New records of Dryinidae Haliday, 1833 (Hymenoptera, Chrysidoidea) from Iran

ABSTRACT New records of Dryinidae Haliday, 1833 (Hymenoptera, Chrysidoidea) from Iran are listed. Two subfamilies (Anteoninae R. Perkins, 1912 and Aphelopinae R. Perkins, 1912), three genera (Anteon Jurine, 1807; Aphelopus Dalman, 1823; and Bocchus Ashmead, 1893) and five species viz. Anteon abdulnouri Olmi, 1987, An. pubicorne (Dalman, 1818), Aphelopus melaleucus (Dalman, 1818), Ap. orphanidesi Olmi, 1994 and Bocchus hyalinus Olmi, 1998 are newly recorded from Iran. The putative male of Dryinus tamaricicola Rakhshani & Olmi, 2016 is discovered in Iran and described. Aphelopus orphanidesi is recorded for the first time from Germany and Sweden. The diagnostic characters of the newly known species are re-evaluated. A key to the Iranian Dryinidae (excluding Gonatopodinae Kieffer, 1906) and a brief description is presented and a distribution map is provided for each species.


INTRODUCTION
The Dryinidae Haliday, 1833 (Hymenoptera, Chrysidoidea) are a small cosmopolitan family known to parasitize Hemiptera Auchenorrhyncha Dumeril, 1806 (Guglielmino & Olmi 2007;Guglielmino et al. 2013). About 1886 species are attributed to this family (Olmi 2020). All species of Dryinidae are ectophagous, except for the completely endophagous genus Crovettia Olmi, 1984 (not present in Iran) and the first endophagous larval instar of the genus Aphelopus Dalman, 1823(Olmi & van Harten 2000. Dryinidae are easily distinguished from other members of Chrysidoidea by ten antennomeres and the chelate female protarsi except for the subfamilies Aphelopinae R. Perkins, 1912(Aphelopus Dalman, 1823and Crovettia Olmi, 1984 and Erwiniinae Olmi & Guglielmino, 2010(Erwinius Olmi & Guglielmino, 2010, whose females are achelate (Olmi & Virla 2014), and capture the hosts by their mandibles and forelegs (Olmi 1994). Males of this interesting family are little known and sexual dimorphism is so strong that opposite sexes cannot be associated without rearing or DNA analysis (Olmi 1984;. This study could reveal interesting biogeographic patterns and clarify the status of the genera and species. Anyway, the group is sufficiently distinct to warrant recognition at the generic level (Olmi et al. 2019).
The family Dryinidae has remained insufficiently known in Iran, due to the lack of sampling. The few known details about the Dryinidae of Iran refer to studies and descriptions of new species by Derafshan et al. (2016Derafshan et al. ( , 2017Derafshan et al. ( , 2020 in the eastern part of the country. Our investigations in the central, North-Eastern and South-Eastern parts of Iran, during 2015-2018, resulted in the first country records of five species representing three genera and two subfamilies records and increased the number of known Dryinidae from 12 to 17 species.

MATERIAL AND METHODS
Sampling and collection of specimens were done in various habitats  of the eastern and central provinces of Iran during 2015-2018, using Malaise traps (Fig. 1A,B,D,F), with 75% ethanol solution as a preservative, sweeping (Fig. 1C), and beating vegetation to knock insects onto sheets. More than seventy dryinid specimens were separated from other collected Hymenoptera and stored in plastic vials in 75% ethanol and later prepared in Alcohol-Xylene-Amyl acetate (AXA protocol: van Achterberg 2009), mounted on cards, labeled, and examined under a Nikon® SMZ645 stereomicroscope. Photographs of the external morphological characters of the specimens were taken using a Canon® EOS 700D (Canon® Inc., Japan). Image stacking was performed with ZereneStacker™ version 1.04. Plates were composed in Photoshop® CS6. Identifications of subfamilies and genera were performed using keys published by Olmi (2006), Olmi & Virla (2014) and Olmi & Xu (2015). Females of Dryinidae were identified to the species level by using keys from Olmi & Xu (2015). Terminology of morphological characters followed that of Olmi (1984), Olmi & Xu (2015), Kawada et al. (2015) and Azevedo et al. (2018). The term "metapectal-propodeal complex" is here used in the sense of Kawada et al. (2015). It corresponds to the term "propodeum" sensu Olmi (1984), Olmi & Virla (2014) and Olmi & Xu (2015). The terms "disc of metapectal-propodeal complex" and "first abdominal tergum" sensu Kawada et al. (2015), used here, correspond to the terms "dorsal surface of propodeum" and "posterior surface of propodeum", sensu Olmi (1984), Olmi & Virla (2014) and Olmi & Xu (2015). The names of cells and veins of the fore wing are here used in the sense of Azevedo et al. (2018). The correspondence between old and new names is the following (the first name is the old name): median cell: radial cell (R); submedian cell: first cubital cell (1Cu); marginal cell: second radial 1 cell (2R1); first brachial cell: second cubital cell (2Cu); stigmal vein: second radial cross&radial sector (2r-rs&Rs); metacarp: poststigmal abscissa of radial 1 (PostabR1). In the text, cells and veins will be named by their respective abbreviations, including costal cell (C). Geographic coordinates, when not available on specimen labels, were obtained using Google Earth®. Maps were prepared using SimpleMappr (Shorthouse 2010).

reMArks
In specimens from Oman, antenna darkened, legs testaceous, except brown metacoxa and clubs of femora; head slightly granulate; mesoscutum dull and strongly granulate. In specimens from Dubai and Afghanistan, frons with unsculptured area in front of anterior ocellus. Frontal line incomplete in some specimens from Afghanistan and Japan, sometimes absent in some Japanese specimens. Distribution in irAn (Fig. 13A). -North Khorasan province.

Male
Not collected in Iran.
reMArks This species is recorded from Germany and Sweden for the first time. In specimen from Sweden, Dalby, a basivolsella has two subdistal bristles, whereas the other basivolsella has only one subdistal bristle. Distribution in irAn (Fig. 14A). -Kerman and Sistan-o Baluchestan provinces.

Male.
Not collected in Iran.

Description
Reviewed in Derafshan et al. (2017) for males and females, both known in Iran. Distribution in irAn (Fig. 14B). -Ilam province.
Subfamily GonAtopoDinAe Kieffer in Kieffer & Marshall 1906 reMArks This subfamily has been completely reviewed in Derafshan et al. (2020). Distribution in Iran is showed in figure 15.

DISCUSSION
Few studies have been conducted on the Dryinidae fauna of Iran, with most of the papers restricted to descriptions of species collected sporadically (Olmi 1984Olmi & Xu 2015). Before the present study, three subfamilies (Bocchinae, Dryininae and Gonatopodinae), five genera (Dryinus, Echthrodelphax R. Perkins, 1903, Gonatopus Ljungh, 1810, Haplogonatopus R. Perkins, 1905 and twelve species were known from Iran (Derafshan et al. 2016(Derafshan et al. , 2017(Derafshan et al. , 2020. With the new records reported herein the totals are increased to five subfamilies (Fig. 16), eight genera and 17 species. Some species listed in the current study, are known exclusively on the basis of only one sex. Only females are known for An. pubicorne, B. hyalinus, D. gharaeii, and D. tarraconensis and only the male in Ap. melaleucus. Both sexes are known for three species (An. abdulnouri, M. atlanticus, and D. tamaricicola). With respect to our collection of D. tamaricicola, because of the pronounced morphological difference between female and male in Dryinus species, the males we collected were putatively associated with the female. We believe the association is reasonable, particularly because of the aforementioned concordance of the sexes in collection location, habitat and method. Nonetheless, molecular data are necessary for confirmation.
From the biogeographical point of view, all the nine species we collected are found in the following sub-regions: An. abdulnouri (E-PAL and W-PAL); An. pubicorne (E-PAL and W-PAL); Ap. melaleucus (E-PAL and W-PAL); Ap. orphanidesi (W-PAL); B. hyalinus (W-PAL); M. atlanticus (E-PAL and W-PAL); D. gharaeii (W-PAL); D. tamaricicola (W-PAL); D. tarraconensis (W-PAL). Two species, D. gharaeii and D. tamaricicola, are provisionally considered as endemic, but since Dryinidae have been poorly collected in Iran, their geographic distribution could be larger. Anteon abdulnouri and Bocchus hyalinus have already been recorded from the Afrotropical region (Olmi 1998 ;Olmi & Xu 2015). We expect that more dryinids are common to both (southern part of ) Iran and the Afrotropical region, as provinces located in the south-eastern and southern parts of Iran share similar climatic and floral conditions (Derafshan et al. 2016(Derafshan et al. , 2020Ghafouri Moghaddam et al. 2019;Heraty et al. 2019). However, further field research is necessary to verify this hypothesis.
To date, there are no host records for Dryinidae collected in Iran. Known hosts of all the species considered in this study belong to the family Cicadellidae Latreille, 1802, except B. hyalinus whose host belongs to the family Tropiduchidae