Of Meripilus Giganteus in an Urban Habitat

Cent. Eur. J. Biol. • 8(2) • 2013 • 143-167 DOI: 10.2478/s11535-013-0119-z

Central European Journal of Biology

Diptera associated with sporocarps of Meripilus giganteus in an urban habitat

Research Article

Jindřich Roháček1,*, Jan Ševčík1,2

1Silesian Museum, CZ-746 01 Opava, Czech Republic

2Department of Biology and Ecology, University of Ostrava, CZ-710 00 Ostrava, Czech Republic Received 05 October 2012; Accepted 05 November 2012

Abstract: The Diptera community associated with fruit bodies of the wood-decaying fungus Meripilus giganteus (Pers.) P. Karst., 1882 was investigated in two city parks in Opava (Czech Republic, Central Europe) during the years 2009 and 2010. A total of 10,451 adult specimens of Diptera belonging to 66 species and 17 families emerged from this fungus during our rearing experiments. The six most dominant species, Coboldia fuscipes (Meigen, 1830) (D=50.70%), Drosophila funebris (Fabricius, 1787) (D=21.40%), Logima satchelli (Quate, 1955) (D =14.16%), Forcipomyia squamigera Kieffer, 1916 (D=5.48%), Lycoriella ingenua (Dufour, 1839) (D=2.96%) and Apteromyia claviventris (Strobl, 1909) (D=0.95%) represented 95.65% of all reared specimens. Altogether 59 species were reared from M. giganteus for the first time. Comments on host specialization, degree of synynthropy and other aspects of biology of particular species are provided. The qualitative composition of the fly community associated withM. giganteus in an urban habitat, causes of high species richness, and the predominance of polysaprophagous species in the reared material are discussed. The accidentally reared Ornitholeria nidicola Frey, 1930 (Chiropteromyzidae) represents the first family record from the Czech Republic and the first record of the species from Central Europe.

Keywords: Insecta • Diptera (17 families)• Fungi (Meripilaceae) • Mycophagy • Synanthropy • Rearing • Czech Republic © Versita Sp. z o.o.

1. Introduction example, recorded as the most common wood-decay fungus in Hamburg [1]. Polypores and other lignicolous fungi represent More than 20 families of Diptera with various degree an important habitat and food source for insects, of trophic specialization have already been recorded to especially for beetles (Coleoptera) and flies (Diptera). develop in wood-destroying fungi (for recent reviews While beetles live mostly in older fruit bodies, flies see [2-6]). Concerning the family Meripilaceae, the usually attack both fresh and decaying fungi. Little rearing records are rather scarce. The highest number of attention has so far been devoted to the insect fauna of Diptera species (belonging to Trichoceridae, Pediciidae, the polypore family Meripilaceae. It includes more than Ditomyiidae, Mycetophilidae, Sciaridae, Cecidomyiidae, 60 species of mostly large polypores classified in 6 Phoridae, Heleomyzidae, Sphaeroceridae, and genera: Grifola Gray (10 species), Henningsia A.Møller Drosophilidae) were reared from Meripilus giganteus, cf. (1 species), Hydnopolyporus D. A. Reid (3 species), [2,7-14], and Ševčík [6] found that this fungus was the Meripilus P. Karst. (6 species), Physisporinus P. Karst. most attractive one for Diptera in the Czech Republic (3 species) and Rigidoporus Murrill (40 species). In with 27 associated species of Diptera. Three species of Central Europe, Meripilus is represented by only one nematocerous Diptera were reared from Grifola frondosa Palaearctic species, Meripilus giganteus (Pers.) P. (Dicks.) Gray and two Diptera species were reared from Karst., 1882. This fungus is rather commonly found Rigidoporus sanguinolentus (Alb. & Schwein.) Donk also in urban habitats, like old city parks. It was, for [6]. There is also a rearing record of one species of

* E-mail: [email protected] 143 Diptera associated with sporocarps of Meripilus giganteus in an urban habitat

Megaselia Rondani, 1856 (Phoridae) from Rigidoporus in the Slezská nížina Lowland. It is surrounded by an microporus (Sw.) Overeem collected in Indonesia [15]. agricultural landscape (Figure 2); the nearest forested In this paper, we summarize all rearing and collecting area is at Otice village, about 4 km SW from Opava. records of flies associated with fruit bodies of Meripilus In 2009 the first sporocarps ofM. giganteus (Figure 3) giganteus in the Opava city (Czech Republic) and provide were found under an old beech tree in the Sady Svobody comments on host specialization and other aspects of Park below Ptačí vrch Hill on 18.09.2009. A sample biology of particular species. The results are compared of adult flies were netted and/or aspirated from them to previous knowledge about association of flies with (J. Roháček leg.). As an unexpected species diversity of this fungus. The causes of high species richness and Diptera was found in this adult sample, the collecting of qualitative composition of the fly community associated flies was repeated on 23.09.2009 which added further with M. giganteus in an urban habitat are discussed and species to this spectrum; small samples of fungus with the predominance of polysaprophagous species in the larvae were taken on 24.09.2009 by the junior author reared material is elucidated. for rearing experiments. Therefore we decided to subsequently collect a large sample of the fungus for rearing in breeding boxes (see below). Unfortunately, 2. Experimental Procedures this intention was not realized because in the meantime all these sporocarps of M. giganteus were removed by The samples of Meripilus giganteus were collected by technical services of the Opava city. In the following year the authors in the Opava city (eastern Czech Republic), several sporocarps of the fungus (Figure 4) were found in two parks within the city centre, in the years 2009 and under a large ash tree in a small park at the nearby 2010. Opava is a mid-sized city (about 60,000 citizens) Sv. Hedvika square. Samples of adult flies were also situated near the Czech-Polish border (Figure 1), close collected there (on 14., 16., 18., 24.09. and 1.10.2010) to the confluence of the Opava and Moravice Rivers, and two complete sporocarps (Figure 5) were taken

Figure 1-2. Maps. 1 – position of the Opava city in Europe; 2 – Opava city and its nearest vicinity. Sources: Fauna Europaea (Figure 1), http://www.mapy.cz (Figure 2).

Figure 3. Meripilus giganteus, sporocarps at base of a beech in Figure 4. Meripilus giganteus, sporocarps at base of European ash locality B. Photo by J. Ševčík. in locality A. Photo by J. Roháček.

144 J. Roháček, J. Ševčík

on 16.09. and 1.10.2010 for rearing experiments larvae and reared adults (Appendix 1) is preserved in (J. Roháček). ethanol and deposited in the collection of the Silesian Two methods of rearing were used. In 2009 only Museum (Opava, Czech Republic) (specimens from small selected samples of fungi with insect larvae were samples collected in 2010) and in the junior author’s placed into glass jars with a small amount of soil and collection (specimens from samples collected in 2009). then closed by monofil (see [6]). In 2010 two samples, The material of adults collected directly on M. giganteus each containing the complete fruit body of the fungus, (see Appendix 2) is dry mounted and deposited in the were placed into special plastic rearing boxes (Figure 6, Silesian Museum. Some preliminary results from these see also [16,17]) equipped with a collecting head of rearing experiments were included in the monograph by similar construction to that used in Malaise traps and Ševčík [6]. containing a 0.5 l polyethylene bottle filled with 75% The sampling localities and dates are as follows: ethanol in which all emerged insects were caught, killed Localities (see map on Figure 7): (A) Czech and preserved. All the examined material of both the Republic: Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 49°56’32.4’’N

Figure 5. A sporocarp of Meripius giganteus used for rearing Figure 6. Plastic boxes used for rearing flies. Photo by J. Roháček. (sample B39). Photo by J. Roháček.

Figure 7. Map of centre of Opava city with position of localities under study (see locality A, locality B). Source: http://www.mapy.cz.

145 Diptera associated with sporocarps of Meripilus giganteus in an urban habitat

17°53’28.9’’E, 271 m, park, under Fraxinus excelsior, 3.1 Mycophagous and mycosaprophagous samples (complete fruit body of fungus) collected species 16.09.2010 (sample B39) and 1.10.2010 (sample B40), Species developing exclusively or predominantly in fresh J. Roháček leg. The rearing period lasted more than (mycophagous larvae) or decayed (mycosaprophagous one year (16.09.2010 – 1.11.2011). Sampling dates: larvae) tissues of sporocarps of fungi. 24.09., 1.10. (B39 only), 8.10., 15.10., 22.10., 1.09., 8.11., 15.11., 22.11., 29.11.2010; 24.03., 29.04., 9.05., 3.1.1 Pediciidae 24.05., 1.06., 10.10., 20.06., 30.06., 11.07., 21.07., Ula (Ula) mollissima Haliday, 1833 8.08., 22.08., 14.09., 1.11.2011 (both B39 and B40). A rather common polymycophagous woodland species (B) Opava, Ptačí vrch, 49°56‘07‘‘N 17°54‘11‘‘E, associated mostly with lignicolous fungi [2,6,18]. It was 268 m, park, under Fagus sylvatica, small samples of recorded from Meripilus giganteus by Chandler [10] and fungus collected on 24.09.2009, J. Ševčík leg. Samples from Grifola frondosa by Ševčík [19]. were checked daily and emerged flies collected. Note: Buxton [9] also recorded rearing U. sylvatica Identification: The material obtained (see above) (Meigen, 1818) from Meripilus giganteus, but at that was identified by the authors and external experts time only one species of Ula was thought to occur in who are listed in the Acknowledgements and also Britain; his material has since been revised by A. Stubbs in Appendix 1 and 2 with indication of families they and the rearing from M. giganteus was of U. mollissima determined. (P. Chandler, personal communication).

species n D (%) 3. Results Coboldia fuscipes 5,299 50.70

Altogether 10,451 adults of Diptera belonging to Drosophila funebris 2,237 21.40 66 species emerged from sporocarps of Meripilus Logima satchelli 1,480 14.16 giganteus during our rearing experiments (Appendix 1). Additionally 404 adult specimens were collected on fruit Forcipomyia squamigera 573 5.48 bodies before they were used for rearings (Appendix 2). Lycoriella ingenua 309 2.96

The collected material was composed of 54 species but Apteromyia claviventris 99 0.95 as many as 34 of them were not reared. On the other hand, 46 species were reared and not collected as Tephrochlamys tarsalis 49 0.47 adults. Scatopse notata 38 0.36

In the reared material only a few species markedly Hirtodrosophila confusa 38 0.36 predominated over the majority of species. The six most Drosophila testacea 23 0.22 dominant species, viz Coboldia fuscipes (D=50.70%), Drosophila funebris (D=21.40%), Logima satchelli Opalimosina czernyi 20 0.19 (D=14.16%), Forcipomyia squamigera (D=5.48%), Minilimosina parvula 18 0.17 Lycoriella ingenua (D=2.96%) and Apteromyia Forcipomyia bipunctata 17 0.16 claviventris (0.95%) formed together 95.65% of all reared specimens. Dominance of any of the remaining 62 reared Neoclastobasis draskovitsae 15 0.14 species did not exceed 0.5%. All species with dominance Camptodiplosis boleti 14 0.13

D≥0.10% are listed below with their abundance (n) and Drosophila melanogaster 14 0.13 dominance (D) values (Table 1). These 22 species were represented by 10,310 specimens (98.63%) in the Fannia manicata 13 0.12 reared material. The remaining 141 specimens (1.37 %) Bradysia sp. 1 12 0.11

belonged to 46 species. Mycetophila luctuosa 11 0.11 All the species found are treated below with basic Psychodocha cinerea 11 0.11 data about their biology with particular emphasis on trophic relation to the fungus. Therefore they are divided Megaselia rufipes 10 0.10 into three main trophic groups according to larval food: Logima albipennis 10 0.10 (1) mycophagous and mycosaprohagous species, Total 10,310 98.63 (2) polysaprophagous species, (3) other associations (predatory etc. species). Table 1. Abundance and dominance of particular species reared from Meripilus giganteus during this study

146 J. Roháček, J. Ševčík

3.1.2 Mycetophilidae L. mali (Fitsch, 1863). It was previously reared from Docosia gilvipes (Walker, 1856) M. giganteus by P. J. Chandler (record published by A polymycophagous Palaearctic species developing Menzel et al. [14]). Chandler [10,18] noted common in various fungi including some Polyporales [2,6] but development of the species in various polypores hitherto not reared from Meripilaceae. It was recently and agarics. More than 300 reared specimens recorded from the Afrotropical region but this is probably (see Appendix 1) indicate that it is probably a a case of introduction [20]. Interestingly, this is the only mycosaprophagous species. species of this genus known to develop in fungi. Only a single specimen was reared from M. giganteus. It was Scatopsciara sp. previously recorded from an urban habitat by Jakovlev Only females from this genus were reared in this study. [21] who reared it from an Agaricus spp. collected in Two closely related species, Scatopsciara neglecta Petrozavodsk city parks. Menzel & Möhrig, 1998 and Scatopsciara pusilla (Meigen, 1818) were reared from lignicolous fungi Leia winthemii Lehmann, 1822 Merulius tremellosus and Ganoderma applanatum, A Holarctic species with little known biology. It was respectively, see [6]. reared from four species of fungi [2] but hitherto not from any polypore. The first rearing record from M. giganteus 3.1.4 Cecidomyiidae is based on 5 specimens. Camptodiplosis boleti (Kieffer, 1901) This is a common oligomycophagous species associated Mycetophila luctuosa Meigen, 1830 with various polypores including Meripilus giganteus, A polymycophagous Holarctic species known from various see [2,6,13,18], and known from several European fungi [2]; first recorded fromMeripilus giganteus by Ševčík countries. Within this study, it was only reared in 2009 [6] as a part of our rearing experiments (11 specimens (see Appendix 1). reared). It is principally a woodland species but there is one previous record from a mine dump in Ostrava city [6]. 3.1.5 Psychodidae Chodopsycha lobata (Tonnoir, 1940) Neoclastobasis draskovitsae Matile, 1978 This is one of the few strictly mycophagous and A very rare European species with little-known biology. mycosaprophagous species of Psychodidae while According to [22], the type material was reared from most the other species are typically polysaprophagous. the agarics Armillariella tabescens, Lactarius acerrimus The range of its host fungi is rather wide but it rarely and L. vellereus. These records were cited by Jakovlev develops in polypores [6]. Meripilus giganteus is its new [2] under the misidentified name Neoclastobasis host record (based on only 1 reared specimen). sibirica Ostroverkhova, 1970 taken from [23]. There is no previous record of N. draskovitsae from a polypore, 3.1.6 Ceratopogonidae although the larvae of the closely related (if not identical) Culicoides (Avaritia) scoticus Downes & Kettle, 1959 Eastern Palaearctic species N. kamijoi (Sasakawa, 1964) This is a typical polymycophagous species, known were found on the surface of dry fruit bodies of Trametes to develop in more than 30 species of fungi including versicolor, Laetiporus sulphureus and Pleurotus several polypores [2,6,18] but hitherto not reared from citrinopileatus [24]. A total of 15 specimens were reared Meripilaceae. from M. giganteus. Interestingly, the only previous record of this species from the Czech Republic [25] is based on 3.1.7 Platypezidae the finding of a single male in Brno city, which suggests Lindneromyia hungarica Chandler, 2001 its possible affinity to the urban environment. This mycophagous species is known to develop in Note: Mycetophila ornata Stephens, 1829 is another species of Agaricus [6]. A single adult (Appendix 1) species of Mycetophilidae previously reared from found on a fruit body of Meripilus surely represents a M. giganteus [2,7,9] but the rearing record of Laštovka specimen only attracted to the smelling fungus. [26] probably refers to different fungus, as stated by Ševčík [6] at page 25. 3.1.8 Phoridae Megaselia shawi Disney, 2006 3.1.3 Sciaridae This species was described by Disney [27] as a „sibling Lycoriella ingenua (Dufour, 1839) species“ of the mycophagous M. frameata Schmitz, A fungicolous species, also known under the junior 1927. Colyer [8] recorded „Megaselia imberbis“ from synonyms Lycoriella solani (Winnertz, 1871) and Meripilus giganteus which possibly was M. shawi (R. H.

147 Diptera associated with sporocarps of Meripilus giganteus in an urban habitat

L. Disney, personal communication). Ševčík [6] recorded 3.1.11 Asteiidae 1 male from this fungus being a part of a series of 6 Leiomyza birkheadi Gibbs in Gibbs & Papp, 2007 males we reared during our experiments (Appendix 1). Formerly this recently described species was confused with These records of M. shawi are the first from the Czech Leiomyza laevigata (Meigen, 1830), see [31]. Like other Republic and the whole mainland of Europe. Leiomyza species, L. birkheadi is mycophagous and was reared from Agaricus arvensis and Amanita phalloides [31] 3.1.9 Piophilidae and Macrolepiota procera [6] but adults were also collected Mycetaulus bipunctatus (Fallén, 1823) on Polyporus squamosus and Volveriella bombycina [18]. A widespread Palaearctic species which develops in The species is more frequent in the Czech Republic than true decaying terrestrial fungi [2,18,28,29], rarely in nests L. laevigata [32]. Interestingly, the single male reared from of birds and rotting wood. Adults can be attracted to M. giganteus (Appendix 1) emerged one year after the meat-baited traps [30]. A few adult specimens were fungus was collected. collected and several observed on Meripilus sporocarps Altogether 3 Leiomyza species, viz. L. birkheadi, in both localities in Opava (Appendix 2, Figure 8) and, L. dudai Sabrosky, 1956 (these two in series of specimens) therefore, it is not excluded that this species may also and L. laevigata (Meigen, 1830) (only 2 males) were develop in this fungus. collected on sporocarps of M. giganteus in parks of Opava (Figure 9, Appendix 2) and it is believed that the 3.1.10 Anthomyzidae other two can also develop in this fungus because at least Fungomyza albimana (Meigen, 1830) L. dudai is a polymycophagous species that was reared An European mycophagous species known to develop from a number of species of Agaricales [33]. in various terrestrial fungi (for summary of records see [17]) but hitherto not reared from Polyporales 3.1.12 Chloropidae although adults are attracted to their sporocarps [17]. Tricimba (Tricimba) lineella (Fallén, 1820) A few adult specimens were collected on Meripilus This common Holarctic species is long known to be sporocarps in both localities under study (Appendix 2) associated with fungi; there is a number of rearing this indicating that the species may have affinity to records from various agarics and boletes (for review see this fungus. [2,18]). M. giganteus is a new host fungus of T. lineella

Figure 8. Mycetaulus bipunctatus, male. Photo by J. Roháček. Figure 9. Leiomyza sp., male. Photo by J. Roháček.

148 J. Roháček, J. Ševčík

based on four females reared in our experiments (Appendix 1). Note: Interestingly, no specimen of T. lineella was collected on sporocarps of Meripilus in contrast to a single female of Tricimba cincta (Meigen, 1830), another mycophagous species which, possibly, could also develop in this fungus.

3.1.13 Heleomyzidae The Suillia species are known to develop in fresh tissue of various fungi [18] but only S. variegata (Loew, 1862) has formerly been reared from Meripilus [9]. The two species we did collect on fresh sporcarps of M. giganteus, viz S. affinis (Meigen, 1830) and S. bicolor (Zetterstedt, 1838) (Figure 10) could possibly also develop in this fungus but we have not reared them.

3.1.14 Sphaeroceridae Opalimosina (Hackmanina) czernyi (Duda, 1918) This uncommon Palaearctic species has long been known to occur exclusively on woodland fungi [11,34] but the first rearing records are those fromMeripilus (one specimen recorded by [6], for others see Appendix 1). It was repeatedly (20 specimens) reared from both samples and some adults were also collected on the fungus prior to breeding experiments (Appendix 2). The occurrence of this species in park habitat near the city centre was fairly unexpected because O. czernyi is normally associated with forests. Figure 10. Suillia bicolor, female. Photo by J. Roháček. Spelobia parapusio (Dahl, 1909) A well-known polymycophagous species that has been reared from more than 30 species of fungi [2]. The first rearing record from M. giganteus was published by Ševčík [6] based on our current study. Adults (females only because it is an exclusively parthenogenetic species in Central Europe) were abundant on Meripilus sporocarps (Figure 11) in both localities and were also reared from both samples although not very frequently (see Appendix 1 and 2). Interestingly, some adults emerged as late as September 2011 (a year after the fungus sample was collected) this indicating an ability of S. parapusio to develop even in strongly decayed fungal tissue. The species is associated with woodland habitats [34] and its larval development is very rapid (a few days under laboratory conditions [35]).

3.1.15 Drosophilidae Drosophila (Drosophila) kuntzei Duda, 1924 This polymycophagous W. Palaearctic species is particularly common in beech forests [6]. It was reared from a number of fungal species [2] but hitherto not from M. giganteus. Only 3 specimens were reared, all from relatively fresh fungus (Appendix 1). Adults were rather Figure 11. Spelobia parapusio, female. Photo by J. Roháček.

149 Diptera associated with sporocarps of Meripilus giganteus in an urban habitat

frequent on sporocarps in both Opava localities where the fungus was found (Figure 12, Appendix 2).

Drosophila (Drosophila) phalerata Meigen, 1830 This commonest mycophagous drosophilid in C. Europe has been surprisingly rare on M. giganteus. Only 1 specimen was reared and 4 were collected (see Figure 13, Appendix 1, 2) although it otherwise is known from more than 150 species of fungi [2,6]. Our first rearing record from Meripilus has already been published in [6].

Drosophila (Drosophila) testacea von Roser, 1840 A further common Palaearctic species known to develop Figure 12. Drosophila immigrans, male. Photo by J. Roháček. in various woodland fungi except for Polyporaceae [2,6]. There is no previous record from M. giganteus. A total of 23 specimens were reared from (Appendix 1) and a number of adults were collected on sporocarps of this fungus (Appendix 2).

Drosophila (Drosophila) transversa Fallén, 1823 A common Holarctic species with polymycophagous larvae [2,18]. It has been reared from M. giganteus by Ševčík [6] but only 3 specimens were reared during our experiments and the adults occurred rarely on sporocarps in sites under study (Appendix 1, 2).

Hirtodrosophila confusa (Staeger, 1844) A widespread Palaearctic species associated with woodland (particularly beech forests) developing mainly in polypores and other lignicolous fungi although also recorded from several terestrial agarics [2,6]. No previous rearing from Meripilus except for those by Ševčík [6]. A total of 38 specimens were reared (Appendix 1), all from relatively fresh fungal tissue, and some adults were also captured on sporocarps examined (Appendix 2).

Mycodrosophila poecilogastra (Loew, 1874) A thermophilous Palearctic species mainly occurring in Figure 13. Drosophila phalerata, ovipositing female. Photo by J. lowland forests. According to [6] the host fungi have been Roháček. poorly known. Recently, M. poecilogastra became more frequent in C. Europe and was found to be associated 3.1.16 Fanniidae with wood-decaying fungi. Ševčík [6] presented rearing The mycophagous Piezura graminicola (Zetterstedt, records from 8 species of fungi including those from 1846) was not reared from M. giganteus but a single M. giganteus. Four specimens were reared from female was collected on the sporocarp of this fungus relatively fresh fungus (Appendix 1) and a further 9 (see Appendix 2). Consequently, it is cannot be excluded adults were collected on sporocarps in parks under that this species may also develop in its tissues. study (Appendix 2). Note: Dely-Draskovits & Babos [12] recorded also 3.2 Polysaprophagous species Leucophenga maculata (Dufour, 1839), a species Species with ability to develop in decayed and mainly associated with lignicolous fungi [6], as reared fermenting tissues of sporocarps of fungi because from M. giganteus. widely polysaprophagous as larvae. They can be often

150 J. Roháček, J. Ševčík

abundant on fungi, particularly in situations where no 3.2.4 Scatopsidae other suitable development media are available in the Apiloscatopse flavicollis (Meigen, 1818) site. A common European species associated with forested areas. It was formerly reared from the fungus Tricholoma 3.2.1 Sciaridae pessundatum by [40]. This record, repeated by Jakovlev Bradysia spp. [2] and Chandler [18], should be regarded as requiring All species of this huge genus are phytosaprophagous, confirmation. Our single rearing record from Meripilus including the cosmopolitan and synanthropic B. ocellaris giganteus was published by Ševčík [6]. (Comstock, 1882), although there are also scarce records from fungi [2]. The specimens reared from Coboldia fuscipes (Meigen, 1830) M. giganteus could not be identified because all were Scatopse notata (Linnaeus, 1758) females (Appendix 1). Both these cosmopolitan and partly synanthropic species are considered polysaprophagous as larvae 3.2.2 Cecidomyiidae but were not formerly recorded from Meripilus giganteus Aprionus sp. except for [6]. They are frequently encountered in urban Only females belonging to this species-rich genus habitats including settlements. Coboldia fuscipes was the were reared. According to Jaschhof & Jaschhof [36], most abundant fly reared from Meripilus (almost 5,300 species of this genus are associated with decaying specimens) and its multiple reproduction in the breeding wood and soil. boxes is supposed. It is the most frequently reared member of Scatopsidae from fungi (known from about Polyardis sp. 10 species of fungi and myxomycetes [2,18]). The other Only females from this genus were reared. Larvae of synanthropic species, Scatopse notata (Figure 14), has the three European species of the genus live in the soil also been formerly reared from some fungi [18]. and in decayed plant litter [36]. No named species of Polyardis has been recorded from the Czech Republic 3.2.5 Ceratopogonidae so far. Forcipomyia (Forcipomyia) bipunctata (Linnaeus, 1767) Forcipomyia (Forcipomyia) brevipennis (Macquart, 1828) 3.2.3 Psychodidae Logima albipennis (Zetterstedt, 1850) Logima satchelli (Quate, 1955) Logima zetterstedti Ježek, 1983 Nomenclature of the above three species follows Ježek [37,38]; see also Appendix 1 where the synonyms are listed. All these Logima species are considered eurybiont and saprophagous species, hitherto not explicitly recorded from fungi, except for the recent record of L. satchelli by Ševčík [6]. The cosmopolitan L. satchelli was one of the dominant species in the reared material (almost 1,500 specimens) while the other two were uncommon.

Psychodocha cinerea (Banks, 1894) A very common cosmopolitan species with saprophagous larvae, recorded from decaying fungi by Withers [39] and Chandler [18]. First rearing record from Meripilus (see Appendix 1).

Psychodula minuta (Banks, 1894) A common Holarctic saprophagous species. It was reared by Withers [39] from Polyporus squamosus and Grifolia frondosa and Chandler [18] recorded it from Polyporus badius (as P. durus). First rearing record from Meripilus (see Appendix 1). Figure 14. Scatopse notata, female. Photo by J. Roháček.

151 Diptera associated with sporocarps of Meripilus giganteus in an urban habitat

Forcipomyia (Forcipomyia) cf. crassipes (Winnertz, 1852) various rotten substrates including wood and pigeon Forcipomyia (Forcipomyia) nigra (Winnertz, 1852) dung [46]. A single male reared from M. giganteus Forcipomyia (Forcipomyia) squamigera Kieffer, 1916 (Appendix 1) represents first rearing record from fungi. Forcipomyia (Lepidohelea) tibialis Remm, 1961 Forcipomyia (Microhela) fuliginosa (Meigen, 1818) Megaselia rufipes (Meigen, 1804) The larvae of Forcipomyia are considered by Krivosheina A very common species widespread in W. Palaearctic [4] as surface feeders because of their morphological area. It is widely saprophagous and was also formerly features which prevent them from living inside the fungal reared from decaying fungi [2,18]. A total of 10 specimens fruit bodies and considers them to be saprosporophages were reared from M. giganteus (see Appendix 1); two of or micromycophages. All the above species have been them have already been recorded from this fungus by reared for the first time from Meripilus (see Appendix 1) Ševčík [6]. but three of them, Forcipomyia bipunctata, F. fuliginosa and F. nigra, have already been reared from other 3.2.8 Piophilidae polypores [2,6]. Krivosheina & Mamaev [41] included Parapiophila vulgaris (Fallén, 1820) F. bipunctata and F. nigra among xylophagous species and A common Holarctic species known to preferentially recorded their larvae under the bark of trees and in other develop in carrion but it was also reared from some plant material. F. squamigera (formerly often treated by other decaying substrates (human dung, rotten leaves, authors as F. tenuisquama [42]) was the most abundant dead snails [29]). There is no previous record from fungi. species in our samples (more than 500 specimens Interestingly, numerous adult specimens of this species reared) which developed both in fresh and strongly rotten were attracted to sporocarps of M. giganteus in 2009 sporocarps of M. giganteus. Szadziewski et al. [42] found (see Appendix 2) but because all collected specimens larvae of this species under bark of logs, fallen branches were males we do not suppose that P. vulgaris can and rotting twigs of Pinus sylvestris and Picea excelsa. develop in this fungus. Note: Interestingly, only females of all Forcipomyia species were reared from M. giganteus. This was surprising 3.2.9 Acartophthalmidae particularly as regards F. squamigera with so many reared Acartophthalmus nigrinus (Zetterstedt, 1847) specimens. It is not easy to explain this phenomenon: A common Holarctic species associated with woodland. possibly this species reproduced parthenogenetically in Its larval development media are unknown but the species the rearing boxes or all males died in pupal and/or larval supposedly develop in various rotting matter. Although stage due to inconvenient conditions. adults commonly occur on various sporocarps of fungi [18,47,48] and were also found on Meripilus both by 3.2.6 Stratiomyidae Chandler [18] and in Opava parks (Appendix 2), they have Sargus bipunctatus (Scopoli, 1763) hitherto not been reared from any species of fungi. A widespread (Holarctic + Oriental) polysaprophagous species developing in dung and rotten plants [43] but females were observed that oviposited also on fruiting bodies of fungus Pleurotus squamosus [44]. Adults were also attracted to Meripilus sporocarps – two specimens were collected (Figure 15, Appendix 2) and several others observed – but none has been reared from this species.

3.2.7 Phoridae Megaselia giraudii (Egger, 1862) A W. Palaearctic species known to develop in various decaying materials and also from several species of fungi [9,45]. The single female obtained from M. giganteus (Appendix 1) is the first rearing record from this fungus.

Megaselia pleuralis (Wood, 1909) Also this W. Palaearctic species obviously is polysaprophagous as larvae because it was reared from Figure 15. Sargus bipunctatus, female. Photo by J. Roháček.

152 J. Roháček, J. Ševčík

3.2.10 Carnidae thus predominantly necrophagous. It also has a Meoneura neottiophila Collin, 1930 distinct affinity to decayed fungi [34] and was recorded A common W. Palaearctic species, predominatly as developing in Coprinopsis atramentaria [33] and necrophagous as larvae but it also has been reared Boletus edulis [11]. Three specimens were reared from from Leccinum scabrum in Finland [49] and its adults Meripilus (one recorded already by [6]), all shortly after are often attracted to decaying fungi including Pleurotus the samples were collected (Appendix 1). and Polyporus [18]. They were also common on M. giganteus sporocarps in parks of Opava (Appendix 2) Leptocera caenosa (Rondani, 1880) but no specimen was reared from them. A cosmopolitan and partly synanthropic species, preferentially necrophagous, living also in various 3.2.11 Heleomyzidae subterranean habitats and within human settlements Heleomyza (Heleomyza) captiosa (Gorodkov, 1962) [50,51]. Hitherto, it has not been reared from fungi. First This common European species is widely saprophagous rearing record from Meripilus although in only a single (including coprophagy) but has not been previously specimen (Appendix 1). reared from fungi. Only two specimens were reared from M. giganteus (see Appendix 1) one being recorded Coproica hirticula Collin, 1956 already by Ševčík [6]. Coproica vagans (Haliday, 1833) Opalimosina (Opalimosina) mirabilis (Collin, 1902) Tephrochlamys tarsalis (Zetterstedt, 1847) Opalimosina (Pappiella) liliputana (Rondani, 1880) An almost cosmopolitan saprophagous species is long Pullimosina (Pullimosina) heteroneura (Haliday, 1836) known to develop in various fungi [2] including Meripilus These 5 polysaprophaous, widespread and common giganteus [9]. Almost 50 specimens were reared from species, although reared (some repeatedly, see both samples (see Appendix 1) and most emerged Appendix 1) from decayed M. giganteus, are considered in late autumn and early spring. Specimens from first to only occasionally develop in fungi because their rearings were already published by Ševčík [6]. preferred development media are different, viz dung (C. hirticula, C. vagans, O. mirabilis) or rotting 3.2.12 Sphaeroceridae vegetation (O. liliputana, P. heteroneura). Amon them, Apteromyia claviventris (Strobl, 1909) only Pullimosina heteroneura has formerly been reared A Holarctic terricolous to cavernicolous species from fungi [49,52] so 4 others represent first rearing developing in a variety of decayed matter of plant and records from a given fungus (although some of them animal origin in various habitats [34]. It is also known from were already recorded by [6]). various species of fungi, including M. giganteus [2,6,11]. However, there are many other species of Almost a hundred specimens were reared from both Sphaeroceridae which are attracted to rotting sporocarps samples including relatively fresh to strongly decayed of fungi [11,18] which can potentially develop in Meripilus sporocarp tissue (cf. Appendix 1), this indicating a high because of wide saprophagy of their larvae. This may attractivity of this substrate to this species. also be true for the following 10 species which were collected on sporocarps of Meripilus in Opava parks Minilimosina (Minilimosina) parvula (Stenhammar, 1855) (see Appendix 2): Bifronsina bifrons (Stenhammar, Another common Holarctic species, polysaprophagous 1855), Coproica ferruginata (Stenhammar, 1855), with preference for necrophagy and mycosaprophagy. It Elachisoma aterrimum (Haliday, 1833), E. bajzae Papp, often occurs on rotting fungi [34], particularly in woodland 1983, Ischiolepta pusilla (Fallén, 1820), Minilimosina areas. It has not been formerly reared from fungi but most (Minilimosina) fungicola (Haliday, 1836), Spelobia of the previous rearing records of M. fungicola (Haliday, clunipes (Meigen, 1830), S. palmata (Richards, 1927), 1836) from various fungi, see [2] page 93, may in fact refer S. talparum (Richards, 1927) and Sphaerocera monilis to M. parvula (these two species were not separated before Haliday, 1836. Of these, Ischiolepta pusilla, Minilimosina 1983). The species was repeatedly reared from Meripilus fungicola and Sphaerocera monilis were formerly reared giganteus (one female recorded already by [6]), both from from fungi [18]. fresh and decayed tissue (Appendix 1) although adults occurred infrequently on the sporocarps (cf. Appendix 2). 3.2.13 Drosophilidae Drosophila (Dorsilopha) busckii Coquillett, 1901 Telomerina flavipes (Meigen, 1830) A synanthropic, cosmopolitan species developing in A subcosmopolitan (owing to partial synanthropy) various fermenting organic matter including fungi (for species, with similar trophic preferences as M. parvula, summary of rearing records see [2]). A single female

153 Diptera associated with sporocarps of Meripilus giganteus in an urban habitat

was reared from Meripilus, representing the first rearing from fungi are scarce [2,18]. Only 1 female was reared record from this fungus. from M. giganteus (first record from this fungus) and, consequently, the species surely only occasionally Drosophila (Drosophila) funebris (Fabricius, 1787) develops in fungi. A very common, cosmopolitan, synanthropic and polysaprophagous species with ability to develop in 3.2.14 Anthomyiidae various decaying and fermenting substrates. It was No species of Anthomyiidae has been reared from reared from numerous species of fungi [2,18] including M. giganteus. Two adults of Delia platura (Meigen, M. giganteus [9]. The large decaying sporocarps of 1826), a common Holarctic fly with saprophagous larvae M. giganteus proved to be a very suitable development were collected on sporocarps of this fungus in a park in medium for the larvae – more than 2,200 specimens of Opava (Appendix 2). D. funebris were reared (Appendix 1) throughout the year and, therefore, a multiple propagation has to occur 3.2.15 Fanniidae in the breeding boxes. Adults of this species were found Fannia canicularis (Linnaeus, 1761) in numbers also on fresh bodies of fungus (Appendix 2). An eusynanthropic and cosmopolitan species with extremely polysaprophagous larvae also known to Drosophila (Drosophila) immigrans Sturtevant, 1921 develop in various fungi [2,6,54]). The nine reared A cosmopolitan, predominantly synathropic species, specimens (Appendix 1) represent first rearing records preferentially developing in fermenting fruits. Our rearing from M. giganteus. of 3 specimens from M. giganteus (Appendix 1; partly published by [6]) and those by [53] from Phallus impudicus Fannia manicata (Meigen, 1826) indicate that its larvae can also utilise fermenting tissue of A widespread Holarctic species, partly synanthropic, fungi. Adults of the species were frequent on sporocarps developing in various rotting substrates including of Meripilus in Opava (Figure 16, Appendix 2). various fungi (for review see [2,54] but hitherto not known from M. giganteus. A total of 13 specimens (all Drosophila (Sophophora) melanogaster Meigen, 1830 females) were reared and 8 more adults collected in this This commonest synanthropic Drosophila develops fungus (Appendix 1, 2). in many fermenting media (mainly fruits) but has infrequently been reared from fungi [2,18]. The Fannia monilis (Haliday, 1838) first rearing records from M. giganteus are given in A Palaearctic species, more thermophilous and less Appendix 1. However, because the adults began to common than F. manicata, with polysaprophagous emerge only in late July 2011 we presuppose that they larvae, recorded as also developing in several species originate from an occasional secondary invasion of of fungi [2,6,54]. Ševčík [6] published the first rearing females into the breeding boxes which oviposited in the records from M. giganteus based on our rearing sporocarps in an advanced stage of decay. experiments. In addition, adults of the following two Drosophila (Sophophora) obscura Fallén, 1823 polysaprophagous Fannia species were collected A widespread Palaearctic species developing in various (single specimens) on fruiting bodies of M. meripilus fermenting matter, mainly in sap runs. The rearings in Opava parks: F. aequilineata Ringdahl, 1945 and F. vesparia (Meade, 1891). Of these, F. aequilineata was also reared from fungi [54]. 3.3 Other associations (predaceous etc. species) Species with larvae not feeding on fungal tissues but occurring in sporocarps because predaceous on or parasitoids of mycophagous and saprophagous invertebrates developing in fungi.

3.3.1 Hybotidae Drapetis (Drapetis) assimilis (Fallén, 1815) An uncommon Holarctic species predaceous both as Figure 16. Drosophila kuntzei, male. Photo by J. Roháček. adult and larva on small insects. Some Drapetis species

154 J. Roháček, J. Ševčík

have been reared from debris in hollow trees and from Hydrotaea armipes and Phaonia subventa have already rotten tree stumps [55] but none from fungi. been reared from various fungi [2]. Helina pertusa Note: D. nigritella recorded by Buxton [9] from the is associated with dead or sickly trees (as are those myxomycete Fuligo septica is Crossopalpus nigritellus invaded by Meripilus giganteus). (Zetterstedt, 1842). A total of 7 specimens were reared from only one sample of M. giganteus (see Appendix 1) . 4. Discussion and Conclusions 3.3.2 Sepsidae Sepsis fulgens Meigen, 1826 4.1 Species of Diptera associated with A coprophagous Palaearctic species, the most common M. giganteus representative of the family in C. Europe. The finding Formerly, only 13 species had been recorded as of single specimen on sporocarp of M. giganteus (see developing in Meripilus giganteus until Ševčík [6] Appendix 2) surely is only occassional. published some results from our rearing experiments: Mycetophila ornata [7], Megaselia imberbis [8] 3.3.3 Chiropteromyzidae (= probably misidentification of M. shawi), Ornitholeria nidicola Frey, 1930 Trichocera hiemalis, Ula sylvatica (misidentification The species is treated here in Frey’s original genus of U. mollissima), Mycetophila ornata, Suillia (sub because the species of Neossos Malloch, 1927 differ Helomyza) variegata, Tephrochlamys tarsalis and distinctly in the formation of the female terminalia Drosophila funebris (all [9]), Ula mollissima [10], and spermathecae [56] while those of O. nidicola are Apteromyia claviventris [11], Leucophenga maculata similar to those of Chiropteromyza wegelii Frey, 1927. [12], Camptodiplosis boleti [2], Ditomyia fasciata, The single female specimen reared from M. giganteus Camptodiplosis boleti, Leptodiplosis polypori (all [13]) (see Appendix 1) is an extremely interesting record and Lycoriella ingenua [14]. The rearing record of not only because this species has been previously Mycetophila ornata by Laštovka [26] was probably not unknown from whole of Central Europe (and represents from Meripilus [6] but the species was reared from this first record of the family from the Czech Republic) but fungus by other authors. Ševčík [6] listed 27 species also because it is known to develop in nests of birds. associated with M. giganteus in the Czech Republic, The type specimens [57] were reared from the nest of largely based on preliminary results of our rearings and Starling (Sturnus vulgaris) in Finland and there is also stated that this fungus had the most diverse species a good series reared from the nest of Barn Owl (Tyto spectrum of all fungal species he used for study. The alba) in Great Britain [58]. Owing to this association we present results have shown that many more species are can presuppose that the larva or puparium of O. nidicola in fact associated with M. giganteus in urban habitats of most probably fell into a sporocarp of M. giganteus from Opava. Of the 66 species reared only one (Ornitholeria a bird nest built on the ash tree (Fraxinus excelsior) nidicola) is clearly not associated with this fungus but under which the fungus had grown and, consequently, all others really developed in it although some only the species was occassionally reared in our experiment. occasionally. Moreover, there are at least 18 species whose adults were collected on sporocarps and, despite 3.3.4 Muscidae were not reared, they can possibly also utilise this Mydaea electa (Zetterstedt, 1860) fungus as a development medium for their larvae (see A Holarctic species developing in a wide range of fungi comments under species above). Considering this fact, [59], rearing records reviewed in [2]. Its larvae (at least as many as 83 species can be regarded as associates their third instar) are predators of other larvae in fungus. of M. giganteus fruiting bodies in Opava parks. This A single female was reared from M. giganteus (see is surely the richest species spectrum ever recorded Appendix 2) and this record has already been published from a single species of fungus. Despite this fact, 6 by Ševčík [6]. species previously reared from M. giganteus were not The following 6 muscid species were only collected as obtained during our study, viz. Trichocera hiemalis, adults on fruiting bodies of M. giganteus (Appendix 1): Mycetophila ornata, Ditomyia fasciata, Leptodiplosis Azelia triquetra (Wiedeman, 1817), Coenosia tigrina polypori, Suillia variegata and Leucophenga maculata. (Fabricius, 1775), Helina pertusa (Meigen, 1826), Most of these species probably do not live in Opava Hydrotaea armipes (Fallén, 1825), Mydaea deserta parks, and, therefore, could not be recorded here. This (Zetterstedt, 1845), Phaonia subventa (Harris, 1780). fact demonstrates that the list of Diptera which can They obviously also have predaceous larvae and utilise sporocarps of M. giganteus is far from complete some of them can possibly also develop in this fungus. and that probably more than 90 species can develop

155 Diptera associated with sporocarps of Meripilus giganteus in an urban habitat

in the fungus. In conclusion, 59 species recorded here remnants of the fauna associated with floodplain were not reared from the fungus previously (without forests surrounding Opava and Moravice rivers several considering the preliminary records by Ševčík [6]) and hundred years ago which survived in fringe tree and 18 further species are additional potential associates shrub communities on river banks and in parks with old of Meripilus based on our collecting records of adults. deciduous trees. It should be noted that a different species array While the woodland mycophages and saprophages can be obtained by the two rearing methods. In small were almost as numerous as the synanthropic and samples selected from fruiting bodies of M. giganteus hemisynanthropic polysaprophages (about 33:35, because of containing larvae (rearings by Ševčík [13] uncertain cases not counted) the latter group markedly and those from 2009) some species were recorded, predominated in number of specimens and formed the rearing of which from large samples (complete almost 94% of all reared material (see below). sporocarps collected) failed. The species reared from small samples were mainly true mycophages which 4.3 Quantitative composition of the reared develops in relatively fresh fungal tissue while in large material samples various polysaprophagous species prevailed It is significant that in the reared material only a (see below) which can develop even in strongly decayed very small number of species predominated over and fermented matter. the majority of species. Of the six most dominant species (Coboldia fuscipes, Drosophila funebris, 4.2 Species richness of the dipterous community Logima satchelli, Forcipomyia tenuisquama, on Meripilus in the urban habitat Lycoriella ingenua, Apteromyia claviventris) only The diversity of species of Diptera living in sporocarps of Lycoriella ingenua is considered mycophagous to M. giganteus in Opava parks was really unusual. Such mycosaprophagous. Consequently, the majority high richness can be caused by two events: (a) the very of the reared specimens (about 9,800) belong to large fruiting body of the fungus that decays slowly and polysaprophagous species with the ability to develop in contains tissues at various stages of decomposition for a strongly decayed tissues of the fungus and repeatedly long time, thus forming an exceptional supply of food to reproduce on this substrate in a relative darkness larvae with various trophic demands; (b) the occurrence in rearing boxes. The extreme adaptibility of some of the fungus in city parks, an urban habitat composed synanthropic polysaprohagous species, including of a wide range of different microhabitats in close their capability to produce further generations in the proximity, ranging from those resembling the situation in rearing boxes, is considered the main factor which a natural lowland forest (e.g. overmature and hollowed influenced the quantitative composition and shifted the deciduous trees) on one side to purely anthropogenic ratio of the reared specimens so distinctly in favour of (settlements, dust bins, small refuse depositories etc.) polysaprophagous species against true mycophages. as the other extreme. Indeed, besides a series of The situation in the field is probably different. In spite polysaprophagous and synanthropic species forming of the longevity of sporocarps of M. giganteus they prosperous populations within human settlements surely desiccate sooner under natural conditions some of which were reared in numbers from rotting than in closed boxes and cannot serve so long as a Meripilus (typically: Logima satchelli and other species development substrate for saprophagous dipterous of Psychodidae, Coboldia fuscipes, Scatopse notata, larvae. On the contrary the living and growing Megaselia rufipes, Tephrochlamys tarsalis, a number fruiting bodies of the fungus can be longer utilised by of species of Sphaeroceridae, Drosophila funebris mycophagous larvae than the cut sporocarps used and some other Drosophila spp., Fannia canicularis, in rearing experiments. It is therefore supposed that F. manicata) also distinctly asynanthropic species in nature the mycophagous and mycosaprophagous occurred here, particularly species with mycophagous or species can rival polysaprophagous ones not only in mycosaprophagous larvae, being originally members of species richness but also in abundance of specimens. the woodland dipterous community (e.g. Ula mollissima, This fact is also indicated by the results of selective Leia winthemii, Mycetophila luctuosa, Lycoriella collecting of adults on sporocarps in Opava parks ingenua, Camptodiplosis boleti, Chodopsycha lobata, (see Appendix 2) where some mycophagous species Culicoides scoticus, Megaselia shawi, Mycetaulus were more abundant than in the reared material (e.g. bipunctatus, Leiomyza spp., Opalimosina czernyi, Drosophila kuntzei, D. testacea, Spelobia parapusio, Spelobia parapusio, a number of Drosophilidae Leiomyza birkehadi) and others have not been reared including Hirtodrosophila confusa and Mycodrosophila at all (Mycetaulus bipunctatus, Fungomyza albimana, poecilogastra). These species seem to represent Leiomyza spp., Suillia spp., Tricimba cincta).

156 J. Roháček, J. Ševčík

Acknowledgements Republic – Chloropidae), J. Preisler (Liberec, Czech Republic – Heleomyzidae), J. Máca (České Budějovice, We are very grateful to the following specialists for Czech Republic – Drosophilidae) and R. Rozkošný the identification of the material of Diptera obtained (Brno, Czech Republic – Stratiomyidae, Anthomyiidae, during this study: J. Starý (Olomouc, Czech Republic – Faniidae, Muscidae). Our thanks are further extended to Pediciidae), H.-G. Rudzinski (Schwanewede, Germany J. Tyranová and J. Svrčková (Opava, Czech Republic) – Sciaridae), M. Jaschhof (Greifswald, Germany – for technical assistance. We would like to thank Cecidomyiidae), J. Ježek (Praha, Czech Republic – particularly to P. J. Chandler (Melksham, England, U.K.) Psychodidae), J.-P. Haenni (Neuchâtel, Switzerland for helpful comments and language improvement of – Scatopsidae), A. Tóthová (Brno, Czech Republic – this paper. The study was supported by the grant of the Ceratopogonidae), M. Barták (Praha, Czech Republic Silesian Museum no. IGS201103 and partially also by – Hybotidae, Sepsidae), R. H. L. Disney (Cambridge, the Czech Science Foundation grant No. 206/08/1500 England, U.K. – Phoridae), Š. Kubík (Praha, Czech to the junior author.

References

[1] Seehan G., Wood-decaying fungi on trees at roads [10] Chandler P.J., The larval food plants of the tipulid and in parks [Holzerstörende Pilze an Straßen- und genus Ula Haliday (Diptera), Entomol. Gaz., 1977, Parkbäumen in Hamburg], Mitt. Dtsch. Dendrol. 28, 57–58 Ges., 1979, 71, 193–221, (in German) [11] Chandler P.J., Some biological notes on British [2] Jakovlev J., Palaearctic Diptera associated with lesser dung flies (Diptera, Sphaeroceridae), with a fungi and Myxomycetes, Karelian Research Center, list of species known to be attracted to fungi, Br. J. Russian Academy of Sciences, Forest Research Entomol. Nat. Hist., 1990, 3, 55–61 Institute, Petrozavodsk, 1995, (in Russian, with [12] Dely-Draskovits Á., Babos M., Flies (Diptera) in English summary) macrofungi species in Hungary, Folia Entomol. [3] Jakovlev J., Fungus gnats (Diptera: Sciaroidea) Hung., 1993, 54, 17–45 associated with dead wood and wood growing [13] Ševčík J., Diptera (excluding Mycetophilidae s. fungi: new rearing data from Finland and Russian str.) associated with fungi in Czech and Slovak Karelia and general analysis of known larval Republics: a survey of rearing records from microhabitats in Europe, Entomol. Fenn., 2011, 22, 1998-2000, Acta Univ. Carol., Biol., 2001, 45, 157–189 157–168 [4] Krivosheina N.P., Macromycete fruit bodies as a [14] Menzel F., Smith J.E., Chandler P.J., The sciarid habitat for dipterans (Insecta, Diptera), Entomol. fauna of the British Isles (Diptera: Sciaridae), Rev., 2008, 88, 778–792 including descriptions of six new species, Zool. J. [5] Ševčík J., Insects associated with wood-decaying Linn. Soc., 2006, 146, 1–147 fungi in the Czech and Slovak republics: a review [15] Disney R.H.L., Ševčík J., A new species of fungus of present knowledge, Acta Fac. Rer. Nat. Univ. breeding Megaselia (Diptera: Phoridae) from Ostrav., Biol. - Ecol., 2003, 9, 159–165 Indonesia, Acta Entomol. Mus. Natn. Pragae, [6] Ševčík J., Czech and Slovak Diptera associated 2011, 51, 211–215 with fungi, Slezské Zemské Muzeum, Opava, 2010 [16] Ševčík J., Roháček J., Fungus gnats (Diptera: [7] Edwards F.W., British fungus-gnats (Diptera, Mycetophilidae and Keroplatidae) reared from Mycetophilidae), with generic classification of the grass and sedge tussocks in the Czech Republic, family, Trans. Entomol. Soc. Lond., 1925, 1924, Čas. Slez. Muz. Opava (A), 2008, 57, 175–178 505–662 [17] Roháček J., A monograph of Palaearctic [8] Colyer C.N., A new species of Megaselia (Dipt., Anthomyzidae (Diptera) Part 2, Čas. Slez. Muz. Phoridae) from Britain; notes on fungicolous Opava (A), 2009, 58, 1–180 Phoridae, Entomol. Mon. Mag., 1954, 89, 108– [18] Chandler P., Associations with Fungi, Mycetozoa 112 and Plants. Associations with Fungi and Mycetozoa. [9] Buxton P.A., British Diptera associated with fungi. In: Chandler P. (Ed.), A dipterist’s handbook (2nd III. Flies of all families reared from about 150 Edition), The Amateur Entomologist, Vol. 15, The species of fungi, Entomol. Mon. Mag., 1960, 96, Amateur Entomologist’s Society, Brentwood, 61–94 Essex, 2010

157 Diptera associated with sporocarps of Meripilus giganteus in an urban habitat

[19] Ševčík J., New records of Diptera associated with [31] Gibbs D., Papp L., A review of the Holarctic fungi from the Czech and Slovak republics, Acta species of Leiomyza Macquart, 1835 (Diptera: Fac. Ecol. Zvolen, 2004, 12, 135–142 Asteiidae) with descriptions of two new species, [20] Kurina O., Ševčík J., Notes on Docosia Winnertz Studia Dipterol. 2007, 13, 241–248 (Diptera: Mycetophilidae), with description of six [32] Roháček J., Máca J., New and interesting records new species from Central Asia and the first generic of Diptera (Asteiidae, Aulacigastridae, Milichiidae, record from the Afrotropical region, Zootaxa, 2012 Sphaeroceridae) from the Czech Republic, Čas. (in press) Slez. Muz. Opava (A), 2010, 59, 165–170 [21] Jakovlev J., Mushrooms and insects associated [33] Papp L., Systematical and ecological with them in Petrozavodsk city parks, Aquilo, Ser. investigations on fly pests of fungi in Hungary, II. Bot., 1993, 31, 131–136 Sphaeroceridae and Asteiidae (Diptera), Annls [22] Matile L., Description of a new Neoclastobasis Hist.-Nat. Mus. Natn. Hung., 1972, 64, 315–317 from Hungary and notes on various Leiini (Diptera: [34] Roháček J., A monograph and re-classification of Mycetophilidae) [Description d’un Neoclastobasis the previous genus Limosina Macquart (Diptera, nouveau de Hongrie et remarques sur divers Leiini Sphaeroceridae) of Europe. Part II, Beitr. Entomol. (Diptera: Mycetophilidae)], Folia Entomol. Hung., Berl., 1983, 33, 3–195 1978, 54,167–172, (in French) [35] Okely E.F., Description of the puparia of twenty [23] Dely-Draskovits Á., Systematic and ecological three British species of Sphaeroceridae (Diptera, studies on flies occurring as pests of fungi in Hungary. Acalyptratae), Trans. R. Entomol. Soc. Lond., VI. Mycetophilidae (Diptera) [Systematische und 1974, 126, 41–56 ökologische Untersuchungen an den in Ungarn als [36] Jaschhof M., Jaschhof C., The Wood Midges Schädlinge der Hutpilze auftretenden Fiegen. VI. (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae: Lestremiinae) of Mycetophilidae (Diptera)], Folia Entomol. Hung., Fennoscandia and Denmark, Studia Dipterol., 1974, 27, 29–41, (in German) 2009, 18, 1–333 [24] Zaitzev A.I., Fungus gnats of the fauna of Russia [37] Ježek J., Contribution to the taxonomy of the and adjacent regions. Part I., Nauka, Moscow, genus Logima Eat. (Diptera, Psychodidae), Acta 1994 Entomol. Mus. Natn. Pragae, 1983, 41, 213–234 [25] Ševčík J., Fifty species of fungus gnats (Diptera: [38] Ježek J., Redescriptions of nine common Mycetophilidae) new for the Czech Republic and/ palaearctic and holarctic species of Psychodini or Slovakia, including a new species of Allodia End. (Diptera: Psychodidae), Acta Entomol. Mus. Winnertz, Čas. Slez. Muz. Opava (A), 1999, 48, Natn. Pragae, 1990, 43, 33–83 97–105 [39] Withers P., Revisionary notes on British species [26] Laštovka P., A study on the last instar larvae of Psychoda Latreille (Diptera, Psychodidae) of some Czechoslovak Mycetophila (Diptera: including new synonyms and a species new to Mycetophilidae), Acta Univ. Carol., Biol., 1971, science, Br. J. Entomol. Nat. Hist., 1988, 1, 68–76 1970, 137–176 [40] Bonnamour S., Insects parasiting in fungi. II. [27] Disney R.H.L., A new species of Megaselia Rearings and a new list of fungicolous Diptera [Les Rondani (Dipt., Phoridae) from Britain and a new insectes parasites des champignons. II. Élevages synonym, Entomol. Mon. Mag., 2006, 142, 32–39 et nouvelle liste de Diptères fongicoles], Annls [28] McAlpine J.F., A revised classification of the Soc. Linn. Lyon, 1924, 72, 85-93, (in French) Piophilidae, including ‘Neottiophilidae’ and [41] Krivosheina N.P., Mamaev B.M., Key to the larvae ‘Thyreophoridae’ (Diptera: Schizophora), Mem. of wood-inhabiting dipteran insects [Opredelitel Entomol. Soc. Can., 1977, 103, 1–66 lichinok dvukrylykh nasekomykh - obitatelej [29] Zuska J. & Laštovka P., A review of the drevesiny], Nauka, Moscow, 1967 (in Russian) Czechoslovak species of the family Piophilidae [42] Szadziewski R., Gilka W., Dominiak P., A with special reference to their importance to food redescription of Forcipomyia squamigera Kieffer, industry (Diptera, Acalyptrata), Acta Entomol. 1916 in all stages (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae). Bohemoslov., 1965, 62, 141–157 In: Andersen T. (Ed.), Contributions to the [30] Barták M., Roháček J., Piophilidae. In: Roháček J., Systematics and Ecology of Aquatic Diptera - A Ševčík J. (Eds.), Diptera of the Poľana Protected tribute to Ole A. Saether, The Caddis Press, Landscape Area - Biosphere Reserve (Central Columbus, Ohio, U.S.A., 2007 Slovakia), SNC SR, Administration of the PLA – BR [43] Rozkošný R., A biosystematic study of the European Poľana, Zvolen, 2009 Stratiomyidae (Diptera). Vol. 1. Introduction,

158 J. Roháček, J. Ševčík

Beridinae, Sarginae and Stratiomyinae, Dr. W. [51] Buck M., Marshall S.A., Revision of New World Jung Publishers, The Hague, Boston, London, Leptocera Olivier (Diptera, Sphaeroceridae), 1982 Zootaxa, 2009, 2039, 1–139 [44] Oldroyd H., Diptera Brachycera. Section (a) – [52] Marshall S.A., Brown B.V., Sphaeroceridae Tabanoidea and Asiloidea. Handbooks for the (Diptera) associated with decaying fungi in Ontario, identification of British Insects, Vol. 9, pt. 4, Proc. Entomol. Soc. Ont., 1984, 115, 43–48 London, 1969 [53] Driessen G., Hemerik L., Van Alphen J.J.M., [45] Disney R.H.L., Ševčík J., Three new host records Drosophila species, breeding in the stinkhorn for scuttle flies (Dipt., Phoridae) reared from (Phallus impudicus Pers.) and their larval fungus sporophores, Entomol. Mon. Mag., 2008, parasitoids, Netherl. J. Zool., 1990, 40, 409–427 144, 191–192 [54] Rozkošný R., Gregor F., Pont A.C., The European [46] Disney R.H.L., Franquinho Aguiar A.F., Scuttle Fanniidae (Diptera), Acta Sci. Nat. Acad. Sci. flies (Diptera: Phoridae) of Madeira, Fragm. Bohem. Brno, 1997, 31, 1–80 Faun., 2008, 51, 23–62 [55] Chvála M. The Tachydromiinae (Dipt. Empididae) of [47] Máca J., Roháček J., Review of findings of Fennoscandia and Denmark., Fauna Entomologica the family Acartophthalmidae (Diptera) in Scandinavica, Vol. 3, Scandinavian Science Press Czechoslovakia [Přehled nálezů druhů čeledi Ltd., Klampenborg, 1975 Acartophthalmidae (Diptera) v Československu], [56] Papp L., 3.41. Families of Heleomyzoidea. In: Papp Čas. Slez. Muz. Opava (A), 1983, 32, 233–237, L., Darvas B. (Eds.), Contributions to a Manual of (in Czech, with English and Russian summary) Palaearctic Diptera. Vol. 3., Higher Brachycera, [48] Papp L., Ozerov A. L., 3.17. Family Science Herald, Budapest, 1998 Acartophthalmidae. In: Papp L., Darvas B. (Eds.), [57] Frey R., New Diptera Brachycera from Finland and Contributions to a Manual of Palaearctic Diptera. neighbouring countries [Neue Diptera brachycera Vol. 3., Higher Brachycera, Science Herald, aus Finnland und angrenzenden Ländern], Notul. Budapest, 1998 Entomol., 1930, 10, 82–94, (in German) [49] Hackman W., Meinander M., Diptera feeding [58] Rotheray G.E., E B Basden’s collection of Diptera from as larvae on macrofungi in Finland, Annls Zool. bird and mammal nests and mammal runs, burrows Fenn., 1979, 16, 50–83 and droppings, Natn. Mus. Scotl. Inf. Ser., 1991, 3, 1–46 [50] Roháček J., Revision of the subgenus Leptocera [59] Gregor F., Rozkošný R., Barták M., Vaňhara J., (s.str.) of Europe (Diptera, Sphaeroceridae), The Muscidae (Diptera) of Central Europe, Folia Entomol. Abh. Staat. Mus. Tierk. Dresden, 1982, Fac. Sci. Nat. Univ. Masaryk. Brun., Biol., 2002, 46, 1–44 107, 1–280

159 Diptera associated with sporocarps of Meripilus giganteus in an urban habitat

Appendix 1. Diptera (adults) reared from Meripilus giganteus during this study

Localities: Czech Republic: Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 49°56‘32.4‘‘N 17°53‘28.9‘‘E, 271 m, park, under Fraxinus excelsior, samples (complete fruiting body of fungus) collected 16.ix.2010 (sample B39) and 1.x.2010 (sample B40), J. Roháček leg. Opava, Ptačí vrch, 49°56‘07‘‘N 17°54‘11‘‘E, 268 m, park, under Fagus sylvatica, small sample of fungus collected 24.ix.2009, J. Ševčík leg.

Total: 10,451 specimens reared

Pediciidae (det. J. Starý) 1 specimen Ula (Ula) mollissima Haliday, 1833 B40, 1♀, 24.iii.-29.vi.2011. Total: 1 ex (1♀).

Mycetophilidae (det. J. Ševčík) 32 specimens Docosia gilvipes (Walker, 1856) B40, 1♀, 29.iv.-9.v.2011. Total: 1 ex (1♀). Leia winthemii Lehmann, 1822 B40, 1♀, 22.x.-1.xi.2010, 1♀, 29.iv.-9.v.2011, 2♂1♀, 9.-24.v.2011. Total: 5 ex (2♂3♀). Mycetophila luctuosa Meigen, 1830 B39, 1♂, 24.ix.-1.x.2010, 1♀, 15.-22.xi.2010, 1♀, 24.iii.-29.iv.2011; B40, 1♂1♀, 1.-8.x.2010, 1♀, 8.-15.xi.2010, 4♀, 15.-22.xi.2010, 1♀, 29.xi.2010-24.iii.2011. Total: 11 ex (2♂9♀). Neoclastobasis draskovitsae Matile, 1978 B40, 8♂5♀, 9.-24.v.2011, 2♀, 24.v.-1.vi.2011. Total: 15 ex (8♂7♀).

Sciaridae (det. H.-G. Rudzinski) 333 specimens Bradysia sp. 1 B39, 1♀, 1.-10.vi.2011; B40, 2♀, 29.iv.-9.v.2011, 1♀, 10.-20.vi.2011, 1♀, 22.viii.-14.ix.2011, 7♀, 14.ix.-1.xi.2011. Total: 12 ex (12♀). Bradysia sp. 2 B40, 1♀, 22.viii.-14.ix.2011. Total: 1 ex (1♀). Lycoriella (Lycoriella) ingenua (Dufour, 1839) B39, 17♀, 16.-24.ix.2010, 1♂25♀, 24.ix.-1.x.2010, 1♀, 8.-15.x.2010, 3♀, 15.-22.x.2010, 2♀, 22.x.-1.xi.2010, 1♂2♀, 1.-8.xi.2010, 3♀, 8.-15.xi.2010, 9♀, 24.iii.-29.iv.2011, 1♀, 29.iv.-9.v.2011, 4♀, 9.-24.v.2011, 5♀, 24.v.-1.vi.2011, 13♀, 1.-10.vi.2011, 7♀, 10.-20.vi.2011, 1♀, 20.-30.vi.2011, 4♀, 30.vi.-11.vii.2011, 1♀, 11.-21.vii.2011; B40, 5♀, 1.-8.x.2010, 2♀, 8.-15.x.2010, 1♀, 15.-22.x.2010, 5♀, 22.x.-1.xi.2010, 6♀, 1.-8.xi.2010, 2♀, 8.-15.xi.2010, 1♀, 15.- 22.xi.2010, 9♀, 24.iii.-29.iv.2011, 14♀, 9.-24.v.2011, 29♀, 24.v.-1.vi.2011, 3♂15♀, 1.-10.vi.2011, 7♂10♀, 10.-20. vi.2011, 15♂10♀, 20.-30.vi.2011, 11♂14♀, 30.vi.-11.vii.2011, 6♂15♀, 11.-21.vii.2011, 1♂14♀, 21.vii.-8.viii.2011, 1♂2♀, 8.-22.8.2011, 1♂5♀, 22.viii.-14.ix.2011, 1♂4♀, 14.ix.-1.xi.2011. Total: 309 ex (48♂261♀). Lycoriella (Lycoriella) sp. B39, 7♀, 1.-8.x.2010. Total: 7 ex (7♀). Scaptosciara sp. B39, 1♀, 1.-10.6.2011, 2♀, 10.-20.vi.2011; B40, 1♀, 14.ix.-1.xi.2011. Total: 4 ex (4♀).

Cecidomyiidae (det. M. Jaschhof and J. Ševčík) 21 specimens Aprionus sp. B39, 1♀, 10.-20.vi.2011; B40, 3♀, 1.-10.vi.2011, 1♀, 30.6.-11.7.2011, 1♀, 14.ix.-1.xi.2011. Total: 6 ex (6♀). Camptodiplosis boleti (Kieffer, 1901) Ptačí vrch, 7♂7♀, 24.ix.-7.x.2009. Total: 14 ex (7♂7♀). Polyardis sp. B40, 1♀, 14.ix.-1.xi.2011. Total: 1 ex (1♀).

160 J. Roháček, J. Ševčík

Psychodidae (det. J. Ježek) 1,505 specimens Chodopsycha lobata (Tonnoir, 1940) B40, 1♀, 1.-8.x.2010. Total: 1 ex (1♀). Logima albipennis (Zetterstedt, 1850) [= Psychoda severini Tonnoir, 1922; = Psychoda jezeki Withers, 1988] B39, 2♀, 1.-10.vi.2011; B40, 4♀, 20.-30.vi.2011, 1♀, 30.vi.-11.vii.2011, 1♀, 11.-21.vii.2011, 2♀, 8.-22.viii.2011. Total: 10 ex (10♀). Logima satchelli (Quate, 1955) [= Psychoda albipennis auct. partim] B39, 4♀, 16.-24.ix.2010, 3♀, 1.-8.x.2010, 1♀, 8.-15.x.2010, 1♀, 1.-8.xi.2010, 11♀, 24.iii.-29.iv.2011, 1♀, 29.iv.- 9.v.2011, 24♂104♀, 9.-24.v.2011, 11♂35♀, 24.v.-1.vi.2011, 1♂5♀, 1.-10.vi.2011, 1♀, 10.-20.vi.2011, 2♀, 20.-30. vi.2011; B40, 3♀, 22.x.-1.xi.2010, 1♀, 1.-8.xi.2010, 2♂17♀, 24.iii.-29.iv.2011, 6♀, 29.iv.-9.v.2011, 169♂211♀, 9.- 24.v.2011, 216♂261♀, 24.v.-1.v.2011, 64♂156♀,1.-10.vi.2011, 5♂43♀, 10.-20.vi.2011, 2♂15♀, 20.-30.vi.2011, 3♀, 11.-21.vii.2011, 2♀, 21.vii.-8.viii.2011. Total: 1480 ex (494♂886♀). Logima zetterstedti Ježek, 1983 [= Psychoda albipennis auctt.]. B40, 1♀, 8.-15.x.2010, 1♀, 22.x.-1.xi.2010. Total: 2 ex (2♀). Psychodocha cinerea (Banks, 1894) B39, 1♀, 16.-24.ix.2010, 1♀, 24.iii.-29.iv.2011, 2♀, 1.-10.vi.2011, 1♀, 10.-20.vi.2011; B40, 1♀, 20.-30.vi.2011, 1♀, 21.vii.-8.viii.2011, 2♀, 22.viii.-14.ix.2011, 2♀, 14.ix.-1.xi.2011. Total: 11 ex (11♀). Psychodula minuta (Banks, 1894) B39, 1♀, 16.-24.ix.2010. Total: 1 ex (1♀).

Scatopsidae (det. J.-P. Haenni & J. Roháček) 5,338 specimens Apiloscatopse flavicollis (Meigen, 1818) B39, 1♀, 8.-15.x.2010. Total: 1 ex (1♀). Coboldia fuscipes (Meigen, 1830) B39, 19♀, 16.-24.ix.2010, 34♀, 24.ix.-1.x.2010, 22♂68♀, 9.-24.v.2011, 1♂11♀, 24.v.-1.vi.2011, 18♂39♀, 1.-10. vi.2011, 1♂36♀, 10.-20.vi.2011, 13♂24♀, 20.-30.vi.2011, 5♂20♀, 30.6.-11.7.2011, 10♀, 11.-21.7.2011, 1♀, 21.vii.- 8.viii.2011; B40, 1♀, 22.x.-1.xi.2010, 4♀, 29.iv.-9.v.2011, 46♀,9.-24.v.2011, 11♀, 24.v.-1.vi.2011, 6♂15♀, 1.-10. vi.2011, 121♂257♀, 10.-20.vi.2011, 110♂134♀, 20.-30.vi.2011, 192♂186♀, 30.vi.-11.vii.2011, 405♂316♀, 11.- 21.vii.2011, 218♂199♀, 21.vii.-8.viii.2011, 369♂324♀, 8.-22.viii.2011, 773♂626♀, 22.viii.-14.ix.2011, 373♂291♀, 14.ix.-1.xi.2011. Total: 5299 ex (2627♂2672♀). Scatopse notata (Linnaeus, 1758) B39, 1♀, 16.-24.ix.2010, 7♀, 24.ix.-1.x.2010, 3♀, 1.-8.x.2010, 1♀, 29.iv.-9.v.2011; B40, 1♀, 8.-15.xi.2010, 4♂8♀, 24.iii.-29.iv.2011, 3♀, 29.iv.-9.v.2011, 1♀, 9.-24.v.2011, 4♂5♀, 14.ix.-1.xi.2011. Total: 38 ex (8♂30♀).

Ceratopogonidae (det. A. Tóthová) 611 specimens Culicoides (Avaritia) scoticus Downes & Kettle, 1959 B40, 7♂, 24.iii.-29.iv.2011. Total: 7 ex (7♂) Forcipomyia (Forcipomyia) cf. crassipes (Winnertz, 1852) B40, 1♀, 30.vi.-11.vii.2011. Total: 1 ex (1♀) Forcipomyia (Forcipomyia) bipunctata (Linnaeus, 1767) [= F. tenuisquama Kieffer, 1924] B39, 1♀, 29.iv.-9.v.2011, 1♀, 30.vi.-11.vii.2011, 1♀, 24.ix.-1.x.2010, 3♀, 20.-30.vi.2011; B40, 3♀, 1.-10.vi.2011, 4♀, 8.-22.viii.2011, 4♀, 22.viii.-14.ix.2011. Total: 17 ex (17♀) Forcipomyia (Forcipomyia) brevipennis (Macquart, 1828) B39, 6♀, 10.-20.vi.2011; B40, 2♀, 20.-30.vi.2011. Total: 8 ex (8♀) Forcipomyia (Microhela) fuliginosa (Meigen, 1818) B40, 1♀, 22.viii.-14.ix.2011, 1♀, 14.ix.-1.xi.2011. Total: 2 ex (2♀) Forcipomyia (Forcipomyia) nigra (Winnertz, 1852) B40, 1♀, 20.-30.vi.2011. Total: 1 ex (1♀) Forcipomyia sp. B40, 1♀, 29.xi.2010-24.iii.2011. Total: 1 ex (1♀) Forcipomyia (Forcipomyia) squamigera Kieffer, 1916 [= F. tenuisquama auctt.] B39, 14♀, 16.-24.ix.2010, 2♀, 24.ix.-1.x.2010, 1♀, 1.-8.x.2010, 3♀, 9.-24.v.2011, 4♀, 24.v.-1.vi.2011, 43♀ 1.-10. vi.2011, 27♀, 10.-20.vi.2011, 15♀, 20.-30.vi.2011, 1♀, 11.-21.vii.2011; B40, 5♀, 9.-24.v.2011, 9♀, 24.v.-1.vi.2011,

161 Diptera associated with sporocarps of Meripilus giganteus in an urban habitat

2♀, 1.-10.vi.2011, 51♀, 10.-20.vi.2011, 23♀, 20.-30.vi.2011, 11♀, 30.vi.-11.vii.2011, 39♀, 11.-21.vii.2011, 44♀, 21.vii.-8.viii.2011, 70♀, 8.-22.viii.2011, 134♀, 22.viii.-14.ix.2011, 78♀, 14.ix.-1.xi.2011. Total: 573 ex (573♀) Forcipomyia (Lepidohelea) tibialis Remm, 1961 B40, 1♀, 8.-22.viii.2011. Total: 1 ex (1♀)

Hybotidae (det. M. Barták) 7 specimens Drapetis (Drapetis) assimilis (Fallén, 1815) B40, 2♀, 10.-20.vi.2011, 1♀, 30.vi.-11.vii.2011, 1♀, 11.-21.vii.2011, 1♂2♀, 8.-22.viii.2011. Total: 7 ex (1♂6♀).

Phoridae (det. R. H. L. Disney) 18 specimens Megaselia giraudii (Egger, 1862) B39, 1♀, 1.-8.x.2010. Total: 1 ex (1♀). Megaselia pleuralis (Wood, 1909) B40, 1♂, 30.vi.-11.vii.2011. Total: 1 ex (1♂). Megaselia rufipes (Meigen, 1804) B39, 1♂1♀, 8.-15.xi.2010, 4♀, 24.iii.-29.iv.2011, 1♀, 9.-24.v.2011, 2♂, 1.-10.vi.2011, 1♀, 10.-20.6.2011. Total: 10 ex (3♂7♀). Megaselia shawi Disney, 2006 B39, 1♂, 8.-15.xi.2010; B40, 1♂, 1.-8.x.2010, 1♂, 24.iii.-29.iv.2011, 1♂, 9.-24.v.2011, 1♂, 8.-22.viii.2011, 1♂, 22.viii.-14.ix.2011. Total: 6 ex (6♂).

Asteiidae (det. J. Roháček) 1 specimen Leiomyza birkheadi Gibbs in Gibbs & Papp, 2007 B40, 1♂, 14.ix.-1.xi.2011. Total: 1 ex (1♂)

Chloropidae (det. Š. Kubík) 4 specimens Tricimba (Tricimba) lineella (Fallén, 1820) B40, 2♀, 9.-24.v.2011, 1♀, 20.-30.vi.2011, 1♀, 8.-22.viii.2011. Total: 4 ex (4♀).

Heleomyzidae (det. J. Preisler) 51 specimens Heleomyza (Heleomyza) captiosa (Gorodkov, 1962) B39, 1♀, 22.x.-1.xi.2010, 1♂, 8.-15.xi.2010. Total: 2 ex (1♂1♀). Tephrochlamys tarsalis (Zetterstedt, 1847) B39, 3♀, 8.-22.x.2010, 5♀, 22.x.-1.xi.2010, 3♀, 22.x.-1.xi.2010, 3♀, 8.-15.xi.2010, 3♀, 24.iii.-29.iv.2011, 1♂3♀, 29.iv.-9.v.2011, 1♂2♀, 9.-24.v.2011; B40, 6♀, 8.-22.x.2010, 2♀, 22.x.-1.xi.2010, 6♀, 1.-8.xi.2010, 2♀, 15.-22. xi.2010, 5♂2♀, 24.iii.-29.iv.2011, 3♂, 29.iv.-9.v.2011. Total: 49 ex (10♂39♀).

Chiropteromyzidae (det. J. Roháček) 1 specimen Ornitholeria nidicola Frey, 1930 B39, 1♀, 24.ix.-1.x.2010

Sphaeroceridae (det. J. Roháček) 162 specimens Apteromyia claviventris (Strobl, 1909) B39, 1♀, 8.-15.xi.2010, 2♂, 29.xi.2010-24.iii.2011, 1♀, 9.-24.v.2011, 4♂4♀, 24.v.-1.vi.2011, 2♂4♀, 1.-10.vi.2011, 3♀, 10.-20.vi.2011, 2♂1♀, 11.-21.vii.2011; B40, 1♂, 15.-22.x.2010, 1♂, 8.-15.xi.2010, 1♂, 15.-22.xi.2010, 2♂, 24.iii.-29.iv.2011, 3♂2♀, 9.v.-24.v.2011, 7♂4♀, 24.v.-1.vi.2011, 14♂18♀, 1.-10.6.2011, 5♂8♀, 10.-20.6.2011, 4♂, 11.-21.vii.2011, 3♀, 21.vii.-8.viii.2011, 1♀, 8.-22.viii.2011, 1♂, 22.viii.-14.ix.2011. Total: 99 ex (49♂50♀). Coproica hirticula Collin, 1956 B39, 1♂, 10.-20.vi.2011, 1♀, 20.-30.vi.2011. Total: 2 ex (1♂1♀). Coproica vagans (Haliday, 1833) B39, 1♀, 8.-15.xi.2010. Total: 1 ex (1♀). Leptocera caenosa (Rondani, 1880) B40, 1♀, 30.vi.-11.vii.2011. Total: 1 ex (1♀).

162 J. Roháček, J. Ševčík

Minilimosina (Minilimosina) parvula (Stenhammar, 1855) B39, 1♀, 16.-24.ix.2010, 1♀, 1.-8.x.2010, 2♀, 9.v.-24.v.2011, 1♂, 24.v.-1.vi.2011, 1♂, 10.-20.vi.2011, 1♂2♀, 20.-30. vi.2011; B40, 1♀, 1.-8.x.2010, 1♂, 1.-8.xi.2010, 1♂2♀, 24.v.-1.vi.2011, 2♂1♀, 10.-20.vi.2011, 1♀, 20.-30.vi.2011. Total: 18 ex (7♂11♀). Opalimosina (Hackmanina) czernyi (Duda, 1918) B39, 1♀, 22.x.-1.xi.2010, 1♂, 10.-20.vi.2011, 1♂, 20.-30.vi.2011; B40, 4♂3♀, 10.-20.vi.2011, 3♂, 20.-30.vi.2011, 4♂1♀, 30.vi.-11.vii.2011, 1♂1♀, 11.-21.vii.2011. Total: 20 ex (14♂6♀). Opalimosina (Opalimosina) mirabilis (Collin, 1902) B39, 1♂1♀, 10.-20.vi.2011; B40, 1♂, 29.iv.-9.v.2011. Total: 3 ex (2♂1♀). Opalimosina (Pappiella) liliputana (Rondani, 1880) B39, 1♂, 16.-24.ix.2010, 1♂, 20.-30.vi.2011; B40, 1♀, 1.-8.x.2010, 1♂, 10.-20.vi.2011, 1♂, 20.-30.vi.2011. Total: 5 ex (4♂1♀). Pullimosina (Pullimosina) heteroneura (Haliday, 1836) B39, 1♀, 8.-15.xi.2010. Total: 1 ex (1♀). Spelobia parapusio (Dahl, 1909) B39, 1♀, 16.-24.ix.2010, 2♀, 24.ix.-1.x.2010, 1♀, 8.-15.xi.2010, 1♀, 1.-10.vi.2011; B40, 2♀, 8.-15.xi.2010, 1♀, 14.ix.-1.xi.2011; nám. Svaté Hedviky, 1♀, 27.ix.2010 (reared separately, ex small piece of M. giganteus collected 24.ix.2010). Total: 9 ex (9♀). Telomerina flavipes (Meigen, 1830) B39, 1♂, 16.-24.ix.2010; B40, 1♀, 1.-8.xi.2010, 1♂, 8.-15.xi.2010. Total: 3 ex (2♂1♀).

Drosophilidae (det. J. Máca & J. Roháček) 2,332 specimens Drosophila (Dorsilopha) busckii Coquillett, 1901 B39, 1♀, 1.-8.x.2010. Total: 1 ex (1♀) Drosophila (Drosophila) funebris (Fabricius, 1787) B39, 2♂, 24.ix.-1.x.2010, 5♂4♀, 1.-8.x.2010, 4♂4♀, 8.-22.x.2010, 47♂49♀, 22.x.-1.xi.2010, 11♂29♀, 8.-15.xi.2010, 28♂16♀, 15.-22.xi.2010, 1♀, 22.-29.xi.2010, 1♂1♀, 29.xi.2010-24.iii.2011, 1♀, 9.-24.v.2011, 1♂ 3♀, 24.v.-1.vi.2011, 5♂9♀, 1.-10.vi.2011, 32♂37♀, 10.-20.vi.2011, 243♂142♀, 20.-30.vi.2011, 191♂86♀, 30.vi.-11.vii.2011, 60♂20♀, 11.-21.vii.2011, 4♂2♀, 21.vii.-8.viii.2011, 1♂, 8.-22.viii.2011, 1♂1♀, 22.viii.-14.ix.2011, 1♂2♀, 8.-15.x.2011; B40, 1♀, 8.-22.x.2011, 4♂1♀, 22.x.-1.xi.2010, 12♂10♀, 1.-8.xi.2010, 2♂3♀, 8.-15.xi.2010, 5♂5♀, 15.-22.xi.2010, 1♂1♀, 24.iii.-29.iv.2011, 1♂1♀, 29.iv.-9.v.2011, 5♂21♀, 9.-24.v.2011, 43♂49♀, 24.v.-1.vi.2011, 47♂30♀, 1.-10.vi.2011, 69♂25♀, 10.-20.vi.2011, 155♂127♀, 20.-30.vi.2011, 157♂136♀, 30.vi.-11.vii.2011, 85♂45♀, 11.-21.vii.2011, 23♂11♀, 21.vii.-8.viii.2011, 31♂21♀, 8.-22.viii.2011, 29♂20♀, 22.viii.-14.ix.2011, 4♂2♀, 14.ix.-1.xi.2011; Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 1♂, 14.-16.ix.2010 (reared separately, ex small piece of M. giganteus); Ptačí vrch, 6♂4♀, 24.ix.-1.x.2009. Total: 2237 ex (1315♂922♀). Drosophila (Drosophila) immigrans Sturtevant, 1921 B39, 1♂, 16.-24.ix.2011; B40, 1♂1♀, 14.ix.-1.xi.2011. Total: 3 ex (2♂1♀). Drosophila (Drosophila) kuntzei Duda, 1924 B39, 1♀, 8.-15.x.2010, 1♂, 15.-22.10.x.2010. Total: 2 ex (1♂1♀). Drosophila (Drosophila) phalerata Meigen, 1830 B39, 1♂, 16.-24.ix.2010. Total: 1 ex (1♂). Drosophila (Drosophila) testacea von Roser, 1840 B39, 1♂, 10.-20.vi.2011; B40, 1♀, 9.-24.v.2011, 2♂4♀, 10.-20.vi.2011, 5♂6♀, 20.-30.vi.2011, 1♂, 30.vi.-11.vii.2011; Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 1♀, 14.-20.ix.2010 (reared separately, ex small piece of M. giganteus; pupated 15.ix.2012). Total: 23 ex (10♂13♀). Drosophila (Drosophila) transversa Fallén, 1823 B39, 1♂1♀, 1.-8.x.2010; Ptačí vrch, 1♂, 24.ix.-1.x.2009. Total: 3 ex (2♂1♀). Drosophila (Sophophora) melanogaster Meigen, 1830 B39, 1♀, 21.vii.-8.viii.2011, 1♀, 8.-22.viii.2011, 2♂1♀, 14.ix.-1.xi.2011; B40, 1♂1♀, 8.-22.viii.2011, 1♀, 22.viii.-14. ix.2011, 2♂4♀, 14.ix.-1.xi.2011. Total: 14 ex (5♂9♀). Drosophila (Sophophora) obscura Fallén, 1823 B39, 1♀, 9.-24.v.2011. Total: 1 ex (1♀). Drosophila (Sophophora) sp. (obscura group)

163 Diptera associated with sporocarps of Meripilus giganteus in an urban habitat

B39, 1♀, 10.-20.vi.2011. Total: 1 ex (1♀). Drosophila (Drosophila) sp. (teneral, unidentifiable) B39, 1♂1♀, 1.-8.x.2010; B40, 1♀, 20.-30.vi.2011, 1♀, 30.vi.-11.vii.2011. Total: 4 ex (1♂3♀). Hirtodrosophila confusa (Staeger, 1844) B39, 2♀, 24.ix.-1.x.2010, 2♂5♀, 1.-8.x.2010, 9♀, 8.-15.x.2010, 5♂1♀, 15.-22.x.2010, 2♀, 22.x.-1.xi.2010, 2♂3♀, 8.-15.xi.2010; B40, 1♂1♀, 22.x.-1.xi.2010, 1♀, 8.-15.xi.2010; Ptačí vrch, 4♀, 24.ix.-1.x.2009. Total: 38 ex (10♂28♀). Mycodrosophila poecilogastra (Loew, 1874) B39, 2♀, 24.ix.-1.x.2011; Ptačí vrch, 1♂1♀, 24.ix.-1.x.2009. Total: 4 ex (1♂3♀).

Fanniidae (det. R. Rozkošný) 33 specimens Fannia canicularis (Linnaeus, 1761) B39, 2♀, 16.-24.ix.2010, 1♀, 24.v.-1.vi.2011; B40, 2♀, 9.-24.v.2011, 1♀, 1.-10.vi.2011, 1♀, 20.-30.vi.2011, 1♀, 30.vi.-10.vii.2011, 1♂, 11.-21.vii.2011. Total: 9 ex (1♂8♀). Fannia manicata (Meigen, 1826) B39, 1♀, 1.-8.x.2010, 7♀, 24.ix.-1.x.2010, 2♀, 24.iii.-29.iv.2011, 1♀, 30.vi.-11.vii.2011; B40, 1♀, 29.iv.-9.v.2011, 1♀, 10.-20.vi.2011. Total: 13 ex (13♀). Fannia monilis (Haliday, 1838) B39, 2♀, 24.ix.-1.x.2010; Ptačí vrch, 2♂5♀, 10.-15.xii.2009. Total: 9 ex (2♂7♀). Fannia sp. (damaged, unidentifiable) B39, 1♀, 24.ix.-1.x.2010; B40, 1♀, 8.-15.xi.2010. Total: 2 ex (2♀).

Muscidae (det. R. Rozkošný) 1 specimen Mydaea electa (Zetterstedt, 1860) Ptačí vrch, 1♀, 10.-15.xii.2009. Total: 1 ex (1♀).

164 J. Roháček, J. Ševčík

Appendix 2. Diptera (adults) collected on Meripilus giganteus

Localities: Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 49°56‘32.4‘‘N 17°53‘28.9‘‘E, 271 m, park, under Fraxinus excelsior Opava, Ptačí vrch, 49°56‘07‘‘N 17°54‘11‘‘E, 268 m, park, under Fagus sylvatica

Stratiomyidae (det. R. Rozkošný) Sargus bipunctatus (Scopoli, 1763) Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 2♀, 14.ix.2010

Platypezidae (det. J. Roháček) Lindneromyia hungarica Chandler, 2001 Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 1♀, 24.ix.2010

Piophilidae (det. J. Roháček) Mycetaulus bipunctatus (Fallén, 1823) Opava, Ptačí vrch, 1♀, 18.ix.2009 Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 1♂ + 3 specimens observed, 14.ix.2010 Parapiophila vulgaris (Fallén, 1820) Opava, Ptačí vrch, 2♂, 18.ix.2009, 15♂, 23.ix.2009

Sepsidae (det. M. Barták) Sepsis fulgens Meigen, 1826 Opava, Ptačí vrch, 1♀, 23.ix.2009

Acartophthalmidae (det. J. Roháček) Acartophthalmus nigrinus (Zetterstedt, 1847) Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 1♂, 14.ix.2010 Opava, Ptačí vrch, 6♂,18.ix.2009, 11♂1♀, 23.ix.2009

Anthomyzidae (det. J. Roháček) Fungomyza albimana (Meigen, 1830) Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 1♀, 24.ix.2010 Opava, Ptačí vrch, 2♂, 18.ix.2009

Asteiidae (det. J. Roháček) Leiomyza birkheadi Gibbs in Gibbs & Papp, 2007 Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 1♂, 14.ix.2010, 2♂, 24.ix.2010 Opava, Ptačí vrch, 8♂, 18.ix.2009, 4♂, 23.ix.2009 Leiomyza dudai Sabrosky, 1956 Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 1♂1♀, 14.ix.2010, 4♂, 16.ix.2010, 3♂, 24.ix.2010 Opava, Ptačí vrch, 15♂2♀, 18.ix.2009, 10♂, 23.ix.2009 Leiomyza laevigata (Meigen, 1830) Opava, Ptačí vrch, 2♂, 18.ix.2009 Leiomyza sp. (birkheadi or laevigata females) Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 1♀, 24.ix.2010 Opava, Ptačí vrch, 2♀, 18.ix.2009, 2♀, 23.ix.2009

Carnidae (det. J. Roháček) Meoneura neottiophila Collin, 1930 Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 8♂1♀, 24.ix.2010 Opava, Ptačí vrch, 3♂, 18.ix.2009, 16♂, 23.ix.2009

165 Diptera associated with sporocarps of Meripilus giganteus in an urban habitat

Chloropidae (det. Š. Kubík) Tricimba cincta (Meigen, 1830) Opava, Ptačí vrch, 1♀, 18.ix.2009

Heleomyzidae (det J. Preisler) Suillia affinis (Meigen, 1830) Opava, Ptačí vrch, 1♂, 23.ix.2009 Suillia bicolor (Zetterstedt, 1838) Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 1♀, 14.ix.2010, 1♂, 24.ix.2010

Sphaeroceridae (det. J. Roháček) Apteromyia claviventris (Strobl, 1909) Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 2♂1♀, 16.ix.2010, 1♂, 1.x.2010 Bifronsina bifrons (Stenhammar, 1855) Opava, Ptačí vrch, 1♂, 18.ix.2009, 2♀, 23.ix.2009 Chaetopodella scutellaris (Haliday, 1836) Opava, Ptačí vrch, 1♂2♀, 23.ix.2009 Coproica ferruginata (Stenhammar, 1855) Opava, Ptačí vrch, 4♀, 23.ix.2009 Coproica hirticula Collin, 1956 Opava, Ptačí vrch, 3♂8♀, 23.ix.2009 Coproica vagans (Haliday, 1833) Opava, Ptačí vrch, 1♀, 23.ix.2009 Elachisoma aterrimum (Haliday, 1833) Opava, Ptačí vrch, 23.ix.2009 2♀ Elachisoma bajzae Papp, 1983 Opava, Ptačí vrch, 2♂, 23.ix.2009 Ischiolepta pusilla (Fallén, 1820) Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 1♂, 16.ix.2010, 2♀, 24.ix.2010 Opava, Ptačí vrch, 1♂3♀, 18.ix.2009, 2♂, 23.ix.2009 Leptocera caenosa (Rondani, 1880) Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 2♂, 1.x.2010 Minilimosina (Minilimosina) fungicola (Haliday, 1836) Opava, Ptačí vrch, 1♂, 18.ix.2009 Minilimosina (Minilimosina) parvula (Stenhammar, 1855) Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 1♀, 1.x.2010 Opava, Ptačí vrch, 1♀, 23.ix.2009 Opalimosina (Hackmanina) czernyi (Duda, 1918) Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 2♂1♀, 16.ix.2010, 1♂, 1.x.2010 Opalimosina (Pappiella) liliputana (Rondani, 1880) Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 3♂2♀, 16.ix.2010, 2♂2♀, 1.x.2010 Pullimosina (Pullimosina) heteroneura (Haliday, 1836) Opava, Ptačí vrch, 4♂5♀, 18.ix.2009 Spelobia clunipes (Meigen, 1830) Opava, Ptačí vrch, 1♂, 18.ix.2009 Spelobia palmata (Richards, 1927) Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 1♂, 14.ix.2010 Spelobia parapusio (Dahl, 1909) Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 8♀, 14.ix.2010, 10♀, 16.ix.2010, 7♀, 24.ix.2010, 19♀, 1.x.2010 Opava, Ptačí vrch, 21♀, 18.ix.2009, 5♀, 23.ix.2009 Spelobia talparum (Richards, 1927) Opava, Ptačí vrch, 1♀, 18.ix.2009 Sphaerocera monilis Haliday, 1836 Opava, Ptačí vrch, 1♂, 23.ix.2009

166 J. Roháček, J. Ševčík

Drosophilidae (det. J. Máca) Drosophila (Drosophila) funebris (Fabricius, 1787) Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 2♂, 14.ix.2010, 2♀, 16.ix.2010, 1♂, 24.ix.2010, 1♀, 1.x.2010 Opava, Ptačí vrch, 11♂3♀, 18.ix.2009, 11♂, 23.ix.2009 Drosophila (Drosophila) immigrans Sturtevant, 1921 Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 2♂, 14.ix.2010, 3♂, 16.ix.2010, 2♂, 24.ix.2010, 1♂2♀, 1.x.2010 Opava, Ptačí vrch, 4♂3♀, 18.ix.2009, 7♂8♀, 23.ix.2009 Drosophila (Drosophila) kuntzei Duda, 1924 Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 4♂1♀, 14.ix.2010, 2♂2♀, 16.ix.2010, 1♂, 24.ix.2010 Opava, Ptačí vrch, 6♂1♀, 18.ix.2009 Drosophila (Drosophila) phalerata Meigen, 1830 Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 1♂, 16.ix.2010, 1♂, 24.ix.2010 Opava, Ptačí vrch, 2♂, 18.ix.2009 Drosophila (Drosophila) testacea von Roser, 1840 Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 1♂, 14.ix.2010, 9♂1♀, 16.ix.2010, 3♂, 24.ix.2010 Opava, Ptačí vrch, 16♂7♀, 18.ix.2009, 4♂7♀, 23.ix.2009 Drosophila (Drosophila) transversa Fallén, 1823 Opava, Ptačí vrch, 1♂, 18.ix.2009 Hirtodrosophila confusa (Staeger, 1844) Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 3♂, 16.ix.2010, 1♂, 24.ix.2010 Opava, Ptačí vrch, 4♂, 18.ix.2009, 1♂2♀, 23.ix.2009 Mycodrosophila poecilogastra (Loew, 1874) Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 1♀, 16.ix.2010, 1♀, 24.ix.2010 Opava, Ptačí vrch, 4♂3♀, 18.ix.2009

Anthomyiidae (det. R. Rozkošný) Delia platura (Meigen, 1826) Opava, Ptačí vrch, 1♂1♀, 23.ix.2009

Fanniidae (det. R. Rozkošný) Fannia aequilineata Ringdahl, 1945 Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 1♂, 4.ix.2010 Fannia canicularis (Linnaeus, 1761) Opava, Ptačí vrch, 1♀, 23.ix.2009 Fannia manicata (Meigen, 1826) Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 1♀, 14.ix.2010, 1♀, 24.ix.2010 Opava, Ptačí vrch, 6♀, 18.ix.2009, 4♀, 23.ix.2009 Fannia vesparia (Meade, 1891) Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 1♀, 16.ix.2010 Piezura graminicola (Zetterstedt, 1846) Opava, Ptačí vrch, 1♀, 18

Muscidae (det. R. Rozkošný) Azelia triquetra (Wiedeman, 1817) Opava, Ptačí vrch, 9♀, 23.ix.2009 Coenosia tigrina (Fabricius, 1775) Opava, Ptačí vrch, 1♀, 23.ix.2009 Helina pertusa (Meigen, 1826) Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 1♂, 16.ix.2010 Hydrotaea armipes (Fallén, 1825) Opava, Ptačí vrch, 1♀, 23.ix.2009 Mydaea deserta (Zetterstedt, 1845) Opava, Ptačí vrch, 1♀, 23.ix.2009 Phaonia subventa (Harris, 1780) Opava, Nám. Sv. Hedviky, 1♀, 16.ix.2010.

167