NORTH AMERICAN TETRASTICHUS — BURKS 509 



count of the Eulophidae of Australia, 19 but in the supplement to this 

 work he listed this genus as a synonym of his Trichaporoidella:-* 

 Later he evidently decided that the two genera were not the same, 

 as he placed one of his new species from the United States 21 in the 

 genus Aprostoceroloides. The characters given in the original de- 

 scriptions of Aprostocerololdes and Trichaporoidella would not sug- 

 gest that they are the same, and my opinion is that Aprostocerololdes 

 is a synonym of Tetrastichus, while Trichaporoidella is more than 

 likely the same as Syntomosphyrum, It also might fairly be said that 

 it is often difficult to reconcile Girault's generic assignments of his 

 North American species with the characters he gave for those genera 

 when he described them. 



My own conclusions regarding the limitation of Tetrastichus and its 

 related genera differ little from those of Kurdjumov. I do not, how- 

 ever, agree with him that Syntomosphyrum is a synonym of Tetrasti- 

 chus, as I consider the two groups recognizably distinct. Further- 

 more, the use of the name Geniocerus seems unnecessary ; the species 

 referred to that genus may well be placed in Tetrastichus. The genus 

 Ceranisus, as identified by Ashmead (and apparently by Kurdjumov 

 as well), is not the same as Walker's genus as originally described. 

 Ceranisus Ashmead. not Walker, is undoubtedly the same as Tetrasti- 

 chus, but Ceranisus Walker (having but two funicle segments) is close 

 to Pentastichus Ashmead. 



The true genus Hyperteles has not, so far, been found to occur in 

 North America. Most of the Nearctic species which have been de- 

 scribed in Hyperteles, however, belong in Tetrastichus. Although I 

 have transferred a number of species from Ootetrastichus Perkins to 

 Tetrastichus, I do not consider Ootetrastichus a synonym of Tetrasti- 

 chus. The genera Thymus 22 and Prothymus, 23 described by Girault, 

 and related to Tetrastichus, seem to be recognizably distinct, although 

 the available material of them is in extremely poor condition. 



Genus TETRASTICHUS Haliday 



Tetrastichus Haliday, Trans. Ent. Soc. London, vol. 3, p. 297, 1843- -Kurdjumov, 



Russ. Ent. Obozr. (Rev. Russe Ent.), vol. 13, p. 253, 1913.— Gahan. Proc. 



U. S. Nat. Mus., vol. 48, p. 166, 1914. (Type, Cirrospilus attalus Walker.) 

 Trichoceras Ratzeburg, Die Ichneurnonen der Forstinsecten . . ., vol. 2, p. 171, 



1848. (Type, Trichoceras erythrophthalmus Ratzeburg.) 

 Geniocerus Ratzeburg, Die Ichneurnonen der Forstinsecten . . ., vol. 2, p. 175, 



1848. (Proposed unnecessarily for Trichoceras Ratzeburg, 1848, which was 



thought to be preoccupied by Trichoccra Meigen, 1S03.) 



19 Mem. Queensland Mus., vol. 2, p. 243, 1913. 



20 Mem. Queensland Mus., vol. 3, p. 229, 1915. 



21 Chalcidoidea nova Marilandensis, pt. 2, p. 2, 1917. 



22 Can. Ent., vol. 48, p. 113, 1916. 



23 New chalcid flies, p. 1, 1917. 



