See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/352059061

THE GENUS NEOCHRYSOCHARIS KURDJUMOV (CHALCIDOIDEA:

EULOPHIDAE) FROM INDIA, WITH THE DESCRIPTION OF THREE NEW
SPECIES

Article · June 2021

CITATIONS READS

0 85

3 authors:

Mohd Majid Jamali Shahid Bin Zeya

Aligarh Muslim University Aligarh Muslim University
24 PUBLICATIONS   10 CITATIONS    40 PUBLICATIONS   123 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Tarique Anwar
Aligarh Muslim University
13 PUBLICATIONS   25 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

DNA Barcoding of fairyflies (Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea: Mymaridae) View project

Biosystematics and biodiversity of Indian Encyrtidae (Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea) View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mohd Majid Jamali on 02 June 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Munis Entomology & Zoology Mun. Ent. Zool.
https://www.munisentzool.org/ 16 (2) (June, 2021) 663
ISSN 1306-3022 © MRG
___________________________________________________________

THE GENUS NEOCHRYSOCHARIS KURDJUMOV

(CHALCIDOIDEA: EULOPHIDAE) FROM INDIA, WITH
THE DESCRIPTION OF THREE NEW SPECIES

Mohd Majid Jamali*, Shahid Bin Zeya**

and Prince Tarique Anwar**
* School of Agricultural Sciences, Glocal University, Saharanpur 247121, Uttar Pradesh,
INDIA. E-mail: majidjamali1988@gmail.com; ORCID ID: …………………….
** Department of Zoology, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh 202002, Uttar Pradesh,
INDIA. ORCID IDs:………………………… and …………………………………..

[Jamali, M. M., Bin Zeya, S. & Anwar, P. T. 2021. The genus Neochrysocharis
Kurdjumov (Chalcidoidea: Eulophidae) from India, with the description of three new
species. Munis Entomology & Zoology, 16 (2): 663-679]

ABSTRACT: The Indian species of Neochrysocharis Kurdjumov (Eulophidae: Entedoninae)

are revised. The revision includes ten species, of which three species are described as new:
Neochrysocharis raily Jamali & Zeya, sp. nov., N. robustus Jamali & Zeya, sp. nov. and N.
sudhiri Jamali & Zeya, sp. nov.. N. formosus (Westwood) is recorded to India. Status of
three species are revoked: N. hyalinipennis Khan & Shafee stat. rev., N. metallicus Khan &
Shafee stat. rev. and N. pubipennis Khan & Shafee stat. rev.. Brief diagnoses are given for
the known species. An identification key to Indian species is also provided.

KEY WORDS: Hymenoptera; entedoninae; revision; new species; new record; revised status

Neochrysocharis Kurdjumov is one of the eulophid genera that mostly contain

potential biological control agents of leaf-mining agromyzid pests (Fisher & La
Salle, 2005). Earlier this genus was confused to Chrysonotomyia Ashmead, but
distinguished from the latter by having three main characters: flagellum with
mushroom shaped peg sensilla; transepimeral sulcus almost always weakly
curved or straight; radial cell always setose and stigmal hairline absent (Hansson,
1995). Neochrysocharis comprises of 51 species, the majority of which have been
described from Nearctic and Palaearctic regions (Noyes, 2021). Until 2021, at
least six species of Neochrysocharis are known. Such as N. horticola Khan,
Agnihotri & Sushil, N. hyalinipennis Khan & Shafee, N. liriomyzae khan
Agnihotri & Sushil, N. indicus Khan, Agnihotri & Sushil, N. metallicus Khan &
Shafee and N. pubipennis Khan & Shafee are known to occur in India (Noyes,
2021).
The aim of this paper is to revise the Indian species of Neochrysocharis. The
revision includes ten species, of which N. raily Jamali & Zeya, sp. nov., N.
robustus Jamali & Zeya, sp. nov. and N. sudhiri Jamali & Zeya, sp. nov. are newly
described. N. formosus (Westwood) is newly recorded from India. Three species
N. hyalinipennis Khan & Shafee, N. metallicus Khan & Shafee and N. pubipennis
Khan & Shafee are transferred to Neochrysocharis from Chrysonotomyia
Ashmead. We further provide an identification key to Indian species of
Neochrysocharis.
 Munis Entomology & Zoology Mun. Ent. Zool.
664 https://www.munisentzool.org/ 16 (2) (June, 2021)
ISSN 1306-3022 © MRG
___________________________________________________________

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The present study is based on specimens collected mainly by sweep net from
several Indian States. All collected specimens were transferred to 80% alcohol
and some of them were mounted on rectangular cards. Slides were prepared
following the methods given by Noyes (1982) and Anwar et al. (2020) for
extremely small chalcids. Prior to mounting specimens on slides, body colour was
observed and recorded in detail. The body lengths are given millimetres. Other
measurements are relative taken from the divisions of a linear scale of an ocular-
micrometer. These measurements were taken at 100× magnification of the
microscope (one ocular micrometer division = 0.01 mm). The photomicrographs
of slide mounted parts were taken with a digital camera (Nikon DS-Fi1c) attached
to a compound microscope (Nikon Eclipse Ci).
The following abbreviations are used in the text:
C1, C2, C3 = Clava segments 1, 2, 3.
F1, F2, F3 = Funicle segments 1, 2, 3.
OOL = Minimum distance between a posterior ocellus and corresponding eye
margin
POL = Minimum distance between the posterior ocelli
The following acronyms are used for the depositories:
GBPUAT = Department of Entomology, G.B. Pant University of Agriculture and
Technology, Pantnagar, India.
ZDAMU = Insect collections, Department of Zoology, Aligarh Muslim University,
Aligarh, India.

SYSTEMATIC ACCOUNTS

Genus Neochrysocharis Kurdjumov

Neochrysocharis Kurdjumov, 1912: 234. Type species Neochrysocharis immaculatus
Kurdjumov, by original designation.
Rhicnopeltomyia Girault, 1913: 174. Type species Rhicnopeltomyia washingtoni Girault, by
original designstion. Synonymy by Hansson, 1995: 29.
Heterocharis Erdös, 1954: 343. Type species Neochrysocharis albipes Kurdjumov, by
original designation. Synonymy by Bouček 1957: 276.
Pholema Graham, 1963: 267. Type species Pholema microstoma Graham, by original
designation. Synonymy by Hansson, 2012: 150.
Fermeceranisus Szelényi, 1977: 241. Type species Fermeceranisus hartigi Szelényi, by
monotypy and original designation. Synonymy by Hansson, 1995: 28.
Diagnosis. Female. Head with frontal grooves V-shaped (Figs. 12, 17); scrobal
grooves very close together throughout their length, reaching frontal groove
separately (Fig. 12); clypeus not set off by sutures; mandible tridentate. Antenna
with 2-segmented funicle; 3-segmented clava; flagellum with mushroom shaped
peg sensilla. Midlobe of mesosctum with 2 pairs of setae; transepimeral sulcus
almost always weakly curved or straight (Hansson, 1990); propodeum short,
transverse and usually smooth, shiny and without any carina; propodeal callus
with 1 or 2 setae; postmarginal vein almost equal or shorter than stigmal vein;
radial cell always setose; coastal cell narrow. Petiole much broader than long.
Male. Scape slightly broad (Fig. 23).
Hosts. Primary parasitoids of Cecidomyiidae, and leaf-mining Diptera and
Lepidoptera; secondary parasitoids of Ichneumonoidea, also reported from
Chrysomelidae, Diprionidae, and Tenthredinidae (Hansson, 1995).
 Munis Entomology & Zoology Mun. Ent. Zool.
https://www.munisentzool.org/ 16 (2) (June, 2021) 665
ISSN 1306-3022 © MRG
___________________________________________________________

Distribution. Australia, India, Indonesia, Peoples' Republic of China (Noyes,

2021).

Key to Indian species of Neochrysocharis Kurdjumov, based on

females

1. Fore wing with infuscation below stigmal vein (Fig. 4) ....................................................... 2

-. Fore wing without any infuscation below stigmal vein (Figs 43, 49) …................................ 3
2. Mesosoma dark brown with metallic green reflection (Fig. 3); scape in basal third or so
white, apical two-third brown; 4.11× as long as broad; flagellum with 3 distinct anelli (Fig. 2)
................................................................................................. 1. N. formosus (Westwood)
-. Mesosoma dark brown with silvery white reflection; scape dark brown except pale yellow
apically; 4.8× as long as broad; flagellum with one distinct anellus ..........................................
............................................................................... 2. N. indicus Khan Agnihotri & Sushil
3. Antenna with pedicel subquadrate, at most 1.14× as long as broad (Fig. 7) ....................... 4
-. Antenna with pedicel distinctly longer than broad, at least 1.3× as long as broad .............. 5
4. Scape narrow, 4× as long as broad; flagellum with 3 anelli (Fig. 7); ovipositor 1.2× as long
as hind tibia ...................................................................................... 3. N. robustus sp. nov.
-. Scape flattened, 3.14× as long as broad; flagellum with one anellus (Fig. 13); ovipositor 2×
as long as hind tibia ........................................................ 4. N. metallicus Khan & Shafee
5. Fore wing with postmarginal vein subequal to or slightly longer than stigmal vein .......... 6
-. Fore wing with postmarginal vein distinctly shorter than stigmal vein ............................... 7
6. Eye height 7× as long as malar space; F1 longer than broad (Fig. 18); scutellum relatively
broad posteriorly (Fig. 19); ovipositor 2.04× as long as hind tibia …. 5. N. sudhiri sp. nov.
-. Eye height 2.7× as long as malar space; F1 quadrate (Fig. 26); scutellum relatively narrow
posteriorly (Fig. 27); ovipositor 1.79× as long as hind tibia .......................................................
…...................................................................................... 6. N. pubipennis Khan & Shafee
7. Gaster subequal to mesosoma ............................... 7. N. hyalinipennis Khan & Shafee
-. Gaster distinctly longer than mesosoma .............................................................................. 8
8. Antenna with pedicel shorter than F1 (Fig. 36) …………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………….8. N. horticola khan Agnihotri & Sushil
-. Antenna with pedicel longer than F1 .................................................................................... 9
9. Antenna with scape less than 4.07× as long as broad; F1 shorter than F2; flagellum with
one anellus (Fig. 41) ................................................................................. 9. N. raily sp. nov.
-. Antenna with scape at least 4.7× as long as broad; F1 subequal to F2; flagellum with 2
anelli (Fig. 47) .............................................. 10. N. liriomyzae khan Agnihotri & Sushil

1. Neochrysocharis formosus (Westwood)

(Figs. 1-5)
Closterocerus formosus Westwood, 1833: 420, female, male. Syntype, female, United Kingdom- England (HDOU), not
examined.
Entedon phaenna Walker, 1839: 25, female. Holotype, female, United Kingdom-England (BMNH). Synonymy by Boucek &
Askew, 1968: 125.
Entedon ovulorum Ratzeburg, 1848: 165, female. Holotype, female, Germany. Synonymy by Askew, 1979: 28.
Entedon lunatus Ratzeburg, 1848: 165, female. Holotype, female, Germany. Synonymy by Bouček & Askew, 1968: 125.
Chrysocharis obscuripes Fӧrster, 1861: 38, female. Lectotype, female, Switzerland (NHMV). Synonymy by Hansson, 1990:
46.
Closterocerus ovulorum (Ratzeburg): Kurdjumov, 1912: 235, new combination.
Derostenus variipes Crawford, 1913a: 315, female. Holotype, female, United States of America (USNM). Synonymy by
Yoshimoto, 1978: 700.
Derostenus fullowayi Crawford, 1913b: 348, female. Holotype, female, Hawaii (USNM). Synonymy by Yoshimoto, 1978:
700.
Achrysocharis formosa erythraea Silvestri: Silvestri, 1914: 210, variety, Eritrea. Thompson, 1955: 272, catalogue.
Achrysocharis formosa meridionalis Silvestri: Silvestri, 1914: 210, variety, Eritrea.
Achrysocharella silvia Girault, 1917: 1, female. Syntype, females, United States of America, Maryland (USNM). Synonymy
by Yoshimoto, 1978: 700.
Achrysocharis camilli Girault, 1917: 5, female. Holotype, female, United States of America, South Dakota (USNM).
Synonymy by Yoshimoto, 1978: 700.
Achrysocharis fullowayi (Crawford): Girault, 1917: 5, new combination.
Derostenus fullowayi Crawford: Frost, 1924: 131, new combination.
Achrysocharis formosa (Westwood): Graham, 1959: 198, new combination. Erdos, 1956: 25, record.
 Munis Entomology & Zoology Mun. Ent. Zool.
666 https://www.munisentzool.org/ 16 (2) (June, 2021)
ISSN 1306-3022 © MRG
___________________________________________________________

Achrysocharella formosa (Westwood): Graham, 1959: 198, new combination.

Derostenus silvia (Girault): Peck, 1951: 466, new combination.
Neochrysocharis trifolii Erdӧs, 1961: 481, female. Holotype, female, Hungary (HNHM). Synonymy by Hansson, 1990: 46.
Achrysocharis ovulorum (Ratzeburg): Peck, 1963: 212, catalogue.
Achrysocharella ovulorum (Ratzeburg): Boucek & Askew, 1968: 125, new combination.
Chrysonotomyia formosa (Westwood): Bouček, 1977: 125, new combination. Sheng & Zhan, 2000: 259, comparison.
Chrysonotomyia (Achrysocharella) ovulorum (Ratzeburg): Yoshimoto, 1978: 704, new combination. Kalina, 1989: 126,
checklist.
Chrysonotomyia (Achrysocharella) formosa (Westwood): Yoshimoto, 1978: 700, new combination.
Achrysocharella fullowayi (Crawford): De Santis, 1979: 279, new combination.
Achrysocharella variipes (Crawford): De Santis, 1979: 279, new combination.
Chrysonotomyia obscuripes (Foerster): Hansson, 1985: 98, new combination.
Neochrysocharis formosa (Westwood). Hansson, 1990: 46; 1995: 39, diagnosis. Fisher & La Salle, 2005: 32, comparison.
Chrysocharis ovulorum (Ratzeburg): Yefremova, 2002: 581, catalogue.
Neochrysocharis formosus (Westwood). Doganlar & Elsayed, 2015: 81. Yefremova, 2015: 22, checklist.
Material examined. INDIA: UTTAR PRADESH: Hathras, 6 ♀♀, 1 ♂ (on cards),
3 ♀♀ (on slide, slide No. EUL.8, EUL.19, EUL.21), 6.iii.2013, Coll. S.K. Ahmed, M.
T. Khan. (ZDAMU).
Redescription. Female. Length, 1.1–1.28 mm. Head dark brown with metallic
green reflection. Antenna brown except scape in basal third or so white.
Mesosoma dark brown with metallic green reflection. Fore wing (Fig. 4)
subhyaline, infumate with pale yellow and with brown infuscation below stigmal
vein. Legs largely pale white except coxae and fore femur completely, mid femur
in basal two-thirds, hind femur in basal three-fourths and last tarsal segments of
all legs brown. Gaster brown to dark brown.
Head (Fig. 1) with polygonal reticulation, in frontal view, 1.26–1.5× as broad
as high; eye height 3.83–4.7× as long as malar space; antennal toruli situated
distinctly above the lower eye margin. Antenna (Fig. 2) with scape 3.77–4.11× as
long as broad, 2.83–3.9× as long as pedicel, subequal to proximal three
flagellomeres combined; pedicel 1.25–1.41× as long as broad; flagellum with 3
distinct anelli; F1 slightly longer than F2; clava 2.68–3.25× as long as broad; third
claval segment narrow.
Mesosoma (Fig. 3) 1.3–1.46× as long as broad; pronotum narrow, visible in
dorsal view; mesoscutum shorter than scutellum; notauli almost complete; mid
lobe of mesoscutum with 4 setae; axillae elongate, reaching half length of
scutellum; scutellum subquadrate; mesoscutum, scutellum and axillae with
polygonal reticulate sculpture; metanotum smooth except reticulate laterally;
dorsellum with transverse striation, 2.8–4.16× as broad as long; propodeum
smooth. Fore wing (Fig. 4) 1.86–1.92× as long as broad; speculum closed;
marginal vein + parastigma 1.95–2.05× as long as marginal vein, 4.3–4.5× as long
as stigmal vein; post marginal vein 0.35–0.42× stigmal vein; longest marginal
seta 0.05× maximum wing width. Hind wing (Fig. 5) 4.5–4.6× as long as broad;
longest marginal seta 0.28–0.37× maximum wing width.
Metasoma (Fig. 3). Petiole 2.6– 4× as broad as long; gaster slightly longer
than mesosoma; ovipositor long second valvifer touching the distal margin of T1,
hardly exserted beyond apex of gaster; ovipositor 1.75– 1.81× long as hind tibia.
Relative measurements. Head height: width, 30: 45; eye height, 23; malar
space, 6. Antennal segments length: width– scape, 17.5: 4.25; pedicel, 5.5: 4; F1,
6: 4.5; F2, 5.5: 4.5; C1, 6: 5; C2, 6: 4.25; C3, 4.5: 2.25; spicula, 3. Mesosoma
length: width, 55: 42. Fore wing length: width, 100: 52; longest marginal seta, 3;
submarginal vein length, 21; parastigma length, 7.5; marginal vein length, 34;
postmarginal vein length, 3.5; stigmal vein length, 10. Hind wing length: width,
88: 19; longest marginal seta, 6; Hind tibia length, 32. Metasoma. Petiole length:
width, 3: 9.5; gaster length, 58; ovipositor length, 56.
Male. Similar to female except sexual diamorphism.
 Munis Entomology & Zoology Mun. Ent. Zool.
https://www.munisentzool.org/ 16 (2) (June, 2021) 667
ISSN 1306-3022 © MRG
___________________________________________________________

Distribution. India (new record): Uttar Pradesh.

Host. Unknown.
Comments. The redescripton of N. formosus (Westwood) is based on females
collected from Indian State Uttar Pradesh and, agrees fairly well with the
descriptions of European specimens (Hansson, 1990 & 1995). However, it differs
slightly from the European species in the following characters: malar space 1.41×
as long as width of scape; fore wing 1.86–1.92× as long as broad; post marginal
vein 0.35–0.42× as long as stigmal vein. In European specimens: malar space
almost twice as long as width of scape; fore wing 1.58× as long as broad; post
marginal vein 0.50× as long as stigmal vein. On the basis of these minor
differences, we consider it to be conspecific.

Figures 1–5. Neochrysocharis formosus (Westwood). Holotype, female: 1, head, frontal

view; 2, antenna; 3, mesosoma and metasoma; 4, fore wing; 5, hind wing.

2. Neochrysocharis indicus Khan, Agnihotri & Sushil

Neochrysocharis indica Khan, Agnihotri & Sushil, 2005: 109, female. Holotype, female, India, Uttarakhand, Pantnagar
(GBPUAT), not examined.
Diagnosis. Female. Length, 0.98 mm. Body dark brown with silvery white
reflection. Antenna dark brown except scape pale yellow apically. Fore wing
hyaline, infuscated below stigmal vein; hind wing hyaline. Legs pale white except
coxae dark brown.
Head finely reticulate and densely setose; frontal grooves broad, Y shaped;
POL 2× OOL. Antenna with scape 4.8× as long as broad; pedicel longer than F1
and F2 individually; flagellum with one distinct anellus; F1 shorter than F2.
Mesosoma with polygonal reticulate sculpture; mesoscutum shorter than
scutellum; notauli incomplete. Fore wing 2.09× as long as broad; speculum
closed; post marginal vein 0.35× stigmal vein.
Metasoma. Petiole short; gaster longer than mesosoma; ovipositor occupying
almost whole of gaster length, slightly exserted beyond apex of gaster.
 Munis Entomology & Zoology Mun. Ent. Zool.
668 https://www.munisentzool.org/ 16 (2) (June, 2021)
ISSN 1306-3022 © MRG
___________________________________________________________

Male. Unknown.
Distribution. India: Uttarakhand.
Host. Liriomyza sp. on castor (Ricinus communis).
Comments. The above diagnosis is based on the original description and
illustrations given by Khan et al. (2005). This species differs from N. formosus
(Westwood) by the characters given in the key.

3. Neochrysocharis robustus Jamali & Zeya, sp. nov.

(Figs. 6-11)
Etymology. The species is named for having robust clava.
Type material. Holotype: ♀ (on slide under four coverslips, slide No. EUL.212),
INDIA: ANDHRA PRADESH: East Godawri, Samalkota, Rayapuram, 5.ii.2015,
Coll. K. M.T. Khan. (ZDAMU).
Paratype: 1 ♀ (on card), data as for holotype. (ZDAMU).
Description. Female. Holotype. Length, 1.15 mm. Head dark brown. Antenna
dark brown except scape white. Mesosoma dark brown. Fore wing (Fig. 9)
subhyaline. Legs including coxae pale white. Gaster brown to dark brown;
ovipositor brown.
Head (Fig. 6) as broad as mesosoma; vertex with transverse striations and
several small setae; frons with polygonal reticulation; eye height 5.8× as long as
malar space; antennal toruli situated slightly above the lower eye margin.
Antenna (Fig. 7) with scape 4× as long as broad, 2.6× as long as pedicel, subequal
to proximal three flagellomeres combined; pedicel flattened, 1.07× as long as
broad, longer than F1 and F2 individually; flagellum with 3 distinct anelli; F1
shorter than F2, 0.84× F2; both the funicle segments broader than long; clava
2.1× as long as broad; C3 conical and narrow.
Mesosoma (Fig. 8) 1.4× as long as broad; pronotum narrow, visible in dorsal
view; mesoscutum slightly shorter than scutellum; notauli incomplete; mid lobe
of mesoscutum with 4 long setae; axillae elongate, reaching almost half length of
scutellum; scutellum longer than broad with 2 long setae; mesoscutum, scutellum
and axillae with polygonal reticulate sculpture; metanotum smooth; dorsellum
3.75× as broad as long; propodeum with faint striations. Fore wing (Fig. 9) 1.93×
as long as broad; speculum closed; marginal vein + parastigma 1.75× as long as
submarginal vein, 4.6× as long as stigmal vein; post marginal vein subequal to
stigmal vein; longest marginal seta 0.1× maximum wing width. Hind wing (Fig.
10) 5.4× as long as broad, apex slightly blunt; longest marginal seta 0.4×
maximum wing width.
Metasoma (Fig. 11). Petiole 1.6× as broad as long; gaster as long as mesosoma;
ovipositor occupying slightly more than half length of gaster, slightly exserted
beyond apex of gaster; ovipositor 1.2× long as hind tibia.
Relative measurements (holotype). Head height: width, 24: 25; eye height,
20.5; malar space, 3.5. Antennal segments length: width– scape, 10: 2.5; pedicel,
3.75: 3.5; F1, 2.75: 3.75; F2, 3.25: 4; C1, 3.25: 4.5; C2, 3.25: 4.25; C3, 3: 2.75;
spicula, 2.5. Mesosoma length: width, 35: 25. Fore wing length: width, 58: 30;
longest marginal seta, 3; submarginal vein length, 12; parastigma length, 3;
marginal vein length, 18; postmarginal vein length, 4.5; stigmal vein length, 4.5.
Hind wing length: width, 49: 9; longest marginal seta, 4; Hind tibia length, 19.
Metasoma. Petiole length: width, 3: 5; gaster length, 35; ovipositor length, 23.
Male. Unknown.
Distribution. India: Andhra Pradesh.
 Munis Entomology & Zoology Mun. Ent. Zool.
https://www.munisentzool.org/ 16 (2) (June, 2021) 669
ISSN 1306-3022 © MRG
___________________________________________________________

Host. Unknown.
Comments. This new species appears similar to N. metallicus Khan and Shafee
(1980) in body length and coloration, but it differs from the latter mainly in
following characters: scape narrow, 4× as long as broad; flagellum with three
anelli; postmarginal vein subequal to stigmal vein; ovipositor 1.2× as long as hind
tibia. In N. metallicus: scape flattened, 3.14× as long as broad; flagellum with one
anellus; postmarginal vein shorter than stigmal vein; ovipositor 2× as long as
hind tibia.

Figures 6–11. Neochrysocharis robustus sp. nov. Holotype, female: 6, head, frontal view; 7,
antenna; 8, mesosoma; 9, fore wing; 10, hind wing.11, metasoma.

4. Neochrysocharis metallicus Khan & Shafee stat. rev.

(Figs. 12-16)
Neochrysocharis metallicus Khan & Shafee, 1980: 488, female. Holotype, female, India, Karnataka, Bangalore (ZDAMU),
examined.
Chrysonotomyia yunusi Hayat et al., 2005: 8 (proposed name for Neochrysocharis metallicus Khan & Shafee as it was
preoccupied by Chrysonotomyia metallica (Ashmead).
Type material. Holotype: ♀ (on slide under one coverslip), INDIA:
KARNATAKA: Bangalore, 30.vi.1975, Coll. M.Y. Khan. (ZDAMU, registration No.
HYM. CH.173). Paratype: 1 ♀ (on two slides), with same data as for holotype.
(ZDAMU, registration No. HYM. CH.173).
Diagnosis. Female. Length, 1.03 mm. Head dark brown with metallic blue
reflection. Antenna dark brown except scape pale yellow. Mesosoma dark brown
with metallic blue reflection. wings subhyaline, venation brown. Legs white except
coxae brown. Gaster dark brown with metallic blue reflection.
Head (Fig. 12) slightly broader than mesosoma, in frontal view, 1.24× (31: 25)
as broad as high; antennal toruli situated slightly above the lower eye margin.
Antenna (Fig. 13) with scape 3.14× (11: 3.5) as long as broad; pedicel 1.14× (4: 3.5)
as long as broad; flagellum with one distinct anellus; F1 subequal to F2.
Mesosoma (Fig. 14) 1.5× (41: 27) as long as broad; mesoscutum subequal to
scutellum; notauli almost complete; mesoscutum, scutellum and axillae with faint
 Munis Entomology & Zoology Mun. Ent. Zool.
670 https://www.munisentzool.org/ 16 (2) (June, 2021)
ISSN 1306-3022 © MRG
___________________________________________________________

polygonal reticulate sculpture. Fore wing (Fig. 15) 1.9× (64: 33) as long as broad;
speculum closed; post marginal vein 0.6× (3: 5) stigmal vein. Hind wing 5.2× (52:
10) as long as broad.
Metasoma (Fig. 16). Gaster slightly longer than mesosoma; ovipositor
occupying more than two-third of gaster length, slightly exserted beyond apex of
gaster.
Male. Unknown.
Distribution. India: Karnataka.
Host. Unidentified scale on Magnifera indica.
Comments. Neochrysocharis metallicus Khan & Shafee a distinctive species.
However, it comes close to N. indicus Khan, Agnihotri & Sushil (2005), but differs
mainly in following characters: scape 3.14× as long as broad; F1 subequal to F2;
notauli almost complete. In N. indicus: scape 5× as long as broad; F1 shorter than
F2; notauli incomplete.

Figures 12–16. Neochrysocharis metallicus Khan & Shafee. (12–15) holotype, female: 12,
head, frontal view; 13, antenna; 14, mesosoma; 15, metasoma. Paratype, female: 16, fore
wing.

5. Neochrysocharis sudhiri sp. nov.

(Figs. 17-24)
Etymology. The species is named for Dr. Sudhir Singh, Head of Entomology
Section, Forest Research Institute, Dehradun, India, for his contributions to the
taxonomy of the Indian Chalcids.
Type material. Holotype: ♀ (on slide under five coverslips, slide No. EUL.15),
INDIA: ANDHRA PRADESH: Vishakhapatnam, Rajipeta, 3.ii.2014 , Coll. K. M. T.
Khan. (ZDAMU).
Paratypes: 1 ♀, 1 ♂. 1 ♀ (on card); 1 ♂ (on slide under four coverslips, slide No.
EUL.16), with same data as for holotype. (ZDAMU).
Description. Female. Holotype. Length, 0.86 mm. Head dark brown with
metallic green reflection. Antenna brown to dark brown except scape in basal
 Munis Entomology & Zoology Mun. Ent. Zool.
https://www.munisentzool.org/ 16 (2) (June, 2021) 671
ISSN 1306-3022 © MRG
___________________________________________________________

three-forths white. Mesosoma dark brown with metallic green reflection. Fore
wing (Fig. 20) subhyaline and slightly infumate. Legs white except hind coxa dark
brown and hind tarsi brown. Gaster dark brown; ovipositor sheath brown.
Head (Fig. 17), in frontal view, 1.08× as broad as high; eye height 7× as long as
malar space; antennal toruli situated at the level of lower eye margin. Antenna
(Fig. 18) with scape 4.5× as long as broad, 3× as long as pedicel, slightly longer
than proximal three flagellomeres combined; pedicel 1.5× as long as broad;
flagellum with 3 distinct anelli; F1 1.28× as long as broad; Fl subequal to pedicel
and slightly shorter than F2; clava 3.66× as long as broad; third claval segment
conical.
Mesosoma (Fig. 19) 1.16× as long as broad; pronotum moderate, 0.24×
mesoscutum; mesoscutum slightly shorter than scutellum; notauli complete; mid
lobe of mesoscutum with 4 long setae; axillae elongate, reaching nearly half length
of scutellum; scutellum subquadrate, rounded posteriorly, with 2 setae;
mesoscutum, scutellum and axillae with polygonal reticulate sculpture;
metanotum smooth except faintly reticulate laterally; dorsellum triangular, 3.77×
as broad as long; propodeum medially smooth, laterally with longitudial
striations. Fore wing (Fig. 20) 2× as long as broad; speculum closed; marginal
vein + parastigma 2× as long as marginal vein, 5.54× as long as stigmal vein;
postmarginal vein 1.18× as long as stigmal vein; longest marginal seta 0.06×
maximum wing width. Hind wing (Fig. 21) 5.45× as long as broad; longest
marginal seta 0.5× maximum wing width.
Metasoma. Petiole 1.6× as broad as long; gaster distinctly longer than
mesosoma; ovipositor (Fig. 22) occupying more than half of gaster length, hardly
exserted beyond apex of gaster; ovipositor 2.04× long as hind tibia.
Relative measurements (holotype). Head height: width, 30: 35; eye height,
24.5; malar space, 3.5. Antennal segments length: width– scape, 13.5: 3; pedicel,
4.5: 3; F1, 4.5: 3.5; F2, 5: 3.25; C1, 5: 3.75; C2, 4.5: 3.5; C3, 4.25: 2.25; spicula, 2.
Mesosoma length: width, 42: 30. Fore wing length: width, 72: 36; longest
marginal seta, 2.5; submarginal vein length, 14.5; parastigma length, 4.5;
marginal vein length, 26; postmarginal vein length, 6.5; stigmal vein length, 5.5.
Hind wing length: width, 60: 11; longest marginal seta, 5.5. Hind tibia length, 21.
Metasoma. Petiole length: width, 3: 5; gaster length, 52; ovipositor length, 43.
Male. Similar to female except sexual diamorphism and antenna (Fig. 23) with
relatively flattened scape. Antennal scape 3.28× as long as broad, 2.3× as long as
pedicel; pedicel 1.66× as long as broad; F1subquadrate and subequal in length to
F2; clava 2.75× as long as broad. Genitalia as in figure 24.
Relative measurements (paratype). Antennal segments length: width–
scape, 11.5: 3.5; pedicel, 5: 3; F1, 3.75: 3.75; F2, 4: 3.75; C1, 3.75: 3.5; C2, 4: 3.25;
C3, 3.75: 2.5; spicula, 2.5.
Distribution. India: Andhra Pradesh.
Host. Unknown.
Comments. Neochrysocharis sudhiri sp. nov. comes close to N. pubipennis
Khan & Shafee, but differs as follows: body size small, 0.86 mm; eye height 7× as
long as malar space; F1 longer than broad; scutellum relatively broad posteriorly.
In N. pubipennis: body size large, 1.03 mm; eye height 2.7× as long as malar
space; F1 quadrate; scutellum relatively narrow posteriorly.
 Munis Entomology & Zoology Mun. Ent. Zool.
672 https://www.munisentzool.org/ 16 (2) (June, 2021)
ISSN 1306-3022 © MRG
___________________________________________________________

Figures 17–24. Neochrysocharis sudhiri sp. nov.. (17–22) holotype, female: 17, head, frontal
view; 18, antenna; 19, mesosoma; 20, fore wing; 21, hind wing; 22, ovipositor. (23–24)
paratype, male: 23, antenna; 24, genitalia.

6. Neochrysocharis pubpennis Khan & Shafee stat. rev.

(Figs. 25-28)
Neochrysocharis pubipennis Khan & Shafee, 1980: 488, female. Holotype, female, India, Uttar Pradesh, Aligarh
(ZDAMU), examined.
Chrysonotomyia pubipennis (Khan & Shafee): Hayat et al., 2005: 8.
Type material. Holotype: ♀ (parts on 3 slides), INDIA: UTTAR PRADESH:
Aligarh, University Agriculture Farm, 10.v.1977, Coll. M.Y. Khan. (ZDAMU,
registration No. HYM. CH.174).
Diagnosis. Female. Holotype. Length, 1.03 mm. Head dark brown with bluish
reflection; eyes reddish and sparsely setose. Antenna dark brown except scape
pale yellow. Mesosoma dark brown with bluish reflection. Wings hyaline,
venation brown. Legs pale yellow except coxae brown. Gaster dark brown.
Head (Fig. 25) in frontal view, 1.45× (35: 24) as broad as high; antennal toruli
situated slightly above the lower eye margin. Antenna (Fig. 26) with scape 4.14×
(14.5: 3.5) as long as broad; pedicel 1.66× (5: 3) as long as broad; flagellum with 3
anelli; F1 subquadrate, subequal to F2.
Mesosoma (Fig. 27) 1.44× (42: 29) as long as broad; notauli incomplete,
anteriorly narrow and widen posteriorly; scutellum slightly longer than broad,
becoming narrow in posterior half, with 2 setae; mesoscutum, scutellum and
axillae with faint polygonal reticulate sculpture. Fore wing (Fig. 28) 1.92× (73: 38)
as long as broad; speculum narrowly opened; post marginal vein 1.08× as long as
stigmal vein.
Metasoma. Gaster slightly longer than mesosoma; ovipositor occupying three-
fourths of gaster length, slightly exserted beyond apex of gaster; ovipositor 1.79×
(43: 24) long as hind tibia.
 Munis Entomology & Zoology Mun. Ent. Zool.
https://www.munisentzool.org/ 16 (2) (June, 2021) 673
ISSN 1306-3022 © MRG
___________________________________________________________

Male. Unknown.
Distribution. India: Uttar Pradesh.
Host. Pulvinaria maxima on Azadirachta indica.
Comments. Neochrysocharis pubipennis Khan & Shafee resembles N. sudhiri
sp. nov. buts it differs from the latter by the characters given under the comment
of N. sudhiri.

Figures 25–28. Neochrysocharis pubipennis Khan & Shafee, holotype, female: 25, head,
frontal view; 26, antenna; 27, mesosoma; 28, fore wing.

7. Neochrysocharis hyalinipennis Khan & Shafee stat. rev.

(Figs. 29-34)
Neochrysocharis hyalinipennis Khan & Shafee, 1980: 486, female. Holotype, female, India, Uttar Pradesh, Aligarh
(ZDAMU), examined.
Chrysonotomyia hyalipennis (Khan & Shafee): Hayat et al., 2005: 6.
Type material. Holotype: ♀ (on card), INDIA: UTTAR PRADESH: Aligarh,
University Campus, 1.v.1977, Coll. M. Y. Khan. (ZDAMU, ref. No. K-200).
Paratypes: 2 ♀♀ (on cards), and 4 slides containing ♀ and ♂ parts with similar
data as for holotype. (ZDAMU, registration No. HYM. CH.172).
Diagnosis. Female. Holotype (Fig. 29). Length, 1.38 mm. Head dark brown
with metallic blue reflection. Antenna pale brown to brown except scape in basal
two-thirds white. Mesosoma dark brown with metallic blue reflection. Wings (Fig.
33) hyaline. Legs white except coxae dark brown. Gaster dark brown with metallic
blue reflection.
Head (Fig. 30), in frontal view, 1.32× (49: 37) as broad as high; antennal toruli
situated slightly above the lower eye margin. Antenna (Fig. 31) with scape 4.2×
(16: 3.75) as long as broad; pedicel 1.57× (5.5: 3.5) as long as broad; flagellum
with 2 distinct anelli; F1 subquadrate and shorter than F2.
Mesosoma (Fig. 32) 1.2× (54: 45) as long as broad; mesoscutum shorter than
scutellum; notauli almost complete; scutellum slightly longer than broad;
mesoscutum, scutellum and axillae with faint polygonal reticulate sculpture. Fore
wing (Fig. 33) 2× (98: 49) as long as broad; speculum closed; postmarginal vein
as long as stigmal vein. Hind wing 4.52× (77: 17) as long as broad.
 Munis Entomology & Zoology Mun. Ent. Zool.
674 https://www.munisentzool.org/ 16 (2) (June, 2021)
ISSN 1306-3022 © MRG
___________________________________________________________

Metasoma. Gaster subequal to mesosoma; ovipositor (Fig. 34) slightly

exserted beyond apex of gaster; ovipositor 1.96× (59: 30) as long as hind tibia.
Male. Similar to female except in following characters: scape 4× as long as broad;
F1 subequal to F2, each distinctly longer than broad; clava 5.5× as long as broad;
fore wing 2× as long as broad; postmarginal vein subequal to stigmal vein length.
Distribution. India: Uttar Pradesh.
Host. Unidentified scale on Carica papaya.
Comments. Neochrysocharis hyalinipennis Khan & Shafee comes close to N.
horticola Khan, Agnihotri & Sushil (2005). However, it differs from the latter in
following characters: pedicel longer than F1; F1 distincly shorter than F2;
postmarginal vein as long as stigmal vein. In N. horticola: pedicel slightly shorter
than F1; F1 subequal to F2; postmarginal vein 0.7× stigmal vein.

Figures 29–34. Neochrysocharis hyalinipennis Khan & Shafee. Holotype female: 29,
habitus. (30–34) paratype, female: 30, head, frontal view; 31, antenna; 32, mesosoma; 33,
fore wing; 34, ovipositor.

8. Neochrysocharis horticola Khan, Agnihotri & Sushil

(Figs. 35-39)
Neochrysocharis horticola Khan, Agnihotri & Sushil, 2005: 107, female. Holotype, female, India, Uttarakhand, Pantnagar
(GBPUAT), examined.
Type material. Holotype: ♀ (on slide: antenna, fore wings, ovipositor under one
coverslip; mesosoma and head in Canada balsam), INDIA: UTTARAKHAND:
Pantnagar, 10.vi.2000, Coll. M. Agnihotri. (GBPUAT, registration No. Hym. Eulo.
Nr. A1019).
Diagnosis. Female. Holotype. Length, 1.06 mm. Body dark brown with silvery
lusture; eyes and ocelli reddish brown; wings hyaline; legs white except coxae
brown.
 Munis Entomology & Zoology Mun. Ent. Zool.
https://www.munisentzool.org/ 16 (2) (June, 2021) 675
ISSN 1306-3022 © MRG
___________________________________________________________

Head (Fig. 35), in frontal view, 1.09× (34: 31) as broad as high with finely
reticulate sculpture; antennal toruli situated markedly above the lower eye
margin. Antenna (Fig. 36) with scape 4.7× (16.5: 3.5) as long as broad; pedicel
1.4× (5: 3.5) as long as broad; flagellum with 3 anelli, first and second anelli
indistinct, third anellus long; F1 subequal to F2.
Mesosoma (Fig. 37) 1.4× (45: 32) as long as broad; notauli incomplete;
scutellum subquadrate; mesoscutum, scutellum and axillae with polygonal
reticulate sculpture; dorsellum smooth; propodeum almost smooth. Fore wing
(Fig. 38) 2.02× (85: 42) as long as broad; speculum closed; postmarginal vein
0.7× (5: 6.5) stigmal vein. Hind wing 5.6× (73: 13) as long as broad.
Metasoma. Gaster petiolate, slightly longer than mesosoma; ovipositor (Fig.
39) occupying more than half of gaster length.
Male. Unknown.
Distribution. India: Uttarakhand.
Host. Chromatomyia horticolae (Diptera: Agromyzidae) on maize.
Comments. The body colour of Neochrysocharis horticola Khan et al. was noted
from the original description given by khan et al. (2005). N. horticola looks
apparently similar to N. sudhiri sp. nov. in having similar body colour, sculpture
on mesosoma and shape of fore wing. However, it differs from N. sudhiri by the
following characters: pedicel shorter than F1; F1 subequal to F2; fore wing with
postmarginal vein shorter than stigmal vein. In N. sudhiri: pedicel subequal to F1;
F1 shorter than F2; fore wing with postmarginal vein longer than stigmal vein.

Figures 35–39. Neochrysocharis horticola khan Agnihotri & Sushil. Holotype, female: 35,
head, frontal view; 36, antenna; 37, mesosoma; 38, fore wing; 39, ovipositor.

9. Neochrysocharis raily sp. nov.

(Figs. 40-45)
Etymology. The species name is an arbitrary combination of letters, and may be
taken as a noun in apposition.
 Munis Entomology & Zoology Mun. Ent. Zool.
676 https://www.munisentzool.org/ 16 (2) (June, 2021)
ISSN 1306-3022 © MRG
___________________________________________________________

Type Material. Holotype: ♀ (on slide under five coverslips, slide No. EUL.201),
INDIA: ANDHRA PRADESH, East Godawri, Samalkotta, Rayapuram, 5.ii.2014,
Coll. M.T. Khan. (ZDAMU).
Paratype: 1 ♀ (on card), with same data as for holotype. (ZDAMU).
Description. Female. Holotype. Length, 0.78 mm. Head dark brown with
bluish reflection; eye reddish. Antenna brown to dark brown except scape in basal
two-thirds pale white. Mesosoma dark brown with bluish reflection on
mesoscutum and scutellum. Legs pale white except coxae brown to dark brown
and hind femur in basal two-third brown. Metasoma dark brown with bluish
reflection.
Head (Fig. 40), in frontal view, 1.36× as broad as long; eye height 3.45× as
long as malar space; antennal toruli situated at the level of lower eye margin.
Antenna (Fig. 41) with scape 4.07× as long as broad, 2.9× as long as pedicel,
slightly shorter than proximal three flagellomeres combined; pedicel 1.5× as long
as broad; flagellum with one distinct anellus; F1 slightly shorter than F2; clava
3.06× as long as broad; C1 subequal to C2; C3 narrow and shortest.
Mesosoma (Fig. 42) 1.25× as long as broad; pronotum 0.12× mesoscutum
length; mesoscutum shorter than scutellum; mid lobe of mesoscutum with 4
setae; notauli almost complete, posteriorly faint and widen; scutellum
subquadrate, with 2 setae; axillae reaching half length of scutellum, with one
small seta; mesoscutum, scutellum and axillae with polygonal reticulate
sculpture; dorsellum 5× as broad as long, with longitudinal striations; sides of
metanotum with longitudinal rugose sculpture; propodeum smooth without any
carina; propodeal callus with one seta. Fore wing (Fig. 43) 2× as long as broad;
speculum closed; marginal vein + parastigma 1.6× as long as submarginal vein,
4.8× as long as stigmal vein; post marginal vein 0.66× stigmal vein; longest
marginal seta 0.09× maximum wing width. Hind wing (Fig. 44) 5.25× as long as
broad with apex pointed; longest marginal seta 0.41× maximum wing width.
Metasoma (Fig. 45). Petiole 1.66× as broad as long; gaster longer than
mesosoma; ovipositor occupying three -forths of gaster length, slightly exserted
beyond apex of gaster; ovipositor 2.09× as long as hind tibia.
Relative measurements (holotype). Head height: width, 25: 34; eye height,
19; malar space, 5.5. Antennal segments length: width– scape, 13.25: 3.25;
pedicel, 4.5: 3; F1, 4: 3.75; F2, 4.5: 3.75; C1, 4.5: 4; C2, 4.25: 3.75; C3, 3.5: 2.25;
spicula, 2.5. Mesosoma length: width, 40: 32. Fore wing length: width, 72: 36;
longest marginal seta, 3.5; submarginal vein length, 17.5; parastigma length, 5;
marginal vein length, 24; postmarginal vein length, 4; stigmal vein length, 6.
Hind wing length: width, 63: 12; longest marginal seta, 5. Hind tibia length, 22.
Metasoma. Petiole length: width, 5: 5.5; gaster length, 48; ovipositor length, 46.
Male. Unknown.
Distribution. India: Andhra Pradesh.
Host. Unknown.
Comments. This new species is a distinct species and come close to N.
liriomyzae Khan, Agnihotri & Sushil (2005) in having more or less similar body
colour. However, it differs from the latter in following characters: eye height
3.45× as long as malar space; flagellum with one distinct anellus; F1 slightly
shorter than F2. In N. liriomyzae: eye height 5.25× as long as malar space;
flagellum with 3 distinct anelli; F1 subequal to F2.
 Munis Entomology & Zoology Mun. Ent. Zool.
https://www.munisentzool.org/ 16 (2) (June, 2021) 677
ISSN 1306-3022 © MRG
___________________________________________________________

Figures 40–45. Neochrysocharis raily sp. nov.. Holotype, female: 40, head, frontal view; 41,
antenna; 42, mesosoma; 43, fore wing; 44, hind wing.45, metasoma.

10. Neochrysocharis liriomyzae Khan, Agnihotri & Sushil

(Figs. 46-50)
Neochrysocharis liriomyzae Khan, Agnihotri & Sushil, 2005: 105, female. Holotype, female, India, Uttarakhand,
Pantnagar (GBPUAT), examined.
Type material. Holotype: ♀ (on slide, antenna, fore wings, ovipositor, legs
under one coverslip; mesosoma and head in Canada balsam), INDIA:
UTTARAKHAND: Pantnagar, 5.xi.2000, Coll. M. Agnihotri. (GBPUAT,
registration No. Hym. Eulo. Nr. A1018).
Diagnosis. Female. Holotype. Body brown with metallic green reflection; wings
hyaline; fore leg pale white except coxa, dorsal margin of femur and tibia, tarsal
segments with brown infuscation; mid leg pale white except coxa and last tarsal
segment with brown infuscation; hind leg pale yellow except coxa and last tarsal
segment with brown infuscation.
Head (Fig. 46), in frontal view, 1.28× (36: 28) as broad as high; antennal
toruli situated slightly above the lower eye margin. Antenna (Fig. 47) with scape
4.78× (16.75: 3.5) as long as broad; pedicel 1.33× (5: 3.75) as long as broad;
flagellum with 3 indistinct anelli; F1 subequal to F2.
Mesosoma (Fig. 48) 1.34× (43: 32) as long as broad, with polygonal reticulate
sculpture; notauli incomplete; scutellum subquadrate, with 2 setae. Fore wing
(Fig. 49) 1.95× (78: 40) as long as broad; speculum closed; post marginal vein
0.86× (6.5: 7.5) stigmal vein. Hind wing 5.33× (64: 12) as long as broad.
Metasoma. Gaster longer than mesosoma; ovipositor (Fig. 50) occupying more
than half of gaster length, slightly exserted beyond apex of gaster.
Male. Unknown.
Host. Liriomyza sp. on castor (Ricinus communis).
Distribution. India: Uttarakhand.
 Munis Entomology & Zoology Mun. Ent. Zool.
678 https://www.munisentzool.org/ 16 (2) (June, 2021)
ISSN 1306-3022 © MRG
___________________________________________________________

Comments. Neochrysocharis liriomyzae Khan, Agnihotri & Sushil comes close

to N. raily sp. nov.. It differs from the latter by the characters given under the
comments of N. raily.

Figures 46–50. Neochrysocharis liriomyzae khan Agnihotri & Sushil. Holotype, female: 46,
head, frontal view; 47, antenna; 48, mesosoma; 49, fore wing; 50, ovipositor.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We thank the Chairman, Department of Zoology, Aligarh Muslim University,

Aligarh, for providing research facilities. Thanks are due to Dr. Mohammad
Hayat, Department of Zoology, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, for constant
help and encouragements. We are also grateful to Dr. Meena Agnihotri, Assistant
Professor, Department of Entomology, G. B. Pant University of Agriculture &
Technology, Uttarakhand, for providing the holotypes of N. horticola and N.
liriomyzae.

LITERATURE CITED
Anwar, P. T., Zeya, S. B. & Veenakumari, K. 2020. Fairyfly genus Camptoptera Foerster (Hymenoptera:
Chalcidoidea: Mymaridae) in India and Sri Lanka, with descriptions of eleven new species. In: Paulus HF, editor.
Zoologica. (Schweizerbart Science Publishers, ISBN: 978-3-510-55052-4). Pp. 89.
Askew, R. R. 1979. Taxonomy of some European Chrysonotomyia Ashmead (Hymenoptera: Eulophi- dae) with
description of C. longiventris n. sp. and notes on distribution. Entomologica Scandinavica, 10: 27-31.
Bouček Z. 1957. Chalcidoidea. Klíc Zvíreny CSR (Key to the Fauna of Czechoslovakia). 2: 204-288.
Bouček, Z. 1977. A faunistic review of the Yugoslavian Chalcidoidea (Parasitic Hymenoptera). Acta entomologica
Jugoslavica, 13: 1-145.
Bouček, Z. & Askew, R. R. 1968. Index of Palaearctic Eulophidae (excl. Tetrastichinae). In: Delucchi, V. & Remaudière,
G., eds, Index of Entomophagous Insects, 3. Paris: Le François, pp. 9-254.
Crawford, J. C. 1913a. Description of new Hymenoptera no.7. Proceedings of the United States National Museum, 45:
309-317.
Crawford, J. C. 1913b. Description of new Hymenoptera no.8. Ibid, 46: 343-352.
De Santis, L. 1979. Catálogo de los himénopteros calcidoideos de América al sur de los Estados Unidos. Publicación
Especial Comisión de Investigaciones Cientificas Provincia de Buenos Aires, 488 pp.
Doganlar, M. & Elsayed, A. K. 2015. Parasitoids complex in summer populations of Asphondylia punica Marchal, 1897
(Diptera: Cecidomyidae) on the mediterranean saltbush, Atriplex halimus L. (Chenopodiaceae) in Egypt, with
descriptions of new species from Euplemidae and Eulophidae) (Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea). Munis Entomology &
Zoology, 10 (1): 75-85.
 Munis Entomology & Zoology Mun. Ent. Zool.
https://www.munisentzool.org/ 16 (2) (June, 2021) 679
ISSN 1306-3022 © MRG
___________________________________________________________

Erdös, J. 1954. Eulophidae hungaricae indescriptae. Annales historico-naturales Musei nationalis hungarici (series nova),
5: 323-366.
Erdös, J. 1956. Additamenta ad cognitionem faunae Chalcidoidarum in Hungaria et regionibus finitmis. VI. 19.
Eulophidae. Folia entomologica hungarica (series nova), 9: 25-26.
Erdös, J. 1961. Fauna Eulophidarum Hungariae generibus speciebusque novis aucta (Hymenoptera). Annales historico-
naturales Musei nationalis hungarici, 53: 471-489.
Fisher, N. & La Salle, J. 2005. A new species of Neochrysocharis Kurdjumov (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae), a parasitoid
of serpentine leafminers (Diptera: Agromyzidae) in Southeast Asia. Zootaxa, 1044: 27-34.
Förster, A. 1861. Ein Tag in den Hochalpen. Progr. Real- schule Aachen 1860–1861, i-xliv.
Frost, S. W. 1924. Memoirs of the New York (Cornell) Agricultural Experiment Station. 131 pp.
Girault, A. A. 1913. Australian Hymenoptera Chalcidoidea IV. The family Eulophidae with description of new genera and
species. Memoir of Queensland Museum, 2: 140-296.
Girault, A. A. 1917. Notes and descriptions of miscellaneous chalcid-flies (Hymenoptera). Proceedings of the United
States National Museum, 53 (2213): 445-450.
Graham, M. W. R. de V. 1959. Keys to the British genera and species of Elachertinae, Eulophinae, Entedontinae, and
Euderinae (Hym., Chalcidoidea). Transactions of the Entomological Society, 13 (10): 169-204.
Graham, M. W. R. de V. 1963. Additions and corrections to the British list of Eulophidae (Hym., Chalcidoidea), with
descriptions of some new species. Transactions of the Entomological Society, 15 (9): 167-275.
Hansson, C. 1985. Taxonomy and biology of the Palaearctic species of Chrysocharis Förster, 1856 (Hymenoptera:
Eulophidae). Entomologica Scandinavica (supplement), 26: 1-130.
Hansson, C. 1990. A taxonomic study on the Palaearctic species of Chrysonotomyia Ashmead and Neochrysocharis
Kurdjumov (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae). Entomologica Scandinavica, 21: 29-52.
Hansson, C. 1995. Revision of the Nearctic species of Neochrysocharis Kurdjumov (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae).
Entomologica Scandinavica, 26: 27-46.
Hansson, C. & Shevtsova, E. 2012. Revision of the European species of Omphale Haliday (Hymenoptera, Chalcidoidea,
Eulophidae). Zookeys (Special Issue), 232: 1-157.
Hayat, M., Aftab, H. & Perveen, S. 2005. Taxonomic notes on some Indian Eulophidae (Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea) -
2. On the types of some Eulophinae, Entedoninae and Euderinae. Oriental Insects, 39: 1-14.
Kalina, V. 1989. Checklist of Czechoslovak Insects III (Hymenoptera). Chalcidoidea. Acta Faunistica Entomologica Musei
Nationalis Pragae, 19: 97-127.
Khan, M. A., Agnihotri, M. & Sushil, S. N. 2005. Taxonomic studies of eulophid parasitoids (Hymenopptera:
Chalcidoidea) of India. Pantnagar Journal of Research (Special Supplement), 2 (1): 1-230.
Khan, M. & Shafee, S. A. 1980. Three new species of the genus Neochrysocharis Kurdjumov (Eulophidae:
Entedontinae) from India. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society, 76 (3): 486-490.
Kurdjumov, N. V. 1912. Hyménoptères - parasites nouveaux ou peu connus. Russkoe Entomologicheskoe Obozrenie, 12
(2): 223-240.
Noyes, J. S. 1982. Collecting and preserving chalcid wasps (Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea). Journal of Natural History, 16:
315-334.
Noyes, J. S. 2021. Universal Chalcidoidea Database. World Wide Web electronic publication.
http://www.nhm.ac.uk/chalcidoids. (Accessed February, 2021).
Peck, O. 1951. Superfamily Chalcidoidea. In: Muesebeck, Krombein, Townes (Eds) Hymenoptera of America north of
Mexico. United States Department of Agriculture Monographs. 410-594.
Peck, O. 1963. A catalogue of the Nearctic Chalcidoidea (Insecta; Hymenoptera). Canadian Entomologist (Supplement),
30: 1-1092.
Ratzeburg, J. T. C. 1848. Die Ichneumonen der Forstinsek- ten in forstlicher und entomologischer Beziehung; ein
Anhang zur Abbildung und Beschreibung der Forstin- sekten, 2: 238 pp.
Sheng, J. K. & Zhan G. X. 2000. A new species of Chrysonotomyia Ashmead (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae) from China.
Systematic and faunistic research on Chinese insects. Proceedings of the 5th National Congress on Insect Taxonomy,
pp. 258-259.
Silvestri, F. 1914. Viaggio in Eritrea per cercare parassiti della mosca dell olive. Bollettino del Laboratorio di Zoologia
Generale e Agraria della R. Scuola Superiore d'Agricoltura, Portici, 9: 210 pp.
Szelényi, G. 1977. New Palaearctic chalcid flies (Hymenoptera, Eulophidae). Annales historico-naturales Musei nationalis
hungarici, 69: 241-247.
Thompson, W. R. 1955. A catalogue of the parasites and predators of insect pests. Section 2. Host parasite catalogue,
Part 3. Hosts of the Hymenoptera (Calliceratid to Evaniid). pp. 191-332.
Walker, F. 1839. Monographia Chalciditum, Vol. 1. London: H Bailli’ere.
Westwood, J. O. 1833. Further notices of the British parasitic Hymenopterous insects; together with the “Transactions of
a fly with a long tail”, observed by Mr. EW Lewis; and additional observations. Magazine of Natural History, 6: 414-
421.
Yefremova, Z. A. 2002. Catalogue of the Eulophidae (Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea) of Russia. Linzer Biologische
Beitrage, 34 (1): 563-618.
Yefremova, Z. A. 2015. An annotated checklist of the Eulophidae (excl. Tetrastichinae) (Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea) of
Israel. Zootaxa, 3957 (1): 22-23.
Yoshimoto, C. M. 1978. Revision of the subgenus Achrysocharella Girault of America North of Mexico (Chalcidoidea,
Eulophi- dae: Chrysonotomyia Ashmead. Ibid, 110: 697-719.

View publication stats