Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T04:53:52.777Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Revision of the Hesperempis genus group (Diptera: Empidoidea: Empididae)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 November 2013

Jeffrey M. Cumming ,
Scott E. Brooks  and
Toyohei Saigusa
Jeffrey M. Cumming*
Affiliation:
Invertebrate Biodiversity, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, K.W. Neatby Bldg., C.E.F., 960 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, ON, Canada K1A 0C6
Scott E. Brooks
Affiliation:
Invertebrate Biodiversity, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, K.W. Neatby Bldg., C.E.F., 960 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, ON, Canada K1A 0C6
Toyohei Saigusa
Affiliation:
Baikoen 2-7-1-402, Chuo-ku, Fukuoka-shi 810-0035 Japan
*
1Corresponding author (e-mail: [email protected]).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Hesperempis genus group is revised. The group includes Dryodromia Rondani and Hesperempis Melander, with Melanderalus Özdikem and Başar and Toreus Melander newly synonymised with Hesperempis, newsynonymy. Dryodromia includes D. testacea Rondani from the western Palaearctic and D. yunnanica Cumming and Saigusa new species from southwestern China. Hesperempis includes H. anatolica Cumming and Brooks new species, H. mabelae (Melander), H. neomexicana (Melander) newcombination, H. sanduca Melander, and H. vespera Cumming and Brooks new species from the Nearctic Region, as well as H. melina Cumming and Saigusa new species, H. nipponica Cumming and Saigusa new species, and H. sibirica Shamshev from the Palaearctic Region. A key to the two genera and 10 species is provided, and a cladistic analysis is presented. A new interpretation of the homologies of the male terminalia is proposed for this lineage, and the phylogenetic relationships and zoogeographic history of the group are discussed.

Résumé

Le groupe du genre Hesperempis est révisé. Le groupe comprend Dryodromia Rondani et Hesperempis Melander, avec Melanderalus Özdikem et Başar (=Toreus Melander) en tant que nouveau synonyme de Hesperempis, nouvelle synonymie.Dryodromia comprend D. testacea Rondani du Paléarctique occidental et D. yunnanica Cumming et Saigusa nouvelle espèce du sud-ouest de la Chine. Hesperempis comprend H. anatolica Cumming et Brooks nouvelle espèce, H. mabelae (Melander), H. neomexicana (Melander) nouvelle combinaison, H. sanduca Melander et H. vespera Cumming et Brooks nouvelle espèce de la région néarctique, ainsi que H. melina Cumming et Saigusa nouvelle espèce, H. nipponica Cumming et Saigusa nouvelle espèce et H. sibirica Shamshev de la région paléarctique. On présente une clé pour les deux genres et les 10 espèces, ainsi qu'une analyse cladistique. Une nouvelle interprétation de l'homologie des appendices terminaux mâles est proposée pour cette lignée, suivie d'une discussion sur les relations phylogénétiques et la zoogéographie historique du groupe.

Type
Systematics & Morphology
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 146 , Issue 2 , April 2014 , pp. 170 - 210
Copyright
Copyright © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, as represented by the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Subject editor: Bradley Sinclair

urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:2FEA5BD7-B962-40B2-B615-90852329A6A5

References

Bigot, J.M.F. 1857. Essai d'une classification générale et synoptique de l'ordre des insectes diptères. 5e mémoire. Annales de la Société Entomologique de France, 5: 517–564.Google Scholar
Caspers, N.Wagner, R. 1982. Emergenz-Untersuchungen an einen Mittelgebirgsbach bei Bonn VII. Empididen- und Dolichopodiden-Emergenz 1976 (Insecta, Diptera, Brachycera). Archiv für Hydrobiologie, 93: 209–237.Google Scholar
Chandler, P.J. 1978. Flower visiting. In A Dipterist's handbook. The amateur entomologist. Volume 15. Edited by A. Stubbs and P. Chandler. Amateur Entomologists’ Society, Middlesex, United Kingdom. Pp. 122–123.Google Scholar
Chvála, M. 2004. Empididae [online]. In Fauna Europaea: Diptera, Brachycera. Edited by T. Pape. Fauna Europaea version 1.1. Available from www.faunaeur.org [accessed 15 March 2007].Google Scholar
Chvála, M. 2006. Empididae Latreille, 1804. In Checklist of Diptera of the Czech Republic and Slovakia. Electronic version 1. Edited by L. Jedlička, V. Stloukalová, and M. Kúdela. Available from http://zoology.fns.uniba.sk/diptera [accessed 15 March 2007].Google Scholar
Chvála, M.Barták, M. 2000. Empididae. In Diptera in an industrially affected region (North-Western Bohemia, Bílina and Duchcov environs) I . Edited by M. Barták and J. Vaňhara. Folia Facultatis Scientiarium Naturalium Universitatis Masarykianae Brunensis, Biologia, 104: 175–181.Google Scholar
Chvála, M.Wagner, R. 1989. Empididae. In Catalogue of Palaearctic Diptera, Volume 6, Therevidae – Empididae . Edited by Á. Soós and L. Papp. Elsevier Science Publishing, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Pp. 228–336.Google Scholar
Collin, J.E. 1961. British flies, 6: Empididae. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
Cumming, J.M.Wood, D.M. 2009. Adult morphology and terminology [Chapter] 2. In Manual of Central American Diptera. Volume 1. Edited by B.V. Brown, A. Borkent, J.M. Cumming, D.M. Wood, N.E. Woodley, and M.A. Zumbado. National Research Council Research Press, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. Pp. 9–50.Google Scholar
Daugeron, C. 1997. Evolution of feeding and mating behaviours in the Empidoidea (Diptera: Eremoneura). In The origin of biodiversity in insects: phylogenetic tests of evolutionary scenarios. Edited by P. Grandcolas. Mémoires du Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris, 173: 63–182.Google Scholar
Falk, S.J.Crossley, R. 2005. A review of the scarce and threatened flies of Great Britain. Part 3: Empidoidea. Species Status, 3: 1–134.Google Scholar
Grootaert, P. 1982. A note on Empididae (Diptera), uncommon or new for the Belgian fauna. Bulletin et Annales de la Société royale belge d'Entomologie, 118: 257–265.Google Scholar
Horvat, B. 1995. Aquatic Empididae Fauna (Diptera) in Macedonia. Acta Musei Macedonici scientiarum naturalium, 19: 147–170.Google Scholar
Hövemeyer, K. 1998. Diptera associated with dead beech wood. Studia Dipterologica, 5: 113–122.Google Scholar
Hövemeyer, K.Schaurmann, J. 2003. Succession of Diptera on dead beech wood: a 10-year study. Pedobiologia, 47: 61–75.Google Scholar
International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature . 1999. International code of zoological nomenclature, 4th edition. International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature. London, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
Krystoph, H. 1961. Vergleichend–morphologische Untersuchungen an den Mundteilen bei Empididen (Diptera). Beiträge zur Entomologie, 11: 824–872.Google Scholar
Loew, H. 1858. Synamphotera pallida, nov. sp. et gen. Zeitschrift für die Gesammten Naturwissenschaften Halle, 11: 453–456.Google Scholar
Loew, H. 1862. Monographs of the Diptera of North America. Part I. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, 6: xxiv +1–221, 2 plates.Google Scholar
Lundbeck, W. 1910. Diptera Danica. Genera and species of flies hitherto found in Denmark. Part 3, Empididae. Gad, Copenhagen, Denmark.Google Scholar
Maddison, D.R.Maddison, W.P. 2001. MacClade 4: analysis of phylogeny and character evolution. Version 4.03. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts, United States of America.Google Scholar
McAlpine, J.F. 1981. Morphology and terminology – adults [Chapter] 2. In Manual of Nearctic Diptera. Volume 1. Edited by J.F. McAlpine, B.V. Peterson, G.E. Shewell, H.J. Teskey, J.R. Vockeroth, and D.M. Wood. Agriculture Canada Monograph, Ottawa, Canada, 27: 9–63.Google Scholar
Melander, A.L. 1902. A monograph of the North American Empididae. Part 1. Transactions of the American Entomological Society, 28: 195–367.Google Scholar
Melander, A.L. 1906. Some new or little-known genera of Empididae. Entomological News, 17: 370–379.Google Scholar
Melander, A.L. 1928. Diptera, Fam. Empididae. In Genera Insectorum, Fasc. 185. Edited by O. Wytsman. Louis Desmet-Verteneuil, Brusselles, Belgium. Pp. 1–434.Google Scholar
Meyer, H.Wagner, R. 2011. Rote Liste und Gesamtartenliste der Langbein-, Tanz- und Rennraubfliegen (Diptera, Empidoidea: Dolichopodidae, Atelestidae, Empididae, Hybotidae, Microphoridae) Deutschlands. In Rote Liste gefährdeter Tiere, Pflanzen und Pilze Deutschlands. Band 3, Wirbellose Tiere (Teil 1), Münster (Landwirtschaftsverlag) . Edited by M. Binot-Hafke, S. Balzer, N. Becker, H. Gruttke, H. Haupt, N. Hofbauer, G. Ludwig, G. Matzke-Hajek, and M. Strauch. Naturschutz und Biologische Vielfalt, Münster, Germany, 70: 87–140.Google Scholar
Niesiołowski, S. 1992. Empididae aquatica. Wodne wujkowate (Insecta: Diptera). Fauna Polski, 14: 1–128.Google Scholar
O'Hara, J.E., Cerretti, P., Pape, T., Evenhuis, N.L. 2011. Nomenclatural studies toward a world list of Diptera genus-group names. Part II: Camillo Rondani. Zootaxa, 3141: 1–268.Google Scholar
Özdikem, H.Başar, K. 2010. The Nearctic genus Toreus Melander, 1906 vs. Toreus Purcell, 1903: the need for a replacement name (Diptera: Empididae). Munis Entomology and Zoology, 5: 290.Google Scholar
Purcell, W.F. 1903. New South African spiders of the families Migidae, Ctenizidae, Barychelidae, Dipluridae and Lycosidae. Annals of the South Africa Museum, 3: 3–40.Google Scholar
Rondani, C. 1856. Dipterologiae Italicae prodromus Vol: I. Genera Italica ordinis dipterorum ordinatim disposita et distincta et in familias et stirpes aggregata. A. Stocchi, Parma, Italy.Google Scholar
Saigusa, T. 2006. Homology of wing venation of Diptera. Privately published handout distributed at the 6th International Congress of Dipterology, Fukuoka, Japan, 26 pp.Google Scholar
Saigusa, T. 2012. A new Asio-Nearctic subgenus of Rhamphomyia (Diptera: Empididae: Empidinae). The Canadian Entomologist, 144: 291–322.Google Scholar
Saigusa, T.Kato, A. 2002. Discovery of the Nearctic empidid genus Hoplocyrtoma Melander (Diptera, Brachycera) from Japan. Special Bulletin of the Japanese Society of Coleopterology, Tokyo 5: 485–493.Google Scholar
Scudder, S.H. 1882. Nomenclator zoologicus. An alphabetical list of all generic names that have been employed by naturalists for recent and fossil names from the earliest times to the close of the year 1879. I. Supplemental list of genera in zoology. List of generic names employed in zoology and paleontology to the close of the year 1879, chiefly supplemental to those catalogued by Agassiz and Marschall, or indexed in the Zoological Record. Bulletin of the United States National Museum, 19: i–xxi, 1–376.Google Scholar
Shamshev, I.V. 1999. New records of empidoids (Diptera, Empidoidea) from Eastern Europe. International Journal of Dipterological Research, 10: 51–52.Google Scholar
Shamshev, I.V. 2007. A new species of the genus Hesperempis Melander (Diptera: Empididae) from Siberia. Zootaxa, 1554: 63–65.Google Scholar
Shamshev, I.V.Kustov, S.Y. 2006. A check-list of the fly families Hybotidae and Empididae (Diptera) from the Caucasus [In Russian with English abstract]. Caucasian Entomological Bulletin, 2: 221–230.Google Scholar
Sinclair, B.J. 1995. Generic revision of the Clinocerinae (Empididae), and description and phylogenetic relationships of the Trichopezinae, new status (Diptera: Empidoidea). The Canadian Entomologist, 127: 665–752.Google Scholar
Sinclair, B.J., Brooks, S.E., Cumming, J.M., Coovert, G.A. 2011. Revision of the Nearctic species of Heleodromia (Diptera: Empidoidea: Brachystomatidae). The Canadian Entomologist, 143: 629–651.Google Scholar
Sinclair, B.J.Cumming, J.M. 2006. The morphology, higher-level phylogeny and classification of the Empidoidea (Diptera). Zootaxa, 1180: 1–172.Google Scholar
Sinclair, B.J.Saigusa, T. 2002. A new species of the seepage midge genus Trichothaumalea Edwards from Japan (Diptera: Thaumaleidae). Insect Systematics and Evolution, 33: 175–184.Google Scholar
Sinclair, B.J.Shamshev, I.V. 2012. World revision of Iteaphila macquarti group (Diptera: Empididae). Zootaxa, 3561: 1–61.Google Scholar
Stoch, F. 2003. Checklist of the species of the Italian fauna. On-line version 2.0 [online]. Available from www.faunaitalia.it/checklist [accessed 22 November 2006].Google Scholar
Swofford, D.L. 2002. PAUP*. Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods). Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts, United States of America.Google Scholar
Turis, P.Vidlička, L. 2013. Relationship of animals to the cyclamen Cyclamen fatrense Halda et Soják: pollinators, consumers and occasional visitors. Biologia (Section Zoology), 68/3: 517–524.Google Scholar