Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T17:48:45.706Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A revision of the north-western European species of the laevigatus-group of Apanteles Förster (Hymenoptera, Braconidae)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

G. E. J. Nixon
G. E. J. Nixon
Affiliation:
c/o British Museum (Natural History), Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The north-western European species of the laevigatus-group of Apanteles are revised. Forty species are dealt with, of which twenty are described as new. Brief notes are added on North American species of the group in the British Museum (Nat. Hist.) to assist their eventual correlation with the European species.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 61 , Issue 4 , June 1972 , pp. 701 - 743
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1972

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ashmead, W. H. (1890). On the Hymenoptera of Colorado.—Bull. Colo. biol. Ass. 1, 3–47.Google Scholar
Förster, A. (1862). Synopsis der Familien und Gattungen der Braconen.—Verh. naturh. Ver. preuss. Rheinl. 19, 225–288.Google Scholar
Gahan, A. B. (1919). New reared parasitic Hymenoptera with some notes on synonymy.—Proc. U.S. natn. Mus. 55, 113–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haliday, A. H. (1834). Essay on the classification of parasitic Hymenoptera.—Entom. Mag. 2, 225–259.Google Scholar
Marshall, T. A. (1885). Monograph of British Braconidae. I.—Trans. ent. Soc. Lond. 1885, 1–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muesebeck, C. F. W. (1920). A revision of the North American species of ichneumon-flies belonging to the genus Apanteles.—Proc. U.S. natn. Mus. 58, 483–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muesebeck, C. F. W. (1931). Descriptions of a new genus and eight new species of ichneumon-flies with taxonomic notes.—Proc. U.S. nain. Mus. 79 (16), 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muesebeck, C. F. W. (1933). Seven new species of reared Braconidae (Hymenoptera).—Proc. ent. Soc. Wash. 35, 193–200.Google Scholar
Muesebeck, C. F. W. (1935). Three new reared parasitic Hymenoptera, with some notes on synonymy.—J. Wash. A cad. Sci. 25, 279–283.Google Scholar
Muesebeck, C. F. W. (1965). Two new Braconid parasites of the spruce budworm (Hymen optera).—Ent. News. 76, 71–74.Google Scholar
Nees von Esenbeck, C. G. D. (1834). Hymenopterorum Ichneumonibus affinium monographicae, genera Europaea et species illustrantes, I.—320 pp. Stuttgart and Tubingen.Google Scholar
Nixon, G. E. J. (1961). Two new European species of Apanteles (Hymenoptera: Braconidae).—Proc. R. ent. Soc. Lond. (B) 30, 50–52.Google Scholar
Nixon, G. E. J. (1965). A reclassification of the tribe Microgasterini (Hymenoptera: Braconidae).—Bull. Br. Mus. nat. Hist. (Ent.). Suppl. 2, 1–284.Google Scholar
Nixon, G. E. J. (1971). Two new species of Apanteles from Europe and Africa with a redescription of the African Apanteles rutilans Nixon (Hymenoptera: Braconidae).—J. nat. Hist. 5, 361–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Provancher, L. (1881). Faune canadienne. Les insectes-Hyménoptères.—Naturaliste can. 12, 193–207.Google Scholar
Ratzeburg, J. T. C. (1844–1852). Die Ichneumonen der Forstinsecten in forstlicher und entomologischer Beziehung, 1–3. Berlin.Google Scholar
Reinhard, H. (1880). Beiträge zur Kenntniss einiger Braconiden-Gattungen.—Dt. ent. Z. 24, 353–370.Google Scholar
Reinhard, H. (1881). Beiträge zur Kenntniss einiger Braconiden-Gattungen.—Dt. ent. Z. 25, 35–52.Google Scholar
Riley, C. V. (1881). Notes on North American microgasters, with description of new species.—Trans. Acad. Sci. St. Louis 4, 296–315.Google Scholar
Ruschka, F. (1917). In Kemner, N. A. Björksäckmalen (Coleophora fuscedinella Zell.) och dess uppträdande 1915–17.—Medd. Cent Anst. Forsoksv. Jordbr., Stockh. no. 161 (ent.) no. 28, 24–25.Google Scholar
Viereck, H. L. (1912). Contributions to our knowledge of bees and ichneumon-flies, including the descriptions of twenty-one new genera and fifty-seven new species of ichneumonflies.—Proc. U.S. natn. Mus. 42, 613–648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wesmael, C. (1837). Monographie des Braconides de Belgique.—Nouv. Mém. Acad. Sci. Bruxelles. 10, 68 pp.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, D. S. (1939). On the identity of Apanteles infimus Haliday and of Apanteles infimus Haliday of Marshall (Hym. Bracon.).—Proc. R. ent. Soc. Loud. (B) 8, 53–60.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, D. S. (1940). New species of Apanteles (Hym. Brac.)—I.—Proc. R. ent. Soc. Lond. (B) 9, 23–29.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, D. S. (1941 a). New species of Apanteles (Hym. Bracon.)—II.—Proc. R. ent. Soc. Lond. (B) 2, 28–34.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, D. S. (1941 b). On the identity of Apanteles albipennis Haliday non Nees and of Apanteles albipennis Haliday of Marshall (Hym. Brac.).—Proc. R. ent. Soc. Lond. (B) 10, 71–81.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, D. S. (1945). Description of Palearctic species of Apanteles (Hymen. Braconidae).—Trans. R. ent. Soc. Lond. 95, 35–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, G. Fox (1928). Two lesser known pests of fruit trees.—Gdnrs' Chron. 83, 416–418.Google Scholar