Masner, a new genus of Ceraphronidae (Hymenoptera, Ceraphronoidea) described using controlled vocabularies

Abstract

A ceraphronid wasp genus, Masner Mikó & Deans, gen. n., with one species, M. lubomirus Deans & Mikó, sp. n. is described from Australia and Fiji based on male specimens. Th is new genus challenges previous defi nitions of the two extant ceraphronoid families by sharing some character states with Megaspilidae (the presence of an expanded pterostigma and an occipital depression) and other character states with Ceraphronidae (the presence of uniramous anterior protibial spur, presence of a comb of the spur on the pro-and mesotibial spurs, a single mesotibial spur, an undivided synsternite, the presence of axillular setae, presence of Waterston's evaporatorium and the fusion of the parossiculus with the gonostipes). Masner is distinguishable from all other Ceraphronoidea by the sensillar patch present on fl agellomere 5 but absent from fl agellomeres 6-9 and the presence of a dorsally visible depression surrounding anterior part of the petiole. Th e limits of Ceraphronidae and Megaspilidae are reviewed, and we provide new characters for family level diagnosis and classifi cation. We also hypothesize that Masner is sister to the remaining Ceraphronidae.

A hymenopterists’ guide to the Hymenoptera Anatomy Ontology: utility, clarification, and future directions

“…During its short life, the potential utility of the HAO has already begun to emerge (e.g., Mikó et al 2012, Johnson and Musetti 2011, Kawada 2011, Talamas et al 2011, Vilhelmsen et al 2010, Mikó and Deans 2009, Deans and Kawada 2008, Yoder 2007. Here we attempt to clarify recurrent issues, with the goal of facilitating continued adoption of the HAO.…”

Biological Taxonomy and Ontology Development: Scope and Limitations

“…Minimally, this means: (1) adopting strict conventions for linking new core taxonomic information to (provisionally accepted) peripheral information so that the relevant context of the new contribution is fully defined; (2) using lineagespecific phenotype ontologies for taxonomic descriptions while specifying the phylogenetic context of the descriptive terms in use (cf. Ramírez et al, 2007;Mikó and Deans, 2009;Dahdul et al, 2010); (3) presenting all nomenclatural and taxonomic novelties in an ontology-compatible format, including intensional and ostensive definitions (see also Sereno, 2009); and (4) providing intensional and ostensive alignments to entities in relevant preceding taxonomies (Franz and Peet, 2009;Thau et al, 2009).…”

“…The result is a phylogenetic underdetermined and multireferential terminology. This problem also affects the utility of ontologies being defined for morphological structures of plants (Avraham et al, 2008), fish , spiders (Ramírez et al, 2007), wasps (Mikó and Deans, 2009), and other taxonomic groups (Smith et al, 2007). Even though each of these controlled vocabularies includes many taxon-specific terms, the terms are not consistently embedded in a phylogenetic context that recognizes convergent occurrences in the tree of life.…”

“…Having originated in the biomedical sector (Smith et al, 2007), the development of such ontologies is now branching out into other disciplines including behavior (Midford, 2004), ecology (Jones et al, 2006;Madin et al, 2008), evolution (Mabee et al, 2007), anatomy (Ramírez et al, 2007;Mikó and Deans, 2009;Vogt et al, 2009;Balhoff et al, 2010;Dahdul et al, 2010;Mungall et al, 2010), and taxonomy (Schulz et al, 2008). Nevertheless, the impact of ontology-based information services has been uneven, in part because of differences in needs and resources among disciplines.…”

A ceraphronid wasp in Early Miocene amber from the Dominican Republic (Hymenoptera: Ceraphronidae)

“…This diversity is segregated into two families, Ceraphronidae and Megaspilidae, with the latter split into two subfamilies, the primitive Lagynodinae and the nominate Megaspilinae. While much alpha taxonomic work has been undertaken on the family, largely through the efforts of the late Paul Dessart (1931Dessart ( -2001 (Pauly, 2001), extensive systematic study across the superfamily has only begun in earnest (e.g., Mikó & Deans, 2009). The superfamily has a meager fossil record but the limited evidence does demonstrate that the lineage extends well into the Cretaceous and two extinct families are presently recognized from the Mesozoic (e.g., Kozlov, 1975;Alekseev & Rasnitsyn, 1981;Engel & Grimaldi, 2009;Ortega-Blanco et al, 2010;McKellar & Engel, 2011).…”