Djvu Document
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
INSECTA MUNDI, Vol. 9, No. 3-4, September - December, 1995 351 Bathycranium : synonymised with Syntormon, distinction between Parasyntormon and Syntormon discussed and S. bicolorellus and S. luteicornis (Diptera: Dolichopodidae) redescribed M. C. D. Speight Research Branch National Parks and Vv'ildlife Selvice 51, St Stephen's Green, Dublin-2, Ireland and R. M. Blackith and R. E. Blackith Zoology Department, Trinity College, Dublin-2, IIeland AbstIact. Itis deIlloIlstlated that there is 110 valid basis OIl which to sustain the InoIIotypic genus BathyCi aniul1t StIohl and concluded that Bathycranium should be recognised as a junior synonym ofSyntormon Loew (new status). The species SYlltormoll bicolOrellus Zetterstedt (new combination) fa lis into a natllTal grouping of 8YlltormOll species with downcuT>red facial hairs in females. This species and S. luteicornis Parent are redescribed. Distinctions between Syntormon and Pu, asynL011tLOn ale discussed. 8ommaire:Aueune base ialable ne soutient Ie genre Bathyeronium Strobletilen ressort que Bathyel'anium Goit etre reconnu comme synonym junior de Syntormon Loew (n. stat.). L'espcke Syntormon bzcolorellus Zetterstedt (n. comb) appartient a un groupement naturel d'especes de Syntormon munies de soies faciales pendantes chez les femelles. Cette espece, ainsi que S. luteicornis Parent, sontredecrites. Les distinctions entre Syntormon etParasyntormon sontpassees en revue. Introduction The PalaearcticgenusBathycraniumwasestab lished by Strobl (1892) for the species Dolichopus The cosmopolitan genus 8yntormon was estab bicolorellus Zetterstedt,1843. As indicated by Ne lished by Loew (1857) based on European species. grobov (1991) Zetterstedt's species bicolorellus be Wheeler (1899) erected the genus Parasyntormon comesthe type speciesafBathycranium, by manoty- for various Nearctic species described by him in py. We have re-examined the original material of that paper, plus the Nearctic Sympycnus occid€n- bzcoLor€llus Zetterstedt,1843, redescri6ed this spe- talis Aldrich,1894. Subsequently, Coquillett (1910) cies anddesignateda lectotype. Here we presentthe designated the European species 8. metathesis case for including the genus Bathycranium under (Loew) as the type species of Svntol mon and the Svntol mono Vie note in passing that thele has been Nearctic P. asellus Wheeler as the type species of confusionoverthe genderofSyntormon; itis mascu- Parasyntormon line Outside the Nearctic, no species seem, as We have discovered that there is potential for yet,to have been assigned to Paras)'ntormon. Ex confusion between Zetterstedt's bicoloreUus and amination ofEuropean Syntormon species demon- Syntormon luteicornis of Parent, 1927. To estab- strates that many of them possess a mixture of lish the placement of S. luteicornis unequivocally, Parasyntormon and Syntormon features, as used we herein redescribe the type material of this by Wheeler and later North American authors to obscure species. characterise these genera. If these genera are to be maintained, a certain amount of redefinition is Bathycranium and Syntormon needed. Here we discuss the available morpholog ical evidence in this context. Strobl (1892) provides no clear statement ofthe charactershe considersdiagnosticofBathycranium, 352 Volume 9, nos. 3-4, September-December, 1995, INSECTA MUNDI but does mention those he regards as separating B. tutmon species on the basis of an absence of the bicolorellum from other species, as follows '- thumb-shaped interdigitation ofthe second anten- 1. AnstasubapICal. nal segment mto the thIrd are serIOusly mIslead 2. Antennae largely yellow. ing. 3. Eyes close together. 3. From our abundant material it is clear that, 4. Frons deeply inset, metallic. in both male and female bicolorellus, the first 5. Acrosticals uniserial. tarsomere ofthe hind leg is subequal to the second, 6. Legs almost entirely yellow. but the third segment is nearly a third shorter 7 Male legs simple (Fig 13) so that Strohl's description of this charac- 8. Hypopygmm concealed. ter IS Incorrect. In the more lengthy redescription he provides 4. Differences between bieolorellus and S;yntor of B. bicolorellum he mentions additional charac mon listed by subsequent authors are unreliable to ters which bear on the relationship between Bathy- the extent that tlrey are based on characters men- cranium and Syntormon' honed by Strobl (1892) 9. Antennal segment I (scape) setose on dorsal None of the other characters mentIoned by surface. Strobl may reasonably be used to separate bicol- 10. Antennal segment 2 (pedicel) convex distally, orellus from Syntormon without substantIally but not with a thumb-shaped projection. altering the current concept of Syntormon. For 11. Basal three tarsomeres of hind leg equal in instance, in different Syntormon species the arista length. may be inserted sub-apically, apically, or dOIsally Of these, characters 4, 10 and 11 might be (Table 1) The colour ofthe antennae in bicolorellus construed as separatmg Bathycranwm from 8yn prOVIdes no dlstmctlon trom 8yntormon, smce tarman, and characters 4 and 10 have been used for there are atleast two other Syntormon species vlith this purpose by later authors. However, it is appar yellow antennae, S. luteicornis in the Palaearctic ent that Strobl had only one male specimen of a (NegIObov, 1975) and 8. simpIicitUl sis Van Duzee species he identified as bicolorellus available to (1925) in the Nearctic (Tables 1 and 2). At least one hIm. We have not seen thIS speCImen but we have European speCIes, S. rufipes Meigen, has virtually been able to examine not only Zetterstedt's type unmodified legs in the male; leg modifications ex- series ofDolichopus bicolorellus but also hundreds hibited by males currently in 8yntormon are so of males and females of this species collected in varied that if they 'Yvere to be used in defining alcohol byMalaise traps atdifferent Irishlocalities. genera, it would become necessary to question the From this extensive material we conclude' inclusion ofmany species in addition to bicoIo1 eUus 1 The concave frons observed by Strobl was an within the genus Syntormon artefact, probably due to dependence on a smgle In the smgle apparent dIfference between 8yn dry specimen. Neither males nor females of bicol tormon and Parasyntormon , bieolorellus ShOVlS orellus exhibit a condition of the frons noticeably the Syntormon condition (see below). We conclude different from that of Syntormon metathesis, when that Dolichopus bicoIuteUus of Zetterstedt should freshly collected specimens or alcohol-preserved be regarded as a species of Syntormon and that material are examined since Bathycranium has only this species consigned 2. In bieolorellus the interdigitation of the sec to it, Batk)'cranium should be regarded as a syn- ondantennalsegmentintothe third (fIrstflagellom onymofSyntormon. Theseconclusionsstandwheth ere) is as great as, or greater than, in many SyntOl- er or not Strobl's specimen belonged to bieolorel mon or Parasyntormon species. It is illustrated Ius of Zetterstedt. here from alcohol-preserved specimens (Figs 1, 2) An extreme example of a short interdigitation, Parasyntormon and Syntormon which was described as "thumb-shaped", IS prOVId ed by S. palmaris Loew (1857) and figured by Van In his description ofhis ne'll genus Paras)'ntor- Duzee (1925). There is some intra-specificvariation mon, Wheeler (1899) gives the following charac in this feature in bicolorellus and it is cer tainly teIS.- more difficult to interpret in dried specimens. We 1. Male face narrow. cOIlClude that Strobl was once again misled by the 2 Antennae inserted nigh on head condition of the limited material at his disposal. 3. Antennal segment 1 bare dorsally. Keys purporting to separate bicolorellus from Syn- INSECTA MUNDI, Vol. 9, No. 3-4, September - December, 1995 353 4. Antermalsegment2 witha thumb-shapedprojec tOI man species, with the results summarised in tion intosegment 3, internally (projectionshorterin Tables 1 to 3. female). EssentIally, the mesopleuralhairpatches (A and 5. .~tennal segment 3 large, tlattened, of vari- B inFigure 9) are rathervariable, butthe metapleu- able shape, distinctly pilose (hardly longer than ral hair patch (C) is consistentlypresentinboththe broad in female). Nearctic and Palaearctic species of Syntornwn we 6. Arista dorsaL subapical or apical, long (dorsal have examined. Ifthis holds true for unexamined in female). species andifabsence ofmetapleuralhairsischarac 7 Acrostical bristles uniserial teristicofall Parasyn lorman species, assuggested by 8. Scutellum WIth only two brIstles. Robmson and Vockeroth, then thIS seems to be the 9. Hypopygium small, embedded, with only "the only character consistently separating Parasyntor small appendages projecting." mon from Syntormon . to. Hind basitarsus (first tarsomere) bare, shorter Is this an adequate basis for segregating Pal u- than 2nd tarsomere syntormon as a distinct genus? Assuredly it is as II. Male foretarsl modIfIed. clear a dIstmctIOn as IS used to separate many other 12. Middle and hind legs unmodified dolichopodid genera Without a thoro'lgh cladistic analySIS of the relatIonships between dolichopodid Only in exhibiting setae on the dorsal surface species and genera it is difficult to carry discussion of antennal segment 1 does the type species of further. A comprehensive reappraisal ofdolichopo Syntormon, S. metathesis, differ from this diagno- did genera seems badly needed. Meanwhile, main- sis of Parasyntormon Nevertheless, it is difficult tenance of Parosyn