S. Mahunka szerk.: Folia Entomologica Hungarica 27/2. (Budapest, 1974)
lopment of Braconidae and must be regarded as an apomorph feature. These animals do not paralyze their hosts, with the help of their ovipositor they lay their eggs directly into the body of the prey, in which the parasites hatch out and devour the host from within. Endoparasitism brought with it several ecological and morpho-physiological changes, well shown in the endoparasites themselves. The wide spectrum of host and the adaptability meant different modifications. On the other hand, Braconidae as epacmic-acmic group of insects are suitable subjects to undergo different modifications, and these phenomena are called evolutionary trends. Among the endoparasitic Braconidae the most ancient form is represented by Helco ninae . They are endoparasites of xylophagous beetle larvae, the external features much resemble Braconinae . Macrocentrinae , Zelinae and Calyptinae are either directly in relation or their ancient forms originated from them. The other subfamilies seem to be more distantly allied with Helconinae, and are more the relatives of each other. On the basis of ethology, body organization and ecology (see above) the following subfamilies are considered to be of close relatives: Adeliinae-Microgasterinae-Cheloninae (larva has caudal vescicle, 2nd cubital cell smaller than the first one, parasites of caterpillars); Alysiinae-Opiinae-Da cnusinae (parasitize Diptera, between the mandibles and the clypeus a split is present, mandibles bending outvard, stigma and 2nd cubital cell generally narrow, ovipositor short, size: 2-5 mm); Blacinae (1st abdominal segment sonewhat petiolate, head cubic, r^ and T2 conjoin in a right angle, relative of Calyptinae) , Triaspiinae (abdominal segments fused, notaulus present, number of cubital cells two, close ally of Calyptinae ), Macrocentrinae-Zelinae (most probably they are in direct relationship with an ancient Hel coninae) , Euphorinae -Ne oneu rinae (abdomen petiolate, they are mostly parasites of adults) , Cosmophorinae-AgathiinaeIchneutinae (the last five subfamilies represent five different, individual developmental trends, among which Euphorinae and Agathiinae are considered to be acmic) . The relationships are tabulated in Fig. 1 showing the subfamilies and tribes (the broken line separates the individual evolutionary trends, the full lines, punctuations, and the size of demarcation with broken lines demonstrate the phylogenetical relations) . PAPP, J.: A gyilkosfürkészek (Braconidae) rendszerezéséről (Hymenoptera) A gyilkosfürkészeknek ma (kerekítve 13 000 faját ismerjük. Ha a brakonidológiai kutatás jelenlegi ütemét tekintjük alapnak, akkor előreláthatóan az évezredfordulóra érjük el azt az állapotot, amikor elmondhatjuk, hogy lényegében megismertük a Föld gyilkosfürkész fajait. Napjaink legértékesebb két brakonidológiai müvét, a világ brakonida irodalmát és brakonida világkatalógusát SHENEFELT (1965, 1969,' 1970a-b, 1972, 1973) állította és állítja össze. Mihelyt a katalógus teljes lesz, várható a brakonidológia további felvirágzása. A gyilkosfürkészek klasszikus rendszerét WESMAEL (1835-1838), FÖRSTER (1862), MARSHALL (1885, 1888-1896), ASHMEAD (1900) dolgozta ki. SZÉPLIGETI (1904) volt az utolsó, aki valamennyi földrész gyilkosfürkészeivel foglalkozott, ő a brakonidológia utolsó polihisztora.
