Clypeus (Figs 2, 3) varying among species from broad as in Fig. 2 to somewhat narrow; surface punctate, generally more finely so dorsally and more coarsely ventrally; ventral margin blunt, evenly convex; epistomal sulcus narrow, usually distinct, often sharply impressed; clypeus in profile weakly bulging, weakly protruding. Inner eye margins parallel. Malar space (Fig. 2) short in the species examined, varying from 0.5 times basal width of mandible to absent or nearly so [
Gauld (1997) described several species from Costa Rica with more prominent malar space]; malar sulcus absent. Mandible (Fig. 3) broad basally, tapering gradually from base to near middle, then parallel or slighly expanded from middle to apex; ventral tooth usually longer than dorsal tooth; ventral margin distinctly carinate. Maxillary palp equal to or shorter than height of head; antenna (Figs 1, 4) equal to or commonly longer than body, first flagellomere often relatively longer than in species shown in Fig. 4. Ocelli small to moderate in size, diameter of lateral ocellus less than distance from lateral ocellus to eye in most species examined, about equal distance from lateral ocellus to eye in one of the species examined. Hypostomal carina meeting occipital carina distinctly above base of mandible; occipital carina complete dorsally. Epomia apparently absent. Epicnemial carina reaching anterior margin of mesopleuron (Fig. 5) in all species examined {
Gauld (1997) described several species in which the epicnemial carina was incomplete dorsally and not extending to the anterior margin]. Notaulus present usually as a distinct impression on anterior declivity (the depression sometimes weakly sculptured), becoming distinctly weaker and shallow on disk, extending posteriorad level of tegula in some species but weaker and shorter in others. Groove between propodeum and metapleuron absent to very weakly indicated, not u-shaped as in pionines; pleural carina present strongly elevated; median longitudinal carinae varying from distinct and narrowly spaced throughout to completely absent as in Fig. 6, usually absent or barely indicated; lateral longitudinal carina nearly always present and extending to spiracle from posterior margin; transverse carinae absent. Legs with apical margin of mid tibia sometimes expanded into a tooth that is nearly as well-developed as that of fore leg; apical comb on posterior side of hind tibia present, though not strongly developed; posterior hind tibial spur 0.35-0.5 times length of hind basitarsus; tarsal claws not pectinate; fifth tarsomere of hing leg normal, not unusually elongate (relative to fourth) (Fig. 8). Fore wing (Fig. 7) with areolet absent; stigma moderately broad, Rs+2r usually arising at or very slightly basad or distad midpoint. Hind wing (Fig. 7) with first abscissa of CU1 longer than 1cu-a. T1 varying from slender (Figs 9, 10) to somewhat broader: very gradually to more strongly expanding posteriorly; ventral margin straight to weakly curved in profile; dorsal carinae absent or present, vary when present usually distinctly elevated and extending distinctly posteriorad spiracles; basal depression at dorsal tendon attachment absent; dorsal-lateral carina complete between spiracle and apex of T1 (Fig. 9); glymma absent. S1 extending to level of spiracle or nearly so. Laterotergites of T2 and T3 separated by creases from median tergite. Ovipositor and sheath more or less straight, ovipositor with distinct dorsal, subapical notch.
This description s modified from Townes (1970) and is based largely on several specimens in the Texas A&M University collection, representing at least 6 species.
