Camarota curvipennis (Latreille, 1805)

(Figs. 1, 5, 10, 15–17)

Oscinis curvipennis Latreille 1805: 383; 1 syntype in Paris (Ismay, 1999); [3 publications]

Camarota curvipennis (Latreille, 1805) . Collin (1911: 148); [131 publications]

Camarota flavitarsis Meigen, 1830: 7; 1♂ type in Paris, 6 types in Vienna (Becker 1902; Ismay 1999); [69 publications] Camarota puncticollis Curtis, 1931 in 1929–1931 nomen nudum [1 publication]

Camarota aurifrons Haliday, 1833: 172; [2 publications]

Camarota rufitarsis Macquart, 1835: Explic. des pls 7. Error for flavitarsis; [1 publication]

Camarota rufimana von Roser, 1840: 61; (2 types in Stuttgart, Nartshuk, 1994); [1 publ.]

Camarota cerealis Rondani, 1873a: 25 –26; [2 publications]

Camarota cerealis Rondani, 1873b: 103 –105. Preoccupied by Rondani (1873a), see below*

Oscinis curvinervis auctt. Error by Becker 1910a: 49 –50, 150–151, 168, Taf. II; [43 publications]

Camarota ceralis . Error for cerealis by O’Hara et al. 2011: 207; [1 publication]

* Osten–Sacken (1896: 257) judged the short description of Rondani (1873a) —mentioning the host plant ”biade” (= Avena)—as the senior one: “N.B.—E una notizia preliminare al No. 115” (His No. 115 is cited here as Rondani 1873b). We possess this short paper with the pagination 32–33 and the manuscript date “Parma, 20 giugno 1873 ”. The more detailed description with the given host “frumento” (= Triticum) is equipped with the manuscript date “Parma 25 Maggio 1873 ” but it may have been published later than the given publication date “July” by O’Hara et al. 2011. That is to say, Rondani himself (1874: 130) confirmed that the species description had been published in “La Camagna, Palermo”. This was overlooked by many authors, latest by O’Hara et al. (2011) who estimated the publication date for the short article in La Capagna as 31.xii.1873.

We found only two papers following the description of Camarota curvipennis by Latreille using this taxon until the year 1910, namely Latreille (1809: 351–352) and Olivier (1811: 563). A misquotation or emendation “ curvinervis ” of the species name could also not be detected in 54 available publications treating the species between 1805 and 1909.

Becker (1910a: 49–50, 150–151, 168, Taf. II, issued 15.iii.1910) was the first author who found out that Meigen’s C. flavitarsis was a junior synonym of Oscinis curvipennis Latreille, 1805 . But unfortunately he misquoted this taxon as “ Camarota curvinervis (Latreille, 1805) ”, which was the startpoint for 34 subsequent workers (with 43 publications) to use this erroneous name, partly until the year 1998. Hendel (1910, issued 15.xii.1910) fixed this error repeating the misquoted name “ curvinervis ” from Becker’s monograph (1910a). Collin (1911: 148) was the first author using the correct name of Latreille as a senior synonym of C. flavitarsis . Finally Coe (1942) took up Collin’s note and clarified the lapsus but wrongly ascribing it to Hendel (1910), and he corrected further confusions with the identical name Oscinis curvinervis Zetterstedt, 1848, actually being a valid species in the genus Meromyza Meigen, 1830 . The other three junior synonyms of C. flavitarsis had already been established before Becker’s monograph, aurifrons by Walker (1849: 1067), cerealis by Mik (1897: 34–35) and rufimana by Becker (1903: 56). They were repeated as synonyms of C. curvipennis with notes on some types by Ismay (1999).

Material examined: 1 ♂ Switzerland, Jussy, 2.v.1980, J. T. Huber leg. [MZUSP] (abdomen and wing dissected) ; 1 ♂ 1 ♀ Greece, Kerkini, Ecotouristic site, 41°08’16”N 23°13’01”E, 26.vi.2006, Gordon Ramel leg. [MZUSP], belonging to a series of 68 ♂ 157 ♀ from Kerkini (photo of head, wing and abdomen dissected). The second author collected several specimens in eleven European countries.

Distribution. This is a widespread species, most abundant in the Mediterranean. Exploiting 251 publications treating this species and adding here four first records from the second author’s collecting (marked with an asterisk), C. curvipennis was collected from 43 countries and major islands: Armenia, Austria, Azerbaidjan, Balearic Islands, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canary Islands, Crete*, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Canary Islands, Georgia, Germany, Greece *, Hungary, Iran, Israel, Italy, Japan, Malta, Moldavia, Morocco, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal mainland, Rhodes*, Romania, Russia, Sardinia, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia *, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Tunesia, Turkey, Ukraine, and the United Kingdom. First record for Greece and Slovenia.

Illustrations (chronologically ordered). Meigen, 1830: Tab. 55, Fig. 18 –21 (fly, head, antenna); Macquart, 1835 Explication des planches: 7 as C. rufitarsis, Pl. XXII, fig. 15; Rondani, 1973b: 105 (fly, head, antenna, leg); Leonardi, 1900: 230, 231 (wing with vena spuria, fly); Becker, 1910a: 168, Taf. II, fig. 23) (fly); Duda, 1932–1933: pl. II (wing with vena spuria); Balachowski & Mesnil, 1935: 978–979 (fly, vena spuria, head, antenna with typical arista, larval spiracles and creeping walls); Meigen in Morge, 1976: 468, pl. CCX; Nartshuk, 1977: 101, 109 (figures of epandrium and genitalia); Andersson, 1977: 131–132; Delyné–Draskovits, 1978: 137 (whole fly; Beschovski, 1985: 140 (head, wing, male and female genitalia); Ismay, 1999: 5, 6, 9 (wing, head); Ismay & Nartshuk, 2000: 393, 412 (head, fly); Nartshuk & Andersson, 2013: 154 (repeated figs. of Andersson, 1977); Wendt, 2016: 110 (photo of fly).