J. HYM. RES. Vol. 17(2), 2008, pp. 138–156

Taxonomic Status and Location of Type Specimens for Species of Coelinidea Viereck and Sarops Nixon (: : ) Described by Garland T. Riegel

ROBERT R. KULA Systematic Entomology Laboratory, PSI, Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, c/o National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, P.O. Box 37012, MRC-168, Washington, DC 20013-7012; email: [email protected] ______

Abstract.—The following species of Coelinidea Viereck and Sarops Nixon described by Garland T. Riegel are transferred to other genera resulting in 28 new combinations: Chorebus pallidus (Riegel), n. comb., Coelinius acicula (Riegel), n. comb., Coelinius acontia (Riegel), n. comb., Coelinius alima, (Riegel), n. comb., Coelinius alrutzae (Riegel), n. comb., Coelinius arizona (Riegel), n. comb., Coelinius arnella (Riegel), n. comb., Coelinius bakeri (Riegel), n. comb., Coelinius baldufi (Riegel), n. comb., Coelinius calcara (Riegel), n. comb., Coelinius columbia (Riegel), n. comb., Coelinius crota (Riegel), n. comb., Coelinius dubius (Riegel), n. comb., Coelinius ellenaae (Riegel), n. comb., Coelinius frisoni (Riegel), n. comb., Coelinius garthi (Riegel), n. comb., Coelinius hayesi (Riegel), n. comb., Coelinius jeanae (Riegel), n. comb., Coelinius marki (Riegel), n. comb., Coelinius marylandicus (Riegel), n. comb., Coelinius minnesota (Riegel), n. comb., Coelinius montana (Riegel), n. comb., Coelinius muesebecki (Riegel), n. comb., Coelinius nellae (Riegel), n. comb., Coelinius niobrara (Riegel), n. comb., Coelinius robinae (Riegel), n. comb., Coelinius ruthae (Riegel), n. comb., and Coelinius sommermanae (Riegel), n. comb. Coelinius ohioensis (Riegel, 1982), and Coelinius wheeleri (Riegel, 1982) are new synonys, and the former is designated the senior synonym because the holotype is a female. The holotypes of Coelinidea antha Riegel, Coelinidea arca Riegel, Coelinidea colora Riegel, and Coelinidea coma Riegel, reportedly deposited at the Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, apparently are lost. Therefore, all four names are considered nomina dubia since each species is known only from the holotype, and information Riegel provided in the original descriptions and key to North American species of Coelinidea is not adequate to apply the names unequivocally. The locations of primary and, where applicable, secondary types are indicated for all other species of Coelinidea and Sarops described by Riegel. Coelinius alima, C. marki, C. ohioensis, and C. robinae are first recorded from Quebec, Wyoming, Wisconsin, and Kansas and Missouri, respectively. ______

Alysiinae is a speciose subfamily of ly, including comprehensive taxonomic koinobiont endoparastioids of cyclorrha- revisions (Griffiths 1964, 1966a, 1966b, phous Diptera (Wharton 1997). The sub- 1967, 1968a, 1968b, Nixon 1937, 1943, family consists of Alysiini and Dacnusini 1944, 1945, 1946, 1948, 1949, 1954). Few with ,1,245 and ,817 described species, taxonomic treatments have been published respectively, as of mid-November 2007 for for Nearctic dacnusines; notable works Alysiini and mid-June 2008 for Dacnusini include Rohwer (1914), Riegel (1950, (Yu et al. 2005). Most species of Alysiini 1982), Wharton (1994), and Kula and with known hosts are parasitoids of sa- Zolnerowich (2008). prophagous flies; as far as is known, all Riegel (1982) revised the Nearctic species dacnusines are parasitoids of plant-feeding of Chaenusa Haliday sensu stricto, Chorebidea flies (Wharton 1997). The Palearctic species Viereck, Chorebidella Riegel, Coelinidea Vier- of Dacnusini have been studied extensive- eck, and Sarops Nixon. The revision, based VOLUME 17, NUMBER 2, 2008 139 largely on Riegel’s doctoral dissertation I agree with Wharton (1994) and consid- from 1947, included descriptions of 44 new er Coelinius s.l. monophyletic based on the species, over half of the ,86 described apomorphies mentioned above. Kula Nearctic species of Dacnusini (Yu et al. (2006) recovered Coelinius sensu Wharton 2005). Several taxonomic changes occurred (1994) as monophyletic in one of two in the 35 years between completion and preliminary cladistic analyses for Dacnu- publication of the revision. Griffiths (1964) sini based on morphology, but bootstrap provided hypotheses on character polarity support was low. Clades corresponding to for dacnusines and for the most part only Coelinius s.s., Lepton,andPolemochartus recognized groups he considered mono- were also recovered, with the included phyletic. As a result Griffiths (1964) syn- species of Coelinius s.s. and Sarops forming onymized Chorebidea Viereck, 1913 and a clade, but only Polemochartus had mod- Chorebidella Riegel, 1950 with Chaenusa erate bootstrap support. Therefore, I agree Haliday, 1839 (i.e., Chaenusa sensu lato). with Wharton and Austin (1991) and Further, Griffiths (1964) treated Coelinidea Wharton (1994) that Coelinius s.l. should Viereck, 1913 and Polemochartus Schulz, not be split into genera or divided into 1911 as subgenera of Coelinius Nees, 1819 subgenera at this point in time since only (i.e., Coelinius s.l.) and synonymized Sarops Polemochartus is clearly monophyletic. Nixon, 1942 with Synelix Fo¨rster, 1862. The species of Sarops described in Riegel Riegel (1982), in reference to Griffiths (1982) were transferred to Coelinius (1964), stated that he was ‘‘not convinced through the synonymy of Coelinius and that certain genera should have been Sarops in Wharton (1994), but the taxonom- placed in synonymy’’ and recognized ic placement of each species has not been Chorebidea, Coelinidea, and Sarops as valid verified through the examination of holo- genera and described four, 32, and four types. The species of Coelinidea described in new species in each , respectively. Riegel (1982) have not been transferred to Wharton and Austin (1991) agreed with the Coelinius s.l., and holotypes should be synonymies in Griffiths (1964) and deter- examined for these species to verify place- mined that Lepton Zetterstedt, 1838 has ment before they are transferred. Holo- priority over Coelinidea but considered the types of several species described in Riegel division of Coelinius into subgenera ‘‘pre- (1982) are currently housed in repositories mature’’ because of undescribed ‘‘interme- other than those indicated in the original diate forms’’ from the Oriental Region. descriptions, and four holotypes apparent- However, Wharton and Austin (1991) did ly are lost. Therefore, the primary objec- not transfer any of the species described in tives of this study are to (1) verify and Riegel (1982) to Chaenusa s.l.orCoelinius s.l. update the taxonomic placement of species Wharton (1994) considered Coelinius s.l. of Coelinidea and Sarops described in Riegel monophyletic based on three putative (1982) and (2) document the location and apomorphies, the presence of an additional condition of holotypes for these species tooth between tooth one and two, a since most are known only from the laterally compressed gaster, and the exclu- holotype. Additionally, repositories are sive use of chloropids as hosts, and on this indicated for all paratypes of the afore- basis synonymized Sarops with Coelinius mentioned species, and new distribution rather than following the synonymy of records are provided for four species of Sarops and Synelix in Griffiths (1964). Kula Coelinius s.l. and Zolnerowich (2008) transferred the species of Chorebidea described in Riegel MATERIALS AND METHODS (1982) to Chaenusa s.l. and returned Chor- Specimens were examined using a Leica ebidella bergi Riegel to Chaenusa s.l. Wild M10 stereomicroscope with 253 140 JOURNAL OF HYMENOPTERA RESEARCH oculars. Images of holotypes were cap- Comparative Zoology, Harvard Universi- tured using a Microptics digital camera ty, Cambridge, Massachusetts (MCZ); system, and image clarity was enhanced Smithsonian Institution National Museum using Adobe Photoshop 9.0. A color image of Natural History, Washington, DC of each holotype was deposited in Morph- (USNM); Snow Entomological Museum, bank (collection number 369162), and if a University of Kansas, Lawrence (SEMC); holotype is damaged, its condition is University of Minnesota Collection, described. Morphological terminology fol- Saint Paul (UMSP); and University of lows Sharkey and Wharton (1997) except as Wyoming Insect Museum, Laramie noted below. All species in this study have (ESUW). The holotypes of Coelinidea antha three major mandibular teeth; the recogni- Riegel, Coelinidea arca Riegel, Coelinidea tion and numbering of teeth follows Whar- colora Riegel, and Coelinidea coma Riegel, ton (2002) and Wharton (1977), respectively. reportedly deposited at the Academy of Tooth one is the dorsal tooth, tooth two is Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, Pennsylva- the middle tooth, and tooth three is the nia (ANSP), apparently are lost and could ventral tooth. In addition to the three major not be examined. All other holotypes of teeth, a smaller tooth is present between species Riegel (1982) described in Coelinidea tooth two and three in Chorebus pallidus and Sarops were examined, as were all (Riegel), new combination and is referred to paratypes except specimens of Coelinius as tooth four. Another smaller tooth is acontia (Riegel), new combination at present between tooth one and two in all ESUW, Coelinius marylandicus (Riegel), species and is referred to as tooth five. Thus, new combination at MCZ, and Coelinius the numbering of mandibular teeth in this niobrara (Riegel), new combination at article differs from Kula and Zolnerowich ESUW. (2008) in that the latter article referred to a In addition to the repositories listed smaller additional tooth as tooth four above, new distribution records and syno- regardless of its position. The apical rim of nyms were discovered through examina- the clypeus, metapleural rosette, and tuft of tion of specimens borrowed from the curved setae on the metacoxa are as in Kula American Entomological Institute, Gaines- and Zolnerowich (2008). ville, Florida (AEIC) and the Bohart Muse- The material examined sections are um of Entomology, University of Califor- formatted as in Kula and Zolnerowich nia, Davis (UCDC). Entries with an asterisk (2008). Exact label data are reported for are new distribution records. holotypes; Riegel (1982) provided more The specific epithets of C. acontia, Coeli- extensive type locality information. The nius alima (Riegel), new combination, Coe- following museum codens (Evenhuis and linius arnella (Riegel), new combination, Samuelson 2007) are used to indicate Coelinius calcara (Riegel), new combination repositories where type specimens of spe- and Coelinius crota (Riegel), new combina- cies Riegel (1982) described in Coelinidea tion, show evidence of being derived from and Sarops are housed currently: Albert J. Latin or Greek words. However, they Cook Research Collection, Mi- cannot be traced in a standard dictionary chigan State University, East Lansing and do not follow established rules of Latin (MSUC); California Academy of Sciences, grammar. Therefore, in accordance with San Francisco (CAS); Canadian National ICZN Article 31.2.2, ‘‘the original spelling Collection of , Ottawa (CNC); Cor- is…retained [for the aforementioned spe- nell University Insect Collection, Ithaca, cific epithets], with gender ending un- New York (CUIC); Illinois Natural History changed’’ since ‘‘the evidence of usage is Survey, Champaign (INHS); Museum of not decisive’’ (ICZN 1999). VOLUME 17, NUMBER 2, 2008 141

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION smooth. The apical rim is present in all species of Chorebus, and t2 is smooth in Chorebus pallidus (Riegel), new combination most species. The apical rim is present in (Fig. 1) species of Coelinius s.l. that fit Coelinius s.s. (Griffiths 1964, Riegel 1982) and Sarops Coelinidea pallida Riegel 1982: 80, 92 [USNM, sensu Riegel (1982) and Maetoˆ (1983), but examined]. t2 is striate. Therefore, C. pallidus is Type material.—Holotype male: Top label transferred to Chorebus because it fits the (white; partially handwritten, partially type- genus aside from the additional tooth written) 5 ‘‘Washgtn [;] 30-6 DC’’. Second label between tooth one and two and otherwise (white; typewritten) 5 ‘‘Type’’. Third label fits the affinis-group. (white; handwritten) 5 ‘‘Chaenon [;] pallidus [;] R Ashm’’. Fourth label (brown; partially Coelinius acicula (Riegel), new combination handwritten, partially typewritten) 5 ‘‘HOLO- (Fig. 2) TYPE „ [;] Coelinidea [;] pallida [;] Riegel’’ Coelinidea acicula Riegel 1982: 82, 109 [SEMC, (USNM). Paratypes: 1 [sex unknown] USA, examined]. WASHINGTON, DC, 30.vi, Collection Ashmead (USNM). Type material.—Holotype male: Top label Discussion.—Riegel (1982) indicated that (white; typewritten) 5 ‘‘Northgate Colo [;] 8- the holotype and paratype of C. pallidus 20-31 [;] L. D. Anderson’’. Bottom label (brown; were deposited at USNM. The holotype partially handwritten, partially typewritten) 5 bears a glass vial with a cork cap between ‘‘HOLOTYPE „ [;] Coelinidea [;] acicula [;] the third and fourth labels. The vial Riegel’’ (SEMC). contains the posterior portion of the meta- Discussion.—Coelinius acicula is known soma. The antennae are broken, as is the only from the holotype, which Riegel tarsus of one prothroacic leg. One meso- (1982) indicated was deposited at the thoracic leg is missing except for the coxa ‘‘University of Kansas…(KU).’’ The holo- and trochanter; the other is broken at the type bears a glass vial with a cork cap coxa. One metathoracic leg is broken at the between the top and bottom labels. The coxa. Either a meso- or metathoracic leg vial contains the posterior portion of the that has broken off of the specimen at the metasoma. One antenna is broken. trochanter is glued to the point. The mandible of C. pallidus has five teeth, Coelinius acontia (Riegel), new combination with tooth four between tooth two and (Fig. 3) three and tooth five between tooth one and Coelinidea acontia Riegel 1982: 81, 102 [INHS, two. Coelinius s.l. is partially defined by the examined]. presence of a small tooth between tooth one and two; Chorebus is partially defined Type material.—Holotype female: Top label by the presence of a small tooth between (white; typewritten) 5 ‘‘INHS [;] Insect Collec- tooth two and three. Thus, the mandible is tion [;] 213,095’’. Second label (white; handwrit- 5 intermediate between Chorebus and Coeli- ten) ‘‘Albany Co., Wyo’’ [;] July 11, 1944 [;] R. E. Pfadt’’. Third label (brown; partially hand- nius s.l. However, C. pallidus has a complete written, partially typewritten) 5 ‘‘HOLOTYPE R metapleural rosette, a narrow, smooth [;] Coelinidea [;] acontia [;] Riegel’’ (INHS). sternaulus, and a tuft of curved setae on Paratypes: 1 R same data as holotype (ESUW); the metacoxa, features Griffiths (1968b) USA, WYOMING: 1 „ Goshen Co., 21.vii.1944, R. used to define the Chorebus affinis-group E. Pfadt, INHS Insect Collection 213,096 (INHS); but not found among species of Coelinius 1 „ Platte Co., 13.vii.1944, R. E. Pfadt (ESUW). s.l. Additionally, the apical rim of the Discussion.—Riegel (1982) indicated that clypeus is present in C. pallidus, and t2 is the holotype and all paratypes of C. acontia 142 JOURNAL OF HYMENOPTERA RESEARCH

Figs 1–6. Holotypes of species of Coelinidea and Sarops described in Riegel (1982) with current taxonomic affiliations. 1, Chorebus pallidus.2,Coelinius acicula.3,Coelinius acontia.4,Coelinius alberta.5,Coelinius alima. 6, Coelinius alrutzae. VOLUME 17, NUMBER 2, 2008 143 were deposited at the ‘‘University of tion [;] 201,193’’. Second label (white; typewrit- Wyoming…(WYO).’’ Scott Shaw (in litt.) ten) 5 ‘‘Fox Lake, Ill.’’ [;] June 3, 1943 [;] confirmed that ESUW has two paratypes, Ross&Sanderson’’. Third label (brown; partially but INHS currently has the holotype and a handwritten, partially typewritten) 5 ‘‘HOLO- TYPE R [;] Coelinidea [;] alima [;] Riegel’’ paratype. The holotype bears a glass vial (INHS). Paratypes: 1 „ same data as holotype with a cork cap below the third label. The except INHS Insect Collection 201,194 (INHS). vial contains the posterior portion of the metasoma. The antennae are broken, as is Other material examined.—*CANADA: QUE- the tarsus of one pro- and mesothoracic BEC: 1 R 2 „ Te´miscamingue, Laniel, 8.vii.1944, leg. One metatarsus is broken; the other is A. R. Brooks (CNC). missing. Discussion.—Riegel (1982) indicated that the holotype and paratype of C. alima were Coelinius alberta (Riegel) deposited at INHS. A glass vial with a cork (Fig. 4) cap was associated with the holotype at some point in time. The cap is still associ- Sarops alberta Riegel 1982: 56, 57 [CNC, exam- ated, but apparently the vial has been lost. ined]. The specimens from CNC expand the range Coelinius alberta: Wharton 1994: 631 [synonymy of Coelinius and Sarops]. of this species to southeastern Quebec. Coelinius alrutzae (Riegel), new combination Type material.—Holotype female: Top label (white; partially handwritten, partially type- (Fig. 6) written) 5 ‘‘Banff, Alta. [;] 16 vi.1922 [;] C. B. Coelinidea alrutzae Riegel 1982: 83, 119 [INHS, D. Garrett’’. Second label (yellow; handwritten) examined]. 5 ‘‘wing [;] on slide’’. Third label (brown; partially handwritten, partially typewritten) 5 Type material.—Holotype male: Top label ‘‘HOLOTYPE R [;] Sarops [;] alberta [;] Riegel’’. (white; typewritten) 5 ‘‘INHS [;] Insect Collec- Fourth label (red; partially handwritten, partial- tion [;] 201,195’’. Second label (white; partially ly typewritten) 5 ‘‘HOLOTYPE [;] 21202 [;] handwritten, partially typewritten) 5 ‘‘Algon- CNC No.’’ (CNC). quin, Ill. [;] June 15 ’08 [;] Nason 192’’. Third Discussion.—Coelinius alberta is known label (brown; partially handwritten, partially only from the holotype, which Riegel typewritten) 5 ‘‘HOLOTYPE „ [;] Coelinidea [;] (1982) indicated was deposited at the alrutzae [;] Riegel’’ (INHS). ‘‘Canadian Department of Agriculture, G. Discussion.—Coelinius alrutzae is known S. Walley (GSW).’’ The holotype bears a only from the holotype, which Riegel (1982) glass vial with a cork cap between the top indicated was deposited at the ‘‘University and second labels. The vial contains some of Illinois…(UILL).’’ The University of debris but otherwise appears to be empty. Illinois insect collection was transferred to The head has been broken off of the INHS in 1979 (P. Tinerella in litt.), and thus, specimen and is glued to the pin. The Riegel apparently deposited the holotype in antennae are broken, as are the tarsi except INHS. The holotype bears a glass vial with a for one mesotarsus. One forewing is cork cap below the third label. The vial mounted on a slide. contains the posterior portion of the meta- soma. One antenna is broken. One pro- Coelinius alima (Riegel), new combination throacic leg is missing except for the coxa; (Fig. 5) the other has a broken tarsus.

Coelinidea alima Riegel 1982: 85, 143 [INHS, Coelinius arizona (Riegel), new combination examined]. (Fig. 7) Type material.—Holotype female: Top label Coelinidea arizona Riegel 1982: 81, 107 [USNM, (white; typewritten) 5 ‘‘INHS [;] Insect Collec- examined]. 144 JOURNAL OF HYMENOPTERA RESEARCH

Type material.—Holotype male: Top label cap below the fifth label. The vial contains (white; partially handwritten, partially type- the posterior portion of the metasoma. The written) 5 ‘‘Huachuca Mts. [;] Ariz., 4-14 1938 antennae are broken, and the forewings are [;] R. H. Crandall’’. Second label (white; torn. handwritten) 5 ‘‘171’’. Third label (white; partially handwritten, partially typewritten) 5 Coelinius bakeri (Riegel), new combination ‘‘Coelinidea [;] sp. [;] det [;] Mues’’. Fourth label (Fig. 9) (brown; partially handwritten, partially type- written) 5 ‘‘HOLOTYPE „ [;] Coelinidea [;] Coelinidea bakeri Riegel 1982: 83, 123 [USNM, arizona [;] Riegel’’ (USNM). examined]. Discussion.—Coelinius arizona is known Type material.—Holotype male: Top label only from the holotype, which Riegel (white; partially handwritten, partially type- (1982) indicated was deposited at the written) 5 ‘‘Colo [;] 1563’’. Second label (white; ‘‘University of Arizona…(ARIZ).’’ The ho- typewritten) 5 ‘‘Collection [;] CFBaker’’. Third lotype was transferred to USNM in 1999 label (brown; partially handwritten, partially (D. Furth in litt.). The holotype bears a typewritten) 5 ‘‘HOLOTYPE „ [;] Coelinidea [;] glass vial with a cork cap below the third bakeri [;] Riegel’’ (USNM). label. The vial contains the posterior Other material examined.—USA, COLORADO: portion of the metasoma. The antennae 3 R Larimer Co., Estes Park, 5.viii.1947, L. D. are broken. One prothoracic leg is imbed- Beamer (SEMC). ded in glue; the other has a broken tarsus. Discussion.—Coelinius bakeri was previ- One mesothoracic leg has a broken tarsus; ously known only from the holotype, the other is missing except for the coxa, which Riegel (1982) indicated was depos- trochanter, and trochantellus, as is the case ited at USNM. The holotype bears a glass with one metathoracic leg. One forewing is vial with a cork cap between the second missing; the other wings are torn and and third labels. The vial contains the missing distally. posterior portion of the metasoma. The antennae are broken. Riegel (1982) indicat- Coelinius arnella (Riegel), new combination ed that the holotype was collected in Fort (Fig. 8) Collins, Larimer County, Colorado. Coelinidea arnella Riegel 1982: 82, 114 [INHS, Coelinius baldufi (Riegel), new combination examined]. (Fig. 10) Type material.—Holotype male: Top label Coelinidea baldufi Riegel 1982: 79, 86 [SEMC, (white; typewritten) 5 ‘‘INHS [;] Insect Collec- examined]. tion [;] 201,099’’. Second label (white; partially handwritten, partially typewritten) 5 ‘‘Mont. Type material.—Holotype male: Top label Exp. Sta. [;] Sidney, Mont. [;] June 14, 1913’’. (white; typewritten) 5 ‘‘Little Beaver Cr. [;] Third label (brown; partially handwritten, par- Colo 7 - 11 - 37 [;] C. L. Johnston’’. Second label tially typewritten) 5 ‘‘HOLOTYPE „ [;] Coeli- (white; typewritten) 5 ‘‘Wing on [;] Sl. No.’’. nidea [;] arnella [;] Riegel’’. Fourth label (white; Third label (brown; partially handwritten, par- handwritten) 5 ‘‘[MON]’’. Fifth label (white; tially typewritten) 5 ‘‘HOLOTYPE „ [;] Coeli- typewritten) 5 ‘‘INHS [;] TYPE [;] #2030’’ nidea [;] baldufi [;] Riegel’’ (SEMC). (INHS). Discussion.—Coelinius baldufi is known Discussion.—Coelinius arnella is known only from the holotype, which Riegel (1982) only from the holotype. Riegel (1982) indicated was deposited at ‘‘KU.’’ The indicated that the holotype was deposited holotype bears a glass vial with a cork cap at ‘‘Montana State College…(MONT),’’ but between the top and second labels. The vial INHS currently has the holotype. The contains the posterior portion of the meta- holotype bears a glass vial with a cork soma. One forewing is mounted on a slide. VOLUME 17, NUMBER 2, 2008 145

Figs 7–13. Holotypes of species of Coelinidea described in Riegel (1982) with current taxonomic affiliations. 7, Coelinius arizona.8,Coelinius arnella.9,Coelinius bakeri. 10, Coelinius baldufi. 11, Coelinius calcara. 12, Coelinius columbia. 13, Coelinius crota. 146 JOURNAL OF HYMENOPTERA RESEARCH

Coelinius calcara (Riegel), new combination with a cork cap between the top and (Fig. 11) second labels. The vial contains the poste- rior portion of the metasoma. One antenna Coelinidea calcara Riegel 1982: 81, 106 [CAS, is broken. examined]. Coelinius crota (Riegel), new combination Type material.—Holotype female: Top label (white; typewritten) 5 ‘‘Sparks Nev. [;] June (Fig. 13) 28 1927’’. Second label (white; typewritten) 5 Coelinidea crota Riegel 1982: 79, 90 [INHS, ‘‘EPVanDunzee [;] Collector’’. Third label examined]. (brown; partially handwritten, partially type- R written) 5 HOLOTYPE [;] Coelinidea [;] Type material.—Holotype male: Top label calcara [;] Riegel’’. Fourth label (white; partially (white; typewritten) 5 ‘‘INHS [;] Insect Collec- handwritten, partially typewritten) 5 ‘‘Califor- tion [;] 201,196’’. Second label (white; typewrit- nia Academy [;] of Sciences [;] Type 16687 [;] ten) 5 ‘‘Apple Riv. Can. S.P. [;] Ill., Aug. 23, „ No.’’ (CAS). Paratypes: 1 same data as 1939 [;] Ross & Riegel’’. Third label (brown; R holotype; USA, CALIFORNIA: 1 Inyo Co., partially handwritten, partially typewritten) 5 R Lone Pine, 10.vii.1929, R. L. Usinger; 1 San HOLOTYPE „ [;] Coelinidea [;] crota [;] Riegel’’ Diego Co., Pine Valley, 24.iv.1920, E. P. VanDu- (INHS). „ zee; 1 same data as previous except W. M. Discussion.—Coelinius crota is known Giffard; 1 „ same data as previous except E. P. VanDuzee, Coelinidea calcara Riegel, 16687 only from the holotype, which Riegel (CAS). (1982) indicated was deposited at INHS. Discussion.—Riegel (1982) indicated that The holotype bears a glass vial with a cork the holotype and all paratypes of C. calcara cap below the third label. The vial contains were deposited at the ‘‘California Acade- the posterior portion of the metasoma. my of Sciences…(CALAS).’’ The holotype Coelinius dreisbachi (Riegel) bears a glass vial with a cork cap between (Fig. 14) the second and third labels. The vial contains the posterior portion of the meta- Sarops dreisbachi Riegel 1982: 57, 60 [MSUC, soma. One antenna is broken. examined]. Coelinius dreisbachi: Wharton 1994: 631 [synony- Coelinius columbia (Riegel), new combination my of Coelinius and Sarops]. (Fig. 12) Type material.—Holotype male: Top label Coelinidea columbia Riegel 1982: 85, 144 [CUIC, (white; partially handwritten, partially type- examined]. written) 5 ‘‘Midland Co., Mich. [;] 5-21-42 [;] R. R. Dreisbach’’. Second label (yellow; hand- Type material.—Holotype female: Top label written) 5 ‘‘wing [;] on slide’’. Third label (white; typewritten) 5 ‘‘Columbia, Mo. [;] May (brown; partially handwritten, partially type- 26–June 8, ’06. [;] C.R. Crosby Coll.’’. Second written) 5 ‘‘HOLOTYPE „ [;] Sarops [;] dreis- label (brown; partially handwritten, partially bachi [;] Riegel’’ (MSUC). 5 R typewritten) ‘‘HOLOTYPE [;] Coelinidea [;] Discussion.—Coelinius dreisbachi is known columbia [;] Riegel’’. Third label (red; partially only from the holotype. Riegel (1982) handwritten, partially typewritten) 5 ‘‘HOLO- TYPE [;] Cornell U. [;] No. 6491’’ (CUIC). indicated that ‘‘R. R. Dreisbach (DREI)’’ Paratypes: USA, NEW YORK: 1 R Tompkins either loaned or donated the holotype but Co., McLean, 2.vii.-3.vii.1904, PARATYPE, Cor- did not specify where the holotype was nell U., No. 6491 (CUIC). deposited. The holotype is currently housed Discussion.—Riegel (1982) indicated that in MSUC, presumably donated after Dreis- the holotype and paratype of C. columbia bach’s death, and bears a glass vial with a were deposited at ‘‘Cornell Universi- cork cap between the top and second label. ty…(CN).’’ The holotype bears a glass vial The vial contains the posterior portion of the VOLUME 17, NUMBER 2, 2008 147

Figs 14–19. Holotypes of species of Coelinidea and Sarops described in Riegel (1982) with current taxonomic affiliations. 14, Coelinius dreisbachi. 15, Coelinius dubius. 16, Coelinius ellenaae. 17, Coelinius frisoni. 18, Coelinius garthi. 19, Coelinius hayesi. metasoma. One antenna is broken. One Type material.—Holotype male: Top label forewing is mounted on a slide, and a (white; typewritten) 5 ‘‘INHS [;] Insect Collection forewing and hind wing are torn. [;] 201,197’’. Second label (white; typewritten) 5 ‘‘3326’’. Third label (white; typewritten) 5 ‘‘Ash- Coelinius dubius (Riegel), new combination mead [;] Det. ’99’’. Fourth label (brown; partially handwritten, partially typewritten) 5 HOLO- (Fig. 15) TYPE „ [;] Coelinidea [;] dubia [;] Riegel’’ (INHS). Coelinidea dubia Riegel 1982: 84, 129 [INHS, Discussion.—Coelinius dubius is known examined]. only from the holotype, which Riegel 148 JOURNAL OF HYMENOPTERA RESEARCH

(1982) indicated was deposited at INHS. Type material.—Holotype male: Top label The holotype bears a glass vial with a cork (white; typewritten) 5 ‘‘INHS [;] Insect Collec- cap below the fourth label. The vial tion [;] 201,199’’. Second label (white; typewrit- contains the posterior portion of the meta- ten) 5 ‘‘New Milford, Ill [;] July 2, 1936 [;] Ross & soma. The antennae are broken. Parks’’. Third label (brown; partially handwrit- ten, partially typewritten) 5 ‘‘HOLOTYPE „ [;] Coelinidea [;] garthi [;] Riegel’’. Fourth label Coelinius ellenaae (Riegel), new combination (white; handwritten) ‘‘Freak [;] wing’’ (INHS). (Fig. 16) Discussion.—Coelinius garthi is known Coelinidea ellenaae Riegel 1982: 81, 105 [SEMC, only from the holotype, which Riegel examined]. (1982) indicated was deposited at INHS. The holotype bears a glass vial with a cork Type material.—Holotype male: Top label cap below the fourth label. The vial (white; typewritten) 5 ‘‘Little Beaver Cr.’’ [;] contains the posterior portion of the meta- Colo 7 - 11 - 37 [;] C. L. Johnston’’. Bottom label soma. The antennae are broken. (brown; partially handwritten, partially type- written) 5 ‘‘HOLOTYPE „ [;] Coelinidea [;] Coelinius hayesi (Riegel), new combination ellenaae [;] Riegel’’ (SEMC). (Fig. 19) Discussion.—Coelinius ellenaae is known only from the holotype, which Riegel Coelinidea hayesi Riegel 1982: 83, 121 [USNM, (1982) indicated was deposited at ‘‘KU.’’ examined]. The holotype bears a glass vial with a cork Type material.—Holotype male: Top label (white; cap between the top and bottom labels. The partially handwritten, partially typewritten) 5 vial contains the posterior portion of the ‘‘Colo [;] 1233’’. Second label (white; handwritten) metasoma. One antenna is broken. 5 ‘‘31’’. Third label (white; typewritten) 5 ‘‘Collection [;] Ashmead’’. Fourth label (white; Coelinius frisoni (Riegel), new combination handwritten) 5 ‘‘Coelinius [;] longulus [;] (Fig. 17) Ashm.’’. Fifth label (brown; partially handwritten, partially typewritten) 5 ‘‘HOLOTYPE „ [;] Coelinidea frisoni Riegel 1982: 83, 117 [INHS, Coelinidea [;] hayesi [;] Riegel’’ (USNM). examined]. Discussion.—Coelinius hayesi is known only from the holotype, which Riegel Type material.—Holotype female: Top label (white; typewritten) 5 ‘‘INHS [;] Insect Collec- (1982) indicated was deposited at USNM. tion [;] 201,198’’. Second label (white; typewrit- The holotype bears a glass vial with a cork ten) 5 ‘‘Empire, Colo. [;] July 23, 1938 [;] H.H. & cap between the fourth and fifth labels. The J.A. Ross’’. Third label (brown; partially hand- vial contains the posterior portion of the written, partially typewritten) 5 ‘‘HOLOTYPE metasoma. One antenna is broken at the R [;] Coelinidea [;] frisoni [;] Riegel’’ (INHS). pedicel; the flagellum of that antenna is Discussion.—Coelinius frisoni is known stuck to the other antenna. only from the holotype, which Riegel (1982) indicated was deposited at INHS. Coelinius jeanae (Riegel), new combination The holotype bears a glass vial with a cork (Fig. 20) cap below the third label. The vial contains Coelinidea jeanae Riegel 1982: 79, 87 [INHS, the posterior portion of the metasoma. One examined]. antenna is broken. Type material.—Holotype male: Top label Coelinius garthi (Riegel), new combination (white; typewritten) 5 ‘‘INHS [;] Insect Collec- (Fig. 18) tion [;] 201,200’’. Second label (white; partially handwritten, partially typewritten) 5 ‘‘Green Coelinidea garthi Riegel 1982: 84, 130 [INHS, Mt. Falls, [;] Colo. Jn. 21, 1938 [;] J.A. Ross’’. examined]. Third label (brown; partially handwritten, par- VOLUME 17, NUMBER 2, 2008 149

Figs 20–26. Holotypes of species of Coelinidea described in Riegel (1982) with current taxonomic affiliations. 20, Coelinius jeanae. 21, Coelinius marki. 22, Coelinius marylandicus. 23, Coelinius minnesota. 24, Coelinius montana. 25, Coelinius muesebecki. 26, Coelinius nellae. 150 JOURNAL OF HYMENOPTERA RESEARCH tially typewritten) 5 ‘‘HOLOTYPE „ [;] Coeli- mead’’. Third label (brown; partially handwrit- nidea [;] jeanae [;] Riegel’’ (INHS). Paratypes: 1 „ ten, partially typewritten) 5 ‘‘HOLOTYPE R [;] same data as holotype except 17.vii.1938, H. H. Coelinidea [;] marylandica [;] Riegel’’ (USNM). & J. A. Ross (INHS); 1 „ USA, COLORADO: Paratypes: 1 R same data as holotype; 1 R same Great Sand Dunes near Botger C.R., 23.vi.1944 data as holotype except Coelinius marylandicus (USNM). Ashm, Coelinidea n. sp. Mues.; USA, TENNES- Discussion.—Riegel (1982) indicated that SEE: 1 „ Middle Tennessee, Cedar Glade Area, the holotype and a paratype of C. jeanae 9.xi, Adelphia Meyer, sweep net; 1 R same data were deposited at INHS and that a paratype as previous except 524, Coelinidea n. sp. det. R was deposited at USNM. The holotype bears Mues. (USNM); USA, VIRGINIA: 1 Falls a glass vial with a cork cap below the third Church, 20.v, Nathan Banks (MCZ). label. The vial contains the posterior portion Discussion.—Riegel (1982) indicated that of the metasoma. The antennae are broken, the holotype and four paratypes of C. as is the tarsus of one prothroacic leg. marylandicus were deposited at USNM and a paratype was deposited at MCZ. The Coelinius marki (Riegel), new combination paratypes at USNM were examined, and (Fig. 21) Stefan Cover (in litt.) confirmed that the other paratype is at MCZ. The holotype Coelinidea marki Riegel 1982: 80, 97 [INHS, bears a glass vial with a cork cap between the examined]. second and third labels. The vial contains the Type material.—Holotype female: Top label posterior portion of the metasoma. The head (white; typewritten) 5 ‘‘INHS [;] Insect Collec- is missing, as are the mesothoracic legs tion [;] 221,941’’. Second label (white; partially except for the coxae. One prothoracic leg is handwritten, partially typewritten) 5 ‘‘Green missing except for the coxa; the other has a Mt. Falls, [;] Colo., Jly. 17, 1938 [;] J. A. Ross & [;] broken tarsus. One forewing is torn. H. H. Ross’’. Third label (brown; partially handwritten, partially typewritten) 5 ‘‘HOLO- Coelinius minnesota (Riegel), new combination TYPE R [;] Coelinidea [;] marki [;] Riegel’’ (INHS). (Fig. 23)

Other material examined.—USA, *WYOMING: Coelinidea minnesota Riegel 1982: 84, 131 [UMSP, 1 R 1 [sex unknown] Big Horn Co., Cowley, examined]. 8.viii.1935, in wheat stem (ESUW). Discussion.—Coelinius marki was previ- Type material.—Holotype female: Top label ously known only from the holotype, (white; typewritten) 5 ‘‘Minneapolis, Minn. [;] which Riegel (1982) indicated was depos- Excelsior Blvd. [;] Aug. 13, 1927 [;] A. T. Hertig’’. ited at INHS. The holotype bears a glass Bottom label (brown; partially handwritten, R vial with a cork cap below the third label. partially typewritten) 5 ‘‘HOLOTYPE [;] The vial contains the posterior portion of Coelinidea [;] minnesota [;] Riegel’’ (UMSP). Paratypes: 1 „ same data as holotype (UMSP). the metasoma. The specimens from ESUW Discussion.—Riegel (1982) indicated that expand the range of this species to north- the holotype and paratype of C. minnesota western Wyoming. were deposited at the ‘‘University of Coelinius marylandicus (Riegel), Minnesota…(MINN).’’ The holotype bears new combination a glass vial with a cork cap between the top (Fig. 22) and bottom labels. The vial contains the posterior portion of the metasoma. Coelinidea marylandica Riegel 1982: 83, 125 [USNM, examined]. Coelinius montana (Riegel), new combination (Fig. 24) Type material.—Holotype female: Top label (white; typewritten) 5 ‘‘Md.’’. Second label Coelinidea montana Riegel 1982: 82, 111 [SEMC, (white; typewritten) 5 ‘‘Collection [;] Ash- examined]. VOLUME 17, NUMBER 2, 2008 151

Type material.—Holotype male: Top label posterior portion of the metasoma. One (white; typewritten) 5 ‘‘Bennett Montana [;] 8- antenna is broken. 12-31 [;] J Nottingham’’. Bottom label (brown; partially handwritten, partially typewritten) 5 Coelinius niobrara (Riegel), new combination ‘‘HOLOTYPE „ [;] Coelinidea [;] montana [;] (Fig. 27) Riegel’’ (SEMC). Discussion.—Coelinius montana is known Coelinidea niobrara Riegel 1982: 83, 122 [INHS, only from the holotype, which Riegel examined]. (1982) indicated was deposited at ‘‘KU.’’ Type material.—Holotype male: Top label The holotype bears a glass vial with a cork (white; typewritten) 5 ‘‘INHS [;] Insect Collec- cap between the top and bottom labels. The tion [;] 213,097’’. Second label (white; partially vial contains the posterior portion of the handwritten, partially typewritten) 5 ‘‘Nio- metasoma. The head is missing. brara Co. Wyo. Stop [;] July 1, 1943 [;] Collected by R.E. Pfadt’’. Third label (white; handwritten) Coelinius muesebecki (Riegel), new combination 5 ‘‘LWYO’’. Fourth label (brown; partially (Fig. 25) handwritten, partially typewritten) 5 ‘‘HOLO- TYPE „ [;] Coelinidea [;] niobrara [;] Riegel’’ Coelinidea muesebecki Riegel 1982: 84, 141 [INHS, (INHS). Paratypes: 1 „ same data as holotype examined]. except INHS Insect Collection 213,098 (INHS); 2 „ same data as holotype (ESUW). Type material.—Holotype female: Top label Discussion.—Riegel (1982) indicated that (white; typewritten) 5 ‘‘INHS [;] Insect Collec- the holotype and all paratypes of C. niobrara tion [;] 221,942’’. Second label (white; handwrit- ten) 5 ‘‘Ripley, Ill. [;] Sept. 1, 1939 [;] Ross & were deposited at ‘‘WYO.’’ Scott Shaw (in Riegel’’. Third label (brown; partially handwrit- litt.) confirmed that ESUW has two para- ten, partially typewritten) 5 ‘‘HOLOTYPE R [;] types, but the INHS has the holotype and a Coelinidea [;] muesebecki [;] Riegel’’ (INHS). paratype. The holotype bears a glass vial Discussion.—Coelinius muesebecki is known with a cork cap below the third label. The only from the holotype, which Riegel (1982) vial contains the posterior portion of the indicated was deposited at INHS. The metasoma. One antenna is broken, as is the holotype bears a glass vial with a cork cap tarsus of one metathoracic leg. below the third label. The vial contains the posterior portion of the metasoma. Coelinius ohioensis (Riegel) (Figs 28, 29) Coelinius nellae (Riegel), new combination Sarops ohioensis Riegel 1982: 56, 58 [SEMC, (Fig. 26) examined]. Coelinidea nellae Riegel 1982: 83, 116 [SEMC, Coelinius ohioensis: Wharton 1994: 631 [synony- examined]. my of Coelinius and Sarops]. Sarops wheeleri Riegel 1982: 56, 59 [INHS, Type material.—Holotype male: Top label examined]. (white; partially handwritten, partially typewrit- Coelinius wheeleri: Wharton 1994: 631 [synonymy ten) 5 ‘‘Summit Co., Ohio [;] 6-9 1937 [;] Louis J. of Coelinius and Sarops]. New synonym. Lipovsky’’. Bottom label (brown; partially hand- written, partially typewritten) 5 ‘‘HOLOTYPE „ Type material.—Holotype female, Sarops ohioensis: [;] Coelinidea [;] nellae [;] Riegel’’ (SEMC). Top label (white; partially handwritten, partially 5 Discussion.—Coelinius nellae is known typewritten) ‘‘Summit Co., Ohio [;] 9-1 1937 [;] Louis J. Lipovsky’’. Second label (yellow; hand- only from the holotype, which Riegel written) 5 ‘‘Wings [;] on slide’’. Third label (1982) indicated was deposited at ‘‘KU.’’ (brown; partially handwritten, partially typewrit- The holotype bears a glass vial with a ten) 5 ‘‘HOLOTYPE R [;] Sarops [;] ohioensis [;] partially broken cork cap between the top Riegel’’ (SEMC). Holotype male, Sarops wheeleri: and bottom labels. The vial contains the Top label (white; typewritten) 5 ‘‘INHS [;] Insect 152 JOURNAL OF HYMENOPTERA RESEARCH

Figs 27–32. Holotypes of species of Coelinidea and Sarops described in Riegel (1982) with current taxonomic affiliations. 27, Coelinius niobrara. 28, Coelinius ohioensis. 29, Coelinius wheeleri. 30, Coelinius robinae. 31, Coelinius ruthae. 32, Coelinius sommermanae.

Collection [;] 212,943’’. Second label (white; Other material examined.—All USA, *WIS- partially handwritten, partially typewritten) 5 CONSIN; 3 R Fond du Lac Co., T13N R19E ‘‘Contoocook [;] N.H. ix-4-’21 [;] E.W. Hall’’. Third S23, 4.ix.1975, gypsy Malaise trap; 1 R label (brown; partially handwritten, partially same data as previous except 4.ix.-9.ix.1975; 1 R typewritten) 5 ‘‘HOLOTYPE „ [;] Sarops [;] 1 „ same data as previous except 9.ix.-2.x.1975; wheeleri [;] Riegel’’. Fourth label (yellow; hand- 1 R 1 „ Jackson Co., T21N R4W S27, 15.ix.- written) 5 ‘‘wings [;] on slide’’ (INHS). 22.ix.1975, gypsy moth Malaise trap; 1 R Oneida VOLUME 17, NUMBER 2, 2008 153

Co., T35N R11E S17, 12.viii.-25.viii.1975, gypsy Other material examined.—USA, *KANSAS: moth Malaise trap (AEIC). 1 „ Douglas Co., 23.v.1941, D. E. Hardy; 1 R 5 „ Discussion.—The holotypes of C. ohioensis same data as previous except 20.vi.1945, R. H. (Riegel, 1982) (Fig. 28) and C. wheeleri Beamer; 2 R 7 „ same data as previous except R (Riegel, 1982) (Fig. 29) fit within a mor- 21.vi.1945; 2 same data as previous except R „ phospecies series of seven females and two 25.vi.1945 (SEMC); 1 1 Riley Co., Konza Prairie Biological Station, watershed N2B, males from Wisconsin and are simply 39u05.279N96u35.099W, 25.v.-27.v.2001, Zolner- conspecific female and male specimens, owich, Kula, Brown, Malaise trap; 2 R 1 „ same respectively. The species are not referenced data as previous except 1.vi.-8.vi.2001; 1 R same in the literature beyond Riegel (1982). data as previous except 8.vi.-12.vi.2001; 3 „ Therefore, C. ohioensis is designated the same data as previous except watershed 4F, senior synonym because the holotype is a 39u04.379N96u34.269W, 1.vi.-8.vi.2001; 5 „ same female; in dacnusines females usually have data as previous except 8.vi.-12.vi.2001; 8 „ a greater number of diagnostic features same data as previous except 15.vi.-19.vi.2001; 1 R compared to males. same data as previous except 19.vi.-22.vi.2001; 5 „ same data as previous except 22.vi.- Coelinius ohioensis and C. wheeleri were 26.vi.2001; 1 „ same data as previous except described from the holotypes only, which watershed 4B, 39u04.659N96u35.759W, 12.vi.- Riegel (1982) indicated were deposited at 15.vi.2001; 1 „ same data as previous except ‘‘KU’’ and INHS, respectively. The holo- 22.vi.-26.vi.2001 (KSUC); *MISSOURI: 2 „ Boone type of C. ohioensis bears a glass vial with a Co., Columbia, 7.vi.1970, Malaise trap (UCDC). cork cap between the top and second Discussion.—Coelinius robinae was previ- labels. The holotype of C. wheeleri bears a ously known only from the holotype, glass vial with a cork cap below the fourth which Riegel (1982) indicated was depos- label. The vials contain the posterior ited at the ‘‘Connecticut Agricultural Ex- portion of the metasoma of each species. periment Station…(CONN).’’ All types in One antenna of the C. ohioensis holotype is the Connecticut Agricultural Experiment broken, and one forewing is mounted on a Station collection were transferred to slide. The antennae of the C. wheeleri USNM in 1962 (G. Ridge in litt.), and thus, holotype are broken, as is the tarsus of Riegel apparently deposited the holotype one meso- and metathoracic leg. The other in USNM. The metasoma is intact unlike mesotarsus is missing. One forewing is holotypes of other species described in mounted on a slide. The specimens from Riegel (1982). Thus, a glass vial is not AEIC expand the range of this species to associated with the specimen. The meso- northern and central Wisconsin. thoracic legs are missing, as is one meta- thoracic leg, one forewing, and one hind Coelinius robinae (Riegel), new combination wing. One prothoracic leg is broken at the (Fig. 30) trochanter; the rest of the leg, except for the trochantellus, is glued to the card. The Coelinidea robinae Riegel 1982: 83, 118 [USNM, specimens from UCDC and KSUC expand examined]. the range of this species to central Missouri and northeastern Kansas, respectively. Type material.—Holotype male: Top label (white; partially handwritten, partially type- Coelinius ruthae (Riegel), new combination 5 written) ‘‘Harry L. Johnson [;] 8-14-1940 [;] (Fig. 31) So. Meriden Conn.’’. Second label (white; partially handwritten, partially typewritten) 5 Coelinidea ruthae Riegel 1982: 79, 85 [SEMC, Coelinidea [;] sp. [;] det [;] Mues’’. Third label examined]. (brown; partially handwritten, partially type- written) 5 ‘‘HOLOTYPE „ [;] Coelinidea [;] Type material.—Holotype male: Top label robinae [;] Riegel’’ (USNM). (white; typewritten) 5 ‘‘Pagosa Springs [;] Colo. 154 JOURNAL OF HYMENOPTERA RESEARCH

7-5-37 [;] C. L. Johnston’’. Second label (white; appear in the ANSP primary type data- typewritten) 5 ‘‘Wing on [;] Sl. No.’’. Third base. Further, I searched throughout the label (brown; partially handwritten, partially entire ANSP collection in 2006 but did not „ typewritten) 5 ‘‘HOLOTYPE [;] Coelinidea [;] find any specimens that could potentially ruthae [;] Riegel’’ (SEMC). be the holotypes. Museum visits and/or Discussion.—Coelinius ruthae is known correspondence with curators and collec- only from the holotype, which Riegel tion managers confirmed that the holo- (1982) indicated was deposited at ‘‘KU.’’ types are not in any of the repositories The holotype bears a glass vial with a cork referenced in Riegel (1982). The holotypes cap between the top and second labels. The of C. antha, C. colora, and C. coma will be vial contains the posterior portion of the difficult to locate in the absence of an metasoma. The antennae are broken, as is explicit holotype label because the locality the tarsus of one mesothoracic leg. One label on each of the three specimens is forewing is mounted on a slide. apparently ‘‘Col,’’ (Riegel 1982), an ab- breviation for Colorado that is the only Coelinius sommermanae (Riegel), locality information for many specimens new combination in ANSP. Recognition of C. arca in the (Fig. 32) absence of an explicit holotype label may be possible, as locality data according to Coelinidea sommermanae Riegel 1982: 80, 93 Riegel (1982) are ‘‘Cochise Co., Arizona, [CUIC, examined]. July 26, 1919, Pinery Canyon, 6000 feet, Type material.—Holotype male: Top label Chiricahua Mts., Witmer Stone.’’ All four (white; typewritten) 5 ‘‘Downie Creek [;] species are known only from the holo- Selkirk Mts. [;] 14 Aug.’05 Br Col [;] J. Ch. types; the original descriptions and key to Bradley’’. Second label (white with red border; NorthAmericanspeciesofCoelinidea in handwritten) 5 ‘‘Coelinius [;] Nees’’. Third Riegel (1982) do not provide enough label (brown; partially handwritten, partially detail to apply the names unequivocally. typewritten) 5 ‘‘HOLOTYPE „ [;] Coelinidea [;] Therefore, the names C. antha, C. arca, C. sommermanae [;] Riegel’’. Fourth label (red; colora,andC. coma are considered nomina partially handwritten, partially typewritten) 5 dubia. ‘‘HOLOTYPE [;] Cornell U. [;] No. 6490’’ (CUIC). Discussion.—Coelinius sommermanae is ACKNOWLEDGMENTS known only from the holotype, which The following individuals kindly provided speci- Riegel (1982) indicated was deposited at mens examined in this study: Philip Clausen (UMSP), ‘‘CN.’’ The holotype bears a glass vial with Zachary Falin (SEMC), Colin Favret (INHS), Henri a cork cap between the second and third Goulet (CNC), Steven Heydon (UCDC), E. Richard Hoebeke (CUIC), Gary Parsons (MSUC), Scott Shaw labels. The vial contains the posterior (ESUW), David Wahl (AEIC), and Robert Zuparko portion of the metasoma. The antennae (CAS). I appreciate Stefan Cover (MCZ) and Scott are broken. Shaw’s confirmation of paratypes in MCZ and ESUW, respectively. I give special thanks to Zhiwei NAMES CONSIDERED NOMINA DUBIA Liu (Eastern Illinois University [EIU]), Michael Goodrich (EIU), and Jason Weintraub (ANSP) for The holotypes of four species of Coelini- their efforts in locating misplaced holotypes. I am dea described in Riegel (1982) apparently indebted to Jens Prena (Systematic Entomology are lost: C. antha, C. arca, C. colora, and C. Laboratory [SEL] at the USNM) for his advice on coma. Riegel (1982) indicated that the Latin grammar. Marie Metz captured and processed all original images. I am grateful to Paul Marsh holotype of each species was deposited at (Kansas State University), John Brown (SEL), and the ‘‘Philadelphia Academy of Natural Thomas Henry (SEL) for their comments on the Sciences…(PHIL).’’ The holotypes do not manuscript. VOLUME 17, NUMBER 2, 2008 155

LITERATURE CITED Nees von Esenbeck, C. G. 1819. Appendix ad J. L. C. Gravenhorst conspectum generum et familiarum Evenhuis, N. L. and G. A. Samuelson. 2007. The ichneumonidum. Genera et familias Ichneumoni- Insect and Spider Collections of the World Website dum adscitorum exhibens. Nova Acta Physico- Bishop Museum, Honolulu, Hawaii, http://hbs. Medica Academiae Ceasareae Leopoldinae-Carolinae 9: bishopmuseum.org/codens/codens-r-us.html 299–310. [accessed 17 November 2007]. Nixon, G. E. J. 1937. The British species of Dacnusa Fo¨rster, A. 1862. Synopsis der Familien und Gattun- (Hym., Fam. Braconidae). Transactions of the gen der Braconen. Verhandlungen des Naturhistor- Society for British Entomology 4: 1–85. ischen Vereines preussischen Rheinlande und West- ———. 1942. A new species of Dacnusa and a new phalens 19: 225–288. dacnusine genus (Hym., Braconidae). The Ento- Griffiths, G. C. D. 1964. The Alysiinae (Hym. mologist’s Monthly Magazine 78: 131–135. Braconidae) parasites of the Agromyzidae (Dip- ———. 1943. A revision of the European Dacnusini tera). I. General questions of , biology (Hym., Braconidae, Dacnusinae). The Entomolo- and evolution. Beitra¨ge zur Entomologie 14: gist’s Monthly Magazine 79: 20–34, 159–168. 823–914. ———. 1944. A revision of the European Dacnusini ———. 1966a. The Alysiinae (Hym. Braconidae) (Hym., Braconidae, Dacnusinae). The Entomolo- parasites of the Agromyzidae (Diptera). II. The gist’s Monthly Magazine 80: 88–108, 140–151, parasites of Agromyza Falle´n. Beitra¨ge zur Entomo- 193–200, 249–255. logie 16: 551–605. ———. 1945. A revision of the European Dacnusini ———. 1966b. The Alysiinae (Hym. Braconidae) (Hym., Braconidae, Dacnusinae). The Entomolo- parasites of the Agromyzidae (Diptera). III. The gist’s Monthly Magazine 81: 189–204, 217–229. parasites of Paraphytomyza Enderlein, Phytagro- ———. 1946. A revision of the European Dacnusini myza Hendel and Phytomyza Falle´n. Beitra¨ge zur (Hym., Braconidae, Dacnusinae). The Entomolo- Entomologie 16: 775–951. gist’s Monthly Magazine 82: 279–300. ———. 1967. The Alysiinae (Hym. Braconidae) para- ———. 1948. A revision of the European Dacnusini sites of the Agromyzidae (Diptera). IV. The (Hym., Braconidae, Dacnusinae). The Entomolo- parasites of Hexomyza Enderlein, Melanagromyza gist’s Monthly Magazine 84: 207–224. Hendel, Ophiomyia Braschnikov and Napomyza ———. 1949. A revision of the European Dacnusini Westwood. Beitra¨ge zur Entomologie 17: 653– (Hym., Braconidae, Dacnusinae). The Entomolo- 698. gist’s Monthly Magazine 85: 289–298. ———. 1968a. The Alysiinae (Hym. Braconidae) ———. 1954. A revision of the European Dacnusini parasites of the Agromyzidae (Diptera). V. The (Hym., Braconidae, Dacnusinae). The Entomolo- parasites of Liriomyza Mik and certain small gist’s Monthly Magazine 90: 257–290. genera of Phytomyzinae. Beitra¨ge zur Entomologie Riegel, G. T. 1947. The American Species of Dacnusinae, 18: 5–62. Excluding Certain Dacnusini (Hymenoptera: Braco- ———. 1968b. The Alysiinae (Hym. Braconidae) nidae). Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Illinois, parasites of the Agromyzidae (Diptera). VI. The Urbana-Champaign, Illinois. 236 pp. parasites of Cerodontha Rondani s.l. Beitra¨ge zur ———. 1950. A new genus and species of Dacnusini Entomologie 18: 63–152. (Hym.: Braconidae). Entomological News 61: Haliday, A. H. 1839. Hymenoptera Britannica: Alysia. 125–129. Hippolytus Baillie`re, London. 28 pp. ———. 1982. The American species of Dacnusinae, ICZN. 1999. International Code of Zoological Nomencla- excluding certain Dacnusini (Hymenoptera: Bra- ture. Fourth Edition. The International Trust for conidae). Novitates Arthropropodae 1: 1–185. Zoological Nomenclature, London. XIX + 306 pp. Rohwer, S. A. 1914. The Nearctic species of the Kula, R. R. 2006. Systematics of Dacnusini (Hyme- hymenopterous genus Symphya Foerster. Entomo- noptera: Braconidae: Alysiinae), Parasitoids of logical News 25: 168–172. Cyclorrhaphous Diptera. Ph.D. Dissertation Schulz, W. A. 1911. Zweihundert alte Hymenopteren. Kansas State University, Manhatttan, Kansas. Zoologische Annalen 4: 1–220. 243 pp. Sharkey, M. J. and R. A. Wharton. 1997. Morphology ——— and G. Zolnerowich. 2008. Revision of New and terminology. Pp. 19–37 in: Wharton, R. A., P. World Chaenusa Haliday sensu lato (Hymenop- M. Marsh, and M. J. Sharkey, eds. Manual of the tera: Braconidae: Alysiinae), with new species, New World Genera of the Family Braconidae (Hyme- synonymies, hosts, and distribution records. noptera). The International Society of Hymenop- Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washing- terists, Washington, DC. 439 pp. ton 110: 1–60. Viereck, H. L. 1913. Descriptions of ten new genera Maetoˆ, K. 1983. Discovery of two genera, Sarops Nixon and twenty-three new species of ichneumon-flies. and Protodacnusa Griffiths, from Japan (Hyme- Proceedings of the United States National Museum noptera, Braconidae). Kontyuˆ 51: 247–253. 44: 555–568. 156 JOURNAL OF HYMENOPTERA RESEARCH

Wharton, R. A. 1977. New World Aphaereta species ———. 2002. Revision of the Australian Alysiini (Hymenoptera: Braconidae: Alysiinae), with a (Hymenoptera: Braconidae). Invertebrate System- discussion of terminology used in the tribe atics 16: 7–105. Alysiini. Annals of the Entomological Society of ——— and A. D. Austin. 1991. Revision of Australian America 70: 782–803. Dacnusini (Hymenoptera: Braconidae: Alysiinae), ———. 1994. New genera, species, and records of parasitoids of cyclorrhaphous Diptera. Journal New World Alysiinae (Hymenoptera: Braconi- of the Australian Entomological Society 30: 193– dae). Proceedings of the Entomological Society of 206. Washington 96: 630–664. Yu, D. S., C. van Achterberg, and K. Horstmann. 2005. ———. 1997. Subfamily Alysiinae. Pp. 84–117 in: World 2004. Taxonomy, Biology, Wharton, R. A., P. M. Marsh, and M. J. Sharkey, Morphology and Distribution. DVD/CD. Taxapad, eds. Manual of the New World Genera of the Family Vancouver. Braconidae (Hymenoptera). The International Society Zetterstedt, J. W. 1838. Insecta Lapponica Sectio secunda of Hymenopterists, Washington, DC. 439 pp. Hymenoptera. Voss, Lipsiae. 1140 pp.