Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-qxdb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T21:21:49.963Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

CRETACEOUS CHALCIDOID FOSSILS FROM CANADIAN AMBER

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

Carl M. Yoshimoto
Carl M. Yoshimoto
Affiliation:
Canadian Forestry Service, Department of the Environment, Ottawa
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This is the first paper on Canadian Cretaceous chalcidoid fossils of the families Mymaridae, Trichogrammatidae, and Tetracampidae, based on 54 specimens representing 12 species from Manitoba and Alberta. Four new subfamilies are proposed, Triadomerinae (Mymaridae), Baeomorphinae, Distylopinae, and Bouceklytinae (Tetracampidae). Descriptions and remarks are given for Archaeromma nearctica n. gen., n. sp.; A. minutissima (Brues) (Mymaromminae); Triadomerus bulbosus n. gen., n. sp.; Carpenteriana tumida n. gen., n. sp.; Protooctonus masneri n. gen., n. sp. (Mymaridae); Enneagmus pristinus n. gen., n. sp. (Trichogrammatidae); Distylopus bisegmentus n. gen., n. sp.; Baeomorpha distincta n. gen., n. sp., B. dubitata Brues (transferred from Scelionidae, Prototrupoidea), B. elongata n. sp., B. ovatata n. sp. and Bouceklytus arcuodens n. gen., n. sp. (Tetracampidae). A list of all previously known fossil Chalcidoidea is provided. A table of primitive and specialized conditions of characters studied is given. The possible lines of phylogeny of families and genera of these fossils are discussed. Keys to the pertinent families and subfamilies and to the fossil species of Baeomorpha are provided. Photomicrographs of species treated are included.

Résumé

Voici le premier article sur les fossiles Chalcidoïdés du Crétacé au Canada; ils appartiennent aux familles Mymaridées, Trichogrammatidées et Tétracampidées. Plus de 54 spécimens représentant 12 espèces furent récoltés au Manitoba et en Alberta. L’auteur propose quatre nouvelles sous-familles: les Triadomérinées (Mymaridées), Baeomorphinées, Distylopinées et Bouceklytinées (Tétracampidées). Il décrit et commente Archaeromma nearctica n. gen., n. sp.; A. minutissima (Brues) (Mymaromminées); Triadomerus bulbosus n. gen., n. sp.; Carpenteriana tumida n. sp.; Protooctonus masneri n. gen., n. sp. (Mymaridées); Enneagmus pristinus n. gen., n. sp. (Trichogrammatidées); Distylopus bisegmentus n. gen., n. sp.; Baeomorpha distincta n. gen., n. sp., B. dubitata Brues (transferré des Scélionidées, Prototrupoïdées),B. elongata n. sp.,B. ovatata n. sp. et Bouceklytus arcuodens n. gen., n. sp. (Tétracampidées). Il fournit une énumération de tous les fossiles Chalcidoidés précédemment connues. Il donne des conditions primitives et spécialisées des caractères étudiés. Il discute les lignées possibles de la phylogénie des familles et des genres de ces fossiles. Il fournit des clés des familles et sous-familles pertinentes et des espèces fossiles de Baeomorpha. Et il ajoute des photomicrographies des espèces traitées.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 107 , Issue 5 , May 1975 , pp. 499 - 527
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1975

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

REFERENCES

Blood, B. N. and Kryger, J. P.. 1922. A new mymarid from Brockenhurt. Entomologist's mon. Mag. 8: 229–230.Google Scholar
Brischke, D. 1886. Die Hymenopteren des Bersteins. Schr. naturf. Ges. Danzig, n.f., 6: 278–279.Google Scholar
Brues, C. T. 1910. The parasitic Hymenoptera of the Tertiary of Florissant, Colorado. Bull. Mus. comp. Zool., No. 54. 125 pp.Google Scholar
Carpenter, F. M. et al. 1937. Insects and arachnids from Canadian amber. Toronto Univ. Studies, Geol. Ser. 40: 7–62.Google Scholar
Cockerell, T. D. A. 1907. Some fossil arthropods from Florissant, Colorado. Bull. Am. Mus. nat. Hist. 23: 605–615.Google Scholar
Debauche, H. R. 1948. Etude sur les Mymarommidae et les Mymaridae de la Belgique (Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea). Mém. Mus. r. Hist. nat. Bruxelles, No. 108. 248 pp.Google Scholar
Doutt, R. L. 1973 a. The genus Polynemoidea Girault. Pan-Pacif. Ent. 49: 215–220.Google Scholar
Doutt, R. L. 1973 b. The fossil Mymaridae. Pan. Pacif. Ent. 49: 221–228.Google Scholar
Förster, B. 1891. Die Insekten des plattigen Steinmergels von Brunnstatt. Abh. geol. specialkarte von Elsass-Lothringen.Google Scholar
Girault, A. A. 1912. Auatralian Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea—I. Mem. 2d Mus., No. 1.Google Scholar
Handlirsch, A. 1906–1908. Die fossilen Insekten und die Phylogenie der rezenten Formen. W. Engelmann, Leipzig. 430 pp.Google Scholar
Heer, O. 1865. Die Urwelt der Schweitz. Zurich.Google Scholar
Hedqvist, Karl-Johan. 1961. Notes on Cleonymidae (Hym. Chalcidoidea) I. Ent. Tidskr. 83: 91–110.Google Scholar
Helm, S. 1899. Insekteneinschlüsse in gedanit. Schr. naturf. Ges. Danzig, n. f., 10: 33.Google Scholar
Hurd, P. D. Jr., Smith, R. F., and Usinger, R. L.. 1958. Cretaceous and Tertiary insects in Arctic and Mexican amber. Proc. 10th int. Congr. Ent. (Montreal, 1956) Vol. 1, p. 851.Google Scholar
Langenheim, R. L. Jr., Smiley, C. J., and Gray, J.. 1960. Cretaceous amber from the Arctic Coastal Plain of Alaska. Bull. geol. Soc. Am. 71: 1345–1366.Google Scholar
Malyshev, S. I. 1968. Genesis of the Hymenoptera and the phases of their evolution. (Translation from Russian.) Methuen, London. 319 pp.Google Scholar
McAlpine, J. F. and Martin, J. E. H.. 1969. Canadian amber — a paleontological treasure chest. Can. Ent. 101: 819–833.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meunier, F. 1901. Contribution à la faune des Mymaridae ou “atomes ailes” de l'ambre. Annls. Soc. Sci., Bruxelles 25: 282–292.Google Scholar
Meunier, F. 1905. Sur deux Mymaridae de l'ambre de la Baltique. Misc. ent. 12: 1–4.Google Scholar
Meunier, F. 1909. Sur deux Mymarinae du Copal récent de Madagascar et de Zanzibar. (Hym.). Bull. Soc. ent. France 1909: 145–149.Google Scholar
Riek, E. F. 1970. In Insects of Australia, Div. Ent. Commonw. Sci. & Ind. Res. Org., Canberra. Fossil History: 168–186; Hymenoptera: 867–959. Melbourne Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Scudder, S. H. 1878. The fossil insects of the Green River shale. Bull. U.S. geol. geogr. Surv. Terr. 4: 747–776.Google Scholar
Scudder, S. H. 1890. The Tertiary insects of North America. Rep. U.S. geol. Surv., No. 13. 734 pp.Google Scholar
Stein, J. P. E. F. 1877. Drei merkwürdige Bernstein-Inseckten. Mitt. münch. ent. Ver. 1: 28–30.Google Scholar
Trjapitzin, V. A. 1963. A new hymenopteran genus from Baltic amber. Paleont. Zhurn., Moscow 3: 89–95.Google Scholar
Usinger, R. L. and Smith, R. F.. 1957. Arctic Amber. Pacific Discovery 10: 15–19.Google Scholar
Yoshimoto, C. M. 1972. Notes on two species of Brachyscelidiphagniae (Pteromalidae: Chalcidoidea, Hymenoptera). Can. Ent. 104: 969–976.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yoshimoto, C. M., Kozlov, M. A., and Trjapitzin, V. A.. 1972. A new subfamily of Mymaridae (Hymenoptera, Chalcidoidea, Mymaridae). Ént. Obozr. 51: 878–885.Google Scholar
Zhelochovtzev, A. N. and Rasnitsyn, A. P.. 1973. On some Tertiary sawflies (Hymenoptera, Symphyta) from Colorado. Psyche, Camb. 79: 315–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zherikhin, V. V. and Sukacheva, I. D.. 1973. O melovykh nasekomonosnykh “yantaryakh” (retinitakh) severa Sibiri, in Doklady na dvadcat chetvertom yezegodnom chteniyi, pamiati N.A. Kholodkovskovo 1–2 aprelya 1971 g. Voprosy Palentologii nasekomykh. Academy of Sciences, U.S.S.R., Publishing House “Nauka”, Leningrad.Google Scholar