Leptandria tishechkini Rodney 2003, sp. n.

Leptandria tishechkini, sp. n.

(figure 3)

Material. H   male, [‘ ECUADOR: Napo, mid. Rio Tiputini, Yasuní Res.; Stn. 0 ° 40.5 ∞ S 76 ° 24 ∞; 18 July 1999; AKT#083’/‘ Eciton buchelli colony EC #21. Nomadic bivouac site just after emigration; A. Tishechkin’/‘ HOLOTYPE, Leptandria tishechkini Hanley, desig. R. S. Hanley, 2001’ (red)] (SEMC). P    , one male, six females (SEMC), four males, seven females (LSUC), [‘ ECUADOR: Napo, mid. Rio Tiputini, Yasuní Res.; Stn. 0 ° 40.5 ∞ S 76 ° 24 ∞; 26 June 1999; AKT#021’/ ‘ Eciton buchelli colony EC #10. Nomadic bivouac site just after emigration; A. Tishechkin’/‘ PARATYPE, Leptandria tishechkini Hanley, desig. R. S. Hanley, 2001’ (yellow)]; one female (SEMC), [‘ ECUADOR: Napo, mid. Rio Tiputini, Yasuní Res.; Stn. 0 ° 40.5 ∞ S 76 ° 24 ∞; 29 June 1999; AKT#034’/‘Sifting 3–6 old refuse deposit of Eciton burchelli colony; A. Tishechkin’/‘ PARATYPE, Leptandria tishechkini Hanley, desig. R. S. Hanley, 2001’ (yellow)]; six males, five females (SEMC), five males, six females (LSUC) [‘ ECUADOR: Napo, mid. Rio Tiputini, Yasuní Res.; Stn. 0 ° 40.5 ∞ S 76 ° 24 ∞; 26 June 1999; AKT#111’/‘ Eciton hamatum colony EC #28. Total bivouac sampling. A. Tishechkin’/‘ PARATYPE, Leptandria tishechkini Hanley, desig. R. S. Hanley, 2001’ (yellow)].

Diagnosis. This species differs from L. ashei by having very large eyes, overall length about 0.6–0.7 times the length of the temples (in L. ashei, the eyes are small, length about 0.3–0.4 times the length of the temples), by having a more or less quadrate pronotum with the area along the midline distinctly extended posteriorly (in L. ashei, the pronotum is more or less oval with area along the midline only slightly extended posteriorly), and by having abdominal sternum VIII with a rounded, semilunate duct opening with apical hairs arranged into a mostly pointed process (in L. ashei, abdominal sternum VIII does not possess a modified duct opening). Leptandria tishechkini differs from L. ecitophila by short antennae, reaching the apex of the pronotum when extended posteriorly (in L. ecitophila, the antennae are longer, typically reaching the middle of the elytra when extended posteriorly), by having no secondary sexual features in the males (in L. ecitophila, males possess various secondary sexual features), and by lacking any distinctive modifications to the females genitalic tract (in. L. ecitophila, females possess lobe-like structures with apical setae).

Description. Body length 3.7–4.5 mm. Head piceous to black, pronotum, elytra, and abdomen brown to dark brown, lateral margins of pronotum and abdominal terga often tan to light brown. Head, pronotum, and elytra covered throughout with short pile of yellow microsetae; abdomen sparsely covered with piceous to black microsetae; integument heavily punctured, moderately to poorly glossy. Head with eyes very large, length about 0.6–0.7 times length of temples, distinct carina present below each eye, pubescence primarily directed anteriorly towards midline. Antennae (figure 3A) more or less short in length, reaching to apex of pronotum when extended posteriorly, widest part at segments 9–11, apical segment acute to rounded. Pronotum (figure 3B) more or less quadrate with outer apical angles slightly sinuate to straight, area along midline extended posteriorly with rounded corners, pubescence evenly distributed, primarily directed posteriorly, each lateral margin of disc. Elytra (figure 3C) with each elytron slightly longer than wide, outer apical margin distinctly sinuate, surface with setiferous punctures, evenly pubescent, with pubescence directed toward apico-lateral angles. Tarsi (figure 3D) with single, long empodial bristle, length about 1.2 times as long as tarsal claws. Mesosternum (figure 3E) without medial carina. Abdominal sternum VIII with distinctive rounded, semilunate duct opening with apical hairs typically arranged into pointed process (figure 3J). Males without secondary sexual features. Female genitalic tract unmodified (figure 3I). Aedeagus (figure 3F), paramere (figure 3G), spermatheca (figure 3H) as depicted.

Remarks. This species was referred to as ‘undescribed species 2’ in the phylogeny portion in Hanley (2002). Adults of L. tishechkini were collected from primarily nomadic bivouac sites of the army ant, Eciton burchelli, after emigration of the ants.