Kaszab Zoltán (szerk.): A Magyar Természettudományi Múzeum évkönyve 68. (Budapest 1976)

Huddleston, T.: A revision of Elasmosoma Ruthe (Hymenoptera, Braconidae) with two new species from Mongolia

Figs. 1-9. — Figs. 1-2: Radial cell of forewing: 1 -- Neoneurus, 2 = Elasmosoma, — Fig. 3. Elasmosoma berolinense RUTHE 9 : apex of gaster, lateral. — Figs. 4-8. Hypopygium in ventral view: 4 = E. Undue sp. n., 5 — E. pergandei ASHM., 6 — E. luxemburgense WASMANN, 7 = E. berolinense RUTHE, 8 = E. vigilans COCK. — Fig. 9. E. platamonense sp. n. 9 : hind tibial spurs and basal segment of tarsus. 8 Hypopygium (fig. 4) narrow, not projecting beyond the sides of the gaster and with only a shallow central euiargination of the apex. Gaster completely black. Mongolia lindae sp. n. - Hypopygium (fig. 5) broad, projecting beyond the sides of the gaster and with a moderately deep, broad emargination of the apex. Gaster most usually with tergite 2 and at least the base of tergite 3 yellow. N. America. Mongolia pergandei ASHMEAD Elasmosoma bakeri ASHMEAD Elasmosoma bakeri ASHMEAD, 1895: 282. Holotype çf USA; Colorado, Fort Collins, C. F. BAKER (USNM 23983) (examined). MUESEBECK (1922: 6) supposed this species to be the male of E. vigilans COCKERELL but declined to synonymise them because he had been able to examine so little material. Elasmosoma berolinense HITHE Elasmosoma berolinense RUTHE, 1858: 7. 10 syntypes 5 çf and 5 9 (?) Germany: Berlin, J. F. RUTHE; one çf syntype BMNH (examined). RUTHE stated that his syntypic series consisted of five males and five females. His description and figure best fit the male — he makes no mention of 13-segmented antennae for instance, but both describes and illustrates the longer 14-segmented antenna characteristic of the male. It seems likely that having a series of 10 males RUTHE correctly identified the sex of those in which the genitalia were extruded, and assumed to be female those males whose genitalia were hidden (1858: 8). I have been able to locate only one specimen of this series — a male in the collection of BMNH labelled in RUTHE'S handwriting, "Elasmosoma berolinensis (sic) m. n. gen. n. sp.". This specimen has been labelled in the BMNH as the holotype of berolinense and has been catalogued as such by SHENEEELT (1969: 138) who mistakenly listed it as female. I have based my concept of the species upon that male and males and females associated with it, but in the hope that