Figs 2–4
Calliceras abdominalisThomson, 1858: 303, ♂, ♀. MZLU.
Ceraphron pallidiventris Ashmead, 1893: 124, 126, ♀. Keyed. Type missing (Masner & Muesebeck 1968). Synonymized by Dessart (1996).
Ceraphron Cameroni Kieffer, 1907b: 230, ♀. BMNH. Synonymized by Dessart (1996).
Ceraphron Microneurus Kieffer, 1907b: 238, ♂. MCSN. Synonymized by Dessart (1965). Preoccupied by Aphanogmus Microneurus Kieffer (1907b).
Ceraphron myrmecophilus Kieffer, 1913b: 197 , ♂. NHMUK, MNHN. Keyed.
Calliceras clavata violae Novitzky, 1954: 54, ♂, ♀. NHMW. Synonymized by Dessart (1996).
Ceraphron abdominalis – Marshall 1873: 2. Generic transfer. –– Kieffer 1907b: 230, 240. Description. –– Petersen 1956: 117. Variation, type information. –– Dessart 1972c: 35. Discussion of Zangheri (1969).
Ceraphron pallidiventris – Brues 1906: 146. Keyed; 1916: 560. Description, keyed. –– Masner & Muesebeck 1968: 107. Type information. –– Dessart 1996: 286. Junior synonym of Aphanogmus abdominalis (Thomson, 1858).
Calliceras myrmecophila – Kieffer 1914b: 77, 100. Generic transfer, description, keyed.
Calliceras abdominalis – Kieffer 1914c: 76, 77. Keyed. –– Szelényi 1939: 87. Description.
Calliceras abdominalis abdominalis – Kieffer 1914c: 95. Description.
Calliceras cameroni – Kieffer 1914c: 76, 95. Generic transfer, description, keyed.
Calliceras microneura – Kieffer 1914c: 77, 98. Generic transfer, description, keyed.
Calliceras pallidiventris – Kieffer 1914c: 79, 110. Generic transfer, description, keyed.
Ceraphron myrmecophilus – Kelner-Pillault 1958: 149. Type information. –– Masner 1965: 12. Type information.
Aphanogmus abdominalis – Dessart 1964: 121. Generic transfer, description, lectotype designation; 1965: 170. Description. –– Hellén 1966: 30, 32. Description, keyed. –– Alekseev & Kozlov in Alekseev 1978: 682. Description.
Ceraphron microneurus – Dessart 1965: 170, 171. Junior synonym of Aphanogmus abdominalis (Thomson, 1858).
Ceraphron cameroni – Masner 1965: 11. Type information. –– Dessart 1996: 286. Junior synonym of Aphanogmus abdominalis (Thomson, 1858).
Calliceras clavata violae – Dessart 1996: 287. Junior synonym of Aphanogmus abdominalis (Thomson, 1858).
Syntype UNITED KINGDOM • ♂; “ Moeurs et patrie. Angleterre: Londres, myrmecophile (H. Donisthorpe)” (Kieffer 1913a: 197); MNHN EY22475, EY22463 to EY22465.
Nearctic and palearctic.
CT found one male specimen marked as the holotype of Ceraphron myrmecophilus Kieffer, 1913 in the MNHN collections. However, there is also a male specimen marked as the holotype of this species at the NHMUK (NHMUK 010812101), as well as an additional female specimen (NHMUK 010812106) marked as an allotype. Concerning the female specimen, Kieffer only described the male of the species (1913a) and an allotype has never been published. Though it is not a part of Kieffer’s syntype series, it is worth noting that the female was captured by the same collector in the same month and year as the two males, and mounted in the same way.
Both the male NHMUK and MNHN specimens were originally card-mounted (Dessart removed the MNHN specimen from its mount when he dissected it), with collection information written on the front or back of the card mounts. Both specimens were collected at Nethy Bridge from Formica rufa Linnaeus, 1761. Based on the similar handwriting and mountings, it appears that both specimens were collected by H. Donisthorpe, though only the NHMUK specimen bears a label with Donisthorpe’s name. The MNHN specimen was collected on “ 14.vi.12 ”, whereas the NHMUK specimen was collected on “ 12.VI.12 ” (the female specimen was captured on “ 23.VI.12 ”).
The original locality information given in Kieffer (1913a) (written in French) is “ Angleterre: Londres, myrmecophile (H. Donisthorpe)”, which does not match either male specimen. However, Kieffer (1914c) (written in German) re-describes the species and gives the locality information as “Mit Formica rufa L., im Juni. England (Nethy Bridge)”. Kieffer has been known to make mistakes in correctly reporting specimen localities, especially when the handwriting of the collector was poor (see Notton 2014). It appears that Kieffer made a mistake in his 1913a publication, which he corrected in his 1914c paper (although Nethy Bridge is actually located in Scotland, not England).
Dessart dissected the card-mounted specimen at the MNHN (MNHN EY22475) and made three slide preparations (prép. no. 6605-181) of an anterior and posterior wing (MNHN EY22463), the male genitalia and metasoma (MNHN EY22464), and the right antenna and the left mid- and hind legs (MNHN EY22465). Although Dessart examined the specimens at both the MNHN and the NHMUK, it does not appear that he ever declared a lectotype or published anything on this species (Johnson & Musetti 2004). However, Dessart did leave a label on the female at the NHMUK which reads “ Not allotype since only ♂ described… but ♂ and ♀ = APH. crassiceps (K)”.
At this time, we consider the two male specimens at the NHMUK and the MNHN as syntypes, not holotypes. However, we synonymize Ceraphron myrmecophilus Kieffer, 1913 syn. nov. with Aphanogmus abdominalis (Thomson, 1858) based on the male genitalia morphology, body shape and especially the presence of foveae on the median length of the mesoscutellum (Mikó 2012a, 2012b; Mikó et al. 2013). It is possible that this species may also be synonymous with Aphanogmus crassiceps Kieffer, 1907, as Dessart believed, but we leave this to future researchers to investigate.