Last updated January 2024
Return to Introduction
1 Forewing with conspicuous transverse dark band ………………………….….………..…… paralia
1’ Forewing without such a band ……………………………………..……….….……….……….. 2
2(1) Head unicolorous brown or black ………….…….…………….…..………….…………………. 3
2’ Head a least partially yellow, orange or red, occasionally only small area around inner eye
margins yellow, orange or red ……………………………………..…………………..………. 20
3(2) Except for anterior margin, mesoscutum completely yellow or orange ……….…….…….. sp. 12
3’ Mesoscutum almost entirely black or brown ………………………………….……….………….. 4
4(3) Tegula light at base ………….………. …………………………………………………………… 5
4’ Tegula all dark ……………….…….……………………………………………..……………..… 7
5(4) Mesopleuron dark …………………………….……………………….………..…….…… sp. 17
5’ Mesopleuron yellow…………… …….………….……………………….…………..………….. 6
6(5) F1 dark, F2-F6 light ……………………..…………………..………….….…………..….. yucca
6’ At least F1-F3 dark ………….…………………………………..………….………..……… sp. 23
7(4) Fore coxa light ……………………………..…………….……..….……………………..……. 8
7’ Fore coxa dark …………………………..……………………..…………….………………..…… 9
8(7) Scape length > 4.0x width ……..………..……………….………………..………………… sp. 2
8’ Scape length about 3.0x width …………………………………………….…………………. sp. 16
9(7) Scape inflated below, length always less than 4x width ……………..….….…………………. 10
9’ Scape linear, length 4x width or more ………………………………………………….…………18
10(9) Funicle unicolorous dark or gradually lightening towards apex …….…………..…..……..… 11
10’ Funicle with some white segments distinctively contrasting with dark segments .…………….. 13
11(10) Scape length about 2x width; club bright white ………………………..……….………. sp. 10
11’ Scape length 2.5-3.0x width; club dark …………..……………………………….……….…… 12
12(11) Length of one or more funicle segments at least 2.0x width ………………….………….. sp. 7
12’ Length of all funicle segments < 2x width ….……………………………….…….………… sp. 11
13 (11) Scape length about 2.0x width ……………………………………………….….……… sp. 20
13’ Scape length 2.5-3.0x width ………………………………………………………………….… 14
14(13) F3-F6 and club uniformly white ………………………………………………….………. sp. 30
14’ Funicle and club colored differently ………….……………………………………….…….….. 15
15(14) Exterior aspect of scape with medial, longitudinal white stripe …………..…..………… sp. 24
15’ Scape without such stripe …………………………………………………..………………..…. 16
16(15) F1 length about 6x width ……….…………………………..…………………………….. sp. 26
16 Length F1 < 5x width ……………………………….……………………………………………. 17
17(16) At least F2 and F3 bright white ……………………………………………………. californicus
17’ Only F2 bright white ……………………………………………………………………..….. sp. 7
18(9) Scape light; marginal vein about 0.5x stigmal vein ……………..……………… dzhanokmenae
18’ Scape mostly dark; marginal vein subequal to stigmal vein …………….………………..……. 19
19(18) At most F2-F3 bright white, remainder of funicle segments darker ……………….……… sp. 8
19’ F1 dark at base, F6 yellowish, funicle segments bright white………………….……………. sp. 21
20(2) Flagellum with pale segments between darker apical & basal segments …..…….…………… 21
20’ Flagellum different ……………………….…….……………………………………..…..…… 26
21(20) Wings completely hyaline …………………………………………………………………… 22
21’ Wings partly darkened ………………………………………………………………………..… 23
22(21) Face orange, except for dark spots at base of eyes ……………………………………… sp. 13
22’ Face mostly dark, light along inner eye margins ……………………………………..…….. sp. 15
23(21) Head and body predominantly orange …………………………………………………… sp. 9
23’ Head and body predominantly dark …………………………………………………………..… 24
24(21) Wings hyaline medially, darker basally and apically; club almost concolorous with F6 ………………………………………………………………….…………sp. 29 (nr. shahidi Hayat)
24’ Wings dark basally and hyaline apically; club white ……………………………………………. 25
25(24) Mesopleuron mostly dark; vertex dark medially ……………………………………..……. sp. 6
25’ Mesopleuron orange; vertex yellow ………………………………………………….…….…. sp. 19
26(20) Flagellum unicolorous brown, or distal segments gradually lighter but without distinct color break…………………………………..………..…………………….………………………….. 27
26’ Flagellum with some distal segments distinctly lighter (white or yellow white) than basal segments…….……………………………………….………………..…………….…………… 31
27(26) Scape length about 4x width ………………………………………………………..…… sp. 14
27’ Scape length about 3x width ………….……………………………………………………………… 28
28(27) Ocelli large, diameter of anterior ocellus about 0.25x frontovertex width ……………… smithi
28’ Ocelli smaller, diameter no more than 0.20x frontovertex width ………………………….…… 29
29(28) Vertex and face mostly dark …………….……………………………………………… sp. 18
29’ Vertex and upper face yellow to dark orange ……………………….…………………….……. 30
30(29) Scutum dark, scutellum dark except edges yellowish ………………………………… nigritus
30’ Scutum and most of scutellum orange ………………………………………………………… sp. 1
31(26) Flagellum mostly dark, at most only F5-F6 and club lightened ………………….….……… 32
31’ At most, only F1-F3 darkened ……………..………….………………………………………… 34
32 (31) Notum orange …………………………….……………………………………..……….. sp. 27
32’ Notum dark ……………………………………………….…….………………………………. 33
33(32) Ocellar triangle acute; marginal vein subequal to postmarginal vein; stigma vein arising from wing margin close to 90°angle ….……………………………………………………. putonophilis
33’ Ocellar triangle obtuse; marginal vein distinctly longer than postmarginal vein; stigma vein arising from wing margin at angle no more than 60°………………………………………… sp. 22
34(31) Frontovertex mostly dark, some light areas bordering eyes ………………….………….. sp. 4
34’ Frontovertex mostly yellow/orange, occasionally with dark patches …………….………..…… 35
35(34) F1-F2 dark, remaining funicle segments light ………………………………….….……….. 36
35’ F1 dark, remaining segments light ……………………….……………….……………….…… 38
36(35) Pedicel longer than F1 ……………………….…………………………………..………. sp. 35
36’ Pedicel shorter than F1 ………………………………….……………………..……………..… 37
37 (36) Notum light ………………………………………………….………………………. clauseni
37’ Notum dark …………………………….……………..…………………………….………. sp. 28
38(35) F1 completely darkened ………….…………………..……………………………………… 39
38’ F1 lightened apically .………………………….…………………….……………………..…… 40
39(38) F2-F6 with a few conspicuous dark setae on outer surface; extreme apex of forewing without marginal setae ………………………………………………………………………………. kamali
39’ F2-F6 without such dark setae; apex of forewing with marginal setae ………. sp. nr. pseudococci
40(38) Head completely orange …………………………….…………………………….……… sp. 3
40’ Lower face dark ……………………………………………………………………….……… sp. 5
Sp. nr. pseudococci: Imperial (UCDC), Orange, Riverside, Ventura (published accounts)
Sp. 1 Alameda, Contra Costa, Santa Clara, Stanislaus, Ventura (RLZC); San Francisco, San Mateo (CAS)
Sp. 2 Lassen, San Bernardino, Stanislaus (RLZC); San Diego (UCDC)
Sp. 3 Ventura (EMEC)
Sp. 4 Calaveras, Mono, Santa Clara, Shasta, Stanislaus, Yolo (RLZC); Imperial (UCDC)
Sp. 5 Alameda, Lassen, Modoc, Santa Clara, Stanislaus (RLZC)
Sp. 6 Marin (RLZC)
Sp. 7 Calaveras, Contra Costa, El Dorado, Kern, Marin, Riverside, San Bernardino, San
Benito, Santa Clara, Stanislaus (RLZC); Riverside (UCRC); San Bernardino (CAS)
Sp. 8 Modoc, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Luis Obispo (RLZC); Imperial, Inyo, San Bernardino (UCDC); Riverside, San Bernardino (UCR)
Sp. 9 Colusa, Contra Costa, Kern, Marin, Modoc, San Luis Obispo, Solano, Stanislaus (RLZC); San Bernardino (LACM); Alameda (EMEC)
Sp. 10 Kern (RLZC)
Sp. 11 Alameda (EMEC); Contra Costa (RLZC)
Sp. 12 San Mateo (RLZC); Santa Barbara (SBNHM); San Mateo (CAS)
Sp. 13 Marin (RLZC); Santa Barbara (SBNHM); Stanislaus (RLZC, UCFC)
Sp. 14 Marin, Stanislaus (RLZC)
Sp. 15 Riverside (UCRC, EMEC); Contra Costa (CAS, CSCA)
Sp. 16 Kern, Lassen, Modoc, San Joaquin, Santa Clara, Stanislaus (RLZC); Imperial, Los Angeles, Solano (UCDC)- Some UCDC specimens have distal antenna segments almost completely lightened; Riverside (UCRC); Kern (EMEC)
Sp. 17 Marin (RLZC)
Sp. 18 Marin (RLZC); Inyo, Mendocino, Monterey, Siskiyou (UCDC), Riverside (UCFC); Inyo, Mendocino, Siskiyou (UCDC)
Sp. 19 Monterey, San Luis Obispo (RLZC)
Sp. 20 Kern, Los Angeles, San Luis Obispo, Solano, Stanislaus (RLZC); Inyo, Riverside, San Bernardino (UCRC); Inyo, Santa Barbara, Solano (UCDC)
Sp. 21 Imperial (UCDC)
Sp. 22 Alameda (RLZC)
Sp. 23 Contra Costa (EMEC), Kern (RLZC); Santa Barbara (SBNHM); Riverside (UCRC), Siskiyou (UCDC); San Luis Obispo
Sp. 24 Imperial (UCDC)
Sp. 25 Santa Barbara (SBNHM); Imperial (UCDC), Stanislaus (UCFC)
Sp. 26 Contra Costa (RLZC)
Sp. 27 San Luis Obispo (RLZC), Santa Barbara (SBNHM)
Sp. 28 Santa Barbara (SBNHM)
Sp. 29 Imperial (UCDC)
Sp. 30 Contra Costa (RLZC)
Described Nearctic species and distribution
-
-
- antoniae Timberlake, 1920: Introduced to MEX (SLP); USA (FL, TX)
- aper Noyes & Menezes, 2000 (in Noyes, 2000): CAN (ON); USA (NH, TX)
- argyrus (Burks, 1952): CAN (PQ); USA (TX, VA)
- californicus (Compere, 1947): USA (AZ, CA, FL)
- clauseni Timberlake, 1924: USA (CA)
- diversicornis (Howard, 1894) (in Riley et al. 1894): USA (FL)
- dzhanokmenae Trjapitzin, Myartseva & Ruiz, 2001: USA (CA)
- fusciventris (Girault, 1915): Introduced to USA (FL)
- kamali Moursi, 1948: Introduced to USA (CA)
- loecki Noyes & Menezes, 2000 (in Noyes, 2000): USA (FL, questionably TX)
- nigritus (Howard, 1898): USA (CA)
- pallidipes Ashmead, 1900: USA (DC, FL, LA, NY, TX)
- paralia Noyes & Menezes, 2000 (in Noyes, 2000): MEX (CA, SLP); USA (AZ, CA, TX)
- pulcher (Ashmead, 1888): USA (CN, FL)
- pulchricornis (Howard, 1894) ) (in Riley et al. 1894): USA (FL, TX)
- punctulatus Agarwal & Alam, 1959: Introduced to USA (TX)
- putonophilus Compere, 1947: USA (CA)
- sacchricola Timberlake, 1932: Introduced to USA (TX)
- schoenherri (Westwood, 1837): Introduced to USA (WA)
- shahidi Hayat, 1979: USA (FL, TX)
- sinope Noyes & Menezes, 2000 (in Noyes, 2000): USA (TX)
- smithi Doutt, 1952: USA (CA)
- thyridopterygis (Ashmead, 1886): USA (FL, NJ)
- townsendi (Howard, 1898): USA (NM)
- trinidadensis (Kerrich, 1953): MEX (DU)
- yucca (Coquillett, 1890): USA (CA)
Remarks
The original descriptions A. kamali and A. pseudococci are of limited usefulness, but Noyes & Hayat (1984) provide good redescriptions of both species. When I prepared a previous version of this key, I had one intact specimen of Anagryus 17, but it was since damaged, and it is now represented only by the head. An inspection of the USNM collection yielded the following results: A. antoniae keys to my sp. 12, but the former has a dark mesopleuron and metasoma longer than head + mesosoma, while the latter has a yellow mesopleuron and shorter metasoma; the holotype, paratype and one nontype of A. aphycus are all missing their head, but the holotype and nontype have a yellow dorsum, and the paratype a dark dorsum; A. argyrus does not match any of my unrecognized species; A. diversicornis keys to couplet 18, but the scape is light except for a dark spot centrally; A. fusciventris keys to sp. 1, but the former has lower face yellow, while sp. 1 has lower face black; A. pallidipennis keys to sp. 16, but doesn’t match that taxon; A. pulcher keys to sp. 13, but they have different markings on the antenna; A. saccharicola keys to couplet 39.References
Agarwal, M.M. & S.M. Alam. 1959. New species of the genus Anagyrus Howard (Chalcidoidea: Encyrtidae) recorded from Aligarh. Proceedings of the 46th Indian Science Congress, Part III. 392.
Ashmead, W.A. 1886. A new chalcid parasite on the common basket worm. Canadian Entomologist 18(5): 97-98.
Ashmead, W.A. 1888. Descriptions of new Florida chalcids belonging to the sub-family Encyrtinae. Entomologica Americana 4: 15-17.
Ashmead, W.A. 1900. On the genera of chalcid-flies belonging to the subfamily Encyrtinae. Proceedings of the United States National Museum 22: 323-412.
Burks, B.D. 1952. A new mealybug parasite (Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae). Journal of the New York Entomological Society 60(3): 179-182.
Compere, H. 1947. A report on a collection of Encyrtidae with descriptions of new genera and species. University of California Publications in Entomology 8: 1-24.
Coquillett, D.W. 1890. New coccids from California and one of their chalcid parasites. West American Scientist 7: 43-45.
Doutt, R.L. 1952. Two new species of Anagyrus (Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae). Proceedings of the Hawaiian Entomological Society 14: 399-402.
Girault, A.A. 1915. Australian Hymenoptera Chalcidoidea VII. The family Encyrtidae with descriptions of new genera and species. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum 4: 1-184.
Hayat, M.M. 1979. Indian species of Anagyrus (Hym.: Encyrtidae) – I. Oriental Insects 13(1-2): 167-188.
Howard, L.O. 1898. On some new parasitic insects of the subfamily Encyrtinae. Proceedings of the United States National Museum 21: 231-248.
Kerrich, G. J. 1953. Report on Encyrtidae associated with mealybugs on cacao in Trinidad, and on some other species related thereto. Bulletin of Entomological Research 44: 789-810.
Moursi, A.A. 1948. Description of two new species of Anagyrus. Bulletin Société Fouad Ier d’Entomologie 32: 1-7.
Noyes, J.S. 2000. Encyrtidae of Costa Rica (Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea), 1. Memoirs of the American Entomological Institute 62: 355 pp.
Noyes, J.S. & M.M. Hayat. 1984. Oriental mealybug parasitoids of the Anagyrini (Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae). CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon: 554 pp.
Riley, C.V., W.H. Ashmead & L.O. Howard. 1894. Report upon the parasitic Hymenoptera of the island of St. Vincent. Journal of the Linnean Society (Zoology) 25: 56-254.
Timberlake, P.H. 1920. Descriptions of new genera and species of Hawaiian Encyrtidae (Hymenoptera). II. Proceedings of the Hawaiian Entomological Society 4: 409-437.
Timberlake, P.H. 1924. The parasites of Pseudococcus maritimus (Ehrhorn) in California (Hymenoptera, Chalcidoidea). Part I. Taxonomic studies. University of California Publications in Entomology 3: 223-251.
Timberlake, P.H. 1932. Three new parasitic Hymenoptera from the Indo-Malayan region. Proceedings of the Hawaiian Entomological Society 8: 153-162.
Trjapitzin, V.A. S.N. Myartseva & E. Ruiz Cancino. 2001. Description of a new species of Anagyrus Howard, 1896 (Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea: Encyrtidae) from Mexico and USA, with a review of economically important species. Russian Entomological Journal 10: 411-415.
-