1954
DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-7998.1954.tb07785.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The mouth‐parts of the Dance Fly, Empis livida L. (Diptera, Empididae)

Abstract: Summary A detailed account is given of the anatomy of the mouth‐parts of Empis livida (L.) (Empididae) and compared with that of Scopeuma stercoraria (L.) (Cordyluridae) described in a previous paper. Homologies are discussed, the probable functions of the mouth‐parts are given and their movements are deduced. Among morphological adaptations to feeding habits the labral blades, analogous to the prestomal teeth of Scopeuma are of particular interest. The struatural adaptations to known predatory habits are disc… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

1957
1957
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The spine like setae on fore coxa and postgena, and the fore coxal tubercle in Zanclotus, are hypothesized to be morphological adaptations to catch and handle prey. The presence of epipharyngal blades strengthens the notion of a predatory lifestyle as these may be used in cutting prey tissue (Bletchly 1954;McAlpine 1981). Species in the genus Hormopeza lack the spine-like setae on for coxa present in species of the Ragadinae, and species in Anthepiscopus and Iteaphila also lack epipharyngal blades.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…The spine like setae on fore coxa and postgena, and the fore coxal tubercle in Zanclotus, are hypothesized to be morphological adaptations to catch and handle prey. The presence of epipharyngal blades strengthens the notion of a predatory lifestyle as these may be used in cutting prey tissue (Bletchly 1954;McAlpine 1981). Species in the genus Hormopeza lack the spine-like setae on for coxa present in species of the Ragadinae, and species in Anthepiscopus and Iteaphila also lack epipharyngal blades.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…The form of the females’ mouthparts differs from that of males. This could be because of a natural dimorphism, common in Empidoidea, where the females have more prominent mouthparts than the males ( Bletchly, 1954 ). We cannot exclude that the females belong to different species because they are found in separate amber pieces.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%