Chrysis rutilans Olivier, 1791

Paukkunen, Juho, Rosa, Paolo, Soon, Villu, Johansson, Niklas & Ødegaard, Frode, 2014, Faunistic review of the cuckoo wasps of Fennoscandia, Denmark and the Baltic countries (Hymenoptera: Chrysididae), Zootaxa 3864 (1), pp. 1-67 : 32

40. Chrysis rutilans Olivier, 1791

Chrysis rutilans Olivier 1791: 676 . Type?; France: Angoumois (MNHN). Mocsáry 1889: 447, Aurivillius 1911: 11, Ehrström 1915: 129, Frey 1915: 43, Hellén 1920: 212, Valkeila 1962: 64, Erlandsson 1971: 88, Tumšs 1976: 22, Silfverberg 1981: 61, Vikberg 1986b: 68, Söderman & Vikberg 2003: 45, Soon 2004: 23, 46, Abenius & Hellqvist 2007: 45 (as C. rutilans “form insperata ”), Salminen 2007: 142, Franzén & Norén 2009: 40, Jantunen & Saarinen 2010: 15, 49, Orlovskytė et al. 2010: 151, Paukkunen 2010: 538, Hallin 2012, Dyntaxa 2013, Johansson 2013a: 45.

Chrysis splendidula [part.]: Trautmann 1927: 170, Trautmann 1930: 507, Jansson 1934: 287, Hellén 1935: 8.

Chrysis splendidula [nec Rossi, 1790]: Dahlbom 1831: 28, Zetterstedt 1840: 434, Dahlbom 1854: 255, Balthasar 1954: 221, Haupt 1957: 103, Humala 1997: 55.

? Chrysis insperata Chevrier 1870: 265 . Holotype ♂; Switzerland (MHNG). Linsenmaier 1959: 128, Erlandsson 1971: 88, Hedström 1989: 154, Berglind 2003: 13, Soon 2004: 46, Paukkunen et al. 2009: 6, Ranta 2011: 88, Dyntaxa 2013, Johansson 2013a: 81.

Chrysis rutilans var. splendidula [nec Rossi, 1790]: Forsius 1922: 94.

Tetrachrysis rutilans: Jansson 1922: 37 , Forsius 1925: 184.

Chrysis rutilans rutilans: Rosa & Soon 2012 .

? Chrysis insperata insperata: Rosa & Soon 2012 .

Material examined: *Russian Fennoscandia: Ka: Säkkijärvi [= Kondratyevo], [1910s], 1 ♀ (Å. Nordström); Kon: Kivach, 3.VII.1989, 1 ex. ( Humala 1997: 55, as C. splendidula ).

Distribution. Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, Sweden, *Russian Fennoscandia.—Transpalearctic: from Europe and North Africa to China and Japan ( Linsenmaier 1997).

Remarks. The species is rare in the studied area. It has not been found in Denmark and Norway, and only a small number of specimens are known from the Baltic countries. In Finland, C. rutilans has been classified as near threatened ( Paukkunen 2010).

The status of the closely related species C. insperata is still uncertain. C. insperata is difficult to separate from C. rutilans , and Kunz (1994) and several subsequent authors considered C. insperata as a nomen dubium. However, e.g. Linsenmaier (1959, 1997) and Rosa (2006) considered both C. insperata and C. rutilans as valid species. Most authors have suggested C. rutilans to be the more common of the two species, and only relatively few records of C. insperata have been published from Finland ( Paukkunen et al. 2009, Ranta 2011) and Sweden ( Linsenmaier 1959, Erlandsson 1971, Hedström 1989, Johansson 2013a). It is yet possible that C. insperata is actually the prevailing species in North Europe. The status of these taxa should be studied in the future in more detail.