Sphiximorpha garibaldii Rondani, 1860 (figs 27–30, 35–38)

M a t e r i a l e x a m i n e d. Ukraine. Kyiv Region: Irpin env., 50.50 N 30.28 E, Lyubka River floodplain forest, 26.06.2018, on flowers of Filipendula ulmaria, 1} (A. Prokhorov).

D i s t r i b u t i o n. Bulgaria, France, Germany (extinct), Greece, Hungary, Italy, Romania, Serbia, Spain, Turkey (Peck, 1988; Dirickx, 1994; Tóth, 2011; Williams et al., 2011; Saribiyik, 2014; Van Steenis et al., 2016; Ricarte & Marcos-García, 2017; Speight, 2018; Wakkie, 2019); Ukraine (first record).

Diagnosis. Only four Sphiximorpha species are known from Europe, and S. garibaldii is most similar to S. subsessilis (Illiger in Rossi, 1807) (figs 31–34, 39–42) in having frons with lateral or medial black vittae (Van Steenis et al., 2016) (in S. euprosopa (Loew, 1869), frons entirely yellow). Sphiximorpha garibaldii differs from very rare sub-Mediterranean S. petronillae Rondani, 1850 by the scutellum yellow with black posterior margin (in S. petronillae Rondani, 1850, scutellum entirely yellow). Female of S. garibaldi can be separated from S. subsessilis female by: face with a lateral yellow marking in the shape of an inverted hook (usually as on fig. 30) (in S. subsessilis, face with a lateral yellow marking not hook-shaped, as on fig. 34), pedicel shorter (fig. 29), ratio of it length to the width is 1.78 (in S. subsessilis, pedicel longer (fig. 33), ratio of it length to the width is 2.0–2.2), hind femur slender (in S. subsessilis, hind femur ventrally near the apex with a small thickening). These characters were based on Van Steenis et al. (2016), except measurements made on our material. Additionally, S. garibaldi clearly differs from S. subsessilis by the slender tergite 2 (fig. 35): ratio of the length of tergite to its width is 1.77 (in S. subsessilis, tergite 2 more robust (fig. 39), ratio of the length of tergite to its width is 1.25–1.43), distance between yellow maculae on tergite 2 (fig. 35) less than width of the macula (dorsal view) (in S. subsessilis, distance between yellow maculae on tergite 2 more than width of the macula, as on fig. 39), frons with two small transverse yellow maculae separated from lateral maculae (fig. 29) (in S. subsessilis, these maculae are fused with lateral maculae, as on fig. 33), hind femur yellow at base about one sixth of its length (fig. 36) (in S. subsessilis, hind femur yellow at base of at least a third of its length, as on fig. 40), mid basitarsus ventrally with yellow setulae (fig. 37), hind basitarsus entirely pale, and hind tarsus dorsally with only pale macrotrichia (fig. 38) (in S. subsessilis, mid basitarsus ventrally with black setulae (fig. 41), hind basitarsus blackish dorsally, and hind tarsus dorsally with numerous black macrotrichia, as on fig. 42). Our specimen, unlike the description of the species (Van Steenis et al., 2016), with scutellum almost black and with only small orange maculae in anterior edge (fig. 35) (in S. subsessilis, scutellum with broad yellow fascia anteriorly, as on fig. 39).

Probably some of the above additional characters may vary, for example the color of the pile on tarsus or the presence and shape of yellow maculae on frons, but our specimen clearly differs from S. subsessilis precisely on these characters.

Note. Perhaps this is one of the most incredible new species for the fauna of Ukraine over the past few years because Ukrainian record is so far from the main range of this Southern European species. The specimen was found in a mixed forest with many old trees of Quercus robur, although the preferred environment of this species cited as “thermophilous deciduous forest of Quercus pubescens with overmature trees and Quercus suber forest with overmature trees” (Speight, 2018).

This insect has been very sparsely recorded and is probably threatened at European level (Speight, 2018).