J. Ent. ( B ) 44 (3), pp. 281-282. 1975

Relationships and synonymy of Winnemana Crawford (Hymenoptera Eulophidae)

M . W. R . D E V . G R A H A M Hope Department of Entomology, University Museum, Oxford

The genus Winnemana was originally placed in the tribe Tetrastichini of the Eulophidae (Crawford, 1911 : 620), and since then it has been retained there or in the sub-family Tetrastichinae (Peck, 1963 : 117; Domenichini, 1966a : 64, 197; 19663 : IS). Recent comparison of Winnemana argei Crawford with Cirrospilus caspicus BouEek by both Dr BouEek and myself has revealed that these two species are so similar that they must be regarded as congeneric. Further examination showed that Winnemana agrees with Cirrospilus but differs from all the Tetrastichinae known to me in the following characters :

Antennae similar in male and female, funicle two-segmented unlike all European Tetrastichinae; mandibles with two larger outer (lower) teeth, followed by three smaller inner teeth; clypeus with anterior margin truncate; frons lacks the sutures which are characteristic of Tetrastichinae, and lacks median carina found in many of them. Meso- scutum mid-lobe with four bristles, front pair farther from notauli than hind pair; mesocutum with hind edge of side-lobes only shallowly excised, without a deep, angulate excision which leaves the axillae projecting forward as in Tetrastichinae ; scutellar bristles placed as in Cirrospilus, submedian grooved lines of scutellum slightly curved, not straight as in Tetrastichinae. Wing venation resembles that of Cirrospilus, no true break between submarginal vein and base of marginal vein.

Because of the structural similarity indicated above, and because the biology of Winnemana species does not differ essentially from that of Cirrospilus species, I propose the following synonymy:

Cirrospilus West wood

Cirrospilus Westwood, 1832 : 128. Winnemana Crawford, 1911 : 620 syn. n. Ootetrustichoides Ii, 1936 : 221 [synonymised with Winnemanu by Domenichini, 19663 :

This genus should be placed in the subfamily Eulophinae, in which I also include the Elachertinae. I am aware that some chalcidologists would place Cirrospilus in the Tetra- stichinae, but in my opinion that begs the question. The relationship between Cirrospilus and several other genera of Eulophinae is so close that one would then have to transfer these other genera to Tetrastichinae as well.

Cirrospilus argei (Crawford) comb. n. has been found recently in Britain : Middlesex, nr. Southgate; 3 .vii. 1970, I 9 (Graham).

151 syn. n.

I wish to thank Dr Zdenek BouEek for kindly lending a paratype of Cirrospilus caspicus.

28 I

I 8

282 M . W.R.de V.Graham: Relationships of Winnemana

REFERENCES

CRAWFORD J.C. 1911. Descriptions of new Hymenoptera. I. Proc. U S . natl. Mus. 38 : 617-23. DOMENICHINI G. I 966a. I Tetrastichini (Hymenoptera Eulophidae) palearctici ed i loro ospiti.

DOMENICHINI G. 1966b. Palearctic Tetrastichinae. Index entomoph. Ins. [I] : 1-101. Ii N. 1936. Notes on a new Chalcidoid-fly infesting the egg of Arge similis Vollenhoven. Kontyu

PECK 0. 1963. A catalogue of the Nearctic Chalcidoidea (Insecta Hymenoptera). Can. Ent. Suppl.

WESTWOOD J.O. 1832. Descriptions of several new British forms amongst the parasitic Hymenop-

Boll. Zool. agr. Bachic. (2 ) 6 : 61-204.

I0 ( 5 ) : 221-5.

30.

terous insects. Phil. Mug. (3) I : 127-9.

Manuscript received 28th January, I 975