Antenna (Figs 3, 10) hairy, stout and slightly thickened medially; scape longer than broad; pedicel as long as broad, antennomere 3 longer than 4; apical 3 antennomeres each with ventral sensory area. Malar space linear; clypeus (Figs 4, 8) truncate or bluntly protruding anteriorly; each mandible with large subapical tooth; inner margins of eyes slightly converging below (Figs 4, 8); genal carina absent; head from above strongly narrowing behind eyes (Figs 5, 9). Epicnemium absent. Forewing (Fig. 2) with 4 cubital cells; hind wing (Fig. 2) without cells Rs and M, anal cell with short petiole. Inner fore tibial spur appearing simple but with very slight preapical projection. Tarsal claws (Fig. 11) with long inner tooth, nearly as long as outer tooth and lateral to outer tooth, with basal lobe. Pulvilli small on hind tarsomeres 3 and 4. Head and body usually with slight metallic luster.

Species of Formosempria are superficially similar to species of Empria, being similar in size and color and similar wing venation; thus, the reason for the name. Takeuchi (1929) mentioned that they are like Empria, but without a malar space. Formosempria will key to the same couplet as Hemibeleses in Malaise’s 1963 key, but are separated from Hemibeleses which has the pedicel as long or longer than the scape and the 3-toothed hind claws in the male. Males of Formosempria were not known at that time, but the hind claw is similar to the fore- and midclaws, not 3-toothed as in Hemibeleses.

Based on this study, two species of Formosempria are recognized, F. varipes from Taiwan, southeastern China, and Vietnam, and F. shanensis from Myanmar. Formosempria crassicornis Wei and Nie is listed, but the type was not examined and its status cannot be determined. The record of Formosempria from India by Saini and Deep (1994) and Saini (2006) is questionable.

This species was described from Hainan, China. The holotype, deposited in the Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, was not examined.

The figures by Wei and Nie (2002) of the female sheath and lancet do not differ from F. varipes, and F. crassicornis may be a synonym. Even though distinguishing characters for the species are not evident in the description and the species seems to fall within the range of F. varipes, it is kept valid until the type can be examined. Haris (2012) recorded a female from Vietnam (“N. Vietnam, Ninh Binh, Cue Phuong NP, near centre, c. 225 m, 20.xii.1999-19.ii.2000”), but gave no discussion. This specimen was not examined.

Malaise described this species from five females from “Burmese Southern Shan States (Taunggyi at 1500 m)”. The syntypes are in NHR and were examined. The lectotype, here designated, is a female labeled “S. Shan States, Burma, 1500 m, Taunggyi, 1-VIII-22.IX.34 [“22.IX” crossed out], Malaise”, “TYPUS” [red], “Formosempria shanensis n. sp., R. Malaise det 1958”, “NHRS-HEVA 000000834” with a lectotype label added. The other four females are paralectotypes with the same data but with the label “PARATYPUS” [in red]; three do not have dates crossed out and one has “1-VIII” crossed out.

The color and structure are very similar to F. varipes, but F. shanensis differs by its slightly larger size, the more truncate clypeus with more acute lateral corners (Fig. 4, more rounded laterally in F. varipes, Fig. 8), and longer antennae (Fig. 1), being more than half the length of the body (thorax and abdomen) and about 2.2× the head width. These differences seem significant to retain F. shanensis as a distinct species at present.

Saini and Deep (1994) and Saini (2006) recorded this species from five males from India: “Himachal Pradesh, Dalhousie, Kalatop, 2850 m, 29.6-30.6.1986”. Saini (2006) mentioned these are the first known males of the genus, although Wei (in Wei and Nie 2003) described the male of F. metallica. Saini (2006) also included description of the female. These specimens have three-toothed hind claws and the genitalia figured are quite different from that of associated males of F. varipes. We have not seen specimens, but according to Saini’s (2006) description, we question that these are F. shanensis or even a member of Formosempria. Thus, the India record for Formosempria is doubtful.

Female: Length, 6.5–7 mm. Black, with slight metallic lustre, and following white: apices of coxae, trochanters, basal third of mid and hind femora, basal third to half of mid and hind tibiae, base of hind basitarsus, most of mid and fore basitarsi. Wings lightly, uniformly infuscated; veins and stigma black. Head and body with slight metallic luster, smooth, shiny, with short silvery hairs.

Antenna (Figs 6, 10) with scape longer than broad; pedicel about quadrate; antennomere 3 longer than 4, remaining antennomeres gradually decreasing; length less than half body length (thorax and abdomen) and about 1.7× head width. Clypeus truncate to slightly protruding anteriorly, with corners rounded (Fig. 8). Malar space linear. Hind basitarsus (Fig. 11) about equal to length of remaining tarsomeres combined. Sheath (Fig. 13) slender in dorsal view, in lateral view slightly truncate at apex, appearing slightly directed dorsally. Lancet (Fig. 12) with serrulae low, pointed at apices, each with about 6 fine anterior and posterior subbasal teeth.

Male: Length, 6.5 mm. Similar in color and structure to female. Genitalia in Figs 14, 15.

Neonates (Fig. 17): Similar to late feeding stage.

Last feeding stage (Fig. 18): Length, about 12 mm. Head black with postclypeus, preclypeus, area between antacorium and clypeus and mandible, mandible except apex and mouthparts except apices of palpi whitish; labrum brownish. Thorax and abdomen entirely pale with whitish bloom. Head with long scattered setae, longer than preclypeus; preclypeus with 2 setae on each side; labrum with 3 setae on each side; right mandible with 3 small ventral teeth and 2 acute and one broad dorsal teeth; left mandible with 2 acute ventral teeth and 4 acute dorsal teeth and with inner ridge extending inward from outer dorsal tooth. Thorax with scattered long setae. Abdominal segments each with 6 dorsal annulets; 2–3 setae on each side of annulets 2 and 4; subspiracular lobe and surpedal lobe each with about 4 long setae; apical segment with about 12 long setae dorsally and with long setae on subanal area.

Prepupa: Differs from feeding stages by head, thorax, and abdomen entirely pale, whitish. Setae on head and body absent. Each mandible with 3 linear teeth; left mandible with outer tooth largest, basal 2 teeth smaller and subequal in size; right mandible with central tooth largest, outer and inner teeth smaller and subequal in size.

Takeuchi described this species from a single female “Sozan near Taihoku, Formosa” “collected by M. Kato, on May 2, 1926”. The holotype should be in UOP with the Takeuchi collection. On a visit to Japan in 1979, I examined the holotype and took some brief notes. When recently requesting the type, it could not be found in the Takeuchi collection at UOP. A thorough search for the type was made by Noria Hirai (UOP) and Akihko Shinohara (National Museum of Nature and Science), but to no avail.

Formosempria annamensis was described from a single female. The holotype is at NHR, was examined and is labeled “Phuc Son, Annam, XI-XII, H Rosse, Berlin, s.w. 11”, “TYPUS” [red], Formosempria annamensis n. sp., R. Malaise det 1958, “NHRS-HEVA 000000839”.

Formosempria metallica was described from nine female and male specimens from Hubei, Fujian, Zhejiang, Hangzhou provinces, China. The female holotype is at CSCS, from “Maheba, Xiangeng, Hubei, 1999-VII-25” and was examined. The holotype label is in Chinese, with the same date and “450 m.” and additional labels “F. metallica”, “Holotype: Formosempria metallica Wei female, M. Wei 1992”.

CHINA: Hong Kong, Sham Tseng San Tsuen Temple, larvae, March 24, 2013, on Paederia foetida, adults April 2013, reared in quarantine, ARS, Ft. Lauderdale, FL by Paul Pratt (5 ♀, 5 ♂, USNM); same data, larvae March 2014, pupated and adults emerged IV–V 2014 (about 7 ♀, 100 ♂, 20 larvae, USNM, IPRL); Hubei, holotype and paratype of F. metallica (1 ♀, 1 ♂, CSCS); Zhejiang, paratype; Henan (1 ♀, SDEI). TAIWAN: Keelung Co., Keelung City, V.2004, Malaise trap, L. Stange and H. Wang (1 ♀, 4 ♂, FSCA). VIETNAM: Holotype of F. annamensis (1 ♀, NHR).

China (Hong Kong, Hubei, Fujian, Zhejiang, Hangzhou); Taiwan; Vietnam.

Paederia foetida, also P. ciliata, P. cruddasiana, P. bojeriana, and P. pilifera based on host testing (Rubiaceae).

The interpretations of F. varipes by Malaise (1961), Togashi (1990) and others were based on the original description by Takeuchi (1929), not examination of the type. The type is now presumed lost. In a collection of sawflies from Taiwan (FSCA) DRS discovered a series of four males and one female that agree with Takeuchi’s description. Due to the absence of the type, we are using these specimens as representative of F. varipes. A key character used by Malaise (1961) and others to separate F. varipes is the length of the hind basitarsomere. Takeuchi (1929) stated “posterior basitarsus shorter than the following joints”. In the specimens examined, the hind basitarsomere is subequal to very slightly longer than the remaining tarsomeres combined. This is the only discrepancy between the Taiwan specimens we have and Takeuchi’s (1929) description. However, because of the overwhelming similarity of the Taiwan specimens with Takeuchi’s description, we do not believe “shorter”, “subequal”, or “slightly longer”, alone are sufficient to justify a separate species. This could have been misinterpreted by the authors, or it could be slightly variable in the species. The female ovipositor and male genitalia of the Taiwan and Hong Kong specimens were compared and were identical.

Togashi (1990) briefly described one female from Taiwan “Shin Bao Shi, near Liu Kui, 3.V.1986, K. Baba leg.” He stated that it agrees with Takeuchi’s original description. He illustrated the dorsal view of the head (fig. 46), front inner tibial spur (fig. 47), tarsal claw (fig. 48), sheath (fig. 49), and lancet (fig. 50). The front inner tibial spur was illustrated and stated to be simple; however, in specimens we have examined there is a very slight subapical projection. Otherwise, Togashi’s description and illustration agree with the specimens examined from Taiwan. Togashi’s specimen was not examined.

Malaise’s holotype of F. annamensis from Vietnam is identical to specimens from Taiwan and Hong Kong; therefore, we synonymize this species.

Wei (in Wei and Nie 2003) stated that F. metallica “…differs from its congeners in malar space absent, lateral furrows of postocellar area very weak and shallow, antenna as long as half the body length, and mesoscutellum black”. Figures in Wei and Nie (2003) of the male genitalia, tarsal claw, sheath and part of the lancet do not noticeably differ from specimens from Taiwan and Hong Kong. All of the differing characters mentioned by Wei are shared with F. varipes, and, upon examination of the holotype, DRS observed no differences between this and F. varipes. Thus, F. metallica is synonymized.