The early evidences on fauna of Aphidiinae in Iran have been summarized in
Starý et al. (2000) which includes 49 species belonging to 13 genera. Since then,
many other attempts have been done on biosystematics of the aphidiine parasitoids,
including tritrophic associations in different parts of Iran (Starý et al. 2005;
Rakhshani et al. 2005a, b, 2006a, b, 2007a, b, 2008a, b, c, d, 2012a, b, 2013;
Nazari et al. 2012; Tomanović et al. 2007; Kazemzadeh et al. 2009; Barahoei et al.
2012, 2013; Jafari and Modarres Awal 2012; Mossadegh et al. 2011; Rakhshani
2012; Alikhani et al. 2013; Farahani et al. 2015; Hadadian et al. 2016). Iran includes
a diverse array of habitats and seems to be the most explored country in the Middle
East, concerning the aphid parasitoids. Barahoei et al. (2014) listed 78 species of
17 genera from Iran which includes some suspicious records/and unidentified
species. The last up-dated list of Aphidiinae of Iran (Farahani et al. 2016) includes
73 species and 15 genera, in which the genus Toxares Haliday is excluded. Species
of the genus Euaphidius Mackauer (Euaphidius cingulatus and Euaphidius setiger)
are also classified within Aphidius Nees. By including the missing record of
Lysiphlebus cardui (Alikhani et al. 2013), as well as the newly recorded species,
Monoctonia pistaciaecola (Kargarian et al. 2016), number of Aphidiinae in Iran
reached to 75. Yet, it is expected many more species are occurring in several
unexplored areas of the country. Many aphids have not yet the recorded parasitoid
in Iran and no aphid parasitoid is known in association with root aphids (Rakhshani
et al. 2019).
9.2.2 Importance of Accurate Identification
For a successful biological control program, it is critical to search for effective
natural enemies, including a very careful and accurate identification, which sometimes led to complete failure. This is important both on the host aphid and its
parasitoid, especially at classical biological control, where a huge amount of
resources are spending for laboratory and field experiences (Rosen 1986). The
situation is more complicated about closely related taxa. Concerning the aphids, it
is critically important to find the identity of the host plants, too. It will give a very
useful perspective about the aphids living on these plants based on the literature. In
his comprehensive handbooks, Rezwani (2001, 2004, 2010) provided reliable data
on the host range of aphids, as well as the key for identification at the species level.
In general, there is considerable amount of available data for the aphids of economic
importance, but in the course of biological control programs, it is needed to have an
expanded knowledge about the host range of the parasitoids, to be identified as much
as possible. It is sometimes necessary to have a medium to large scale rearing for the
parasitoid species on the alternative aphid host which should be very carefully
selected and identified. In every case, an expert aphidologist should confirm the
identifications.
Like many other braconids, identification of Aphidiinae species are very difficult.
Beside the occurrence of intraspecific variabilities on morphological characters,
336
E. Rakhshani and P. Starý
Starý et al. (2000) which includes 49 species belonging to 13 genera. Since then,
many other attempts have been done on biosystematics of the aphidiine parasitoids,
including tritrophic associations in different parts of Iran (Starý et al. 2005;
Rakhshani et al. 2005a, b, 2006a, b, 2007a, b, 2008a, b, c, d, 2012a, b, 2013;
Nazari et al. 2012; Tomanović et al. 2007; Kazemzadeh et al. 2009; Barahoei et al.
2012, 2013; Jafari and Modarres Awal 2012; Mossadegh et al. 2011; Rakhshani
2012; Alikhani et al. 2013; Farahani et al. 2015; Hadadian et al. 2016). Iran includes
a diverse array of habitats and seems to be the most explored country in the Middle
East, concerning the aphid parasitoids. Barahoei et al. (2014) listed 78 species of
17 genera from Iran which includes some suspicious records/and unidentified
species. The last up-dated list of Aphidiinae of Iran (Farahani et al. 2016) includes
73 species and 15 genera, in which the genus Toxares Haliday is excluded. Species
of the genus Euaphidius Mackauer (Euaphidius cingulatus and Euaphidius setiger)
are also classified within Aphidius Nees. By including the missing record of
Lysiphlebus cardui (Alikhani et al. 2013), as well as the newly recorded species,
Monoctonia pistaciaecola (Kargarian et al. 2016), number of Aphidiinae in Iran
reached to 75. Yet, it is expected many more species are occurring in several
unexplored areas of the country. Many aphids have not yet the recorded parasitoid
in Iran and no aphid parasitoid is known in association with root aphids (Rakhshani
et al. 2019).
9.2.2 Importance of Accurate Identification
For a successful biological control program, it is critical to search for effective
natural enemies, including a very careful and accurate identification, which sometimes led to complete failure. This is important both on the host aphid and its
parasitoid, especially at classical biological control, where a huge amount of
resources are spending for laboratory and field experiences (Rosen 1986). The
situation is more complicated about closely related taxa. Concerning the aphids, it
is critically important to find the identity of the host plants, too. It will give a very
useful perspective about the aphids living on these plants based on the literature. In
his comprehensive handbooks, Rezwani (2001, 2004, 2010) provided reliable data
on the host range of aphids, as well as the key for identification at the species level.
In general, there is considerable amount of available data for the aphids of economic
importance, but in the course of biological control programs, it is needed to have an
expanded knowledge about the host range of the parasitoids, to be identified as much
as possible. It is sometimes necessary to have a medium to large scale rearing for the
parasitoid species on the alternative aphid host which should be very carefully
selected and identified. In every case, an expert aphidologist should confirm the
identifications.
Like many other braconids, identification of Aphidiinae species are very difficult.
Beside the occurrence of intraspecific variabilities on morphological characters,
336
E. Rakhshani and P. Starý