REVISION OF LEUCOSPIDAE 5 



Leucospidae and to draw up their present classification. The re-evaluation of 

 the old taxa could be achieved only by a review of the existing knowledge and 

 by checking it, at the same time, against all the available rich material. This, 

 together with the biological information (including distribution), was supposed 

 to reveal something of the actual range of variation and thus of the natural limits 

 of various taxa and of the gaps between them. Only then could I be relatively 

 sure to which taxa the types eventually belonged, apart from their nomenclatural 

 value. In a few species, however, the available material seems to be still inadequate 

 for safe conclusions. 



The limits, relationship, variation and other aspects of taxonomy including 

 the biological data are eventually treated, where necessary, with the individual 

 taxa, including the family taxon as a whole. In a general scheme the valid name 

 is followed by the quotation and the synonymy, then by the eventual information 

 on the type material, including its nomenclatural and taxonomic aspects, problems 

 concerning the intraspeciftc variation and the interspecific relations. In a few cases 

 several infraspecific forms are recognized, in Leucospis afftnis and L. histrio on 

 the subspecific level, in which case the discussion is followed by a key to the 

 subspecies and then each subspecies is treated as a separate unit. Biological data 

 and general distribution (mostly in terms of countries) of species (or subspecies) 

 are treated in separate paragraphs, followed by an account of the material 

 examined. In the synonymy only names having some bearing on the nomenclature 

 i.e. names available under the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature are 

 mentioned. Misidentifications are therefore referred to only where a name is 

 partly or entirely based on them. 



MORPHOLOGICAL TERMS AND MEASUREMENTS 



Some of the morphological terms, including all less common ones, are explained 

 here and in a few figures (mainly Text-figs 1-15), together with the measurements 

 used in descriptions. In spite of the relatively large size of these insects exact 

 measurements are sometimes necessary, although their variation may be greater 

 than known at present. There is no point in giving absolute measurements (e.g. 

 in microns), as their main value is in relation to the measurements of the other 

 parts. 



The normal position of the head is taken as that with the mandibles and other 

 mouth parts directed downwards. Consequently the length of head is its maximum 

 thickness in antero-posterior direction (in dorsal view; Text-fig. 2), its breadth (or 

 width) the distance between the outer margins of the eyes (less pubescence) and 

 its height is measured from the uppermost point, usually on the occipital carina, 

 down to the lowermost point of the lower clypeal margin (Text-fig. 1). The head 

 usually has dorsally an area in front of the occipital carina delimited anteriorly 

 by the frontal protuberances. As the part in front of the ocelli is called frons, 

 this area is called fronto-vertex ; its breadth is measured as the minimum distance 

 between the inner margins (orbits) of the eyes, at about the level of the median 

 ocellus. Ocellar triangle: the width means the distance between the outer margins 



