i 74 Z. BOUCEK 



Some of the species of the ftetiolata-group are very close to each other and, 

 probably owing to the wide distribution, very variable. The group includes 

 L. petiolata Fabricius (? aggregate), L. atriceps (Girault), L. sinensis Walker, 

 L. pulchella Crawford, L. banksi Weld, L. nigerrima Kohl and L. buchi Hedqvist. 



Leucospis petiolata Fabricius (? aggregate) 

 (Text-figs 189-191) 



Leucospis petiolata Fabricius, 1787 : 285. LECTOTYPE $ (here designated), India: 'Coro- 



mandel' (UZM, Copenhagen) [examined]. 

 Leucospis atra Fabricius, 1798 : 259. LECTOTYPE Cj (here designated), 'India Orientalis' 



(UZM, Copenhagen) [examined]. Syn. n. 

 Leucospis Aruera Walker, i860 : 18-19, $. LECTOTYPE $ (here designated), Indonesia: 



Aru Island (BMNH) [examined]. Syn. n. 

 Leucospis semirufa Walker, 1862 : 346, $. LECTOTYPE $ (here designated), Sulawesi: 



Makassar (UM, Oxford) [examined]. Syn. n. 

 Leucospis amauroptera Schletterer, 1890 : 242-244, $. Holotype <$, Sulawesi: Bantimoerang 



(SMT, Dresden) [examined]. Syn. n. 

 Leucospis similis Enderlein, 1901 : 217-219, g. Holotype <J, New Guinea: Milne Bay (MNHU, 



Berlin) [examined]. Syn. n. 

 Leucospis feminina Strand, 19116 : 169-170, $. Holotype $, New Guinea: Finchhafen 



(MNHU, Berlin) [examined]. Syn. n. 

 Leucospis indiensis Weld, 1922 : 20-21,$. Holotype $, India: Coimbatore (USNM) [examined]. 



Syn. n. 



The original material in each case apparently consists of single specimens which 

 are designated as lectotypes where the original author did not specify how many 

 specimens he had. I found or can confirm that the above names are synonyms. 

 L. amauroptera was suspected to be a synonym of L. petiolata already by Roman 

 (1920 : 10). Masi (1935 : 41) thought that L. indiensis was the same species as 

 L. banksi, with which I do not agree, and described the male of indiensis (i.e. 

 actually of L. petiolata). Schletterer (1890 : 290-291) believed that L. atra 

 mentioned by Walker (1841 : 217), apparently by mistake as coming from Africa, 

 was different from Fabricius' L. atra described from India. One of the specimens 

 of Walker, a male, is still preserved in the BMNH, labelled as the original specimen 

 by Waterston and 'Madras', in agreement with a Walker's later statement (1846 : 2). 

 It is the same as L. atra Fabricius. 



This is a very variable species, as seems to have been known already to Schletterer 

 (1890), Cameron (1907 : 596) and Roman (1920 : 10). For some time I believed 

 that two species were involved, the second species being L. aruera Walker, of more 

 easterly distribution and of more extensive yellow pattern. It is still possible 

 that my conclusions are not quite right, as some new evidence and still richer material 

 may prove. I base my present view on the following findings. 



The westerly specimens of L. petiolata usually have poor whitish markings 

 consisting of two narrow arcuate lines (which are narrowly raised, rib-like) on the 

 pronotum, a transverse spot on the propodeum, a line bordering dorsal edge of 

 the hind femur and a shorter one basally at the ventral edge, apart from narrow 



