identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
03FE87A8FFEBFF92FDDCFA8AFCC00740.text	03FE87A8FFEBFF92FDDCFA8AFCC00740.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tridyminae Thomson 1876	<div><p>Subfamily Tridyminae Thomson, 1876</p><p>Tridymina Thomson, 1876 .</p><p>Type genus: Tridymus Ratzeburg, 1848; treated as Tridyminae by Ashmead (1904).</p><p>Diagnosis</p><p>Body usually with metallic reflections (with some yellowish, brown or black exceptions). Female antenna with 1–2 microscopic, 1–2 anelliform, and 3–5 large flagellomeres before a 4-segmented clava (with 3 large clavomeres and a ‘terminal button’). Eyes at most slightly divergent ventrally. Marginal vein at most 3× as long as the relatively long stigmal vein (except Ecrizotomorpha alternativa – see below, and two new species described herein where the marginal vein is slightly longer). Petiole short, hardly visible, without dorsal lamina.</p><p>Taxonomic comments</p><p>Ecrizotomorpha was previously included in the subfamily Pireninae (Burks et al. 2022), based on the smaller number of large flagellomeres before clava (only three instead of four or five in Tridyminae), and the short stigmal vein found in E. alternativa . However, in other species such as E. taskhiri the fore wing venation is very similar to that of Ecrizotes and Spathopus . Apart from the peculiar structure of the flagellum, with one anelliform flagellomere flanked by two large ones (Figs 1C, 2E, 9D, 11C, 13F), all other characters of Ecrizotomorpha are indistinguishable from those of Ecrizotes and Spathopus . Moreover, at least in Ecrizotes monticola the same flagellomere shows various degrees of reduction. Thus, Ecrizotomorpha should be included in the subfamily Tridyminae, but the structure of the antenna alone cannot justify its distinct generic status (see below).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03FE87A8FFEBFF92FDDCFA8AFCC00740	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.		Plazi	Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan;Andriescu, Ionel;Manic, Gheorghe	Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan, Andriescu, Ionel, Manic, Gheorghe (2024): The Afrotropical and West-Palaearctic species of Ecrizotes Förster (Hymenoptera: Pirenidae). European Journal of Taxonomy 970: 1-37, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2024.970.2745, URL: https://europeanjournaloftaxonomy.eu/index.php/ejt/article/download/2745/12583
03FE87A8FFEAFF96FD84FE07FAD30339.text	03FE87A8FFEAFF96FD84FE07FAD30339.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ecrizotes Forster 1861	<div><p>Genus Ecrizotes Förster, 1861</p><p>Figs 1–13</p><p>Ecrizotes Förster, 1861: 33; type species by original monotypy Ecrizotes monticola Förster, 1861 .</p><p>Henicetrus Thomson, 1876: 188, 190; type species by subsequent designation Henicetrus annellus Thomson, 1876 in Gahan &amp; Fagan 1923: 70; subjective synonym of Ecrizotes in Ashmead 1904: 377.</p><p>Spathopus Ashmead, 1904: 272; type species by original designation or monotypy Spathopus anomalipes Ashmead, 1904; syn. nov.</p><p>Ecrizotomorpha Mani, 1939b: 537; type species by original monotypy Ecrizotomorpha taskhiri Mani, 1939; syn. nov.</p><p>Liaoella Xiao &amp; Huang, 1999; type species by original designation or monotypy Liaoella alternativa Xiao &amp; Huang, 1999; subjective synonym of Ecrizotomorpha in Huang &amp; Xiao 2005: 215–216; syn. nov.</p><p>Diagnosis</p><p>Body dark, with at most faint metallic reflections, mostly on head (Figs 1–13). Female antenna with 2 microscopic, 1–2 anelliform, and 3–5 large flagellomeres before the 4-segmented clava (with 3 large clavomeres plus a ‘terminal button’) (Figs 1C, 2E, 3E, 4E, 5E, 6C, 7E, 8C, 9D, 10D, 11C, 12F, 13F). Male antenna with 1 microscopic and 6 large flagellomeres before the 3-segmented clava (with 2 large clavomeres and a ‘terminal button’) (Figs 4F, 7F, 9E). Propodeum without plicae or median carina (e.g., Figs 1E, 10E, 13E). Fore wing with parastigmal hyaline break (Figs 1F, 3H, 4H, 5E, 6G, 7F, 8G, 9F, 10C, 11E, 12F, 13C). Female with hypopygium from almost reaching to surpassing the apical tergite of gaster (e.g., Figs 5H, 10F, 11F, 12E). Male sometimes with enlarged tibiae (Figs 5B, 9B).</p><p>Etymology</p><p>The name Ecrizotes has a Greek origin and comes from the words ‘εκ’ meaning ‘from’ or ‘out’, and ‘ρίζα’ meaning root. It can be translated as ‘the one that takes the root out’ or metaphorically ‘the one that destroys something’; it is of masculine gender.</p><p>Description</p><p>Female</p><p>Body with faint metallic reflections, these most obvious on the head (Figs 1–13). Body sculpture always delicate, alutaceous (e.g., Figs 1E, 3F, 6D, 8E, 10E, 11E, 12C). Setation sparse, setae rather long, piliferous punctures occasionally visible on the upper face (e.g., Figs 10B, 11B, 12B).</p><p>Head in frontal view subcircular (e.g., Figs 1B, 2C, 3B, 4C, 5C, 8B, 10B, 11B, 12B). Vertex sometimes conspicuously protruding between posterior ocelli (Figs 5C, 12B). Gena evenly round (Figs 8B, 10B) to conspicuously buccate (Figs 1B, 2C, 3B, 4C, 5C, 6B, 7C, 9C, 12B), not hollowed at mouth corner (e.g., Fig. 6B). Clypeal margin from weakly convex (Figs 4C, 6B, 7D, 8D, 9C, 13D) to strongly convex (Figs 2D, 3D, 5D, 10C, 11D) or acute (Figs 1D, 12D). Tentorial pits invisible. Scrobal depression short and shallow, with weak inter-torular ridge (e.g., Figs 8D, 10B, 12D). Malar sulcus present (e.g., Figs 10A, 12F). Eyes in frontal view slightly diverging in lower part (e.g., Figs 1B, 5C, 8B, 10B, 11B). Temples short and strongly converging in dorsal view of the head (Figs 5G, 8E). Occiput without carina. Antennal inserted much lower than LOL (e.g., Figs 1B, 3B, 4C, 5C 7C, 8B, 10B, 11B, 12B, 13B), with 2 microscopic, 1–2 anelliform (one often intercalated between two larger ones), and 3–5 large flagellomeres before the 4-segmented clava (with 3 large clavomeres plus a ‘terminal button’); antennal clava symmetric, without conspicuous area of microsetation, distal end rounded (Figs 1C, 2E, 3E, 4E, 5E, 6C, 7E, 8C, 9D, 10D, 11C, 12F, 13F). Mandibles usually at least slightly falcate (Figs 1A, 7D, 10C, 12F, 13D), in the few observable cases with the formula 4:3.</p><p>Mesosoma dorsally convex (Figs 3A, 4A, 5A, 6A, 8A, 10A, 11A) or almost flat (Figs 1A, 2A, 7A, 9A, 12A, 13A). Pronotum often long, with large diverging shoulders (Figs 1E, 2G, 5G, 10E, 11E, 12C, 13E), occasionally shorter, with smaller shoulders (Figs 3F, 4G, 6D, 7H, 8E, 9F, 10F). Pronotum evenly sloping, without transverse carina (e.g., Fig. 10A). Mesoscutum shorter than mesoscutellum; notauli complete and deep (Figs 1E, 2G, 3F, 4G, 5G, 6D, 7H, 8E, 9F, 10E, 11E, 12C, 13E). Axillae only slightly advanced. Mesoscutellum from convex to almost flat; frenum mostly indistinct. Dorsellum subhorizontal, smooth, semicircular (e.g., Figs 1E, 3F, 4G, 5G, 7H, 8E, 10E, 11E, 12C, 13E). Propodeum much shorter than mesoscutellum, smooth or uniformly and superficially sculptured; plicae and median carina absent; hind corners not prominent and not sharp; spiracles almost touching posterior margin of metanotum (e.g., Figs 1E, 4G, 6D, 10E, 13E). Hind coxa dorsally bare. Fore wing hyaline (Figs 1F, 2H, 3C, 4H, 5H, 6E, 7G, 8F, 9G, 10F, 11F, 12E, 13C), extensively setose, fringe present; veins slender or slightly thickened; parastigma with hyaline break; stigmal vein much shorter than marginal vein, stigma moderately capitate; postmarginal vein much shorter than marginal vein and only slightly longer than stigmal vein.</p><p>Gaster at least slightly compressed laterally, occasionally strongly so (Figs 3A, 4A, 6A, 7A, 8A, 9A). Petiole inconspicuous. Gastral tergites subequal in length, their posterior margin straight. Hypopygium from almost reaching to surpassing the apical tergite of gaster, its tip with (e.g., Figs 3G, 6F) or without a small incision (e.g., Fig. 7I).</p><p>Male</p><p>Similar to female (Figs 2B, 4B, 5B, 7B, 9B), except mainly for the differential features given in the diagnosis.</p><p>Distribution</p><p>The genus Ecrizotes is newly recorded in Africa (six species). Various species are present on all continents except for South America, Australia and Antarctica: Europe (seven species), Asia (five species) and North America (one species).</p><p>Hosts</p><p>Bouček (1964: 258) considered that Ecrizotes hofferi (Bouček, 1964) comb. nov. “probably develops as a parasite of some Cecidomyids”. Ecrizotes taskhiri (Mani, 1939) comb. nov. was cited as a hyperparasitoid of Dasineura lini (Barnes, 1936) ( Diptera: Cecidomyiidae) in India (Pruthi et al. 1940).</p><p>Taxonomic comments</p><p>Of the four described species of Spathopus, males are known only for S. anomalipes and S. hofferi (Fig. 4B). In both species all tibiae are strongly swollen; this feature only characterizes the males and makes them easily discernible from both conspecific females and males of Ecrizotes, which have normal tibiae.According to Mani (1939:538), the male of Ecrizotomorpha taskhiri has the hind tibiae “[…]broad, compressed laterally”. The males of the other two species classified in Ecrizotomorpha are unknown. This feature was used by both Graham (1969) and Bouček &amp; Rasplus (1991) to separate the Ecrizotes males from the Spathopus males. However, in our examined material from Africa, we found several males that have slender fore and mid tibiae (as in Ecrizotes) and inflated hind tibiae (as in Spathopus) (Fig. 6B). Furthermore, the strong sexual dimorphism present in some species and not in others is not a reliable indication of their generic distinctiveness, as shown in the related genus Macroglenes Westwood, 1832 ( Pirenidae: Pireninae): the males of some species (e.g., M. gibsoni Mitroiu, 2010) display abnormally large eyes, the males of other species have a strongly inflated antennal scape (e.g., M. bouceki (Graham, 1969)), while the males of other species (e.g., M. paludum (Graham, 1969)) do not have any of these unusual characters.</p><p>Regarding the separation of the females of Ecrizotes and Spathopus, according to Graham (1969) and Bouček &amp; Rasplus (1991), the main differences are summarized in Table 1.</p><p>The number and development of fore tibial spines (character 1) is difficult to assess and it is virtually impossible to separate the two instances. Characters 2 and 3 are also variable inside many chalcid genera. Character 4 was considered relevant by Bouček &amp; Rasplus (1991), but not Graham (1969) and indeed Ecrizotes monticola and E. caudatus have a posteriorly constricted pronotum, although less long (Fig. 10F). Character 5 refers to the head thickness in anteroposterior axis, which is a variable character inside many chalcid genera. The ventral clypeal margin is more or less convex in both Spathopus and Ecrizotes and has a continuous degree of projection, ranging from only slightly convex to sharp (Figs 1D, 2D, 3D, 4D, 5B, 6D, 7D, 9C, 10D, 11D, 12D, 13D).</p><p>According to Mani (1939: 537), Ecrizotomorpha has affinities with both Ecrizotes (“in venation and moniliform antennae of male”) and Spathopus (“in its stout and compressed hind tibiae and short stouter fore tibiae”), but differs from Ecrizotes in “the pubescent eyes, absence of ring-joints and triarticulate maxillary palpi” and from Spathopus in “the longer hind tibiae, pubescent eyes, absence of ring-joints and clypeus produced obtusely but not triangularly”. All of the above differences do not hold upon a closer examination of the three genera involved: (1) the “ring-joints” refer to the microscopic flagellomeres, which are not absent in Ecrizotomorpha but can be seen (at least the second) if enough magnification is used; (2) all species of these genera have some eye pubescence; (3) the ventral clypeal margin shows various degrees of convexity, ranging from broadly convex to narrowly pointed (see above); (4) the maxillary palpus is triarticulate at least in Spathopus hofferi; (5) the length of hind tibia is irrelevant as it can be variable inside a given genus.</p><p>Furthermore, the only character that separates females of Ecrizotes from those of Gastrancistrus Westwood, 1833 is the position of the hypopygium, which is situated at the same level with the distal tip of the apical tergite or slightly beyond it in Ecrizotes and clearly anterior of it (mostly anterior to middle of gaster) in Gastrancistrus . Males of Ecrizotes are indistinguishable from those of Gastrancistrus, except for those having enlarged hind tibiae. However, Gastrancistrus is a hugely diverse genus and until its revision other taxonomic changes are postponed. Melancistrus Graham, 1969, which also has the hypopygium near the tip of gaster, differs in having a translucid median projection (the mucro) extending posteriorly from the hypopygium, and a transverse propodeal carina; it could also belong here but unavailability of material prevented further investigations. Afrothopus Mitroiu, 2024 also has similarities with Ecrizotes, Gastrancistrus and Spathopus but differs in several key characters (see Discussion and Mitroiu et al. 2024).</p><p>In conclusion, there are no reliable characters for the separation of Ecrizotes, Ecrizotomorpha and Spathopus and consequently Ecrizotomorpha syn. nov., Liaoella syn. nov. (previously synonymized with Ecrizotomorpha), and Spathopus syn. nov. are regarded as junior synonyms of Ecrizotes, with the following new combinations: Ecrizotes alternativa (Xiao &amp; Huang, 1999) comb. nov.; E. anomalipes (Ashmead, 1904) comb. nov.; E. hofferi (Bouček, 1964) comb. nov.; E. montanus (Huggert, 1976) comb. nov.; E. nasalis (Springate &amp; Noyes, 1990) comb. nov.; E. taskhiri (Mani, 1939) comb. nov.; and E. tenkasiensis (Jamal Ahmad &amp; Shafee, 1993) comb. nov.</p><p>Key to Afrotropical and West-Palaearctic species of Ecrizotes (females)</p><p>1. Antenna with at least proximal funiculars longer than wide or quadrate and none anelliform (Figs 4E, 8C); Palaearctic species .................................................................................................................... 2</p><p>– Antenna with all funiculars wider than long, usually at least some anelliform (Figs 1C, 2E, 3E, 5E, 6C, 7E, 9D, 10D, 11C, 12F, 13F); Afrotropical and Palaearctic species .......................................... 3</p><p>2. Funiculars distinctly longer than wide, Fu1 length about twice width (Fig. 8C); clava at most as long as combined length of the three preceding funiculars; scape in lateral view about 6–7 × as long as wide ..................................................................................................... E. longicornis (Walker, 1848)</p><p>– Funiculars at most slightly longer than wide or quadrate, Fu1 length about 1.1× width (Fig. 4E); clava length 1.25 × combined length of the three preceding funiculars; scape in lateral view at most about 5.5× as long as wide ................................................................. E. filicornis (Thomson, 1876)</p><p>3. Gaster length (without ovipositor sheath) 1.15–1.40 × combined length of head and mesosoma, strongly compressed laterally (Figs 3A, 6A, 7A, 9A); ovipositor sheath length at least 0.5 × length of hind tibia .................................................................................................................................... 4</p><p>– Gaster length (without ovipositor sheath) at most equal to combined length of head and mesosoma, at most moderately compressed laterally (Figs 1A, 2A, 5A, 10A, 11A, 12A, 13A); ovipositor sheath at most 0.4 × length of hind tibia ...................................................................................................... 7</p><p>4. Tip of hypopygium incised (Figs 3G, 6F); Fu3 smaller than Fu2 and Fu4, but not anelliform (Figs 3E, 6C); Afrotropical and Palaearctic species ....................................................................... 5</p><p>– Tip of hypopygium not incised (e.g., Fig. 7I); Fu3 variable (Figs 7E, 9D); Afrotropical species .... 6</p><p>5. Ovipositor sheath about 0.9× as long as hind tibia; hind leg slender, tibia length about 8 × width; tibiae extensively yellowish brown (Fig. 6A); Afrotropical species ........ E. incisus Mitroiu sp. nov.</p><p>– Ovipositor sheath about 0.5–0.6 × as long as hind tibia; hind leg stouter, tibia length about 5 × width; legs entirely dark brown (Fig. 3A); Palaearctic species ..................... E. caudatus (Thomson, 1876)</p><p>6. Ovipositor sheath very long, about 1.2× as long as hind tibia (Fig. 7A); Fu3 only slightly smaller than Fu2 and Fu4 (Fig. 7E) ................................................................ E. longicauda Mitroiu sp. nov.</p><p>– Ovipositor sheath shorter, about 0.5–0.6 × as long as hind tibia (Fig. 9A); Fu3 anelliform (Fig. 9D) ................................................................................................................... E. longus Mitroiu sp. nov.</p><p>7. Ventral clypeal margin strongly protruding and acute (Fig. 1D); Afrotropical species ...................... ....................................................................................................................... E. acer Mitroiu sp. nov.</p><p>– Ventral clypeal margin more or less evenly curved (Figs 2C, 5D, 10C, 11D, 13D), if rarely almost acute ( E. nasalis), then less strongly protruding (Fig. 12D); Afrotropical and Palaearctic species … 8</p><p>8. Antenna with Fu3 not anelliform, not or only slightly smaller than Fu2 or Fu4 (Figs 5E, 10D, 12F); Palaearctic species ............................................................................................................................ 9</p><p>– Antenna with Fu3 conspicuously smaller than Fu2 or Fu4, usually anelliform (Figs 2E, 11C, 13F); Afrotropical and Palaearctic species ................................................................................................11</p><p>9. Ventral clypeal margin acute (Fig. 12D) .............. E. nasalis (Springate &amp; Noyes, 1990) comb. nov.</p><p>– Ventral clypeal margin evenly convex (Figs 5D, 10C) ................................................................... 10</p><p>10. Head in frontal view with vertex less convex between posterior ocelli and gena evenly rounded (Fig. 10B) .......................................................................... E. montanus (Huggert, 1976) comb. nov.</p><p>– Head in frontal view with vertex more strongly convex between posterior ocelli and gena buccate (Fig. 5C) .................................................................................. E. hofferi (Bouček, 1964) comb. nov.</p><p>11. Ventral clypeal margin weakly convex (Fig. 13D); MV about 2.4× SV; scape, pedicel, and legs except basal part of femora yellowish (Fig. 13A); Afrotropical species ............................................ ................................................................................................................ E. rovumae Mitroiu sp. nov.</p><p>– Ventral clypeal margin strongly convex (Figs 2D, 11D); MV about 2.5–3.0× SV; scape, pedicel and legs more extensively dark, femora completely dark (Figs 2A, 11A); Afrotropical and Palaearctic species ............................................................................................................................................. 12</p><p>12. Mesosoma dorsally convex (Fig. 11A); pronotum shorter than mesoscutum (Fig. 11E); Fu3 short but clearly visible (Fig. 11C); hind tibia length 5.0–5.2 × width; MV 2.5–2.9× SV; ovipositor sheath length 0.3–0.4 × length of hind tibia; Palaearctic species ........................ E. monticola Förster, 1861</p><p>– Mesosoma dorsally almost flat (Fig. 2A); pronotum about as long as mesoscutum (Fig. 2G); Fu3 hardly distinct (Fig. 2E); hind tibia length almost 7× width; MV about 3 × SV; ovipositor sheath length about 0.01 × length of hind tibia; Afrotropical species ........... E. brevicauda Mitroiu sp. nov.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03FE87A8FFEAFF96FD84FE07FAD30339	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.		Plazi	Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan;Andriescu, Ionel;Manic, Gheorghe	Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan, Andriescu, Ionel, Manic, Gheorghe (2024): The Afrotropical and West-Palaearctic species of Ecrizotes Förster (Hymenoptera: Pirenidae). European Journal of Taxonomy 970: 1-37, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2024.970.2745, URL: https://europeanjournaloftaxonomy.eu/index.php/ejt/article/download/2745/12583
03FE87A8FFEEFF98FD88FAA0FD3D0339.text	03FE87A8FFEEFF98FD88FAA0FD3D0339.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ecrizotes acer Mitroiu & Andriescu & Manic 2024	<div><p>Ecrizotes acer Mitroiu sp. nov.</p><p>urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act: 40C9288B-94D4-4B9D-9788-E2B8E4C48AC9</p><p>Fig. 1</p><p>Diagnosis</p><p>Female</p><p>All funiculars wider than long, Fu3 anelliform (Fig. 1C); ventral margin of clypeus strongly protruding and acute (Fig. 1D); head in frontal view with gena buccate (Fig. 1B); hind tibia length 4.8–5.0 × width; gaster shorter than combined length of head and mesosoma, moderately compressed laterally (Fig. 1A); tip of hypopygium not incised (cf. Fig. 7I); ovipositor sheath length about 0.2 × length of hind tibia.</p><p>Male</p><p>Unknown.</p><p>Etymology</p><p>The species name refers to the shape of the ventral clypeal margin (from the Latin adjective ‛ acer ’ = ‛sharp’, ‛pointed’).</p><p>Type material</p><p>Holotype ZIMBABWE • ♀; “ Rhodesia / Salisbury / A. Watsham / WF 67 / i ×.74 ”; NHMUK.</p><p>Paratypes D.R. CONGO • 1 ♀; “DR Congo: Oriental Prov. / Ituri region, Mongbwalu, / AGK camp, 20-27. III.2015 / A. Gumovsky &amp; C. Dhendro // behind pld fences, / abandoned shamba, bananas, avocado, sweet / potato, 75 YPTs”; MICO.</p><p>ZIMBABWE • 2 ♀♀; “ Rhodesia / Makumbi Miss / A. Watsham / W.244, × ii.76 // Spathopus ! [Bouček’s handwriting]”; NHMUK .</p><p>Description</p><p>Female holotype</p><p>Body length: 1.0 mm. Colour as in Fig. 1. Head in frontal view with vertex not protruding between posterior ocelli (Fig. 1B). Gena buccate (Fig. 1B). Ventral margin of clypeus strongly protruding and acute (Fig. 1D). Upper face smooth except rare piliferous punctures (Fig. 1B). Length of pedicel plus flagellum shorter than head width. All funiculars wider than long, Fu3 anelliform (Fig. 1C). Mesosoma dorsally almost flat (Fig. 1A). Pronotum about as long as mesoscutum (Fig. 1E). Basal cell of fore wing with a few scattered setae on upper side (Fig. 1F). MV about 2.4 × SV. Hind tibia length about 4.8× width. Gaster shorter than combined length of head and mesosoma, moderately compressed laterally (Fig. 1A). Tip of hypopygium not incised (cf. Fig. 6I). Ovipositor sheath length about 0.2 × length of hind tibia.</p><p>Variation</p><p>Female</p><p>The specimen collected in the D.R. Congo has a slightly less protruding clypeal margin. Hind tibia length 4.8–5.0× width.</p><p>Distribution</p><p>D.R. Congo, Zimbabwe.</p><p>Hosts</p><p>Unknown.</p><p>Taxonomic comments</p><p>This is one of the most easily recognizable species of Ecrizotes due to its large triangular clypeal margin, which is expected to be similar in males.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03FE87A8FFEEFF98FD88FAA0FD3D0339	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.		Plazi	Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan;Andriescu, Ionel;Manic, Gheorghe	Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan, Andriescu, Ionel, Manic, Gheorghe (2024): The Afrotropical and West-Palaearctic species of Ecrizotes Förster (Hymenoptera: Pirenidae). European Journal of Taxonomy 970: 1-37, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2024.970.2745, URL: https://europeanjournaloftaxonomy.eu/index.php/ejt/article/download/2745/12583
03FE87A8FFE0FF9AFDD7FAA1FE9C0087.text	03FE87A8FFE0FF9AFDD7FAA1FE9C0087.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ecrizotes brevicauda Mitroiu & Andriescu & Manic 2024	<div><p>Ecrizotes brevicauda Mitroiu sp. nov.</p><p>urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act: 7AE37C37-2888-41EB-9BF5-2EA7BDE2BE3E</p><p>Fig. 2</p><p>Diagnosis</p><p>Female</p><p>All funiculars wider than long, Fu3 anelliform (Fig. 2E); ventral margin of clypeus strongly convex (Fig. 2D); head in frontal view with gena buccate (Fig. 2C); hind tibia length almost 7× width; gaster shorter than combined length of head and mesosoma, moderately compressed laterally (Fig. 2A); tip of hypopygium not incised (cf. Fig. 7I); ovipositor sheath length about 0.01 × length of hind tibia.</p><p>Male</p><p>Hind tibia slightly widened, length 4.4–4.7 × width (Fig. 2B). Funicular segments wider than long (Fig. 2F). Fore wing with upper side of basal cell having one irregular row of setae plus several additional ones near basal vein.</p><p>Etymology</p><p>The species name refers to the very short ovipositor that characterizes the females of this species (from the Latin words ‛ brevis ’ = ‛short’ and ‛ cauda ’ = ‛tail’; noun in apposition).</p><p>Type material</p><p>Holotype SOUTH AFRICA • ♀; “S. Africa. / R.E. Turner. / Brit. Mus. / 1921-450 // Mossel Bay, / Cape Province. / October, 1921.”; NHMUK.</p><p>Allotype SOUTH AFRICA • ♂; “S. Africa / R.E. Turner. / Brit. Mus. / 1921-412 // Mossel Bay, / Cape Province. / Sept, 1921.”; NHMUK.</p><p>Additional paratypes</p><p>SOUTH AFRICA • 2 ♂♂; same data as for allotype; NHMUK .</p><p>Description</p><p>Female holotype</p><p>Body length: 0.75 mm. Colour as in Fig. 2. Head in frontal view with vertex protruding between posterior ocelli (Fig. 2C). Gena buccate (Fig. 2C). Ventral margin of clypeus strongly convex (Fig. 2C). Upper face smooth except rare piliferous punctures (Fig. 2C). Length of pedicel plus flagellum shorter than head width. All funicular segments wider than long, Fu3 anelliform, barely visible (Fig. 2E). Mesosoma dorsally almost flat (Fig. 2A). Pronotum about as long as mesoscutum (Fig. 2G). Basal cell of fore wing with a few scattered setae on upper side (Fig. 2H). MV about 3 × SV. Hind tibia length about 6.6 × width. Gaster shorter than combined length of head and mesosoma, moderately compressed laterally (Fig. 2A). Tip of hypopygium not incised (cf. Fig. 6I). Ovipositor sheath length about 0.01 × length of hind tibia.</p><p>Male allotype</p><p>Body length: 0.9 mm. Differs from the female holotype in the structure of the antenna (see generic diagnosis) and in the characters stated in the above species diagnosis. Additionally, the mesosoma is more convex and the pronotum is shorter than the mesoscutum (Fig. 2B).</p><p>Variation</p><p>Male</p><p>Hind tibia length 4.4–4.7 × width.</p><p>Distribution</p><p>South Africa.</p><p>Hosts</p><p>Unknown.</p><p>Taxonomic comments</p><p>This species is somewhat similar to E. monticola, from which it differs mainly in the characters given in the key.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03FE87A8FFE0FF9AFDD7FAA1FE9C0087	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.		Plazi	Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan;Andriescu, Ionel;Manic, Gheorghe	Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan, Andriescu, Ionel, Manic, Gheorghe (2024): The Afrotropical and West-Palaearctic species of Ecrizotes Förster (Hymenoptera: Pirenidae). European Journal of Taxonomy 970: 1-37, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2024.970.2745, URL: https://europeanjournaloftaxonomy.eu/index.php/ejt/article/download/2745/12583
03FE87A8FFE2FF9FFDA4F943FABC0430.text	03FE87A8FFE2FF9FFDA4F943FABC0430.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ecrizotes caudatus Thomson 1876	<div><p>Ecrizotes caudatus Thomson, 1876</p><p>Fig. 3</p><p>Henicetrus caudatus Thomson, 1876: 191; lectotype ♀, LUZN, designated by Graham 1969: 331, images examined.</p><p>Ecrizotes caudata – Schmiedeknecht 1909: 273; new combination.</p><p>Ecrizotes caudatus – Erdős 1947: 110.</p><p>Diagnosis</p><p>Female</p><p>All funiculars wider than long; Fu3 smaller than Fu2 and Fu4, but not anelliform (Fig. 3E); ventral margin of clypeus strongly convex (Fig. 3D); head in frontal view with gena buccate (Fig. 3B); hind tibia length about 5× width; gaster longer than combined length of head and mesosoma and strongly compressed laterally (Fig. 3A); tip of hypopygium incised (Fig. 3G); ovipositor sheath length about 0.5–0.6 × length of hind tibia.</p><p>Male</p><p>Unknown.</p><p>Material examined</p><p>BULGARIA • 8 ♀♀; “Bulgaria mer. / Pirin, Begovica, 1750m. / 1.-2.VIII.74 / Lgt. Dr. Aug. Hoffer ”; NMPC .</p><p>CZECH REPUBLIC • 1 ♀; “ Praha – Chuchle / Bohemia, 8.8.59 / J. Macek // sec. LT = H. caudatus Th. ♀ / Zd. Bouček det. 1962”; NMPC .</p><p>FRANCE • 1 ♀; “France, Htes Alp. / Queyras: Arvieu × / 18.7.90, Bouček // ♀ Ecrizotes monticola Först. / det. Z. Bouček, 1990”; NMPC .</p><p>Distribution</p><p>Germany (Haas et al. 2021), as E. monticola; Hungary (Erdős 1947), Sweden (Thomson 1878), Bulgaria, Czech Republic, France (new records). The record from Germany was assessed based on the images provided by Haas et al. (2021) (see Taxonomic comments below).</p><p>Hosts</p><p>Unknown.</p><p>Taxonomic comments</p><p>We agree with Erdős (1947) that E. caudatus (and not E. caudata) is the valid name of this species (see Etymology of Ecrizotes above). Both Bouček (1961: 58) and Graham (1969: 331) consider Henicetrus caudatus a probable junior synonym of E. monticola, differing in details such as a slightly longer gaster, hypopygium and ovipositor. Although recorded as a valid species in Noyes (2019) and UCD Community (2023), most users presumably followed Graham’s view and recorded this species as E. monticola (see Distribution). Initially, we followed the same species concept of E. monticola and considered the possibility to describe a new species that differed from E. monticola mainly in having a shorter ovipositor and a more reduced Fu3. However, after examining (1) a paralectotype of E. monticola (Figs 11G–I), (2) a specimen compared with the lectotype of E. caudatus by Z. Bouček (Fig. 3H–I), and (3) several specimens that could be separated in two groups based on the length of the ovipositor (without intermediate forms), we decided for the most conservative approach and regard both E. caudatus and E. monticola as valid, with the potentially new species falling within the variability of E. monticola . Consequently, we consider E. caudatus as having a longer ovipositor sheath (0.5–0.6 × the length of hind tibia), a longer and more laterally compressed gaster (at least slightly longer than head plus mesosoma), and Fu3 only moderately reduced (Fig. 3); we regard E. monticola as having a shorter ovipositor sheath (0.3–0.4× the length of the hind tibia), a shorter and mostly uncompressed gaster (at most as long as head plus mesosoma in un-collapsed specimens, or shorter in collapsed ones), and Fu3 usually anelliform (Fig. 11). Interestingly, the images of the holotype of Henicetrus annellus Thomson, 1878 (considered a synonym of E. monticola by Graham (1969)) provided by ZMUL (https://ento.biomus.lu.se/search.php?taxa=henicetrus) show that in this species Fu3 is shorter than both Fu2 and Fu4 but not anelliform, while the ovipositor is considerably shorter than in E. caudatus . Another potential identification problem arises from the positional variability and collapse degree of the hypopygium, which can make the shallow incision present in E. caudatus and E. monticola (Fig. 3G) difficult or impossible to observe (Fig. 3A, H); nevertheless, E caudatus should be easily separated from the other Palaearctic species having a relatively long ovipositor sheath, i.e., E. filicornis and E. longicornis, by its much shorter funiculars. Perhaps future molecular studies could help elucidate the taxonomy of this species complex, but at the time of this study no fresh material was available.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03FE87A8FFE2FF9FFDA4F943FABC0430	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.		Plazi	Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan;Andriescu, Ionel;Manic, Gheorghe	Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan, Andriescu, Ionel, Manic, Gheorghe (2024): The Afrotropical and West-Palaearctic species of Ecrizotes Förster (Hymenoptera: Pirenidae). European Journal of Taxonomy 970: 1-37, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2024.970.2745, URL: https://europeanjournaloftaxonomy.eu/index.php/ejt/article/download/2745/12583
03FE87A8FFE7FF81FDD3FDD7FB3E07B1.text	03FE87A8FFE7FF81FDD3FDD7FB3E07B1.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ecrizotes filicornis (Thomson 1876)	<div><p>Ecrizotes filicornis (Thomson, 1876)</p><p>Fig. 4</p><p>Henicetrus filicornis Thomson, 1876: 191; lectotype ♀, designated by Graham 1969: 332, ZMUL, not examined.</p><p>Ecrizotes filicornis – Schmiedeknecht 1909: 273; new combination.</p><p>Diagnosis</p><p>Female</p><p>All funiculars at least slightly longer than wide or quadrate, Fu1 length about 1.1× width, Fu3 not smaller than either Fu2 or Fu4 (Fig. 4E); ventral margin of clypeus weakly convex (Fig. 4D); head in frontal view with gena buccate (Fig. 4C); hind tibia length about 6.6× width; gaster longer than combined length of head and mesosoma and strongly compressed laterally (Fig. 4A); tip of hypopygium incised (cf. Figs 3G, 6F); ovipositor sheath length about 0.4 × length of hind tibia.</p><p>Male</p><p>All tibiae normal, hind tibia length about 5.5× width (Fig. 4B). Funicular segments quadrate, except Fu1 longer than wide (Fig. 4F). Fore wing with upper side of basal cell having one irregular row of setae plus several additional ones near basal vein.</p><p>Material examined</p><p>CZECH REPUBLIC • 1 ♀; “ Bohemia or. Hradec Králové / 29.VII.1945. Bouček leg. // Ecrizotes Förster filicornis Thoms. ”; NMPC • 1 ♀; “ Krásná Lipa (Ústí n. L.) / 12.7.56, Bohemia Dlabola”; NMPC • 1 ♀; “ Bohemia centr., Veltrusy // P. Mikula, 26.V.64 ”; NMPC • 1 ♂; “ Bohemia, Krkomše / Lysečiny / VIII.1964. J. Macek ”; NMPC .</p><p>UNITED KINGDOM • 1 ♀; “ Burnham Beeches / Bucks. England / Bouček 26.v.80 // Ecrizotes filicornis (Thoms.) / det. Z. Bouček 1980”; NHMUK • 1 ♀; “Chobham Comm. / Surrey, England / Bouček 4.6.71 // ♀ Ecrizotes filicornis (Thoms.) / det. Z. Bouček, 1981”; NMPC • 1 ♂; “ Chobham Comm. / Surrey, England / Bouček 6.6.71 ”; NMPC .</p><p>Distribution</p><p>Czech Republic, Hungary, Netherlands, Sweden, United Kingdom (UCD Community 2023).</p><p>Hosts</p><p>Unknown.</p><p>Taxonomic comments</p><p>Alongside E. longicornis, the species is easily recognizable by the long antennae, with all funiculars at least slightly longer than wide. From the female of the latter species the female of E. filicornis differs mostly in having shorter antennae, with less elongated funicular segments (Fig. 4E).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03FE87A8FFE7FF81FDD3FDD7FB3E07B1	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.		Plazi	Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan;Andriescu, Ionel;Manic, Gheorghe	Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan, Andriescu, Ionel, Manic, Gheorghe (2024): The Afrotropical and West-Palaearctic species of Ecrizotes Förster (Hymenoptera: Pirenidae). European Journal of Taxonomy 970: 1-37, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2024.970.2745, URL: https://europeanjournaloftaxonomy.eu/index.php/ejt/article/download/2745/12583
03FE87A8FFF9FF83FDFEFE29FD8207DA.text	03FE87A8FFF9FF83FDFEFE29FD8207DA.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ecrizotes hofferi (Boucek 1964) Mitroiu & Andriescu & Manic 2024	<div><p>Ecrizotes hofferi (Bouček, 1964) comb. nov.</p><p>Fig. 5</p><p>Spathopus hofferi Bouček, 1964: 257–258; holotype ♀, NMPC, not examined.</p><p>Diagnosis</p><p>Female</p><p>All funiculars wider than long; Fu3 not smaller than either Fu2 or Fu4 (Fig. 5E); ventral margin of clypeus strongly convex (Fig. 5D); head in frontal view with gena buccate (Fig. 5C); hind tibia length about 5× width; gaster about equal to combined length of head and mesosoma, moderately compressed laterally (Fig. 5A); tip of hypopygium not incised (cf. Fig. 7I); ovipositor sheath length about 0.4× length of hind tibia.</p><p>Male</p><p>All tibiae strongly inflated, hind tibia length about 2.9 × width (Fig. 5B). Funicular segments wider than long (Fig. 5F). Fore wing with upper side of basal cell sparsely and more or less uniformly setose. See also Taxonomic comments below.</p><p>Material examined</p><p>FRANCE • 1 ♀; “ Lac de Tigne / Savoie, France / 9.8.1965. Comellini // Spathopus hofferi Bčk. / det. Z. Bouček, 1976”; NMPC .</p><p>SPAIN • 1 ♂; “Spain (Madrid): Cercedilla / 8.vii.74. Z. Bouček // ♂ Spathopus? hofferi Bčk. / det. Z. Bouček, 1975”; NMPC .</p><p>Distribution</p><p>Iran, Kazakhstan, Russia, Slovakia, Sweden (UCD Community 2023). France (new record).</p><p>Hosts</p><p>Unknown. According to Bouček (1964: 258), the species might be a parasitoid of Cecidomyiidae Newman, 1835 ( Diptera).</p><p>Taxonomic comments</p><p>The male specimen from Spain (see above, Fig. 5B, F) identified by Bouček as “ ? hofferi ” (see Material examined) remains questionable regarding its species-level identification as it generally fits the description of E. hofferi male except for the antenna. In this specimen, the right antenna is broken beyond the pedicel, while the left antenna is broken beyond Fu4. Nevertheless, the first funicular segments are quite different from Bouček’s drawing (Bouček 1964: 256, fig. 4); the antenna drawn by Bouček (apparently belonging to the male allotype collected in Russia) is very curious in having a compact flagellum, with only four large segments before a 3-segmented clava, with an unusually long Fu4; this is rather odd as antennae of males never have fewer funicular segments than the antennae of females. In the redescription of Spathopus, Bouček (1964) states that the antennal formula is 11053 in females and 11143 or 11233 in males, the latter formula probably relying on Ashmead’s assertion that the male antenna is “10-jointed, with one or two ring-joints” (Ashmead 1904). However, in the Spanish male specimen listed above, the flagellum is not compact and the first four funicular segments are more or less equally-sized (Fig. 5F); this is the same as seen in the male specimens of E. brevicauda sp. nov. (Fig. 2F) and E. longicauda sp. nov. (Fig. 7F) described herein, as well as with the male of E. filicornis (Fig. 4F). In all these species, the male antennal formula is 11062, with funiculars never compact and with a 2-segmented clava. The Russian specimen examined by Bouček has inflated tibiae and was rightfully identified as a male, but we consider the possibility that it could have been a gynandromorph male, with abnormal antennae.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03FE87A8FFF9FF83FDFEFE29FD8207DA	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.		Plazi	Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan;Andriescu, Ionel;Manic, Gheorghe	Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan, Andriescu, Ionel, Manic, Gheorghe (2024): The Afrotropical and West-Palaearctic species of Ecrizotes Förster (Hymenoptera: Pirenidae). European Journal of Taxonomy 970: 1-37, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2024.970.2745, URL: https://europeanjournaloftaxonomy.eu/index.php/ejt/article/download/2745/12583
03FE87A8FFFBFF82FDBFFD8CFDF207CD.text	03FE87A8FFFBFF82FDBFFD8CFDF207CD.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ecrizotes incisus Mitroiu 2024	<div><p>Ecrizotes incisus Mitroiu sp. nov.</p><p>urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act: 3A495840-DCC1-476B-B554-D6C6D92011C5</p><p>Fig. 6</p><p>Diagnosis</p><p>Female</p><p>All funiculars wider than long; Fu3 smaller than both Fu2 and Fu4, but not anelliform (Fig. 6C); ventral margin of clypeus weakly convex (Fig. 6B); head in frontal view with gena buccate (Fig. 6B); hind tibia length about 8× width; gaster longer than combined length of head and mesosoma and strongly compressed laterally (Fig. 6A); tip of hypopygium incised (Fig. 6F); ovipositor sheath length about 0.9× length of hind tibia.</p><p>Male</p><p>Unknown.</p><p>Etymology</p><p>The species name refers to the incised tip of the female's hypopygium (from the Latin adjective ‛ incisus ’= ‛cut up’).</p><p>Type material</p><p>Holotype SOUTH AFRICA • ♀; “ South Africa / Grahamstown / A. Watsham: 12: 73”; NHMUK.</p><p>Description</p><p>Female holotype</p><p>Body length: 1.5 mm. Colour as in Fig. 6. Head in frontal view with vertex not protruding between posterior ocelli (Fig. 6B). Gena buccate (Fig. 6B). Ventral margin of clypeus weakly convex (Fig. 6B). Upper face uniformly sculptured, piliferous punctures hardly distinct (Fig. 6B). Length of pedicel plus flagellum shorter than head width. All funiculars wider than long; Fu3 smaller than both Fu2 and Fu4, but not anelliform (Fig. 6C). Mesosoma dorsally convex (Fig. 6A). Pronotum shorter than mesoscutum (Fig. 6D). Basal cell of fore wing with a few scattered setae on upper side (Fig. 6E). MV about 2.7× SV. Hind tibia length about 8× width. Gaster longer than combined length of head and mesosoma and strongly compressed laterally (Fig. 6A). Tip of hypopygium incised (Fig. 6F). Ovipositor sheath length about 0.9× length of hind tibia.</p><p>Variation</p><p>Unknown.</p><p>Distribution</p><p>South Africa.</p><p>Hosts</p><p>Unknown.</p><p>Taxonomic comments</p><p>This species can be separated from the other known species with an incised hypopygium by the longer ovipositor and more slender tibiae.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03FE87A8FFFBFF82FDBFFD8CFDF207CD	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.		Plazi	Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan;Andriescu, Ionel;Manic, Gheorghe	Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan, Andriescu, Ionel, Manic, Gheorghe (2024): The Afrotropical and West-Palaearctic species of Ecrizotes Förster (Hymenoptera: Pirenidae). European Journal of Taxonomy 970: 1-37, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2024.970.2745, URL: https://europeanjournaloftaxonomy.eu/index.php/ejt/article/download/2745/12583
03FE87A8FFFDFF87FDD6FE9FFBF40497.text	03FE87A8FFFDFF87FDD6FE9FFBF40497.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ecrizotes longicauda Mitroiu & Andriescu & Manic 2024	<div><p>Ecrizotes longicauda Mitroiu sp. nov.</p><p>urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act: 14089D86-9EED-4AC5-A2C8-1D36126221A5</p><p>Fig. 7</p><p>Diagnosis</p><p>Female</p><p>All funiculars wider than long, Fu3 only slightly smaller than Fu2 and Fu4 (Fig. 7E); ventral margin of clypeus weakly convex (Fig. 7D); head in frontal view with gena buccate (Fig. 7C); hind tibia length about 8× width; gaster longer than combined length of head and mesosoma and strongly compressed laterally (Fig. 7A); tip of hypopygium not incised (Fig. 7I); ovipositor sheath length about 1.2 × length of hind tibia.</p><p>Male</p><p>Fore and mid tibiae normal, hind tibia inflated, length about 3.5× width (Fig. 7B). All funicular segments wider than long (Fig. 7F). Fore wing with upper side of basal cell with one irregular row of setae plus several additional ones near basal vein.</p><p>Etymology</p><p>The species name refers to the long ovipositor that characterizes the females of this species (from the Latin words ‘ longus ’ = ‘long’ and ‘ cauda ’ = ‘tail’; noun in apposition).</p><p>Type material</p><p>Holotype ZIMBABWE • ♀; “ Rhodesia / Salisbury / A. Watsham / WF117, (i)75 // 453.R”; NHMUK.</p><p>Allotype ZIMBABWE • ♂; “ Rhodesia / Mokumbi Miss / A. Watsham (i)76”; NHMUK.</p><p>Additional paratype</p><p>ZIMBABWE • 1 ♀; “ Rhodesia / Salisbury / A. Watsham / WF.222, (i)76”; NHMUK .</p><p>Description</p><p>Female holotype</p><p>Body length: 1.3 mm. Colour as in Fig. 7. Head in frontal view with vertex not protruding between posterior ocelli (Fig. 7C). Gena buccate (Fig. 7C). Ventral margin of clypeus weakly convex (Fig. 7D). Upper face uniformly and very superficially sculptured except several piliferous punctures (Fig. 7C). Length of pedicel plus flagellum slightly longer than head width. All funiculars wider than long, Fu3 only slightly smaller than Fu2 and Fu4 (Fig. 7E). Mesosoma dorsally almost flat (Fig. 7A). Pronotum shorter than mesoscutum (Fig. 7H). Basal cell of fore wing with a few scattered setae on upper side (Fig. 7G). MV about 2.9 × SV. Hind tibia length about 8 × width. Gaster longer than combined length of head and mesosoma and strongly compressed laterally (Fig. 7A). Tip of hypopygium not incised (cf. Fig. 7I). Ovipositor sheath length about 1.2× length of hind tibia.</p><p>Male allotype</p><p>Body length: 1.0 mm. Differs from the female holotype mainly in the structure of the antenna (see generic diagnosis) and the characters given in the above species diagnosis; mesosoma less flattened and gaster much shorter (Fig. 7B).</p><p>Variation</p><p>Female</p><p>Body length: 1.3–1.5 mm. MV 2.9–3.2 × SV.</p><p>Distribution</p><p>Zimbabwe.</p><p>Hosts</p><p>Unknown.</p><p>Taxonomic comments</p><p>Ecrizotes longicauda sp. nov. is the species whose females have the longest ovipositor (Fig. 7A). Both sexes are superficially similar to E. longus sp. nov. The two sexes were associated based mainly on the setation of the basal cell. The female of E. longicauda differs from the female of E. longus in having a much longer ovipositor and a non-anelliform Fu3 (Fig. 7E), while the male of E. longicauda differs from the male of E. longus in having the hind tibiae less strongly inflated (Fig. 7B).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03FE87A8FFFDFF87FDD6FE9FFBF40497	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.		Plazi	Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan;Andriescu, Ionel;Manic, Gheorghe	Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan, Andriescu, Ionel, Manic, Gheorghe (2024): The Afrotropical and West-Palaearctic species of Ecrizotes Förster (Hymenoptera: Pirenidae). European Journal of Taxonomy 970: 1-37, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2024.970.2745, URL: https://europeanjournaloftaxonomy.eu/index.php/ejt/article/download/2745/12583
03FE87A8FFFFFF87FDD3FD73FEDB01F5.text	03FE87A8FFFFFF87FDD3FD73FEDB01F5.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ecrizotes longicornis (Walker 1848)	<div><p>Ecrizotes longicornis (Walker, 1848)</p><p>Fig. 8</p><p>Gastrancistrus longicornis Walker, 1848: 155; lectotype ♀, designated by Graham 1956: 263, NHMUK, examined.</p><p>Ecrizotes longicornis – Graham 1956: 263; new combination.</p><p>Diagnosis</p><p>Female</p><p>All funiculars distinctly longer than wide, Fu1 length about twice width, Fu3 not smaller than either Fu2 or Fu4 (Fig. 8C); ventral margin of clypeus weakly convex (Fig. 8D); head in frontal view with gena evenly rounded (Fig. 8B); hind tibia length about 7.5 × width; gaster longer than combined length of head and mesosoma and strongly compressed laterally (Fig. 8A); tip of hypopygium incised (cf. Figs 3G, 6F); ovipositor sheath length about 0.3–0.4 × length of hind tibia (about 0.3× in the lectotype).</p><p>Male</p><p>Unknown.</p><p>Material examined</p><p>CZECH REPUBLIC • 1 ♀; “ Dĕčín. Snĕžník / 27.7.56, Bohemia / Bouček // Ecrizotes longicornis (Walk. 48) ♀ / Det. Z. Bouček 1958”; NMPC .</p><p>UNITED KINGDOM • 1 ♀; “ Lectotype // Gastrancistrus longicornis // Gastrancistrus longicornis Walker [Waterhouse label] // Type C.F. // Ecrizotes longicornis (Walk.) ♀ / det. M.W.R. de V. Graham 1956 // B. M. Type Hym. 5.1817”; NHMUK • 1 ♀; “ New Forest, Hants. England / Bouček 17.6.76 // ♀ Ecrizotes longicornis (Walk.) / det. Z. Bouček, 1980”; NMPC .</p><p>Distribution</p><p>Czech Republic, Hungary, Ireland, Sweden, United Kingdom (UCD Community 2023).</p><p>Hosts</p><p>Unknown.</p><p>Taxonomic comments</p><p>See E. filicornis .</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03FE87A8FFFFFF87FDD3FD73FEDB01F5	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.		Plazi	Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan;Andriescu, Ionel;Manic, Gheorghe	Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan, Andriescu, Ionel, Manic, Gheorghe (2024): The Afrotropical and West-Palaearctic species of Ecrizotes Förster (Hymenoptera: Pirenidae). European Journal of Taxonomy 970: 1-37, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2024.970.2745, URL: https://europeanjournaloftaxonomy.eu/index.php/ejt/article/download/2745/12583
03FE87A8FFFEFF88FDB9F914FE51077B.text	03FE87A8FFFEFF88FDB9F914FE51077B.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ecrizotes longus Mitroiu & Andriescu & Manic 2024	<div><p>Ecrizotes longus Mitroiu sp. nov.</p><p>urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act: 7405A093-2E00-4E5A-BEA6-B9EB37F3A6EF</p><p>Fig. 9</p><p>Diagnosis</p><p>Female</p><p>All funiculars wider than long, Fu3 anelliform (Fig. 9D); ventral margin of clypeus weakly convex (Fig. 9C); head in frontal view with gena buccate (Fig. 9C); hind tibia length 6.6–6.8 × width; gaster longer than combined length of head and mesosoma and strongly compressed laterally (Fig. 9A); tip of hypopygium not incised (cf. Fig. 7I); ovipositor sheath length 0.5–0.6× length of hind tibia.</p><p>Male</p><p>Fore and mid tibiae normal, hind tibia strongly inflated, length 2.6–2.8× width (Fig. 9B). All funicular segments wider than long (Fig. 9E). Fore wing with upper side of basal cell densely and uniformly setose.</p><p>Etymology</p><p>The species name refers to the elongated body that characterizes the females of this species (from the Latin adjective ‛ longus ’ = ‛long’).</p><p>Type material</p><p>Holotype ZIMBABWE • ♀; “ Rhodesia / Salisbury / A. Watsham / WF115 / (i)75”; NHMUK.</p><p>Allotype ZIMBABWE • ♂; “ Rhodesia / Salisbury / A. Watsham / WF117 / (i)75 // 420.R // Spathopus / Pirene m”; NHMUK.</p><p>Additional paratypes</p><p>ZIMBABWE • 1 ♀; “ Rhodesia / Salisbury / A. Watsham / WF110 / (i)75”; NHMUK • 2 ♂♂; “ Rhodesia / Salisbury / A. Watsham / WF.222 / (i)76”; NHMUK • 1 ♂; “ Rhodesia / Salisbury / A. Watsham / WF.99 / × ii.74 // 597.R; NHMUK • 1 ♂; “ Rhodesia / Salisbury / A. Watsham / WF108 / i-75 ”; NHMUK .</p><p>Description</p><p>Female holotype</p><p>Body length: 1.0 mm. Colour as in Fig. 9. Head in frontal view with vertex protruding between posterior ocelli (Fig. 9C). Gena buccate (Fig. 9C). Ventral margin of clypeus weakly convex (Fig. 9C). Upper face almost wholly very superficially sculptured except rare piliferous punctures (Fig. 9C). Length of pedicel plus flagellum about equal to head width. All funiculars wider than long, Fu3 anelliform (Fig. 9D). Mesosoma dorsally almost flat (Fig. 9A). Pronotum shorter than mesoscutum (Fig. 9F). Basal cell of fore wing entirely setose on upper side (Fig. 9G). MV about 3× SV. Hind tibia length about 6.6× width. Gaster longer than combined length of head and mesosoma and strongly compressed laterally (Fig. 9A). Tip of hypopygium not incised (cf. Fig. 7I). Ovipositor sheath length about 0.5 × length of hind tibia.</p><p>Male allotype</p><p>Body length: 0.8 mm. Differs from the female holotype mainly in the structure of the antenna (see generic diagnosis) and the characters given in the above species diagnosis; gaster much shorter (Fig. 9B).</p><p>Variation</p><p>Female</p><p>Body length: 1.00– 1.25 mm. MV about 3.0–3.3× SV. Hind tibia length about 6.6–6.8× width. Ovipositor sheath length about 0.5–0.6× length of hind tibia.</p><p>Male</p><p>Body length: 0.8–1.1 mm. Hind tibia length about 2.6–2.8 × width.</p><p>Distribution</p><p>Zimbabwe.</p><p>Hosts</p><p>Unknown.</p><p>Taxonomic comments</p><p>See E. longicauda sp. nov.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03FE87A8FFFEFF88FDB9F914FE51077B	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.		Plazi	Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan;Andriescu, Ionel;Manic, Gheorghe	Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan, Andriescu, Ionel, Manic, Gheorghe (2024): The Afrotropical and West-Palaearctic species of Ecrizotes Förster (Hymenoptera: Pirenidae). European Journal of Taxonomy 970: 1-37, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2024.970.2745, URL: https://europeanjournaloftaxonomy.eu/index.php/ejt/article/download/2745/12583
03FE87A8FFF3FF8AFDECFE9FFDE205FA.text	03FE87A8FFF3FF8AFDECFE9FFDE205FA.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ecrizotes montanus (Huggert 1976) Mitroiu & Andriescu & Manic 2024	<div><p>Ecrizotes montanus (Huggert, 1976) comb. nov.</p><p>Fig. 10</p><p>Spathopus montanus Huggert, 1976: 56–58; holotype ♀, Huggert Collection, Sweden, not examined.</p><p>Diagnosis</p><p>Female</p><p>All funiculars wider than long, Fu3 not smaller than either Fu2 or Fu4 (Fig. 10D); ventral margin of clypeus strongly convex (Fig. 10C); head in frontal view with gena evenly rounded (Fig. 10B); hind tibia length about 6.8 × width; gaster shorter than combined length of head and mesosoma, not compressed laterally (Fig. 10A); tip of hypopygium not incised (cf. Fig. 7I); ovipositor sheath length about 0.3× length of hind tibia.</p><p>Male</p><p>Unknown.</p><p>Material examined</p><p>SWEDEN • 1 ♀; “ Hrj. Tänäs / 28.7.68 / coll. A. Sundholm // Standing over: / Spathopus montanus in Hedqvist coll. / BMNH(E) 2011-27 // Det. confirmed ♀ / C. Thuróczy 2013 // NHMUK010834304 ”; NHMUK .</p><p>Distribution</p><p>Finland, Kazakhstan, Sweden (UCD Community 2023).</p><p>Hosts</p><p>Unknown.</p><p>Taxonomic comments</p><p>The female of E. montanus is somewhat similar to the female of E. hofferi, from which it differs mainly in the characters given in the key.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03FE87A8FFF3FF8AFDECFE9FFDE205FA	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.		Plazi	Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan;Andriescu, Ionel;Manic, Gheorghe	Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan, Andriescu, Ionel, Manic, Gheorghe (2024): The Afrotropical and West-Palaearctic species of Ecrizotes Förster (Hymenoptera: Pirenidae). European Journal of Taxonomy 970: 1-37, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2024.970.2745, URL: https://europeanjournaloftaxonomy.eu/index.php/ejt/article/download/2745/12583
03FE87A8FFF2FF8CFDBDFC6DFEEC032F.text	03FE87A8FFF2FF8CFDBDFC6DFEEC032F.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ecrizotes monticola Forster 1861	<div><p>Ecrizotes monticola Förster, 1861</p><p>Fig. 11</p><p>Ecrizotes monticola Förster, 1861: 33; lectotype ♀, ZMHB, designated by Bouček 1961: 58, not examined.</p><p>Henicetrus anellus Thomson, 1876: 191; holotype ♀, ZMUL, images examined.</p><p>Ecrizotes anellus – Schmiedeknecht 1909: 273; new combination.</p><p>Henicetrus anellus – Graham 1969: 331; subjective synonym of E. monticola .</p><p>Diagnosis</p><p>Female All funiculars wider than long; Fu3 anelliform (Fig. 11C); ventral margin of clypeus strongly convex (Fig. 11D); head in frontal view with gena buccate (Fig. 11B); hind tibia length 5.0–5.2 × width; gaster at most equal to combined length of head and mesosoma, only slightly compressed laterally (Fig. 11A); tip of hypopygium incised (cf. Figs 3G, 6F); ovipositor sheath length 0.3–0.4 × length of hind tibia.</p><p>Male</p><p>Unknown.</p><p>Material examined</p><p>CYPRUS • 1 ♀; “ <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=32.896667&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=34.928333" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 32.896667/lat 34.928333)">Troodos</a>, Almyrolivado / 1650m, 34°55’42”N 32°53’48”E / 27-29 May 2009, Fusu L. &amp; / Popovici O., YPT, dry slope // MICO UCRC_ENT 00486453 // DNA Voucher D#4809 / UCR, J.M. Heraty”; MICO • 2 ♀♀; same data as for preceding; “ sweep net ”; MICO .</p><p>FRANCE • 2 ♀♀; “ Villefranche / nr. Lyon, France / 13.vi.75 // on Phacelia congesta / lg. Piaccordi // det. Z. Bouček 1978 // ♀ Spathopus ”; NMPC .</p><p>REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA • 2 ♀♀; “ R. Moldova, Vulcă- / nești, 12.07.2008 / Medicago sativa / Leg. Manic Gh.”; MICO • 1 ♀; “ Rez. Codrii, r. Stră- / șeni, Rep. Moldova / 19.08.2007 // Medicago sativa / leg. Manic G. ”; MICO .</p><p>ROMANIA • 1 ♀; “VD [Valea lui David], 12.5.07 / leg. O. P. [Ovidiu Popovici]!”; MICO .</p><p>SWITZERLAND • 1 ♀, paralectotype; “17 / 251. Frst. / Roseggthal [Förster’s handwriting] // Ecrizotes monticola Förster 1861 ♀ / Cotype [red label]”; NMPC .</p><p>Distribution</p><p>Switzerland (Förster 1861), Sweden (Thomson 1878); Cyprus, France, Republic of Moldova (new records); also cited from Romania (Mitroiu 2008), but apart from the specimens listed above, previous records need to be confirmed. In UCD Community (2023), there are additional country records, but these also need to be checked in order to establish which of the two species ( E. caudatus or E. monticola) is involved (see Taxonomic comments under E. caudatus).</p><p>Hosts</p><p>Unknown. Collected on Phacelia congesta Hook. ( Hydrophyllaceae) in France, steppe vegetation in Romania, and alfalfa in Republic of Moldova.</p><p>Taxonomic comments</p><p>In NMPC we examined a female paralectotype of E. monticola (labeled as cotype and bearing Förster’s label), probably loaned by Bouček from Berlin (Fig. 11G–I). It agrees well with Förster’s brief description in having the “ovipositor slightly protruding” / “Bohrer etwas vorragend” (Förster 1861: 33). Along with a shorter and less laterally compressed gaster, this character can quite easily separate this species from the otherwise similar E. caudatus (see also Taxonomic comments under that species); additionally, we noticed that in E. monticola Fu 3 tends to be considerably smaller – sometimes virtually invisible in air-dried specimens (Fig. 11C, H) – than in E. caudatus, where it was always easily visible (Fig. 3E, I).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03FE87A8FFF2FF8CFDBDFC6DFEEC032F	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.		Plazi	Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan;Andriescu, Ionel;Manic, Gheorghe	Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan, Andriescu, Ionel, Manic, Gheorghe (2024): The Afrotropical and West-Palaearctic species of Ecrizotes Förster (Hymenoptera: Pirenidae). European Journal of Taxonomy 970: 1-37, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2024.970.2745, URL: https://europeanjournaloftaxonomy.eu/index.php/ejt/article/download/2745/12583
03FE87A8FFF4FF8EFE21FABBFD22075C.text	03FE87A8FFF4FF8EFE21FABBFD22075C.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ecrizotes nasalis (Springate & Noyes 1990) Mitroiu & Andriescu & Manic 2024	<div><p>Ecrizotes nasalis (Springate &amp; Noyes, 1990) comb. nov.</p><p>Fig. 12</p><p>Spathopus nasalis Springate &amp; Noyes, 1990: 224–225; holotype ♀, NHMUK, examined.</p><p>Diagnosis</p><p>Female</p><p>All funiculars wider than long, Fu3 not or only slightly smaller than either Fu2 or Fu4 (Fig. 12F); ventral margin of clypeus acute (Fig. 12D); head in frontal view with gena buccate (Fig. 12B); hind tibia length about 6.7 × width; gaster shorter than combined length of head and mesosoma, not compressed laterally (Fig. 12A); tip of hypopygium not incised (cf. Fig. 7I); ovipositor sheath length 0.25 × length of hind tibia.</p><p>Male</p><p>Unknown.</p><p>Material examined</p><p>SWEDEN • 1 ♀; “ Örebro, Latorp / 12/6 1943 / A. Jansson // Standing over: / Spathopus montanus / in Hedqvist coll. / BMNH(E) 2011-27 // Det. confirmed ♀ / C. Thuróczy 2013 // NHMUK010834303 ”; NHMUK .</p><p>UNITED KINGDOM • 1 ♀; “ Holotype // Wales: Mid Glam. / Kenfig Pool LNR / 6.viii.88 / J.S. Noyes // ♀ Spathopus nasalis sp.n. / det. N.D. Springate &amp; J.S. Noyes 1990 // B.M. Type Hym 5.3471 // NHMUK 014583381 ”; NHMUK .</p><p>Distribution</p><p>United Kingdom (UCD Community 2023); Sweden (new record).</p><p>Hosts</p><p>Unknown.</p><p>Taxonomic comments</p><p>After E. acer sp. nov., E. nasalis is the species with the most protruding clypeal margin, although considerably less acute than in E. acer .</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03FE87A8FFF4FF8EFE21FABBFD22075C	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.		Plazi	Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan;Andriescu, Ionel;Manic, Gheorghe	Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan, Andriescu, Ionel, Manic, Gheorghe (2024): The Afrotropical and West-Palaearctic species of Ecrizotes Förster (Hymenoptera: Pirenidae). European Journal of Taxonomy 970: 1-37, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2024.970.2745, URL: https://europeanjournaloftaxonomy.eu/index.php/ejt/article/download/2745/12583
03FE87A8FFF6FFB1FDA4FE0AFEC2013B.text	03FE87A8FFF6FFB1FDA4FE0AFEC2013B.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ecrizotes rovumae Mitroiu 2024	<div><p>Ecrizotes rovumae Mitroiu sp. nov.</p><p>urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act: 3877D00F-835D-43D2-82F1-2D8D20F6BCE0</p><p>Fig. 13</p><p>Diagnosis</p><p>Female</p><p>All funiculars wider than long, Fu3 anelliform (Fig. 13F); ventral margin of clypeus weakly convex (Fig. 13D); head in frontal view with gena buccate (Fig. 13B); hind tibia length about 5 × width; gaster shorter than combined length of head and mesosoma, moderately compressed laterally (Fig. 13A); tip of hypopygium not incised (cf. Fig. 7I); ovipositor sheath length about 0.3 × length of hind tibia.</p><p>Male</p><p>Unknown.</p><p>Etymology</p><p>The species name refers to the great river Rovuma, in the vicinity of which the holotype was collected (noun in genitive case).</p><p>Type material</p><p>Holotype MOZAMBIQUE • ♀; “Mozambique / Nhica, <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=40.217667&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=-10.7062" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 40.217667/lat -10.7062)">‘League 34’</a> / 20-27. × i.2009 / Claire Villemant // S10°42.372’ / E40°13.060 / AH. 71 m, Malaise M3”; MNHN.</p><p>Description</p><p>Female holotype</p><p>Body length: 0.8 mm. Colour as in Fig. 13. Head in frontal view with vertex not protruding between posterior ocelli (Fig. 13B). Gena buccate (Fig. 13B). Ventral margin of clypeus weakly convex (Fig. 13D). Upper face smooth except rare piliferous punctures (Fig. 13B). Length of pedicel plus flagellum shorter than head width. All funiculars wider than long, Fu3 anelliform (Fig. 13F). Mesosoma dorsally almost flat (Fig. 13A). Pronotum longer than mesoscutum (Fig. 13E). Basal cell of fore wing with a few scattered setae on upper side (Fig. 13C). MV about 2.4 × SV. Hind tibia length about 5× width. Gaster shorter than combined length of head and mesosoma, moderately compressed laterally (Fig. 13A). Tip of hypopygium not incised (cf. Fig. 6I). Ovipositor sheath length about 0.3× length of hind tibia.</p><p>Variation</p><p>Unknown.</p><p>Distribution</p><p>Mozambique.</p><p>Hosts</p><p>Unknown.</p><p>Taxonomic comments</p><p>This species stands out in having extensively light-coloured legs and differs from similar species such as E. brevicauda sp. nov. and E. monticola in having a weakly convex clypeal margin and a shorter marginal vein.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03FE87A8FFF6FFB1FDA4FE0AFEC2013B	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.		Plazi	Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan;Andriescu, Ionel;Manic, Gheorghe	Mitroiu, Mircea-Dan, Andriescu, Ionel, Manic, Gheorghe (2024): The Afrotropical and West-Palaearctic species of Ecrizotes Förster (Hymenoptera: Pirenidae). European Journal of Taxonomy 970: 1-37, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2024.970.2745, URL: https://europeanjournaloftaxonomy.eu/index.php/ejt/article/download/2745/12583
