Erythmelus (Erythmelus) agilis (Enock, 1909)

Triapitsyn, Serguei V., Koponen, Martti, Vikberg, Veli & Várkonyi, Gergely, 2020, Taxonomy, annotated new records and a checklist of Mymaridae (Hymenoptera) of Finland, with description of a new species of Eustochus, Acta Entomologica Musei Nationalis Pragae 60 (2), pp. 565-589 : 572

Erythmelus (Erythmelus) agilis (Enock, 1909) are accepted here and expanded as follows: clava of fe-

Material examined. Ta: Janakkala, Kalpalinna (6757:8369), 7.vii.2017, male antenna 1- (entire), 2- or 3-segmented. Caraphractus V. Vikberg (1 ♀, VVCT). Walker, 1846 was considered to be most closely related to

Eustochus of which the former might be a derived offshoot; Distribution. Palaearctic ( Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech their only more or less significant difference was the claval Republic, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, Italy, segmentation of the female antenna: entire in the former but Kyrgyzstan, Netherlands, North Macedonia, Norway, 2- or 3-segmented in the latter genus (Hඎൻൾ*© & Bൺඊඎൾ*©ඈ Russia, Serbia, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom) 2007). Both genera were known from eggs of Coleoptera and Nearctic ( Canada, USA) Regions (T*©ංൺඉංඍඌඒඇ 2003b; (T*©ංൺඉංඍඌඒඇ 2012; P*©ං*öඈඉ & MඈǤඅൺඇ 2016) and are T*©ංൺඉංඍඌඒඇ et al. 2007; Sൺආκඈඏග et al. 2020). strictly Holarctic in distribution (Hඎൻൾ*© & Bൺඊඎൾ*©ඈ 2007).

However, our discovery of two new species of Eustochus

Eustochus Haliday, 1833 from Finland and Germany with an entire clava (see be- Caraphractus Walker, 1846 , syn. nov., downgraded to a subgenus of low) shows that the variable segmentation of the clava in Eustochus is not a good genus-defining character, hence Remarks. The diagnoses of Eustochus Haliday, 1833 by the proposed synonymy of Caraphractus syn. nov. with Hඎൻൾ*© & Bൺඊඎൾ*©ඈ (2007) and P*©ං*öඈඉ & MඈǤඅൺඇ (2016)the earlier described Eustochus ; furthermore, the former is treated here as its subgenus, E. ( Caraphractus ) stat. revid. Caraphractus , with its sole valid member, the type species C. cinctus Walker, 1846 (= Eustochus (Caraphractus) cinctus (Walker, 1846) , comb. nov.), is very likely essentially nothing more than just an aquatic species of Eustochus . However, while proposing this new generic synonymy, we also downgrade the taxonomic status of Caraphractus to that of a subgenus of Eustochus for the following reasons kindly provided by John T. Huber (personal communication): in female Caraphractus , mandible with 3 serrated teeth (2, not serrated teeth in most Eustochus s. str. except with 3 teeth in E. (Eustochus) koponeni ); petiole ventrally with strong reticulations (smooth in most Eustochus s. str. except in E. (Eustochus) koponeni ) and without a longitudinal suture (suture present at least partially in most Eustochus s. str. except in E. (Eustochus) koponeni ); first gastral tergum laterally with about 10 longish setae (such setae absent in Eustochus s. str.); mps absent on funicle segments (present on several segments in Eustochus s. str.). Also, male Caraphractus have 1 less antennal flagellar segment than male Eustochus s. str., but these are known only for E. (Eustochus) atripennis (Curtis, 1832) .