C. elegans Meigen, 1804

Conops elegans Meigen, 1804: 275; type-locality: “Marseille” [France]; holotypus ♂ [MNHN]

Diagnosis. Body brown to orange-brown, with more or less black and, exceptionally, some yellow markings. Scutum brown to orange, with more or less extensive black, but without yellow postpronotum. Scutellum orangebrown. Abdomen orange-brown to black, usually more or less extensively black to dark brown dorsally. Antenna usually orange, including first two aristomeres. In most specimens, frons with distinct, irregular transverse grooves; without black markings and at most, with very slight and inconspicuous lateral dusting. Face uniformly whitish yellow to yellow-brown. Gena completely dusted. Gena below eye more than one-third of eye height. Labium distinctly longer than head length in side view. Palps absent. Stripe of dense silver dusting present from mid coxa to notopleuron, indistinct in many specimens. Usually one pair of scutellar bristles. Legs uniformly orange to brown, bases of basitarsi dorsally black, as are the remaining tarsi. Posterior surfaces of fore and middle tibiae with flattened densely dusted fields distally. Apical two-thirds of middle femur posteriorly with a row of regularly arranged, long black hairs. Wing with distinct brown markings, at least apically in radial cell r2+3. In some specimens the wing is completely black to brownish (colour morph fuscipennis Macquart, 1849). Wing cells br and bm usually more or less without microtrichia; cell cup mainly covered with microtrichia. Theca long; blunt spicules on posterior surface of theca, and on sternite 6, arranged in palisade groups or close-set, broken, horizontal lines. Smallish species (wing length ≤ 9.9 mm).

= Conops aegyptiacus (Rondani, 1850) syn. nov.

Conopaejus aegyptiacus Rondani, 1850: 167 –168; type-locality: “Aegypti”; holotypus ♀ [depository unknown]

The holotype of C. aegyptiacus should be in the collection at Turin (MRSN) but could not recently be found there (Picciau in litt.) and could not be found in Florence (MZUF), so it is therefore probably lost. Becker (1922) proposed C. aegyptiacus as a synonym of Conops nubeculipennis Bezzi, 1901, but this synonymy has not been accepted by later authors who listed it as a valid species (e.g. Kröber 1925, 1936; Zimina 1976; Chvála & Smith 1988). The original description of C. aegyptiacus fits completely to specimens of C. elegans and I therefore propose C. aegyptiacus as a new junior synonym of C. elegans .

= C. ruficornis Becker, 1913 syn. nov.

Conops ruficornis Becker, 1913a: 89 –90; type-locality: “ Tanger ” [Morocco]; holotypus ♀ [missing ex coll. Becker]

The original description of C. ruficornis fits very well with some specimens of C. elegans examined from Tunisia. Therefore, C. ruficornis should be interpreted as a junior synonym of C. elegans . The depository of the type of C. ruficornis is unknown and this specimen is probably lost (Kröber, 1939).

= C. theryi Séguy, 1928 syn. nov.

Conops theryi Séguy, 1928: 45; type-locality: “ Maroc: Rabat”; holotypus ♂ [MNHN] The male holotype of C. theryi in the MNHN was examined and is conspecific with Conops elegans . Thus, C. theryi is proposed as junior synonym of C. elegans .

= C. tifedarius Séguy, 1928 syn. nov.

Conops tifedarius Séguy, 1928: 46; type-locality: “ Maroc: Rabat ”; holotypus ♂ [MNHN] The male holotype of C. tidefarius was examined and is conspecific with Conops elegans .

= C. djanetianus Séguy, 1938 syn. nov.

Conops elegans var. djanetianus Séguy, 1938: 42; type-locality: “ Djanet ” [Algeria]; unknown type material [depository unknown]

Type material could not be found in the MNHN and the depository is unknown. The short description of this variety lies within the variability of C. elegans and it is therefore treated as a synonym of the latter herewith.