 1963 Bokotey read the description of the new species poloninicus in front of an audience, but the paper was never published”

This information indicates that “ carpatica Bokotey ” is the same as the nomen nudum “ poloninicus Bokotej ”. Bokotej’s information (1959, 1962) about the type locality and collection data made it possible for Y. Sundukov to identify three specimens in the collection of the Zoological Museum in Moscow on which the species description of 1988 is based. Zhelochovtsev prepared the manuscript of the key, but died already in 1976, and Zinovjev later completed this and had it published. The name “ carpatica ” was thus made unintentionally available by these authors.

The coloration of the three available males is rather variable. The mesoscutellum of the lectotype is almost black with a faint pale patch, but largely green in the paralectotypes (http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/ m9.figshare.1408861).

The types agree with the description of Tenthredo pictipes and the dark varieties discussed above. Similar forms were also found in the Harz Mountains in Germany. The penis valves of the carpatica types are not different from the valves of R. scalaris. Currently, these dark forms are considered to belong to scalaris. The specimen recorded as Rhogogaster carpat (h)ica by Zombori & Ermolenko (2001) and Roller & Haris (2008) belongs to the R. picta group (http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1150166).

The species is frequently mixed up with R. chlorosoma. See discussion there.