Boros István (szerk.): A Magyar Természettudományi Múzeum évkönyve 52. (Budapest 1960)

Papp, J.: A revision of the tribe Braconini Ashm. from the Carpathian Basin (Hymenoptera, Braconidae)

ANNALES HISTORICO-NATURALES MUSEI NATIONALIS HUNGARICI Tomus 52. PARS ZOOLOGICA 1960. A Revision of the Tribe Braconini Ashm. from the Carpathian Basin (Hymenoptera, Braconidae) By J. PAPP, Veszprém The first paper on the Braconini was published at the beginning of the last century (IN e e s 1831). In the second half of it and at the beginning of the present one, however, three authors revised or catalogized this tribe (Förster 1862, Marshall 1888—1897, S z é p 1 i g e t i 1904). The last one to study the Palearctical Braconini species was F a h r inge r. He compiled identification keys, gave detailed descriptions of every species, their distribution and furnished ethological data. On the other hand. Mues e beck (1951) summarized the species of the IMearcticum in a catalogue. In Hungary, Szépligeti (1896) was the first to publish contributions ; later M o c s á r y (1897) enumerated 21 species without Bracon F. in the Fauna Regni Hungáriáé. This catalogue was completed by Szépligeti's further papers (1897, 1899), and by the studies of Győrfi (1941, 1943—44, 1953), L. Móczár (1938, 1941), and S tar y (1956. 1957). Each of them increased our knowledge giving new data on localities, hosts and ethology. In the last four decades, there were several investigators working on Braconidae, inch Braconini. W

. Hellén (Helsinki) recorded the species collected in Finnland and added his critical remarks (1927, 1957). N. A. Tel eng a (Kiev) published identification keys and detailed characterizations of the species found in the Soviet Union (1936) : later he grouped the species from the point of view of zoogeography (1952). Recently Tobias studies taxonomically and phylogenetically (1957) the Braconinae species of the Soviet LTnion. Finally, Stary deals in Czechoslovakia with this Hymenopteran group (1956, 1957, 1958). — I express my thanks to all who favoured me with their opinion on taxonomically dubious species. My study is based on the Braconini-collcction of the Zoological Department of the Hungarian National Museum, but the Hungarian and foreign contributions and revisions, mentioned previously, were also taken into consideration. Summarizing all these, I prepared the identification keys for the genera and species, and give their distribution in the Palearcticum and within the Carpathian Basin. Under the heading "Critical remarks to some species" I put forth some observations of my own concerning the taxonomical position of certain species. It is here that I must mention that though S z é p 1 i g e t i (1901) and Fahring er (1928) set up identification keys, a new one seems to be necessary. The authors mentioned based their keysystem mostly on colour, but considering the available material it is quite clear that colour is greatly variable even within a single species. Therefore I tried to prepare my keys on the ground of sculptural markings. — I did not take into account the genus Bracon, for it has an exceedingly high number of species whose taxonomical position needs further and thorough investigations. Tribus Rraconini Ashmead A round pit between clypeus and mandibles. Margin never in occipital region. 2. cubital cell quadrangular, longer than wide. Submedial vein interstitial. Key to genera 1 (4) Radius short : radial vein reaches edge of wing approximately in middle between stigma and end of wing. Sculpture of tergites generally lined or granulated. Ground-colour of body reddish-yellow or yellowish-red. Always three black spots on mesonotum.