Description of two new Australian genera of Megastigmidae (Hymenoptera, Chalcidoidea) with notes on the biology of the genus Bortesia

Abstract

Two new genera, Striastigmus, gen. nov., and Vitreostigmus, gen. nov., as well as three new species, S. bicoloratus, sp. nov., V. maculatus, sp. nov., and V. kangarooislandi, sp. nov., are described from Aus-tralia. A key to species of Vitreostigmus is provided as well as new information on the biology of genus Bortesia. Potential hosts of the newly described genera are discussed.

Full text

Description of two new Australian genera of
Megastigmidae (Hymenoptera, Chalcidoidea) with
notes on the biology of the genus Bortesia
Julie Böhmová1, Jean-Yves Rasplus2, Gary S. Taylor3, Petr Janšta1,4
1Department of Zoology, Faculty of Science, Charles University, 128 43 Prague, Czech Republic 2CBGP,
INRAE, Univ. Montpellier, CIRAD, IRD, Montpellier SupAgro, Montpellier, France 3Centre for Evolution-
ary Biology & Biodiversity, and School of Biological Sciences, University of Adelaide, North Terrace, Adelaide,
South Australia 5005, Australia 4Department of Entomology, State Museum of Natural History Stuttgart,
70191 Stuttgart, Germany
Corresponding authors: Julie Böhmová (bohmova.julie42@gmail.com), Petr Janšta (petr.jansta@natur.cuni.cz)
Academic editor: Miles Zhang|Received 21 February 2022|Accepted 22 March 2022|Published 29 April 2022
http://zoobank.org/9B6E1A56-2D68-412B-A71C-D3C9EF69BA1F
Citation: Böhmová J, Rasplus J-Y, Taylor GS, Janšta P (2022) Description of two new Australian genera of
Megastigmidae (Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea) with notes on the biology of the genus Bortesia. Journal of Hymenoptera
Research 90: 75–99. https://doi.org/10.3897/jhr.90.82585
Abstract
Two new genera, Striastigmus, gen. nov., and Vitreostigmus, gen. nov., as well as three new species,
S. bicoloratus, sp. nov., V. maculatus, sp. nov., and V. kangarooislandi, sp. nov., are described from Aus-
tralia. A key to species of Vitreostigmus is provided as well as new information on the biology of genus
Bortesia. Potential hosts of the newly described genera are discussed.
Keywords
Casuarinaceae, gall, Hakea, parasitoid, phytophagous
Introduction
While Parasitoida (sensu Peters et al. 2017) are mostly parasitic in habit, several lineages
have returned, at least partly, to the ancestral phytophagy of Hymenoptera. Examples
include the well-known gall-making Cynipidae (Blaimer et al. 2020) as well as a few
lesser known cases within the Braconidae (e.g., Flores et al. 2005; Zaldívar-Riverón et
al. 2014). Secondary phytophagy has evolved multiple times within Chalcidoidea (La
JHR 90: 75–99 (2022)
doi: 10.3897/jhr.90.82585
https://jhr.pensoft.net
Copyright Julie Böhmová et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC
BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
RESEARCH ARTICLE

Julie Böhmová et al. / Journal of Hymenoptera Research 90: 75–99 (2022)
76
Salle 2005) where it occurs in various ways such as seed-eating (e.g., Eulophidae, Eu-
rytomidae), stem-boring (Eurytomidae), gall-making (e.g., Agaonidae, Tanaostigma-
tidae, Eulophidae, Pteromalidae), inquilinism (e.g., Eulophidae, Eurytomidae), and
entomophytophagy (Eurytomidae, Ormyridae) (see Table 1).
Several of these strategies, together with parasitoidism, are also present in Megastigmi-
dae (Grissell 1999) which makes the family remarkable among Hymenoptera for the
diversity of its feeding strategies (Bouček 1988; Grissell 1995; Janšta et al. 2018).
Megastigmidae includes parasitoids of various gall-making Diptera (mainly Cecid-
omyiidae), such as Mangostigmus Bouček, Megastigmus Dalman and Neomegastigmus
Girault, and of gall-making Hymenoptera (mainly Cynipidae and Chalcidoidea) such
as Bootanomyia Girault and Megastigmus. It also contains several species with strictly
phytophagous larvae (Bootanelleus Girault, Bootania Dalla Torre, Bortesia Pagliano and
Scaramozzino, Megastigmus, and Macrodasyceras Kamijo). Several families of numerous
species of Gymnosperms (mostly conifers) and Angiosperms serve as the host of either
gall-makers, such as Bortesia, or seed-feeders (Bouček 1988; Grissell 1999; Roques
et al. 2016; Le et al. 2020). Holarctic species of the richest genus Megastigmus that
develop in seeds, especially of conifers, are sometimes considered important economic
pests (Roques and Skrzypczyńska 2003; Auger-Rozenberg and Roques 2012).
So far, only one genus of Megastigmidae, the genus Bortesia, has been shown to be
a gall-maker. Bortesia occurs in Australia and comprises three species – B. longistigmus
Riek, B. mirostigmus Riek and B. similis Riek. However, our knowledge of their biology
is relatively limited (Riek 1966). According to Riek (1966), Bortesia develops in bud
galls of several species of Hakea H. Schrader and J. C. Wendland (Proteaceae). Bortesia
Table 1. Summary of secondary phytophagous strategies in Chalcidoidea.
Family Feeding strategy Reference
Agaonidae gall-making (Agaoninae, Sycophaginae) (Cook and Rasplus 2003)
Eulophidae seed-feeding (Tetrastichinae) (La Salle 2005)
gall-making (Opheliminae, Tetrastichinae) (La Salle 2005; Reghunath and Raju 2020)
seed-feeding (Entedoninae) (Rasplus 1990)
inquilinism (Tetrastichinae) (La Salle 2005)
Eurytomidae seed-feeding (Zerova and Fursov 1991)
stem-boring (Zerova 1994; La Salle 2005)
gall-making (La Salle 2005)
inquilinism (La Salle 2005)
entomophytophagy (Zerova and Fursov 1991)
Megastigmidae seed-feeding (Grissell 1999)
gall-making (Riek 1966)
Ormyridae entomophytophagy (Gómez et al. 2017)
Pteromalidae gall-making (Epichrysomallinae, Melanosomellini, Otitesellinae,
Sycoecinae, Austrosystasinae, Miscogasterinae, Ormocerinae)
(Bouček 1988; Askew and Blasco-Zumeta
1997; Cook and Rasplus 2003; La Salle 2005)
inquilinism (Sycoryctinae) (Cook and Rasplus 2003)
Tanaostigmatidae seed-feeding (Lateef and Reed 1985)
gall-making (La Salle 2005)
inquilinism (La Salle 2005)
Tetracampidae gall-making (Mongolocampinae) (Sugonjaev and Voinovich 2003)
Torymidae seed-feeding (Bouček 1988)

Two new Australian genera of Megastigmidae and notes on the biology of Bortesia 77
longistigmus was reared from a bud gall on H. dactyloides (J. Gaertner) A. J. Cavanilles,
B. mirostigmus from bud galls on H. dactyloides and from the stigma [probably part of
the pistil] or bud galls on H. teretifolia J. Britten, and B. similis from “pineapple” bud-
galls on H. leucoptera R. Brown. Since then, no update or specication of the biology
of Bortesia has been recorded.
Megastigmidae comprises over 200 species currently classied in 12 valid gen-
era (Janšta et al. 2018; Noyes 2019). e family is generally considered to have
a worldwide distribution, however, its specic and generic richness occurs in the
Australian biogeographical region. Megastigmus is the only cosmopolitan genus
of the family, and is mostly diversied throughout the Holarctic region (Bouček
1988; Grissell 1999).
In this paper, we describe two new genera of Australian Megastigmidae. As one
of these genera is morphologically similar to Bortesia, we also provide information on
how these two genera can be recognized and add some new ndings about the biology
of Bortesia species.
Materials and methods
Specimens of Striastigmus, Vitreostigmus spp., Bortesia mirostigmus and some of
B.similis were swept in dierent Australian localities (for details see respective species).
A majority of our specimens of B. similis were reared from buds, leaves and twigs of
Hakea rostrata (Böhmová and Janšta, pers. obs.). Hakea parts were stored in sealed
plastic bags at room temperature and checked every two days. All specimens, both
emerged and swept, were stored in 96% EtOH.
DNA of some specimens (those labeled as JRAS or JBOH) were extracted using
the Qiagen DNeasy kit following the manufacturer’s protocol and were subsequently
sequenced for the COI (barcode fragment) following Cruaud et al. (2010) or ultra-
conserved elements (UCE) following Cruaud et al. (2021). All COI sequences are
deposited at NCBI under the accession numbers: ON007286–88.
High resolution images and some measurements of specimens were taken us-
ing a Keyence VHX 5000 digital microscope. For general observation and other
measurements, a Leica M205C stereomiscrocope was used. Terminology of mor-
phological structures in this study mostly follows Burks et al. (unpubl.), Gibson
et al. (1997), and Janšta et al. (2020). Terms for surface sculpture follow Stein-
mann and Zombori (1985). Abbreviations of used morphological characters are:
F1–F7 = funicular 1–7; Gt1–Gt4 = gastral terga; POD = posterior ocellus long-
est diameter, dorsal view; OOL=shortest distance between posterior ocellus and
eye margin, dorsal view; POL=posterior ocellus longest diameter, dorsal view;
MPS = multiporous plate sensilla; OI = ovipositor index, i.e., the ratio of oviposi-
tor length to metatibia length.
Institutional abbreviations are: Charles University, Faculty of Science, De-
partment of Zoology, Prague, Czech Republic (CUPC); Centre de Biologie

Julie Böhmová et al. / Journal of Hymenoptera Research 90: 75–99 (2022)
78
pour la Gestion des Populations, Montferrier-sur-Lez, France (CBGP); Queens-
land Museum, Brisbane, Australia (QMB); South Australian Museum, Adelaide,
Australia (SAMA).
Results
Striastigmus Rasplus, Böhmová & Janšta, gen. nov.
http://zoobank.org/b00dd03f-2562-477c-a3be-115ca5213c44
Fig. 1A–G
Type species. Striastigmus bicoloratus Rasplus, Böhmová & Janšta, sp. nov., by present
designation.
Etymology. e generic name is composed of the Latin prex stria, referring to
the dense striation covering most of the body and stigmus referring to the large stigma
of Megastigmidae. Masculine gender.
Diagnosis. Recognized from other Megastigmidae by having circular head shape
with concentric striated sculpture on most of face (Fig. 1D). Toruli situated low on
head with lower margin slightly above lower margin of eyes (Fig. 1D). Scrobes shallow,
smooth and narrowly triangular, not reaching median ocellus (Fig. 1D). Most setation
on upper face long and black, shorter and white on lower face. Gena smooth and shiny
(Fig. 1C). Occipital carina raised, sharp, its dorsal part reaching vertex (Fig. 1A). An-
tenna slightly clavate with a conspicuous micropilosity area on last clavomere (Fig. 1E).
Pronotum elongated, collar margined and more than half as long as mesoscutum
(Fig. 1B). Anterior half of collar with ten transverse carinae (Fig. 1B). Mesoscutum
coarsely cross striated (Fig. 1B). Mesoscutellum delimited anterolaterally from mes-
oscutum and axillae by broad foveate-septated scutoscutellar sulcus separating axillae
(Fig. 1B). Frenum coarsely reticulated, extending on about half length of mesoscutel-
lum (Fig. 1B). Propodeum relatively long, area between spiracles coarsely cross striated
in proximal part, striate in distal part of propodeum medially turning backwards to
propodeal foramen (Fig. 1G). Mesosoma dorsally with scarce long black setae, three
long white setae laterally on pronotal collar, one on mesoscutal lateral lobe and three
smaller ones on axilla along scutoscutellar suture (Fig. 1B). Hind coxa bare dorsally.
Fore wing with marginal vein about as long as postmarginal vein, stigma enlarged,
ovoid, basal vein present (Fig. 1F). Petiole elongated, about 0.8× as long as propodeum
(Fig. 1G). Metasoma, not including petiole, shorter than mesosoma, smooth or with
traces of coriaceous sculpture laterally (Fig. 1A), Gt1–2 medially slightly emarginated.
Ovipositor upturned and slightly longer than the entire metasoma (Fig. 1A).
In the key of Bouček (1988) Striastigmus goes to couplet 14 (page 120) but diers
from Paramegastigmus Girault by having oval head with concentric striated sculpture
on most of face, cross striated pronotum, mesonotum and propodeum, coarsely reticu-
lated frenum, and bicolored petiole, mesoscutellum, metanotum and legs, as well as
the bicolored setae on head and mesosoma.

Two new Australian genera of Megastigmidae and notes on the biology of Bortesia 79
Figure 1. Striastigmus bicoloratus holotype, female A habitus, lateral view B mesosoma, dorsal view
C head and mesosoma, lateral view D head, frontal view E antenna, lateral view F venation G propo-
deum, dorsal view. Scale bars: 200 µm except for habitus (1 mm).

Julie Böhmová et al. / Journal of Hymenoptera Research 90: 75–99 (2022)
80
Generic description. Female. Same as for description of Striastigmus bicoloratus
Rasplus, Böhmová & Janšta, sp. nov.
Host association. Unknown. Swept from vegetation in rain forest.
Distribution. Australia: Queensland.
Striastigmus bicoloratus Rasplus, Böhmová & Janšta, sp. nov.
http://zoobank.org/C7F53A6F-6F4A-4C85-91FA-C2DA1002BC70
Fig. 1A–G
Material examined. Holotype: A • ♀; Queensland, Wooroonooran NP,
Palmerston section; 17.5896°S, 145.7042°E; 26 Nov. 2018; Cruaud A., Rasplus J.-Y.
leg.; deposited in QMB (JRAS08291_0201).
Etymology. Species name refers to the bicolored petiole, mesoscutellum, metano-
tum and legs, as well as the bicolored setae on head and mesosoma.
Diagnosis. Same as for the genus.
Description. Female. Holotype. Body length excluding ovipositor 2.65 mm;
length of ovipositor 1.30 mm. Color: Head, pronotum and mesonotum brown with
upper face dorsally, lower face, vertex, lateral panel of pronotum, mesonotum distally,
and lower mesepisternum dark brown to black. Axilla, foveate-septated line between
axillae and mesoscutellum, frenum, lateral panel of metanotum, metapleuron and pro-
podeum black to very dark brown. Mesoscutellum except frenum and marginal rim
of mesoscutellum bright yellow. Axillula, metapleuron distally and adpetiolar stripe
brownish. Antenna bright brown. Hind coxa and all femora and tibiae mostly black.
Fore- and midtibiae apically, tibial spurs and tarsi pale yellow to white. Wings slightly
infuscated with venation bright brown. Petiole bicolored, black in proximal part and
pale yellow distally. Rest of metasoma and ovipositor sheath black except brown distal-
most part of gaster and base of ovipositor sheath. Ovipositor stylet brown.
Head. Vertex and entire face with concentric striated sculpture except almost
smooth scrobes and clypeus coriaceous medially; genae and temples smooth. Head
circular frontally, 1.00× as broad as high; 1.44× as broad as long; 1.21× as broad as
mesonotum at its widest part in dorsal view (Fig. 1C, D). Temples relatively long, 0.31×
as long as eye (Fig. 1C). Eyes separated by 0.61× their own height; eye 1.60× as high as
long. Scrobes shallow, in shape of elongated narrow triangle, its dorsal edge not reaching
median ocellus; interantennal process inconspicuous, not reaching above dorsal edge
of toruli. Vertex and upper face with sparse long black setation except a row of shorter
bright brown to white setae along each side of scrobal cavity. Lower face striated, with
short white setae except two setae on clypeus and two on lower face lateral to clypeus
being about 2.00× longer than white ones, longer setae bright brown (Fig. 1D). Clypeus
bilobed ventrally. Malar space 0.45× as long as breadth of oral fossa and 0.42× as long as
eye height. Ocelli with POL 1.50× as long as OOL, OOL 1.25× as long as POD. Oc-
cipital carina distinct, with its dorsal margin on top of head; setation on occiput short
and bright. Both mandibles with three teeth. Antenna (Fig. 1F) inserted very low on
face, lower margin of toruli at level of lower eye margin. Scape short, reaching at most

Two new Australian genera of Megastigmidae and notes on the biology of Bortesia 81
dorsal margin of scrobes, 5.00× as long as broad. Pedicel 2.20× as long as broad. Com-
bined length of pedicel and agellum 1.37× as long as breadth of head. Anellus slightly
transverse to quadrate, its breadth slightly narrower than F1 breadth. Relative length/
breadth (ratio) of funiculars as follows: F1 16/10 (1.60), F2 19/10 (1.90), F3 19/10
(1.90), F4 17/10 (1.70), F5 16/10.5 (1.52), F6 15/11 (1.36), F7 14/13 (1.08). Clava
with relative length/breadth (ratio) 30/16 (1.87); micropilosity area small on last claval
segment. Setation of scape, pedicel and F1 dark, rest of agellum bearing white setae.
Mesosoma. Setation of mesosoma as described above in the diagnosis. Mesosoma
2.53× as long as broad; pronotum 0.82× as broad as mesoscutum and about 1.13× as broad
as long. Pronotum with pronotal collar delimited by transverse pronotal carina with 9 ad-
ditional transverse carinae in its anterior half. Entire mesoscutum coarsely cross striated.
Notauli well developed, foveate-septate, with row of setae along them. Mesoscutellum
circular in dorsal view, 1.14× as long as broad; frenum densely reticulate and occupying
half the length of mesoscutellum; frenum nely reticulate almost smooth; mesoscutellum
with two pairs of setae, the rst pair in anterior half and second pair on frenum (Fig. 1B).
Propodeum (Fig. 1G) 1.72× as broad as long, area between spiracles coarsely cross stri-
ated in proximal part, striae in distal part of propodeum turning backwards medially to
propodeal foramen; callus with long white setae; postspiracular furrow present. Supracoxal
ange weakly developed. Metapleuron with no setae. Hind coxa rounded and bare dorsal-
ly, with transverse carinae dorsally, reticulated laterally. Metatibia with two spurs, shorter
spur minute, about 0.2× as long as longer spur; longer spur shorter than basimetatarsus.
Fore wing 2.60× as long as broad (Fig. 1A); clear with bright brown venation. Setae on
disc dense and brown. Basal cell bare with basal setal line complete, basal vein weakly scle-
rotized but still visible. Marginal vein 1.14× as long as postmarginal vein and 3.23× as long
as stigmal vein; stigma enlarged, ovoid, 1.46× as long as broad; uncus with 3 uncal sensilla.
Metasoma. Metasoma without ovipositor almost as long as mesosoma (Fig. 1A).
Petiole about 0.80× as long as propodeum. Gastral tergites with shallow alutaceous
sculpture; Gt1–Gt4 incised medially. Tip of hypopygium reaching to about 0.70× of
length of gaster. Ovipositor upturned, about 1.25× as long as metasoma; OI 1.90.
Male. Unknown.
Biology. Unknown.
Distribution. Australia: Queensland, Wooroonooran NP.
Condition of the holotype. Holotype mounted on a rectangular card with left
wings glued on a separate card. Very good condition, with legs, antennae and yellow-
ish parts of the body slightly translucid due to DNA extraction and subsequent drying
using HMDS (Heraty and Hawks 1998).
Vitreostigmus Böhmová & Janšta, gen. nov.
http://zoobank.org/2B9B9E87-25F7-470F-9445-8C4E568A7C06
Figs 2–5
Type species. Vitreostigmus kangarooislandi Böhmová and Janšta, by present
designation.

Julie Böhmová et al. / Journal of Hymenoptera Research 90: 75–99 (2022)
82
Figure 2. Vitreostigmus maculatus holotype, female A habitus, lateral view B head and mesosoma, dorsal
view C head, frontal view D clypeus, frontal view E antenna, lateral view F propodeum, dorsal view (ar-
row indicates postspiracular furrow) G lower metepisternum, posteroventral view H fore wing, dorsal view
I hypopygium, lateral view J posterior part of metatibia and metatarsi, lateroventral. Scale bars: 200 µm.

Two new Australian genera of Megastigmidae and notes on the biology of Bortesia 83
Etymology. Named after the transparent stigma which distinguishes the new ge-
nus from other genera of Megastigmidae. Masculine gender.
Diagnosis. Vitreostigmus can be distinguished from other genera of Megastigmidae
by the following combination of characters: clypeus medially with one tooth (Fig. 3B);
F1–F5 more than twice as long as broad; each agellomere with two (in females) or
three (in males) rows of MPS (Figs 2E, 3F, 5E); pronotal collar delimited by transverse
pronotal carina and with some additional incomplete transverse striae (Figs 2B, 5D);
mesoscutellum without frenal area, broadly touching transscutal articulation with
small fovea separating disc of metascutellum from transscutal articulation (Figs 3E,
4B); propodeum long, about 0.50× as long as broad; postspiracular furrow well de-
veloped (Figs 2F, 3D); lower metepisternum with propodeal foramen oval, posteriorly
narrower than anteriorly (pear-like shape); surface of lower metepisternum irregularly
carinated, two additional carinae originate submedially from anterior margin of pro-
podeal foramen, going forward in parallel and turning outwards to anterior margin of
metacoxal foramen (Fig. 2G); fore wing with at least two infumations; stigma large,
elongated, and transparent (Fig. 3G); tip of hypopygium reaching about 0.75× of
length of gaster, but its tip narrow, ngerlike, projecting (Fig. 2I); ovipositor about
0.8× as long as metasoma (Figs 2A, 3A).
In the key of Bouček (1988) Vitreostigmus goes to couplet 19 (page 121) but diers
from Bortesia by having, e.g., more intensive metallic color, pronotal collar carinated,
long propodeum, and stigma transparent, and from Bootanelleus by having antennae
inserted above lower margin of eye and stigma elongated and transparent and oviposi-
tor shorter than metasoma.
Generic description. Female. Body length excluding ovipositor 2.12–2.66mm;
length of ovipositor 0.78–0.96 mm. Body light brown yellow. At least part of vertex,
upper face, lower face laterally, posterior part of mesoscutal midlobe, posterior half of
mesoscutellum, axilla, callus posterior to spiracle, propodeum and metapleuron blue
green violet. Pronotal collar, lateral lobe of mesoscutum, lower mesepisternum, and
metasomal tergites at least with weak violet tint. Fore wing with at least a brown macu-
la under parastigma and around stigmal vein; submarginal vein light brown, marginal
and postmarginal vein light brown yellow to white, stigmal vein translucent, some-
times appearing white.
Head. Vertex and at least upper face reticulate; malar space, temple, and gena cori-
aceous; occiput alutaceous. Temple 0.23–0.38× as long as eye. Eyes separated by 1.02–
1.11× their own height, inner eye margins slightly diverging dorsally. Face with white
setation; setae long and lanceolate, denser on lower face (Figs 2C, D, 3B). Scrobes
shallow, not deeper than scape breadth, upper margin below imaginary line connect-
ing dorsal margins of eyes; interantennal process reaching to about 0.33× of scrobes
length. Clypeus delimited by weak sulcus laterally and posteriorly, medially with one
tooth. Malar space 0.45–0.50× as long as breadth of oral fossa and 0.37–0.44× as
long as eye height. Occipital carina present and well developed. Torulus inserted above
ventral level of eye, but below centre of face. Anellus breadth slightly narrower than
F1 breadth. F1–F5 more than twice as long as broad. Each segment with two rows of

Julie Böhmová et al. / Journal of Hymenoptera Research 90: 75–99 (2022)
84
Figure 3. Vitreostigmus kangarooislandi holotype, female A habitus, lateral view B head, frontal view
C head, dorsal view D propodeum, dorsal view E mesosoma, dorsal view F antenna G fore wing, dorsal
view. Scale bars: 200 µm.

Two new Australian genera of Megastigmidae and notes on the biology of Bortesia 85
MPS; micropilosity area very small and restricted to third claval segment. First claval
segment with two rows of MPS, the other two with one row of MPS. Ocelli small,
POL 1.31–1.39× as long as OOL, OOL 1.68–2.25× as long as POD.
Mesosoma. Mesosoma 2.13–2.20× as long as broad, covered irregularly with sparse
relatively long white setae dorsally. Pronotum 0.80–0.85× as broad as mesoscutum.
Pronotum with pronotal collar well delimited by transverse pronotal carina; pronotal
neck about as long as pronotal collar. Pronotal collar with some incomplete transverse
striae. Mesoscutal midlobe reticulate with narrow smooth anterior part usually hid-
den under pronotal sclerite. Mesoscutal lateral lobes striate. Notauli well developed,
foveated and whitish. Mesoscutellum with foveated marginal rim and without frenal
area; anterior margin broadly touching transscutal articulation with small fovea separat-
ing disc of mesoscutellum from transscutal articulation; breadth of anterior mesoscu-
tellar margin about half of posterior breadth of mesonotum. Mesoscutellum reticulate
dorsally, with denser reticulation posteriorly, with two rows of several setae submedially.
Axilla reticulate-striate. Scutoscutellar sulcus separating axillae foveate-septated. Propo-
deum long, about 0.50× as long as broad, irregularly longitudinally striate. Callus with
smooth sculpture bearing long setation. Propodeal spiracle small and rounded, about
1.30× as far from anterior margin of propodeum as spiracle diameter. Postspiracular
furrow developed as deep sulcus. Metacoxal ange developed as sharp ange. Lower
metepisternum (Fig. 2G) with propodeal foramen oval, posteriorly narrower than an-
teriorly (broad pear-like shape), its anterior end below imaginary line drawn across
posterior margin of metacoxal foramina; metacoxal foramina as far from each other as
anterior diameter of propodeal foramen. Lower metepisternum anteriorly delimited by
transverse concave carina connecting anterior margins of metacoxal foramina; medially
carina rising in front of metafurcal pit. Surface of lower metepisternum with several
irregular and incomplete transverse and longitudinal carinae; two additional carinae
originate submedially from anterior margin of propodeal foramen, going forward in
parallel and turning outwards to anterior margin of metacoxal foramen. Metatibia with
two spurs, but shorter spur minute, about 0.33× as long as longer spur; longer spur
shorter than basimetatarsus. Fore wing about 2.60× as long as wide, with infuma-
tion ventrad to parastigma and around stigmal vein; setae on disc dense and brown;
speculum small reaching more or less only to end of parastigma; basal cell bare; basal
setal line with a few setae dorsally; basal vein present but rudimentary, visible only as
sclerotized fold in its posterior part; marginal vein 0.78–0.92× as long as postmarginal
vein and 1.38–1.47× as long as stigmal vein; stigma large and elongated, 2.78–5.00× as
long as broad; uncus with four uncal sensilla in row; venation pale brown, stigma vein
posteriorly and stigma transparent (in some specimens white due to drying).
Metasoma. Petiole transverse, several times broader than long. Metasoma slightly
longer than mesosoma. Gaster with very shallow alutaceous sculpture; Gt1–Gt4 in-
cised medially; tip of hypopygium reaching about 0.66–0.75× of length of gaster, but
its tip narrow, ngerlike, projecting. Ovipositor about 0.80× as long as metasoma.
Male. Only the male of V. kangarooislandi is known. Color and sculpture similar
to females, sometimes more extensively metallic; antenna with scape shorter, hardly

Julie Böhmová et al. / Journal of Hymenoptera Research 90: 75–99 (2022)
86
reaching ventral margin of anterior ocellus; combined length of pedicel and agellum
about 2.5× as long as breadth of head; stigma large and broadly ovoid and brown;
propodeum with irregular reticulate sculpture; all gastral tergites margins straight; fu-
nicular segments of the large male with three rows of MPS.
Comments. Vitreostigmus and Bortesia share several characters: single median
tooth on clypeus, stigma lengthened in female, and ovipositor upturned and no longer
than gaster (Riek 1966; Bouček 1988). However, Bortesia have the antennae inserted
above the centre of face, a short pronotal collar which is bluntly angled (Fig. 6A),
mesoscutellum anteriorly as broad as mid lobe of mesoscutum posteriorly, notauli
almost meeting scutoscutellar sutures, and a short propodeum about 0.25× as long as
broad and smooth to nely reticulate with no striae. Additionally, females of Bortesia
have the stigma brown to bright brown (Fig. 6A, C), funiculars F2–F7 at most 2×
as long as broad and bearing only one row of MPS (Fig. 6B). Bortesia females are
non-metallic or at most with metallic hue while females of Vitreostigmus exhibit
metallic coloration. In addition to the characters listed above, males of Bortesia dier
from males of Vitreostigmus in exhibiting extensive metallic coloration (Fig. 6D, E),
scape shorter than F1 (Fig. 6F), funicular segments attened laterally, broadened and
ventrally convex, and MPS partially sunken in funicular segments (Fig. 6G).
Key to species of Vitreostigmus
1 Lower face densely setose (Fig. 2C); scape shorter, only 5.56× as long as broad
(Fig. 2A); F2–F4 more than 2.50× as long as broad; fore wing with ve brown
maculae, pear-like macula ventrad to parastigma, around stigmal vein and
three brown maculae on tip of wing (Fig. 2H); stigma broadening in poste-
rior half with tapering end; OI 1.14 ............................ V. maculatus sp. nov.
– Lower face with sparser setation (Fig. 3B); scape longer, 5.71–5.86× as long as
broad (Fig. 3F); at most F1 about 2.50× a long as broad; fore wing with two
brown maculae, one ventrad to parastigma and one surrounding stigmal vein
(Fig. 3G); stigma not broadening posteriorly; OI 1.25–1.34 .........................
......................................................................... V. kangarooislandi sp. nov.
Vitreostigmus maculatus Böhmová & Janšta, sp. nov.
http://zoobank.org/C3EAA0EE-8D37-474B-868B-8CAF5DAD03A9
Fig. 2A–J
Material examined. Holotype: A • ♀; Queensland, Kirrama Barracks, Kir-
rama State Forest; 18°12'S, 145°45'E; 4 Jun. 1996; C. J. Burwell leg.; deposited in
QMB (JBOH00033_0101).
Diagnosis. Head circular frontally (Fig. 2C); lower face with dense and long seta-
tion, setae adpressed and lanceolate (Fig. 2D); scape of antenna shorter, only 5.56× as
long as broad; F2–F4 more than 2.5× as long as broad (Fig. 2E); mesoscutellum only

Two new Australian genera of Megastigmidae and notes on the biology of Bortesia 87
1.26× as long as broad (Fig. 2B); propodeum irregularly longitudinally striate (Fig. 2F);
metatarsomere 4 (mtar4) with elongated unpaired spur-like seta, seta about as long as
length of mtar4 (Fig. 2J); fore wing with ve brown maculae, pear-like macula ventrad
to parastigma, around stigmal vein and three brown maculae on tip of wing; stigma
elongated, broadening in posterior half with tapering end (Fig. 2H); metasoma with
tip of hypopygium reaching more than 0.75× of length of gaster (Fig. 2I); OI 1.14.
Description. Female. Holotype. Body length excluding ovipositor 2.47 mm;
length of ovipositor 0.89 mm (Fig. 2A, B). Vertex except small area between lateral
ocellus to upper eye margin and between median ocellus and scrobes, upper face be-
tween scrobes and inner eye margin, lower face laterally, posterior part of mesoscutal
midlobe, posterior half to third of mesoscutellum, axilla, callus posterior to spiracle,
anterior 0.66× of propodeum, and metapleuron blue violet. Supraclypeal area, clypeus,
temple, pronotal collar, lateral lobe of mesoscutum, lower mesepisternum, fore coxa
and femur, hind coxa and metasomal tergites laterally with violet tint. Fore wing trans-
parent except brown pear-like macula under parastigma, broad brown macula sur-
rounding stigmal vein and three brown maculae on tip of wing with anterior one the
largest, posterior one smaller.
Head. Vertex and face reticulate. Head appearing circular from frontal view, vertex
convex and median ocellus relatively high above upper eye margin; 1.14× as broad
as high (Fig. 2C); 1.69× as broad as long; 1.35× as broad as mesonotum at its widest
part in dorsal view. Temple short, converging, 0.23× as long as eye (Fig. 2B). Eyes
separated by 1.02× their own height; eye 1.34× as high as long. Face setae adpressed;
very dense on lower face so that clypeus surface not clearly visible (Fig. 2D); upper face
with setae only along eye (one incomplete row) and scrobes (in about three rows) and
few additional setae on vertex. Scrobes only slightly longer than half length of scape.
Malar space 0.45× as long as breadth of oral fossa and 0.42× as long as eye height.
Antenna (Fig. 2E) with scape 5.56× and pedicel 1.56× as long as broad, the former
slightly curved in lateral view and reaching above dorsal margin of posterior ocellus.
Combined length of pedicel and agellum 1.87× as long as breadth of head. Anellus
transverse. Relative length/breadth (ratio) of funiculars as follows: F1 22.5/10 (2.25),
F2 24/9.5 (2.53), F3 25/9.5 (2.63), F4 24/9.5 (2.53), F5 22.5/9.5 (2.37), F6 21/9.5
(2.21), F7 19/11.5 (1.65). Clava with relative length/breadth (ratio) 30.5/15 (2.03).
POL 1.35× as long as OOL, OOL 2.18× as long as POD. Left mandible with three
teeth, right mandible denticulation hidden under left mandible.
Mesosoma. Mesosoma 2.13× as long as broad (Fig. 2B). Pronotum 0.85× as broad
as mesoscutum. Pronotal collar about 3.09× as broad as long, with two incomplete but
well raised transverse striae medially and with few additional incomplete lower striae
laterally and lateromedially. Mesoscutellum 1.26× as long as broad, without frenal
area, and with two rows of (probably) three setae submedially. Propodeum 2.20× as
broad as long (Fig. 2F). Area between spiracles irregularly longitudinally striate; with
few long white setae medially. Metacoxa 2.00× as long as broad, with long setation
dorsally and ventrally; metafemur 4.50× as long as broad; metatibia 8.15× as long as
broad; metatarsus relatively short, only 0.68× as long as metatibia. Metatarsomere 4

Julie Böhmová et al. / Journal of Hymenoptera Research 90: 75–99 (2022)
88
(mtar4) bearing elongated unpaired spur-like seta, seta about as long as length of mtar4
(Fig. 2J). Fore wing 2.63× as long as wide, slightly infumate ventral to parastigma and
clear brown macula surrounding stigmal vein and three brown maculae on tip of wing
(Fig. 2H); basal setal line complete, with several setae dorsally; mediocubital setal line
with at least 3 setae dorsally in distal third; marginal vein 0.78× as long as postmar-
ginal vein and 1.40× as long as stigmal vein; stigma broadening in posterior half with
tapering end, 4.40× as long as broad; stigmal vein posteriorly and stigma transparent.
Metasoma. Metasoma 1.17× as long as mesosoma (Fig. 2A). Gaster not com-
pressed laterally and with very shallow alutaceous sculpture; tip of hypopygium reach-
ing more than 0.75× of length of gaster. Ovipositor upturned; OI 1.14.
Male. Unknown.
Etymology. Named after the distinctive brown maculae on fore wings.
Biology. Unknown.
Distribution. Australia: Queensland, Kirrama State forest.
Condition of the holotype. Unfortunately the unique specimen collected, the
holotype female, was broken during imaging and several parts are now glued on three
separate cards: one triangular card bears left fore and hind wing; a second triangular
card with head including right scape, pedicel and annelus, part of mesosoma with right
fore and hind wings and forelegs into one piece and mesophragma as a second piece;
and a third rectangular card with right agellum, metasoma, right mid leg, hind legs
and posterior part of mesosoma including propodeum.
Vitreostigmus kangarooislandi Böhmová & Janšta, sp. nov.
http://zoobank.org/0858BAAA-ED54-49B7-AFB2-C9BA18E7EB06
Figs 3A–G, 4A–D, 5A–I
Material examined. Holotype: A • ♀; South Australia, Kangaroo Island,
Flinders Chase NP, Gosse lands; 35.93325°S, 136.9326°E; 16 Jan. 2019; P. Janšta, J.
Böhmová leg., sweeping Allocasuarina sp.; deposited in SAMA (JBOH0037_0101);
NCBI accession number ON007288. Paratypes: A • 3 ♀♀; same collec-
tion data as holotype; CUPC (JBOH0035_0101 (CUPC000156), CUPC000157
(NCBI accession number ON007286), CUPC000162) • 1 ♀; same collection data as
holotype; SAMA (CUPC000159) • 2 ♀♀; same collection data as holotype; SAMA
(CUPC000159, CUPC000161) • 1 ♂; same collection data as holotype; SAMA
(CUPC000158); NCBI accession number ON007287 • 1 ♂; Kangaroo Island, near
Seal Bay turning; 35.93253°S, 137.26188°E; 12 Jan. 2019; P. Janšta, J. Böhmová leg.;
sweeping; CUPC (JBOH00013_0101 (CUPC000163)).
Diagnosis. Head slightly transverse frontally; lower face with long white setae, but
setation not as dense as in V. maculatus (Fig. 3B); antenna with scape reaching dor-
sal margin of anterior ocellus, relatively longer, 5.71–5.86× as long as broad; anellus
longer than broad; at most F1 about 2.50× a long as broad, other funiculars shorter
(Fig. 3F); mesoscutellum 1.28–1.41× and propodeum 1.71–1.93× as broad as long

Two new Australian genera of Megastigmidae and notes on the biology of Bortesia 89
(Fig. 3D, E); propodeum between spiracles with two smooth fovea anteriosubmedi-
ally delimited by striae on its each side, otherwise longitudinally striate (Fig. 3D);
fore wing slightly obscured, with stronger infumation ventrad to parastigma and clear
brown macula surrounding stigmal vein; stigma elongated, not broadening posteriorly,
about 2.78–5.00× as long as broad (Fig. 3G); OI 1.25–1.34.
Figure 4. Vitreostigmus kangarooislandi paratypes females A head and mesosoma, dorsal view B head and
mesosoma, dorsal view C head, dorsal view D habitus, lateral view. Scale bars: 200 µm.

Julie Böhmová et al. / Journal of Hymenoptera Research 90: 75–99 (2022)
90
Figure 5. Vitreostigmus kangarooislandi paratypes, males A habitus, lateral view (CUPC000163) B head, dor-
sal view (CUPC000163) C fore wing, dorsal view (CUPC000163) D mesosoma, dorsal view (CUPC000158)
E antenna (CUPC000158) F habitus, lateral view (CUPC000158) G head, dorsal view (CUPC000158)
H fore wing, dorsal view (CUPC000158) I propodeum, dorsal view (CUPC000158). Scale bars: 200 µm.

Two new Australian genera of Megastigmidae and notes on the biology of Bortesia 91
Description. Female. Body length excluding ovipositor 2.12–2.66 mm [holotype
= 2.33 mm]; length of ovipositor 0.78–0.96 mm [0.78 mm] (Fig. 3A). Most of vertex,
upper face including area lateral to supraclypeal area and clypeus, most of mesoscutal
midlobe, axilla, mesoscutellum, and callus posterior to spiracle violet. Metapleuron
and anterior 0.66× of propodeum blue violet. Temple, lateral panel of pronotum, pro-
notal collar, mesoscutal lateral lobe, hind coxa dorsally and metasomal tergites with
violet tint. Fore wing slightly obscured with stronger infumation under parastigma and
clear brown macula surrounding stigmal vein.
Head. Vertex and upper face reticulate; clypeus and lower part of supraclypeal
area smooth. Head slightly transverse, 1.12–1.19× [1.19] as broad as high (Fig. 3B);
1.81–1.96× [1.86] as broad as long; 1.34–1.46× [1.46] as broad as mesonotum at
its widest part in dorsal view. Temple short, converging, 0.23–0.38× [0.26] as long
as eye (Fig. 3C). Eyes separated by 1.02× their own height; eye 1.31–1.42× [1.42]
as high as long. Upper face with only two rows of setae along eye and scrobes and
few additional setae (2–3) between them. Malar space 0.45–0.50× [0.50] as long as
breadth of oral fossa and 0.37–0.44× [0.39] as long as eye height. Antenna (Fig. 3F)
with scape 5.71–5.86× [5.86] and pedicel 1.44–1.85× [1.50] as long as broad, the
former reaching dorsal margin of anterior ocellus. Combined length of pedicel and
agellum 1.52–1.76× [1.75] as long as breadth of head. Anellus longer than broad, its
breadth slightly narrower than F1 breadth. Relative length/breadth (ratio) of funiculars
as follows: F1 2.06–2.53× [20/8 (2.50)], F2 2.10–2.38× [19/8 (2.38)], F3 2.25–2.44×
[19/8 (2.38)], F4 2.10–2.22× [18/8 (2.25)], F5 2.10–2.2× [17.5/8.5 (2.06)], F6 1.81–
1.82× [17/9 (1.89)], F7 1.40–1.57× [15/10 (1.50)]. Clava with relative length/breadth
(ratio) 1.77–2.00× [26/15 (1.73)]. POL 1.31–1.39× [1.39] as long as OOL, OOL
2.20–2.67× [2.36] as long as POD. Each mandible with three teeth.
Mesosoma. Mesosoma about 2.20× as long as broad (Fig. 3E). Pronotum about
0.80× as broad as mesoscutum. Pronotum with pronotal collar about 2.90× as broad as
long, with few transverse incomplete striae. Mesoscutellum 1.28–1.31× [1.41] as long as
broad, with two rows of four setae submedially. Propodeum 1.71–1.93× [1.90] as broad
as long (Fig. 3D). Area between spiracles with two small smooth areas anteriosubmedially
delimited by striae on its each side, otherwise longitudinally striate; with few long white
setae in proximal half. All legs relatively long and slender. Metacoxa about 2.65× as long
as broad, with long setation dorsally and ventrally; metafemur about 4.75× as long as
broad; metatibia about 7.83× as long as broad; metatarsus about 0.7× as long as metati-
bia. Fore wing 2.63–2.84× [2.63] as long as wide, slightly infumated, with stronger in-
fumation ventrad to parastigma and clear brown macula surrounding stigmal vein (Fig.
3G); basal setal line with only three setae dorsally, mediocubital setal line bare dorsally
and with about 8 setae ventrally in distal two thirds; marginal vein 0.85–0.92× [0.86]
as long as postmarginal vein and 1.38–1.47× [1.41] as long as stigmal vein; stigma
2.78–5.00× [3.20] as long as broad; stigmal vein posteriorly and stigma transparent.
Metasoma. Metasoma about 1.05× as long as mesosoma. Gaster with very shallow
alutaceous sculpture and in holotype female compressed laterally; tip of hypopygium
reaching about 0.66–0.72× [0.67] length of gaster. OI 1.25–1.34 [1.27].

Julie Böhmová et al. / Journal of Hymenoptera Research 90: 75–99 (2022)
92
Female variability. Some specimens have vertex, upper face, most of mesoscutal
midlobe, part of axilla, mesoscutellum in posterior third, metapleuron and anterior
0.66× of propodeum green blue; lower face including clypeus, temple, occiput close
to occipital foramen and lower mesepimeron in its posterior half brownish with green,
blue or violet tint (Fig. 4A–D). Marginal, postmarginal and stigmal veins after drying
with HMDS tend to be bright yellow to white, and hence stigma not transparent.
Male. Length of body 1.40–2.59 mm. Our two males are quite dierent in metal-
lic coloration e smaller one (CUPC000163) has vertex, mesoscutal midlobe distally,
mesoscutellum, and median part of propodeum with a blue violet tint only; stigmal
vein light brown, not translucent (Fig. 5A–C). e larger specimen (CUPC000158)
is more intense metallic blue green as in most females having dorsal part of pronotal
collar, mesoscutal midlobe, mesoscutellum and propodeum between spiracles largely
blue green with violet reection and stigma brown with brown surrounding infuma-
tion; antenna dark brown with slight metallic reection except scape beneath (Fig.
5E–J). Other measurements similar to females except as follows: eyes separated by
1.14–1.36× their own height; eye 1.28–1.32× as high as long; malar space 0.44–0.48×
as long as eye height; antenna with scape 3.8× as long as broad, hardly reaching ventral
margin of anterior ocellus; combined length of pedicel and agellum 2.40–2.58× as
long as breadth of head; ocelli small, POL 1.50–1.61× as long as OOL, OOL 1.68–
2.25× as long as POD; fore wing with marginal vein 0.71–0.87× as long as postmar-
ginal vein and 1.56–2.15× as long as stigmal vein; stigma large and broadly ovoid
but not elongated, 1.40–1.60× as long as broad; propodeum with irregular reticulate
sculpture (Fig. 5I); all gastral tergite margins straight, not incised medially. Relative
length/breadth of agellar segments as follows: F1 3.75–4.30×, F2 3.33–3.68×, F3
3.06–3.33×, F4 2.72–3.11×, F5 2.66–2.89×, F6 2.29–2.50×, F7 1.77–2.18×, clava
2.50–3.69×. Funicular segments of the larger male have three rows of MPS, the smaller
specimen has funicular segments only with two rows of MPS.
Etymology. Named after Kangaroo Island, the place of its discovery.
Biology. Unknown, probably associated with Casuarinaceae as some specimens
were swept solely from Allocasuarina L. A. S. Johnson.
Condition of the holotype. Holotype mounted on a triangular card with no miss-
ing body parts. Metasoma is articially laterally compressed due prior DNA isolation
and subsequent drying using HMDS.
Bortesia similis (Riek, 1966)
Figs 6A–G, 7A–B
Material. A • 1 ♀; South Australia, Mount Lofty; 34.97539°S, 138.70528°E;
21 Jan. 2019; P. Janšta, J. Böhmová leg.; sweeping Hakea rostrata; CUPC
(JBOH0032_0101 (CUPC000164)) • 2 ♀♀; same collection data as for preced-
ing; SAMA (CUPC000198–199) • 8 ♂♂; same collection data as for preceding;
SAMA (CUPC000200–207) • 3 ♀♀; same collection data as for preceding; em.

Two new Australian genera of Megastigmidae and notes on the biology of Bortesia 93
Figure 6. Bortesia similis A female habitus, lateral view B female head, antennae and mesosoma, frontal/
dorsal view C female fore wing, dorsal view D male habitus, dorsal view E male habitus, lateral view
F male head, frontal view G male antenna, lateral view. Scale bars: 200 µm.

Julie Böhmová et al. / Journal of Hymenoptera Research 90: 75–99 (2022)
94
from Hakea rostrata twigs (Jan.–Feb. 2019); CUPC (CUPC000165–166, 217) • 3
♂♂; same collection data as for preceding; em. from Hakea rostrata twigs (Jan.–Feb.
2019); CUPC (CUPC000167–168, 218) • 1 ♀; same collection data as for preced-
ing; em. from Hakea rostrata buds (Jan.–Feb. 2019); CUPC (CUPC000208) • 1 ♂;
same collection data as for preceding; em. from Hakea rostrata buds (Jan.–Feb. 2019);
CUPC (CUPC000209) • 8 ♀♀; same collection data as for preceding; 34.97538°S,
138.71064°E; 20 Jan. 2019; swept from Hakea rostrata; CUPC (CUPC000169–176)
• 9 ♂♂; same collection data as for preceding; CUPC (CUPC000177–185) • 4 ♀♀;
same collection data as for preceding; SAMA (CUPC000186–189) • 8 ♂♂; same col-
lection data as for preceding; SAMA (CUPC000190–197) • 5 ♀♀; South Australia,
Kangaroo Island, Flinders Chase NP, Gosse lands; 35.93625°S, 136.93204°E; 12 Jan.
2019; P. Janšta, J. Böhmová leg.; sweeping; CUPC (CUPC000210, 219–222).
Male recognition. We have reared and swept several males of B. similis during
our survey in Mt. Lofty which is the rst male record for this species. Face and dorsal
thorax pilosity, sculpture of dorsal mesosoma and wing venation are similar to those of
females (Fig. 6A–C). Males of B. similis can be easily recognized from males of B. mi-
rostigmus by their coloration. ey have the entire lower face, lower part of upper face,
lateral panel of pronotum, prepectus, acropleuron, fore- and midlegs and hind femur,
tibia and tarsi yellow. Upper part of upper face, rest of metasoma dorsally and laterally,
and hind coxa are metallic green to blue green. Dorsal and lateral metasoma is brown
to bright brown with blue green metallic reections dorsally (Fig. 6D–G). In contrast,
males of B. mirostigmus are darker with more extensive coloration (Riek 1966).
Distribution. Australia: NSW: Strahorn state forest (Riek 1966); SA: Adelaide,
Mount Lofty; Kangaroo Isl. (new records).
Host. Hakea leucoptera (Riek 1966) and H. rostrata (new record).
Remarks on the biology of B. similis. While Riek (1966) reared B. similis from
“pineapple” (bud) galls on Hakea leucoptera, we observed females of this species ovi-
Figure 7. Hakea rostrata with emergence holes of Bortesia similis A enlarged bud (indicated by arrow)
B leaf (emergence hole indicated by arrow).

Two new Australian genera of Megastigmidae and notes on the biology of Bortesia 95
positing into the buds, but also into the twigs of Hakea rostrata. Subsequently, several
specimens were reared from the twigs, leaves and slightly enlarged buds of H. rostrata
(Fig. 7A) sampled in the same locality. e twigs and the leaves show no sign of swell-
ings, but the leaves from which Bortesia emerged appeared to be dry apically (Fig. 7B).
Together with Bortesia specimens, we also reared several individuals of Megastigmus sp.
from the sampled organs of H. rostrata. Because no native Australian species of Megastigmus
is known to be a gall-maker or phytophagous on Hakea, and because no other insects
emerged from our samples, we considered Megastigmus sp. to be a parasitoid of B. similis.
Bortesia mirostigmus (Riek, 1966)
Material. A • 3 ♀♀; South Australia, Kangaroo Island, Platypus Waterhole
Walk; 35.93617°S, 136.72993°E; 14 Jan. 2019; Janšta, Böhmová leg.; sweeping of
vegetation; CUPC (CUPC000211–212), SAMA (CUPC000213) • 3 ♂♂; same col-
lection data as for preceding; CUPC (CUPC000214–215), SAMA (CUPC000216).
Distribution. Australia: NSW: Kariong (Riek 1966); WA: Perth, Scarborough;
SA: Adelaide, Mount Lofty (Bouček 1988); Kangaroo Isl. (new record).
Host. Hakea dactyloides, H. teretifolia.
Biology. All specimens were swept on Hakea sp.
Discussion
In the last few years, we have carried out an extensive survey of the world Megastigmi-
dae to reconstruct the rst phylogeny of the family based on the sequencing of ultra-
conserved elements (UCE, Böhmová et al., in prep.). We conducted extensive sam-
pling in Australia which enabled us to discover the two new genera described here.
Consequently, the number of megastigmid genera is now raised to fourteen (Bouček
1988; Noyes 2019).
In non-oophagous species of Chalcidoidea, there is a global trend to associate me-
tallic coloration and a parasitic way of life. Most larval or nymphal parasitoids appears
to have metallic coloration (i.e., Pteromalidae, Eulophidae, Torymidae, Eupelmidae),
even if some groups make exception (Leucospidae, Aphelinidae, most Chalcididae
and Eurytomidae). Similarly, absence of metallic tinge is frequently associated with
phytophagous habits. For example Agaonidae, Epichrysomallinae, Melanosomellini,
Mongolocampinae or Anselmellini are all phytophagous and non-metallic, while their
closer relatives are metallic and parasitoids. Within Megastigmidae, this trend was al-
ready discussed by Bouček (1988) who highlighted the association between metallic
coloration and the parasitoid habits of Palaearctic Bootanomyia and to the opposite the
non-metallic coloration of phytophagous Megastigmus.
is correlation, however, appears to be a rather poor predictor within Australasian
Megastigmidae (Bouček 1988). While this appears to be true for Bootanomyia which

Julie Böhmová et al. / Journal of Hymenoptera Research 90: 75–99 (2022)
96
are mostly metallic and parasitic (Doğanlar 2011), Bortesia, which is also partly metal-
lic, is phytophagous. In the same manner, Australian species of Megastigmus with no
metallic coloration appear to be in fact parasitoids (where the biology has been thor-
oughly demonstrated) (Riek 1966; Grissell 1999).
Although we do not have information about the biology of the newly described
taxa, we could possibly infer their potential biology from their closest relatives.
Morphologically, Vitreostigmus appears closely related to Bortesia, Bootanelleus and
Ianistigmus. ese genera are characterized by a clypeus with a median tooth (Bouček
1988). As far as we know, males of all these genera all have long funicular segments
bearing at least three rows of MPS, an unusual character within Megastigmidae
(Bouček 1988). Bortesia (see above) and Bootanelleus are known to be phytophagous
but the biology of Ianistigmus is still unknown. All specimens of V. kangarooislandi were
swept from vegetation containing predominantly Allocasuarina sp. (Casuarinaceae), a
member of the same plant family as Casuarina L., which is the host of the seed-eating
Bootanelleus orientalis (Bouček 1988). erefore, we hypothesize here that species of
Vitreostigmus could be phytophagous as well.
Based on the bilobed clypeus, elongated pronotal collar, propodeum and petiole,
Striastigmus appears closely related to Paramegastigmus (Bouček 1988). Unfortunately,
the biology of Paramegastigmus is very poorly known. Bouček (1988) reported that
P. avus is associated with small leaf-galls on Lophostemon Schott (refered as Tristania
R. Brown) species (Myrtaceae) and he observed both sexes of P. avus swarming around
galled leaves of Lophostemon confertus (R. Brown) Peter G. Wilson and J. T. Waterh
(referred to as Tristania conferta R. Brown), without seeing any oviposition. From these
observations, we expect that Paramegastigmus could be parasitic on some gall-makers.
erefore, we predict that Striastigmus, a close relative of Paramegastigmus, could be
parasitic in habits.
is study highlights our lack of knowledge on Megastigmidae. Apart from a few
Megastigmus species with economic importance, most other Megastigmidae are rather
poorly studied in terms of taxonomy but also of biology. Out of the currently known
14 genera, we have fragmentary knowledge for only eight genera. Furthermore, for a
majority of species, especially for the Australian members of the family, the biology still
needs to be better documented.
Acknowledgements
is work was supported by e Charles University Grant Agency (GAUK) – project
n. 1122218 (to JB) and SVV 260571/2022 (to PJ). We are grateful to Chris Burwell
and Susan Wright (both QMB), and Ondřej Barda for help with gathering mate-
rial. We thank the following institutions: the Queensland Government, Department
of National Parks, Sport and Racing for delivering permits to sample in Queensland
National Parks (permits #WITK18248017-WITK18278817 to JYR); Government of
South Australia, Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources for pro-

Two new Australian genera of Megastigmidae and notes on the biology of Bortesia 97
viding collecting permit for national parks of South Australia (permit U26825-1 to
PJ); Australian Government, Department of the Environment and Energy for provid-
ing export permit (permit PWS2019-AU-000191 to PJ). e authors are thankful to
the reviewers, John Heraty and Paul Hanson, and academic editor, Miles Zhang, for
their valuable comments.
References
Askew RR, Blasco-Zumeta J (1997) Parasitic Hymenoptera inhabiting seeds of Ephedra
nebrodensis in Spain, with descriptions of a phytophagous pteromalid and four other
new species of Chalcidoidea. Journal of Natural History 31: 965–982. https://doi.
org/10.1080/00222939700770471
Auger-Rozenberg M-A, Roques A (2012) Seed wasp invasions promoted by unregulated seed
trade aect vegetal and animal biodiversity. Integrative Zoology 7: 228–246. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1749-4877.2012.00308.x
Auger-Rozenberg M-A, Kerdelhué C, Magnoux E, Turgeon J, Rasplus J-Y, Roques A (2006)
Molecular phylogeny and evolution of host-plant use in conifer seed chalcids in the genus
Megastigmus (Hymenoptera: Torymidae): Molecular phylogeny of Megastigmus. Systematic
Entomology 31: 47–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3113.2005.00310.x
Blaimer BB, Gotzek D, Brady SG, Bungton ML (2020) Comprehensive phylogenomic anal-
yses re-write the evolution of parasitism within cynipoid wasps. BMC Evolutionary Biol-
ogy 20: 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12862-020-01716-2
Bouček Z (1988) Australasian Chalcidoidea (Hymenoptera). A biosystematic revision of genera
of fourteen families, with a reclassication of species. CAB International (Wallingford),
832 pp.
Cook JM, Rasplus J-Y (2003) Mutualists with attitude: coevolving g wasps and gs. Trends
in Ecology & Evolution 18: 241–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-5347(03)00062-4
Cruaud A, Jabbour-Zahab R, Genson G, Cruaud C, Couloux A, Kjellberg F, Van Noort S, Ras-
plus J-Y (2010) Laying the foundations for a new classication of Agaonidae (Hymenop-
tera: Chalcidoidea), a multilocus phylogenetic approach. Cladistics 26: 359–387. https://
doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-0031.2009.00291.x
Cruaud A, Delvare G, Nidelet S, Sauné L, Ratnasingham S, Chartois M, Blaimer BB, Gates M,
Brady SG, Faure S, van Noort S, Rossi J-P, Rasplus J-Y (2021) Ultra-Conserved Elements
and morphology reciprocally illuminate conicting phylogenetic hypotheses in Chalcidi-
dae (Hymenoptera, Chalcidoidea). Cladistics 37: 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/cla.12416
Doğanlar M (2011) Review of Palearctic and Australian species of Bootanomyia Girault 1915
(Hymenoptera: Torymidae: Megastigminae), with descriptions of new species. Turkish
Journal of Zoology 35: 123–157. https://doi:10.3906/zoo-0905-15
Flores S, Nassar JM, Quicke DLJ (2005) Reproductive phenology and pre-dispersal seed-feed-
ing in Protium tovarense (Burseraceae), with a description of the rst known phytophagous
“Bracon” species (Hymenoptera: Braconidae: Braconinae). Journal of Natural History 39:
3663–3685. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222930500392659

Julie Böhmová et al. / Journal of Hymenoptera Research 90: 75–99 (2022)
98
Gibson GAP, Huber JT, Woolley JB (1997) Annotated keys to the genera of the Nearctic Chal-
cidoidea (Hymenoptera). National Research Council Research Press (Ottawa): 1–794.
Gómez JF, Hernández Nieves M, Gayubo SF, Nieves-Aldrey JL (2017) Terminal-instar lar-
val systematics and biology of west European species of Ormyridae associated with insect
galls (Hymenoptera, Chalcidoidea). ZooKeys 644: 51–88. https://doi.org/10.3897/zook-
eys.644.10035
Grissell EE (1995) Toryminae (Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea: Torymidae): a redenition, ge-
neric classication and annotated world catalogue of species. Memoirs on Entomology,
International 2: 1–470.
Grissell EE (1999) An annotated catalog of world Megastigminae (Hymenoptera: Chalci-
doidea: Torymidae). Contributions of the American Entomological Institute 31: 1–92.
Heraty J, Hawks D (1998) Hexamethyldisilazane: a chemical alternative for drying insects.
Entomological News 109: 369–374.
Janšta P, Delvare G, Baur H, Wiper B, Peters RS (2020) Data-rich description of a new genus
of praying mantid egg parasitoids, Lasallegrion gen. n. (Hymenoptera: Torymidae: Podagri-
onini), with a re-examination of Podagrion species of Australia and New Caledonia. Journal
of Natural History 54: 755–790. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222933.2020.1778112
Janšta P, Cruaud A, Delvare G, Genson G, Heraty J, Křížková B, Rasplus J-Y (2018) Torymidae
(Hymenoptera, Chalcidoidea) revised: molecular phylogeny, circumscription and reclas-
sication of the family with discussion of its biogeography and evolution of life-history
traits. Cladistics 34: 627–651. https://doi.org/10.1111/cla.12228
Kamijo K (1962) A revision of the species of the Megastigminae occurring in Japan (Hymenop-
tera : Chalcidoidea) [Taxonomic Studies on the Torymidae of Japan, 1]. Insecta Matsumu-
rana 25: 18–40. https://eprints.lib.hokudai.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/2115/9682/1/25(1)_
p18-40.pdf
La Salle J (2005) Biology of gall inducers and evolution of gall induction in Chalcidoidea
(Hymenoptera: Eulophidae, Eurytomidae, Pteromalidae, Tanaostigmatidae, Torymidae).
In: Raman A, Schaefer CW, Withers, TM (Eds) Biology, Ecology, and Evolution of Gall-
inducing Arthropods. Science Publishers (Eneld): 507–537.
Lateef SS, Reed W (1985) Tanaostigmodes cajaninae LaSalle sp. n. (Hymenoptera: Tanaostig-
matidae), a potential pest of pigeon pea in India. Bulletin of Entomological Research 75:
305–313. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007485300014395
Le NH, Nahrung HF, Morgan JAT, Lawson SA (2020) Multivariate ratio analysis and DNA
markers reveal a new Australian species and three synonymies in eucalypt-gall-associated
Megastigmus (Hymenoptera: Megastigmidae). Bulletin of Entomological Research 110:
1–16. https://doi.org/10.1017/S000748532000022X
Noyes JS (2019) Universal Chalcidoidea Database – World Wide Web Electronic Publication.
https://www.nhm.ac.uk/our-science/data/chalcidoids/database/ [Accessed on 30.01.2022]
Peters RS, Krogmann L, Mayer C, Donath A, Gunkel S, Meusemann K, Kozlov A, Podsiad-
lowski L, Petersen M, Lanfear R, Diez PA, Heraty J, Kjer KM, Klopfstein S, Meier R,
Polidori C, Schmitt T, Liu S, Zhou X, Wappler T, Rust J, Misof B, Niehuis O (2017)
Evolutionary history of the Hymenoptera. Current Biology 27: 1013–1018. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.cub.2017.01.027

Two new Australian genera of Megastigmidae and notes on the biology of Bortesia 99
Rasplus JY (1990) Nouvelles espèces afrotropicales du genre Entedon Dalman et notes sur leur
biologie. Bulletin de la Société Entomologique de France 94: 223–245.
Reghunath A, Raju R (2020) Anselmella kerrichi – A new pest on the reproductive reduc-
tion of an Endangered tree (Syzygium parameswaranii) of semi-evergreen Forests of the
Western Ghats, India. Trees, forests and people 2: e100017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
tfp.2020.100017
Riek EF (1966) A new genus of gall-forming megastigmine Torymidae (Hymenoptera:
Chalcidoidea). Australian Journal of Zoology 14: 1199–1206. https://doi.org/10.1071/
ZO9661199
Roques A, Skrzypczyńska M (2003) Seed-infesting chalcids of the genus Megastigmus Dalman,
1820 (Hymenoptera: Torymidae) native and introduced to the West Palearctic region: tax-
onomy, host specicity and distribution. Journal of Natural History 37: 127–238. https://
doi.org/10.1080/713834669
Roques A, Copeland RS, Soldati L, Denux O, Auger-Rozenberg M-A (2016) Megastigmus seed
chalcids (Hymenoptera, Torymidae) radiated much more on Angiosperms than previously
considered. I- Description of 8 new species from Kenya, with a key to the females of Eastern
and Southern Africa. ZooKeys 585: 51–124. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.585.7503
Steinmann H, Zombori L (1985) An atlas of insect morphology. Akadémiai Kiadò (Budapest):
1–253.
Sugonjaev ES, Voinovich ND (2003) On the geographic distribution and host linkages of
phytophagous chalcids of the subfamily Mongolocampinae (Hymenoptera, Chalcidoidea,
Tetracampidae) living on Nitraria spp. (Nitrariaceae), with descriptions of their immature
stages. Entomologicheskoe Obozrenie 82: 310–320. [in Russian]
Zaldívar-Riverón A, Martínez JJ, Belokobylskij SA, Pedraza-Lara C, Shaw SR, Hanson PE,
Varela-Hernández F (2014) Systematics and evolution of gall formation in the plant-asso-
ciated genera of the wasp subfamily Doryctinae (Hymenoptera: Braconidae). Systematic
Entomology 39: 633–659. https://doi.org/10.1111/syen.12078
Zerova MD (1994) A new group of phytophagous chalcids of the family Eurytomidae (Hyme-
noptera: Chalcidoidea). Entomological Review 73: 101–106.
Zerova MD, Fursov VD (1991) e Palaearctic species of Eurytoma (Hymenoptera: Eurytomi-
dae) developing in stone fruits (Rosaceae: Prunoideae). Bulletin of Entomological Research
81: 209–219. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007485300051294