Pardoteleia Kozlov & Lê, 1988

Pardoteleia Kozlov & Lê, 1988: 70 . Original description. Type: Pardoteleia prater Kozlov & Lê, by monotypy and original designation.

Description. Body honey-brown in color; head wider than long; hyperoccipital carina absent; frontal depression absent; lateral ocelli adjacent to compound eye in females and not so in males; ocelli much larger in males than females; antenna with twelve antennomeres, clava with six clavomeres in female; radicle very long, 0.3× the length of A1; males with moniliform-filiform antenna with A2 much narrower than other antennomeres; mandible tridentate.

Netrion present; skaphion present; notauli absent; metascutellum triangular; macropterous or micropterous; if macropterous, fore wing with either one or two dark bands; postmarginalis 1.5–1.64× as long as stigmalis; stigmalis 2× as long as marginalis.

Metasoma 1.5× as long as wide; horn on T1 absent; metasomal tergites with broad dark brown markings on T2–T4; ovipositor Scelio -typ e.

Host. Not known.

Diagnosis. The genera Calotelea and Pardoteleia share several characters such as radicle long; mesoscutellum unarmed; skaphion present; metascutellum either produced into a transverse lamella or a triangular plate; fore wing with transverse bands; postmarginalis well developed, longer than stigmalis and marginalis; T3 largest segment of metasoma. However, Calotelea differs from Pardoteleia in having a distinct horn on T 1 in females while the horn is absent in Pardoteleia . Venation on forewing differs between these two genera; in Pardoteleia length of postmarginalis>stigmalis>marginalis while in Calotelea marginalis is almost as long as stigmalis (Popovici, 2013). Generally Calotelea are very slender and gracile with an elongate and spindle-shaped metasoma while in Pardoteleia the metasoma is oval, around 1.5× as long as wide. The males of Pardoteleia and Calotelea can be distinguished using antennal characters and shape of the body. Pardoteleia has moniliform-filiform antenna and oval body where body length to width ratio is around 1.5 whereas in Calotelea the antenna is filiform and has a fusiform body. Venation mentioned for the females is also applicable for the males.