Szekessy Vilmos (szerk.): A Magyar Természettudományi Múzeum évkönyve 57. (Budapest 1965)

Móczár, L.: Remarks of some types of Drynini and Gonatopodini (Hymenoptera)

(=„im Musée National Hongrois, in Budapest"). The specimen in Coll. Hung. Mos. therefore can be regarded as the holotype, with the following data: „Kwala—Lumpur", „Malaccá, BÍRÓ", „6" and in BIRÓ'S writing (red label) „Platygonatopus maurus K. typus". Between KIEFFER'S diagnosis and the above mentioned specimen, the following differences are to be found. According to KIEFFER (1906 p. 336): „Vordere Trochanteren . . . gelblichweiss", true only to a small degree. (1914 p. 94): „Scheitel nicht ausgehöhlt, flach . . .", „mit durchlaufenden Längsleiste'", upper face really situated distinctly beneath level of eyes and its surface slightly concave, with only a (race of a longitudinal keel. „Maxillarpalpus mit drei deutlichen Gliedern hinter der Biegung" not correct; there are 4 segments after angle. Also maxillary palpi with 6 segments (Fig. 24), (the section before the angle can be regarded as two segments, altough the border of the basal segment is not as distinct as on the allied species). Labial palpi with 3 segments (Fig. 25). KIEFFER writes of antennae: „4.— 10. Glied gleichdick ; 1. kaum länger als das 2. ", Thickness of antennái segments identical only from segment 5, true proportions between segments 1—10 = 6 : 5 : 12 : 10 : 8 : 7:5:5:5:6. Segment 2 not twice but more than three times as long as its breadth. „Thorax . . . glänzend, glatt oder sehr fein chagriniert", only last character correct, Hinterer Knoten des Thorax . . . hinten . . . ungestreift" on holotype slightly but distinctly transversely striated (magnified x 40). Addition to the description: mandibles and lower margins of eyes connected by the subocular suture. Upper face smooth, brilliant, slightly hairy on lower part, Ocelli in an acute angle, POL : OOL = 1.5 : 6. Pronotum : mesonotum : scutellum : metanotum+propodeum = 12:4:3:24. Breadth of propodeum — 12. Length and breadth of fore trochanter = 11 : 4. One quarter of fore femora proximally conspicuously thickened and distally gradually narrowed, its length; maximal breadth — 25 : 10. Hind femora much thinner, its lengt : breadth = 35 : 6. Antennae almost reaching end of propodeum, as long as about middle tarsi together with tarsal segments. Sides of fore tibiae almost parallel (Fig. 22). Hind tibiae as long as fore and middle ones together. Fore metatarsus (Fig. 23) : segment 2—5 : enlarged claw = 10 : 2 : 3 : 11 : 16 : 15. Segment 5 of fore tarsi rather strongly thickened proximally. Enlarged claw without lamellae, only a preapical stumpy tooth far from top (Fig. 26). On the basis of the maxillary and labial palpi (with 6 resp, 3 segments), 1 relegate it to the genus Chalcogonatopus. Haplogonatopus P E RKI N S Haplogonatopus PERKINS, 1905, Rep. exp. Stat. Hawaii. Ent., 1, p. 39; 1907, PERKINS, 1. c. 2, Bull. 4, p. 9 Haplogonatopus: 1907, KIEFFER, Gen. Insect,, 54, p. 16 Trigonatopus KIEFFER, 1913, Boll. Laborat. Zool. Portici, 7, p. H25 syn. nov. Haplogonatopus : 1914, KIEFFER, Das Tierreich, 41, p. 88 Trigonatopus: 1914, KIEFFER, Das Tierreich, 41, p. 72 Hapiogonatopus: 1918, FENTON, Ohio Journ. Sei. Columbus, 18, p. 264 Trigonatopus: 1928, BERLAND, Faune de France, 19, p. 145 Haplogonatopus: 1939, RICHARDS, Trans. R. ent. Soc. Lond., 89, p. 195 KIEFFER (1913 p. 325) proposed the genus 7 rigonatopus only for Gonatopus bifariusbut his description, differed from G. bifarius in essential characters as expounded in details when treating the species below (e. g. : pronotal impression, preapical