Revision of the genus Thambemyia Oldroyd (Diptera: Dolichopodidae) with description of a new subgenus

Abstract

The genus Thambemyia Oldroyd is revised. Five species are recognized. Three new species -T. bisetosa, T. bruneiensis and T. hui -are described, and T. pagdeni Oldroyd, 1956 is redescribed. A new subgenus is founded for one new Japanese species, T. (Prothambemyia) japonica. A key to all known species of the genus is provided. Their distributions are also discussed.

First record of Thambemyia Oldroyd (Diptera, Dolichopodidae) from Brazil, with description of a new species

“…Type-species: C. rectus Takagi (original designation). Synonymized by Meuffels & Grootaert (1984), but see Masunaga et al (2005) and Masunaga & Saigusa (2010).…”

“…Whatever the decision, the generic placement of T. fusariae sp. nov. should not be affected, since it fits in a restrict concept of Thambemyia (as in Masunaga et al 2005), recognizable by the following characters: presence of gena, absence of posterior notopleural setae, white pollinosity of male mesonotum weak, tarsomere 1 of male fore leg weakly modified, female segments 6 and 7 with many setae and exposed (not telescoped into preabdomen), female cercus weakly sclerotized, female tergite 10 with two pairs of spines, and female paraproct reduced.…”

“…Additionally, Masunaga et al (2005) recognized two subgenera for Thambemyia (treated separately from Conchopus): Prothambemyia, with a single Palearctic species from Japan, and Thambemyia, with five Oriental species, including the recently described T. lopatini Grichanov, from India (Grichanov 2013). T. fusariae sp.…”

“…T. fusariae sp. nov. belongs in the subgenus Thambemyia (as proposed by Masunaga et al 2005) by having elongated gena (to which the palp is fused), separation between face and clypeus indistinct, acrostichal setae present, unmodified wing venation, tarsomere 2 of male fore leg swollen, and male mid tibia with ventral subapical seta. Accordingly, the subgenus Thambemyia currently has an Oriental-Neotropical distribution.…”

“…Meuffels & Grootaert (1984) established the synonymy of Conchopus with Thambemyia, a decision endorsed in recent catalogues (Bickel & Dyte 1989;Pollet et al 2004;Yang et al 2006). Nevertheless, Masunaga et al (2005) and Masunaga & Saigusa (2010) reported on their unpublished phylogeny, in which they found that Conchopus in the sense of Takagi (1965) and Thambemyia are not sister groups. Rather, there are three distinct clades: (1) the rectus-group of Conchopus, comprising the genus concept in a narrower sense, (2) the species of Conchopus exclusive of the rectus-group, and (3) Thambemyia.…”