315 



Family ICHNEUMONIDAE 



By Robert W. Carlson 



Most of the members of this large family are parasites of holometabolous insects. A few spe- 

 cies or groups of species parasitize spiders (egg sacs, spiderlings, or adults) or egg sacs of pseu- 

 doscorpions. No identified Ichneumonidae are known to be primary parasites of paurometabo- 

 lous insects (cf. Clancy and Pierce, 1966). Further discussion of host relations is deferred to the 

 introductions pertaining to genera or supergeneric categories. General information on the biolo- 

 gy, host selection, or ecology of Ichneumonidae can be found in the discussions of Cushman 

 (1926), Clausen (1940), Townes and Townes (1951, p. 184-185), and Townes (1958,1962). Addi- 

 tional biological references were cited by Sachtleben (1962c). 



According to the estimate of Townes (1969, p. 6) the Nearctic fauna of Ichneumonidae includes 

 slightly more than 8000 species, only 35 percent of which had been described. Of the 27 currently 

 recognized subfamilies, only the Agriotypinae and Collyriinae have no species native to North 

 America (one species of Collyriinae was introduced from Europe). 



I have attempted to include most of the species known to have been released in North Amer- 

 ica for purposes of biological control. In a few cases, I knew from voucher material or had other 

 reasons to suspect that the identifications which had been published in reference to releases 

 were incorrect. When I lacked the information necessary for correcting the identifications of 

 such species, they were excluded from the catalog. None of the species thus excluded are known 

 to be established. 



Lists of species synonymy for species not confined to America north of Mexico are as 

 complete as I could make them. No synonyms were intentionally excluded by virtue of having 

 been described from areas outside the geographic scope of this catalog. 



Distributions given for species are self-explanatory. In the catalog of Townes and Townes 

 (1951) numerous species which are not particularly common in collections, and some which ac- 

 tually are rather scarce, were cited as having distributions such as "transcont. in Transit, and U. 

 Austr. Zones." Except in a very few cases, distributions of the latter type have been replaced by 

 lists of states and provinces or by bracketing distributions such as: Que. w. to s. B. C, s. to n. 

 Fla., N. Mex., and s. Calif. 



In giving the geographic distributions of genera or supergeneric categories, and in some other 

 discussions, I have used the terms Nearctic and Neotropic in reference to distributions in Amer- 

 ica north of Mexico and south of the United States, respectively. No alternatives were feasible. 



Lists of hosts are arranged so that names of taxa belonging to the same family are in 

 alphabetical sequence. The names of the families themselves would have been a very worthwhile 

 addition, and their inclusion would not have been incompatible with the process of computeriza- 

 tion. It is hoped that inclusion of them will be allowed in future editions of the catalog. 



Although he did not refer to them by number (except on p. 49), Townes, (1969, p. 15-18) 

 discussed the manner in which Opinions 157 and 159 of the International Commission on Zoologi- 

 cal Nomenclature came to be pubHshed by Hemming (1945). I have looked into the various 



