' GENERA 29 JAN Nomenclatural studies on the British Pompilidae (Hymenoptera) M. C. Day Department of Entomology, British Museum (Natural History), Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD Contents Synopsis 1 Introduction ............ 1 The nomenclature of the British Pompilidae ....... Check list of British species .......... 20 Summary of nomcnclatural changes 21 Acknowledgements ........... References ............. Index 26 Synopsis Type-material of north-west Palaearctic species of Pompilidae has been examined in order to determine the correct application of names of the 41 species that comprise the pompilid fauna of the British Isles. Par-ticular attention has been given to the identity of type-species of genera and the consequent application of generic names. The priority of various competing suprageneric names has been established. The identity of the genus Aporus Spinola is discussed in detail and action taken to stabilize the name in its current sense. Two genus-group names and ten species-group names are newly synonymized; one genus-group name and three species-group names are recalled from synonymy. One new species (previously mis-identified) is proposed and 18 lectotypes are designated; one new combination is established. Two species are newly recorded from Britain and a revised check list of British species is given. Six extra-limital species are treated. Introduction The Pompilidae are spider-hunting fossorial wasps of predominantly tropical distribution, but with some 41 species in the British Isles. They are not commonly encountered, are relatively difficult to capture and have a markedly homogeneous general morphology. It is thus not sur-prising that these wasps have been poorly understood and frequently misidentified. However, in recent decades real progress has been made in the recognition of species as biological entities and in the correct association of sexes. The significance of particular morphological characters is now better understood, and it is possible with reasonable certainty correctly to identify the type-material of early authors in order to stabilize nomenclature. Unfortunately, few past students have attempted exhaustively to locate and identify such material. This is not to say that these studies have been neglected ; but they have been fragmentary and progress has thus been arbitrary rather than systematic. The imminence of a revised edition of the Hymenoptera part of the Check List of British Insects has prompted the re-examination of type-material of early authors, and the results are presented here. Designation of lectotypes where necessary and the presentation of unambiguous synonymies will, I hope, clarify the nomenclatural history of many names; unfortunately, many past synonymic lists have not adequately differentiated between original descriptions, subsequent citations, homonyms and misidentifications. I hope that the work can eventually be expanded in order to lay a sound nomenclatural base for future work with the larger southern Palaearctic fauna. Particular attention has been paid to the application of generic names; this has necessitated the study of some tropical forms. The designation of lectotypes for the type-species of some genera here suffices to stabilize existing usages, some of which have been in doubt. Bull. Br. Mus. not. Hist. (Ent.) 38 (1): 1-26 Issued 25 January 1979
BioStor
