27 de noviembre de 2022

Griffiths' Treatment of the Genera of Anthomyiidae in the Nearctic Region Part 4: The Alliopsis-Group

Griffiths work from 1987 and 1991 volumes 6 and 7

  1. Genus Paradelia
    The first draft of this section was entirely deleted by accident so this will be a minimal treatment.

Griffiths' Notes:
"Hennig (1976a) also characterizes the Alliopsis-group by the structure of the proboscis (shining mentum, msall labella , strong prestomal teeth); indicative of predatory habits. This seems to be correct since sclerotized prestomal teeth can often bee seen in preserved specimens of all speces. Iwata (1983) has reported the presence of strongly sclerotized teeth in Anthomyiidae only in Alliopsis (as Paraprosalpia) and Pegoplata, but since he examined only seven selected species of thr family (further information on the distribution of tis character is needed. Predatory habiys have so bfsfr been only confirmed forn the genuys Alliopsis,. The mentum is shining in all species, a fact helpful when sorting collections (since anything with dusted mentum can be immediately ruled out from possibly belonging to tje Alliopsis-group).
...In the present treatment, I follow Michelson's (1985) subdivision into two genera, Alliopsis s.l. (including Paraprosalpia) and Paradelia s.l. (including Pseudonupedia)...
...All species of Paradelia retain the sexual dimorphism normal in Anthomyiidae (narrow-fronted males with reduced frontal chaetotaxy and with enlarged pulvilli, broad-fronted females with ors and ori differentiated and with small pulvilli). Females with narrow frons and other masculine secondary sexual characters and males with feminine secondary sexual characters (broad frons etc), both of which are found in Alliopsis, do not occur in Paradelia.
Other common characters omitted from the descriptions of Paradelia pspecies below are follows: eyes without evident pubescence; face flat to slightly convex centrally, without prominent keel, not constricted ventrally (vibrissae separated by more than shortest distance from each to eye margin); arista not angled; vibrissal prominence without additional setulae behind vibrissa; notopleural depression without setulae additional to the usual two long setae; scutellum finely pubescent ventrally; bearing the usual two long marginal pairs of setae and a shorter discal pair; propleural depression bare; hypopleuron bare; hind tibiae without apical pv seta; tarsi without unusual modifications or adornment...

...Species of Paradelia were erroneously includd in Pegomya in Huckett's (1941) work (partly heterogenous "intersecta-subgroup of the flavipes group" partly as species not included in any group). Theyb have been generally cited under the genus Pegomya in Nearctic literature, except for the introduction of Pseudonupedia for some of the species in Huckett's ladt works during the 'seventies."

Characterization tables:
There is one. There is 15 species in the genus in our area. Most characters only genitalic. Divided into subgenera Pegomyiella with only P. lunatifrons in it and Paradelia, latter divided into P. lundbeckii section and P. intersecta section, which is divided into species solae and P. intersecta subsection, which is divided into species solae and P. intersecta superspecies. P. lunatifrons is the only species of Anthomyiidae besides those in the genus Egle that has the costal more swollen at the junction with vein R1. The only photographic characters are develooment of setae on third sternite in males and the expansion of female palpi. Only P. lundbeckii section has the males with the third sternite with outstandingly long setae and 4th sternite much enlarged as well. Female palpal expansion is quite variable among the genus, with females not known for some species.

My comments:
This genus may be difficult to recognize from Pegomya. Species with pale-colored and dark-colored legs exist. As stated, the prementum is shining.
Males have eyes narrowly separated, not wider than diameter of anterior ocellus, parafrontals not exceeding third antennal article in width, peristomal/lower facial margin not projecting beyond level of parafrontal angle, gena narrow, 0.1-0.2 times as high as eye height, genal setae in 1 row unless otherwise stated, cruciate interfrontal setae various in male, present in female, third antennal article usually 2 times as long as wide or longer, arista with at most short pubescence, palpi of many females enlarged, vibrissal prominence without additional setulae behind vibrissa.
Scutellum always with hairs on ventral surface, prosternum bare or setulose, middle of proepisternum without setulae, katepimeron without hairs, thorax with 3 ps dc, apical setulae of scutellum may be distinctly stronger than ventral hairs, multiple posterior posthumeral setae often present (1+2 or 1+3), notopleura without additional setulae, prealar seta shorter than posterior notopleural seta, scutellum largely bare centrally, anepisternum potentially without anterodorsal setula, but this remains unreported in Griffiths.
Tibial chaetotaxy similar between males and females. Hind tibia usually with 2 pd setae, almost never with any pv setae, mid or apical (1 posterior seta may be present in P. palpata). Mid tibia without an av, exclusive of apical setae.
Costa of wings without widely spaced coarse setae on lower surface distal to subcostal break, this lower surface also ranging from bare to densely setulose, lower calypter not distinctly extended beyond upper one, costal spinules all short, including pair before subcostal break, vein A1+CuA2 traceable to wing margin.
The key in the Manual of Nearctic Diptera does not include the genus Paradelia. It includes the group of species making up the former Pseudonupedia and the remaining species as Pegomya. Most of the species are only known to have 2 posterdorsal setae on the hind tibiae. They will key readily to couplet 35. A couple species have the ventral surface of the costa with numerous setulae, but most of them have cruciate interfrontal setae present. Regardless they probably key to Pegomya/Eutrichota on that couplet. The other species will then key to couplet 37, but which is problematic because several species have medial setae on the fore tibiae. The apical scutellar setulae were not described anywhere by Griffiths for this genus, but the male fifth sternite is perhaps more setose in "Paraprosalpia". The species then might loosely keyed to Pseudonupedia. The species P. setiventris, P. ventribarbata, P. palpata, P. trigonaloides can have 1 or 3 posterodorsal setae on the hind tibiae, thus keying to couplet 38, where the sexes are divided into males going to couplet 39 and females to couplet 56. The lack of an apical pv seta (In both sexes) brings it to couplet 40, the presence of male cruciate interfrontal setae to couplet 41, and the setose processes of sternite 5 key it to couplet 42. Most of the species that key there will key to Pegomya on account of the yellowish legs, but with the exception of P. trigonaloides, which have all dark legs. This species is difficult to key further because the posterior series of setae on the anepisternum is not described in Griffiths' work here, and leaves it at odds with Hydrophoria. The species may be separated from Hydrophia by the arista with at most short pubescence or the short prealar. It will otherwise key to couplet 55, in which P. trigonaloides keys closest to the genus Delia. The species probably does not have outstanding setula below anterior notopleural seta on the anepisternum, has 1 pd on the mid tibiae, is known only from Yukon Territory, and does not have medial pv setae on the hind tibiae in males. Griffiths did not describe the epandrium or syntergosternite 7+8 of P. trigonaloides. Unfortunately for females, the species of Paradelia without 2 posterodorsal setae on the hind tibiae key dubiously. Paraprosalpia is met at couplet 67, where the status of the scutellar setulae is not known, prementum is polished, and status of segment 5 of the abdomen as relatively short or not is not known. Cruciate interfrontal setae are present and this combined with lacking discal setae on tergite 5, anterior katepisternal setae no more than 1, and mid tibiae with 1 posterodorsal seta key it to couplet 75, where they will all most likely key to genus Delia, but otherwise to any of the other genera Lasiomma and Pegomya based only on tibial colors.

2. Genus Alliopsis

Griffiths' notes:
"...Michelsen (in correspondence) reports that the possession of specialized raptorial modifications of the prestomal teeth is also a constitutive character of Alliopsis. Details of the tooth structure are not considered in my descriptions, since I have not made preparations of the mouthparts. Good illustrations of the mouthparts (including prestomal teeth) in A. silvestris (Fallen) have been published by Sychevskaya (1981).
There is considerable diversity among species of Alliopsis with respect to the develpment of the male 5th sternite processes and secondary sexual characters. The genus includes groups with normal sexual dimorphism in head structure, pulvillar development etc, groups whose females have acquired male secondary sexual characters, and groups whose males have acquired female characters. As a result of this diversity many generic or subgeneric names have been proposed. Hennig (1966a-1976a) synonymized most proposed names under Paraprosalpia, retaining Alliopsis sensu stricto as a separate small genus. But Paraprosalpia in his sense cannot be characterized as a monophyletic group. More probably it is paraphyletic through exclusion of Alliopsis s. s. For this reason I follow Michelson's (1985) proposal of expanding the concept of Alliopsis (the earliest name available) to include Paraprosalpia. I recognize Alliopsis in Hennig's sense as the A. glacialis section. Pseudochirosia, recognized by Hennig as a subgenus of Paraprosalpia, merits no higher rank than superspecies, having hypopygial structure typical of the A. conifrons section. In Huckett's works and other previous Nearctic literature the generic names Alliopsis and Paraprosalpia were used in the same senses as in Hennig's work, except that Pseudochirosia was misplaced in the heterogenous "Myopinini" on account of the broad-fronted males. The monobasic Circia was misplaced in the "Fucelliinae" for the same reason...
In contrast with the colour variation shown in the sister-group Paradelia, there is little color variation in Alliopsis. All Nearctic species except A. tinctipennis have entirely dark body and appendages in both sexes...
Since the primary subdivision of this genus is unclear, I do not recognize subgenera in the present treatment. The recognition of a multitude of subgenera, as proposed by Ringdahl (1942), has not been supported by other authors. I have arranged the species in three sections: the A. glacialis section, A. silvestris section, and A. conifrons section. There remain 15 Nearctic species (partly included in superspecies) not included in these sections...
...The genus Alliopsis is confined to the Palearctic and Nearctic regions, with greatest diversity in the mountains and in the boreal to subarctic zones. Many species have holarctic distributions. None have been found south of the Mexican border.
Common characters omitted from the descriptions of Alliopsis species below are as follows: Mesonotum with 2 (presutural) + 3 (postsutural) pairs of dorsocentral setae (except in A. tinctipennis); notopleural depression without setulae additional to the usual two long setae; scutellum finely pubescent ventrally, except in A. tinctipennis, bearing the usual two long marginal pairs of setae and normally a shorter discal pair (except in A. benanderi and A. tinctipennis); propleural depression bare; hypopleuron normally bare (except in A. brevior); hind tibiae without apical pv seta..."

Characterization tables:
One massive table present with numerous photographic characters. As Griffiths said above, the species were divided into three sections with no subgenera. There are also no subsections, infrasections, etc except for superspecies. The variation of the genus is so large that I don't think they should be in the scope of this synopsis.

My comments:
This genus can be difficult to characterize as one genus than as a whole with distinctiveness manifesting in the parts making it up. The predatory habit of muscoids typically comes with a Coenosia-like repertoire that can actually be recognized in the field. They may stand somewhat conspicuously on foliage waiting for prey instead of squatting more like most flies. Most Alliopsis species can be recognized as either being quite extensively hairy and having strong setation, even on the eyes, or have relatively narrow frons in both sexes along with conspicuously long tibial setae (like coenosiine flies; the A. silvestris section), or a distinct species with 4 postsutural dorsocentrals, yellow legs, and maculate wings (A. tinctipennis), a species with long antennae, an arista distinctly bent, and sometimes with opaque whitish wings (A. fractiseta superspecies), or species with some setulae situated behind vibrissa. Apparently only about 2 species don't fit in any of those groups in our area (A. laminata and A. benanderi, both from Alaska to Yukon Territory) but some species with setulae behind the vibrissa may have them few.
Male eyes variously separated, proboscis not long, slender, or tubular, eyes densely pilose to bare, prementum not conspicuously enlarged in either sex, longest aristal hairs not longer than width of first flagellomere, cruciate interfrontal setae usually present in both sexes (except some species in the A. glacialis section), head at maximum length shorter than high, vibrissa in nearly all species with at least a few setulae behind on vibrissal prominence (except some A. silvestris superspecies, A. laminata, and A. benanderi), face often with a convex or bulging area.
Katepisternal setae typically 1+1(2) to 1+3, thorax with 3-4 postsutural dorsocentral setae (only 4 in A. tinctipennis), prealar shorter to longer than length of posterior notopleural seta, discal setae of scutellum short or absent (A. benanderi and A. tinctipennis), katepimeron almost always bare, only with a few setulae in some A. brevior.
Mid tibia with or without a/av. Hind tibia with or without pv setae, with 2-7 pd, often 2.
Costa with (A. tinctipennis) or without widely spaced coarse setae on lower surface distal to subcostal break, this surface bare to almost entirely setulose, lower calypter not distinctly extended beyond upper one, vein A1+CuA2 traceable to wing margin.
Abdomen in male conical.
In the Manual of Nearctic Diptera, the genus Circia containing only the distinctive species C. tinctipennis is now a synonym of Alliopsis. It does indeed key to couplet 4, with the ventral surface of the scutellum without hairs (much like the dorsal surface), widely spaced coarse setae distal to subcostal break on the ventral costal surface, and a single pair of presutural dorsocentral setae. No changes in its range from Alaska to Alberta are noted. Alternatively, one could recognize it by its very distinctive pale whitish body, with maculate wings, yellow legs, and nearly arctic distribution. Griffiths was satisfied with placing the species into Alliopsis sensu lato vs in "Fucelliinae" based on the hypopygial structure, in contrast to Huckett's treatment in the Manual which was derived from Malloch (1929). Its position within Alliopsis though, is unsettled. Nothing is known of the life history for this unusual species, but Griffiths posits the small eyes and long costal spines may suggest a behavior like Eutrichota, occupying the subterranean burrows of animals. Griffiths found no additional material since Malloch in 1929. Further in the key, A. brevior of the A. glacialis section may rarely key to couplet 15 if the katepimeron has hairs, to which the bare prosternum and lack of tridentate abdominal pattern will key it to Hydrophoria, from which it can be separated by the pilose eyes, being in Alliopsis s. s., the almost bare arista, the short third antennal article, in most cases by only one strong anterior katepisternal setae, and likely by color or other characters. Otherwise, the remaining Alliopsis glacialis section will key to Alliopsis s. s. in couplet 27 with the eyes "more or less densely haired". This is true for most species, but also very close to true for the rest, A. brevior and A. incompta, that have them rather sparsely clothed with short, fine pubescence, as opposed to bare or with at most extremely sparse hairs only visible under high magnification in other Anthomyiidae. It gets difficult further in. Many species have 2 pd on the hind tibiae, but a few have none to 1, the same ones may have 0-3, posteroventral setae may or may not be present (there is no sexual dimorphism with respect to this character in this genus), and females may or may not have narrowed frons. The A. glacialis section have at least 3 pd setae, the female frons is narrowed, and pv/p setae are present. In the A. silvestris section, only two species can have 2 pd on the hind tibiae, A. pseudosilvestris and A. angustitarsis, both of which have 1 (outstandingly long) pv seta on the hind tibia (in both sexes) and a narrowed female frons. The A. conifrons section has A. fractiseta, A. albipennis, A. badia, and A. laminata known to potentially have 2 pd setae, but all members of the section have no pv setae on the hind tibiae as well and the females don't have narrowed frons. Of the remaining species not in sections, the species A. pilitarsis, A. benanderi, A. uniseta, A. littoralis, A. aldrichi, and A. brunneigena can potentially have 2 pd setae in some form or another. However, they all do not have pv setae and the female eyes are widely separated. Thus, the logic of this key's couplet is relatively without fault...either there are 2 posterodorsal setae and of these the female frons width is narrowed or not, and pv setae are present or not, or there are none, 1, or at least 3 posterodorsal setae. The A. glacialis section, if not keying prior, has the luxury of having both adorned hind tibiae, pv setae, and narrowed frons in the females. This section, the A. silvestris section, and the specimens without 2 pd key to couplet 38, and the species of the A. conifrons section and those that are solae with 2 pd setae key to couplet 33. Going to couplet 33, some of the species have an anteroventral seta on the mid tibia, exclusive of the apical seta, so would key to Pegomya in couplet 34, from which they can be separated by distinctive characters (A. albipennis), setulae present behind vibrissa, or an absent prealar seta. Going to couplet 35, the species that key here have the lower costal surface at least largely bare, keying to couplet 37 with the shining prementum, and then all of those species keying to Paraprosalpia with distinct fore tibial medial setae EXCEPT sometimes A. uniseta, pilitarsis, and benanderi...which can be separated from "Pseudonupedia" well from this single journal page since that is a synonym of Paradelia (setulae on vibrissa (A. uniseta, A. pilitarsis), or prealar absent (A. uniseta, A. benanderi), long setulae on hind tarsi (pilitarsis), or nearly lacking discal scutellar setae (A. benanderi)). Griffiths does not make any mention of the apical scutellar setulae in Alliopsis. The one specimen of A. pseudosilvestris I can see on Canacoll's digital collection of specimens has apical setulae that appear strong but I can't be sure. No mentions are made on the apical setulae on the scutellum of Paradelia or the P. intersecta section (formerly Pseudonupedia) as well. We next have the species on the path of couplet 38 which separates the sexes, leading to 39 and 56. Couplet 39 asks for the presence of pv setae on the hind tibiae and makes an exception when it is absent, "but with a single posterior bristle near middle in some Paraprosalpia". This is correct except for some A. silvestris which can apparently have 2, but also 1. Otherwise, the A. silvestris section will key to Paraprosalpia in couplet 41. Should there be a male A. silvestris with 2 posterior setae, the realm of genitalia has been entered, thus note that hind tibia is without apical pv, sternite 6 is bare, abdominal sternite 5 is not lengthy and notched on the inner border (scutellum with distinct ventral hairs), syntergosternite 7+8/the pregenital sclerite is strongly shining, and the abdomen is conical, keying to couplet 49 where it will butt heads with Lasiomma (as both Acrostilpna and Lasiomma in the key), but differing from that genus by the outstanding tibial setae. The A. glacialis section should not make it this far with its distinctive characters at this point, but it should key similarly. If not, it may be because the pregenital sclerite is is not shining, and it would key to Pegohylemyia (=Botanophila) and Delia which they differ by having at least 3 pd setae on the mid tibiae. The females of the same A. glacialis section, A. silvestris section, and other specimens without 2 pd key to couplet 56, which can then be easily keyed to couplet 67.. The shining prementum will then place it around Paraprosalpia, with again the apical setulae of the scutellum to be discussed. Tarsomere 5 is not greatly expanded in the species of Alliopsis; only at most tarsomeres 2 and 3 in the females of the A. silvestris section.

Ingresado el 27 de noviembre de 2022 por aispinsects aispinsects | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario

25 de noviembre de 2022

Griffiths' Treatment of the Genera of Anthomyiidae in the Nearctic Region Part 3: The Pegoplata-Group

Griffiths covered this group in volumes 5-6 of his work, which were published in 1986 and 1987, respecitvely.

1. Genus Pegoplata

Griffiths' notes:
"The genus is the first of a group of genera included by Hennig (1976a: lxiii) in the "Nupedia-group" (here called Pegoplata-group in view of the synonymy of Nupedia with Pegoplata), characterized primarily by the modified structure of the distal section of the aedeagus (expanded, rather uniformly sclerotized without separation of paraphalli from dorsal sclerotization, adorned with pairs of papillae, with acrophallus well developed as separate sclerite in midventral position). The processus longi are retained, and Hennig suggests that the presence of a basal projection on the gonostylus (where it articulates with the processus longus) may be an additional constitutive character of this group...The aedeagal structure validates the core of Hennig's Pegoplata-group containing in his treatment the genera Pegoplata, Nupedia, Myopina, Enneastigma, and Calythea. Another common character of the Pegoplata-group (= Nupedia-group) in this sense is the enlargement of (at least) the female palpi, which probably represents a constitutive synapomorphy although species with enlarged female palpi also occur in a few other genera (such as Paradelia). When apical setulae are present on the scutellum they are very fine, not stouter than the fine ventral setulae...the apical setulae are also very fine in Myopina and Calythea.
...I amalgamate Pegoplata and Nupedia (= Pegomyia virginea and P. dissecta groups of Huckett 1941), since I can find no consitutive modifications (autapomorphies) characteristic of Nupedia alone...
Unlike in Myopina, strong sexual dimorphism in eye size and frons width is normally retained in Pegoplata; only in P. abnormis (Stein) is a male form with rather widely separated eyes brown. The interfrontal setae are normally well-developed in both sexes, tending to be displaced forwards rather than reduced in males with closely approximated eyes.
The prosternum and the hypopleuron are bare, and the notopleural depression normally lacks setulae additional to the usual two long setae in all species of Pegoplata; the scutellum is finely pubescent apically and ventrally, bearing the usual two long marginal pairs of setae and a shorter discal pair. The hind tibiae lack an apical pv seta. The pulvilli are sexually dimorphic, enlarged to a varying degree in males but always small (less than half as long as the 5th tarsal article) in females.

...The male 5th sternite is flat and more or less heart-shaped (with convex outer margins), with dense inner fields of short setulae or spinules...
...The only species of Pegoplata whose life-history has been studied in detail is P. aestiva (Meigen), whose larvae feed in faeces. Information for other species is sketchy or in need of confirmation...
...In the Nearctic Region species of Pegoplata can be found in a wide range of habitats from hot desert to the alpine and low arctic zones."

Characterization tables:
Griffiths did not recognize subgenera for Pegoplata, despite containing the former genus Nupedia, because he believed the subdivisions of the genus required more study. One characterization is provided. Four sections were recognized: the P. palposa section, P. infirma section, P. acutipennis section, and the P. cuticornis section, with the Palearctic P. debilis superspecies as incertae sedis. The photographic characters used are the length of the mentum, development of a keel between the antennae on the face, projection of the lower facial margin, number of rows of the postocular setulae of males, pubescence of the arista, and ventral costal chaetotaxy. Only the P. (section infirma) aestiva superspecies has the mentum elongated and a swollen keel on the face between the antennae. In other species, the mentum is short and the facial keel is absent or narrow. Most species have a lower facial not projecting beyond the level of the parafrontal angle except for the P. aestiva superspecies and P. (section cuticornis) nasuta with an ambiguous state for species P. cuticornis. The number of rows of dorsal postocular setulae on the male is varied across the genus. They are present in 2-3 rows in the P. aestiva superspecies, P. infirma, P. (section infirma) tundrica, P. nasuta, and an ambiguous state for P. cuticornis. The P. palposa superspecies and P. (section palposa) pictipes have a plumose arista, whilst other species have an arista with only short pubescence. The species in the P. palposa section have the lower surface of the costa extensively setulose, with ambiguous states for the P. (section acutipennis) acutipennis superspecies, P. (section acutipennis) abnormis superspecies, and P. valentinae.

My comments:
This poorly known genus has about 10 species occurring in our area. Fortunately, the genus can be somewhat recognizable if certain features are paid attention to. The third antennal segment is 1.4-2.5 times as long as wide. The prementum is finely dusted to shining, and the palpi of at least the female are enlarged apically. Palpi can be difficult to see and judge in photos, but Griffiths has referred to palps expanding distally as expanding to "two thirds the width of third antennal article" for a species of Myopina. Scutellum with ventral hairs present. Proepisternum with or without setulae. Thorax with 3(-4?) postsutural dorsocentral setae. Anterior post-sutural supra-alar or prealar seta in most species short or absent. Presutural acrostichal setae usually in widely separated rows. Griffiths did not provide information about the anepisternum for this genus, but P. palposa may lack an anterodorsal seta here. Chaetotaxy of the anepisternum was not considered in descriptions until next one or two volumes, although alas it is probably one of the most distinguishing and photographable characters in the family. Scutellum mostly bare dorsally to largely setulose. Mid tibia usually without av exclusive of apical setae. Hind tibia usually with 2 pd, the apical pd seta conspicuously longer than the other, without any pv setae in both sexes.
The Manual of Nearctic Diptera does not treat this genus well. Pegoplata aestiva was outdatedly placed under the genus Paregle in couplet 13. Some sources have suggested Pegoplata aestiva may have four post-sutural dorsocentral setae, but I have not been able to remember which. Longest aristal hairs may at most be as long as the antennae are wide (in P. palposa superspecies and P. pictipes). The mid tibia of only P. aestiva may have a mid av seta, keying it to couplet 34's "Adia". Going to couplet 35 for species without the av and 2 pd (or less) on the hind tibiae, the species of Pegoplata with a setulose ventral costal surface are difficult to place, as these species will have interfrontal setae present, although perhaps short in the males. Separating Pegoplata from Pegomya can be tricky and may require species by species separation, looking at acrostichal arrangement, numbers of posthumeral setae, color, and presence of interfrontal setae where useful. Otherwise, remaining species will key to Nupedia with the prementum being "pruinose". This is mostly true with most species having a "finely dusted" prementum instead of entirely shining per Griffiths, however, P. infirma and P. tundrica are two exceptions of "Nupedia" with a rather shining to shining prementum. Furthermore, Pegoplata juvenilis can have up to 4 posterodorsal setae on the hind tibiae in the female. This keys it all the way to Paraprosalpia (=Alliopsis) in couplet 67, where the apical setulae, if present, are weak, but differs by the finely dusted and not polished prementum, the long aristal pubescence, and probably a few other characters, such as lack of setulae behind the vibrissal prominence (like for Pegomya vs Eutrichota). Alliopsis is a difficult to define genus but made up of distinctive groups of species that are usually easily eliminated from options when compared to species of Pegoplata.

2. Genus Myopina

Griffiths' Notes:
"This small Holarctic genus was placed in the Pegoplata-group by Hennig (1976a) on account of the presence of papillae on the distal section of the aedeagus and the nature of the articulation between the gonostylus and the processus longus. This opinion is accepted here, although the male genitalia are so extraordinarily modified...that it will be difficult to have confidence in the placement of the genus unless species with less modified structure are discovered. The earlier concepts of Fucelliinae or Myopinini, in which Myopina was included by earlier authors...were unnatural mixtures, as Hennig says.
The previously described valid species belonging in Myopina are three only: M. myopina (Fallen), M. scoparia (Zetterstedt), and M. crassipalpis Ringdahl. I here add one new species , M. martini n. sp...
Species of Myopina will be recognized by the following combination of characters: The head structure (Fig. 834) is not sexually dimorphic, with the relatively small oval eyes equally widely separated in both species; crossed interfrontal setae are always present; additional post-ocular setulae are present dorsally below the marginal row; the third article of the arista is thickened on its basal third to half; the palpi are somewhat expanded distally at least in females.
The male abdomen is swollen (more or less circular in cross-section)...
...The thoracic chaetotaxy is in no way unusual in Myopina, and in particular the fine ventral setulae of the scutellum are present as in most other Anthomyiidae. Huckett's (1965a, 1971a) characterization of "Myopinini" with the phrase "scutellum usually without hairs on ventral surface" did not apply to Myopina. The propleural depression and hypopleuron are bare, and the notopleural depression lacks setulae additional to the usual two long setae in all species. The scutellum bears the usual two long marginal pairs of setae and a shorter discal pair; its apical setulae, when present, are short and fine (not stouter than ventral setulae). The lower squama is weakly expanded or linear. The hind tibiae lack an apical pv seta. The legs are strongly sexually dimorphic, displaying unusual modifications (varying according to species) in the males.

Species of Myopina are not commonly collected and their immature stages are unknown...unique synapomorphies of the males of [M. scoparia and M. crassipalpis] are the presence of a complex ventral sclerite between synsternite (6+7) and the hypandrium...and the presence of a tuft or brush of setae on the posterior surface of f3."

Characterization tables:
None.

My comments:
This small genus of distinctive flies are so unusual for the family that they would probably be identified no further than Calyptratae or even mistaken as an oestroid family if wing venation is ignored. Nonetheless, very few identified representatives are known, but images of some Myopina myopina can be found readily online. In addition to Griffiths' characterization, these flies also have very wide gena, the prementum finely dusted to shining, scutellum broadly bare centrally, crossvein dm-cu usually straight, at most slighty bent, ventral surface of the costa usually bare, at most with submarginal row of fine setulae, and legs dark. The prosternum in only M. martini is setulose. Two of the four species, M. myopina and M. scoparia, have the scape and pedicel yellowish. Males of 3 species are known, excepting M. martini. They exhibit much sexual dimorphism in the legs, with M. myopina males having a bowed first hind tarsomere, and other species differing from females by at least a slightly swollen hind femur and at least the hind tarsi shortened. The male of M. martini is unknown but would be the missing key to understanding the relationships of these species to each other.

3. Genus Calythea

Griffiths' notes:
" The above synonymy follows Ackland (1968) and Hennig (1968), and has been adequately discussed in Ackland's paper. In North American literature, only the names of Calythea and Anthomyiella have been used...It is possible that Enneastigma (Stein, 1916: 122), containing three species from southern Europe, can also be included in Calythea...
...In comparison with Pegoplata and Myopina, Calythea (and Enneastigma) stand out as apomorphous (derived) with respect to the reduced vestiture of the gonostylus...
...Calythea is more diverse in the Old World than the New (represented in the Afrotropical and Oriental, as well as Palearctic, regions). Only five species occur in the Nearctic region. Four of these are evidently very closely related (showing the same characteristic setulosity of the hypopleuron and identical genitalia), belonging to what I propose to call the C. micropteryx superspecies. Since the Neotropical C. comis (Stein) also belongs to this superspecies, we are probably dealing with the results of a Tertiary invasion of the New World. The most northern member of this superspecies, C. bidentata (Malloch), retains a Holarctic distribution. The fifth Nearctic species (not belonging to the C. micropteryx superspecies) is the holarctic C. pratincola (Panzer)...
...The Nearctic species of Calythea are all small flies (less than 5 mm wing length), easily confused with small muscids or fanniids on superficial inspection on account of the enlarged lower squama (larger in area than upper) and distally faint anal vein. They can be readily recognized (in both sexes) by their possession of bright silvery grey-dusting on the abdomen , forming a contrasting pattern with opaque sooty areas (Fig. 862). As in other members of the Pegoplata-group, interfrontal setulae are retained in all females and most males (with the exception of C. pratincola), the female palpi are (at least slightly) expanded and the scutellum retains ventral setulae (with apical setulae, when present, very fine, not stouter than the ventral setulae). The normal sexual dimorphism in eye size and frons width is retained. The thoracic chaetotaxy varies between species, providing many diagnostic characters; among the sclerites described in this work only the propleural depression is bare in all species (hence omitted from the species descriptions); the scutellum bears the usual two long marginal pairs of setae and a shorter discal pair. The hind tibiae lack an apical pv seta. The pulvilli are only weakly dimorphic (not much longer in males than in females)...
...The larvae of two species of Calythea, C. micropteryx (Thomson), and the Palearctic C. nigricans (Robineau-Desvoidy), are known to feed in mammalian feces."

Characterization tables:
None.

My comments:
These small flies belong to a complex of various calyptrate flies across families that show sometimes contrasting patterns of black and silvery white dusting that can be very easily confused for each other. Species in Limnophora, Gymnodia/Brontaea, Anthomyia, some tachinids, and probably some more I am forgetting. It is important to keep in mind wing venation, leg chaetotaxy, presence or absence of interfrontal setae, maybe the elongated basiventral seta on the base of the hind first tarsomere, maybe some color details, and maybe dorsocentral setae when trying to determine these genera from each other. The anal vein won't be of much help as this genus has it rather faint distally. There are only 4 species known north of Mexico with one additional species from Mexico included in Griffiths' treatment. They are relatively homogenous in structure except for color, variations, and minor chaetotaxy, so it can be described further here.
Prementum finely pruinose, thorax mainly black with silvery areas in the males, but varying from densely dusted with black patches in C. pratincola to almost entirely dark in C. crenata, more dusted in females and with coppery sheen, abdomen with dark and light areas, more densely dusted in females, legs dark, wings slightly yellowish tinged to brownish tinged.
Male eyes narrowly separated, no wider than width of anterior ocellus, eyes pilose only in the Mexican species C. crenata, gena below lowest point of eye nearly eliminated (extremely narrow) except for 0.1-0.15 times eye height in C. pratincola, peristomal/lower facial margin scarcely to strongly projecting anteriorly beyong parafrontal angle, face with (C. monticola) or without a shining ocellar tubercle separating antennal bases, with or without a keel betwen antennae, various in width and height, interfrontal setulae short or absent in males of C. pratincola only, well-developed in other forms, genal setae in 1-2 rows, not described to have setulae behind the vibrissal prominence, postocular setulae usually in 1 row dorsally, only known in the female of C. pratincola to be in 2 rows, third antennal article 1.6-1.8 times as long as wide, arista with short to very short pubescence, palpi not expanded to distinctly expanded distally to about width of third antennal article, wider in females, mentum 0.3-0.6 times as long as head height.
3 pairs of presutural acrostichals usually in widely separated rows at least anteriorly, rather narrowly in some C. bidentata, with or without additional setulae in between, 1 anterior and 2 strong posterior posthumeral setae, notopleuron with setulae anteriorly or bare, prealar short or absent, scutellum bare dorsally, largely bare in C. pratincola, katepisternal setae largely arranged 1+2, with anterior seta potentially short or reduced in the female of C. pratincola, prosternum and hypopleuron setulose (at least laterally and anteriorly, respectively) in all species except C. pratincola.
Costal spinules of wing all shorter than costal width, lower surface of the costa bare. Crossvein dm-cu almost straight.
Mid femora without distal anterior or anteroventral setae. Fore tibia with 0-1 ad (if present, long), 0-1 p; mid tibia with 0-1 ad, 0-1 pd, 0-2 p; hind tibia with 1-2 av, 1-2 ad, 1-2 pd, the latter very long if only one present.

References:
Evenhuis, N.L. & Pape, T. (editors). 2022. Systema Dipterorum, Version 3.9. http://diptera.org/, accessed on 4 August 2022.
Gomes, L.R.P., Souza, D.S., Carvalho, C.J.B. de. 2021. First insights into the evolution of neotropical anthomyiid flies (Diptera: Anthomyiidae). Systematics and Biodiversity 19(7): 724-737.
Griffiths, G.C.D. 1983-2004. Anthomyiidae. Flies Nearctic Region 8(2): 1-160 (=no. 1), 1983; 161-288 (=no. 2), 1983; 289-408 (=no. 3), 1984; 409-600, (=no. 4), 1984; 601-728 (=no. 5), 1986; 729-952 (=no. 6), 1987; 953-1048 (=no. 7), 1991; 1049-1240 (=no. 8), 1991; 1241-1416 (=no. 9), 1992; 1417-1632 (=no. 10), 1993; 1633-1872 (=no. 11), 1996; 1873-2120 (=no. 12), 1998; 2121-2288 (=no. 13), 2001: 2289-2484 (=no. 14), 2003: 2485-2635 (=no. 15), 2004.
Holmberg, R.G. 2017. Entomological Society of Canada/La Société d’entomologie du Canada, https://esc-sec.ca/wp/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Obit_Griffiths_Graham.pdf
Michelsen, V. 2000. Oldest authentic record of a fossil calyptrate fly (Diptera): a species of Anthomyiidae from early Coenozoic Baltic amber. Studia Dipterologica 7: 11–18.
Michelsen, V. 2010. ANTHOMYIIDAE (ANTHOMYIID FLIES). In: Brown, B.V., Borkent, A., Cumming, J.M., Wood, D.M., Woodley, N.E. & Zumbado, M.A. (Eds.), Manual of Central American Diptera. Vol. 2. NRC Research Press, Ottawa, pp. 1271-1276.

Ingresado el 25 de noviembre de 2022 por aispinsects aispinsects | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario

09 de agosto de 2022

Griffiths' Treatment of the Genera of Anthomyiidae in the Nearctic Region Part 2: The Pegomya-Group

Griffiths covered this group in the first few volumes of his work, which were published between 1983 and 1986.

1. Genus Pegomya

Griffiths' Notes:
"The context of the genus Pegomya in my present sense agrees with that proposed by Suwa (1974: 231), differing from Hennig's (1973) concept through the exclusion of his "connexa-group". The structure of the male genitalia in the species included in that group indicates that some belong to Eutrichota in Suwa's expanded sense and some to a new genus to be described shortly by Michelson or myself...
...I have been in some doubt whether to recognize Emmesomyia (including Taeniomyia) as a full genus or as a subgroup of Pegomya. Michelson has informed me (in correspondence) that he finds a difference in the articulation between the bases of the gonostyli which suggests that Emmesomyia is the sister-group of Pegomya in the present sense; and that enlargement of the male acessory glands is a constitutive (autapomorphous) character of Pegomya lacking in Emmesomyia. This evidence suggests that separation of Emmesomyia from Pegomya as a full genus is justified...
...The frons width is sexually dimorphic (narrower in the male) in all species of Pegomya. Interfrontal setulae are normally lacking in males of all species with the exception of P. convergens Huckett. In the females interfrontal setae may be present or absent, even within series of the same species (so that this character is not reliable for identification). The mentum [or prementum in today's terms] is rather short in all species (at most 0.4 times as long as head height). The thoracic chaetotaxy is unremarkable, with 1+2 posthumerals in the groundplan (less frequently 1+1); none of the species have setulae on the prosternum, propleural depression [or proepisternum], hypopleuron [or meron], pteropleural [anepimeral] or notopleural area (apart from the usual two long notopleural setae); the scutellum is finely pubescent ventrally in all species, bearing on its dorsal surface two marginal pairs of setae and usually a shorter discal pair (sometimes weakly differentiated). The wing venation varies between species in little except the degree to which the lower cross-vein is sinuate; in all Nearctic species (but according to Hennig not in the European P. fuscinata Tiensuu) the lower surface of the costa bears additional short setulae below the main marginal series of of short spinules. The spine before the distal costal break (at the end of the subcosta) is normally also rather short, not much stronger than the other spinules along the basal sections of the costa. The pulvilli are sexually dimorphic, enlarged to a varying degree in males but always small (at most half as long as the 5th tarsal article) in females. The hind tibiae lack apical pv setae...
...Naturally some of the common characters just mentioned are omitted from the species descriptions, since they do not provide any discrimination between species. Much caution is needed in using colour as a diagnostic criterion in Pegomya, since many species show geographical color variation. In many species the females are paler coloured than the males, but they are never darker...
...My keys differ considerably from previous keys because of my elimination of unreliable colour distinctions and greater use of postabdominal characters...
Following Hennig (1973) the genus Pegomya is divided into two subgroups (here ranked as subgenera) of about equal diversity (Pegomya sensu stricto and Phoraea). The subgenus Pegomya in my present sense consists solely of species with leaf-mining larvae..."

Characterization Tables:
Griffiths then includes two characterization tables of the species and species-groups in the subgenera Pegomya and Phoraea in relation to apomorphous and plesiomorphous characters. Griffiths often divided genera in Anthomyiidae into sections, infrasections, subsections, superspecies, and more. The only photographic character used for subgenus Pegomya is the development of the prealar seta, also known as the anteriormost post-sutural supra-alar seta. In most species, this seta is present. The prealar seta being absent is considered apomorphous and the prealar seta being normal present is considered plesiomorphous. An ambiguous value is said for P. umbripennis. Pegomya (subgenus Pegomya) (section hyoscyami) pribifolensis superspecies, P. (Pegomya) (hyoscyami) alticola, and P. (Pegomya) (section minuta) are said to be apomorphous for the prealar seta here.
The only photographic character used for subgenus Phoraea is the size of the lower squama, also known as the lower calypters, in relation to the upper calypters. In most species, these calypters are apparently smaller in area compared to the upper calypters. The lower calypters being larger is considered apomorphous and the lower calypters being smaller is considered plesiomorphous. Only Pegomya (section geniculata) winthemi superspecies and P. (geniculata) unicolor are said to be apomorphous for the prealar seta here.

My comments:
These include the leaf mining "root maggot flies" in the subgenus Pegomya many of you are familiar with. They are not as popular, well known, and perhaps they are even arguably not as commonly encountered as their other infamous distant cousins the Agromyzidae. I am not as familiar with the leaf mining aspect of flies, so I have no comments on their host specificity, but Griffiths says their primary host association is that of the botanical group known as "Centrospermae" or Caryophyllaceae, Amaranthaceae, Portulacaceae, etc. The subgenus Phoraea mostly includes species with mycophagous lifestyles. Others have lifestyles not known or are stem-borers like in the P. rubivora section.
Griffiths pretty much covers about all the characters we can use to recognize the genus. The longest aristal hairs are not longer than the width of the first flagellomere. The vibrissa do not usually have setulae behind the vibrissa like Eutrichota and some species in other genera do. Most species have 1+2 posthumeral setae. The anepisternum is either with or without at least one anterodorsal seta on the corner below the anterior notopleural seta. The prealar can be further defined as being not only present in most species but also, when present, usually noticeably shorter than the length or size of the notopleural setae. The hind tibiae are with 1-3 pd, usually with 2 pd, although 1 only in Pegomya notabilis. Neither sex has any pv setae on the hind tibiae, apical or not apical. Mid tibiae in both sexes with or without an av, exclusive of apical bristle, but usually with 1 pd. Femora and tibiae mainly yellowish. Tarsomeres normal in female. Costal setulae are as Griffiths describes; short and weak, including the pair of spines before the distal break (or subcostal break). A substantial number of species do not have much yellow on the body, with even the legs dark.

2. Genus Emmesomyia

Griffiths' notes:
"Constitutive (autapomorphous) characters by which Emmesomyia differs from Pegomya are as follows: The lower squama is enflarged, distinclty larger in area than the upper in all species. (In the groundplan of Pegomya the lower squama is smaller in area than the upper, but a similar enlargement occurs in members of the P. winthemi subsection)...
...In most species of Emmesomyia the head is sexually dimorphic, with the eyes only narrowly separated and the upper parafrontal setae (ors) lacking in the male (Fig. 470). This head dimorphism is associated with dimorphism with leg structure (enlarged pulvilli in males, presence of strong av seta near base of F2 [mid femora] in females. However, in a remarkable new species (described as E. megaloceros [= Taeniomyia megaloceros]) the eyes are widely separated in the male (Fig. 471) as in the female and the legs are also identical in both sexes (with pulvilli less than half as long as 5th tarsal article as normally in females).
The presence or absence of interfrontal setae in females may, as in Pegomya, not be a constant character and should not be relied upon for diagnostic purposes. The mentum is rather short in all species (at most 0.4 times as long as head height). The thoracic chaetotaxy is characterized by strong development of the acrostichals (in well separated rows with additional shorter setulae in between), 1+1 or 1+1(2) posthumerals (lower posterior weak or absent) and relatively short prealar. Malloch (1917b) based his concept of Emmesomyia on the presence of a pteropleural seta, but this is not a groundplan character of the genus as a whole. This seta is (no doubt primitively) lacking in subgenus Taeniomyia, and is not entirely constant in its presence in subgenus Emmesomyia [either]. No species have setulae on the prosternum, propleural depression, hypopleuron, or notopleural area apart from the usual two long notopleural setae); the scutellum is finely pubescent ventrally in all species, and in most (except E. megaloceros) bears two long marginal pairs of setae (and sometimes a shorter discal pair). The lower surface of the costa bears additional short setulae below the main marginal series of short spinules (as also in Pegomya). The hind tibiae lack apical pv setae. There are three spermathecae, as normally in Calyptratae.
...The constitutive characters of subgenus Emmesomyia [now just genus Emmesomyia], so far as can be judged on the basis of Nearctic species, are the presence of a pteropleural seta and the absence of a setula on the postgonite. However, it should be noted that occasional individuals lacking the pteropleural seta can be found."

Characterization Tables:
None.

My comments:
The genus Emmesomyia represent a good example of a genus that would have probably been difficult to recognize or identify based on current keys but is quite distinctive. These flies appear to approach a slightly more muscid appearance, looking quite similar to the genus Phaonia. Griffiths noted the strong development of the acrostichals which is definitely something that is noticeable in photos and a worthwhile difference from other genera. I have to add the arista should always be moderately long haired to long haired (missing in the holotype of E. longiforceps). The third antennal article is at least 2.5 times as long as wide in all the Nearctic species. This is longer than the vast majority of the other Anthomyiidae in this region. The prealar or anterior post-sutural supra-alar seta is very short. The dorsal surface of the scutellum is bare centrally to largely setulose. The Manual of Central America explains that the basal node of vein R2+3 is with short, fine setulae on dorsal and ventral surfaces. As far as their color goes, they are similar to the genus Pegomya, with extensive yellow at times.
I have found E. socialis in Florida to be not uncommon, typically perched on foliage in many different habitats. One of them I noticed had a strange, long, filament distinctly attached to the same point on the costa of both wings. Another strange thing I noticed was that I only see females (probably); I have never seen a (at least noticeably) male in real life or online. Other species in North America should also not be uncommon.

3. Genus Taeniomyia

Griffiths' notes:
"The above synonymy calls for little explanation except to to note that the customary restriction of Taeniomyia to what is hre called subgenus Taeniomyia does not accord with Stein's (1919) original concept, which also included species of subgenus Emmesomyia. Stein's concept of Taeniomyia largely coincided with the concept of genus Emmesomyia here proposed. Malloch's prior proposal of the name Emmesomyia was unknown to Stein at the time of writing.
...The pteropleural seta characteristic of subgenus Emmesomyia s.s. is absent in Taeniomyia. All females of Taeniomyia which I have examined possess strong spines on the posterior margins of the 6th tergite and 6th sternite (Fig. 502-503). These provide ready diagnosis, since they can be seen without extending the ovipositor. I interpret the development of these spines as a constitutive (autapomorphous) character of Taeniomyia. How the spines are used during oviposition (or larviposition?) is unknown."

Characterization tables:
None.

My comments:
This genus was treated as a subgenus of Emmesomyia by Griffiths. They are primarily Neotropical in distribution. There are about 3 species in the genus with only 1 known to occur north of Mexico in Arizona (T. spinulosa, but Griffiths describes all of them in his work). Michelsen (2010) treated it as a full genus. Gomes et al. (2021) found that it was actually more closely related to Pegomya than Emmesomyia (however, the two diagrams provided in that paper have completely different relationships between all those genera; in any case, the discussion of that clade clearly distinguishes Pegomya+Taeniomyia).
My comments on morphology for the genus Emmesomyia are the same for Taeniomyia. The exceptions are obviously the absence of an anepimeral seta, the species are more yellow than those in the genus Emmesomyia, T. megaloceros is even almost entirely yellow, the third antennal is shorter in T. megaloceros, 1.5-2 times as long as wide, but this species is not known north of Mexico anyway. The only species in this region as said earlier is T. spinulosa, which I will as a result try to briefly describe/transcribe here:
Male: thorax and abdomen finely dusted, sometimes ground color becoming yellowish on humeri, postalar calli, and tip of scutellum, abdomen shining over largely yellowish. Mid and hind legs almost entirely yellowish.
Male eyes separated narrowly to distance up to width of ocellar tubercle. Genal setae in 1 row. Arista with long pubescence. Third antennal article 2.8-3.2 times as long as wide. 1+1 posthumerals. Prealar very short. Scutellum largely setulose but with bare central area at base.
Leg chaetotaxy: T1 with 1 ad, 1 p; T2 with 1 pd, 2 p; T3 with 1 av, 3 ad, 2 pd (in which lower is outstandingly long)
Wings slightly yellowish tinged. Costal spinules slightly strong.
Female: same as male except abdomen largely shining orange and yellow. 6th tergite entire, with strong spines and dense setulae posteriorly.

4. Genus Parapegomyia

Griffiths' notes:
"[See Griffiths' Notes for genus Pegomya] The present taxon was recognized as the Pegomyia connexa group by Huckett (1941: 14). Hennig (1973) broadened the concept of the Pegomya connexa group to include Arctopegomyia (here considered a subgenus of Eutrichota), but offered no convincing evidence that the group in this expanded sense is monophyletic. Suwa (1974), evidently influenced by Hennig's concept, included members of the P. connexa group in the original sense along with Arctopegomyia in Eutrichota, but offered no detailed justification. In my opinion the Pegomyia connexa group in Huckett's (1941) original sense should not be included in Eutrichota, since it lacks the constitutive (autapomorphous) characters of that genus. The new genus Parapegomyia is therefore proposed. The following is the formal description:
Frons width sexually dimorphic (narrower in the male); interfrontal setulae absent or at most weakly developed (in some females). Palpi not expanded. 1+1 posthumeral setae; notopleural area without setulae additional to the usual two long notopleural setae; prealar seta longer than posterior notopleural; scutellum with discal pair of setae much shorter than the two long marginal pairs, with fine pubescence on its ventral surface; propleural depression, prosternum, pteropleuron and hypopleuron bare. Lower surface of costa with additional short setulae below the main marginal series of spinules; lower squama smaller in area than upper. Hind tibia without apical pv. Pulvilli sexually dimorphic, enlarged in males but less than half as long as 5th tarsal article in females...
...The life history of Parapegomyia is entirely unknown. The presence of strong hooked spines on the ovipositor suggests that the eggs (or larvae) may be inserted into an elastic medium."

Characterization tables:
None.

My comments:
These confused flies were considered Arctopegomyia by Hennig until Griffiths pointed out two overlooked heterogenous taxa in this group: one being Eutrichota (Arctopegomyia) and another being the group containing Pegomya connexa, which did not share the synapomorphous characters for the genus Eutrichota according to Griffiths, and is this genus Parapegomyia here. Later on, Barták et al. (1990) synonymized Parapegomyia with Eutrichota. I don't have access to that paper, unfortunately. Griffiths had a massive amount of evidence to support the split. There were numerous differences in genitalic structure, especially in the structure of the female's ovipositor which was, in fact, unique in Anthomyiidae. The antennae are longer than almost any other species of Eutrichota in the region, the third antennal article at least 2.5 times as long as wide. There are no additional setulae behind the vibrissa as in Eutrichota. A distal anteroventral seta on the mid femora is absent, which is only shared by 1-2 species in Eutrichota. The arista is plumose. The 1+1 posthumerals differs from the 1+2 groundplan of Eutrichota. Some females may apparently have a short pair of interfrontal setae, which are invariably absent in Eutrichota. Whatever the case for the synonymy may be, it must be very convincing. Systema Dipterorum considers it to be Eutrichota.
The genus is made up of two species-group taxa: Parapegomyia socculata connexa and Parapegomyia socculata socculata. However, the statuses of these is another issue. After Griffiths' treatment, Pont and Ackland (2009) wrote the valid name of Parapegomyia socculata connexa as Parapegomyia connexa. "P. connexa" and P. s. socculata according to Griffiths both occur in vicariance with P. s. socculata in northwest Canada and Alaska and "P. connexa" as a quite frequently collected and widespread eastern species. He wrote that they only differ in color, mainly the legs. No structural characters were recorded in the description for P. socculata socculata, as Griffiths referred to the other taxon for those. The ovipositor in P. socculata socculata was not examined. P. socculata connexa is the overwhelmingly commoner species. I'm not as sure which side to take here, but I feel that Griffiths' treatment of the two as simply subspecies was just fine. No taxonomic complex has been proposed.
The key for both subspecies on Griffiths involves entirely color. In P. socculata connexa, the coxae and femora are largely yellowish (except for brownish basal patches on coxae) and the processes on the 5th sternite of the male is yellowish. In P. socculata socculata, these are largely infuscated to dark.
Griffiths described both color and structure of P. socculata connexa. These flies are somewhat distinctive to the trained eye. They are shining with their thorax blackish and laterally grayish in some angles. They are very similar to Eutrichota lipsia but lack expanded tarsal articles and differ in the antennae.
The male frons is also wider, with the eyes separated by about the width of the ocellar tubercle. The third antennal article is 2.5-3 times as long as wide. The arista has long pubescence. Presutural acrostichals consist of 3 pairs in rows becoming rather widely separated anteriorly, with a few shorter setulae in between. The dorsal surface of the scutellum is mostly bare with only a few scattered setulae on the sides. Katepisternum with 1+2 setae. Costa with marginal spinules weak except for pair before subcostal break which are about twice as long as the costal width. The lower crossvein is slightly sinuate. Hind tibia with 2-3 posterodorsal setae and 0-2 posterior to posteroventral setae. Wing membrane extensively yellowish tinged.

5. Genus Eutrichota

Griffiths' notes:
"I accept the expanded concept of Eutrichota proposed by Suwa (1974), within which Eremomyia and Eremomyioides must obviously be included on morphological grounds. Suwa omitted the last two names from consideration because no included species occur in Japan. Hennig (1976a: lxiii) partly accepted Suwa's proposal (with the inclusion of Eremomyia and Eremomyioides), but suggested the retention of Arctopegomyia in the sense of his Pegomya connexa group as a separate genus on the grounds that it is not finally settled whether this taxon is more closely related to the rest of Eutrichota in Suwa's sense or to Pegomya.
I have concluded that the solution of this disagreement between Suwa and Hennig lies in recognizing that there are two heterogenous taxa included by Hennig (1975) in his Pegomya connexa group. One of these, equivalent to Arctopegomyia in Ringdahl's (1973) original sense, appears correctly included in Eutrichota, having ovipositor structure abd male genitalia very similar to those of the rest of the genus. Suwa's synonymization of Arctopegomyia with Eutrichota can thus be upheld. There remains the taxon containing connexa Stein (=socculata Zetterstedt) and its close relatives, whose inclusion in Eutrichota by Suwa can indeed be challenged since it is not supported by synapomorphous characters. This taxon has been described above as the new genus Parapegomyia...
...There is considerable variation in the degree of sexual dimorphism in the frons width in Eutrichota. In some species the eyes of the male are only very narrowly separated (by less than the width of the anterior ocellus), while there are at least two species (E. inornata and E. melanderi) in which the frons is broad and fully feminine in appearance (with differentiation of ors and ori). Since a complete series of intermediate conditions is shown, the separation of the Palearctic type-species E. inornata as a distinct genus, by some authors (such as Seguy 1937) even placed in a different tribe, is obviously untenable. In other respects E. inornata is in no way remarkable, having male genitalia typical of subgenus Eutrichota s. s. (as here defined). I include it in the E. praepotens superspecies on account of the plumose arista, basal epiphallus, and expanded female fore tarsal articles.
Interfrontal setae are invariably lacking both in male and female Eutrichota. The presence of additional setulae (spiniform in some species) behind the vibrissa (in addition to the usual marginal setae below it) is useful for separating Eutrichota and Pegomya when sorting collections. The mentum is relatively short (0.3-0.4 times as long as head height) in all Nearctic species of Eutrichota. In the groundplan (and most species) there are 1+2 posthumeral setae and a long prealar (longer than the posterior notopleural). Variation in the thoracic setae and setulae is of considerable diagnostic value, since the genus includes subgroups with unusual proliferation of setae and setulae (most extensively in the E. cylindrica superspecies) as well as one in which the chaetotaxy is somewhat reduced (the E. affinis section). The lower surface of the costa bears additional short setulae below the main marginal series of spinules in all species. The lower squama is smaller in area than the upper in all species. The leg chaetotaxy varies considerably between the various subgroups and is of diagnostic importance. It seems likely that the presence of a distal anteroventral seta on f2 is a groundplan character, since this is found in Arctopegomyia [see Griffiths' notes and my comments for Parapegomyia] as well as in some species of all sections of Eutrichota s. s. Such a seta is never present in Pegomya and Parapegomyia. Huckett has also used the development of the apical tibial setae for diagnosis, which is indeed of some vlue but not as constant in many species as he assumed. In my descriptions I refer to the development of an apical pd on t1 (between the invariably present apical ad and p), which seems the most useful character involving the apical tibial setae. The hind tibiae lack an apical pv seta. The pulvilli are sexually dimorphic, enlarged to a varying degree in males but always small (at most half as long as the 5th tarsal article) in females. In the females of some species the 2nd to 4th tarsal articles (but not the 5th) of the fore legs are expanded to some degree.
As in Pegomya, the females of some species of Eutrichota are paler coloured than the males but never darker. Life histories are known only for a few members of subgenus Eutrichota s. s. (see below). The genus appears confined to the Palearctic and Nearctic Regions, where it occupies the full ranges of habitats from hot desert through temperate and boreal forest to arctic and alpine tundra."

Characterization tables:
Griffiths includes one characterization table for the whole genus that includes the subgenera Arctopegomyia and Eutrichota. The characters that distinguish the subgenera are mainly genitalic. There are no ranks established within subgenus Arctopegomyia besides the species. In contrast, subgenus Eutrichota is divided into the triticiperda, affinis, apicalis, and praepotens sections with E. substriatella as a species sola. The affinis section has further an affinis subsection, but no other sections have any ranks besides the "superspecies" and below.
Unlike for most of these tables in Griffiths' work, many photographable characters are used in this table. These include the sexual dimorphism in eye height, development of the costal spinules and setulae, vestiture of the notopleuron, length of the discal setae on the scutellum, the shape of the arista, vestiture of the thoracic sclerites (prosternum, proepisternum, meron), the degree of shininess of the first and second antennal articles (scape and pedicel), the development of the prealar seta, and modifications of the fore tarsomeres. The main important points will be explained here and others as comments of mine. The Eutrichota affinis section is separated from all other species of Eutrichota almost unequivocally by the lack of a prealar seta. These flies seem to have it reduced to a setula whose base is marked by a dark spot noticeable in many photographs. In the other species, this seta is long, at least longer than the length of the notopleural setae, and there is no in between. In the E. obversa "superspecies" in the triticiperda section, species may have the notopleural area are with setulae in addition to the 2 setae. This also occurs in all E. (section apicalis) incompleta superspecies, part of E. (apicalis) albidosa, all E. (section praepotens) humeralis superspecies, all E. (praepotens) cylindrica superspecies, and all E. (praepotens) costalis. The same species may also have large discal setae on the scutellum, the pair being over half as long as the marginal pairs. Otherwise, the variations with this character are part of E. (triticiperda) obversa superspecies, all E. (apicalis) incompleta superspecies, all E. (apicalis) albidosa, part of E. (apicalis) apicalis, part of E. (apicalis) flavicans superspecies, and all of E. (praepotens) humeralis superspecies. The arista is quite shortly branched in all the known Nearctic species. The Palearctic E. (praepotens) praepotens superspecies has it plumose but they are not known to occur here. All of the E. cylindrica superspecies uniquely have a hairy proepisternum, and also prosternum and meron. All of the E. triticiperda section have the antennal scape and pedicel shining in contrast to the pruinose third antennomere, along with several other species in subgenus Eutrichota, but not in subgenus Arctopegomyia. Finally, females may have tarsomeres 3 and 4 expanded, and this occurs in all E. (Arctopegomyia) labradorensis, all of E. (Arctopegomyia) partita, and all of the E. praepotens section except for E. costalis, which was only tentatively included in that section by Griffiths.

My comments:
Griffiths characterized this variable genus quite well. Arctopegomyia is often considered a junior synonym of Eutrichota rather than a subgenus. This is probably not supported by enough evidence (Xue et al., 2010). Many cite Suwa's (1974) synonymy of Arctopegomyia in the 21st century but Griffiths' treatment was made well after Suwa's. Griffiths provided much evidence for his treatment based on the aedeagus and thus examination of material.
The subgenera are difficult to separate from each other in the absence of distinctive characters, which are usually abundant in the subgenus Eutrichota. Females in both subgenera may have modified fore tarsomeres. Subgenus Arctopegomyia do not have many distinctive characters. There only 4 species in the subgenus. E. (Arctopegomyia) abradorensis (range Alaska to New Hampshire) can be a very pale-colored species, supposedly entirely shining yellow in the female. Species can have 2-4 posterodorsal setae on the hind tibiae. The males are holoptic but the frons width is variable. The arista has very short pubescence. The third antennal article is 1.7-2.5 times as long as wide, covering the extreme long variation for the genus. Additional setulae behind the vibrissa and marginal row are present. The mid femora always has at least one distal anteroventral seta. The scutellum is largely setulose dorsally. Legs are yellow to black. Life histories of Arctopegomyia are not known.

References:
Barták, M., Michelsen, V., Rozkošný, R. 1990. New records of Anthomyiidae from Czechoslovakia, with a revised check list of Czechoslovak species (Diptera). Scripta Facultatis Scientiarum Naturalium Universitatis Purkyniensis Brunensis 20(9–10): 439–450.
Evenhuis, N.L. & Pape, T. (editors). 2022. Systema Dipterorum, Version 3.9. http://diptera.org/, accessed on 4 August 2022.
Gomes, L.R.P., Souza, D.S., Carvalho, C.J.B. de. 2021. First insights into the evolution of neotropical anthomyiid flies (Diptera: Anthomyiidae). Systematics and Biodiversity 19(7): 724-737.
Griffiths, G.C.D. 1983-2004. Anthomyiidae. Flies Nearctic Region 8(2): 1-160 (=no. 1), 1983; 161-288 (=no. 2), 1983; 289-408 (=no. 3), 1984; 409-600, (=no. 4), 1984; 601-728 (=no. 5), 1986; 729-952 (=no. 6), 1987; 953-1048 (=no. 7), 1991; 1049-1240 (=no. 8), 1991; 1241-1416 (=no. 9), 1992; 1417-1632 (=no. 10), 1993; 1633-1872 (=no. 11), 1996; 1873-2120 (=no. 12), 1998; 2121-2288 (=no. 13), 2001: 2289-2484 (=no. 14), 2003: 2485-2635 (=no. 15), 2004.
Holmberg, R.G. 2017. Entomological Society of Canada/La Société d’entomologie du Canada, https://esc-sec.ca/wp/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Obit_Griffiths_Graham.pdf
Michelsen, V. 2010. ANTHOMYIIDAE (ANTHOMYIID FLIES). In: Brown, B.V., Borkent, A., Cumming, J.M., Wood, D.M., Woodley, N.E. & Zumbado, M.A. (Eds.), Manual of Central American Diptera. Vol. 2. NRC Research Press, Ottawa, pp. 1271-1276.
Pont, A.C. & Ackland, D.M. 2009. The types of Anthomyiidae (Diptera) in the Museum fur Naturkunde Berlin, Germany. Zoosystematics and Evolution. 85: 5-56.
Suwa, M. 1974. Anthomyiidae of Japan (Diptera). Insecta Matsumurana (n.s.) 4: 1-247.
Xue, W., Dong, W., & Bai, S. (2010). A study on the genusEutrichota(Diptera: Anthomyiidae), with descriptions of three new species from China. Oriental Insects, 44(1), 77–90.

Ingresado el 09 de agosto de 2022 por aispinsects aispinsects | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario

Griffiths' Treatment of the Genera of Anthomyiidae in the Nearctic Region Part 1: Introduction

Note: Part 2 will be posted almost immediately after this. these are also my notes, not formal publication, even though this may end up on Google Scholar for some ridiculous reason.

The Anthomyiidae represent one of the most difficult to identify and neglected families of flies. First, recognizing the family itself from other families in Muscoidea can often be difficult. Generic diagnoses primarily describe differences in genitalia, which almost always requires dissection to see in calyptrate flies. References for keying fauna of the larger continents are highly lacking. When present, they are scattered, outdated in nomenclature, and/or perhaps importantly, can be highly inaccessible or expensive to obtain. No comprehensive classification exists for this family, with the few attempts not having substantial grounds in cladistic argumentation. The only molecular and evolutionary study of these flies had not been done since last year (Gomes at el., 2021). For a family that contains species of economic importance, specialized on by the considered founder of modern cladistics Dr. Willi Hennig, not as diverse as better known calyptrate families, and with species primarily inhabiting temperate or arctic regions, they should not be in the state they currently are in.
Dr. Graham C. D. Griffiths from the University of Alberta, to say the least, revised the species of the Nearctic Region in his multi-volume Flies of the Nearctic Region. Before the Anthomyiidae, his work consisted of extensive translations of the systematic works of Hennig, the higher-order systematics of flies, and especially on the taxonomy of Agromyzidae with Dr. Kenneth Spencer. His familiarity with several languages probably made him a great bridge between European and American workers in the systematics of these flies, which was certainly needed. He wrote in his Flies of the Nearctic Region that the species of Anthomyiidae even in the Palearctic were in extensive confusion due to inadequate descriptions and lack of study of the type specimens. This was until Hennig created his monograph of the family in 1967-1976. The state of the family in the Nearctic must have been worse. It still lagged behind the understanding of the Palearctic region at the time. Dr. Hugh Huckett was for 60 years the only taxonomist in North America for the family, and certainly the first and only specialist on them for the region at the time. While his work was actually an improvement over earlier literature, it still had several deficiencies. Many species could not be recognized from descriptions due to lack of information on the genitalia. Association of the sexes was also apparently problematic, so many of the allotypes were not the same species as the holotypes. Griffiths also wrote that Huckett proposed many synonyms for species already described from Europe. Griffiths hoped to further correct these inconsistencies, and he certainly did. Unfortunately, the entire work was not able to be completed as he was diagnosed with throat cancer in 2006 and died 3 years later. The relationships between the genera of Anthomyiidae (probably a key to genera), characterization of the family, a revision of the genus Botanophila, and brief comments on formal nomenclature were intended to be published according to his first volume.
Griffiths was also known for his strong opinions on morphology and phylogeny. He utilized sections and other ranks of aggregate species or groups between genera and species in the Anthomyiidae. Griffiths reasonably remarked that although he believes in these groups, they were not intended to necessarily be included in catalogues in spite of the worries some authors had about the concept of polynomial nomenclature. As for the ICZN, it does not recognize these ranks. They are all treated as names at the level of subgenera (except for the superspecies groups, which are not considered to be genus-group names). However, these names are not available regardless, because they are incorrectly in a binomial format rather than composed of only one word.
All in all, keys to the genera of Anthomyiidae in the Nearctic region are desperately needed and need to be accessible. The Manual of Nearctic Diptera includes a key to the genera of Anthomyiidae of the Nearctic region created by Dr. Hugh Huckett. Unfortunately, it was developed before the publication of Griffith's important monograph of the family, and maybe even in large part before the completion of Hennig's Palearctic version, resulting in the key being highly outdated in terms of nomenclature and classification. The Global Biodiversity Information Facility, Systema Dipterorum, and perhaps other sites include many of these synonyms and their currently valid names which will be helpful in identifying these. The Manual's key includes the genus-group names Circia (=Alliopsis), Chelisia (=Anthomyia), Chiastocheta (the Nearctic species on the Manual are now in Botanophila), Pseudochirosia (=Alliopsis), Eremomyioides (=Eutrichota), Crinurina (=Lasiomma), Macrophorbia (=Lasiomma), Anthomyiella (=Calythea), Neohylemyia (=Leucophora), Proboscimyia (=Leucophora), Pycnoglossa (=Chirosia), Hylemyza (=Hylemya), Ganperdea (=Leucophora), Pegomya of couplet 35 (=Eutrichota), Nupedia (=Pegoplata), Pseudonupedia (=Paradelia), Paraprosalpia (=Alliopsis), Eremomyia (=Eutrichota), Craspedochoeta (=Anthomyia), Acrostilpna (=Lasiomma), Macateeia (=Botanophila), and Pegohylemyia (=Botanophila).
In anticipation of an attempt to reconstruct a more user-friendly key for the Nearctic genera of Anthomyiidae, generic synopses of the Anthomyiidae will first be compiled. I like to imagine the generic synopses proposed by Griffiths hinted at the direction of which he intended his own generic key to go as well. Although many workers think that keys to the genera in this family will unequivocally require genitalia in large part, I don't really think so. Before Griffith's final 2004 volume in his Flies of the Nearctic Region, however, that would have probably been true. Dr. Verner Michelsen did construct a key to the Neotropical genera in the Anthomyiidae chapter of the Manual of Central America published in 2010, and genitalia was not used at all in the couplets.
The higher-order classification of Anthomyiidae is shaky with very minimal proposals having been made, but better than the other calyptrate families. A summary of this matter has been provided by Gomes at al. (2021). Huckett's classification in the Manual of Nearctic Diptera is outdated and untenable. Michelsen (2000) proposed one of the best possible classifications for the family, dividing it into the subfamilies Myopininae, Pegomyinae, and Anthomyiinae, but excluded the genera Phaonantho and Coenosopsia from any subfamilies. I don't currently have access to Michelsen (2000). Gomes et al., (2021) shows that Phaonantho and Coenosopsia are not basal in the family, and formed a relationship with Hydrophoria and Zaphne (unproposed grouping). Another relationship between Calythea, Pegoplata, Enneastigma, and Myopina was recovered ("Myopininae?"). Another for Pegomya, Emmesomyia, Taeniomyia, and obviously Eutrichota ("Pegomyinae"?). Finally, the rest of Anthomyiidae or Anthomyiinae. Fucellia were not sampled, but Hennig suggested a clade consisting of Botanophila, Fucellia, and Chiastocheta. Gomes et al. (2021) also added "Hylemyza" to this relationship. A tribal classification is present in the informal Diptera of the British Isles, which was reviewed by Dr. Michael Ackland. It is remarkably close to what I have imagined would be a good classification, but some of those groups are not monophyletic (for example, Delia in Hydrophoriini). Based on their analyses, a classification could be proposed where Pegomyinae would include tribes Myopinini and Pegomyini (nonetheless, Myopininae could be monophyletic). A new subfamily Hydrophoriinae which could also include Hydrophoriini and Coenosopsiini. Anthomyiinae could be split into tribes Deliini and Anthomyiini. These are not formal proposals. Dolichopodidae: Hydrophorinae and Scathophagidae: Delininae may cause confusion. Additional genera also would be interesting to sample for these molecular studies, especially Parapegomyia and Hylemyia.

Glossary:
Anepimeron - the sclerite on the side of the thorax usually lacking strong setae, located immediately posterior to the anepisternum, above the katepisternum, essentially equivalent to our oblique muscles, same as pteropleuron, pteropleura, pteropleural
Anepisternum - probably the largest sclerite on the side of the thorax, there is a row of strong setae lining the posterior margin of this region, essentially equivalent to our oblique muscles in location
Apical - the tips of the body part, usually furthest away from the body (distal)
Antennae - the parts of the antennae are divided into three segments, the scape, pedicel, and flagellum. The scape is referred to as first antennal article in Griffiths. The pedicel second antennal article. The flagellum in calyptrates, referred to as third antennal article in Griffiths, is composed of a few units known as flagellomeres. These flies evolved to have the first flagellomere absurdly expanded into a bulb-like organ with many names, the first flagellomere, third antennomere, third antennal article, third antennal segment. The remaining flagellomeres became the arista.
Apomorphous - having derived or specialized value
Autapomorphous - being unique to a group, same as constitutive
Basal - (1) located closest to the body (2) an ancient or ancestral lineage; synonym: proximal
Calypters - the flap-like pieces of wing membrane located at the base of the wings, same as squama
Chaetotaxy - the physical characteristics including arrangement of setae on the body
Surfaces of chaetotaxy:
a - anterior
ad - anterodorsal
av - anteroventral
d - dorsal
p - posterior
pd - posterodorsal
pv - posteroventral
v - ventral
Discal - located on the disc or middle of a sclerite, such as discal scutellar seta
Distal - located furthest away from the body
Interfrontal - the middle black to reddish rectangular region on the forehead of the fly between the eyes, there is often a pair of interfrontal setae located shortly anterior to the ocellar setae
Face - the facial region of these flies is considered to be between the ptilinal fissures, usually covered by the antennae, and located between the vibrissa
Frons - the forehead of the fly between the eyes
Katepisternum, katepisternal - "hips" of the fly on the thorax that are over the middle pair of legs, it is located directly over them, there are usually 3-5 strong setae pointing in different directions on this region, same as sternopleura, sternopleuron, sternopleural
Lower crossvein - the vein on the wings that forms the end of a noticeable, sharply, nearly right-angled rectangular region, same as crossvein dm-cu
Marginal - located at the edge of a sclerite
Mentum - a sclerotized region on the proboscis, it excludes the membranous area closer to the chin and the spongy part at the end
Meron - the "hips" of the fly on the thorax that are over the hind pair of legs, located slightly below and in front of the base of the halteres, same as hypopleuron
Notopleura, notopleural, notopleuron, notopleural depression - a sclerite located at the end of the transverse suture on top of the thorax, there are usually only two equidistant pairs of widely separated setae on them, essentially equivalent to our serratus anterior muscles
Parafrontals - the silvery linear area on the head between the interfrontal area and the eyes of the fly. Griffiths considers these to be the same as the parafacials, which is what this region graduates into below the base of the antennae, lateral to the face.
Plesiomorphy - character state found in the ancestor of a group
Posthumerals - Setae between the humeri or the bulged area on the shoulders of the presutural region on the thorax and the presutural dorsocentral setae. The labeling of the presutural area of the thorax is convoluted among taxonomic works. The posthumeral system is much more intuitive than the "presutural anterior intra-alar" system that McAlpine and the Canada JAI Pollenia key uses (and O'Hara agrees). This is because the presutural setae are not neatly organized into rows of setar as well as the postsutural region. It is better to refer to the setae immediately around the postpronota/humeri using a different system than the intraalar/supraalar system. They are used here as a formula "Posthumeral [# of anterior posthumeral]+[# of posterior]" where "anterior posthumeral" are synonymous with inner posthumeral and anterior intra alar. "Posterior posthumeral" are synonymous with outer posthumeral and anterior supra alar.
Postsutural - a line or suture, sometimes incomplete, can be imagined across the thorax, dividing it into anterior and posterior portions. The posterior portion is referred to as postsutural.
Prealar - anterior postsutural supra-alar seta, often located just above posterior notopleural seta
Presutural - a line or suture, sometimes incomplete, can be imagined across the thorax, dividing it into anterior and posterior portions. The anterior portion is referred to as presutural.
Proepisternum - the major sclerite visible in side view on the very anterior portion of the thorax, they're like the collar bones in a human, same as propleural depression
Prosternum - A sclerite over the neck on the underside of the fly, located between two membranous areas between the two fore coxae
Pulvilli - the tarsal pads
Sclerite - a chitinized plate or region on the body, usually used to describe these parts of the thorax, and usually gray-colored
Scutellum - the shield-like sclerite noticeable on the back of the fly between the wings in top view
Subcosta - on the anteiror margin of the wing, it is the second most notable vein to reach the wing margin
Synapomorphy - a character shared by the ancestor of a taxon
Symplesiomorphy - character with the value ancestral for the family and shared by several groups, usually referred to as groundplan, but that word here may also refer to plesiomorphy
Tarsomeres, tarsal articles - the units the feet of the fly are divided into. They can be modified, expanded in size compared to the tarsomeres on the other legs or they may possess long setulae in the males of some species, rarely females
Vibrissae - the two strong setae pointing forward on the face of the fly not on the antennae

References:
Evenhuis, N.L. & Pape, T. (editors). 2022. Systema Dipterorum, Version 3.9. http://diptera.org/, accessed on 4 August 2022.
Gomes, L.R.P., Souza, D.S., Carvalho, C.J.B. de. 2021. First insights into the evolution of neotropical anthomyiid flies (Diptera: Anthomyiidae). Systematics and Biodiversity 19(7): 724-737.
Griffiths, G.C.D. 1983-2004. Anthomyiidae. Flies Nearctic Region 8(2): 1-160 (=no. 1), 1983; 161-288 (=no. 2), 1983; 289-408 (=no. 3), 1984; 409-600, (=no. 4), 1984; 601-728 (=no. 5), 1986; 729-952 (=no. 6), 1987; 953-1048 (=no. 7), 1991; 1049-1240 (=no. 8), 1991; 1241-1416 (=no. 9), 1992; 1417-1632 (=no. 10), 1993; 1633-1872 (=no. 11), 1996; 1873-2120 (=no. 12), 1998; 2121-2288 (=no. 13), 2001: 2289-2484 (=no. 14), 2003: 2485-2635 (=no. 15), 2004.
Holmberg, R.G. 2017. Entomological Society of Canada/La Société d’entomologie du Canada, https://esc-sec.ca/wp/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Obit_Griffiths_Graham.pdf
Michelsen, V. 2000. Oldest authentic record of a fossil calyptrate fly (Diptera): a species of Anthomyiidae from early Coenozoic Baltic amber. Studia Dipterologica 7: 11–18.
Michelsen, V. 2010. ANTHOMYIIDAE (ANTHOMYIID FLIES). In: Brown, B.V., Borkent, A., Cumming, J.M., Wood, D.M., Woodley, N.E. & Zumbado, M.A. (Eds.), Manual of Central American Diptera. Vol. 2. NRC Research Press, Ottawa, pp. 1271-1276.

Ingresado el 09 de agosto de 2022 por aispinsects aispinsects | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario

22 de junio de 2022

Systema Dipterorum's Checklist of Helina (Diptera: Muscidae) north of Mexico and potentially

The genus Helina has been called the second largest genus in Muscidae., with well over 400 species in the world (Wang et al., 2004), It is also one of the difficult to recognize genera of muscids along with Phaonia and Mydaea. The biology of Helina species is poorly studied. Many revisionary works lack any mention at all on biology, but most species are probably detritivores as larvae, living under bark, in rotting wood, in tree holes, in vertebrate nests, and more.
No catalogue for Muscidae exists for the Nearctic region after Huckett in Stone et al. (1965). Since then, several changes could have occured according to Systema Dipterorum. A catalogue to Neotropical Muscidae was created by de Carvalho et al. (2005). Quadrularia is now a part of Helina, transferring annosa, "laetifica" (=evecta), "laetifica var. nivalis" (=flavisquama), and "punctata " Stein (=steini) to Helina. Helina laetifica is considered to be a synonym of H. evecta, but its variety known as nivalis is considered one of H. flavisquama by Systema Dipterorum, which conflicts with BugGuide. Helina steini is proposed by Pont (2013) for Helina puctata Stein. Helina flavisquama is also now considered the new name for Helina basalis Zetterstedt. Helina duplicata is now a synonym of the Holarctic species Helina reversio, the latter thus being an introduced species not recognized until recently. Helina troene var. fulviventris is treated as a full species distinct from troene. Eupogonomyia neoborealis is transferred to Helina. Helina platykarenos and polychaeta are described from California by Huckett (196). Helina punctata Robineau-Desvoidy is a synonym of Helina sexmaculata. Helina rothi became a synonym of H. subvittata. Ariciella flavicornis is transferred to Helina and its new name Helina rubripalpis is delivered by Pont (1972). Helina setifer is described by Huckett (1965). Helina snyderi is described from Wyoming by Steystkal (1966). Once again, these are all from the perspective of Systema Dipterorum and often these changes are not accepted among workers in reality
Additional species were included in this checklist that are not known north of Mexico, but are implied in some way by Systema Dipterorum that they could reach into north. The species are included if the range notes detail "NE: Mexico" (not NT: Mexico) with NE meaning Nearctic and NT meaning Neotropical or something more explicit. These species are Helina caneo (range notes: "(NE: NE) Mexico"), H. meraca (range notes: "(NT: NT NE) Mexico"), mulcata (range notes: "(NT: NT NE) Mexico; ?North America"), parvula (range notes: "(NE: NE PA NT AF) Mexico"), sera (its synonym, H. arroya has range notes: "NE"), and H. tarsalis (range notes: "(NE: NE) Mexico"). Helina depuncta and H. refusa were listed in Stone et al. (1965) with strong doubts as to their Nearctic occurences. There remains no reason to believe they occur in the Nearctic.
In order to key or identify these specimens, several keys are needed at hand: Wulp (1896), Malloch (1921), Snyder (1949b), Huckett (1965), and more. Original descriptions may also need to be consulted, especially for specimens from subtropical areas. Snyder (1949) is the major revision to use. In that paper, H. rothi is H. subvittata, H. anceps is nigribasis, and H. obscuripes is cothurnata, according to Systema Dipterorum.

Checklist (67 species):
Genus Helina Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830: 493
Helina abiens (Stein, 1898: 193) - Arizona, North Dakota to s. Quebec, s. toN.C. References: Snyder (1949b)
= Spilogaster abiens Stein, 1898: 193
Helina algonquina Malloch, 1922: 96 - North Carolina,Florida References: Snyder (1949b)
Helina annosa (Zetterstedt, 1838: 663) - Alaska to Labr.,s. to California and New York,Palaearctic References: Malloch (1921), Snyder (1949a)
= Anthomyza annosa Zetterstedt, 1837: 43 (nomen nudum)
= Anthomyza annosa Zetterstedt, 1838: 663
= Aricia bicolor Pokorny, 1889: 549
= Aricia multisetosa Strobl, 1898: 238
Helina barpana (Walker, 1849: 933) - Nova Scotia
= Anthomyia barpana Walker, 1849: 933
Helina bicolorata (Malloch in Cole and Lovett, 1919: 253) - British Columbia, Washington,California References: Snyder (1949b)
= Aricia bicolorata Malloch in Cole and Lovett, 1919: 253
= Mydaea aperta Stein, 1920: 28
Helina bispinosa Malloch, 1920: 142 - British Columbia toMan., s. toCalif. and New Mexico References: Snyder (1949b)
Helina bohemani (Ringdahl, 1916: 235) - British Columbia to Manitoba, s.to California and New Mexico, also Illinois, n. Europe,Russia References: Snyder (1949b)
= Helina subeiensis Ma & Wang, 1992: 407
= Mydaea bohemani Ringdahl, 1916: 235
Helina canadensis Snyder, 1949b: 136 - Quebec,New York
Helina caneo Snyder, 1941: 10 - Mexico
Helina cinerella (Wulp, 1867: 150) - Alaska to Labr., s. to Calif.and Michigan,Palaearctic References: Snyder (1949b) (as vanderwulpi)
= Aricia cinerella Wulp, 1867: 150
= Aricia vanderwulpi Schnabl, 1888: 387
= Aricia propinqua Strøm, 1896: 239
= Aricia brevis Stein, 1898: 180
= Aricia menechma Pandellé, 1898: 56
= Helina aldrichi Snyder, 1949: 122
= Helina tuleskovi Lavciev, 1968: 63
Helina consimilata Malloch, 1920: 144 - Washington, Colorado,Wisconsin to New Hampshire andMass. References: Snyder (1949b)
Helina cothurnata (Rondani, 1866: 116) - Alaska to N.W.T., s. to California and New Hampshire, Palaearctic References: Snyder (1949b) (as obscuripes)
= Spilogaster cothurnata Rondani, 1866: 116
= Anthomyza obscuripes Zetterstedt of Stein, 1916: 65
Helina cruciata Snyder, 1941: 9 - Arizona References: Snyder (1949b)
Helina evecta (Harris, 1780: 125) - Alaska to Nfld., s. to California and Tennessee, cent. Amer.,Palaearctic References: Malloch (1921), Snyder (1949a)
= Musca evectus Harris, 1780: 125
= Musca lucorum Fallén, 1823: 55
= Mydina laetifica Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830: 500
= Mydina soror Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830: 501
= Anthomyia pylone Walker, 1849: 928
=Anthomyia incerta Walker, 1853: 354
= Anthomyia solita Walker, 1853: 354
= Spilogaster venosa Rondani, 1877: 98
= Aricia graefenbergiana Schnabl, 1888: 447
= Aricia mohyleviensis Schnabl, 1888: 449
= Aricia obscurataeformis Schnabl, 1888: 383
= Hyetodesia abacta Giglio-Tos, 1893: 8
= Hyetodesia abdicta Giglio-Tos, 1893: 8
= Mydaea vulnifera Villeneuve, 1927: 266
= Spilogaster limbovenosa Hennig, 1961: 228
Helina exilis (Stein, 1920: 30) - Wisconsin, Michigan,New York,Quebec,Connecticut References: Snyder (1949b)
= Mydaea exilis Stein, 1920: 30
Helina flavisquama (Zetterstedt, 1849: 3287) - Alaska to Nunavut,s. to California and Labrador,Newfoundland,Palaearctic. References: Snyder (1949b)
= Anthomyza basalis Zetterstedt, 1837: 43 (nomen nudum)
= Anthomyza basalis Zetterstedt, 1838: 663
= Anthomyza nivalis Zetterstedt, 1838: 663
= Aricia flavisquama Zetterstedt, 1849: 3287
= Aricia setigera Stein, 1900: 305
= Mydaea setitibia Stein, 1914: 19
= Mydaea flavocalyptrata Stein, 1920: 31
= Helina hylemyioides Malloch, 1920: 137
Helina floridensis Snyder, 1949: 126 - Florida References: Snyder (1949b)
Helina fulvisquama (Zetterstedt, 1845: 1491) - Alaska to Labrador, s. to California and New Hampshire,Lapland, n.Europe,Russia References: Snyder (1949b)
= Aricia fulvisquama Zetterstedt, 1845: 1491
= Phaonia arctica Schnabl & Becker, 1915: 50
= Helina tuberculata Malloch, 1919: 277
Helina fulviventris (Bigot, 1885: 291) - B.C.s. to Calif. References: Snyder (1949b) (as synonym of troene)
= Spilogaster fulviventris Bigot, 1885: 291
= Mydaea varia Stein, 1920: 36
= Helina troene var. fulviventris Bigot of Stone et al., 1965
Helina garretti Snyder, 1949: 140 - British Columbia
Helina griseogaster Snyder, 1949: 138 = Colorado
Helina humilis (Stein, 1920: 32) - British Columbia to California, Arizona, Wyo.,andColo. References: Snyder (1949b)
= Mydaea humilis Stein, 1920: 32
Helina johnsoni Malloch, 1920: 141 - Wisconsin,Quebec and N.S., s.toGa. References: Snyder (1949b)
Helina keremeosa Snyder, 1949: 156 - California References: Snyder (1949b)
Helina lasiosterna Snyder, 1941: 9 - Mexico; North America References: Snyder (1949b)
Helina laxifrons (Zetterstedt, 1860: 6200) - Alaska to Que., s. to Utah and Georgia,Palaearctic References: Snyder (1949b)
= Aricia laxifrons Zetterstedt, 1860: 6200
= Aricia curvipes Schnabl, 1888: 383
= Aricia nigripennis Schnabl, 1888: 378
= Spilogaster nigricans Stein, 1898: 198
= Mydaea tinctipennis Stein, 1916: 69
Helina linearis Malloch, 1920: 139 - Washington, Alberta, Montana,Minnesota to Quebec, s. toIll. References: Snyder (1949b)
Helina longicornis (Zetterstedt, 1838: 678) - Yukon Territory, Nunavut,Manitoba,Palaearctic References: Snyder (1949b) (notes), Huckett (1965)
= Anthomyza longicornis Zetterstedt, 1837: 44 (nomen nudum)
= Anthomyza longicornis Zetterstedt, 1838: 678
= Spilogaster angulicornis Pokorny, 1889: 555
Helina luteisquama (Zetterstedt, 1845: 1492) - Alaskato Nunavut, s. to Manitoba and Labrador,Palaearctic References: Snyder (1949b)
= Aricia luteisquama Zetterstedt, 1845: 1492
Helina maculipennis (Zetterstedt, 1845: 1475) - Alaska, British Columbia and Alberta, s. to California and New Mexico, alsoMan.,Labrador, Brazil, Europe, Asia References: Snyder (1949b) (as neopoeciloptera)
= Helina neopoeciloptera Malloch, 1920: 139
= Helina poeciloptera Malloch, 1918: 271
Helina marguerita Snyder, 1949: 137 - Yukon Territory, Nunavut, California,Quebec, Ontario,Labrador References: Snyder (1949b)
Helina meraca (Wulp, 1896: 325) - Mexico References: Wulp (1896) (as Limnophora), Pont (1972) (not easily accessible), de Carvalho et al. (2005)
= Limnophora meraca Wulp, 1896: 325
= Helina meraca>/i> Wulp of Pont, 1972 (new combination)
Helina mulcata
(Giglio-Tos, 1893: 7) - Mexico; ?North America References: Wulp (1896) (as Hyetodesia), Stein (1918) (notes) (as Mydaea), de Carvalho et al. (2005)
= Hyetodesia mulcata Giglio-Tos, 1893: 7
Helina multiseriata Malloch, 1922: 95 - British Columbia and Alberta,s. to California andColo. References: Snyder (1949b)
Helina neoborealis Snyder, 1949: 122 - Alaska, Nunavut (Victoria and Ellesmere Is.),California,Colorado References: Huckett (1965) (as Eupogonomyia)
= Eupogonomyia neoborealis Snyder of Stone et al., 1965
Helina nigribasis Malloch, 1920: 143 - Alaska to Arizona, Wisconsin & Illinois to Maryland and Labrador, s. to Florida. References: Snyder (1949b)
= Anthomyza anceps Zetterstedt of Stein, 1904: 449
Helina nigripennis (Walker, 1849: 929) - Alaska to California and Colorado, also Manitoba to Newfoundland, s.toMich. References: Snyder (1949b)
= Anthomyia nigripennis Walker, 1849: 929
= Aricia nitida Stein, 1898: 185
= Spilogaster crepuscularis Stein, 1898: 201
Helina nigrita Malloch, 1920: 139 - Alberta toMan., s. toCalif. and New Mexico References: Snyder (1949b)
Helina nudibasis Snyder, 1949: 147 - New Mexico
Helina obscurata (Meigen, 1826: 89) - Alaska to Labrador,s. to California, Illinois, and New York,Palaearctic References: Snyder (1949b)
= Anthomyia obscurata Meigen, 1826: 89
= Mydina fuliginosa Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830: 498
= Mydina vernalis Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830: 498
= Anthomyza sahlbergi Zetterstedt, 1837: 43 (nomen nudum)
= Anthomyza sahlbergi Zetterstedt, 1838: 664
= Anthomyza veterana Zetterstedt, 1838: 662
= Aricia duplaris Zetterstedt, 1845: 1411
= Aricia sordidiventris Zetterstedt, 1845: 1416
= Anthomyia detracta Walker, 1853: 122
= Helina nasoni Malloch, 1920: 138
Helina obscuratoides (Schnabl, 1887: 347) - Alberta, Manitoba,South Dakota,Palaearctic References: Snyder (1949b)
= Aricia obscuratidea Pandellé, 1898: 59
= Aricia obscuratoides Schnabl, 1887: 347
Helina obscurinervis (Stein, 1898: 199) - Oregon, California, Kansas to Quebec, s. to Texas andFla. References: Snyder (1949b)
= Spilogaster obscurinervis Stein, 1898: 199
Helina orbitaseta (Stein, 1898: 186) - Wash.to California andAriz., alsoMo. References: Snyder (1949b)
= Aricia orbitaseta/i> Stein, 1898: 186
Helina oregonensis
(Malloch in Cole and Lovett, 1919: 254) - British Columbia,Idaho,Utah References: Snyder (1949b) (notes)
= Aricia oregonensis Malloch in Cole and Lovett, 1919: 254
Helina parvula (Wulp, 1896: 321) - Mexico References: Snyder (1941), de Carvalho et al. (2005)
= Spilogaster parvula Wulp, 1896: 321
Helina pectinata (Johannsen, 1916: 392) - British Columbia to Manitoba, s. toCalif. and Arkansas, also Que.to N.S. toN.Y. References: Snyder (1949b)
= Mydaea pectinata Johannsen, 1916: 392
= Mydaea biseriata Stein, 1920: 29
= Helina mimetica Malloch, 1920: 142
Helina platykarenos Huckett, 1966: 286 - California
Helina polychaeta Huckett, 1966: 288 - California
Helina procedens (Walker, 1861: 315) - Mexico; North America References: Snyder (1949b)
= Aricia procedens Walker, 1861: 315
= Spilogaster uniseta Stein, 1898: 192
Helina reversio (Harris, 1780: 146) - Alaska to Nfld., s. to California and New York,Palaearctic References: Malloch (1921) (as duplicata), Huckett (1965) (as duplicata)
= Musca reversio Harris, 1780: 146
= Anthomyia compuncta Wiedemann, 1817: 80
= Anthomyia duplicata Meigen, 1826: 92
= Helina tibialis Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830: 494
= Mydina claripennis Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830: 497
= Mydina communis Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830: 497
= Mydina limpidipennis Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830: 498
= Mydina nigricans Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830: 497
= Mydina nigripes Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830: 498
= Anthomyia quadripunctata Brullé, 1833: 315
= Spilogaster caesia Macquart, 1835: 296
= Spilogaster quadrivittata Macquart, 1844: 163
= Anthomyia decedens Walker, 1853: 121
= Anthomyia fixa Walker, 1853: 121
= Anthomyia infixa Walker, 1853: 132
= Anthomyza vilis Zetterstedt, 1845: 1669
= Anthomyza flavogrisea Zetterstedt, 1860: 6275
= Aricia prospinosa Pandellé, 1898: 56
= Mydaea multimaculata Schnabl, 1911: 95
= Mydaea tagojana Santos Abreu, 1976: 115
Helina rubripalpis (Wulp, 1896: 320) - Mexico, Costa Rica; Texas References: Wulp (1896) (as Spilogaster), Stein (1920) (as Mydaea), Pont (1972), de Carvalho et al. (2005)
= Spilogaster rubripalpis Wulp, 1896: 320
= Ariciella flavicornis Malloch, 1918: 66
= Helina flavicornis Malloch, 1918: 66
Helina rufitibia (Stein, 1898: 181) - Alberta to Quebec, s. to California andGa. References: Snyder (1949b)
= Aricia rufitibia Stein, 1898: 181
= Hebecnema rufitibia Stein, 1908: 95
= Helina rufitibialis Hennig, 1957: 152
= Hebecnema luteoligaster Santos Abreu, 1976: 75
= Hebecnema nitidiuscula Santos Abreu, 1976: 76
= Hebecnema thoracica Santos Abreu, 1976: 76
Helina sera (Giglio-Tos, 1893: 9) - Mexico References: Snyder (1949c), de Carvalho et al. (2005)
= Spilogaster sera Giglio-Tos, 1893: 9
= Helina arroya Snyder, 1949: 6
Helina setifer Huckett, 1965: 256 - Yukon Territory
Helina sexmaculata (Preyssler, 1791: 88) - South Dakota and Minnesota, s. to Colorado and Missouri, Massachusetts to Georgia,Palaearctic, New Zealand References: Snyder (1949b) (as uliginosa)
= Musca deduco Harris, 1780: 125
= Musca sexmaculata Preyssler, 1791: 88
= Musca uliginosa Fallén, 1825: 81
= Rohrella punctata Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830: 492
= Anthomyza flavicoxa Zetterstedt, 1860: 6277
Helina spinicosta (Zetterstedt, 1845: 1641) - Alaska,Nunavut, n. Europe, n.USAS.R. References: Snyder (1949b) (notes), Huckett (1965)
= Anthomyza spinicosta Zetterstedt, 1845: 1641
= Anthomyza congenulata Zetterstedt, 1860: 6266
= Ecliponeura spinicosta Emden, 1941: 257
= Helina spinicostata Pont, 1980: 736
Helina spinilamellata Malloch, 1920: 140 - Montana References: Snyder (1949b)
Helina spinosa (Walker, 1849: 926) - Alaska to Labrador, s. toCalif. and New Mexico References: Snyder (1949b)
= Anthomyia spinosa Walker, 1849: 926
= Aricia latifrontata Malloch, 1918: 270
Helina spuria Malloch, 1920: 144 - Oregon, Colorado References: Snyder (1949b)
Helina squalens (Zetterstedt, 1838: 669) - Alaska to Labr., s. to Manitoba, n.w.Europe References: Snyder (1949b)
= Anthomyza borealis Zetterstedt, 1837: 44
= Anthomyza squalens Zetterstedt, 1837: 43
= Anthomyza borealis Zetterstedt, 1838: 679
= Anthomyza squalens Zetterstedt, 1838: 669
Helina snyderi Steyskal, 1966: 177 - Wyoming
Helina steini Pont, 2013
= Aricia punctata Stein, 1898: 182
= Quadrularia punctata Stein of Stone et al., 1965
Helina subvittata (Séguy, 1923: 336) - Europe: (Andorra), Russia: Asia: Japan; Alaska to Labrador, s. to California and New York,Palaearctic References: Snyder (1949b) (as rothi)
= Helina rothi Ringdahl, 1939: 150
= Phaonia subvittata Séguy, 1923: 336
Helina tarsalis (Stein, 1918: 220) - Mexico References: Stein (1920) (as Mydaea), Pont (1972) (not easily accessible), de Carvalho et al. (2005)
= Mydaea tarsalis Stein, 1918: 220
= Helina tarsalis Stein of Pont, 1972 (new combination)
Helina toga Snyder, 1949: 158 - Michigan
Helina troene (Walker, 1849: 936) - British Columbia to Newfoundland, s. to Calif.andGa. References: Snyder (1949b)
= Anthomyia lysinoe Walker, 1849: 938
= Anthomyia troene Walker, 1849: 936
= Spilogaster amoeba Stein, 1898: 190
= Spilogaster pubiceps Stein, 1898: 194
Helina ute Snyder, 1949: 155 - California
Helina villihumilis Snyder, 1949: 156 - British Columbia

References
Bigot, J.M.F. 1885. Diptères nouveaux ou peu connus. 25 partie, XXXIII: Anthomyzides nouvelles. Annales de la Société Entomologique de France (1884) (6) 4: 263-304.
Brullé, A.M. 1833. IVe Classe. Insectes [part]. Pp. 289-336. In Bory de Saint-Vincent (ed.), Expedition scientifique de Moree. Section des sciences physiques 3 (1) (Zool. 2), 400 pp. Paris.
Cole, F.R. & Lovett, A.L. 1919. New Oregon Diptera.Proceedings of the California Academy of Sciences (4) 9: 221-255.
de Carvalho, C.J.B., Couri, M.S., Pont, A.C., Pamplona, D. & Lopes, S.M. 2005. A catalogue of the Muscidae (Diptera) of the Neotropical Region. Zootaxa 860, 282 pp.
Giglio-Tos, E. 1893. Diagnosi di nuovi generi e di nuove specie di Ditteri. VIII. Boll. Mus. Zool. Anat. Comp. R. Univ. Torino 8 (147), 11 pp.
Malloch, J.R. 1918. Notes and descriptions of some anthomyiid genera. Proceedings of the Biological Society Washington 31: 65-68.
Malloch, J.R. 1919. A new anthomyiid from Labrador (Diptera). The Canadian Entomologist 51: 277-278.
Malloch, J.R. 1920. Descriptions of new North American Anthomyiidae (Diptera). Transactions of the American Entomological Society 46: 133-196, 3 pls.
Malloch, J.R. 1921. A synopsis of the North American species of the genus Helina R.-D., sens. lat. (Diptera, Anthomyiidae). The Canadian Entomologist 53: 103-109.
Malloch, J.R. 1922. Two new species of the genus Helina R.-D. (Diptera, Anthomyiidae). Bulletin of the Brooklyn Entomological Society 17: 95-96.
Meigen, J.W. 1826. Systematische Beschreibung der bekannten europäische n zweiflugeligen Insekten. Funfter Theil. Schulz-Wundermann, Hamm. xii + 412 pp.
Pont, A.C. (1972) Family Muscidae. In: A Catalogue of the Diptera of the Americas South of the United States, Museu de Zoologia, Universidade de São Paulo, 97, 111 pp.
Pont, A.C. 2013. The Fanniidae and Muscidae (Diptera) described by Paul Stein (1852-1921). Zoosystematics and Evolution 89(1): 31-166.
Preyssler, J.D.E. 1791. Beschreibungen und Abbildungen derjenigen Insekten, welche in Sammlungen nicht aufzubewahren sind, dann aller, die noch ganz neu, und solcher, von denen wir noch keine oder doch sehr schlechte Abbildung besitzen. Mayer, Samml. Naturh. Physikal. Aufsatze, Dresden 1: 55-151, 3 pls.
Rondani, C. 1866. Anthomyinae Italicae collectae distinctae et in ordinem dispositae. Dipterorum Stirps XVII. Anthomyinae Rndn. Atti della Società Italiana di Scienze Naturali e del Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di Milano 9: 68-217.
Santos Abreu, E. 1976. Monografia de los Anthomyidos de las Islas Canarias (Dipteros). Servicio del Aula de Cultura Elias Santos Abreu. 175 pp., 24 col. figs.
Schnabl, J. 1887. Contributions a la faune dipterologique. Genre Aricia. Trudy Russk. Ent. Obshch. (1885-1887) 20: 271-440, 21 pls.
Séguy, E. 1923. Diptères Anthomyides. Faune Fr., 6: ix + 393 pp.
Snyder, F.M. 1941. Contribution to a revision of Neotropical Mydaeini (Diptera: Muscidae). American Museum Novitates 1134, 22 pp.
Snyder, F.M. 1949a. Review of Nearctic Mydaea, sensu stricto, and Xenomydaea (Diptera, Muscidae). American Museum Novitates 1401, 38 pp.
Snyder, F.M. 1949b. Nearctic Helina Robineau-Devoidy (Diptera, Muscidae). Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 94: 111-160.
Snyder, F.M. 1949c. Notes and descriptions of some Phaoniinae (Diptera, Muscidae). American Museum Novitates 1402: 1-25.
Stein, P. 1898. Nordamerikanische Anthomyiden. Beitrag zur Dipteren-fauna der Vereinigten Staaten. Berliner Entomologische Zeitschrift (1897) 42: 161-288.
Stein, P. 1918. Zur weitern Kenntnis aussereuropaeischer Anthomyiden. Annales Historico-Naturales Musei Nationalis Hungarici 16: 147-244.
Stein, P. 1920. Nordamerikanische Anthomyiden. 2. Beitrag. Archiv für Naturgeschichte Abt. A 84 (9)[1918]: 1-106.
Walker, F. 1849. List of the specimens of dipterous insects in the collection of the British Museum. Part IV. British Museum (Natural History), London. Pp. [3] + 689-1172 + [2]
Walker, F. 1853. Insecta Britannica, Diptera. Volume 2. Reeve & Benham, London. vi + 298 pp., pls. 11-20.
Walker, F. 1861. Catalogue of the dipterous insects collected in Batchian, Kaisaa and Makian, and at Tidon in Celebes, by Mr. A. R. Wallace, with descriptions of new species. Journal and Proceedings of the Linnaean Society of London, Zoology 5: 270-303.
Wang, M. F., Xue, W. Q., & Zhang, D. 2004. NOTES ON ANNOSA SPECIES‐GROUP OF HELINA R.‐D.(DIPTERA: MUSCIDAE) IN CHINA. Insect Science, 11(4), 293-301.
Wiedemann, C.R.W. 1817. Neue Zweiflügler (Diptera Linn.) aus der Gegend um Kiel. Zoologisches Magazin 1(1): 61-86.
Wulp, F.M. van der 1896. Fam. Muscidae [part]. Biologia Centrali-Americana. Insecta. Diptera 2: 321-344
Zetterstedt, J.W. 1838. Dipterologis Scandinaviae. Sect. 3: Diptera, pp. 477-868. In his Insecta Lapponica. vi + 1,140 (pp.) Lipsiae [= Leipzig].
Zetterstedt, J.W. 1845. Diptera Scandinaviae disposita et descripta. Tomus quartus. Officina Lundbergiana, Lundae [= Lund.]. Pp. 1281-1738.
Zetterstedt, J.W. 1860. Diptera Scandinaviae disposita et descipta. Tomus decimus qvartus seu ultimus, continens addenda, corrigenda & emendata tomis prioribus, atque generico omnium tomorum. Officina Lundbergiana, Lundae [= Lund.]. Pp. i-iv + 6191-6609.

Ingresado el 22 de junio de 2022 por aispinsects aispinsects | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario

20 de junio de 2022

Systema Dipterorum's Checklist of Phaonia and Dolichophaonia (Diptera: Muscidae) north of Mexico

The "Phaoniini" of muscid flies in North America include some of the most diverse genera of the family in our area. Unfortunately, they are also very poorly known, often confused in nomenclature, and difficult to recognize from photographs. No checklist of the genus Phaonia north of Mexico has been made since Stone et al.'s catalogue, and Dolichophaonia was described in 1993, after which some Phaonia species in our area were almost silently transferred to. I have here compiled a list of species occuring in this area according to Systema Dipterorum, which keeps tabs on these taxa watchfully, including works published this year. It's one of the only options of sources we have to help make accessible checklists like these. Carvalho et al. made a catalogue of Muscidae of the Neotropical region in 2005. Next I will try to do this for Helina, which I also have specimens of, and might be an even more heterogenous genus than Phaonia.

Synopsis of Genera:
Genus Phaonia Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830: 482 (79 species)
In my trip to Massachusetts, I caught some flies and one of them keyed to Phaonia apicata (ssp. apicata? No nominal subspecies has been proposed) in Malloch (1923). That alone doesn't mean it is apicata; species not included in that key also should be accounted for, hence why I made this updated checklist, as notes for myself, but I would also like to share this with other people (I'm just not sure if I should be sharing this information like crazy, mostly due to copyright and stuff).
One of the defining characters for the genus Phaonia is the presence of hind tibia bare of setae except for a single well developed posterodorsal seta on the apical fourth or so. Other genera may also have this character, though, such as Hydrotaea (can we come to a consensus on the Hydrotaea-Ophyra issue please?!?!), Lophosceles, Muscina, and more. Helina almost always have a different configuration of the hind tibial chaetotaxy as Phaonia, with either more than 1 seta on the posterodorsal surface or with a single seta reduced in size or displaced. Arguably what's actually probably the more unique character of Phaonia is that many, maybe even most Phaonia also have 3 post-sutural dorsocentral setae, an exception among Muscidae, which usually have 4. Generally only Coenosiini and maybe some Helina have this character state. This can make them more difficult to separate from Anthomyiidae, however. In these cases, acrostichals also tend to be entirely lacking except for a prescutellar pair, which almost never occurs in Anthomyiidae. Most anthomyiids also have more than one posterodorsal seta on the hind tibiae. The crossveins on the wings may also be clouded with dark in Phaonia. The eyes can also be hairy.
Several additions to the fauna have been made since the keys from Malloch (1923) and Huckett (1965), and few synonymies. Ringdahl (1933) described P. bidentata. Hall (1937) described P. pudoa. Huckett (1965) of course described a few species. After Stone et al.'s catalogue, Huckett (1966) described several species from western North America. Huckett (1973) described P. cauta from Maine. Dialyta rufitibia, used in Huckett (1965), was synonymized with Phaonia flavitibia, and is consequently now Phaonia flavitibia. Phaonia morio Zetterstedt, used in Huckett (1965), was synonymized with P. lugubris. P. pruinosa became a junior primary homonym of Polietina concinna.
Not as straightforwardly, Phaonia pratensis has a markedly confused history of nomenclature. Most of it was summarized by Collin (1951) and Pont (1984). I haven't found it or its synonyms at all in Malloch (1923), Stone et al. (1965), or Huckett (1965), but it's listed to occur here by Systema Dipterorum. It turns out this species had been referred to as over 4 different species-group names. Collin (1951) described P. laetabilis, an additional species found among an assemblage also containing P. laeta Fallén in the UK. Later on, the valid name of P. laetabilis became P. trigonalis and that of P. laeta Fallén became P. pratensis. The lectotype of P. laeta turned out to be P. trigonalis itself though, and so Pont (1984), whom also explains all this, synonymized P. laetabilis with P. laeta. This should also imply that all of these names are just P. pratensis, since P. laeta is already a synonym of P. pratensis, but this was not made too clear. Systema Dipterorum lists both P. laeta and P. pratensis as valid names, but the ranges are printed exactly the same, suggesting that they meant for the two species to be the same. Therefore, I treat them all as P. pratensis here. I won't get into the other species-group names, but they are also synonyms. Collin (1951) denotes its morphology.

Genus Dolichophaonia Carvalho, 1993: 19 (2 species)
de Carvalho (1993) described the genus Dolichophaonia in their publication written in Portuguese. All the species assigned to the genus at the time were Neotropical, none occuring north of Mexico (yet?). Later on, our Phaonia texensis was provisionally transferred to the genus. Vockeroth (1996) shortly in his key to genera synonymized Dolichophaonia with Phaonia, suggesting there are no ways to separate females of that genus from Phaonia. This interpretation is reflected in the Muscidae portion in the Manual of Central America, written by Savage and Vockeroth (2015), which still considered Dolichophaonia a part of Phaonia. Couri & de Carvalho rejected this synonymy in 2002 during their key and taxonomic work of the Muscidae of the Neotropical region (that's also extremely difficult to access; I do not have it). It remains controversial if Dolichophaonia should remain a distinct genus. Systema Dipterorum considers it so. Fortunately, Malloch (1923) includes our Dolichophaonia species as Phaonia species and they are quite easily separated. Those species form a group in the key, suggesting a distinct relationship. At this time, only Dolichophaonia texensis appears to have been collected north of Mexico. Eventually, D. limbinervis will probably be found here. Systema Dipterorum broadly lists North America as part of its range anyway.

Checklist:
Genus Phaonia Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830: 482 (79 species)
Phaonia aberrans Malloch, 1919: 208 - New Jersey, Tennessee,North Carolina References: Malloch (1923)
Phaonia albocalyptrata Malloch, 1920: 267 - s.Alaska References: Malloch (1923), Huckett (1965)
Phaonia alpicola (Zetterstedt, 1845: 1401) - Alaska, Nunavut, Manitoba, Quebec,Europe,Palaearctic References: Huckett (1965)
= Aricia alpicola Boheman, 1844: 104 (nomen nudum)
= Aricia alpicola Zetterstedt, 1845: 1401
Phaonia alticola Malloch, 1923: 260 - Alaska, Nunavut,Yukon Territory References: Huckett (1965)
Phaonia antennalis Huckett, 1966: 296 - California
Phaonia apicalis Stein, 1914: 46 - Alaska,Michigan,n.Europe References: Huckett (1965)
Phaonia apicata Johannsen, 1916: 396 - Alberta, Iowa, Wisconsin,Michigan, Quebec, Labrador toGa. References: Malloch (1923)
+ssp. solitaria Stein, 1920: 15 - Wisconsin, New York
Phaonia atlanis Malloch, 1923: 279 - Quebec, Mich.to New York, s. to Miss.andFla.
Phaonia atrocitrea Malloch, 1923: 262 - Yukon Territory,Quebec References: Huckett (1965)
Phaonia atrocyanea Ringdahl, 1916: 234 - Alaska, Yukon Territory,Nunavut, Quebec, Labrador,Sweden References: Malloch (1923) (as citreibasis), Huckett (1965)
= Phaonia citreibasis Malloch, 1920: 268
Phaonia aurea Malloch, 1923: 256 - Washington
Phaonia azygos Malloch, 1923: 261 - New York
Phaonia basiseta Malloch, 1920: 133 - Alberta to Nunavut,s.to Alberta, South Dakota and Minnesota, e.Asia References: Malloch (1923), Huckett (1965)
Phaonia bidentata Ringdahl, 1933: 17 - Nunavut, Quebec,Labrador References: Huckett (1965)
Phaonia brevispina Malloch, 1923: 269 - Washington, to California,Idaho, Illinois to New Hampshire andVa.
Phaonia bysia (Walker, 1849: 936) - Alaska to Oreg., Alberta andIdaho, Michigan to Quebec, s. toGa. References: Malloch (1923), Huckett (1965)
= Anthomyia bysia Walker, 1849: 936
= Phaonia pallicornis Stein, 1920: 12
Phaonia caerulescens (Stein, 1898: 187) - Washington to Alberta, s.to California andUtah References: Malloch (1923)
= Aricia caerulescens Stein, 1898: 187
Phaonia californiensis (Malloch, 1923: 236) - California,Arizona
= Bigotomyia californiensis Malloch, 1923: 236
Phaonia cauta Huckett, 1973: 232 - Maine
Phaonia consobrina (Zetterstedt, 1838: 665) - Alaska to Greenland, s. to Quebec, Europe, n. Russia References: Malloch (1923), Huckett (1965)
= Anthomyza consobrina Zetterstedt, 1837: 43 (nomen nudum)
= Anthomyza consobrina Zetterstedt, 1838: 665
= Anthomyza vicina Zetterstedt, 1838: 673
= Aricia marmorata Zetterstedt, 1860: 6197
= Anthomyia serva Meigen of Lundbeck, 1898: 309
Phaonia coriatlanis Huckett, 1966: 297 - California
Phaonia curvinervis Malloch, 1923: 275 - N.S.
Phaonia curvipes (Stein, 1920: 19) - Michigan to Quebec, s.toN.C. References: Huckett (1965)
= Trichopticus curvipes Stein, 1920: 19
Phaonia deleta (Stein, 1898: 178) - Nunavut,California, Texas, Iowa to Quebec, s. toPa. References: Malloch (1923), Huckett (1965)
= Aricia deleta Stein, 1898: 178
Phaonia diruta (Stein, 1898: 188) - South Dakota,Kansas,Michigan to Connecticut, s. toGa. References: Malloch (1923)
= Spilogaster diruta Stein, 1898: 188
Phaonia dissimilis Malloch, 1923: 263 - Alaska References: Huckett (1965)
Phaonia errans (Meigen, 1826: 112) - Alaska to Newfoundland, s. toCalif. and New Jersey,Palaearctic References: Malloch (1923), Huckett (1965)
= Musca erratica Fallén, 1825: 77
= Anthomyia errans Meigen, 1826: 112
= Trennia nigricornis Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830: 484
= Anthomyza zetterstedt Bonsdorff, 1866: 273
= Yetodesia tinctipennis Rondani, 1866: 104
= Yetodesia manicata Rondani, 1871: 322
= Aricia girschneri Schnabl, 1888: 401
= Phaonia biseta Ringdahl, 1935: 31
+ssp. completa Malloch, 1923: 258 - New Hampshire
= Phaonia errans var. completa Malloch, 1923: 258
+ssp. luteva Walker, 1849: 934 - Nova Scotia
= Hyetodesia varipes Coquillett, 1900: 441
Phaonia fausta Huckett, 1965: 313 - Nunavut
Phaonia flava Stein, 1920: 6 - British Columbia, Oregon,California References: Malloch (1923)
Phaonia flavibasis Malloch, 1919: 208 - New York,New Hampshire References: Malloch (1923)
Phaonia flavitibia (Johannsen, 1916: 394) - Wisconsin to Quebec,s. toN.C. References: Huckett (1965) (as Dialyta)
=Dialyta flavitibia Johannsen, 1916: 394
=Dialyta rufitibia Stein, 1920: 23
Phaonia fraterna Malloch, 1923: 251 - New Hampshire
Phaonia fuscana Huckett, 1965: 906 - Washington, Oregon, Wisconsin to Quebec, s. to Tex.andGa.
= Spilogaster fusca Stein, 1898: 189
Phaonia fuscicauda Malloch, 1918: 269 - Washington,Oregon References: Malloch (1923)
= Phaonia fuscinervis Stein, 1920: 7
Phaonia harti Malloch, 1923: 266 - Alberta,Idaho, Arizona, Kans.to Michigan and Massachusetts, s. toVa.
Phaonia houghii (Stein, 1898: 177) - British Columbia toQue., s. to California,Oklahoma, andN.J. References: Malloch (1923)
= Aricia houghii Stein, 1898: 177
= Phaonia inculta Stein, 1920: 8
Phaonia hybrida (Schnabl, 1888: 396) - Alaska, Yukon Territory,Nunavut,Palaearctic References: Huckett (1965)
= Aricia hybrida Schnabl, 1888: 396
Phaonia imitatrix Malloch, 1919: 61c - USA (Alaska); Canada(Yukon) References: Huckett (1965)
Phaonia inenarrabilis Huckett, 1965: 314 - Nunavut,Alberta
Phaonia laticornis Malloch, 1923: 279 - Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, New Hampshire toN.C.
Phaonia lugubris (Meigen, 1826: 87) - Alaska, Yukon Territory, Nunavut, Greenland, cent. and n. Europe, e.Asia References: Huckett (1965) (as morio)
= Anthomyia lugubris Meigen, 1826: 87
= Aricia morio Boheman, 1844: 103 (nomen nudum)
= Aricia morio Zetterstedt, 1845: 1399
= Aricia plumbea Zetterstedt of Lundbeck, 1898: 308
Phaonia magnicornis (Zetterstedt, 1845: 1666) - Alaska, Yukon Territory,Palaearctic References: Huckett (1965)
= Anthomyza magnicornis Zetterstedt, 1845: 1666
= Aricia medisecta Pandellé, 1899: 102
Phaonia marylandica Malloch, 1923: 265 - Maine
Phaonia monticola Malloch, 1918: 266 - Alaska to Newfoundland, s. to Arizona andColo. References: Malloch (1923), Huckett (1965)
= Aricia morio Zetterstedt of Stein, 1920: 17
Phaonia neglecta Huckett, 1966: 299 - Alberta,Washington, Oregon,Colorado
Phaonia nigricans Johannsen, 1916: 395 - Alberta to South Dakota,Utah, Wisconsin to Quebec and Newfoundland, s. toD.C. References: Malloch (1923)
= Phaonia nigricans Johannsen, 1916: 395
= Spilogaster cayugae Johannsen, 1917: 327
= Phaonia nervosa Stein, 1920: 12
Phaonia nigricauda Malloch, 1918: 268 - California References: Malloch (1923)
Phaonia pallidisquama (Zetterstedt, 1849: 3288) - Nunavut (Baffin I.), Greenland, Quebec, n.w.Europe References: Huckett (1965)
= Aricia pallidisquama Zetterstedt, 1849: 3288
= Aricia anthracina Zetterstedt, 1860: 6227
Phaonia pallidosa Huckett, 1965: 907 - British Columbia and Idaho toCalif.
= Dialyta pallida Stein, 1920: 22
Phaonia pallidula Coquillett, 1902: 122 - Tex.to s. Ga.toMass References: Malloch (1923)
= Phaonia dulcis Stein, 1920: 5
Phaonia parviceps Malloch, 1918: 267 - Oregon References: Malloch (1923)
= Phaonia caesia Stein, 1920: 4
Phaonia peregrinans Huckett, 1965: 314 - Alaska
Phaonia perfida Stein, 1920: 13 - California,Utah References: Malloch (1923)
Phaonia picealis Huckett, 1965: 315 - Alaska
Phaonia pratensis (Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830: 485) - Michigan, Ontario, New Hampshire, Ohio,Europe References: Collin (1951), Pont (1984)
= Musca laeta (Fallén, 1823: 56) (tentative placement)
= Anthomyia trigonalis Meigen, 1826: 127
= Mydaea nigripes Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830: 481
= Euphemia pratensis Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830: 485
= Euphemia tibialis Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830: 486
= Anthomyia betuleti Bouché, 1834: 78
= Aricia brevivillosa Macquart, 1835: 292
= Aricia nigripes Schnabl, 1888: 454
= Aricia maculipennis Strøm, 1896: 238
= Phaonia laetabilis Collin, 1951: 2
Phaonia prisca Stein, 1920: 14 - New York References: Malloch (1923)
Phaonia protuberans Malloch, 1923: 247 - Washington to Colorado,Alberta to Labrador, s.toN.Y. References: Huckett (1965)
Phaonia proxima (Wulp, 1869: 85) - Alaska, Yukon Territory,Washington,Michigan References: Huckett (1965)
= Aricia proxima Wulp, 1869: 85
Phaonia pudoa Hall, 1937: 215 - Washington,Montana
Phaonia pulvillata (Stein, 1904: 422) - New York to Georgia References: Malloch (1923)
= Aricia pulvillataStein, 1904: 422
Phaonia quieta Stein, 1920: 14 - Oregon,California,Utah,Michigan References: Malloch (1923)
Phaonia reclusa Huckett, 1966: 300 - California
Phaonia reflecta Huckett, 1966: 301 - California
Phaonia reversa Huckett, 1966: 303 - California
Phaonia rufibasis Malloch, 1919: 207 - Alberta, Utah, Que.toMd References: Malloch (1923)
Phaonia rugia (Walker, 1849: 923) - Alaska to Labr., s. to Utah, Colo.andN.H. References: Malloch (1923) (as incerta), Huckett (1965)
= Anthomyia rugia Walker, 1849: 923
= Aricia brunneinervis Stein, 1898: 183
= Phaonia incerta Malloch, 1923: 250
Phaonia savonoskii Malloch, 1923: 248 - Nunavut,Washington,Alberta,Manitoba References: Huckett (1965)
Phaonia serva (Meigen, 1826: 86) - N.W.T.to Newfoundland, s. to Wyo. and Georgia,Palaearctic References: Malloch (1923), Huckett (1965)
= Anthomyia serva Meigen, 1826: 86
= Fellaea agilis Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830: 478
= Fellaea erratica Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830: 478
= Anthomyia interlatens Walker, 1853: 120
Phaonia sobriana Huckett, 1966: 304 - California
Phaonia soccata (Walker, 1849: 941) - Alberta, Ontario to MainetoN.Y. References: Malloch (1923), Huckett (1965)
= Anthomyia soccata Walker, 1849: 941
Phaonia striata (Stein, 1898: 179) - Washington,California References: Malloch (1923)
= Aricia striata Stein, 1898: 179
Phaonia subfusca Malloch, 1923: 273 - Arkansas, Ohio,New York
Phaonia subfuscinervis (Zetterstedt, 1838: 673) - Alaska to Greenland, s. to Manitoba and Quebec, New Hampshire,n.w.Europe References: Huckett (1965)
= Anthomyza inconspicua Zetterstedt, 1837: 43 (nomen nudum)
= Anthomyza subfuscinervis Zetterstedt, 1837: 43 (nomen nudum)
= Anthomyza turpis Zetterstedt, 1837: 43 (nomen nudum)
= Anthomyza vicina Zetterstedt, 1837: 43 (nomen nudum)
= Anthomyza inconspicua Zetterstedt, 1838: 673
= Anthomyza subfuscinervis Zetterstedt, 1838: 673
= Anthomyza turpis Zetterstedt, 1838: 673
Phaonia tenebriona Huckett, 1965: 315 - Yukon
Phaonia tipulivora Malloch, 1923: 252 - New York,New Hampshire, Maine,Massachusetts,Connecticut
Phaonia trivialis Malloch, 1923: 278 - Alberta
Phaonia uniseriata Malloch, 1923: 268 - Washington
Phaonia versicolor Stein, 1920: 16 - Colorado References: Malloch (1923)
Phaonia winnemanae Malloch, 1919: 3 - Wisconsin,Michigan, New York,Massachusetts, Maine,New Hampshire References: Malloch (1923)
= Phaonia apta Stein, 1920: 4

Genus Dolichophaonia Carvalho, 1993: 19 (2 species)
Dolichophaonia texensis (Malloch, 1923) - California, Arizona,Florida,Mexico
+ssp. flavofemorata Malloch - Texas, Florida
Dolichophaonia limbinervis (Stein, 1918: 208) - Mexico; North America References: Malloch (1923)

References:
de Carvalho, C. J. B. DOLICHOPHAONIA, GEN. N.(DIPTERA, MUSCIDAE, PHAONIINAE) DESCRIÇOES, NOVAS COMBINAÇOES, SINONIMIAS. Revista Brasiliera de Entomologia 37(1): 19-34.
de Carvalho, C.J.B. & Couri, M.S. 2002. Part I. Basal groups, pp. 17-132. In: Carvalho, C.J.B. de (ed.), Muscidae (Diptera) of the Neotropical Region: taxonomy. Iniversidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Curitiba. 293 pp.
de Carvalho, C.J.B., Couri, M.S., Pont, A.C., Pamplona, D. & Lopes, S.M. 2005. A catalogue of the Muscidae (Diptera) of the Neotropical Region. Zootaxa 860, 282 pp.
Collin, J.E. 1951. Phaonia laetabilis sp.n. with notes on some other related Anthomyiidae (Diptera). Entomologist’s Record and Journal of Variation 63(2): 1-5.
Couri, M.S. & de Carvalho, C.J.B. 2002. Part II. Apical groups, pp. 133-260. In: Carvalho, C.J.B. de (ed.), Muscidae (Diptera) of the Neotropical Region: taxonomy. Iniversidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Curitiba. 293 pp.
Falk, S.J, and Pont, A.C. 2017. A Provisional Assessment of the Status of Calypterate flies in the UK. Natural England. Commissioned Reports, Number 234.
Fallen, C.F. 1820-1825. Monographia Muscidum Sveciae.
Hall, D.G. 1937. New muscoid flies (Diptera) in the United States National Museum. Proceedings of the United States National Museum 84[3011]: 201-216.
Huckett, H.C. 1965. The Muscidae of Northern Canada, Alaska and Greenland (Diptera). Mem. ent. Soc. Can. 42, 369 pp.
Huckett, H.C. 1966. New species of Anthomyiidae and Muscidae from California (Diptera).Proceedings of the California Academy of Sciences 34: 235-305.
Huckett, H.C. 1973. The Anthomyiidae and Muscidae of Mt. Katahdin, Maine (Diptera). J. N.Y. ent. Soc. 80[1972]: 216-233.
Malloch, J.R. 1918. Diptera from the southwestern United States. Paper IV. Anthomyiidae. Transactions of the American Entomological Society 44: 263-319, 1 pl.
Malloch, J.R. 1919. One new genus and two new species of Anthomyiidae from the vicinity of Washington, D. C. (Diptera). Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 32: 1-14.
Malloch, J.R. 1919. Some new eastern Anthomyiidae (Diptera). Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 32: 207-210.
Malloch, J.R. 1919. The Diptera collected by the Canadian Expedition, 1913-1918 (Excluding the Tipulidae and Culicidae). Pp. 34c-90c. In: Anderson, R. M. (ed.), Report of the Canadian Arctic Expedition 1913-1918. Vol. 3: Insecta. 90 pp., 10 pls.
Malloch, J.R. 1920. Descriptions of new North American Anthomyiidae (Diptera). Transactions of the American Entomological Society 46: 133-196, 3 pls.
Malloch, J.R. 1923. Flies of the anthomyiid genus Phaonia and related genera. Transactions of the American Entomological Society 48[1922]: 227-282.
Meigen, J.W. 1826. Systematische Beschreibung der bekannten europäische n zweiflugeligen Insekten. Funfter Theil. Schulz-Wundermann, Hamm. xii + 412 pp.
Pont, A.C. 1984. A revision of the Fanniidae and Muscidae (Diptera) described by Fallen. Entomologica Scandinavica 15: 277-297.
Stein, P. 1898. Nordamerikanische Anthomyiden. Beitrag zur Dipteren-fauna der Vereinigten Staaten. Berliner Entomologische Zeitschrift (1897) 42: 161-288.
Stein, P. 1914. Versuch, die Gattungen und Arten unserer Anthomyiden nur nach dem weiblichen Geschlecht zu bestimmen, nebst Beschreibung einiger neuen Arten. Archiv für Naturgeschichte (Abt. A) 79 (8)[1913]: 4-55.
Stein, P. 1920. Nordamerikanische Anthomyiden. 2. Beitrag. Archiv für Naturgeschichte Abt. A 84 (9)[1918]: 1-106.
Vockeroth, J.R. 1996. Key to the genera of Muscidae (Diptera) of Mexico, Central America, and the West Indies. Memoirs of the Entomological Society of Washington 18: 280–288.
Walker, F. 1849. List of the specimens of dipterous insects in the collection of the British Museum. Part IV. British Museum (Natural History), London. Pp. [3] + 689-1172 + [2].
Zetterstedt, J.W. 1838. Dipterologis Scandinaviae. Sect. 3: Diptera, pp. 477-868. In his Insecta Lapponica. vi + 1,140 (pp.) Lipsiae [= Leipzig].
Zetterstedt, J.W. 1845. Diptera Scandinaviae disposita et descripta. Tomus quartus. Officina Lundbergiana, Lundae [= Lund.]. Pp. 1281-1738.

Ingresado el 20 de junio de 2022 por aispinsects aispinsects | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario

14 de junio de 2022

Systema Dipterorum's Checklist of Limnophora (Diptera: Muscidae) north of Mexico

The species of Limnophora and related genera are poorly known and a nomenclatural mess. The Systema Dipterorum probably serves as the only modern or recent taxonomic authority for such genera, at least for the Nearctic region. The work in Stone et al. (1965) hardly differs from this catalogue except for the addition of the species L. invada from California described by Huckett in 1966.

Checklist (10 species):
Limnophora discreta Stein, 1898: 204 - Alaska to California and New Mexico, British Columbia to Newfoundland, s. to Ill.andFla.
Limnophora narona (Walker, 1849: 945) - Washington to Alberta & Quebec, s. to Chile & Argentina; Bermuda, West Indies
= Anthomyia narona Walker, 1849: 945
= Anthomyia prominula Thomson, 1869: 550
= Homalomyia dentata Bigot, 1885: 284
= Limnophora cyrtoneurina Stein, 1898: 203
= Limnophora indecisa Stein, 1901: 198 (unavailable)
= Limnophora transmutans Stein, 1901: 214 (unavailable)
Limnophora incrassata Malloch, 1919: 299 - Alaska,Washington, Montana, Oregon, Wyo.,Colorado
Limnophora invada Huckett, 1966: 285 - California
Limnophora femorata (Malloch, 1913: 603) - Arizona, New Mexico, BajaCalif.
= Tetramerinx femorata Malloch, 1913: 603
Limnophora nigripes (Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830) - Alaska to Greenland, s. to California,Quebec, and Newfoundland, also S.Dak.
= Limosia nigripes Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830: 541
Limnophora groenlandica Malloch, 1920: 147 - West Greenland
Limnophora rotundata (Collin, 1930: 256) - w Greenland
= Pseudolimnophora rotundata Collin, 1930: 256
Limnophora sinuata Collin, 1930: 256 - Newfoundland, Greenland, Iceland,Favoes,Norway
= Limnophora islandica Lyneborg, 1965: 215
Limnophora uniseta Stein, 1916: 94 - Alaska to Greenland,also British Columbia, Washington, n.Europe
= Limnophora quadripunctata Curtis, 1837: 264 (nomen nudum)
= Limnophora coenosiaeformis Schnabl, 1889: 336 (nomen nudum)
= Limnophora nilotica Schnabl, 1889: 335 (nomen nudum)
= Limnophora parallelinervis Schnabl, 1889: 335 (nomen nudum)
= Limnophora lunulata Santos Abreu, 1976: 97
= Limnophora tenuiornata Santos Abreu, 1976: 91

Reference
Bigot, J.M.F. 1885. Diptères nouveaux ou peu connus. 25 partie, XXXIII: Anthomyzides nouvelles. Annales de la Société Entomologique de France (1884) (6) 4: 263-304.
Collin, J.E. 1930. A revision of the Greenland species of the anthomyid genus Limnophora sens. lat. (Diptera), with figures of the male genitalia of these and many other Palaearctic species. Transactions of the Royal Entomological Society of London 78: 255-281, 13 pls.
Curtis, J. 1837. A guide to an arrangement of British Insects: being a catalogue of all the named species hitherto discovered in Great Britain and Ireland. Second Edition, Greatly enlarged. J. Pigot, Sherwood and Co. & Marshall, London. vi pp. + 294 columns.
Huckett, H.C. 1932. The North American species of the genus Limnophora Robineau-Desvoidy, with descriptions of new species (Muscidae, Diptera). Journal of the New York Entomological Society 40: 25-76, 105-158, 279-338, 7 pls.
Huckett, H.C. 1966. New species of Anthomyiidae and Muscidae from California (Diptera).Proceedings of the California Academy of Sciences 34: 235-305.
Lyneborg, L. 1965. On Muscidae and Anthomyiidae (Diptera) from Iceland. With the description of two new species. Opuscula Entomologica 30: 211-226.
Malloch, J.R. 1913. Three new species of Anthomyiidae (Diptera) in the United States National Museum collection. Proceedings of the United States National Museum 45[2004]: 603-607.
Malloch, J.R. 1919. New species of flies (Diptera) from California. Proceedings of the California Academy of Sciences (4) 9: 297-312.
Malloch, J.R. 1920. Descriptions of new North American Anthomyiidae (Diptera). Transactions of the American Entomological Society 46: 133-196, 3 pls.
Santos Abreu, E. 1976. Monografia de los Anthomyidos de las Islas Canarias (Dipteros). Servicio del Aula de Cultura Elias Santos Abreu. 175 pp., 24 col. figs.
Schnabl, J. 1889. Contributions a la faune dipterologique. Trudy Russk. Ent. Obshch. 23: 313-347.
Stein, P. 1898. Nordamerikanische Anthomyiden. Beitrag zur Dipteren-fauna der Vereinigten Staaten. Berliner Entomologische Zeitschrift (1897) 42: 161-288.
Stein, P. 1901. Die Walker'schen aussereuropäische n Anthomyiden in der Sammlung des British Museum zu London. Zeitschrift für Systematische Hymenopterologie und Dipterologie 1: 185-221.
Stein, P. 1916. Die Anthomyiden Europas. Tabellen zur Bestimmung derGattungen und aller mir bekannten Arten, nebst mehr oder wenigerausfuhrlichen Beschreibungen. Archiv für Naturgeschichte (1915) (A) 81(10): 1-224.
Stone, A., Sabrosky, C.W., Wirth, W.W., Foote, R.H. & Coulson, J.R. 1965. A catalog of the Diptera of America north of Mexico. Agric. Handbk 276, 1696 pp.
Thomson, C.G. 1869. Diptera. Species nova descripsit, pp. 443-614. In: Kongliga svenska fregatten Eugenies resa omkring jorden under befäl af C.A. Virgin, åren 1851-1853. 2 (Zoologi) 1, Insecta. "1868". P.A. Norstedt & Soner, Stockholm. 617 pp., pl. 9.
Walker, F. 1849. List of the specimens of dipterous insects in the collection of the British Museum. Part IV. British Museum (Natural History), London. Pp. [3] + 689-1172.

Ingresado el 14 de junio de 2022 por aispinsects aispinsects | 6 comentarios | Deja un comentario

29 de abril de 2022

Brief synopsis on some keys to Phoridae in the New World, possibly incl. key to genera of Phoridae North of Mexico in the future

The Manual of Nearctic Diptera's key to genera is outdated. Additionally, a whole addendum/corrigendum to the key published by Dr. Brian Brown was published in 1988 that went overlooked by online sources (no page for the reference exists on BugGuide, it seems, yet). I have added this and other important literature for the Nearctic fauna to the Phoridae family page on BugGuide. The key in Manual Central America includes most of the genera north of Mexico, except as follows (species if only one species occuring in our area) based on the world catalogue on Phorid.net (ranges based on Systema Dipterorum):

  • Aenigmatias
  • Beckerina
  • Chaetopleurophora (but that publication includes Chaetocnemistoptera, which was and is often treated as part of Chaetopleurophora) (EDIT: Dr. Brown has commented, saying they are both separate genera, so Chaetopleurophora remains amiss)
  • Hirotophora multiseriata - Nebraska to Massachusetts, s. to New Mexico, Mississippi andV
  • Hypocera
  • Mallochphora orphnephiloides - Maryland, Virginia, Tennessee
  • Microselia texana - Arizona,Texas
  • Spiniphora
  • Stenophorina petiolata - Michigan, Tennessee
  • Trucidophora camponoti - Canada (Alberta to Ontario) s. to USA (California)
  • Veruanus boreotis - Michigan

The genera with multiple species in the region seen here is Aenigmatias, Beckerina, Hypocera, and Spiniphora.

EDIT: Dr. Brown has commented, saying Crinophleba is a junior synonym of Burmophora.

References:
Brown, B. V. 1988. Additions to the phorid chapter in the “MANUAL OF NEARCTIC DIPTERA, VOLUME 2” (Diptera: Phoridae). The Canadian Entomologist, 120(04), 307–322.

Ingresado el 29 de abril de 2022 por aispinsects aispinsects | 3 comentarios | Deja un comentario

16 de abril de 2022

Systema Dipterorum's Checklist of Chrysopilus (Diptera: Rhagionidae) north of Mexico

Chrysopilus andersoni Leonard, 1930: 131 - USA: Illinois, Indiana,Ohio
Chrysopilus angustifacies Hardy, 1949: 148 - USA: Arizona
Chrysopilus anthracina Bigot, 1887: 105 - USA: WA to CA
Chrysopilus arctiventris James, 1936: 343 - USA: Washington to Wyo., s. to California and New Mexico
Chrysopilus basilaris (Say, 1823: 36) - Michigan toN.H., s. to Texas and Florida,?Guatemala.
Chrysopilus beameri Hardy, 1949: 151 - USA: FL
Chrysopilus connexus Johnson, 1912: 108 - USA: FL
Chrysopilus davisi Johnson, 1912: 4 - USA: NC
Chrysopilus dilatus Cresson, 1919: 177 - USA: CA
Chrysopilus divisus Hardy, 1949: 152 - USA: AZ
Chrysopilus fasciatus (Say, 1823: 37) - New Hampshire to North Carolina
Chrysopilus flavibarbis Adams, 1904: 438 - British Columbia to Manitoba, s. to California and New Mexico, also Mass
/syn. Chrysopilus aldrichi James, 1936
/syn. Chrysopilus cameroni Curran, 1926: 170
Chrysopilus foedus Loew, 1861: 317 - USA: South Dakota to Indiana andKans.
Chrysopilus georgianus Hardy, 1949: 154 - USA: Georgia
Chrysopilus griffithi Johnson, 1897: 119 - USA: Florida
Chrysopilus humilis Loew, 1874: 379 - USA: California, New Mexico, Colorado,?Illinois
Chrysopilus infuscatus Leonard, 1930: 141 - USA: Indiana, Louisiana
Chrysopilus kincaidi Hardy, 1949: 156 - USA: WA
Chrysopilus longipalpis Hardy, 1949: 157 - British Columbia toCalif.
Chrysopilus modestus Loew, 1872: 58 - Nebr.to New York, s. to Texas andVa.
Chrysopilus nudus Cresson, 1919: 176 - USA: CA, WA
Chrysopilus occidentalis Kerr, 2010: 122 - British Columbia and Alberta, s. to n. California & Utah
/syn Chrysopilus lucifer Adams, 1904: 437
Chrysopilus pilosus Leonard, 1930: 152 - Colorado and Nebraska, e. to Ohio andMich.
Chrysopilus proximus (Walker, 1848: 214) - South Dakota to N.S., s. to Florida, ?California,?Nevada
Chrysopilus quadratus (Say, 1823: 35) - British Columbia to Newfoundland, s. to California andFla.
/syn Chrysopilus dispar Wulp, 1867: 143
/syn Chrysopilus flavidus Bigot, 1887: 104
Chrysopilus rotundipennis Loew, 1861: 317 - Massachusetts to Florida andAla.
Chrysopilus testaceipes Bigot, 1887: 105 - British Columbia and Alberta to s. California and New Mexico
/syn. Chrysopilus bellus Adams, 1904: 438
Chrysopilus thoracicus (Fabricius, 1805: 70) - Illinois to Ontario andN.C.
Chrysopilus tomentosus Bigot, 1887: 104 - Washington to s. California andColo.
Chrysopilus velutinus Loew, 1861: 316 - Kentucky, Maryland, North Carolina,Florida
Chrysopilus xanthopus Hardy, 1949: 163 - Arizona, New Mexico,Texas

Ingresado el 16 de abril de 2022 por aispinsects aispinsects | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario

14 de marzo de 2022

Key to some New World genera of Coenosiini and its close relatives

The body plan of Coenosia-like flies is actually convergently evolved, with some species in genera outside of Coenosiini having this body plan (predatory flies with a gray body with some small markings on the abdomen, legs with long setae, dichoptic in both sexes, etc). These are flies with the anepimeron bare (not Muscini, Stomoxyini, etc), body color not usually metallic, bare hind coxae, node of Rs and base of R4+5 bare above, vein M usually straight or only curved slightly forward, and at least one presutural dorsocentral bristle moderately strong, clearly distinguishable from surrounding setulae. This key was made to overcome accessibility issues, probably all New World genera of Coenosiini are covered here.

  1. Labella fleshy or reduced; prestomal teeth present or absent; first presutural dorsocentral bristle
    more than half as long as second, but if absent, then labella fleshy, prestomal teeth absent and male
    holoptic (aberrant Helina spp.); katepisternal bristles, if more than two in number, with lower or
    lower posterior one always closer to upper posterior one than to upper anterior one; lower proepimeral
    bristle curved dorsally; first postsutural supra-alar (prealar) present or absent; male frons varied in
    width. Hind tibia usually without posterodorsal bristles or with at most two bristles; if three or more are present, they are restricted to basal half of tibia and are much shorter than anterodorsal bristles; legs sometimes partly yellow. Hind tibia with calcar absent, at most with one to two short bristles on basal half (Non-Coenosiini)...........................................................................................................................................................2
    Labella reduced; prestomal teeth developed; first presutural dorsocentral bristle absent or weak
    and less than half as long as second and/or katepisternal bristles arranged in nearly equilateral
    or isosceles triangle, with lower bristle almost equidistant from the two upper bristles
    (rarely closer to anterior upper katepisternal bristle in Bithoracochaeta); lower proepimeral bristle
    usually curved ventrally or anteroventrally; first postsutural supra-alar (prealar) bristle
    absent; male frons at least one-fifth as wide as head................................................................................................6

  2. Katepimeron and prosternum setulose....................................................................................................Helina
    Katepimeron bare; prosternum bare or setulose.....................................................................................3

  3. Sternite 1 setulose; first postsutural supra-alar (prealar) bristle usually absent, but if
    visible, then less than half as long as second notopleural; hind tibia with anterodorsal apical bristle
    various..................................................................................................................................................................4
    Sternite 1 bare; first postsutural supra-alar bristle present or absent; hind tibia with anterodorsal
    apical bristle strong.............................................................................................................................................5

  4. Sternite 1 with few strong setae near posterior margin; frons of male narrow, frontal
    vitta obliterated on most of upper half of frons; hind tibia with anterodorsal apical bristle weak..Brontaea
    Sternite 1 with fine setulae on most of its surface; frons of male wide, frontal vitta
    distinct throughout; hind tibia with anterodorsal apical bristle strong..................................................Lispoides

  5. Arista pubescent, longest microtrichium no longer than basal diameter of arista; first postsutural
    supra-alar (prealar) bristle absent; legs entirely black...............................................................................Spilogona
    Either arista with longest microtrichium much longer than basal diameter of arista or first postsutural
    supra-alar (prealar) bristle present or legs partly to entirely yellow.......................................................Helina

  6. Dorsocentral bristles 2+4; arista short, only slightly longer than first flagellomere; Nearctic, Bahamas, South America................................................................................................................................................Tetramerinx
    Dorsocentral bristles 1-2+2-3; arista various.........................................................................................................7

  7. Profrons projected................................................................. ............................................................................Noelia
    Profrons not projected.................................................................................. ...............................................................8

  8. Parafacial with a few fine hairs on upper third. Arista with longest hairs almost twice as long as width of first flagellomere...........................................................................................................................................Pentacricia
    Parafacial bare. Arista with longest hairs at most as long as with of first flagellomere.................................9

  9. One strong presutural dorsocentral seta, sometimes preceded by a second short seta. .................................................................................................................... ........................................................................10
    Two strong presutural dorsocentral setae, more or less similar in length......................................................24

  10. Postsutural dorsocentral setae 2...........................................................................................................................11
    Postsutural dorsocentral setae 3...............................................................................................................................12

  11. Basal scutellar seta shorter the apical pair; frons longer than wide; hind tibia with long median setae on anterodorsal, anteroventral, posterodorsal and sometimes posteroventral surfaces.......Bithoracochaeta
    Basal scutellar seta as long as or longer than the apical pair; frons wider than long............Schoenomyzina

  12. Wing with anal lobe reduced............................................................................................................Cholomyioides
    Wing with anal lobe normal..........................................................................................................................................13

  13. Hind tibia with at least one anterodorsal supramedian seta in addition to the median seta...................14
    Hind tibia without any anterodorsal supramedian seta in addition to the median setae ............................18

  14. Hind tibia without any posterodorsal supramedian seta; frons wider than longer; mid tibia with anteroventral seta.....................................................................................................................................Schoenomyza
    Hind tibia with at least one posterodorsal supramedian seta; frons variable...............................................15

  15. Apical scutellar setae short...........................................................................................................................Pilispina
    Apical scutellar setae strong........................................................................................................................................16

  16. Arista bare; lower calypter may be twice as large as upper calypter..........................................Stomopogon
    Arista not as above...........................................................................................................................................................17

  17. Hind tibia with preapical setae on anterodorsal and dorsal surfaces ...................................................................................................................................................................Notoschoenomyza
    Hind tibia with preapical setae on anterodorsal, dorsal and posterodorsal surfaces..........Spathipheromyia

  18. Katepisternal seta 0:1; disc of katepisternum with numerous setulae and hairs; lower proepimeral seta directed upwards, male: prealar seta present...............................................................................Drepanocnemis
    Katepisternal setae 1:1:1; disc of katepisternum with few setulae or hairs; lower proepimeral seta directed downwards, male: prealar seta absent.......................................................................................................19

  19. Calypteres similar in length..................................................................................................................Schoenomyza
    Lower calypter about twice as long as upper calypter.........................................................................................20

  20. Arista with plumes only on basal two-thirds; hind tibia with one supramedian posterodorsal seta.....................................................................................................................................................................Plumispina
    Arista with plumes along its entire length or only on basal two-thirds but usually with only very short hairs; hind tibia only rarely with a supramedian posterodorsal setae.................................................................21

  21. Hind femur with 3 preapical setae, on anterodorsal, dorsal and posterodorsal to posterior surfaces...............................................................................................................................................................................22
    Hind femur with 2 preapical setae, on anterodorsal and posterodorsal surfaces.........................................23

  22. Antennal insertion well above mid-level of eye; one pair of postsutural intra-alar setae; lower calypter transverse......................................................................................................................................................Cordiluroides
    Antennal insertion at mid-level of eye; two pairs of postsutural
    intra-alar setae; lower calypter glossiform............................................................................Neodexiopsis, in part

  23. Gena greatly reduced, almost linear; female: ovipositor of medium length; tergites and sternites broad..................................................................................................................................................................Agenamyia
    Gena of moderate width; female: ovipositor long; tergites and sternites long and
    narrow.................................................................................................................................................Coenosia, in part

  24. Apical scutellar setae shorter than the basal setae.............................................................................Pilispina
    Apical scutellar setae as long as the basal setae....................................................................................................25

  25. Palpus rather enlarged apically; gena very deep; eyes reduced in size, with few setae around vibrissae.........................................................................................................................................................................Apsil
    Palpus slender; gena variable; eyes not or hardly reduced, with few or many setae
    around vibrissae..................................................................................................................................................................26

  26. Antennal flagellomere modified apically; hind tibia without setae on posterodorsal surface; fore tibia with mid posterior seta..................................................................................................................................Oxytonocera nigrohalterata
    Antennal flagellomere not modified apically............................................................................................................27

  27. Arista short and enlarged basally; katepisternum 2:2; claws and pulvilli small; male hypandrium not tubular; female ovipositor of moderate length with large tergites................................................Pachyceramyia
    Arista long and slender, or without the combination of above characters.......................................................28

  28. Fore tibia on posterior surface without setae; legs blackish; hind tibiae with 1 seta on posterodorsal surface; katepisternum 1:1:1 but may be with additional anterior seta.........................................................................................................................................Rhabdotoptera striatipennis
    Fore tibia usually with setae on posterior surface; not with the above combination of characters...........29

  29. ?????? Fore tibia on middle of posterior surface with, at least, one seta; katepisternal setae 1:1:1; arista long and slender; claws and pulvilli long; male: hypandrium tubular, very elongated; female: ovipositor long, with slender tergites; South America.................................................................................................Reynoldsia
    ???????............................................................................................................................................................................30

  30. Legs blackish; hind tibia with 2 anterodorsal setae...........................................................................................31
    Fore and mid tibiae, and often most of legs, yellow; hind tibia usually with one anterodorsal seta..........32

  31. Frontal vitta at level of anterior ocellus as wide in both sexes as distance between anterior pair of dorsocentral setae; ocellar triangle densely silvery pruinose in male and whitish pruinose in female, extending to anterior margin of frons.....................................................................................................Limnospila
    Frontal vitta at level of anterior ocellus narrower in both sexes than distance between anterior pair of dorsocentral setae; ocellar triangle not silvery nor whitish pruinose, and not extending to anterior margin offrons..........................................................................................................................................................Pseudocoenosia

  32. Katepisternum with 4 setae, 3 of which are located at posterior edge of sclerite.....................Macrorchis
    Katepisternum with 3 setae; postsutural dorsocentral setae 3; hind tibia without any anterodorsal supramedian seta in addition to the median setae; disc of katepisternum with few setulae or hairs; lower calypter about twice as long as upper calypter; lower proepimeral seta directed downwards, male: prealar seta absent; arista with plumes along its entire length or only on basal two-thirds but usually with only very short hairs; hind tibia only rarely with a supramedian posterodorsal setae................................................................................................................................33

  33. Hind femur with 3 preapical setae, on anterodorsal, dorsal and posterodorsal to posterior surfaces; antennal insertion at mid-level of eye; two pairs of postsutural intra-alar setae; lower calypter glossiform.......................................................................................................................................Neodexiopsis, in part
    Hind femur with 2 preapical setae, on anterodorsal and posterodorsal surfaces; postsutural dorsocentral setae 3; gena of moderate width; female: ovipositor long; tergites and sternites long and narrow.....................................................................................................................................................Coenosia, in part

Ingresado el 14 de marzo de 2022 por aispinsects aispinsects | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario