An annotated checklist of the chrysidid wasps (Hymenoptera, Chrysididae) from China Author Rosa, Paolo Via Belvedere 8 / d, I- 20881 Bernareggio (MB), Italy Author Wei, Na-sen Department of Entomology, College of Natural Resources and Environment, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou 510640, China Author Xu, Zai-fu Department of Entomology, College of Natural Resources and Environment, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou 510640, China text ZooKeys 2014 2014-11-19 455 1 128 http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.455.6557 journal article http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.455.6557 1313-2970-455-1 7346B2B940BF4358AFE4B3F30023F9F2 FF9EFF935938FF8EFF4DFFEBFFAEFF82 578622 73. Philoctetes duplipunctatus (Tsuneki, 1948) Chrysellampus near harmandi : Tsuneki 1946 : 33 (China: Shanxi, tax.). Chrysellampus duplipunctatus Tsuneki, 1948a: 120. Holotype ♀, China: Shanxi, Wutai Shan (120 (descr.), 122 (Wutaishan, comp. notes), 128 (Shanxi, cat.), pl. 7 (figs A, B), pl. 8 (figs A-E), depository: KUM). Chrysellampus duplipunctatus f. suzukii Tsuneki, 1948a: 122. Holotype ♀, China: Shanxi, Yangcheng (122 (descr.), 128 (cat.), depository: KUM). Chrysellampus duplipunctatus f. variegatus Tsuneki, 1950: 63. Syntypes ♂♀, Korea, Manchuria: Kay-juan (63 (descr.), depository: NIAS). Chrysellampus duplipunctatus : Tsuneki 1953a : 55 (Manchuria: Kaiyuean , tax.); Tsuneki 1953b : 23 (North China, Manchuria, tax.). Chrysellampus duplipunctatus f. variegatus : Tsuneki 1953a : 55 (Manchuria: Kaiyuean , distr., cat.); Tsuneki 1953b : 23 (tax.). Omalus (Chrysellampus) duplipunctatus : Linsenmaier 1959 : 22 (China, tax., descr.). Philoctetes duplipunctatus : Kimsey and Bohart 1991 : 255 (China, cat.); Kurzenko and Lelej 2007 : 1004 (China, cat.). Distribution. China (Liaoning, Jilin, Shanxi). Korea and Russian Far East ( Tsuneki 1953b ; Kurzenko and Lelej 2007 ; Lelej and Kurzenko 2012 ). Remarks. Kimsey and Bohart (1991) considered the forms Philoctetes duplipunctatus f. suzukii and Philoctetes duplipunctatus f. variegatus invalid names. However, according to the ICZN, the two names are indeed valid.