identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
BF734D71F047EC6CE9E7FEADFE12F92A.text	BF734D71F047EC6CE9E7FEADFE12F92A.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Braconidae	<div><p>Braconidae of Mountain Lake Biological Station</p><p>Seventy-four species of Braconidae are known from MLBS (Table 1). This includes 13 species from Milne and Milne (1944); only one of those species, Austrozele uniformis (Provancher), was collected through this research. The 14 species listed in Milne and Milne (1944) currently constitute 13 due to subsequent nomenclatural changes. The eight species in Milne and Milne (1944) identified to genus and listed as morphospecies only were not included in Table 1 because they were not available for comparison with specimens from this research. Seven hundred and forty-five specimens of Braconidae were collected through sampling carried out in this research and represented 62 of the 74 braconid species known from MLBS. Not included in Table 1 were 49 specimens determined as Alysiini (n=3), Chorebus Haliday (n=1), Ephedrus Haliday (n=1), Blacus Nees (n=1), and Microgastrinae (n=43) but not sorted into morphospecies because they are either males or damaged. Of the 62 species, Alysiinae and Opiinae were the two richest subfamilies, with 22 and nine species, respectively. Thus, at least 31 of the 62 species are parasitoids of cyclorrhaphous flies (Wharton 1997a, b). Doryctinae, Aphidiinae, and Microgastrinae were the next highest subfamilies in terms of richness, with six, five, and four species, respectively. Aphidiines are exclusively parasitoids of aphids (van Achterberg 1997a), doryctines are primarily parasitoids of wood-boring beetle larvae (Marsh 1997), and microgastrines are exclusively parasitoids of lepidopteran larvae (Whitfield 1997). The remaining 16 species represent nine subfamilies with no more than three species per subfamily. Six of those species are from the subfamilies Cheloninae (3), Macrocentrinae (2), and Orgilinae (1) and thus are parasitoids of lepidopterans (van Achterberg 1997b; Shaw 1997; Wharton 1997c). Considering those species along with the microgastrines, at least 10 of the 62 species are parasitoids of lepidopterans.</p><p>An undetermined species of Dinotrema Förster was the most abundant (n=301) (Table 1) followed by an undetermined species of Orthostigma Ratzeburg (n=113). Those two species alone accounted for 56% of the specimens collected through this research. Cratospila neocirce Wharton (n=45) and an undetermined species of Aspilota Förster (n=44) were also abundant relative to the other species collected. Species of Aspilota, Dinotrema, and Orthostigma are primarily parasitoids of flies in the family Phoridae, and their hosts are often associated with fungi (Wharton 1997a; Yu et al. 2005). Given the high diversity of fungi at MLBS and its environs (Linder 1937; Meyer 1943; Graff 1947; Miller 1965), and at the sites sampled (especially Hunter’s Branch, R. Kula pers. obs.), it is likely that species of Aspilota, Dinotrema, and Orthostigma collected through this research attack phorids associated with fungi. Host use is unknown for species of Cratospila Förster (Wharton 1997a; Yu et al. 2005). No more than 17 specimens were collected for any of the remaining species.</p><p>Specimens of Spathius Nees from MLBS could not be identified reliably to species despite a recently published review that included a key to species in North America (Marsh &amp; Strazanac 2009). Species are separated in couplet 3 of the key based on malar space length “at least 3/4 eye height” compared to “at most 1/2 eye height.” The malar space:eye height ratios for the two MLBS specimens considered a species near Spathius calligaster Matthews are 0.55 and 0.48. They were taken through both options of couplet 3 and best fit the couplets following malar space length “at most 1/2 eye height.” Both specimens passed easily to couplet 8, where Spathius longipetiolatus Ashmead was differentiated from other species of Spathius based on a “smooth and polished” scutellar disc. However, the scutellar disc transitions, anteriorly to posteriorly, from smooth to coriaceous in S. longipetiolatus based on examination of the lectotype and paralectotype. Therefore, other features must be used to differentiate S. longipetiolatus from congeners. The lectotype of S. longipetiolatus is missing the head and metasoma, and the wings and legs are damaged. The paralectotype is missing the wings and metasoma, and the rest of the specimen is damaged and covered with debris. This makes equivocal identification of S. longipetiolatus extremely difficult. The vertex of the paralectotype is almost entirely obscured but clearly strigate compared to entirely smooth in the MLBS S. sp. nr. calligaster specimens. Therefore, I do not consider them conspecific with S. longipetiolatus . If both specimens are keyed to couplet 9, they fit S. calligaster in that forewing 1CU and 2CU are interstitial; they differ in that t4 is smooth (“acinose” in S. calligaster per Marsh &amp; Strazanac 2009), and the lateral margin of t2+t3 is sharp at the base only (“sharp and distinct” along entire length in S. calligaster per Marsh &amp; Strazanac 2009). If both specimens are keyed to couplet 10, they differ from Spathius evansi Matthews in that the vertex is smooth (strigate in S. evansi) and metatarsomere 3 is subequal to metatarsomere 5 (3 longer than 5 in S. evansi). They fit Spathius elegans Matthews in that the vertex and t4 are smooth and metatarsomere 3 is subequal to metatarsomere 5; they differ in that 1CU and 2CU are interstitial (i.e., 2CU is intercepted by 2cu-a in S. elegans). Thus, the two MLBS specimens of Spathius considered a species near S. calligaster do not precisely fit S. calligaster, S. elegans, or S. evansi sensu Marsh and Strazanac (2009), but they fit closest to S. calligaster based on examination of primary and/or secondary types for the three species. Examination of S. calligaster paratypes revealed that 1CU and 2CU are not interstitial (i.e., 2CU is intercepted by 2cu-a) and t4 is smooth in some specimens. Thus, S. calligaster sensu Marsh and Strazanac (2009) differs from S. calligaster sensu Matthews (1970), although the former authors did not state this explicitly. The specimens of Spathius sp. nr. calligaster from MLBS key easily to the couplet containing S. calligaster in Matthews (1970). However, they do not have the head and mesosoma dorsoventrally compressed, and they lack a dorsal transverse swelling on the pronotum, features Matthews (1970) used to define S. calligaster .</p><p>Two other species of Spathius were collected at MLBS. Both key easily to couplet 16 in Marsh and Strazanac (2009). Spathius impus Matthews was differentiated at couplet 16 from other species of Spathius based on “ocellaroccipital distance equal to or less than ocellar-ocular distance” and “outer apical margin of hind tibia with 2–3 small spines.” The distance is longer in both species, but both have two spines on the outer apical margin of the hind tibia. Both species differ from Spathius pallidus Ashmead (couplet 17) in terms of mesopleural sculpture and body color, and both species differ from Spathius leiopleuron Marsh and Strazanac (couplet 18) in terms of mesopleural sculpture. Spathius sp. 1 fits Spathius laflammei Provancher (couplet 18) except it has two spines on the outer apical margin of the hind tibia (3–8 in S. laflammei). Spathius sp. 2 differs from S. laflammei in that the former has the vertex smooth (strigate in S. laflammei) and two spines on the outer apical margin of the hind tibia (3–8 in S. laflammei).</p><p>Two specimens from MLBS were determined as a species near Ontsira imperator (Haliday) . They differ from specimens in the USNM determined as O. imperator in that the MLBS specimens have the metafemur brownish yellow and the metatibia and metatarsus brown, while those features are entirely yellow in the USNM specimens. Also, the scutellar disc is rugose posteriorly in the MLBS specimens, while it is smooth with punctures in the USNM specimens.</p><p>One specimen from MLBS was determined as a species near Diospilus fomitis Mason. It is similar to D. fomitis in that the ovipositor is downcurved apically. Conversely, the MLBS specimen has a sharply defined, pentagonal areola that bears a few rugosities, while the areola in four paratypes of D. fomitis in the USNM is either imperceptible (i.e., propodeum entirely areolate-rugose) or a weakly defined pentagon bearing areolate-rugose sculpture. Also, the head, mesosoma, and metasoma are darker brown in the MLBS specimen than in the paratypes of D. fomitis examined, and the metatibia and metatarsus are yellowish brown in the former compared to yellow in the latter. However, the lighter coloration observed in the paratypes could be an artifact of specimen preservation.</p><p>Fifteen species were reported from Virginia for the first time, but nine of those species are known from at least one state that borders Virginia. Noteworthy new distribution records are as follows (known distribution beyond Virginia in parentheses): Aphaereta ithacensis Fischer (CANADA: Ontario; U.S.A.: Michigan, New York, Ohio [Fischer 1966]), Pentapleura foveolata Viereck (U.S.A.: Connecticut [Viereck 1917]), Tanycarpa gracilicornis (Nees) (Oriental and Palearctic regions [Yu et al. 2005]; CANADA: Alberta, Ontario; U.S.A.: Alaska [Wharton 1980]), Ascogaster provancheri Dalla Torre (U.S.A.: Alaska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio [Yu et al. 2005]), Euphoriella pallidifacia Loan and New (CANADA: Quebec [Loan &amp; New 1972]), and D. fomitis (CANADA: Manitoba, Quebec, Saskatchewan [Mason 1968]). The specimens collected at MLBS are the southernmost records for those species.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/BF734D71F047EC6CE9E7FEADFE12F92A	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Kula, Robert R.	Kula, Robert R. (2013): A new species and new distribution records for Braconidae from Mountain Lake Biological Station in southwestern Virginia and a redescription of Pentapleura foveolata Viereck. Zootaxa 3641 (5): 501-523, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3641.5.1
BF734D71F04FEC65E9E7FEE1FD07F829.text	BF734D71F04FEC65E9E7FEE1FD07F829.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pentapleura foveolata Viereck	<div><p>Pentapleura foveolata Viereck</p><p>(Figs. 4–8)</p><p>Diagnosis. Pentapleura pumilio (Nees) and Pentapleura quadridens (Fischer) are known from the Nearctic Region in addition to P. foveolata . The forewing stigma is broader and less elongate in P. pumilio (Wharton 1980: fig. 21) and P. quadridens (Fig. 9) than in P. foveolata (Fig. 8). Additionally, the mandible is broader in P. quadridens (Fig. 10) than in P. foveolata (Fig. 5).</p><p>Description. Female. Body length: 1.23–1.63 mm. Head: HL 0.69–0.76X HW, HW 1.03–1.06X TW, FW 1.20–1.31X FH, EL 0.73–0.80X EH, MNL 1.86–2.20X MNAW, MNAW 1.00–1.20X MNBW, F1L 1.22–1.40X F2L; antenna with 14–16 flagellomeres, maxillary palpus with 6 palpomeres, labial palpus with 3 palpomeres; face smooth, setiferous; frons smooth except rugulose ventromesally, glabrous; gena and vertex smooth, setiferous; occiput smooth, glabrous; eye setiferous; clypeus with apical rim, setiferous; mandible (Fig. 5) with four teeth, margin between first and second tooth with notch resulting in bump at base of tooth 2, outer surface setiferous except excavated distal portion glabrous, rugose except excavated distal portion smooth, tooth 1, 3, and 4 rounded apically, tooth 2 acute apically, tooth 1 forming less than 90° angle and smaller than tooth 3, tooth 3 suborthogonal, tooth 2 elongate and triangular, tooth 4 ventral to tooth 3 and lobelike.</p><p>Mesosoma (Figs. 6–7): ML 1.80–2.10X MW, ML 1.27–1.46X MH, MW 0.67–0.71X MH, SSL 0.22–0.38X SSW; pronotal collar anteriorly smooth or with a few rugae and posteriorly crenulate, pronope present, lateral portion of pronotum rugose to rugulose except posterodorsal corner smooth, collar setiferous, lateral portion setiferous along margins but otherwise glabrous; notauli absent, a few rugosities present on anterior declivity where notauli would be located if present; mesoscutal midpit slitlike to oval; mesoscutum (excluding lateral margin and notauli) smooth, setiferous anteriorly, laterally, and where notauli would run if complete; scutellar sulcus bearing median longitudinal ridge; scutellar disc smooth, setiferous; metanotum with ridge mesally; propodeum with band of rugose sculpture mesally and smooth laterally, median longitudinal carina distinct in two specimens, with two to three setae mesally but setae otherwise confined to margins; precoxal sulcus absent; posterior mesopleural furrow smooth or virtually so, at most with a few weak crenulae below episternal scrobe; mesopleuron (excluding precoxal sulcus and posterior mesopleural furrow) smooth except a few crenulae in subalar groove at anteromesal margin mesopleuron, setiferous along margins but otherwise glabrous; metapleuron smooth with a few rugosities ventrally and/or laterally, setiferous.</p><p>Forewing (Fig. 8): 2RS length 0.64–0.73 X 3 RSa length; hyaline; stigma elongate; with following veins complete and tubular: C+SC+R, 1CUa, 1CUb, 1-1A, 1RS, 1M, (RS+M)a, 1m-cu, 1cu-a, r, 2RS, 3RSa, 3RSb, r-m, and 2M; M+CU nebulous proximally transitioning to tubular distally; first subdiscal cell open, 2-1A entirely absent or nearly so, at most represented by nebulous stub proximally, 2cu-a absent, 2CUa present as nebulous stub; vein 3RSb straight to wing margin; vein 1cu-a distad vein 1M or interstitial; vein 1m-cu distad vein 2RS.</p><p>Hind wing (Fig. 8): Hyaline; basal and subbasal cells enclosed by tubular veins; R and R1 complete and tubular; RS and 2M spectral; m-cu absent.</p><p>Metasoma: T1L 1.27–1.43X T1W; subcylindrical; OL 1.26–1.39X ML; t1 carinulate, dorsal carinae extending posteriorly as separate carinae or joining to form median carina, carinae/carina terminating at midpoint of tergum or nearly reaching posterior margin, dorsope present; t2–t8 smooth; t2–t7 setiferous, setae in roughly single line in posterior half of each tergum, t8 setiferous, pattern indeterminate.</p><p>Color: Head (excluding mouthparts and antenna) brown, mandible yellow except tooth 2 mostly brown and margins brownish, palpi whitish yellow, antenna with scape and pedicel brownish yellow, flagellum brown; mesosoma brown; legs yellow; metasoma with t1 yellow, t2 brown, t3–t5 brown with posterior edge slightly darker, t6–t8 yellowish brown.</p><p>Male. As in female except: Body length: 1.53–1.67 mm. Head: FW 1.13–1.33X FH, EL 0.73–0.81X EH, MNL 1.83–2.25X MNAW; antenna with 20 flagellomeres, labial palpus with 2–3 palpomeres.</p><p>Mesosoma: ML 1.38–1.50X MH, MW 0.69–0.73X MH, SSL 0.33–0.44X SSW; pronotal collar virtually smooth or entirely crenulate, pronope present or absent.</p><p>Forewing: 2RS length 0.61–0.89 X 3 RSa length.</p><p>Metasoma: T1L 1.14–1.29X T 1W.</p><p>Host. Unknown.</p><p>Material examined. Holotype female: Top label (white; partially handwritten, partially typewritten)=“NewHavenCt [;] 21 Oct. 1903 [;] H L Viereck”. Second label (red; handwritten)=“CAES [;] 146”. Third label (red; partially handwritten, partially typewritten)=“TypeNo [;] 66269 [;] USNM”. Fourth label (white with black border; handwritten)= Pentapleura [;] foveolata [;] Type 3 Vier.”. Other material examined: All U.S.A., 4 Ƥ VIRGINIA:Giles Co. Mountain Lake Biol. Station 37°22'25.69"N 80°31'25.41"W forest along Spring Road 4.iii.-15.viii.2009 R.R. Kula Malaise trap (1 used for SEM); 1 Ƥ 2 3 same data as previous except spring along Spring Trail (USNM, Ƥ used for SEM).</p><p>Discussion. Viereck (1917) described male P. foveolata from the type locality. A body length range of “ 1.5–2 mm ” was indicated in the original description, suggesting it might have been based on multiple males. However, only one male specimen of this species exists in the USNM, and it bears the label “TypeNo 66269 USNM.” Also, a unit tray for potential syntypes does not exist in the USNM. Thus, I follow Wharton (1980) and regard the single male in the USNM as the holotype. The description in Viereck (1917) is very short, and while Wharton (1980) provided a diagnosis for Pentapleura Förster, he did not redescribe P. foveolata as indicated in Yu et al. (2005). Therefore, P. foveolata is redescribed above to provide data on morphological variation for females and males.</p><p>Examination of the holotype for P. quadridens revealed intraindividual variation in the number of mandibular teeth. One mandible bears four teeth, with the additional tooth ventral to tooth 3; the other mandible bears five teeth (Fig. 10), with the additional teeth ventral to tooth 3.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/BF734D71F04FEC65E9E7FEE1FD07F829	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Kula, Robert R.	Kula, Robert R. (2013): A new species and new distribution records for Braconidae from Mountain Lake Biological Station in southwestern Virginia and a redescription of Pentapleura foveolata Viereck. Zootaxa 3641 (5): 501-523, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3641.5.1
BF734D71F04AEC67E9E7F8C5FBEFFE72.text	BF734D71F04AEC67E9E7F8C5FBEFFE72.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Alysia (Alysia) salebrosa Wharton	<div><p>Alysia (Alysia) salebrosa Wharton</p><p>(Figs. 11–14)</p><p>Discussion. The specimens of this species from MLBS were originally misinterpreted as representing an undescribed species because the ovipositor of A. (A.) salebrosa was described as “nearly twice length of mesosoma” in Wharton (1986). The ovipositor length:mesosoma length (OL:ML) ratios for the two MLBS specimens are 1.33 and 1.40. Also, the 2RS length:3RSa length (2RSL:3RSaL) ratio for A. (A.) salebrosa was reported as “1.16±0.05” in Wharton (1986), but the ratios for the two MLBS specimens are 0.90 and 1.05. The author (RRK) measured the holotype and four paratype females of A. (A.) salebrosa and found that OL:ML ranged from 1.22–1.65 (1.24 in holotype), and 2RSL:3RSaL ranged from 0.97–1.13 (1.13 in holotype). Likely, the quantitative ratios observed here differ from those in Wharton (1986) due to measurement error as discussed in Wharton (1980, 1986). The broad range observed here for OL:ML is also likely due to measurement error. The author (RRK) was not able to find any diagnostic difference between the MLBS specimens and the types of A. (A.) salebrosa examined; therefore, they considered specimens of A. (A.) salebrosa .</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/BF734D71F04AEC67E9E7F8C5FBEFFE72	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Kula, Robert R.	Kula, Robert R. (2013): A new species and new distribution records for Braconidae from Mountain Lake Biological Station in southwestern Virginia and a redescription of Pentapleura foveolata Viereck. Zootaxa 3641 (5): 501-523, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3641.5.1
BF734D71F054EC7BE9E7FB61FA7EF804.text	BF734D71F054EC7BE9E7FB61FA7EF804.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Coelinius wrayi Kula	<div><p>Coelinius wrayi Kula, new species</p><p>(Figs. 15–19)</p><p>Diagnosis. Coelinius wrayi is most similar morphologically to Coelinius hopkinsii Ashmead and Coelinius muesebecki (Riegel) . The axillae extend posteriorly as thick, blunt protuberances in C. wrayi (Fig. 18); they bear flangelike carinae in C. hopkinsii (Fig. 20) and C. muesebecki .</p><p>Description. Male. Body length: 4.40–4.90 mm. Head: HL 0.87–0.88X HW, HW 0.98X TW, FW 1.63–1.65X FH, EL 0.74–0.81X EH, MNL 2.36–2.70X MNAW, MNAW 0.85–1.11X MNBW, F1L 1.11–1.40X F2L; antenna with 39–41 flagellomeres, maxillary palpus with 6 palpomeres, labial palpus with 4 palpomeres; face punctate, setose; frons mostly smooth, rugose ventromesally, glabrous; gena and vertex smooth with widely spaced punctures, setiferous; occiput smooth except punctate ventrolaterally, setiferous ventrolaterally but otherwise glabrous; eye virtually glabrous; clypeus protruding to degree that apical rim appears absent, punctate, setose; mandible (Fig. 16) with four teeth, outer surface setiferous except teeth glabrous, punctate except teeth smooth and with ridges associated with tooth 1 and 3, tooth 1, 3, and 4 rounded apically, tooth 2 acute apically, tooth 1 and 3 forming less than 90° angle and similar in size and shape, tooth 2 elongate and triangular, tooth 4 between tooth 1 and tooth 2 as flangelike protrusion at base of tooth 2.</p><p>Mesosoma (Fig. 17): ML 2.43–2.68X MW, ML 1.82–1.96X MH, MW 0.73–0.75X MH, SSL 0.20–0.30X SSW; pronotal collar smooth anteriorly and crenulate posteriorly, pronope present, lateral portion of pronotum crenulate-rugose ventrally, posteriorly, and in anterior furrow with remainder smooth or coriaceous with punctures, collar setiferous, lateral portion setiferous posterodorsally and along margins with remainder glabrous; notauli present, extending posteriorly on mesoscutum into deep furrow anteriad transscutal articulation, crenulate; mesoscutal midpit represented by rugose furrow spanning from middle of mesoscutum posteriorly to transscutal articulation; mesoscutum (excluding lateral margin, notauli, and midpit) with median lobe punctate and lateral lobes coriaceous mesally and punctate laterally, setose except lateral lobes glabrous mesally; scutellar sulcus bearing median longitudinal ridge along with crenulae and rugae; axillae extending posteriorly as thick, blunt protuberances (Fig. 18); scutellar disc smooth with widely spaced punctures to punctate, setiferous; metanotum with flange mesally; propodeum areolate-rugose, setiferous; precoxal sulcus present along entire length of mesopleuron, rugose; posterior mesopleural furrow entirely crenulate; mesopleuron (excluding precoxal sulcus and posterior mesopleural furrow) coriaceous except subalar groove and anterior margin crenulate-rugose, setiferous anteriorly, ventral to precoxal sulcus, and diagonally from subalar area to posteroventral corner near mesocoxa; metapleuron areolate-rugose, setose.</p><p>Forewing (Fig. 19): Hyaline; stigma with fairly discrete proximal and distal margins, semielliptical; vein r arising from middle of stigma; with following veins complete and tubular: C+SC+R, 1CUa, 1CUb, 1-1A, 2-1A, 1RS, 1M, (RS+M)a, 1m-cu, 1cu-a, 2CUa, 2cu-a, r, 2RS, and 3RS; M+CU nebulous proximally transitioning to tubular distally; 2M transitioning from tubular proximally to nebulous then spectral distally; vein 3RS evenly curved to wing margin; vein 1cu-a distad vein 1M; vein 1m-cu basad vein 2RS.</p><p>Hind wing (Fig. 19): Hyaline; basal and subbasal cells enclosed by tubular veins; R and R1 complete and tubular; RS and 2M nebulous proximally transitioning to spectral distally; m-cu absent.</p><p>Metasoma: T1L 4.04–4.21X T1W; subcylindrical; t1 areolate-rugose, dorsal carinae not extending beyond dorsope; t2 coriaceous, t3 coriaceous or smooth, t4–t8 smooth; t2–t3 setiferous, setae in no apparent pattern, t4–t8 setiferous, setae located in posterior half of each tergum but otherwise in no apparent pattern.</p><p>Color: Head (excluding mouthparts and antenna) brown, mandible yellow except tooth 2 mostly brown and margins brownish, palpi brownish yellow, antenna with scape yellow and pedicel brownish yellow, flagellum brown; mesosoma brown except propleuron yellowish brown and pronotum yellow to brownish yellow anteriorly and brown posteriorly; pro- and mesothoracic legs yellow, metathoracic leg yellowish brown except trochanter, trochantellus, and tarsus yellow; metasoma brown with t1 darker than other terga.</p><p>Host. Unknown.</p><p>Material examined. Holotype male: Top label (white; typewritten)= U.S.A., “VIRGINIA:Giles Co. [;] Mountain Lake Biol. Station [;] 37°22'25.69"N, 80°31'25.41"W ”. Second label (white; typewritten)=“forest along Spring Road [;] 4.viii.-15.viii.2009 [;] R.R. Kula Malaise trap” (USNM). Paratype: 1 3 same data as holotype (USNM).</p><p>Etymology. The species is named in honor of Brendan Wray for his assistance to the author as an Intern at the Smithsonian Institution National Museum of Natural History.</p><p>Discussion. Coelinius wrayi fits Lepton Zetterstedt (= Coelinidea Viereck) sensu Griffiths (1964). The monophyly of subgenera recognized previously within Coelinius sensu lato is questionable except for Polemochartus Schulz (Kula 2008) . Therefore, Coelinius wrayi is not formally assigned to a subgenus at this time.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/BF734D71F054EC7BE9E7FB61FA7EF804	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Kula, Robert R.	Kula, Robert R. (2013): A new species and new distribution records for Braconidae from Mountain Lake Biological Station in southwestern Virginia and a redescription of Pentapleura foveolata Viereck. Zootaxa 3641 (5): 501-523, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3641.5.1
