S. Mahunka szerk.: Folia Entomologica Hungarica 55. (Budapest, 1994)

Localities - 1/1: 1 Ç (paratype, No. 7615): Budapest, Kerepesi temető, 6 VEI 1916, leg. L. Bíró. 1 d (paratype in Eberswalde): Fülöpháza, 5 IX 1978, leg. L. Zombori. 1 d (paratype, No. 7616): Szigetszentmiklós, ex larva Coleophora saponariella Heeger 25 VII 1959 (emerging time of the braconid) (food-plant of host: Saponaria sp.), leg. et educ. J. Szőcs. 1 d (paratype, No. 7617): Sződ, VI 1920, leg. L. Bíró. - VIII-IX. Orgilus similis Szépligeti, 1896 (= O. ruficornis Szépligeti, 1896) - In my paper (Papp 1983: 315, 318) I placed in synonymy O. ruficornis with O. similis sen. syn. on the basis of the examination of their type-series deposited in the Hungarian Natural History Museum (O. ruficornis: lectotype Ç and 1 Ç + 1 d paralectotypes; O. similis: lectotype d and 2 dd paralectotypes). The synonymization was not indicated by Taeger and, indeed, he considers the two taxa as representing two different valid species (Taeger 1989: 3031, 179-181, 190-191). Contrarily to Taeger'

s comprehension my standpoint is persistent and the two names are considered as referring to the same species. My standpoint seems to be supported by Szépligeti'

s (1908: 412) taxonomic indication that later he ranged his ruficornis as a variety ("var. 2.") under his species O. similis, and, furthermore, the type-series of the two taxa were collected in the same locality and same day by Szépligeti himself (Budapest, Sashegy, 18 June 1895). I have to remark that in the synonymization I followed Szépligeti'

s notion with the adjustment that the reversed synonymization would be more logical: ruficornis was described on the basis of both the female and male sexes, similis only on the basis of the male sex. The distinctive features given in his key by Taeger (1989: 30-31) are minute and I consider them rather infraspecific variations of the same species. Taking into consideration Taeger's (I.e.) and Tobias's (1986: 271) distributional data the species was reported from several countries in Europe eastwards as far as the Caucasus Mts. In Hungary a frequent species. Localities -VI: 2 dd : Balatonszéplak, Töreki-láp. 2 Ç Ç + 4 dd : Budapest, Kistétény. 1 d : Budapest, Rákos. 1 d : Etyek. 1 d : Gyula, Szanazug. 1 d : Gyula, Veszélycsárda. 1 d : Túrkeve. - D71: 1 d : Budapest. 1 Ç (lectotype of O. ruficornis, No. 611): Budapest, Budafok, 11 VII 1895, leg. Szépligeti. 2 dd : Budapest, Gellérthegy. 2 dd : Budapest, Nagysváb-hegy. 1 fj? + 2 dd (1 Ç + 1 d paralectotypes of O. ruficornis, Nos 612-613; 1 d : O. similis): Budapest, Sashegy, 18 VI 1895, leg. Szépligeti. 3 dd (lectotype d + 2 d paralectotypes of O. similis, Nos 614-616)*: Budapest, Sashegy, 18 VI 1895, leg. Szépligeti.. 1 Ç : Csákvár, Hosszú-hegy. 1 d : Csákvár, park. 1 Ç : Herend, Szolimán. - II/2: 1 Ç : Máriabesnyő. 3 dd : Vácduka, Csörög-hegy. - III/l (Slovakia): 1 Ç : Holies (= Holic). - HI/4 (Transylvania): 1 Ç : Tasnád (= Tasnad). - III/5 (Transylvania): 1 d : Nagyenyed (= Aiud). - VI/1: 1 d : Pécs, Misina. - VI-IX, frequent on the wing in June and September. Orgilus sticticus Taeger, 1989 - The holotype of this species was described from Hungary (Budaörs), listed localities, besides our country, are from Germany, Austria, Bohemia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Romania (Transylvania), Bulgaria. The species is deceptively similar to O. brevicaudis Taeger. * The third paralectotype of this taxon with the same collecting data under the number No. 617 proved to represent the species O. oehlkei Taeger, 1989, see also there.