Description of the first sclerogibbid wasp (Hymenoptera: Sclerogibbidae) from Burmese (Myanmar) amber and its phylogenetic significance

A new species of Baeomorpha (Hymenoptera, Rotoitidae) from mid-Cretaceous Burmese amber

“…It is notable that Archaeoteleia (Scelioninae, Platygastridae) (Talamas et al 2016) has a very similar distribution to Rotoitidae, being present as an extant genus only in South America and New Zealand and as an extinct genus (with some morphological differences from extant species) in mid-Cretaceous Burmese amber. Incidentally, this is yet another example in Hymenoptera in which a given genus appears to have existed from the mid-Cretaceous to the present; the others belong to Chrysidoidea (Ross 2019, Martynova et al 2019. The most parsimonious and, we believe, the best explanation for the extinct and extant distribution of Rotoitidae, Archaeoteleia, Mymaridae and perhaps the other, unrelated, taxa as well, is to assume they all evolved earlier than currently thought, perhaps sometime in the Jurassic and were widespread across Pangaea in suitable habitats.…”

A golden age for ectoparasitoids of Embiodea: Cretaceous Sclerogibbidae (Hymenoptera, Chrysidoidea) from Kachin (Myanmar), Charentes (France) and Choshi (Japan) ambers

“…In extant Sclerogibbidae, females are always apterous and males macropterous (Olmi, 2005). In fossil species, the only known male was also macropterous (Sclerogibba cretacica, from Kachin amber; Martynova et al, 2019a), but females were shown to be either apterous (Probethylus poinari, Dominican amber) or macropterous (Pterosclerogibba antiqua (Fig. 1), Dominican amber;…”

“…Extant webspinners live in silk galleries produced by glands situated in the first protarsomere of both sexes. According to Martynova et al (2019a), life in silk galleries cannot be considered as the primary mode of living in Embiodea. In fact, the probable ancestral families of the Embiodea (Alexarasniidae Gorochov, 2011 andSinembiidae Huang &Nel, 2009) did not live in silk galleries, as demonstrated by the absence of modified protarsomeres, but probably lived in protected microhabitats under bark or in wood or forest litter.…”

“…The main reasons for the assignment of Alexarasniidae to webspinners are the homonomous wings, the thick R of the fore wing, the presence of hyaline folds, the shift of the beginning of RS and first branches of M and CuA to the wing base, oligomerization of RS, MA and MP veins, and the merging of bases of the main veins along the posterior wing margin (Shcherbakov, 2015). According to Martynova et al (2019a) and despite the generally accepted opinion, palaeontological data enable us to hypothesize that the slender body, short legs, enlarged hind femora, cerci with a small number of segments and the flexible wings with sinuses along the veins evolved in the ancestors of webspinners that had already adapted to living in secluded microhabitats long before their descendants evolved the ability to spin Journal Pre-proof J o u r n a l P r e -p r o o f 35 silk galleries (Shcherbakov, 2015). Ross (in Engel et al, 2011) even questioned the assignment of Jurassic Sinembiidae to webspinners because of the absence of probasitarsal modifications, fully winged females, etc.…”

“…However, because of the necessity of quick reverse movements inside silk galleries, the apices of the wings would probably have frequently snagged against opposing gallery walls which would have slowed or prevented escape. According to Martynova et al (2019a), the true embiodean ancestors had long evolved an extraordinary wing flexibility. As a result, when in a resting position over the back, the wings of all modern webspinners readily fold transversely and slide forward towards the head, thereby reducing the likelihood of snagging.…”