RECLASSIFICATION OF MICROGASTERINI 7 



able to find in my search for a means of dividing Apanteles into smaller units. 



Making the fullest use of the few characters offered by Apanteles, so far as I have 

 been able to discover them, I have subdivided the genus into 44 species-groups. 

 Some of these such as the glomeratus-gvonp (virtually coextensive with Wilkinson's 

 group F) are very large ; many others consist of less than half a dozen species, 

 while several are based on a single species. These groups have, I believe, a certain 

 homogeneity. Nevertheless, and although they emerge from an investigation of 

 many hundreds of species from all parts of the world, they still lack that sharpness of 

 definition that would justify generic status. 



In spite of what I have just said, I am convinced that if ever so large and unwieldy 

 a genus as Apanteles is going to be handled satisfactorily, a basis for generic cleavages 

 will have to be found. The generic names exist and need only to be lifted out of 

 synonymy. Their application, however, will require an investigation that explores 

 more widely and deeply the world fauna than this one of mine does. 



In the meantime, by making use of the species-group concept and by fully exploit- 

 ing the range of structural patterns occurring within Apanteles, I have suggested the 

 lines along which further investigation can, I believe, proceed. 



MICROGASTER Latreille of authors 



Microgaster, separated from Microplitis, as it has been, solely on the length of the 

 inner spur of the hind tibia, is even more amorphous than Apanteles. The conclusion 

 is inescapable that among the species lumped together in Microgaster, there are 

 several evolutionary lines of descent. This is even more obvious than in Apanteles, 

 partly because " Microgaster " species tend to be larger than species of Apanteles, 

 their characters are better seen and morphological divergence seems to be sharper 

 and more striking. 



I have found it expedient to take out of synonymy the genera Hypomicrogaster 

 Ashmead, Protomicroplitis Ashmead and Xanthomicrogaster Cameron and to restrict 

 drastically the concept of Microgaster Latreille itself. I have also made a few 

 genera to accommodate known species already described in Microgaster and a few 

 new species that would certainly have been covered by the older interpretation of 

 the genus. 



Of the above genera, Protomicroplitis is by far the largest, and is abundantly 

 represented throughout the tropics of the Old and New World. I have subdivided it 

 into several species-groups, some of the smaller of which I have worked out to species 

 level. 



Microgaster, as subsequently redefined, is chiefly confined to the temperate regions 

 of the Northern Hemisphere. 



MICROPLITIS Forster 



This, the third of the three traditional microgasterine genera, is in my opinion, the 

 most homogeneous of them all. I have associated with it two new genera, one of 



