Nomenclature of the European Species of Neoascia Williston (Diptera: Syrphidae)

Nomenclature of the European species of Neoascia Williston (Diptera: Syrphidae)

F. CHRISTIAN THOMPSON

tnt. SCcinCl. Thompson, F. C. Nomenclature of the European species of Neoascia Meigen (Diptera: Syrphidae). Ent. scand. 12: 470-478. Lund, Sweden 15 Decmeber 1981. ISSN 0013-8711. The nomenclature of the European Neoascia species is reviewed. Previously unrecognized senior synonyms are brought forward for the nomenclaturally confused species: annexa Miiller forfloralis of authors, not Meigen; meticulosa Scopoli for dispar andaenea Meigen; and tenur Harris for dispar of authors, not Meigen. Sphegina clavata (Scopoli) is recognized as the senior synonym for nigra Meigen and verecunda Collin. F. C. Thompson, Syst. Ent. Lab., SEA, USDA, c/o U.S. Nat. Mus. NHB-168, Washing- ton, D.C. 20560 USA.

The names and identities of some of the com- Art. 12 of the, International Code of Zoological monest European species of Neoascia have been Nomenclature). These descriptions, especially confused. Lundbeck (1916) was first to correctly those associated with older names, are frequent- delimit and fix the names of the species, dispar ly inadequate for positive identification, but they Meigen and floralis Meigen. Collin (1940), while do provide the only evidence for assigning their accepting Lundbeck's species definitions, dis- associated names. agreed with his application of the Meigen names. Hence, confusion arose; some authors have fol- Names can ge grouped according to their as- lowed Lundbeck and others Collin. All names sociated descriptions (or absence of one), into applicable to the European species of Neoascia four classes as follows: are reviewed. Each name is discussed individual- Nomina perfecta: Names applicable to a particu- ly and in alphabetical order. A summary sy- lar taxon, that is, the associated description nonymy is given for each valid name. This sy- "perfectly" defines its taxon; nonymy also identifies the usage in various keys Nomina imperfecta: Names applicable to more to the European Neoascia species. Unused than one taxon, that is, the associated descrip- senior synonyms are brought forward for those tion "imperfectly" defines its taxon; species which have had a confused nomen- Nomina incognita: Names not applicable to any clatural history. known taxon, that is, the associated description My approach to nomenclatural problems, defines an "unknown" taxon (or taxa); and which may appear unorthodox to some, has been Nomina nuda: Names without descriptions. explained elsewhere (Thompson 1980). Briefly, the Law of Priority is considered to be the prin- The treatment of names is rather uniform ciple of nomenclature and the basis for stability: except those of the class Nomina imperfecta. Old names are to be used, not ignored. Where Nomina perfecta are considered valid on the type specimens of names exist, they should be basis of synonymy and priority. Nomina incog- studied and their names applied accordingly. nita are ignored or listed as nomina dubia or Where type specimens no longer exist, their incertae sedis. Nomina nuda are not available names must be resolved on the basis of their and, thus, are not part of Zoological Nomencla- descriptions (here used in the broad sense of ture. Nomina imperfecta are treated differently "descriptions, definitions or indications" as per accordingly to their usage. Some nomina imper-

Entomologica scandinavica (DIPT 041). Purchased by United States Department ■>t Agriculture for Official use. ENT. SCAND. VOL. 12 (1981) Nomenclature of European Neoascia Williston 471 fecta are considered valid when they have been date of Zoological Nomenclature (1758). I have defined by tradition, whereas others are ignored carefully checked the few publications contain- as nomina dubia. For example, the name per- ing Diptera names that occur in the five-year tinax Scopoli has been used for an Eristalis spe- period and feel certain that no older Sphegina cies with bright orange front tarsi ever since names exist. For the 59-year period between Schiner (1856:417) resurrected the name from 1763 and 1822, I am not as certain to whether synonymy with Eristalis tenax (Linnaeus) (Rossi Sphegina names older than nigra Meigen exist 1790: 282). As Scopoli (1763: 352) did not de- and, thereby, potentially, could upset nomen- scribe the characteristic orange front tarsi, there clatural stability again. The time span is much is doubt ("grave doubts" Verrall 1901a: 514) greater in the cases of the Neoascia names dis- whether the name pertinax has been correctly cussed here. identified. Its original description could apply to other Eristalis species (nemorum Linnaeus, pratorum Meigen, etc.). Another example is the name clavata Scopoli which has never been used since its validation. When the name appeared in Summary synonymy the literature, it was listed as a questionable synonym of Neoascia podagrica (Fabricius). Neoascia Williston Scopoli clearly described a teneral specimen of annexa (Miiller, 1776) NEW STATUS the genus Sphegina, but which of the four com- bifasciata Schrank, 1776 NEW SYNONYM mon Austrian species he described is not certain. dizonias Gmelin, 1790 Thus pertinax is a nomen imperfection consid- floralis of Sack 1929; Collin 1940; Seguy 1961; ered as valid and defined by tradition, and cla- Pedersen 1971 vata is a nomen imperfectum ignored as a nomen geniculata (Meigen, 1822) dubium. interrupta (Meigen, 1822) littoralis Zetterstedt, 1843 What has been said above about names and meticulosa (Scopoli, 1763) NEW STATUS their treatment is accurate and non-controver- crassipes Schrank, 1785 NEW SYNONYM sial. The actions taken in this paper, however, dispar Meigen, 1822 NEW SYNONYM may be considered controversial, as I have aenea Meigen, 1822 NEW SYNONYM brought forward previously unused and unrec- nitidula Meigen, 1822 ognized names for four of the most common and hastata Meigen, 1822 best known European species of Neoascia and dispar of Lundbeck 1916; Sack 1929 (in part); Sphegina. Examination of the types of the names Seguy 1961 (in part) currently considered valid revealed that these aenea of Collin 1940; Coe 1953; Stackelberg names have been misapplied and were invalid. 1955, 1970; Hippa 1967a; Pedersen 1971 As name changes were required, I opted to use nitidula of Sack 1929 old names on what some may consider weak obliqua Coe, 1940 grounds because the identification of the names podagrica of Sack 1929 (in part) used on the basis of their descriptions may be petsamoensis Kanervo, 1934 rather dubious. Another alternative would be to podagrica (Fabricius, 1775) change to the oldest names supported by types molio Harris, 1780 or exact descriptions. I opted for the oldest floralis Meigen, 1822 NEW SYNONYM probable names as they are intrinsically more lanceolata Meigen, 1822 stable (because of their greater age) and the maculata Macquart, 1829 grounds for their use are no more dubious than lunifasciata Strobl, 1898 those for some names now in use (v. s., Eristalis tenur (Harris, 1780) pertinax example). For example, in changing quadripunctata Meigen, 1822 Sphegina verecunda Collin, 1937 to clavata bifasciata Zetterstedt, 1838 (Scopoli, 1763) instead of nigra Meigen, 1822 lapponica Kanervo, 1934 greater stability has been achieved. The Scopoli splendida Kanervo, 1934 name is only five years later than the starting dispar of Sack 1929 (in part); Collin 1940; Coe 472 F. Christian Thompson ENT. SCAND. VOL. 12 (1981)

1953; Stackelberg 1955, 1970; Seguy 1961 (in clearly applies to a two-banded Neoascia species part); Andersson 1966; Pedersen 1971 ("M. annexa glabra, abdomine elongato nigro, floralis of Lundbeck 1916 fasciis duabus pedibusque luteis; posticis nigro annulatis. * +Femora posticorum vel clavatae, Other names discussed vel tibiae arcuatae sunt; an mera varietasT' (of Musca elongata Muller, which is Sepsis Paragus tibialis (Fallen, 1817) cynipsea (L.) (New Synonym))). The reference analis Macquart, 1839 NEW SYNONYM to elongata, a sepsid, fixes the size and general Sphegina clavata (Scopoli, 1763) NEW STATUS habitus; the colour characters and hind leg shape nigra Meigen, 1822 NEW SYNONYM restricts the name to floralis of Collin. Due to the verecunda Collin, 1939 NEW SYNONYM confusion associated with the name floralis Mei- Sepsis cynipsea (Linnaeus, 1758) gen and its interpretation, annexa, which has elongata Muller, 1776 NEW SYNONYM priority, is here used. bicincta Stephens, 1829: 280 (Ascia). Bicincta is a catalog name, a nomen nudum. Review of Neoascia names bifasciata Schrank, 1776: 95, pi. 3, Fig. 21 aenea Meigen, 1822: 191 (Ascia. Type-locality: (abdomen) (Musca. Type-locality: Austria, Linz. Types lost). Bifasciata is not a synonym of Epi- Austria & France. Lectotype, Female, MNHN, strophe eligans as listed by Bezzi & Stein (1907: Paris).' Aenea is represented by a single female 61), but refers to a Neoascia species. The double type in the Meigen Collection (No. 1136) which unbroken abdominal bands restrict the name to is here designated lectotype. This is a specimen annexa Muller. Bifasciata Schrank is a junior of meticulosa Scopoli; this name herein is pro- primary homonym, Fabricius (1775) having used posed as the senior synonym for both aenea the name before. Dizonias Gmelin was proposed Meigen and dispar Meigen. Collin (1940: 151) as a replacement name (1790: 2880). recognized aenea Meigen as a junior synonym of dispar Meigen. bifasciata Zetterstedt, 1838: 583 (Ascia. Type-lo- analis Macquart, 1839: 109 G4.sc/a. Type-locality: cality: Finland, Lapponia Kemensis, Muo- Canary Islands. Type(s), male(s), MNHN, nioniska. Lectotype, male, ZI, Lund). Anders- Paris). Analis was listed as a questionable syno- son (1966: 178) studied Zetterstedt's types and nym of floralis by Bezzi & Stein (1907: 85) and as designated a lectotype for bifasciata. Andersson a valid species by Sack (1929: 124). The name identified the lectotype as a specimen of the applies to a species of Paragus (Pandasyopthal- species here called tenur Harris. Zetterstedt's mus). Only two species of that subgenus occur in name is a junior secondary homonym, Schrank the Canary Islands, from whence analis was de- (1776) having used the name before. scribed (coadunatus Rondani, 1847 and tibialis bipunctata Curtis, 1837: 250 (Ascia). This name Fallen, 1817; Baez 1978). These two species can is a nomen nudum, being merely a catalog name be distinguished only by male genital characters. in Curtis's Guide to British Insects. The name The type(s) of analis is (are) presumably lost as I was first noted and placed as a junior synonym of was unable to find it (them) in the Webb and podagrica by Bezzi & Stein (1907: 87). Berthelot Collection. As the true identity of analis is not known, I, for pragmatic reasons, accept cingulata Stephens, 1829: 280 (Ascia). Cingulata analis as a junior synonym of tibialis Fallen. is a catalog name, a nomen nudum. annexa Muller, 1776: 173 (Musca. Type-locality: clavatus Scopoli, 1763: 357 (Conops. Type-local- (Denmark. Types lost. Muller's description ity: Austria, "Carniola". Types destroyed). Clavatus was thought to apply to a Neoascia species by Schiner (1856: 418) and was listed as a 1 The format used for each specific name is as follows: questionable synonym of podagrica by Bezzi & Name author, date: page number of original description. (Original genus. Type-locality: (as given, or if not, Stein (1907: 87). Conops clavatus was described the probable locality is given in parentheses). Type as a small fly, with clavate hind femora and (kind of), sex, location of types). petiolate reddish abdomen with two brown ENT. SCAND. VOL. 12 (1981) Nomenclature of European Neoascia Williston 473 bands. These characters are of teneral Sphegina two specimens remain under this name. One, a specimens, which are common in nature (Hull male, does not agree with either Meigen's de- 1935: 373). The oldest Sphegina name is clunipes scription or his figure, as it has two complete Fallen, 1817. As the name verecunda Collin, a bands, and the other, a female, is now merely junior synonym of nigra Meigen (new synonym) and unidentifiable fragment. Collin based his (Thompson, in press), must be replaced, I prefer interpretation of dispar on the male in the to bring clavata Scopoli forward for that species. Meigen Collection. Lundbeck and all earlier authors based their interpretation on Meigen's de- crassipes Schrank, 1785: 343 (Syrphus. Type-lo- scription and figure. Hence, the situation resol- cality: Germany, Schroffenberg, near Berchtes- ves itself into the classic dilemma of gaden. Types, sex?, unknown and probably systematists: Is the specimen in the Meigen Col- lost). Schrank's description, which is repeated lection a type or not a type? And that question verbatim in his Fauna Boica (1830: 109), is of a depends on the emphasis one gives the original Neoascia species with immaculate wings and description: Is it right or wrong? abdomen and with yellow-tipped hind femora. When dealing with old collections where the Among the German Neoascia species, only dis- data associated with the specimens are minimal par Meigen fits these characters. Meigen, in fact, and the curatorial history of the collection is listed crassipes, as "Schrank Fauna Boica. III. dubious, I prefer to place the emphasis on the 2415.", as a synonym of his dispar. Collin (1940: description. However, if the problem can be 151) in discussing this reference confused two avoided, I do so. And in this case, a specimen different species. His comments on the identity not in, nor part of, the Meigen Collection is se- of Syrphus crassipes Schrank, 1785 were based lected as type (v. /.)• on the description of Musca crassipes Schrank, Two different usages of the name dispar exist, 1781 and are, hence, erroneous. Schrank de- depending on the alternative to the above di- scribed two crassipes; a Musca crassipes (1781: lemma that various authors have accepted. 450, aMerodon species) and & Syrphus crassipes Thus, the best course of action is to avoid the use (1785: 343). The Meigen reference to species of the name dispar, if possible. Meigen included number 2415 applies to the Syrphus crassipes. the species Syrphus crassipes Schrank in his Crassipes and dispar are made isotypic (see dis- concept of dispar. Crassipes represents the typi- par), and crassipes, thus, should be the valid cal female form, that with an unmarked abdo- name for the species. However, as a name men. Hence, I restrict and designate as lectotype change is required, it is appropriate to change to of dispar, the type of crassipes Schrank (NB: an even older name, meticulosa Scopoli. Syntypes may be "specimens not seen by the dispar Meigen, 1822: 188, Figs. 27 & 28 (habitus, author but which were the bases of previously male & female) (Ascia.Type-locality: Germany, published descriptions or figures upon which he mountains north of Monschau. Paralectotypes, founded his taxon in whole or part" (Art. 73 (c) male, female, MNHN, Paris). The original de- (i) of the Code)). Crassipes Schrank is here con- scription of dispar Meigen was based on a sidered a junior subjective synonym of meticu- minimum of two males and four females, as losa Scopoli. shown by the variety of abdominal patterns de- dizonias Gmelin, 1790: 2880 {Musca, new name scribed. Meigen described the abdominal for bifasciata Schrank). Dizonias is a replace- patterns of dispar as follows: Male abdomen ment name for bifasciata Schrank, which is a with one unbroken band on the base of the third junior synonym of annexa Miiller. tergum, rarely with this band interrupted; and female abdomen is usually unmarked, some floralis Meigen, 1822: 188 04.sc/a. Type-locality: specimens have reddish spots on second tergum, (Germany, region of Aachen). Lectotype, Male, others have spots on the third tergum, and still MNHN, Paris). This name was correctly inter- others have spots on both the second and third preted by Lundbeck (1916: 379), but was later terga (translated from the original German). misapplied by Collin (1940: 152), who applied the Meigen also figured the typical pattern for both name floralis to a species unknown to Lundbeck sexes, one band in the male and none in the (see annexa Miiller). Collin noted that the male female. In the Meigen Collection(No. 1131), only under the name floralis in the Meigen Collection 474 F. Christian Thompson ENT. SCAND. VOL. 12 (1981)

(No. 1130) was an teneral specimen of podagrica to fix the name to its present concept (Sack 1929: Fabricius, an identification which I have con- 124; Collin 1940: 153; Coe 1953: 52; Stackelberg firmed. Collin then wrote "There is no certainty 1970: 43). that this was the male described by Meigen, nor hastataWiedemann, in Meigen, 1822: l%9 {Ascia. has it been proved that the female Meigen de- Type-locality: Germany, Berlin region. Holo- scribed was not the (at present unknown) female type, female, NHM, Wien). The description and of Kowarz's male." (= floralis of Collin). Col- presumed holotype of this name apply to meticu- lin's argument was: (1) whereas the male speci- losa Scopoli. Hastata is usually credited to men in the Meigen Collection is not a type; (2) Meigen, but the species was unknown to him as and whereas the then unknown female of the is indicated by the cross after the name. Wiede- male identified by Kowarz as floralis could be mann, while citing Hoffmannsegg as source of the female of Meigen's floralis; therefore (3), he the name, described hastata for Meigen as is based his interpretation offloralis on the "Kow- indicated by the quotation marks and his name in arz's male". Collin's first statement could apply parentheses at the end of the description (Meigen to any specimen in the Meigen Collection. Collin 1818: iv). Hastata was based on a single female seemed to accept specimens as types only when they agreed with his concept of the name. The in the Hoffmannsegg Collection. A single female, male in the Meigen Collection does agree well labeled as hastata, is part of the Winthem Col- with the original description, and is here consid- lection and is now in Vienna. I believe this is the holotype of hastata. The Winthem and Wiede- ered a syntype as well as designated as the lecto- mann Collections are intermixed. Winthem type of floralis Meigen. Collin's second statement overlooks the fact that there is also a fe- owned both and had started, but apparently did male in the Meigen Collection under the name not finish, incorporating the Wiedemann Collec- tion into his own (Osten Sacken 1878: xv-xvi). floralis. This female syntype, which agrees with Meigen's description, is dispar of Collin and Wiedemann apparently acquired the Hoffmanns- egg Diptera as I have found many specimens of floralis of Lundbeck. It could be designated as the species he described and cited as "In Hoff- the lectotype of floralis. This would preserve mannseggischen Sammlung" in Vienna. Lundbeck's interpretation, but such a designa- tion would only further confuse the situation. interrupta Meigen, 1822: 190 (Ascia. Type-local- For this reason, I select the male as the lectotype ity: France, Bondy, near Paris. Lectotype, fe- and synonymize the name floralis Meigen under male, MNHN, Paris). A single female, labeled podagrica Fabricius. The female of the species as a male, is present in the Meigen Collection called floralis by Collin (= the name Kowarz (No. 1134) under this name and is here desig- used for his male) has now been identified by nated lectotype. The type corresponds well to Stackelberg (1955: 345) and Pedersen (1971: 53, the accepted concept of its name. Figs.), and it does not agree with Meigen's description (i.e., it has two complete bands, not lanceolata Meigen, 1822: 187 {Ascia. Type-locality: Germany, Aachen region. Lectotype, fe- two interrupted bands as described by Meigen). male, MNHN, Paris). A single female is present Hence, Collin's second statement, while being a in the Meigen Collection (No. 1129) under this "red-herring" to distract workers from the fact that a female syntype does exist, is incorrect as it name and is here designated lectotype. It is a specimen of podagrica Fabricius, as first noted would fix the name floralis to a female which byZetterstedt(1834:855). does not agree with Meigen's description. An- nexa Miiller is available for floralis of Collin and lapponica Kanervo, 1934: 118 (Neoascia, as subsequent authors. subsp. of floralis. Type-locality: USSR, Petsa- mo, various localities. Syntypes, 15 males & 5 geniculata Meigen, 1822: 192 (Ascia. Type-local- females, ZM, Turku). Anders son (1966) studied ity: England. Holotype, female, MNHN, Paris). some syntypes of lapponica and identified them The holotype of geniculata Meigen is in poor as belonging to tenur Harris (as dispar). He condition, with the abdomen and posterior part stated that the characters the subspecies concept of the thorax missing. However, the short third was based on were "obscure and show variabil- antennal segments are present and are sufficient ity". He further stated that he could not find any ENT. SCAND. VOL. 12 (1981) Nomenclature of European Neoascia Williston 475 distinctions that would support the division of agree that Harris's figure or description clearly the species into a northern and southern sub- applies to either one or the other of these two species. Hence he synonymized the name under species. dispar. nitidula Meigen, 1822: 191 {Ascia. Type-locality: littoralis Zetterstedt, 1843: 888 {Ascia). Littoralis Austria. Types probably lost). Nitidula was de- is a manuscript name Zetterstedt used for inter- scribed as an immaculate Neoascia male. Im- rupta Meigen and published in synonymy under maculate males of Neoascia are atypical, as that name. Hence, the name is a nomen nudum. males normally have at least some pale mark- ings. Possibly Meigen was confused as to the sex maculata Macquart, 1829: 169. {Ascia. Type-lo- of his nitidula specimens, as two females of other cality: (Northern France). Types apparently species in his collection are labeled as males. lost). This name applies to a two-banded Neo- Without examination of the types, the question ascia species with maculate wings, either obli- of the sex and identity of nitidula is moot. While qua Coe or podagrica Fabricius. The critical Meigen did not clearly indicate the depository of characters for distinguishing these two species the type series, it has to be either in his collection are not mentioned in Macquart's description. or in Vienna (Megerle Collection). I have The types of maculata should be in the museum checked both places carefully without finding a at Lille, but no such specimen are on a list pre- trace of the types. Nitidula is accepted here as pared of that collection by Macquart. Hence, belonging with meticulosa Scopoli, as was sug- maculata is left as a junior synonym of poda- gested by Meigen himself (as aenea Meigen). grica where it was first placed by Verrall (1901b: 72). obliqua Coe, 1940: 18 {Neoascia. Type-localities: England, various localities. Syntypes, 4 meticulosa Scopoli, 1763: 344 (Musca. Type-lo- males, 5 females, BMNH, London & Oxford). cality: Austria, "Carniola". Types destroyed). This species was only differentiated in 1940, and Under this name Scopoli described a small (5 1/2 there appears to have been no confusion as to its mm wing span), shiny black, clear-winged hover identity or name. Previously the species was in- fly with curved hind tibiae. Bezzi & Stein (1907: cluded under the concept and name of podagrica 85) placed it as a questionable synonym of dispar Fabricius. Meigen. Collin (1940- 151) rejected this synonymy as follows, "There is far too much doubt as omicron Stephens, 1829: 280 04.sc/a). Omicron is to the identity of Scopoli's insect ...". Taken at a catalog name, a nomen nudum. face value, all of Scopoli's characters (color, size, curved hind tibia, and hovering habit) indi- petsamoensis Kanervo, 1934: 117 {Neoascia. cate an immaculate Neoascia species or dispar Type-locality: USSR, Petsamo, Nautsi, at Meigen. The only doubt is whether Scopoli's Nautsi River. Lectotype, female, ZM, Turku). hover fly was a syrphid, a point no one since This northern species was unknown until Schiner (1856: 415) has ever doubted. Scopoli Kanervo described it in 1934, and, there is no could have described a Pipunculus species. De- confusion over its identify and name. Andersson spite such a doubt, I accept, without hesitation, (1977: 179) designated a lectotype for petsa- Bezzi & Stein's synonymy, as there is a need for moensis, and Hippa (1967b) has described the a name with an untainted history and long male and figured its genitalia. seniority to replace dispar of Meigen and some, but not all, subsequent authors. podagrica Fabricius, 1775: 768 {Syrphus. Type-locality: Denmark. Lectotype, ?sex, Kiel molio Harris, 1780: 111, pi. 33, Fig. 54 (habitus) Collection at ZM, Copenhagen). In the Fabrician {Musca. Type-locality: (England) Types lost). Collection there are two single wings on separate This name has always been considered a syno- pins. One is labeled "podagrica" in Fabricius' nym of podagrica Fabricius, first being sy- hand-writing. This wing is hyaline, and, as nonymized by Stephens (1829: 280), so it might Fabricius mentions maculate wings in his de- as well remain as such. The name definitely scription, this wing cannot be considered a syn- applies either to obliqua Coe or podagrica. De- type. The other wing is maculate and is here spite the statements of Goffe (1946: 82), I do not designated as lectotype of podagrica. Three 476 F. Christian Thompson ENT. SCAND. VOL. 12 (1981)

Danish Neoascia species have maculate wings Hence, the possibility of unifasciata being a {interrupta Meigen, obliqua Coe andpodagrica). senior synonym of obliqua exists. The holotype The characters mentioned in the original de- will be studied to settle this question. scription eliminate interrupta, but do not dis- criminate between the other two. Hence, there is no evidence to fix the name podagrica to its present concept. The traditional concept is main- Note on collections tained, as there is also no evidence, nor conflicts in usage, to support doing otherwise. The Scopoli collection was destroyed (Higgins 1963, Horn & Kahle 1936: 252). Miiller, it is quadripunctata Meigen, 1822: 189 {Ascia. believed, never kept a collection (Tuxen, in litt.), Type-locality: Unknown, probably France. Syn- although those who believe otherwise consid- types male(s) & female(s) MNHN, Paris). In the ered the collection to have been destroyed in the Meigen Collection, there are two females (No. battle of Copenhagen (1807) (Hagen 1844: 131; 1133, one labeled as a male) under this name. Horn & Kahle 1936: 184). Nothing is known of They are specimens of tenur Harris. Harris's collection, and, in a country with as many diligent collectors as England has, I doubt splendida Kanervo, 1934: 120 {Neoascia, as var. whether after two centuries anything will ever be of floralis lapponica). As the name splendida known about it. The principal Fabrician collec- was proposed as a variety of a subspecies, the tions are now in the Universitetets Zoologiske name is clearly infrasubspecific and not avail- Museet, Copenhagen. Zimsen (1964) has re- able. viewed all Fabrician type material. The Meigen tenur Harris, 1780: 112, pi. 33, Fig. 59 (habitus) Collection is now preserved as a separate entity {Musca. Type-locality: England. Types lost). at the Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Harris described and figured a two banded Neo- Pgris. Some Meigen material is also in the ascia species with hyaline wings. Stephens Naturhistorisches Museum, Vienna. I have (1829: 280) and most subsequent authors have studied all the Fabrician and Meigen material regarded tenur as a synonym of podagrica now extant in Copenhagen, Paris, and Vienna. Fabricius. Goffe (1946: (83) rightly rejected this synonymy as Harris neither figured nor men- Summary tioned the maculate wings of podagrica. Harris did mention this character when he described his There has been confusion about the correct molio, a junior synonym of podagrica. Goffe application and usage of three Neoascia names restricted tenur to either dispar or floralis {aenea, dispar and floralis Meigen): Different Meigen {sensu Collin), but he did not feel that authors have used the same name for different Harris's description and figure precisely species and different names for the same species. matched dispar. Neoascia floralis does not This confusion makes the use of all these names occur in England. Goffe, thus, left tenur as a suspect. Three previously unused and unrecog- nomen duhium. Goffe, I believe, demanded too nized senior synonyms are brought forward for much precision for Harris's work, which was these nomenclaturally confused species. also noted by Coe (1940: 149-153). As Neoascia dispar of Collin is the only English species which Acknowledgments: I thank Mr. Loi'c Matile of Mus. matches Harris's description and figure, and, Natn. d'Hist. Nat., Paris, Dr Leif Lyneborg of Univ. Zool. Mus., Copenhagen, and Dr Ruth Lichtenberg of because it also needs a name, I feel it is reason- Nat.hist. Mus. Wien, Vienna for the permission to able to use tenur Harris for it. study the material in their care. I also thank Drs Curtis W. Sabrosky, Robert W. Carlson, Richard E. White, unifasciata Strobl, 1898: 222 {Ascia, as var. of Raymond J. Gagne and Ronald W. Hodges of the Syst. podagrica. Type-locality: Austria, Styria, Ent. Lab., USDA, Washington; and Dr Wayne N. Admont. Holotype, male, Strobl Collection, Mathis of the Smithsonian Inst., Washington, for their Admont). The status of this name is uncertain. critical review of this manuscript. The description is of a dark male of podagrica, but at the time it was described the distinctions between podagrica and obliqua were not known. ENT. SCAND. VOL. 12 (1981) Nomenclature of European Neoascia Williston 477

References Ent. Beihefte 2: 1-160, pis. 1-16(1935); 3: 161-296, pis. 17-26 (1936); 4: 297-536, pis. 27-38, i-vi (1937). Andersson, H. 1966. The Swedish species of Neoascia Hull, F. M. 1935. Description of new species of the and Sphegina (Dipt. Syrphidae), with lectotype genus Sphegina with a key to those known from designations. — Opusc. ent. 31: 178-182. North America (Diptera: Syrphidae). — Trans. Baez, M. 1978. Revision del genero Paragus en las Amer. ent. Soc. 61: 373-382. Islas Canariae (Dipt. Syrphidae). — Bol. Assoc. esp. Ent. 1 (1977): 119-122. Kanervo, E. 1934. Einige neue Syrphidae aus Petsa- Bezzi, M. & P. Stein. 1907. Cyclorrapha Aschiza. mo. — Ann. Soc. Zool. Bot. Fenn. Vanamo 14: Cyclorrapha Schizophora: Schizometopa. Pp. 115-135. 1-189; 190-749. In: Becker, T., Bezzi, M., Kertesz, Lundbeck, W. 1916. Diptera Danica. Genera and K. & Stein, P., (eds.), Katalog der palaarktischen species of flies hitherto found in Denmark. Part V. Dipteren, Vol. 3, 828 pp. Budapest. Lonchopteridae, Syrphidae. 603 pp., 202 Figs. Coe, R. L. 1940. A new British species of the genus Copenhagen. Neoascia Williston (Dipt., Syrphidae). — Ent. Macquart, J. 1829. Insectes Dipteres du nord de la mon. Mag. 76: 18-19. France. Syrphies. — Mem. Soc. R. Sci. Agric. — 1950. On the Syrphidae (Diptera) of Moses Harris. Arts. Lille 1827/1828: 149-371. 4 pis. (Also pub- — Entomologist 83: 149-160. lished separately as his "Insectes Dipteres du nord — 1953. Diptera. Family Syrphidae. — Handb. Ident. de la France", vol. 4, 223 pp., 4 pis.. Lille, 1829.) Brit. Ins. 10(1), 98 pp. — (1839). Dipteres. Pp. 97-119, pi. 4, Figs. 2-11. In: Collin, J. E. 1940. Notes on Syrphidae (Diptera). IV. Webb, P. B. & Berthelot, S., (eds.), Histoire — Ent. mon. Mag. 76: 150-158. naturelle des lies Canaries. Vol. 2, P. 2: Zoologie, Curtis, J. 1837. A guide to an arrangement of British (Sect. 6): Entomologie, 119 pp., 7 pis. Paris, Insects; being a catalogue of all the named species "1836-1844". hitherto discovered in Great Britain and Ireland. Meigen, J. W. 1818. Systematische Beschreibung der 2nd ed., vi + 294 pp., London. bekannten europaischen zweifliigeligen Insekten. Fabricius, J. C. 1775. Systema entomologiae, sistens Vol. 1, xxxvi + 333 pp., pis. 1-11 Aachen. insectorum classes, ordines, genera, speceis adiec- — 1822. Systematische Beschreibung der bekannten tis synonymis, locis, descriptionibus, observationi- europaischen zweifliigeligen Insekten. Vol. 3, x + bus. 832 pp. Flensburgi et Lipsiae (= Flensburg and 416 pp., pis. 22-32. Hamm. Leipzig). Miiller, O. F. 1776. Zoologiae Danicae prodromus sen Fallen, C. F. 1816-1817. Syrphici Sveciae. Pp. 1-22 Animalium Daniae et Norvegiae indigenarum (1816), 23-62 (1817). Lundae (= Lund). characters, nomina, et synonyma imprimis popula- Gmelin, J. F. 1790. Caroli a Linne, Systema naturae rium. xxxii + 282 pp., Havniae (= Copenhagen). per regna tria naturae. Ed. 13. Vol. 1: Regnum Osten Sacken, C. R. 1878. Catalogue of the described Animate, Pt. 5, pp. 2225-3020. Lipsiae (= Leipzig). Diptera of North America. Smithson. Misc. Coll. Goffe, E. R. 1946. The Syrphidae (Diptera) of Moses 270, xlvii + 276 pp. Harris, 1776. — Ent. mon. Mag. 82: 67-86. Pedersen, E. Torp. 1971. De danske arter af slaegten Hagen, H. A. 1844. Nachricht iiber die entomologi- Neoascia Williston (Dipt., Syrphidae). Entomol. schen Sammlungen in Norwegen, Schweden und Meddel. 39: 51-62. Danemark. — Stettin. Ent. Zeitg. 5: 68-70, 75-80, Rondani, C. 1847. Osservazioni sopra parecchie specie 130-131. di esapodi Afidicidie sui loro nemici. Nuov. Ann. Harris, M. 1776-(1780). An exposition of English in- Sci. nat. Bologna (2) 8: 337-351. sects with curious observations and remarks where- Sack, P. 1928-1932. 31. Syrphidae. In: Lindner, E., in each insect is particularly described, its parts and (ed)., Die Fliegen der Palaearktischen Region. Bd. properties considered, the different sexes distin- 4, pt. 6, pp. 1-48 (1928), 49-144 (1929), 145-240 guished, and the natural history faithfully related. (1930), 241-336 (1931), 337-451 (1932). Decad I, pp. 1-40, 2 pis. + pis. 1-10 (1776); decad Schiner, J. R. 1856. Scriptores austriaci rerum diptero- II, pp. 41-72, pis. 11-20 (71776); decad III, pp. logicarum. Eine Revision der von osterreichischen 73-99, pis. 21-30 (71780); decad IV, pp. 100-138, Entomologen aufgefiihrten Dipteren. Verhandl. pis. 31-40 (71780); decad V, pp. 139-166, pis. 41-50 Zool.-Bot. Ver., Wien 6; 399-424. + 1 pi. (71780). London "1776". Schrank von Paula, F. 1776. Verzeichniss einiger In- Higgins, L. G. 1963. Entomologia Carniolica: J. A. sekten, derer im Linneanischen Natursysteme nich Scopoli, 1763. — J. Soc. Bibliogr. Nat. Hist. 4: gedacht wird. Pp. 59-98, pi. 3. In his "Beytrage zur 167-169. Naturgeschichte". vii + 137 + iii pp., 7 pis. Augs- Hippa, H. 1967a. A redescription of Neoascia aenea burg. Meig. (Dipt., Syrphidae). — Ann. Ent. Fenn. 33: — 1781. Enumeratio insectorum Austraie indigeno- 113-117. rum (xxiv) + 548 + (iv) 4 pis. Augustae Vindelico- — 1967b. The male of Neoascia petsamoensis rum. Kanervo (Dipt., Syrphidae) with remarks on the — 1775. Verzeichniss beobachteter Insectoren im females and the distribution.of the species. — Ann. Furstenthume Berchtesgaden. — Fiiessly Neues Ent. Fenn. 33: 256-260. Mag. Liebh. Entomol. 2(4): 313-345. Horn, W. & I. Kahle. 1935-1937. Uber entomologische — 1803. Fauna Boica. Durchgedachte Geschichte der Sammlungen, Entomologen & Entomo-Museologie in Baiern einheimischen und zahmen Thiere. Vol. (Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Entomologie). — 3, Pt. 1. 272 pp. Landshut. 478 F. Christian Thompson ENT. SCAND. VOL. 12 (1981)

Scopoli, J. A. 1763. Entomologia Cariolica exhibens their affinities. Containing also the reference to ev- Insecta Carnioliae indigena et distributa in ordines, ery english writer on entomology, and to the princi- genera, species, varietates. Methodo Linnaeana. pal foreign authors, with all the published British xxxvi + 420 + i pp., Vindobonae (= Vienna). genera to the present time, xxxvi + 388 pp., Seguy, E. 1961. Dipteres Syrphides de 1'Europe oc- London. cidentale. — Mem. Mus. Natn. Hist. nat. (A, Zool.) Strobl, G. 1898. Die Dipteren von Steiermark. IV. 23: 1-248. Theil. Mitteil. — Naturw. Ver. Steiermark (1897) Stackelberg, A. A. 1955. (Palaearctic species of the 34: 192-298. genus Neoasciq Williston (Diptera: Syrphidae)). — Verrall, G. H. 1901a. Platypezidae, Pipunculidae, and Trud. Zool. Ins. Akad. Nauk. SSSR 21: 342-352. Syrphidae of Great Britain. Vol. 8, 691 pp., 457 (In Russian.) Figs. In his "British Flies". London. — 1965. (New data on the taxonomy of Palaearctic — 1910b. Catalogue of the Syrphidae of the European Hoverflies (Diptera: Syrphidae)). — Ent. Obozr. District with references and synonymy. Pp. 17-121, 44: 907-926 (in Russian). Appended to his "British Flies". Vol. 8 (v. s.) — 1970. (49. Earn. Syrphidae - Hover flies). Pp. London). 11-96. In: Stackelberg, A. A. & Nartshuk, E. P. Zetterstedt, J. W. 1838. Dipterologis Scandinaviae. (eds.), Vol. 5, (Flies, fleas). 2nd part., 943 pp. In: Sect. 3: Diptera. Pp. 477-868. In his "Insecta Lap- Bei-Bienko, G. Ya. (ed.), (Keys to the Insects of ponica" vi + 1,140 pp. Lipsiae (= Leipzig). the European USSR), Leningrad (in Russian). — 1843. Diptera Scandinaviae. Disposita et descripta. Stephens, J. F. 1829. A systematic catalogue of British Vol. 2. Pp. 441-894. Lundae (= Lund). Insects: being an attempt to arrange all the hitherto Zimsen, E. 1964. The type material of I. C. Fabricius. discovered indigenous insects in accordance with 656 pp. Copenhagen.

Manuscript received December 1979.

Journal and subscription to reprints of particular groups to be ordered from: NFR, Editorial Service P.O. Box 23136, S-104 35 Stockholm, Sweden.