Bull. Natl. Mus. Nat. Sci., Ser. A, 41(1), pp. 21–41, February 20, 2015

The Gilpinia abieticola Species Group (Hymenoptera, Diprionidae)
Hideho Hara1 and Akihiko Shinohara2
1

Forestry Research Institute, Hokkaido Research Organization,
Bibai, Hokkaido 079–0198, Japan
E-mail: hara-hideho@hro.or.jp
2
Department of Zoology, National Museum of Nature and Science,
4–1–1 Amakubo, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305–0005, Japan
E-mail: shinohar@kahaku.go.jp(Received 15 October 2014; accepted 24 December 2014)

Abstract The Gilpinia abieticola species group (Hymenoptera, Diprionidae) is proposed for G.
abieticola (Dalla Torre, 1894) from Europe and Siberia, G. albiclavata Hara and Nakamura, 2015
from Japan (Honshu), G. hokkaidoensis n. sp. from Japan (Hokkaido) and G. kojimai n. sp. fromJapan (Honshu). This species group is recognized only by the combination of some structural andcolor characters in the female. Gilpinia abieticola (=Lophyrus abietis Stein, 1886, a primary homonym of Lophyrus abietis Harris, 1841) is redescribed based on the type material and a lectotype isdesignated for Lophyrus abietis Stein, 1886. Descriptions of the two new species and a key to all
four species and the closely similar male of G. hercyniae are given. The larva of G. kojimai feeds
solitarily on the needles of Pinus pumila (Pall.) Regel.
Key words : Hymenoptera, Diprionidae, Gilpinia abieticola, redescription, Lophyrus abietis,
lectotype designation, Gilpinia hokkaidoensis, Gilpinia kojimai, new species.

Introduction
Gilpinia (Hymenoptera, Diprionidae) is a sawﬂy genus consisting of 38 Palaearctic and Oriental species (Taeger et al., 2010; Hara and Nakamura, 2015). The Euro-Siberian Gilpinia
abieticola (Dalla Torre, 1894) has been recognized by the combination of the richly white- or
yellow-marked body, the dark band between eyescrossing the frontal and ocellar areas, the shortﬂagellar rami, the simple posterior spur of thehind tibia and the large oval scopa in female(Enslin, 1917; Reeks, 1941; Gussakovskij, 1947;
Ermolenko, 1975; Beneš and Krístek, 1979; Viitasaari and Varama, 1987; Zhelokhovtsev, 1988).
Recently, Hara and Nakamura (2015) described
G. albiclavata from Honshu, Japan, which ismorphologically closely similar to G. abieticola,and referred to the occurrence of two additional
Japanese species, which are externally hardly
distinguishable from G. abieticola.

We here redescribe G. abieticola in detail
based on the type specimens, designate a lectotype for Lophyrus abietis Stein, 1886, describe
G. kojimai n. sp. from Honshu, Japan and G.
hokkaidoensis n. sp., from Hokkaido, Japan, andpropose treating these three species and G. albiclavata as comprising the G. abieticola species
group.
Material and Methods
Material used in this work is kept in the following institutions: BMNH=Natural History
Museum, London; HU=Hokkaido University,
Sapporo; NMW=Naturhistorisches Museum,
Wien; NSMT=National Museum of Nature andScience, Tsukuba; SDEI=Senckenberg Deutsches
Entomologisches
Institut,Müncheberg;
USNM=National Museum of Natural History,
Washington, D.C. Specimens are listed under thematerial examined section. We also examined22

Hideho Hara and Akihiko Shinohara

and dissected the ovipositors or genitalia of thefollowing specimens of Gilpinia polytoma (Hartig, 1834) and G. hercyniae (Hartig, 1837). Gilpinia polytoma ― ESTONIA: 1 ♂, “Painurmi”,“VII・2・'39”, Sellersetal (NSMT). GERMANY:
1 ♂, “Sierne 87” (SDEI); 1 ♂, Ottobeuren, Kohlstattkopf, VI. 2000, M. Goßner (SDEI); 1 ♀, Berlin, Marzahn, 1. IX. 2012, Köhler (SDEI). GERMANY or CZECH REPUBLIC: 1 ♂, Ore
Mountains, Lange (SDEI). AUSTRIA: 1 ♂,“Tschek 1872” “Wand 6/S 866” (NMW); 1 ♂,“Tschek 1872 Piesting” (NMW); 1 ♂, Pulgarn,“9. 8. 32”, H. Priesner (NSMT); 1 ♂, Tirol,“Kilabüehler Horn” “24.7.85. Handl” (NMW).
CZECH REPUBLIC: 2 ♀, “Moravia Kuničky
Krístek” (NSMT). HUNGARY: 1 ♂, Hegyalja,“Kemeuce v.”, 13. VII. 1955, Erdōs (NSMT).
SLOVENIA: 1 ♀, Laško, 10–11. V. 1976, A. Shinohara (NSMT). CROATIA: 1 ♂, Plitvička
Jezera, 8. V. 1976, A. Shinohara (NSMT). Gilpinia hercyniae ― SWEDEN: 1 ♂, “"A" VII-1338” (USNM); 1 ♂, Vittangi, “VIII・22・38”(USNM). USA: 1 ♀, Maine, Bar Harbor, 28. VI.
1936, A.E. Brower (USNM): 1 ♂, Maine, Bar
Harbor, 24. V. 1937, bred (USNM); 1 ♀, Maine,
Portage, 2. V. 1936, bred (USNM); 1 ♀, do. but
19. V. 1936; 1 ♂, do. but 17. VI. 1938; 1 ♂,“Wilmington Vt. VI-79”, “Picea rubra” (USNM).
See Hara and Nakamura (2015) for terminology and methodology of morphological examination and photography.
Results and Discussion
Gilpinia abieticola species group
Female. Head anteriorly black at least above
toruli, but dorsally pale (Fig. 1). Mesoscutumwith median lobe widely pale along notaulus andlateral lobe laterally with pale marking. Mesoscutellum pale, narrowly black along anterior andposterior margins. Mesepisternum at least centrally pale. Legs black with pale areas; femora
except for trochantelli black, apically pale. Second to eighth abdominal terga pale along anterolateral or anterior margins.

Postocellar area weakly or moderately convex(Fig. 1); anterior and lateral furrows distinct.
Clypeus with ventral margin very slightly concave (Fig. 3B, E, M). Flagellar rami short,becoming inconspicuous on apical ﬂagellomeres(Fig. 3D, F, K, N); ﬁrst ﬂagellomere 1.0–
1.5 × length of second along dorsal margin, withramus about 0.3 × length of ﬁrst ﬂagellomere
along dorsal margin. Prepectus very small, farapart from postspiracular sclerite; pronotum andmesepisternum usually contiguous above prepectus. Mesoscutellum with anterior edge angled at
110–150° (Fig. 4); in dorsal view, mesoscutellar
appendage not visible, except usually for narrowapex. Metascutellum small, not or strongly convex. Hind leg (Fig. 6A–B, E–F) with posterior(inner and longer) tibial spur tapering apically or
rod shaped, and its length 0.9–1.2 × breadth oftibia, 0.8–1.0 × (rarely 1.1 ×) length of ﬁrst tarsomere (excluding pulvillar pad); length of second
and third tarsomeres combined 1.1–1.7 × lengthof ﬁrst. Ovipositor sheath in dorsal view about
3.0 × as wide as cercus (Fig. 7A, E, H, L); scopa
oval and large, with height about 1.5–2.0 × width(Fig. 7B, G, I, M). Hypopygium with posterior
margin very shallowly concave or slightly
notched medially, without pair of posteromedial
projections (Fig. 1B, G, J). Lance in lateral view
with dorsal margin weakly concave at middle,
mid-apically with longitudinal membranous area
along ventral margin (Fig. 7D, K, O); posterior
projection of processus articularis large, in dorsal
view about 2.5–3.0 × as long as wide, with distinct basal suture (Fig. 7C, J, N) (indicated byarrow in Fig. 7C; this suture present on ventralside). Lancet (Fig. 8) with ventral margin not or
weakly convex at second annulus in outline anddorsal membranous area relatively narrow, widest at middle of lancet; ﬁrst annulus without serrula, with row of spines (=ctenidium) not reaching ventral margin of lancet; serrulae simple,
except for two or three apical serrulae, each isposteriorly angularly convex.
Male. Head, thorax and dorsum of abdomen
mostly black (Fig. 2A–C, G–H, L); dorsum of
abdomen at most laterally pale on some apicalSawﬂies of Gilpinia abieticola Group

Fig. 1. Female: Gilpinia abieticola (A–E), G. hokkaidoensis (F–H) and G. kojimai (I–K). — A, D, F, I, Dorsal or
dorsolateral view; B, E, G, J, ventral or ventrolateral view; C, H, K, head, dorsal view. — A–C, Zittau; D–E,
lectotype; F–K, holotypes.

23

24

Hideho Hara and Akihiko Shinohara

terga (ninth and 10th terga usually hidden andinvisible). Legs mostly pale.
Structure as in female except for usual sexual
differences. Antenna with 22–27 antennomeres.
Hind leg (Fig. 6C–D, G) with posterior tibial
spur tapering apically, 0.6–0.9 × length of ﬁrst
tarsomere; length of second and third tarsomeres
combined 1.0–1.3 × length of ﬁrst. Basiparamerewith parapenis very long (Fig. 9A–B, E, I–J, M).
Harpe in ventral view with medial margin concave and apex nearly pointed or narrowly
rounded. Valviceps pigmented throughout, in lateral view narrow, apically curved ventrally (Fig.
9C, F, K, N), with spine at apex and minute orinconspicuous spines around sensory pores innarrow apical area delimited by sharp line anteriorly and dorsally (Fig. 9D, G–H, L, O–P). Ergot
long (Fig. 9C, F, K, N).
Remarks. Benson (1939) divided Gilpinia
into two species groups, the G. polytoma groupand the G. socia group, by the shape of the innerhind-tibial spur in the female. Gilpinia polytoma
species group has a broadened spur, which is
unique to the group in the Diprionidae and evenin the Tenthredinoidea and strongly supports themonophyly of this species group. Gilpinia socia
species group has a usual simple spur, and no
characters suggesting its monophyly have beenfound. Gilpinia abieticola species group is a partof the G. socia species group. It is proposed here
based on the close similarity between the members and not based on the possession of certain
unique characters suggesting monophyly.
The females of the group are very similar to
those of G. polytoma and G. hercyniae, but thelatter two belong to the G. polytoma species
group. The males of this species group (that of G.
hokkaidoensis is unknown) are very similar tothat of G. hercyniae. These species differ fromthe other congeners in that the valviceps is pigmented throughout and in lateral view it is narrow and curved ventrally, with a pointed apex,

and the ergot is long (Figs. 9C, F, K, N, 10C, E).
Known males of the species of the G. abieticola
group and that of G. hercyniae are separated by
the characters given in the key below. The maleof G. abieticola is also very similar to that of G.
polytoma in external characters, but in the latter
species the valviceps in lateral view is relatively
wide and apically with a wide non-pigmented
area (Fig. 10A–B).
Gilpinia abieticola (Dalla Torre, 1894)(Figs. 1A–E, 2A–F, 3A–H, P–Q, 4A–F, 5A–F, 6A–D,
7A–G, 8A–D, 9A–H)
Lophyrus abietis Stein, 1886: 141 [primary homonym of
Lophyrus abietis Harris, 1841 ＝Neodiprion abietis(Harris, 1841)].
Lophyrus abieticola Dalla Torre, 1894: 293 [replacement
name for Lophyrus abietis Stein, 1886]; Konow, 1905:
42; Enslin, 1914: 178, 179, 180; Enslin, 1917: 557,
562.
Gilpinia abieticola: Benson, 1939: 341; Reeks, 1941:
181, 186, 187; Gussakovskij, 1947: 162, 224, 225, 229[part]; Thalenhorst, 1955: 353–361; Lorenz and Kraus,
1957: 28; Thalenhorst, 1960: 513–524; Vehrke, 1961:
179; Verzhutskii, 1966: 55; Verzhutskii, 1973: 119,
123, 124; Thalenhorst, 1968: 338–350; Smith, 1975:
412 [part]; Ermolenko, 1975: 133, 134, 159, 180;
Naito, 1976: 5, 6 [part]; Beneš and Krístek, 1979: 90,
92, 93; Verzhutskii, 1981: 74; Pschorn-Walcher, 1982:
105; Viitasaari and Varama, 1987: 53; Zhelokhovtsev,
1988: 78 [part]; Larsson et al., 1993: 458; Liston,
1995: 55; Taeger et al., 1998: 86 [part]; Pschorn-Walcher and Altenhofer, 2000: 283; Westendorff, 2006: 48;
Taeger et al., 2006: 460; Taeger et al., 2010: 204[part]; Hara and Nakamura, 2015: 38.
Diprion abieticola: Kontuniemi, 1960: 1, 80.

Female [character states of lectotype in brackets]. Length 6.0–8.0 [7.5] mm. Black, with yellow markings, without metallic reﬂection (Fig.
1A–B, D–E). Head yellow, with black transverseband between eyes crossing frontal and ocellar
areas (Figs. 1C, 3A–B, E); this band sometimes
dorsally becoming brown [brown]; facial groove
sometimes slightly brown [slightly brown]; ante-

Fig. 2. Male: Gilpinia abieticola (A–F), G. kojimai (G–M). — A–B, G, Dorsal or dorsolateral view; C, H, L, ventral or ventrolateral view; D, I, head, dorsal view; E, J, ventromedial part of head, anterior view; F, K, M, pronotum, anterolateral view. — A–F, Chodau; G–M, Mt. Yokote-yama.

Sawﬂies of Gilpinia abieticola Group

25

26

Hideho Hara and Akihiko Shinohararior tentorial pit black; border between supraclypeal area and clypeus sometimes narrowly
brown [narrowly brown]; malar space ventrally
narrowly brown, sometimes with brown to black
vertical band (Fig. 3E) [with faint brown verticalband (Fig. 3B)]; gena black narrowly along eye
margin (Fig. 3C); occiput mostly black. Antenna
brown to black brown, often basally yellow or
yellow brown [yellow brown]. Mandible basallyyellow, apically red brown. Labrum dark brown,basally pale, or entirely pale brown (Fig. 3B, E)[dark brown, basally pale]. Palpi pale yellow,
basally somewhat darkened. Pronotum yellow,
narrowly black anteriorly (Fig. 1A–B). Mesepisternum except for pectus yellow with black margins (Figs. 1B, E, 5A, C); pectus black. Legs
brown to black, yellow on apices of coxae, mostof trochanters and trochantelli, apices of femora,fore and middle tibiae except for narrow apices
and ventral parts of apical two-thirds, hind tibia
except for apical fourth, and bases of tarsomeres;
fore and middle femora sometimes anteriorly
mostly yellow [fore femur anteriorly mostly yellow]; trochanters often widely darkened [somewhat darkened]; tibial spurs yellow to brown.
Wings nearly clear hyaline; stigma pale brown,basally and marginally darkened; in fore wing,veins black, pale brown on C, most of section of
R1 basal to stigma, apical section of R1, andmost of A. Abdomen dark brown to black; ﬁrst
tergum with yellow or brown marking [brown];
second to seventh terga and sterna yellow anteriorly, but second to fourth or ﬁfth terga not or narrowly so medially; eighth tergum yellow anteriorly and black posteriorly, with blackanterolateral spot; ninth tergum yellow, black on
narrow anterolateral margin and on dorsal area
except for narrow dorsomedial area; tenth tergum
black, medially yellow. Cercus dark brown. Ovipositor sheath black; scopa yellow to brown.

Head and thorax densely punctured, moderately or weakly shiny [moderately]. Frontal area
and its adjacent areas with punctures mostly contiguous (Fig. 3A). Supraclypeal area and dorsal
area of clypeus weakly punctured (Fig. 3B, E).
Ventral area of clypeus and labrum nearlysmooth. Punctures on mesonotum and mesepisternum mostly contiguous and well deﬁned(Figs. 4A–D, 5 A–D).
Postocellar area with width 1.7–2.0 [2.0] ×
length (Fig. 1C). Distances between eye and lateral ocellus, between lateral ocelli, and between
lateral ocellus and posterior margin of head 0.9–
1.2 : 1.0 : 0.7–1.0 [1.2 : 1.0 : 0.8]; distances between
eye and lateral ocellus and between lateral ocellus and posterior margin of head 1.2–1.4 : 1.0[1.4 : 1.0]. Distance between eyes 1.9–2.1 [2.1] ×
eye height. Distance between torulus and eye
1.2–1.6 [1.6] × distance between toruli. Malar
space 1.2–1.9 [1.5] × width of median ocellus,
0.2–0.3 [0.3] × eye height. Antenna (Fig. 3D, F)
with 18–20 [20] antennomeres. Ovipositor sheathas in Fig. 7A–B, E–G.
Lance (Fig. 7C–D) with eight annular suturesand middle sutures weakly oblique. Lancet (Fig.
8A–D) with 10 or rarely nine annuli (Fig. 8D)[10 annuli], abruptly narrowing apically beyond
seventh annulus; length of lancet from its apex toventral end of most basal (ﬁrst) row of spines(=ctenidium) 3.1–3.5 [3.4] × maximum width oflancet; ﬁrst row of spines distinctly oblique, withventral end located basal to dorsal end; fourth
row of spines (=ctenidium+serrula) about as longas second row of spines; serrula of second annulus somewhat smaller than that of third; eighthand ninth annuli each nearly straight, less obliquethan middle annuli, and spinose throughout or
often not spinose dorsally [ninth annulus not spinose dorsally].
Male. Length 5.7–6.3 mm. Black (Fig. 2A–

Fig. 3. Head (A–C, E, G–J, L–M, O), female antenna (D, F, K, N) and label (P, Q): Gilpinia abieticola (A–F,
female; G–H, male), G. hokkaidoensis (I–K, female) and G. kojimai (L–N, female; O, male). — A, G, I, L, O,
Anterolateral view; B, E, J, M, anteroventral part, anterior or anteroventral view; C, H, lateral view; D, F, K,
outer lateral view (D, reversed); N, inner lateral view, reversed. — A–D, Lectotype; E–F, Zittau; G–H, Chodau;
I–N, holotypes; O, Mt. Yokote-yama; P, lectotype of Lophyrus abietis; Q, paralectotype of Lophyrus abietis.

Sawﬂies of Gilpinia abieticola Group

27

28

Hideho Hara and Akihiko Shinohara

C). Head brown to dark brown between postocellar area and eye (Fig. 2D); supraclypeal area
sometimes dark brown; clypeus dark brown, ventrally brown yellow (Fig. 2E), or yellow except
for narrow dorsal margin. Labrum pale brown.
Mandible apically red brown. Palpi pale yellow,
basally somewhat darkened. Antenna dark brown
to black. Pronotum posterolaterally widely paleyellow (Fig. 2F). Legs yellow (Fig. 2C); coxae
basally widely black; femora often widely brownto dark brown posteriorly (according to Stein,
1886, femora usually not darkened); tarsi sometimes apically narrowly black. Wings (Fig. 2A)
as in female. Abdomen dorsally with sixth toeighth terga anterolaterally yellow brown orslightly pale (Fig. 2B), ventrally yellow or yellow brown, slightly darkened along narrow posterior margins of sterna and laterotergites (Fig.
2C); subgenital plate anteriorly slightly and narrowly darkened. Basiparamere of genital capsuledark, harpe somewhat pale (Fig. 9A–B).
Punctation as in female, but punctures generally more dense and distinct (Figs. 3G, 4E–F,
5E–F). Supraclypeal area densely punctured(Fig. 2E).
Structure as in female except for usual sexual
differences. Postocellar area with width 2.0–2.2 ×length (Fig. 2D). Distances between eye and lateral ocellus, between lateral ocelli, and between
lateral ocellus and posterior margin of head 1.0 :1.0 : 0.6; distances between eye and lateral ocellus and between lateral ocellus and posterior
margin of head 1.6–1.7 : 1.0. Distances betweeneyes 1.9–2.0 × eye height. Distance between torulus and eye 1.2–1.4 × distance between toruli.
Malar space 1.6–1.8 × width of median ocellus,
0.3 × eye height. Antenna (Fig. 2A) with 22–27
antennomeres; ﬂagellum with 18–22 biramose
ﬂagellomeres (basal and preapical ﬂagellomeres
uniramose, and apical ﬂagellomere not ramose)(see also Stein, 1886).

Genitalia as in Fig. 9A–H. Basiparamere inventral view with parapenis tapering apically,
nearly straight, with apex narrowly rounded.
Valviceps in lateral view with very small spine at
apex and ventral margin weakly rounded near
apex; apical area narrow, with longest axis 4.1–
4.5 × shortest axis.
Material examined. Lectotype (hereby designated) (Fig. 1D–E): ♀ labeled “L. abietis e. larva♀ 31/3 69 Keivpa [?]” “CZECHOSLOVAKIA
Bohemia, Chodau. R. von Stein Coll. B. M.
1935-271” (Fig. 3P) (BMNH). Paralectotype:1 ♀, “L. abietis, e larva ♀ 28/7 85 Ch” “Diprion
abieticola DT ♀ Forsius det.” (Fig. 3Q) (USNM).
Stein (1886) described Lophyrus abietis basedon nine adults reared from 35 larvae collected in
the Chodau area in Czech Republic and threeother specimens, including one female reared
from a larva collected in “sächsischen Erzgebirge”. The “sächsischen Erzgebirge” belongs to
Saxony, Germany (A. Taeger, personal communication, 2014). Stein (1886) did not designate
types, and these 12 adult specimens are regarded
as syntypes.
In the Stein collection now kept in the Natural
History Museum, London (BMNH) (Horn et al.,1990), there are eight specimens labeled “abietis”
but six of these were collected (or emerged) in
1887. One male labeled “L. abietis, e larva 21/3
86 Ch” may have emerged from a larva collectedin 1885 and referred to in Stein (1886) but the
emergence of the adults in 1886 was not mentioned in the paper and therefore it cannot be
regarded as a syntype. The remaining specimen,
a female labeled “L. abietis, e. larva ♀ 31/3 69
Keivpa[?]” (Fig. 3P), agrees with the data of afemale mentioned by Stein (1886, 151), “dasletzte, ein am 31. März 1869 ausgekrochenes
Thier, stammt aus dem sächsischen Erzgebirge”,
though the last word on the hand-written label,apparently a locality name, is illegible. This

Fig. 4. Medial part of mesonotum, dorsal view: Gilpinia abieticola (A–D, female; E–F, male), G. hokkaidoensis(G–H, female) and G. kojimai (I–J, female; K–L, male). — A, C, E, G, I, K, Digital microscope using ringlight; B, D, F, H, J, L, SEM. — A–B, Lectotype; C–D, Zittau; E–F, Chodau; G–J, holotypes; K–L, Mt. Yokoteyama.

Sawﬂies of Gilpinia abieticola Group

29

30

Hideho Hara and Akihiko Shinohara

specimen certainly belongs to Steinʼs original
type series. We also examined one female labeled“L. abietis, e larva ♀, 28/7 85 Ch” (Fig. 3Q) kept
in the National Museum of Natural History,
Washington, D.C. (USNM). We designate thefemale syntype in BMNH as a lectotype ofLophyrus abietis Stein, 1886. The female in
USNM also agrees with the data of Stein (1886)
and is a paralectotype.
Other material examined: CZECH REPUBLIC: 1 ♂, “L. abietis, e larva 21/3 86 Ch”“CZECHOSLOVAKIA Bohemia, Chodau. R.
von Stein Coll. B. M. 1935-271” “Dissection on
slide Series. No. 1. 30. 1. 1964/8.” (BMNH); 1 ♂,“abietis, 10/5 87 Ch” (USNM); 1 ♀, “Bohemia
Prachatitz” “23. 7. 84. Handl.” (NMW). GERMANY or CZECH REPUBLIC: 3 ♀, Ore Mountains between Czech Republic and Germany,
Lange (SDEI); 1 ♀, same locality (SDEI). GERMANY: 1 ♀, Ottobeuren, “Kohlstattkopf”, VII.
2000, M. Goßner (SDEI); 1 ♀, “Leipzig Fla[?]18. 4. 92 Braun”, Konow (SDEI); 1 ♀, “Lückendorf bei Zittau, 6. 7. 11, Sieber” (SDEI). AUSTRIA: 1 ♀, “Piesting Tschek” (NMW); 1 ♀,“Tschek 1872 Piesting.” “abietis enel[?] 6/7 65”(NMW); 1 ♂, “Tschek 1872 Piesting.” (NSMT);
1 ♀, “Piesting.” “Wand 10/S 866” (NSMT). BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA: 1 ♀, “Treskavicapl. Bosnia, Fodor.” (NSMT).
Distribution. Europe (for more details, see
Taeger et al., 2006); Siberia (Verzhutskii, 1966).
The records from Japan by Takeuchi (1940),
Togashi (1961), Okutani (1967) and Naito (1976)
are most probably erroneous (see Hara andNakamura, 2015).
Host plants. Pinaceae: Picea abies (L.)(“Pinus abies L.” in Stein, 1886; “Picea excelsa
Link” in Lorenz and Kraus, 1957) and P. obovata
Ledeb. (Verzhutskii, 1966).
Okutaniʼs (1967) record of Pinus pumila(Pall.) Regel. was based on a misidentiﬁcation of

the sawﬂy (Okutani, 1970).
Remarks. Gilpinia abieticola is similar to G.
albiclavata, G. hokkaidoensis and G. kojimai inthe female and also to G. hercyniae in the male,but these species are distinguished from eachother by the characters given in the key below.
Reeks (1941) separated the males of G. abieticola, G. polytoma and G. hercyniae by the coloration of the hind femur, the punctation on thethoracic dorsum and the shape of the valviceps.
His treatment was accepted by Ermolenko (1975)
and Beneš and Krístek (1979). We recognizedthat the valviceps shows distinct differencesamong the three species (cf. Figs. 9–10), but thecoloration and the punctation may not be usefulin separating males of these three species. Reeks(1941) wrote that the hind femur is posteriorly
mostly black and the punctation on the thoracic
dorsum is coarse in G. abieticola and G. hercyniae, while the hind femur is mostly yellow andthe punctation is ﬁne in G. polytoma. However,in our material, the coloration of the femur andthe punctation is not distinctly different among
the three species.
The number of biramose antennomeres is
21–23 for “G. polytoma” (probably including G.
hercyniae) and 19 or 19–20 for G. abieticola in
Enslin (1917) and Gussakovskij (1947), but it
overlaps in G. abieticola, G. hercyniae and G.
polytoma according to Reeks (1941) and in ourmaterial. Enslin (1917) and Zhelokhovtsev(1988) used the antennal length to separate G.
abieticola from G. polytoma and G. hercyniae,
but the antenna very often curls up, so that theaccurate measurement is difﬁcult. Viitasaari andVarama (1987) used the color and pilosity of thearea just in front of the median ocellus, the colorof the clypeus and the color of the tenth abdominal tergum (=“viimeinen selkäkilpi”) in the key
to the males of the European Gilpinia species,
though they suggested rather wide variability ofFig. 5. Dorsal part of mesepisternum, lateral view: Gilpinia abieticola (A–D, female; E–F, male), G. hokkaidoensis (G–H, female) and G. kojimai (I–J, female; K–L, male). — A, C, E, G, I, K, Digital microscope using ringlight; B, D, F, H, J, L, SEM. — A–B, Lectotype; C–D, Zittau; E–F, Chodau; G–J, holotypes; K–L, Mt. Yokoteyama.

Sawﬂies of Gilpinia abieticola Group

31

32

Hideho Hara and Akihiko ShinoharaFig. 6. Hind leg (from apex of tibia to third or fourth tarsomere): Gilpinia abieticola (A–B, female; C–D, male),
G. hokkaidoensis (E, female) and G. kojimai (F, female; G, male). — A, Left leg, anterior view; B, D, right leg,
ventral view; C, E–F, do., anterior view, reversed; G, do., posterior view, reversed. — A–B, Zittau; C–D, Chodau; E–F, holotypes; G, Mt. Yokote-yama.

these characters. In our limited material, the areain front of the median ocellus is narrowly yellow
in G. abieticola, narrowly or rather widely yellow or black in G. polytoma and black in G. hercyniae, and the area is narrowly or widely glabrous in all the three species. The clypeus ismostly (or its wide ventral margin) yellow, pale
brown or brown in G. abieticola and G. hercyniae, and mostly yellowish white or yellow in G.
polytoma. The tenth tergum is often difﬁcult toobserve. In the specimens with a visible tenth tergum, it is brown in G. abieticola and G. hercyniae and yellow or brown in G. polytoma. We consider that these characters are rather difﬁcult touse for the separation of these three species,
although the frequency of character states may
differ between them.
Gilpinia hokkaidoensis n. sp.
[Japanese name: Kita-shima-matsuhabachi](Figs. 1F–H, 3I–K, 4G–H, 5G–H, 6E, 7H–K, 8E–H)

Female [character states of holotype in brackets]. Length 6.0–7.0 [7.0] mm. Black, with paleyellow to yellow markings, without metallic
reﬂection (Fig. 1F–G). Head yellow, anteriorly
with black marking between eyes (Fig. 1H); thisblack marking dorsally margined with brown,
sometimes lateroventrally extending to malar
space (Fig. 3J) [extending to malar space]; postocellar area usually medially dark brown (Fig. 1H)[medially dark brown]; pale area between postocellar area and gena narrow or wide [narrow];border of supraclypeal area and clypeus darkbrown (Fig. 3J); anterior tentorial pit black; area
between facial groove and malar space yellow, or
black and with yellow or brown spot near byfacial groove [black with brown spot]; malar
space anteriorly black; gena yellow except for
black area along eye margin, or yellow or brownventrally and black dorsally [yellow ventrally
and black dorsally]; occiput mostly black.
Antenna dark brown to black, basally yellow orbrown [brown]. Mandible basally brown, apically red brown. Labrum dark brown (Fig. 3J).
Palpi yellow, basally somewhat darkened. Pronotum yellow, narrowly black anteriorly (Fig.
1F–G). Mesepisternum except for pectus darkbrown to black, centrally with yellow marking[yellow marking present only on left mesepisternum]; pectus black (Fig. 1G). Legs brown to
black; apices of coxae yellow; trochanters andtrochantelli partly yellowish; apices of femora,fore and middle tibiae except for narrow apices
and apical parts of ventral sides, hind tibia except

Sawﬂies of Gilpinia abieticola Group

33

Fig. 7. Ovipositor sheath (A–B, E–I, L–M) and lance (C–D, J–K, N–O): Gilpinia abieticola (A–G), G. hokkaidoensis (H–K) and G. kojimai (L–O). — A, E, H, L, Posterodorsal view; B, G, I, M, posterior view; F, lateralview; C, J, N, dorsal view; D, K, O, lateral view; 1, 8 in D, ﬁrst (most basal) and eighth (most apical) annularsutures. — A–D, Lectotype; E–G, Zittau; H–I, holotype; J–K, locality unknown; L–O, holotype.

for apical third and bases of tarsomeres yellow;
tibial spurs yellow to brown. Wings nearly clear
hyaline; stigma pale brown, basally and marginally dark brown; in fore wing, veins dark brown
to black, yellow to pale brown on C, most of section of R1 basal to stigma, apical section of R1

and most of A. Abdomen dark brown to black;ﬁrst tergum often with wide yellow brown area
medially [with yellow brown area]; second toseventh terga yellow anteriorly, but anterior terga
not or narrowly so medially; laterotergites yellow
anterolaterally; sterna anteriorly or anterolater-

34

Hideho Hara and Akihiko ShinoharaFig. 8. Lancet: Gilpinia abieticola (A–D), G. hokkaidoensis (E–H) and G. kojimai (I–L). 1, 2, 9 in A, First (mostbasal), second and ninth row of spines. — A, Lectotype; B, Chodau; C, Leipzig; D, Piesting; E, holotype;F, Aizankei; G, locality unknown; H, Tomakomai; I, holotype; J–L, Mt. Yokote-yama.

ally yellow [anterolaterally]; eighth tergum anteriorly yellow, with small black spot anterolaterally; ninth tergum yellow or brown [yellow],
black on narrow anterior margin and dorsal area

except for brown narrow dorsomedial area; tenthtergum black, medially yellow or brown [yellow]. Cercus dark brown. Ovipositor sheath
black; scopa yellow or brown [yellow].

Sawﬂies of Gilpinia abieticola Group

Fig. 9. Genitalia: Gilpinia abieticola (A–H) and G. kojimai (I–P). — A, I, Genital capsule, dorsal view; B, E, J,
M, do., ventral view; C, F, K, N, penis valve, lateral view, left dorsal (K, reversed); D, G–H, L, O–P, apicalpart of valviceps, lateral view, left dorsal (L, reversed). — A–D, Piesting; E–H, Chodau; I–P, Mt. Yokote-yama.

35

36

Hideho Hara and Akihiko ShinoharaFig. 10. Penis valve: Gilpinia polytoma (A–B) and G. hercyniae (C–F). — A–C, E, Lateral view, left dorsal (E,reversed); D, F, apical part of valviceps, lateral view, left dorsal (F, reversed). — A, Ottobeuren; B, Pulgarn;
C–D, Wilmington; E–F, Portage.

Head and thorax densely punctured, moderately shiny. Frontal area and its adjacent areas
with punctures mostly contiguous (Fig. 3I). Supraclypeal area and dorsal part of clypeus weakly
punctured (Fig. 3J). Ventral part of clypeus
nearly smooth. Labrum weakly punctured. Punctures on mesonotum and mesepisternum predominantly contiguous and well deﬁned (Figs. 4G–H,
5G–H); those on posterior part of median mesoscutal lobe sometimes ill-deﬁned [ill-deﬁned].
Postocellar area with width 1.7–2.1 [1.7] ×length (Fig. 1H). Distances between eye and lateral ocellus, between lateral ocelli, and between
lateral ocellus and posterior margin of head 1.1–
1.2 : 1.0 : 0.8–1.1 [1.1 : 1.0 : 0.9]; distances between
eye and lateral ocellus and between lateral ocellus and posterior margin of head 1.1–1.3 : 1.0 [1.3
: 1.0]. Distance between eyes 1.8–2.0 [1.9] × eyeheight. Distance between torulus and eye 0.9–1.2[1.2] × distance between toruli. Malar space 1.1–
1.7 [1.7] × width of median ocellus, 0.2–0.3 [0.3] ×
eye height. Antenna (Fig. 3K) with 20–21 [20]antennomeres. Ovipositor sheath as in Fig. 7H–I.
Lance (Fig. 7J–K) with eight annular suturesand middle sutures weakly oblique. Lancet (Fig.
8E–H) with 10 annuli, gradually narrowing apically; length of lancet from its apex to ventral

end of most basal (ﬁrst) row of spines (=ctenidium) 3.2–3.4 [3.4] × maximum width of lancet;
ﬁrst row of spines oblique, with ventral end
located anterior to dorsal end; fourth row ofspines (=ctenidium+serrula) about as long second row of spines; second serrula somewhat
smaller than third serrula; eighth and ninth annuli
each curved, not spinose dorsally.
Male. Unknown.
Material examined. Holotype: ♀ (Fig. 1F–G), labelled “Yamada-onsen 800 m, Tokachi,
Hokkaido, 28–30. VI. 1995, A. Shinohara”(NSMT). Paratypes: 2 ♀, “Lot 11-J. IV-15-1937”“770” (NSMT); 1 ♀, Hokkaido, Tomakomai, 23.
VI. 1959, T. Kumata (HU); 1 ♀, Hokkaido,
Aizankei, 16. VII. 1960, S. Takagi (HU); 1 ♀,same locality, 15. VII. 1963, A. Nakanishi(NSMT).
Etymology. The species epithet is derived
from the locality.
Distribution. Japan: Hokkaido.
Host plants. Unknown.
Remarks. Gilpinia hokkaidoensis is distinguished from similar species in the key below.
This species may be associated with Abies or
Picea, because the holotype was collected at asite where Abies and Picea are abundant but

Sawﬂies of Gilpinia abieticola Group

Pinus is not found.
Gilpinia kojimai n. sp.
[Japanese name: Shima-haimatsu-habachi](Figs. 1I–K, 2G–M, 3L–O, 4I–L, 5I–L, 6F–G, 7L–O,
8I–L, 9I–P)[Shima-haimatsu-habachi] (Japanese name only): Anonymous, 1986: 198; Nakamura, 2004: 33.

Female [character states of holotype in brackets]. Length 6.5–7.5 [6.8] mm. Black, with yellow markings, without metallic reﬂection (Fig.
1I–J). Head yellow, anteriorly with black marking between eyes (Fig. 1K); this black marking
narrowly margined with brown dorsally, extending posteriorly along midline on postocellar area,and extending to malar space lateroventrally(Figs. 1K, 3M); anterior tentorial pit black; narrow or wide yellow spot present near facial
groove [narrow]; malar space black; gena black,ventrally yellow; occiput mostly black. Antenna
dark brown to black, basally narrowly or widely
yellow to brown [widely yellow to brown]. Mandible basally brown yellow, apically red brown.
Labrum brown yellow to dark brown [brown].
Palpi pale yellow or brown yellow, basally somewhat darkened. Pronotum yellow, narrowly blackanteriorly (Fig. 1I–J). Mesepisternum black, withyellow marking at middle and pectus black, very
often posteromedially yellow or brown [brown].
Legs brown to black; apices of coxae yellow; trochanters and trochantelli partly yellowish; apicesof femora, fore and middle tibiae except for narrow apices, hind tibia except for apical fourthand bases of basal tarsomeres yellow; tibial spurs
yellow to brown. Wings nearly clear hyaline;
stigma pale brown, basally and marginally black;veins mostly black; in fore wing, C yellow, apically darkened, and most of section of R1 basal
to stigma and most of A pale brown. Abdomen
dark brown to black; ﬁrst tergum black, oftenwith yellow marking medially [entirely black];
second to eighth terga yellow anteriorly, butanterior terga not or narrowly so medially; sterna
anteriorly or anterolaterally yellow [anterolater-

37

ally]; ninth tergum black, dorsomedially narrowly yellow, posterolaterally narrowly darkbrown or widely brown [narrowly dark brown];tenth tergum dark brown, medially yellow orbrown [yellow]. Cercus black. Ovipositor sheath
black; scopa yellow.
Head and thorax densely punctured, moderately shiny. Frontal area and its adjacent areas
with punctures predominantly contiguous (Fig.
3L). Supraclypeal area and dorsal part of clypeus
weakly punctured (Fig. 3M). Ventral part of clypeus nearly smooth. Labrum weakly and sparsely
punctured. Punctures on mesonotum and mesepisternum predominantly contiguous and welldeﬁned (Figs. 4I–J, 5I–J); punctures on mesonotum rarely predominantly separated [contiguous].
Postocellar area with width 2.0–2.3 [2.1] ×
length (Fig. 1K). Distances between eye and lateral ocellus, between lateral ocelli, and between
lateral ocellus and posterior margin of head 1.0–
1.2 : 1.0 : 0.8–1.0 [1.2 : 1.0 : 1.0]; distances between
eye and lateral ocellus and between lateral ocellus and posterior margin of head 1.2–1.3 : 1.0 [1.2 :1.0]. Distance between eyes 1.9–2.2 [2.2] × eyeheight. Distance between torulus and eye 1.2–1.3[1.2] × distance between toruli. Malar space 1.5–
1.7 [1.6] × width of median ocellus, 0.3 × eyeheight. Antenna (Fig. 3N) with 19–21 [20] antennomeres. Ovipositor sheath as in Fig. 7L–M.
Lance (Fig. 7N–O) with eight annular sutures,and middle sutures weakly oblique. Lancet (Fig.
8I–L) with 10 annuli (10th annulus inconspicuous), abruptly narrowing apically beyond seventh
annulus; length of lancet from its apex to ventral
end of most basal (ﬁrst) row of spines (=ctenidium) 2.6–2.9 [2.6] × maximum width of lancet;
ﬁrst row of spines nearly erect; fourth row ofspines (=ctenidium+serrula) slightly shorter thansecond row of spines; second serrula somewhat
smaller than third serrula; eighth and ninth annuli
each nearly straight, less oblique than middle
annuli, and not spinose dorsally.
Male. Length 5.5–6.5 mm. Black (Fig.
2G–H). Head sometimes dark brown between
postocellar area and eye as in Fig. 2D. Clypeus
ventrally narrowly or widely brown yellow to38

Hideho Hara and Akihiko Shinoharabrown (Fig. 2J), or entirely black. Labrum yellow, brown or black. Mandible apically red
brown. Palpi pale yellow, basally somewhat
darkened. Antenna dark brown to black. Pronotum posterolaterally narrowly or somewhat
widely brown or yellow (Fig. 2K, M); pale area
ventrally not extending beyond postspiracularsclerite, in only one specimen extending beyond
this sclerite. Legs brown yellow (Fig. 2H, L);
coxae basally widely black; trochanter and trochantelli narrowly or widely darkened; femora narrowly or widely brown to dark brown posteriorly,
often also basally; middle and hind tibiae sometimes narrowly darkened apically. Wings as infemale. Abdomen almost entirely black or dorsally with sixth or seventh to eighth terga eachanterolaterally brown, ventrally dark brown to
black, brown yellow to brown on sixth to seventh
sterna, sixth to eighth laterotergites, wide posterior area of subgenital plate, and narrow anterolateral areas of second to ﬁfth laterotergites (Fig.
2H) (in one specimen, also pale on subgenital
plate and wide areas of fourth and ﬁfth sterna
and laterotergites, as in Fig. 2L). Basiparamereof genital capsule dark, harpe somewhat pale(Fig. 9I–J, M).
Punctation as in female (Figs. 3O, 4K–L,
5K–L). Supraclypeal area densely punctured(Fig. 2J).
Structure as in female except for usual sexual
differences. Postocellar area with width 2.2–2.6 ×length (Fig. 2I). Distances between eye and lateral ocellus, between lateral ocelli, and between
lateral ocellus and posterior margin of head 1.0–
1.1 : 1.0 : 0.6–0.7; distances between eye and lateral ocellus and between lateral ocellus and posterior margin of head 1.5–1.8 : 1.0. Distances
between eyes 1.9–2.3 × eye height. Distance
between torulus and eye 1.1–1.4 × distance
between toruli. Malar space 1.4–2.0 × width ofmedian ocellus, 0.3–0.4 × eye height. Antenna(Fig. 2G) with 23–26 antennomeres.
Genitalia as in Fig. 9I–P. Basiparamere in ventral view with parapenis weakly curved laterally,slightly or distinctly tapering apically, with apex
narrowly rounded. Valviceps in lateral view with

distinct apical spine and ventral margin weakly
or moderately rounded near apex; apical area
narrow, with longest axis 3.8–4.3 × shortest axis.
Material examined. Holotype: ♀ (Fig. 1I–J),
labelled “JAPAN, HONSHU, Nagano pref.,Yamanouchi, Mt. Yokote-yama, coll. larva on
Pinus pumila, 30. VIII. 2012, coc. 1–8. IX., em.
17–28. IX. 2012, H. Kojima” (NSMT). Paratypes: 1 ♂, Nagano Pref., Mt. Yokote-yama, em.
30. VII. 1984, host Pinus pumila, H. Kojima(NSMT); 1 ♂, do., but em. 2. VIII. 1984; 1 ♀,do., but em. 3. VIII. 1984; 9 ♀5 ♂, same data as
holotype (NSMT); 1 ♀, do., No. 34; 8 ♂, offspring of No. 34, em. 15. XI. – 1. XII. 2012
(NSMT); 1 ♀, No. 44, same data as holotype(NSMT); 2 ♂, offspring of No. 44, em. 12–18.
XI. 2012 (NSMT); 9 ♀6 ♂, same data as holotype, but coll. larva on Pinus pumila, 10. IX.
2013, coc. –17. IX., em. 28. IX.–30. X. 2013
(NSMT).
Etymology. This new species is named after
Haruyoshi Kojima, who discovered this species.
Distribution. Japan: Honshu (Nagano Pref.,Mt. Yokote-yama) (Anonymous, 1986).
Host plants. Pinaceae: Pinus pumila (Pall.)Regel (Anonymous, 1986).
Remarks. The differences between Gilpinia
kojimai and the most similar species are shownin the key below. Anonymous (1986) alreadyreported on the occurrence of this species (as anundescribed species) on Pinus pumila stands on
Mt. Yokote-yama, but the species was left undescribed.
Host plants are Pinus for G. kojimai and G.
albiclavata, while they are Picea for G. abieticola. Gilpinia kojimai and G. albiclavata are associated with the same plant, P. pumila, and occur
in the alpine regions of central Honshu. However, the two species differ in the larval habit anddistribution in addition to the slight adult differences. Larvae of G. kojimai are always solitary(H. Kojima, personal communication, 2014),
while the larvae are solitary or gregarious in G.
albiclavata (Hara and Nakamura, 2015). The former species has been collected only in a small
area near the top of Mt. Yokote-yama in Shiga-

Sawﬂies of Gilpinia abieticola Groupkogen Highland. On the other hand, the latter
species is widely distributed on Yatsugatake
Mountains, Akaishi Mountains, Hida Mountains,

39

Kiso Mountains and Mt. Hakusan, but not in
Shiga-kogen Highland.

Key to species of Gilpinia abieticola group
The following key contains the members of G. abieticola species group, G. abieticola, G. albiclavata, G. hokkaidoensis (male unknown) and G. kojimai, and the male of G. hercyniae.
1. Female. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2― Male. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2. First abdominal tergum pale, narrowly dark along margins (very rarely widely dark with pale
medial marking); antenna with 17–19 antennomeres; malar space 1.8–2.2 × width of median ocellus; mesepisternum with punctures usually ill deﬁned; lance with seven sutures; lancet with nine
annuli. [Pectus narrowly or mostly pale; lancet gradually narrowing apically, with length from apex
to ventral end of ﬁrst (most basal) row of spines 2.6–2.8 × maximum width and ﬁrst row of spines
nearly erect.] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . G. albiclavata― First abdominal tergum predominantly dark with pale medial marking or entirely dark (Fig. 1A, F,I); antenna with 19–21 antennomeres; malar space 1.1–1.9 × width of median ocellus; mesepisternum with punctures well deﬁned (Fig. 5A, C, G, I); lance with eight sutures (Fig. 7D, K, O); lancet
with 10 annuli (rarely nine annuli) (Fig. 8).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Pectus entirely black (Fig. 1B, G); lancet narrow, length from apex to ventral end of ﬁrst row ofspines 3.1–3.5 × maximum width (Fig. 8A–H); ﬁrst row of spines distinctly oblique. . . . . . . . . . . . . 4― Pectus very often posteromedially pale (Fig. 1J); lancet wide, length from apex to ventral end ofﬁrst row of spines 2.6–2.9 × maximum width (Fig. 8I–L); ﬁrst row of spines nearly erect. [Lancet
abruptly narrowing apically beyond seventh annulus.] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . G. kojimai
4. Lancet abruptly narrowing apically beyond seventh annulus (Fig. 8A–D); eighth and ninth annuli
nearly straight.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . G. abieticola― Lancet gradually narrowing apically (Fig. 8E–H); eighth and ninth annuli curved.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . G. hokkaidoensis
5. Valviceps with very small apical spine (Fig. 9D, G, H). [Pronotum posterolaterally with wide paleyellow area ventrally extending beyond postspiracular sclerite; subgenital plate entirely yellow toyellow brown; malar space 1.6–1.8 × width of median ocellus; antenna with 22–27 antennomeres.]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . G. abieticola― Valviceps with distinct apical spine (Figs. 9L, O–P, 10D, F). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. Valviceps with long apical spine (Fig. 10D, F); subgenital plate entirely yellow to yellow brown.
[Pronotum posterolaterally with wide yellow area ventrally extending beyond postspiracular sclerite; malar space 1.5–1.8 × width of median ocellus; antenna with 23–28 antennomeres.]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . G. hercyniae― Valviceps with short apical spine (Fig. 9L, O–P); subgenital plate usually basally or entirely black.
....................................................................................... 7
7. Pronotum posterolaterally with yellow or brown area usually not extending beyond postspiracularsclerite ventrally; malar space 1.4–2.0 × width of median ocellus; antenna with 23–26 antennomeres. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . G. kojimai― Pronotum posterolaterally with wide pale yellow area extending beyond postspiracular sclerite ventrally; malar space 1.9–3.0 × width of median ocellus; antenna with 22–24 antennomeres.

40

Hideho Hara and Akihiko Shinohara. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . G. albiclavata

Acknowledgments
We thank H. Kojima (Nagano) for offering thematerial and information on biology of Gilpinia
kojimai, A. D. Liston and A. Taeger (SDEI), M.
Ohara (HU), S. Ryder (BMNH), D. R. Smith(USNM) and D. Zimmermann and M. Vizek(NMW) for the loan of the material, A. D. Liston
for his careful reading of the manuscript andvaluable suggestions, and A. Taeger for the information on the label data. This study was partly
supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant No.
25440223.
References
Anonymous 1986. [New species of sawﬂies.] In: Fauna
and Flora of Shinano, Photobook, pp. 198–201. Shinano Mainichi Shinbun, Nagano. (In Japanese.)
Beneš, K. and J. Krístek 1979. Present state of taxonomic
knowledge on European species of the families Pamphiliidae, Diprionidae and Tenthredinidae (Hymenoptera, Symphyta). Acta Universitatis Agriculturae(Brno), Series C (Facultas Silviculturae), 48(1–4):
77–118. (In Czech with English abstract.)
Benson, R. B. 1939. On the genera of Diprionidae(Hymenoptera Symphyta). Bulletin of EntomologicalResearch, 30: 339–342.
Dalla Torre, C. G. 1894. Tenthredinidae incl. Uroceridae(Phyllophaga & Xylophaga). Catalogus Hymenopterorum hucusque descriptorum systematicus et synonymicus, vol. 1. 459 pp. Sumptibus Guilelmi Engelmann,
Lipsiae.
Enslin, E. 1914. Die Blatt- und Holzwespen (Tenthrediniden) Mitteleuropas, insbesondere Deutschlands. In
Schröder, C. (ed.): Die Insekten Mitteleuropas insbesondere Deutschlands, Band III, Hymenopteren (Dritter
Teil), pp. 95–213. Franckhʼsche Verlagshandlung, Stuttgart.
Enslin, E. 1917. Die Tenthredinoidea Mitteleuropas VI.
Deutsche Entomologische Zeitschrift [1917] (Beiheft6): 539–662.
Ermolenko, V. M. 1975. Rohokhvosty ta pylʼshchyky.
Vypusk 3. Arhidy. Dyprionidy. Tentredynidy (selandriiny, doleryny). Fauna Ukrainy, 10(3). 374 pp.
Gussakovskij, V. V. 1947. Chalastogastra (pt. 2). Faune delʼURSS (n. s. 32), Insectes Hyménoptères, II (2).
235pp. Édition de lʼAcademie des Sciences de l'URSS,
Moscou, Leningrad. (In Russian with English sum-mary.)
Hara, H. and H. Nakamura 2015. A pine sawﬂy, Gilpinia
albiclavata sp. nov. (Hymenoptera: Diprionidae),infesting Pinus pumila in the Japanese Alps. Entomological Science, 18: 31–40.
Horn, W., I. Kahle, G. Friese and R. Gaedike 1990. Collectiones Entomologicae, ein Kompendium über den
Verbleib Entomologischer Sammlungen der Welt bis
1960, Teil II: L bis Z, pp. 221–573. Akademie derLandwirtschaftswissenschaften der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik, Berlin.
Konow, F. W. 1905. Hymenoptera, Fam. Tenthredinidae.
In Wytsman, P. (ed.): Genera Insectorum, (29). 176 pp.,3pls. Bruxelles.
Kontuniemi, T. 1960. Suomen sahapistiäistoukkien ravintokasvit. Die Futterpﬂanzen der Sägewespenlarven(Hymenoptera, Symphyta) Finnlands. Animalia Fennica, 9: 1–104.
Larsson, S., C. Björkman and N. A. C. Kidd 1993. Outbreaks in diprionid sawﬂies: Why some species and notothers? In Wagner, M. R. and K. F. Raffa (eds.): Sawﬂy
Life History Adaptations to Woody Plants, pp. 453–
483. Academic Press, San Diego and London.
Liston, A. D. 1995. Compendium of European Sawﬂies.
190 pp. Chalastos Forestry, Gottfrieding.
Lorenz, H. and M. Kraus 1957. Die Larvalsystematik derBlattwespen (Tenthredinoidea und Megalodontoidea).
Abhandlungen zur Larvalsystematik der Insekten, 1:
1–389.
Naito, T. 1976. Chromosomes and sex of sawﬂies. Forest
Pests, 25(5): 2–7. (In Japanese.)
Nakamura, H. 2004. Sawﬂies infesting Pinus pumila
around Mt. Kiso-komagatake in the Japan Central Alps.
Annals of Environmental Science, Shinshu University,
26: 33–38. (In Japanese with English abstract.)
Okutani, T. 1967. Food plants of Japanese Symphyta (I).
Japanese Journal of Applied Entomology and Zoology,
11: 43–49. (In Japanese with English abstract.)
Okutani, T. 1970. Food plants of Japanese Symphyta (III).
Japanese Journal of Applied Entomology and Zoology,
14: 25–28. (In Japanese with English abstract.)
Pschorn-Walcher, H. 1982. Unterordnung Symphyta,
Pﬂanzenwespen. In Schwenke, W. (ed.): Die Forstschädlinge Europas, 4, pp. 4–196, 232–234. Paul Parey,
Hamburg und Berlin.
Pschorn-Walcher, H. and E. Altenhofer 2000. Langjährige
Larvenaufsammlungen und Zuchten von Pﬂanzenwespen (Hymenoptera, Symphyta) in Mitteleuropa.
Linzer biologische Beiträge, 32: 273–327.
Reeks, W. A. 1941. On the taxonomic status of Gilpinia
polytoma (Htg.) and G. hercyniae (Htg.) (Hymenoptera, Diprionidae). The Canadian Entomologist, 73:

Sawﬂies of Gilpinia abieticola Group
177–188.
Smith, D. R. 1975. Conifer sawﬂies, Diprionidae: Key toNorth American genera, checklist of world species, anda new species from Mexico (Hymenoptera). Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington, 76:
409–418.
Stein, R. 1886. Neue Afterraupen. Wiener Entomologische Zeitung, 5: 141–151.
Taeger, A., E. Altenhofer, S. M. Blank, E. Jansen, M.
Kraus, H. Pschorn-Walcher and C. Ritzau 1998. Kommentare zur Biologie, Verbreitung und Gefährdung derPﬂanzenwespen Deutschlands (Hymenoptera, Symphyta).
In Taeger, A. and S. M. Blank (eds.): Pﬂanzenwespen
Deutschlands (Hymenoptera, Symphyta), Kommentierte Bestandsaufnahme, pp. 49–135. Goecke & Evers,
Keltern.
Taeger, A., S. M. Blank and A. D. Liston 2006. European
sawﬂies (Hymenoptera: Symphyta) ― A species checklist for the countries. In Blank S. M., S. Schmidt and A.
Taeger (eds.): Recent Sawﬂy Research: Synthesis andProspects, pp. 399–504. Goecke & Evers, Keltern.
Taeger, A., S. M. Blank and A. D. Liston 2010. World catalog of Symphyta (Hymenoptera). Zootaxa, 2580:
1–1064.
Takeuchi, K. 1940. A systematic study on the suborder
Symphyta (Hymenoptera) of the Japanese Empire (III).
Tenthredo, 3: 187–199.
Thalenhorst, W. 1955. Zur Kenntnis der FichtenBlattwespen. III. Die Apparenzen der Diprionini.
Zeitschrift für Pﬂanzenkrankheiten und Pﬂanzenschutz,
62: 353–361.
Thalenhorst, W. 1960. Zur Kenntnis der Fichtenblattwespen. VI. Die Populationsdichte der Diprionidae: Niveau und Fluktuationen. Zeitschrift für Pﬂanzenkrankheiten und Pﬂanzenschutz, 67: 513–524.
Thalenhorst, W. 1968. Zur Kenntnis der Fichten-

41

blattwespen VIII. Eizahl und Eiablage. Zeitschrift für
Pﬂanzenkrankheiten und Pﬂanzenschutz, 75: 338–350.
Togashi, I. 1961. Sawﬂies (Hym. Symphyta) of Mt. Hakusan. Life Study, 5: 27–42. (In Japanese with English
abstract.)
Vehrke, H. 1961. Zur Unterscheidung der Larven von Gilpinia abieticola (D.T.), G. polytoma (Htg.) und G. hercyniae (Htg.) (Hymenoptera: Diprionidae) nach dem
Zeichnungsmuster der Kopfkapseln. Zeitschrift fürAngewandte Entomologie, 48: 176–185.
Verzhutskii, B. N. 1966. Pililʼshchiki Pribaikalʼia. 162 pp.
Nauka, Moskva. (English translation, 1978, Sawﬂies of
Baikal Region. 234 pp. Indian National Scientiﬁc Documentation Centre, New Delhi.)
Verzhutskii, B. N. 1973. Opredelitelʼ Lichinok Rogokhvostov i Pililʼshchikov Sibirii i Dalʼnego Vostoka. 140
pp. Nauka, Moskva.
Verzhutskii, B. N. 1981. Rastitelʼnoiadnye Nasekomye v
Ekosistemakh Vostochnoi Sibiri (Pililʼshchiki i
Rogokhvosty). 303 pp. Nauka, Novosibirsk.
Viitasaari, M. and M. Varama 1987. Sawﬂies 4. Conifer
sawﬂy (Diprionidae). University of Helsinki, Department of Agricultural and Forest Zoology, Reports, 10:
1–79. (In Finnish with English summary.)
Westendorff, M. 2006. Chromosomes of sawﬂies (Hymenoptera: Symphyta) - A survey including new data. In
Blank S. M., S. Schmidt and A. Taeger (eds.): Recent
Sawﬂy Research: Synthesis and Prospects, pp. 39–60.
Goecke & Evers, Keltern.
Zhelokhovtsev, A. N. 1988. Symphyta. In Medvedev, G.
S. (ed.): Opredelitelʼ Nasekomykh Evropeiskoi Chasti
SSSR, Tom III, Pereponchatokrylye, Shestaia Chastʼ.
599 pp. Nauka, Leningrad. (English translation, 1994,
Keys to the Insects of the European Part of the USSR,
Vol. III, Hymenoptera, Part VI, Symphyta, pp. 7–234.
E.J. Brill, Leiden, New York, Köln.)