3 o Z. BOUCEK 



Ovipositor sometimes relatively short (Text-figs 36, 149, 234, 235) but even then its sheaths 

 exposed, upturned and capable of some movement in antero-posterior direction (indicated in 

 Text-fig. 229) ; if sheaths longer then turned forwards over dorsum of gaster, reposing in ovi- 

 positorial furrow. Exposed part of sixth tergite, landmarked by spiracles, divided in two 

 lateral plates by (but not fused with) the median part of epipygium which is thrust upwards by 

 the base of sheaths. In male the gaster often with exposed parts of sternites rather narrow and 

 then laterally delimited by keels. 



The genus Leucospis includes at present more than 100 species which are treated 

 in species-groups and this again may raise a question of a subdivision of the genus 

 into subgenera or even of splitting it into several genera. 



There are a few characters which come into consideration. They are: the occipital 

 carina, the form of the lower margin of clypeus, the mandibles, the pronotal carinae, 

 the mesoscutal carina, the form of dorsellum, form of propodeum including the 

 development of the median carina and plicae, the carinate or non-carinate dorsal 

 edge of fore femur and tibia, form of the dorsal edge of hind coxa, of hind femur 

 and its teeth, of the apex of hind tibia including the outer spur, in certain groups 

 also the length of ovipositor (mean length of the ovipositorial sheaths) and in 

 connection with it the length of the ovipositorial furrow (and of the propodeum), 

 and in the males the relative breadth of the sternites. 



Some of these characters seem to have greater weight only in certain species- 

 groups, e.g. the high occipital carina in some American groups only. Perhaps a 

 similar case is the absence of the median tooth on the lower margin of clypeus. 

 It is not developed in the (again American) species of Polistomorpha and in the 

 American Leucospis of the texana-group, egaia-group and speif era-group, but in 

 the latter it sometimes becomes conspicuous, e.g. in L. versicolor. On the other 

 hand, the median tooth is present in all the other groups and species solae, but is not 

 developed for example in L. clavigaster of the cayennensis-group. 



More often it is not a case of presence or absence of a certain character but of the 

 degree to which the character is developed. In the cayennensis-group the lower 

 tooth of the mandible is relatively more conspicuous, being separated from the 

 upper edge by a semicircular emargination, whilst in the other species-groups 

 the tooth is usually shorter and the separating notch more triangular, often small; 

 but it is deep e.g. in L. bulbiventris and L. manaica of the egaia-group. It varies 

 even within the cayennensis-group; it is unusually broad and deep e.g. in L. ignota 

 (Text -fig. 116), but rather shallow e.g. in some L. cayennensis (Text-fig. no; lower 

 tooth worn off?). For some time I had been considering the question, whether 

 the cayennensis-group should be separated as a subgenus, in which case the name 

 Metallopsis Westwood were available, the more that the males of the group seem 

 to be easy to recognize on the broad sternites not carinate at sides (similar to 

 those of Polistomorpha). I dropped the idea because the separation of one species- 

 group does not seem useful (the subgenus category being of some value only for 

 the taxonomists) and because the diverse complex of the other species-groups of 

 Leucospis is more difficult to split. And the cayennensis-group itself includes 

 some rather different-looking species, mostly little known, three of them until 

 now only in one sex. 



