Monophyly of Euaesthetinae (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae): phylogenetic evidence from adults and larvae,review of austral genera,and new larval descriptions

Abstract We develop a morphological dataset for the rove beetle subfamily Euaesthetinae comprising 167 morphological characters (135 adult and 32 larval) scored from 30 terminal taxa including 25 ingroup terminals (from subfamilies Euaesthetinae and Steninae) and five outgroups. Four maximum parsimony analyses using different sets of terminals and character sets were run to test the monophyly of (1) Euaesthetinae, (2) Steninae, (3) Euaesthetinae + Steninae, (4) euaesthetine tribes Austroesthetini, Alzadaesthetini, Euaesthetini, Fenderiini and Stenaesthetini, and (5) the ten currently known austral endemic genera together. Analyses of adult and larval character sets separately and in combination recovered the monophyly of Euaesthetinae, Steninae, and both subfamilies together, with strong support. Analysis of 13 ingroup terminals for which complete data were available suggests that monophyly of Euaesthetinae is supported by 19 synapomorphies (13 adult, six larval), of Steninae by 23 synapomorphies (14 adult, nine larval), and of both subfamilies together by 24 synapomorphies (21 adult, three larval). Within Euaesthetinae, only the tribe Stenaesthetini was recovered as monophyletic based on adult characters, and in no analyses were the ten austral endemic genera recovered as a monophyletic group. Phylogenetic relationships among euaesthetine genera were weakly supported, although analyses including adult characters supported monophyly of Octavius and Protopristus separately, and of Octavius + Protopristus, Austroesthetus + Chilioesthetus and Edaphus + Euaesthetus. Steninae may include a third genus comprising two undescribed species probably possessing a ‘stick–capture’ method of prey capture, similar to that in Stenus. These two species formed a strongly supported clade recovered as the sister group of Stenus based on adult characters. Diagnoses and a key to adults are provided for the 15 euaesthetine genera currently known from the austral region (Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and southern South America). Euaesthetine larvae previously were known only for Euaesthetus, and we describe the larvae of nine more genera and provide the first larval identification key for genera of Euaesthetinae.     

The systematic position of Ergasticus (Decapoda,Brachyura) and allied genera,a molecular and morphological approach

The complete larval series (zoea I, zoea II and megalopa) of the crab Ergasticus clouei is described and illustrated based on plankton samples from Mediterranean waters. The zoea II and megalopal stages, previously unknown, are described here for the first time. Nucleotide sequence analysis of two gene regions (16S rDNA and Cox1 genes) confirmed the assignment of these larvae to Ergasticus clouei. The molecular analyses and the morphology of the larval stages revealed large differences between Ergasticus and Inachus, the type genus of the family Inachidae. In fact, E. clouei larvae presented a series of morphological characters, such as antennal shape and mouthparts setation pattern that placed them closer to the family Oregoniidae. The phylogenetic analyses also showed significant support for the monophyly of the Oregoniidae + Ergasticus group. The data argue for removal of Ergasticus and the related genera (Bothromaia, Pleisticanthoides, Parapleisticantha and Pleistacantha) from the Inachidae and their placement within the Oregoniidae as a separate subfamily, Pleistacanthinae ?tev?i?, 2005. Our results demonstrate that larval stages provide reliable morphological traits, independent from those of adults, to help resolving relationships among Majoidea genera.     

A preliminary study on the phylogenetic relationships of Copelatus Erichson (Coleoptera: Dytiscidae: Copelatinae) based on larval chaetotaxy and morphology

The phylogenetic relationships of the diving-beetle (Dytiscidae) subfamily Copelatinae are not well known. Some authors postulated a sister-group relationship between Copelatus Erichson and the remaining Dytiscidae, relying mainly on the absence of a mandibular channel in Copelatus. Other authors suggested a more derived position of the genus. Larval characters have been underutilized in phylogenetic studies, mainly because the larvae of many taxa within the family and, in particular, within Copelatinae are unknown. A comprehensive approach aimed to study the phylogenetic placement of a member of this subfamily based on larval characters has not been produced so far. In this study, the phylogenetic relationships of Copelatus are explored based on a cladistic analysis of 24 taxa and 120 chaetotaxic and morphological characters from larvae. For this purpose, larvae of Copelatus longicornis Sharp are described and illustrated in detail for the first time, with particular emphasis on morphometry and chaetotaxy, with the latter being unexplored until now. The results support a derived position of Copelatus within Dytiscidae, with a sister-group relationship between this genus and a clade formed by the subfamilies Lancetinae, Coptotominae, Laccophilinae, Colymbetinae, Matinae, and Dytiscinae, and part of Agabinae. No evidence was found for a sister-group relationship between Copelatus and the remaining Dytiscidae so that the absence of a mandibular channel in this genus is likely a reduction. Copelatus is supported by three apomorphies within Dytiscidae: mandibular channel absent, internal margin of the stipes with three robust spinulae, and seta MX8 inserted subapically on the galea. Handling editor: K. Martens     

Global diversity of butterflies (Lepidotera) in freshwater

In Lepidoptera, the subfamily Acentropinae and Pyraustinae of Crambidae (Pyraloidea) and the family Arctiidae (Noctuoidea) contain species with true aquatic larvae, which live submerged during larval development. In Pyraustinae and Arctiidae only a few species exhibit an aquatic life-history. From the latter, aquatic larvae are known from the Neotropical genus Paracles. The number of aquatic Paracles species is unknown. The Acentropinae are predominantly aquatic. They are distributed worldwide, and reach the highest diversity in tropical regions of South East Asia/Malesia and in the Neotropical Region. At present, the Acentropinae include a total of 50 genera and 737 described species. All genera, assigned to the subfamily, are listed in a table, and the numbers of included species are indicated. The taxonomy and phylogeney of the genera are inadequately known. The species have a minor economic importance, however, they are very sensitive to degradation of water quality and habitat destruction. Guest editors: E.V. Balian, C. Lévêque, H. Segers & K. Martens Freshwater Animal Diversity Assessment     

Larvae of Trichophya and phylogeny of the tachyporine group of subfamilies (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae) with a review, new species and characterization of the Trichophyinae

Abstract. Larvae of the staphylinid subfamily Trichophyinae are described for the first time based on larvae of a new species of Trichophya from the southwestern United States. Adults and larvae of the new species, Trichophya texana Ashe & Newton (type locality Texas, Brewster Co., Big Bend National Park), are described and illustrations of both provided. Also given are a key for separation of the Nearctic species of Trichophya , a checklist of the known World fauna of the Trichophyinae (including first report of the genus from Mexico and Guatemala), and a characterization of the subfamily Trichophyinae based on both larvae and adults. The relationships of major genera and higher taxa in the tachyporine group of staphylinid subfamilies are analysed cladistically using larval characters. No larval characters were found that provide evidence for the monophyly of the tachyporine group; no evidence was found for the monophyly of the Tachyporinae; Charhyphus, Olisthaerus and Phloeocharis (Phloeocharinae + Olisthaerinae) form a monophyletic group; the Trichophyinae and Habrocerinae are sister groups and together probably are the sister group to the Aleocharinae; the Aleocharinae are confirmed to be monophyletic based on larval characters; and Gymnusa + Deinopsis form the sister group to the remainder of the Aleocharinae.     

Discovery of the Quedius antipodum Sharp larva from New Zealand: phylogenetic test of larval morphology for Staphylinini at the intratribal level (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae)

Quedius antipodum Sharp is an endemic species from New Zealand. Here we describe its larva, the first of the species‐rich group of the south temperate ‘Quedius’ spp. This finding throws light on the controversy between the conventional systematics of Quedius Stephens and newer phylogenetic analyses, both of which are based on non‐larval characters only. We compare the larva of Q. antipodum with those of the north temperate Quedius (Quediina), where it was traditionally placed, and with the known larvae of Amblyopinina, a group where Q. antipodum was placed by recent phylogenetic studies. Sister‐group relationships of Q. antipodum within the tribe Staphylinini are explored based on larvae by means of parsimony analysis: 77 morphological characters scored for 20 species from 17 genera. Consistent with the adult morphology and DNA sequences, larvae‐based cladistic analysis confirms that Q. antipodum should not be placed in the north temperate genus Quedius. However, larval analysis alone remains dubious with respect to finding the exact sister relationships of that species.     

Phylogeny of the parasitic wasp subfamily Euphorinae (Braconidae) and evolution of its host preferences

The braconid subfamily Euphorinae is a large, cosmopolitan group of endoparasitoid wasps. The majority of species attack adult hosts, a strategy that is rare among parasitic wasps, but there are also many species that attack nymphs and larval stages. Euphorine hosts may belong to a variety of insect orders (Coleoptera, Hemiptera, Hymenoptera, Neuroptera, Psocoptera, Orthoptera and Lepidoptera) although most euphorine tribes are confined to Coleoptera. Here we investigate the phylogenetic relationships of the Euphorinae based on molecular data (3 kb of nucleotide data from four markers: 18S, 28S, CAD and COI) and propose a higher‐level classification based upon the resulting phylogeny. We also infer the evolution of host associations and discuss the diversification of the Euphorinae. Results from both Bayesian inference and maximum‐likelihood analysis show that the subfamily, as previously circumscribed, is paraphyletic. We propose that the subfamily be expanded to include the tribes Meteorini and Planitorini (Mannokeraia + Planitorus), so that it corresponds to a clade that is strongly supported as monophyletic in our analyses. Based on our results, a revised higher classification of the Euphorinae is proposed, in which 52 extant genera and 14 tribes are recognized. We reinstate the genus Microctonus belonging to the tribe Perilitini, and synonymize Ussuraridelus with Holdawayella, Sinuatophorus with Eucosmophorus. Furthermore, we propose the following tribal rearrangements: Spathicopis and Stenothremma are transferred to Perilitini; Tuberidelus, Eucosmophorus and Plynops to Cosmophorini; Ecclitura to Dinocampini; Chrysopophthorus, Holdawayella and Wesmaelia to Helorimorphini; Proclithroporus and Heia to Townesilitini. The monotypic tribe Cryptoxilonini is synonymized with Cosmophorini. The genera Pygostolus and Litostolus are placed in a separate tribe, Pygostolini, previously recognized as a subtribe among the Centistini. Parsimony‐based ancestral state reconstructions suggest that the ancestor of Euphorinae was a parasitoid of lepidopteran larvae, and that a host shift to larval Coleoptera occurred only in one clade of the Meteorini, some members of which secondarily shifted back to larval lepidopteran hosts. In the remainder of the subfamily, there was an initial shift from larval to adult coleopterans, followed by subsequent shifts to adults or larvae of Hemiptera, Hymenoptera, Neuroptera, Orthoptera and Psocoptera.     

Description of the immature stages of two Mononychus species (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Ceutorhynchinae) and a study of the host preferences of M. punctumalbum for Iris species in central Europe

Last larval instars and pupae of Mononychus punctumalbum (Herbst, 1784) and Mononychus schoenherri Kolenati, 1859 (Curculionidae, Ceutorhynchinae) are described in detail for the first time. No immatures of other species of this genus had previously been described. The immatures of Mononychus were compared with available data on immatures of all genera in the subfamily Ceutorhynchinae. Both the larvae and pupae of the two Mononychus species are very distinctive, having distinct characters from other genera in the subfamily Ceutorhynchinae. New bionomic data for M. punctumalbum concerning its host preferences for Iris species in central Europe can be used to verify literature data indicating the important role of the iris weevil in the dramatic decline in the plant's abundance in natural habitats as well as in gardens and other anthropogenic associations.     

Comparative morphology,biology and phylogeny of terminal‐instar larvae of the European species of Toryminae (Hym., Chalcidoidea,Torymidae) parasitoids of gall wasps (Hym. Cynipidae)

We present a phylogenetic and taxonomic study of the morphology and biology of the terminal‐instar larval stage of 19 species representing all the genera of Torymidae parasitoids of gall wasps in Europe, with the single exception of Megastigmus. The genera studied include Adontomerus Nikol'skaya, Idiomacromerus Crawford, Chalcimerus Steffan & Andriescu, Glyphomerus Förster, Pseudotorymus Masi and Torymus Dalman. We primarily used chaetotaxy and some head structures. The terminal‐instar larvae of all studied species are thoroughly described for the first time and illustrated with SEM images. We provide diagnostic characters for the family and the genera studied, and keys to genera and species for the identification of torymid larvae associated with cynipid galls. The majority of the torymid larvae studied are solitary monophagous parasitoids. Finally, to assess the potential use of larval characters in systematic studies of the family, a phylogenetic analysis of the studied taxa based on 42 larval morphological characters is proposed and compared with the current taxonomy of Torymidae. Our results suggest that body chaetotaxy, and characters of the head and mouthparts could be used for genera and species discrimination. © 2008 The Linnean Society of London, Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2008, 154 , 676–721.     

Ontogenetic evidence supporting a relationship between <Emphasis Type="Italic">Brotulotaenia</Emphasis> and <Emphasis Type="Italic">Lamprogrammus</Emphasis> (Ophidiiformes: Ophidiidae) based on the morphology of exterilium and rubaniform larvae

Analysis of the Dana collection of larval fishes yielded 36 exterilium larvae and 17 rubaniform larvae, referable to the Ophidiidae. Both larval types reach large sizes before transformation and are characterized by an exterilium gut, although it is less strongly expressed in rubaniform larvae. Both have early-forming, elongate, descending processes of the coracoid that serve to support the trailing intestines. Both have a greatly reduced pelvic girdle attached to a stalklike cartilaginous structure, resulting in a pelvic fin origin well posterior to the cleithral symphysis, a position that is without precedent in the family Ophidiidae. Both of these larval types also strongly display an anterior to posterior developmental sequence, lose the pelvic fin rays at transformation, and have extraordinarily elongate proximal radials supporting their dorsal and anal fins and modified proximal radials supporting the anterior dorsal fin rays. After examination of these larvae and reference to 5 previously described exterilium larvae and 1 previously described rubaniform larva, we conclude that they belong to Lamprogrammus (three species) and Brotulotaenia (four species), respectively. The most recent classification of the Ophidiidae places Brotulotaenia in the monotypic subfamily Brotulotaeniinae, and Lamprogrammus in the subfamily Neobythitinae along with 37 other genera. The latter subfamily is an unwieldy assemblage for which monophyly has never been established. Ontogenetic evidence suggests a closer relationship between Brotulotaenia and Lamprogrammus, and the most economical reorganization of the ophidiids would involve incorporating the latter genus into the Brotulotaeniinae.     

Phantoms of Gondwana?—phylogeny of the spider subfamily Mynogleninae (Araneae: Linyphiidae)

This is the first genus‐level phylogeny of the subfamily Mynogleninae. It is based on 190 morphological characters scored for 44 taxa: 37 mynoglenine taxa (ingroup) representing 15 of the 17 known genera and seven outgroup taxa representing the subfamilies Stemonyphantinae, Linyphiinae (Linyphiini and Micronetini), and Erigoninae, and a representative of the family Pimoidae, the sister‐group to Linyphiidae. No fewer than 147 of the morphological characters used in this study are new and defined for this study, and come mainly from male and female genitalia. Parsimony analysis with equal weights resulted in three most parsimonious trees of length 871. The monophyly of the subfamily Mynogleninae and the genera Novafroneta, Parafroneta, Laminafroneta, Afroneta, Promynoglenes, Metamynoglenes, and Haplinis are supported, whereas Pseudafroneta is paraphyletic. The remaining seven mynoglenine genera are either monotypic or represented by only one taxon. Diagnoses are given for all genera included in the analysis. The evolution of morphological traits is discussed and we summarize the diversity and distribution patterns of the 124 known species of mynoglenines. The preferred topology suggests a single origin of mynoglenines in New Zealand with two dispersal events to Africa, and does not support Gondwana origin.     

A revised subfamily classification of Tenebrionidae (Coleoptera)

Existing classifications of Tenebrionidae are reviewed briefly. The inclusion of the families Alleculidae, Lagriidae, and Nilionidae in Tenebrionidae is confirmed. The splitting off from this complex of a family, Tentyriidae, by Doyen is discussed and rejected. Various taxa which had been included in Tenebrionidae are excluded, amongst which Syrphetodes, Brouniphylax, Exohadrus, Arthopus, Cotulades, Docalis, and Latometus (=Elascus) have not previously been formally excluded. A new family, Archeocrypticidae, is established and defined briefly for Archeocrypticus, Sivacrypticus, and Enneboeus.

Data from matrices based on adult and larval characters comparing Tenebrionidae with most other families of Tenebrionoidea (=Heteromera) are presented for derived characters in common, and for overall similarity. The families most closely related to Tenebrionidae according to these data are Zopheridae, Chalcodryidae, Merycidae, Archeocrypticidae, Synchroidae, Colydiidae, and Monommatidae; none is very close to Tenebrionidae, which has had a long independent history.

Characters of the subfamilies recognised are tabulated, and interpreted in a phylo‐genetic dendrogram. Phylogeny is discussed in relation to adaptive changes in the biology of the various subfamilies, which are Zolodininae new subfamily, Pimeliinae new sense (including Tentyriinae), Toxicinae new sense, Phrenapatinae new sense (including Archeoglenini new tribe), Diaperinae new sense, Gnathidiinae, Tenebrioninae new sense, Alleculinae, Nilioninae, Lagriinae new sense, Cossyphinae, and Cossyphodinae new status.

Biology, economic importance, copulation, orientation of the aedeagus, and distribution are discussed briefly.

Definitions of the family and subfamilies and a key to subfamilies are given, and keys to tribes are included for the smaller subfamilies. The previously unknown larvae of the genera Zolodinus, Menimus, Archeoglenes, Lepispilus, and Nyctoporis are described in detail. Pupae of Zolodinus and Nyctoporis are described. Keys to larvae include many other genera which were hitherto unknown or poorly known.     

A cladistic analysis of the nomadine bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea)

Abstract. This study compares the results of Rozen's cladistic analysis of the larvae of fifteen genera of cleptoparasitic bees in the subfamily Nomadinae with an independent data set of adult characters for the same genera. Adult characters exhibited considerably higher levels of homoplasy and poorer resolution of cladistic relationships, with multiple equally parsimonious cladograms. However, comparison of a Nelson consensus tree based on adult characters with the cladogram based on larval characters reveals three components consistently supported in both analyses (the tribes Epeolini and Ammobatini, and Neopasites + Neolarra) , one component supported only by adult characters (Isepeolus + Protepeolus) , and one terminal component supported only by larval characters (Nomada + Ammobatini), as well as several more inclusive groupings based on larval characters that are difficult to compare with the adult consensus tree because it shows so much less resolution. When adult and larval characters are combined in a single data matrix, the resulting cladogram closely resembles the cladogram based on larval characters alone, although levels of homoplasy are considerably higher than in the larval analysis.
A preliminary analysis of adult characters for thirty-four genera in the Nomadinae also exhibited high levels of homoplasy and very large numbers of equally parsimonious cladograms. Nevertheless, certain consistent monophyletic groupings, most notably the Epeolini and Ammobatini, were also supported in this analysis. The one currently recognized tribe whose monophyly has received no support from any analysis is the Nomadini.
The relevance of these phylogenetic hypotheses to our understanding of host associations and variable features of egg morphology and oviposition behaviour in nomadine bees is briefly discussed.     

Phylogeny of the tachyporine group subfamilies and 'basal' lineages of the Aleocharinae (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae) based on larval and adult characteristics

Abstract. This paper reports the conclusions of studies into the phylogeny of tachyporine group subfamilies and the ‘basal’ lineages of the subfamily Aleocharinae (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae) based on both larval and adult morphological data (133 adult characters, twenty-seven larval characters). Representatives of forty species of the tachyporine group were used in the analysis, including representatives of the Aleocharinae, Trichophyinae, Habrocerinae, Phloeocharinae, Olisthaerinae, and Tachyporinae. The Aleocharinae included representatives of the tribes Gymnusini, Deinopsini, Mesoporini, the ‘subfamily’ Trichopseniinae, and representatives of nine major tribes in the ‘higher’ Aleocharinae (Athetini, Hoplandriini, Falagriini, Lomechisini, Oxypodini, Aleocharini, Myllaenini, Homalotini, and Hypocyphtini). Analyses were performed first with adult characters alone and then with both larval and adult characters in a simultaneous analysis. The analysis based on adult characters produced eighty-five equally parsimonious trees (length = 499, consistency index = 42; retention index = 69). In the consensus tree, the Tachyporinae are not monophyletic, and the sister-group relationship between the Trichophyinae + Habrocerinae and the Aleocharinae is not resolved. The Aleocharinae are monophyletic, but, among the ‘basal’ Aleocharinae, the relationships of Gymnusini + Deinopsini, the Mesoporini, and the Trichopseniinae are unresolved. The combined adult and larval data, using Tachinus as the outgroup, produced six equally parsimonious trees (tree length = 588; consistency index = 43; retention index = 69). The strict consensus tree of the combined larval and adult data supports the following conclusions: (1) larval characters substantially stabilize the tree; (2) the subfamily Tachyporinae is not supported to be monophyletic; (3) the subfamilies Trichophyinae and Habrocerinae are sister groups, and together they are sister to the Aleocharinae; (4) the ‘basal’ Aleocharinae are not a monophyletic group, but the ‘higher’ Aleocharinae are monophyletic; (5) the sister group of the remaining Aleocharinae is a lineage made up of genera currently in the tribes Gymnusini and Deinopsini; (6) within the Gymnusini–Deinopsini lineage, the monophyly of the Gymnusini is weakly supported, but the monophyly of the Deinopsini is strongly supported; (7) the subfamily Trichopseniinae is strongly supported to be a member of the ‘basal’ Aleocharinae; (8) the Myllaenini are resolved well within the ‘higher’ Aleocharinae; (9) strong support for the monophyly of some tribes of ‘higher’ Aleocharinae suggests that morphological characters provide substantial phylogenetic signal for analysis of higher-level phylogeny of the Aleocharinae in spite of the preliminary nature of the analysis at this taxonomic level.     

Reevaluation of Blapimorpha and Opatrinae: addressing a major phylogeny‐classification gap in darkling beetles (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae: Blaptinae)

The taxonomic concepts of Blapimorpha and Opatrinae (informal and traditional, morphology‐based groupings among darkling beetles) are tested using molecular phylogenetics and a reassessment of larval and adult morphology to address a major phylogeny‐classification gap in Tenebrionidae. Instead of a holistic approach (family‐level phylogeny), this study uses a bottom‐up strategy (tribal grouping) in order to define larger, monophyletic lineages within Tenebrioninae. Sampling included representatives of 27 tenebrionid tribes: Alleculini, Amarygmini, Amphidorini, Blaptini, Bolitophagini, Branchini, Cerenopini, Coniontini, Caenocrypticini, Dendarini, Eulabini, Helopini, Lagriini, Melanimini, Opatrini, Pedinini, Phaleriini, Physogasterini, Platynotini, Platyscelidini, Praociini, Scaurini, Scotobiini, Tenebrionini, Trachyscelini, Triboliini and Ulomini. Molecular analyses were based on DNA sequence data from four non‐overlapping gene regions: carbamoyl‐phosphate synthetase domain of rudimentary (CAD) (723 bp), wingless (wg) (438 bp) and nuclear ribosomal 28S (1101 bp) and mitochondrial ribosomal 12S (363 bp). Additionally, 15 larval and imaginal characters were scored and subjected to an ancestral state reconstruction analysis. Results revealed that Amphidorini, Blaptini, Dendarini, Pedinini, Platynotini, Platyscelidini and Opatrini form a clade which can be defined by the following morphological features: adults—antennae lacking compound/stellate sensoria; procoxal cavities externally and internally closed, intersternal membrane of abdominal ventrites 3–5 visible; paired abdominal defensive glands present, elongate, not annulated; larvae—prolegs enlarged (adapted for digging); ninth tergite lacking urogomphi. To accommodate this monophyletic grouping (281 genera and ～4000 species), the subfamily Blaptinae sens. nov. is resurrected. Prior to these results, all of the tribes within Blaptinae were classified within the polyphyletic subfamily Tenebrioninae. The non‐monophyletic nature of Terebrioninae has already been postulated by previous authors, yet no taxonomic decisions were made to fix its status. The reinstatement of Blaptinae, which groups ～50% of the former Tenebrioninae, helps to clarify phylogenetic relations among the whole family and is the first step towards a complete higher‐level revision of Tenebrionidae. The Central Asian tribe Dissonomini (two genera, ～30 species) was not included in Blaptinae due to a lack of representatives in the performed phylogenetic analyses; however, based on morphological features, the tribe is listed as a potential addition to the subfamily.     

A description and classification of some final—instar larvae of the Mesochorinae (Hymenoptera, Ichneumonidae)

The characters of the final–instar larvae of the Mesochorinae are reviewed on knowledge of species belonging to four genera. Relationships indicated by larval characters, within the Mesochorinae, and between the Mesochorinae and other groups of rchneumonidae, are outlined. Evidence is given that the larval characters of Cidaphus indicate this genus to be the least specialized of the Mesochorinae.