REVISION OF LEUCOSPIDAE 143 



Leucospis Spinolae Westwood, 1834 : 216-217. [Proposed as replacement name for L. inter- 

 media Spinola.] 



Leucospis assimilis Westwood, 1834 : 2I 7> $• LECTOTYPE $ (here designated), Europe: 

 'PGermany' (UM, Oxford) [examined]. 



Leucospis Sicelis Westwood, 1834 : 218, $. LECTOTYPE $ (here designated),. Italy: Sicily 

 (UM, Oxford) [examined]. 



Leucospis ligustica Nees, 1834 : 17, 9 6*- [Proposed (with description) as replacement name for 

 L. intermedia Spinola.] 



Leucospis scutcllata Spinola, 1838: 441-442, $>• LECTOTYPE £ (here designated), Egypt 

 (MIZS, Turin [examined]. 



Leucospis vicina Fonscolombe, 1840 : 186-187, $. Type(s), France: Aix-en-Provence (?lost). 



Leucospis Algirica Walker, i860 : 17, $. LECTOTYPE $ (here designated), Algeria (UM, 

 Oxford) [examined]. 



Leucospis lepida Chevrier, 1870 : 274-276, $ (J. LECTOTYPE °- (here designated), Switzer- 

 land: Bassin du Leman (MCSN, Genoa) [examined]. 



Leucaspis(l) turkeslanica Radoszkowski, 1886 : 51, $. LECTOTYPE $ (here designated), 

 U.S.S.R.: "Turkestan' (MNHU, Berlin) [examined]. 



The only available original specimen of L. dorsigera is designated as lcctotype. 



C. passavianus, originally described (Schrank, 1780, and mentioned by the same 

 author again 1781 : 307) under a one-word name Coelogaster (see generic synonymy 

 of Leucospis Fabricius, p. 28), was, when first mentioned under this binomen, 

 synonymized by* its author with L. dorsigera Fabricius. Although no original 

 material could be traced, the synonymy seems to be correct and was accepted as 

 such by all subsequent authors. 



L. coelogaster Hochenwarth. No original material has been traced but from the 

 illustrated description it is clear to me that the species was L. dorsigera Fabricius. 

 Schletterer (1890 : 195, 198) assumed that L. coelogaster might be L. intermedia 

 Illiger and for some time I agreed with him, mainly because coelogaster was 

 described as having 'die Stirn des Hauptes mit zwey gelben Linien' (p. 344). 

 However, on the preceding page Hochenwarth describes the present L. gigas 

 Fabricius (calling it dorsigera; misidentification) as having four yellow lines on 

 frons and his fig. ib clearly shows that the inner lines represent the yellow antennal 

 scapes. Consequently his 'two yellow lines' in coelogaster are believed to refer to 

 the yellow scapes and not to yellow lines on the frons which is always black in L. 

 dorsigera but more or less yellow in L. intermedia. All the other characters also 

 fit dorsigera better than intermedia and I feel sure that Klug (1814 : 69) was right 

 when he placed coelogaster in synonymy with dorsigera. Hochenwarth did not 

 refer to Schrank's papers; probably he regarded his one-word name as invalid. 



L. dubia. I could not trace the original material but the description leaves no 

 doubt that dubia was a male of dorsigera. Westwood (1839 : 2 59) placed dubia 

 as a variety of L. dorsigera but Schletterer (1890) omitted it. 



L. dispar. The three Fabrician specimens come from the Kiel (private) collection 

 of Fabricius (kindly submitted by Dr Petersen, UZM, Copenhagen). They are 

 two males and one female with the ovipositor broken off; the female is not accepted 

 as syntype as it does not fit the description ('abdomine cingulis tribus punctoque 

 apicis flavis') well. The male best fitting the description was chosen as lectotype 

 and is the same as L. dorsigera, with which it has been regarded as identical since 



