Chrysis impressa Schenck 1856

• Main Authors: Paukkunen, Juho, Rosa, Paolo, Soon, Villu, Johansson, Niklas, Ødegaard, Frode
• Format: Other/Unknown Material
• Language: unknown
• Published: 2014
• Subjects: Biodiversity; Taxonomy; Animalia; Arthropoda; Insecta; Hymenoptera; Chrysididae; Chrysis; Chrysis impressa; Norway; Nordstrand; Fennoscandia
• Online Access: https://zenodo.org/record/4930527; https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4930527

61. Chrysis impressa Schenck, 1856 Chrysis impressa Schenck 1856: 29. Lectotype ♀ (designated by Morgan 1984: 9); Germany (SMF). Erlandsson 1971: 88, Silfverberg 1981: 61, Vikberg 1986b: 68, Hedström 1989: 154, Nilsson 1991: 82, Abenius 2004 a, Soon 2004: 22, 46, Abenius 2006: 57, Abenius & Hellqvist 2007: 66, Hallin 2007: 21, Karlsson 2008, Johansson 2009, Artsdatabanken 2010, Johansson 2010: 118, Orlovskytė et al. 2010: 150, Smissen 2010c: 307, Smissen 2010d: 393, Johansson 2011: 35, Molander 2011: 95, Ødegaard et al. 2011: 64, Soon & Saarma 2011: 15, Franzén et al. 2012: 27, Hallin 2012, Ranta 2012: 33, Rosa & Soon 2012, Dyntaxa 2013, Soon et al. 2014: 310–311. Chrysis ignita var. aurifera Linsenmaier 1951: 76. Syntypes; southern and central Europe (NMLS) (examined). Hellén 1952: 180. Chrysis ignita var. impressa: Hellén 1952: 180. Chrysis ignita impressa: Humala & Polevoi 2012: 142. Chrysis ignita [part.]: Södeerman & Vikberg 2003: 45. Chrysis valida [nec Mocsáry, 1912]: Humala & Polevoi 2009: 63. Material examined. * Denmark: B: Arnager, 27.VI.1958, 1 ♂ (S. Erlandsson); EJ: Kolding, 28.X.1942, 1 ♂ (W. Hünsch); NEZ: Nykøbing Sjaelland, Nordstrand, 15.–24.VII.1943, 1 ♀ (Dr. Mortensen). * Latvia: Basi, 16.IX.1969, 1 ♀ (V. Tumšs). Distribution. * Denmark, Estonia, Finland, * Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, Sweden, Russian Fennoscandia.—Westpalearctic: from West Europe to central Asia (Linsenmaier 1997). Remarks. The species is common and widespread in the Nordic and Baltic countries. It is especially closely related to C. ignita, Chrysis sp. (see below) and C. schencki. The females are usually morphologically distinctive, but the males are often difficult to determine (Smissen 2010a), and DNA barcoding is recommended for their identification (Soon et al. 2014). The species is here reported as being new to Denmark and Latvia, based on specimens deposited in NMLS in Luzern, ZMUC in Copenhagen and LMSZ in Riga. Published as part of Paukkunen, Juho, Rosa, Paolo, Soon, Villu, Johansson, Niklas ...