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

Griffiths work from 1987 and 1991 volumes 6 and 7

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

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

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

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

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

2. Genus Alliopsis

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

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

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

פורסם על-ידי aispinsects aispinsects, נובמבר 27, 2022 06:33 אחה"צ

תגובות

לא קיימות הערות בינתיים

הוספת תגובה

כניסה או הרשמה להוספת הערות