Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pjpqr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-14T15:33:53.946Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Studies in Siricidae, especially of Europe and southern Asia (Hymenoptera, Symphyta)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

Robert B. Benson
Robert B. Benson
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, British Museum (Nat. Hist.).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. These studies were originally intended to form the basis of a world monograph of the Siricidae ; such a work cannot be completed under present circumstances.

2. Two ratios are introduced as useful characters for separating species : the ovipositor/forewing ratio and the sawsheath/ovipositor ratio. These ratios were obtained from all specimens of all the species represented in the British Museum collections and the results are tabulated. They were found not to vary with the size of the insects.

The former ratio is specially useful in the genus Urocerus, which has a long ovipositor, and the latter ratio in the genus Sirex, which has a shorter ovipositor.

3. Keys are given to the genera of the world. Of Semenov's new genera, Xoanon is accepted but not Xanthosirex. A new genus Eriotremex is erected for certain Indo-Malayan species previously included in Tremex.

4. Keys are given to the European species, which are compared critically with related species from other parts of the world. A key to the species of Eriotremex, gen. nov., is also given.

5. Sirex noctilio, F., and S. juvencus, L., are recorded for the first time from North America and S. cyaneus, F., from the continent of Europe. The common Urocerus of the northern Palaearctic region is shown to be more closely related to the Nearctic U. gigas flavicornis, F., than to the central European U. gigas gigas, L., and is treated as a new subspecies—U. gigas taiganus, subsp. nov. U. gigas tibetanus, subsp. nov., is described from the Himalayas. U. sah, Mocsáry, is treated as a subspecies of U. augur, Klug, and U. cedrorum, Smith, as a synonym of U. augur augur, Klug.

6. The British Siricidae are discussed, and it is suggested that U. gigas taiganus, subsp. nov., and the form of S. juvencus, L., with entirely black antennae may be native in the Caledonian forest.

7. It is argued that modern Siricidae could not have been derived from the Jurassic Pseudosiricidae.

8. The known Oriental and Himalayan Siricidae are listed and discussed. Urocerus multifasciatus, Takeuchi, and Eriotremex formosanus, Matsumura, are mentioned as two species originally described from Formosa but shown also to occur on the mainland. Urocerus niger, sp. nov., is described from the Himalayan region, and the name Eriotremex malayanus, sp. nov., is given to a form described without a name by Forsius from Malaya.

9. Several errors in previous work on Siricidae are corrected.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 34 , Issue 1 , April 1943 , pp. 27 - 51
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1943

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

Benson, R. B. (1938). Some more new or little known British sawflies (Hymenoptera Symphyta) III.—Ent. mon. Mag., 74, pp. 255–257.Google Scholar
Bradley, J. C. (1913). The Siricidae of North America.—J. Ent. Zool., 5, no. 1, pp. 1–35, figs. 1–39.Google Scholar
Bradley, J. C. (1934). A new species of Xeris (Hymenoptera Siricidae) from the Himalayas.—Rec. Indian Mus., 36, p. 145.Google Scholar
Cameron, P. (1908). A new species of Tremex from Borneo.—Entomologist, 41, pp. 33–34.Google Scholar
Cockerell, T. D. A. (1921). Some British fossil insects.—Canad. Ent., 53, pp. 22–23, figs. 26–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conde, O. (1935). Oryssoidea et Tenthredinoidea collecta in Ussuri et Sachalin ab N. Delle.—Notul. ent., 14, pp. 67–87.Google Scholar
Enslin, E. (1912–1918). Die Tenthredinoidea Mitteleuropas, 1–7.—Dtsch. ent. Z., Beih., 1912–1917.Google Scholar
Evans, W. (1922). Notes on the woodwasps (Sirex) occurring in Scotland with special reference to their present-day distribution.—Scot. Nat., 1922, pp. 175–189.Google Scholar
Forsius, R. (1934). Notes on a collection of Malaysian Tenthredinoidea (Hym.).—Bull. Raffles Mus., 5, no. 8, pp. 169–193.Google Scholar
Francke-Grosmann, H. (1939). Ueber das Zusammenleben von Holzwespen (Siricinae) mit Pilzen.—Z. angew. Ent., 25, no. 4, pp. 647–680, 18 figs.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghigi, H. (1909). Sopra una nuova specie di Siricide delle Azore.—Boll. Soc. ent. ital., 40 (1908) pp. 163–170.Google Scholar
Guiglia, D. (1937). Alcune osservazioni intorno Tremex hyalinatus Mocsáry (Hymen. Phytophaga).—Ann. Mus. Stor. nat. Genova, 59, pp. 433–437, pl. xv.Google Scholar
Gussakovskié, V. V. (1935). Faune de l'URSS, (N. S.) no. 1. Insectes Hyménoptéres., T. II, vol. 1 Chalastogastra, Pt. 1.Google Scholar
Hedicke, H. (1938). Hymenopterorum Catalogus, part 6, Siricidae.Google Scholar
Konow, F. N. (1905). Syst. Zusammenst. Chalastog., pp. 316–352.Google Scholar
Koornneef, J. (1935). Paururus sucineiceps Knf. 1935 ♀.—Tijdschr. Ent., 78 (Verslag) pp. xix–xx.Google Scholar
Lange, C. F. (1909). Beschreibung einer neuen Holzwespe aus Deutsch-Neuguinea (Hym.).—Dtsch. ent. Z., 1909, p. 210.Google Scholar
Martynov, A. (1937). Liassic insects from Shurab and Kisyl-Kiya.—Trav. Inst. Paléontol., 7, p. 142, fig. 20 (p. 42).Google Scholar
Matsumura, S. (1930). The illustrated thousand insects of Japan.—2 (Hymenoptera).Google Scholar
Peck, O. (1937). The males of Urocerus albicornis F. and U. flavicornis F. (Hymenoptera : Siricidae).—Canad. Ent., 69, pp. 275–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roebuck, W. D. (1906). Xeris spectrum L. at Leeds : an addition to the British list of Hymenoptera.—Naturalist, 1906, p. 223.Google Scholar
Rohwer, S. A. (1910). Japanese sawflies in the collection of the United States National Museum.—Proc. U. S. nat. Mus., 39, pp. 99–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, H. H. (1936). The ancestry and wing-venation of the Hymenoptera.—Ann. ent. Soc. Amer., 29, no. 1 pp. 99–111, figs. 1–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saunt, J. W. (1925). Notes on collecting, etc.—Ent. Rec., 97, p. 94.Google Scholar
Semenov-Tian-Shanskiî, A. (1921). Praecursoriae Siricidarum novorum diagnoses (Hymenoptera).—Rev. russe Ent., 17 (1917) pp. 81–95.Google Scholar
Sonan, J. (1938). Siricidae of Formosa.—Trans. nat. Hist. Soc. Formosa, 28 no. 175, pp. 88–94, figs. 1–5.Google Scholar
Stephens, J. F. (1835). Illustrations of British Ent., Mandibulata, VIII. Uroceridae, pp. 111–116.Google Scholar
Takeuchi, K. (1938). A systematic study of the suborder Symphyta (Hymenoptera) of the Japanes Empire (1).—Tenthredo, 2, no. 2, pp. 187–195, fig. 4.Google Scholar
Tansley, G. (1939). The British Islands and their vegetation. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Tillyard, R. J. (1927). The ancestry of the order Hymenoptera.—Trans. ent. Soc. Lond., 75, pp. 307–318, figs. 1–7, pl. XXVI.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waterston, J. (1928). In Chrystal, R. N.The Sirex wood wasps and their importance in Forestry.—Bull. ent. Res., 19, pp. 219–241.Google Scholar
Westwood, J. O. (1874). Thesaurus entomologicus Oxoniensis. Oxford.Google Scholar