Identification, Images, & Information
For Insects, Spiders & Their Kin
For the United States & Canada
Clickable Guide
Moths Butterflies Flies Caterpillars Flies Dragonflies Flies Mantids Cockroaches Bees and Wasps Walkingsticks Earwigs Ants Termites Hoppers and Kin Hoppers and Kin Beetles True Bugs Fleas Grasshoppers and Kin Ticks Spiders Scorpions Centipedes Millipedes

Upcoming Events

Interested in a 2022 BugGuide gathering in New Mexico?

Photos of insects and people from the Spring 2021 gathering in Louisiana, April 28-May 2

National Moth Week 2020 photos of insects and people.

Photos of insects and people from the 2019 gathering in Louisiana, July 25-27

Discussion, insects and people from the 2018 gathering in Virginia, July 27-29

Photos of insects and people from the 2015 gathering in Wisconsin, July 10-12

Photos of insects and people from the 2014 gathering in Virginia, June 4-7.

Previous events


Edited! Is this a first step towards the correct interpretation of what Hymenoptera taxonomy should be on
Order Hymenoptera - Ants, Bees, Wasps and Sawflies
  • No Taxon - Sawflies, Horntails, and Wood Wasps
    • Family Siricidae - Horntails
    • Family Pamphiliidae - Webspinning and Leafrolling Sawflies
    • Family Argidae - Argid Sawflies
    • Family Tenthredinidae - Common Sawflies
    • Family Cimbicidae - Cimbicid Sawflies
    • Family Orussidae - Parasitic Wood Wasps
    • Family Diprionidae - Conifer Sawflies
    • Family Xyelidae
    • Family Xiphydriidae - Xiphydriid Wood Wasps
  • No Taxon - Aculeata - Bees, Ants, and other Stinging Wasps
    • Anthophila (Apoidea) - Bees
      • Family Andrenidae - Mining Bees
      • Family Halictidae - Sweat Bees
      • Family Megachilidae - Leaf-cutter bees, Mason Bees, and allies
      • Family Apidae - Cuckoo, Carpenter, Digger, Bumble, and Honey Bees
      • Family Colletidae - Plasterer Bees, Masked or Yellow-faced Bees
    • Apoid Wasps (Apoidea)- traditional Sphecidae
      • Family Ampulicidae - Cockroach Wasps
      • Family Crabronidae
      • Family Sphecidae - Thread-waisted Wasps
    • Superfamily - Vespoidea
      • Family Tiphiidae - Tiphiid Wasps
      • Family Sapygidae - Sapygid wasps
      • Family Mutillidae - Velvet Ants
      • Family Bradynobaenidae
      • Family Pompilidae - Spider Wasps
      • Family Rhopalosomatidae
      • Family Scoliidae - Scoliid Wasps
      • Family Vespidae - Yellowjackets, Paper Wasps, and Hornets; Potter, Mason and Pollen Wasps
      • Family Formicidae - Ants
    • Superfamily - Chrysidoidea - Cuckoo Wasps and Allies
      • Family Bethylidae
      • Family Chrysididae - Cuckoo wasps
      • Family Dryinidae - Dryinids
  • No Taxon - parasitic Apocrita
    • Family Trigonalyidae
    • Family Stephanidae - Stephanid Wasps
    • Superfamily - Evanioidea- Aulacids, Ensigns, and Gasteruptiids
      • Family Aulacidae
      • Family Evaniidae - Ensign Wasps
      • Family Gasteruptiidae - Gasteruptiid]
    • Superfamily Ichneumonoidea - Braconids and Ichneumons
      • Family Braconidae - Braconid Wasps
      • Family Ichneumonidae - Ichneumon Wasps
    • Superfamily Chalcidoidea - Chalcid Wasps
      • Family Torymidae
      • Family Aphelinidae
      • Family Chalcididae - Chalcid Wasps
      • Family Pteromalidae - Pteromalids
      • Family Leucospididae - Leucospidids
      • Family Perilampidae
      • Family Encyrtidae - Encyrtids
      • Family Eulophidae
      • Family Eurytomidae
      • Family Mymaridae
      • Family Elasmidae
      • Family Trichogrammatidae
      • Family Agaonidae - Fig wasps
      • Family Eupelmidae
    • Superfamily Cynipoidea
      • Family Cynipidae - Gall Wasps
      • Family Ibaliidae - Ibaliid Wasp Family
      • Family Eucoilidae
    • Family Platygastridae
    • Family Proctotrupidae - Proctotrupids
    • Family Scelionidae
    • Family Diapriidae
    • Family Pelecinidae - Pelecinids
  • No Taxon Adalbert's Colorado Images

I think there are still problems with the revamped classification that was undertaken recently. For example, in the Pompilidae, Pepsis is listed separately from the tribe Pepsini. Pepsis should be a taxon BELOW Pepsini! If you are going to change the classification, then please make sure all the relevant 'nodes(?)' follow each other systematically. Thank you.

We did not touch anything below
the family level. The family Pompilidae is exactly the same way now as it was before we rearranged the higher taxa. We hope Nick will read this and make some decisions on Pompilidae since he is the one who created the Pepsinae and Pepsini pages along with other pages between Family and Genus. Should BugGuide have subfamilies and tribes in the taxonomy of Pompilidae? Our gut response would be to say "No", go right from the Family to the Genus, but we are certainly not qualified to answer that. We are just in favor of a simplified taxonomy on BugGuide.

Anyway, bottom line, the problem is unrelated to the work we did, so we are not going to try to solve it without knowing what we're doing. We hope someone would post a new topic in the Forums on whether we need subfamilies and tribes in the taxonomic list of Pompilidae. Then the experts can reach consensus and the Family can be fixed.

Probably not.
I don't know what the hell happened there. Hopefully it wasn't something I screwed up, but I put everything back. Pepsis is now under Pepsini where it should be. The thing is, I created the tribe pages well before our discussion on simplifying the guide. Pompilidae is a small enough family that I think the tribe level just adds clutter. There were some things I was going to try to do with the tribe pages, but I think I will be able to do that on the subfamily pages. The tribe level isn't really all that useful in Pompilidae(in this context, anyway), since several genera can be conclusively be placed in a subfamily but not in a tribe. For instance, Psorthaspis has traditionally been placed in Aporini but there are some characters that would also place it in the Pompilini. It's probably just simpler if the tribes were deleted. All 30+ genera are in the guide (I have not added info YET on some of them), but I suppose I could just put them in taxonomic order and then add something about the subfamilies and tribes in the info section of the family page. So, I guess I could summarize by saying I'm not opposed to deleting the lower taxon pages in the Pompilidae.

Please don't delete them on the basis
of our gut response to their presence. You wasp experts should make that decision after some time and thought. It should be a carefully considered decision, and not one subject to the whims of amateurs such as us. Thanks for fixing the problem Eric discovered. We wouldn't even have known what to move!

I've already started, and already screwed up...maybe not
I decided to delete the subfamily and tribe pages. I have done so for the following reasons:
1. I created all of those pages and have added little to them since they have been created.
2. The family is too small to bother with those designations and otuwardly do not add very much useful information to the guide.
3. Related to number 2, they only add confusion since there are only four recognized subfamilies, so 30+ genera remain hidden under four (actually only three) subfamilies. Easy for those who know the family to navigate, not so easy for those who don't. I'd rather just have all of the genera in taxonomic order.

So, I don't consider it a whim...I consider it a realization.

Unfortunately I messed up when I deleted the pages. I moved all of the images and it worked for two of the subfamilies. However, when I deleted Pompilinae I must have done something in the wrong order and it moved all of the images under Pompilinae. They show up under name headings in the "Pompilidae" images, but not under the image section on individual guide pages. What the heck did I do? J+J: Is there a way I can move the images back to where they belong without everyone who has submitted a Pompiline image getting an autocomment? I should have just let you guys do it...sorry.

I guess part of the program is to fix stuff like that? I just checked and the pages are working properly now.

Don't worry!
There's a bug that causes this when guide pages are moved, but John VanDyk has a program that looks for such problems and fixes them. There's no way to avoid it, but it doesn't last very long.

Family Vespidae common name
Just a small criticism, the wasp family Vespidae has many more solitary species than eusocial ones, with all three solitary subfamilies occurring in the US (only two of the three eusocial subfamilies are in the US). Including common names of only social species is misleading. It's a very diverse family.

Adding on "Potter, Mason and Pollen Wasps" would satisfy this.

good suggestion

Ok, Hymenoptera are arranged as above
Please advise if changes are needed. Hope this suits everyone well.

still messed up
Currently there's a category called "No Taxon Superfamily Apoidea/Anthophila - Bees"

What a mouthful! Why not just "No Taxon - Bees"? And why not "No Taxon - Apoid wasps"? A category should not be both a Superfamily and a No Taxon. And there are no such superfamilies named "Apoidea/Anthophila" and "Apoidea/Apoid Wasps".

I think the idea
is to show that Anthophila and Apoid Wasps collectively make up Superfamily Apoidea. The challenge is to show the relationship without requiring an extra node in the tree.

No Taxon (Superfamily Apoidea)Bees
No Taxon (Superfamily Apoidea)Apoid Wasps

Actually, I don't see the need
to show the relationship in the taxonomic tree. Why not just a superfamily Apoidea, and on the info page mention that it's composed of bees and apoid wasps. If the two groups are not important enough to have their own taxonomic category (between superfamily and family) why do we need to invent one?

Lack of a ranked name for bees
does not make this group unimportant! The standard family and superfamily ranks are already used to name other important groups so no standard ranked name is available for the bees.

Made some changes
following Chuck's compromise suggestions. The categories exist as they do, as our best interpretation of the wishes of Dr Ascher. We will leave them this way while we await word from him. Though, this being a site driven by consensus, we would hope other Hymenoptera experts would chime in. Do you think we should open a new forum topic just asking for comments? Are people avoiding this because of the number of comments already generated or are they just saying the final result is not that important to them one way or the other?

it looks good to me
A few suggestions:

A few more common names could be added. For example, the common colletid bees in genus Hylaeus are often called Masked or Yellow-faced Bees. The common name for Cynipidae is "Gall Wasps"

A uniform treatment is needed for groups lacking a well established common name.

Some additional minor families such as Sierolomorphidae could be added as an incentive for someone to photograph them.

We think we've included all the comments
except Chuck's May 30 comment below. Please check that out and advise. Any more comments on changing the BugGuide taxonomy of Hymenoptera to the above??

School is coming to an end so John may have more time to work on this, but if one of the editors who has more experience with moving things around in taxonomy would be willing to work on this, we would be most happy to encourage you rather than run the risk of making a big mess ourselves.


it looks really good
a big improvement in my opinion

It may be useful to add a few more common names with appropriate qualifiers. For example, Megachilidae could be "Leaf-cutter bees, Mason Bees, and allies"

OK - Working...
Waiting for John VanDyk to make a couple changes and for the software to upgrade the location of the images. Should be ready soon.

I noticed there wasn't much cladistic info on the hymenopteran info tab, so here's some info I pulled from Grimaldis & Engel's "Evolution of the Insects" that can be added. :) It'd be nice if someone added one of these nice color-coded phylogenies that covered the breakdown of all families/superfamlies.


The traditional higher level hymenopteran classification divided the order into the suborders Symphyta and Apocrita. Recent cladistic revisions have shown symphyta (a mostly phytophagous group) to be paraphyletic, with 'Apocrita' being most closely related to Orussidae (both parasitic groups). This grouping of Apocrita and Orussidae is now known as Euhymenoptera (= Vespina). Other traits uniting Orussidae with Apocrita are: loss of thoracic legs in larvae, reduction of larval antennae to a single segment, the adult mesocoxae fitting into a metepisternal depression, and reduction of hind wing venation.

Apocritans are recognized by a constriction between the 1st and 2nd abdominal segments, resulting in a superficial narrowing from thorax to abdomen (as the 1st abdominal segment (= propodeum) is actually more closely associated with the thorax). The terms meso- and metasoma are also used to avoid ambiguity.

For ease of understanding, Apocrita can be broken down into three groups (though this is NOT a cladistic approach).

1. The basalmost families, which are few in number and primarily parasitic on wood-boring insects.

2. Aculeata and its sister group Ichneumonoidea, united by valvilli on the ovipositor and a narrow propodael foramen w/ dorsolateral propodael 'teeth'. Most large wasps are in this group..

3.Proctotrupomorpha, a monophyletic group containing most of the 'microhymenopterans', united by intricacies of the tentorium and loss of a median scutual sulcus. This is an eminently difficult group for most amateurs to identify due to the small size of most species and the often uncertain limits of some families.

The Basalmost Apocritan Superfamilies

Stephanoidea – the proposed sister group to all remaining apocritans, this group consists of a single familiy, Staphanidae, a mostly pantropical assemblage of ectoparasitoids on wood-boring beetles and siricids.

Megalyroidea – a pantropical/austral group of ectoparasites on wood-boring insects, not found in the Neartic

Trigonalyoidea - a single cosmopolitan family (Trigonalyidae, 120 spp) of endoparasitoids, which can rather uniquely utilize an intermediate host (caterpillar) to infect a secondary host (vespid)

Evanioidea – Characterized by the metasomal connection high up on the propodeum, away from the coxae. Comprised of Aulacidae (a cosmopolitan group, parasitic on wood-boring insects), Evaniidae & Gasteruptiidae (larval predators {Note: not parasitic} on cockroach ootheca and wasps/bees respectivlely).

A Modified Euhymenopteran Phylogeny
*this should be expanded to include families and be presented in a cladistic manner

Stephanoidea, Trigonalyoidea & Megalyroidea, Evanoidea
Ichneumonoidea & Aculeata
Proctotrupomorpha - (Platygastroidea, Ceraphronoidea, Mymarommatoidea, Chalcidoidea, Cynipoidea, Proctotrupoidea)

it is easy to find problems
harder to find the perfect solution

Formicoidea should go, as ants are a mere family (Formicidae) of Vespoidea

Crabronidae, Sphecidae, and Ampulicidae are now in Apoidea and could usefully be grouped as "Apoid Wasps" [=former/traditional Sphecidae=Sphecidae sensu lato]

Bees are best called simply "Bees" or if a latinized term is desired "Anthophila"

Vespidae are no more "True" than other wasps. How about "Yellowjackets, Paper Wasps, and Hornets"?

Symphyta is no longer a formal taxon as it is paraphyletic, so it is actually more appropriate to refer to this assemblage as "Sawflies"

Evolution of the Insects by Grimaldi and Engel is an accurate and useful reference

We made some more changes above
but notice we have changed nothing in the guide yet. We're simply changing a comment on a forum. It's very fluid and easily changed and if people, in the end, decide it's no good, it can just be deleted.
Please check English names and see if they are appropriate or could be improved to help BugGuide visitors.
Should we move Orussidae out from under the Sawflies to ... ???
What about Siricidae?
Is there a better arrangement of families under Apoidea or Vespoidea?
Is Trigonalidae misspelled?
Should Stephanidae be moved out from under Ichneumonoidea to ...???
Where do the wasp families currently at the end of the list belong?
Other thoughts and suggestions?

this looks like a good step in the right direction
The informal, paraphyletic assemblage "Sawflies" could be called "Sawflies, Horntails, and Wood Wasps" and includes Orussidae, Siricidae, etc.

Another option is to use the formal, cladistic classification, i.e. the superfamilies as recognized by Grimaldi and Engel

Is there a better arrangement of families under Apoidea:

It may be useful to divide Apoidea into two categories:

1. Bees=Anthophila (monophyletid)
amd 2. Apoid Wasps=traditional Sphecidae (paraphyletic with respect to bees)

Is Trigonalidae misspelled?

The spelling of this family is genuinely controversial, e.g.:
Trigonalidae (Krombein et al., 1979; Carmean and Kimsey, 1998) vs. Trigonalyidae (Carmean, 1991; Grimaldi and Engel, 2005)

Should Stephanidae be moved out from under Ichneumonoidea

Yes. They are now thought to be very distantly related.

to ...???

Stephanoidea or "parasitic Apocrita"

Where do the wasp families currently at the end of the list belong?
Other thoughts and suggestions?

It is useful to separate the stinging wasps (Aculeata) from the other Apocrita (no taxon):

Within Aculeata the three superfamilies are stable and useful. The following are in Chrysidoidea (Cuckoo Wasps and Allies):

Family Bethylidae
Family Chrysididae - Cuckoo wasps
Family Dryinidae - Dryinids
Family Sclerogibbidae
Family Embolemidae

The more I consider this issues the more I think it useful to group Hymenoptera by their currrent, monophyletic superfamilies, as there are relatively few of these and most are distinctive.

For example, Evanioidea includes:
Family Aulacidae
Family Evaniidae - Ensign Wasps
Family Gasteruptiidae - Gasteruptiid

Some unranked taxa are particularly important when discussing and learning Hymenoptera, such as Apocrita, Aculeata, and Bees=Anthophila

How about:
The following is what I came up with based on Wikipedia's articles on Hymenoptera, sawflies, Apocrita, Aculeata, etc, as well as the Tree of Life pages.
I put everything at the same rank in alphabetical order, with one important exception: Apocrita and Aculeata are phylogenetically in among other groups, but are so obviously different that I put them at the end, along with the phylogenetically closest group.
I'm not completely sure this is the best compromise between phylogenetic accuracy and ease of use, but it seems to work.
Order Hymenoptera - Ants, Bees, Wasps and Sawflies
No Taxon - Sawflies, Horntails, and Wood Wasps
  • Superfamily Megalodontoidea
    • Family Pamphiliidae - Webspinning and Leafrolling Sawflies
  • Superfamily Siricoidea
    • Family Siricidae - Horntails
  • Superfamily Tenthredinoidea
    • Family Argidae - Argid Sawflies
    • Family Cimbicidae - Cimbicid Sawflies
    • Family Diprionidae - Conifer Sawflies
    • Family Tenthredinidae - Common Sawflies
  • Superfamily Xyeloidea
    • Family Xyelidae
    • Family Xiphydriidae - Xiphydriid Wood Wasps
  • Superfamily Orussoidea
    • Family Orussidae - Parasitic Wood Wasps
No Taxon- Apocrita: Narrow-waisted Hymenoptera
  • Superfamily Chalcidoidea - Chalcid Wasps
  • Superfamily Cynipoidea
  • Superfamily Evanioidea
    • Family Aulacidae
    • Family Evaniidae (ensign wasps)
    • Family Gasteruptiidae
  • Superfamily Platygastroidea
    • Family Platygastridae
    • Family Scelionidae
  • Superfamily Proctotrupoidea
    • Family Diapriidae
    • Family Pelecinidae - Pelecinids
    • Family Proctotrupidae - Proctotrupids
  • Superfamily Stephanidoidea
    • Family Stephanidae
  • Superfamily Trigonaloidea
    • Family Trigonalidae
  • Superfamily Ichneumonoidea
    • Family Braconidae
    • Family Ichneumonidae
  • No Taxon Aculeata - Stinging Hymenoptera
    • Superfamily Apoidea- Bees and Apoid Wasps
      • No Taxon Bees
        • Family Andrenidae - Mining Bees
        • Family Apidae - Cuckoo, Carpenter, Digger, Bumble, and Honey Bees
        • Family Colletidae - Plasterer Bees
        • Family Halictidae - Sweat Bees
        • Family Megachilidae
      • Family Ampulicidae - Cockroach Wasps
      • Family Crabronidae
      • Family Sphecidae - Thread-waisted Wasps
    • Superfamily Vespoidea
      • Family Bradynobaenidae
      • Family Formicidae - Ants
      • Family Mutillidae - Velvet Ants
      • Family Pompilidae - Spider Wasps
      • Family Rhopalosomatidae
      • Family Sapygidae - Sapygid wasps
      • Family Scoliidae - Scoliid Wasps
      • Family Tiphiidae - Tiphiid Wasps
      • Family Vespidae - Yellowjackets, Paper Wasps, and Hornets
    • Superfamily Chrysidoidea
      • Family Bethylidae
      • Family Chrysididae - Cuckoo wasps
      • Family Dryinidae - Dryinids

a few comments
Family Xiphydriidae - Xiphydriid Wood Wasps are in their own superfamily Xiphydrioidea (not close to Xyeloidea)

"Superfamily Trigonaloidea, Family Trigonalidae" is spelled Superfamily Trigonalyoidea, Family Trigonalyidae (with a "y") according to some recent sources (e.g., Grimaldi and Engel, 2005)

The ordering should be either alphabetical or phylogenetic; the present list is neither

My only suggestion would be t
My only suggestion would be to remove the 'No Taxon Bees' layer... just seems like an extra click, that's info for the info tab

Ah! we have to figure out how
to do those indents! Our proposal at the top is meant to add good helpful important correct structure and yet keep things simple. For example, we wouldn't see any problem with posting the Sawfly superfamilies on the sawfly Info page, but we don't find it helpful to add five superfamily guide pages when you only have nine families to begin with. Let's just see the families when we click on sawflies, and if we want to learn more, we can click on Info, would be our suggestion.

Andrenidae is five layers deep on this scheme, but only three on ours, etc.

But we are rank amateurs here, so we welcome other views, and ours are not that important except as they represent an average BugGuide visitor. We are trying as best we can here to generate something useful yet correct based on Dr Ascher's comments. We're not big on extra added layers of suborders and superfamilies except as they really help group large numbers of images for visitor learning. And we should point out that the idea of alphabetizing has been brought up and argued against several times here in the forums for various groups.

Lets hear from some more folks!

A possible solution
How about a No Taxon called "Alphabetical list of Hymenoptera families" to go right under the Hymenoptera node. It would have just an alphabetical list in the remarks section (each name would be a link, of course), and nothing else. That way we could have an alphabetical list without the several minutes of thumbnail-image loading time for dial-up users that we have in the Coleoptera page.

We made changes, above
but not in the guide yet, except for changing a couple of English names. It sounds from your comment that there are some more apoid wasp families that should be moved in with the bees. And we're guessing there are some more wasp families that should be moved into Vespoidea. Do you have a good English name for that group?

When we finish this, we will copy the bugguide hymenopteran taxonomy to the info page for Hymenoptera, so visitors can see how we've structured that group.

"Bees and Apoid Wasp"s minus the wasps
I would strongly recommend returning the name of that taxon to "Bees", since it has nothing to do with apoid wasps in its current configuration.

I like your compromise solution re: separate nodes for Bees and for Apoid Wasps. I would just suggest using a No Taxon for each, since neither is a superfamily in its own right.

As for Aculeata: I would call them "Stinging Apocrita" or "Ants, Bees and Stinging Wasps". "Stinging Apocrita" would make more structural sense because it would show that both Aculeata and "Parasitica" are in the same group.

I agree
with Chuck's
"...separate nodes for Bees and for Apoid Wasps... a No Taxon for each, since neither is a superfamily in its own right."

Sometimes I forget not everyone owns a copy of Borror & Delong's


Sieromorphidae (not in guide yet)

and as Dr Ascher rightly points out, most of these groups are solitary...

I'd also suggest naming the remaining taxa 'parasitic wasps'. And how about arranging them phylogenetically instead of alphabetically... for instance, the evanioids would be better served if placed near each other to emphasize their similarities... perhaps even creating a superfamily (as has been done with other similar hymenopteran groups), though I know that would be contentious. :)

it is Sierolomorphidae
"I'd also suggest naming the remaining taxa 'parasitic wasps'"

The term "wasp" best applies to Aculeata. The term "parasitic Apocrita" is more general

Here's Joe's original posting
on a thread that took another direction.

I'd like to suggest a minor tweaking of the higher level Hymenoptera taxonomy

1. Include Sphecidae/Crabronidae/Ampulicidae in with Apoidea (where they belong)

2. Create a superfamily Vespoidea for all the social species & ants... this follows Borror & Delong's, as I don't think Formicoidea is even a recognized taxon.

... these are by far the 2 most posted hymenopteran groups on the guide... it makes sense to include them together in 2 well-defined, easy to navigate taxa... everything else seems fine as is... although 'wasps' could then be changed to 'parasitic wasps'

Contributed by Joe, Entomologist (in training) on 10 May, 2007 - 3:28am

bad advice from Joe (needs more training)
"Create a superfamily Vespoidea for all the social species & ants"

Totally inappropriate as most vespoid families are solitary

"1. Include Sphecidae/Crabronidae/Ampulicidae in with Apoidea (where they belong)"

It would be confusing, albeit technically acceptable, to lump these apoid wasps in with the bees without annotation.

Grimaldi and Engel...the standard?
I don't have Grimaldi and Engel's Evolution of the Insects (yet) but maybe we should make that the standard for Bugguide taxonomy, or at least Hymenoptera. I think I'll just sit back and see what happens with this, instead of getting further involved:)

No, please do get involved
but let's focus on what is a reasonable taxonomy for BugGuide's Hymenoptera, without adding layers. Notice the above rough proposal only has two layers except in a couple of Superfamilies. We need some appropriate English Names for some of these groups, realizing that we won't all agree on them. And since we, John and Jane, know absolutely nothing about this, but can do the work, we still need help ordering some of the families.

Ya, I forgot to mention the s
Ya, I forgot to mention the solitary groups that are in Vespoidea... like I said though, follow Borror & Delong's... so I bite my thumb at your 'needs more training' comment... at least as it pertains to this :)

Borror & Delong is way out of date
It is presumptuous of you to make so many suggestions when you clearly need more training.

Grimaldi/Engel uses the same Aculeata classification as Borror/Delong... and that was all I suggested changing in the original topic... I completely agree that Grimaldi is the better choice for basing bugguide's classification...

And for the record, I didn't see anyone else bringing this topic up... this site depends on know-it-alls like myself raising these issues... what it doesn't need is someone of your stature making belittling comments at an honest attempt to improve this site.

Cheers, Joe

For the record
I halfway agree with you:

In my opinion this personal conflict has gone far enough.

We don't need know-it-alls, we need people with ideas who are willing to listen to others. Unfortunately you've careened back and forth between the two. Please try to think things through more, and jump in head-first less.

We also don't need to personalize things. While I must admit that John has legitimate grievances against you, at this point it's all water under the bridge. I hope he can take a deep breath and get back to discussing things on their merits.

This isn't just a web site, it's a community. It will only work as long as we focus on what we have in common, and on what's important.

I'm not saying that everyone has to like everybody, or that we all join hands and sing Kumbaya with smiles on our faces- let's just stop dwelling on personal stuff and get back to bugs.

I halfway agree with him too
and recognize that Joe is raising useful issues, such as the need for a more accurate Hymenoptera classification, and is working to improve the site.

Comment viewing options
Select your preferred way to display the comments and click 'Save settings' to activate your changes.