Aphestia Schiner, 1866

Camargo, Alexssandro, Vieira, Rodrigo & Rafael, José Albertino, 2024, Taxonomic review of Aphestia Schiner, 1866 (Diptera: Asilidae: Laphriinae) with description of seven new species, Zootaxa 5436 (1), pp. 1-80 : 7-9

publication ID	https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.5436.1.1
publication LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:pub:42656763-C43A-4762-9678-EBE40136907B
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/6B7E87DC-FFDB-FFDE-FF34-4771C640FBE4
treatment provided by	Plazi
scientific name	Aphestia Schiner, 1866
status

Treatment

Aphestia Schiner, 1866 View in CoL

( Figs 1–41 View FIGURE 1 View FIGURE 2 View FIGURE 3 View FIGURE 4 View FIGURE 5 View FIGURE 6 View FIGURE 7 View FIGURE 8 View FIGURE 9 View FIGURE 10 View FIGURE 11 View FIGURE 12 View FIGURE 13 View FIGURE 14 View FIGURE 15 View FIGURE 16 View FIGURE 17 View FIGURE 18 View FIGURE 19 View FIGURE 20 View FIGURE 21 View FIGURE 22 View FIGURE 23 View FIGURE 24 View FIGURE 25 View FIGURE 26 View FIGURE 27 View FIGURE 28 View FIGURE 29 View FIGURE 30 View FIGURE 31 View FIGURE 32 View FIGURE 33 View FIGURE 34 View FIGURE 35 View FIGURE 36 View FIGURE 37 View FIGURE 38 View FIGURE 39 View FIGURE 40 View FIGURE 41 )

Aphestia Schiner, 1866: 661 View in CoL , 663–664, 673. Type-species: Aphestia brasiliensis Schiner, 1866 View in CoL (original designation); Schiner, 1867: 378–379 (species description); Bigot, 1878: 235 (species description); Röder, 1881: 386 (species description); Williston, 1883: 33 (species list); Williston, 1891: 78 (catalogue); Williston, 1901: 317, pl. 6, fig. 2 (species description); Aldrich, 1905: 268 (catalogue); Kertész, 1909: 167 (catalogue); Hermann, 1912: 121–124 (revision); Ricardo, 1913: 149 (revision of Australasian Asilidae View in CoL ); Bromley, 1946: 110 (catalogue); Carrera & d’Andretta, 1952: 256 (prey); Hull, 1962 (1): 383, (2): figs. 292, 648, 1195, 1204 (synopsis of world fauna); Martin & Papavero, 1970: 50 (catalogue); Theodor, 1976: 32, 36 figs. 50–52 (terminalia); Daniels, 1989: 344 (catalogue); Artigas, Papavero & Serra, 1991: 57 figs. 18–24 ( Atomosiini View in CoL catalogue);; Stark, 1995: 140 (list of references); Papavero & Ibáñez-Bernal, 2001: 121 (species list); 2003: 176 (species list); Papavero, 2009: 84 (catalogue); Papavero, Artigas & Lamas, 2009: 181 figs. 815–821 (key for genera, Manual of Neotropical Asilidae View in CoL ); Evenhuis, 2012: 106, 107 (mention, type designation).

Diagnosis. Mostly black flies ( Fig. 7A–B View FIGURE 7 ); frons with convergent slopes ( Fig. 7C View FIGURE 7 ); frons and face commonly white or yellowish pruinose ( Fig. 7C View FIGURE 7 ); mystacal macrosetae covering the entire face ( Figs 7D View FIGURE 7 , 13C–D View FIGURE 13 ); 2 ocellar setae ( Fig. 7C View FIGURE 7 ); scape about 2 times the pedicel length ( Fig. 7D View FIGURE 7 ); postpedicel about 2.5 times the length of scape and pedicel combined ( Figs 7D–F View FIGURE 7 , 17D–F View FIGURE 17 ); dorsal sensorial element placed after postpedicel mid-length ( Fig. 7E– F View FIGURE 7 ); sensorial area present, larger in males ( Figs 7E View FIGURE 7 , 13E View FIGURE 13 ); pleuron usually white pruinose; scutum and scutellum punctate bearing, short, thin, appressed, golden setae ( Fig. 7A–B View FIGURE 7 ); anatergal setae thin; wings translucent, usually with microtrichia on apical half and posterior margin ( Fig. 7H View FIGURE 7 ); six abdominal tergites visible dorsally ( Fig. 13A View FIGURE 13 ); abdominal tergites punctate, bearing short, thin, appressed, usually golden setae; tergites with a very thin white pruinose band posteriorly, thicker laterally; lateral marginal macrosetae present in all tergites or restricted to T1, T2 and T6 ( Fig. 3B–C View FIGURE 3 ); male terminalia retracted under T6 (in rare cases completely exposed) ( Fig. 3B–C View FIGURE 3 ); female terminalia internal.

Redescription. Head: black; frons with convergent slopes, white or yellowish pruinose, orbital setae present ( Figs 4C View FIGURE 4 , 13C View FIGURE 13 ); mystacal macrosetae and setae yellowish white or black covering the entire face; facial gibbosity slightly visible laterally; lower facial margin yellowish or white pruinose ( Figs 4C–D View FIGURE 4 , 13C–D View FIGURE 13 ); ocellar tubercle prominent with three ocelli, one anterior and two posterodorsal; 2 ocellar setae; vertex excavated with or without thin setae; 10–15 postocular macrosetae; occiput white, yellowish or brownish to golden pruinose; lower occipital margin white pruinose ( Figs 4D View FIGURE 4 , 13D View FIGURE 13 ); proboscis black with proboscial and labial setae present ( Figs 4D View FIGURE 4 , 13D View FIGURE 13 ); palpus with one segment, setose. Antenna: scape about two times the pedicel length, setose; pedicel small, setose; postpedicel about 2.5 times the length of scape and pedicel combined ( Fig. 4D View FIGURE 4 ), dorsal sensorial element placed after postpedicel mid-length, sensorial area present, larger in males than females ( Fig. 4E–F View FIGURE 4 ).

Thorax: black; scutum and scutellum punctate ( Fig. 4G View FIGURE 4 ); scutum white or brownish pruinose on lateral and posterior margins; pleuron usually white pruinose; postpronotal lobe and postalar callus yellowish or reddish ( Fig. 4G View FIGURE 4 ); scutellum with very slightly impressed rim (sometimes inconspicuous) ( Fig. 4G View FIGURE 4 ). Chaetotaxy: scutum and scutellum with short, thin, appressed golden setae on punctations ( Fig. 4G View FIGURE 4 ); 1–2 notopleural; 1 supra-alar; 2–3 postalar; 2–6 marginal scutellar ( Figs 4G View FIGURE 4 , 7G View FIGURE 7 , 13G View FIGURE 13 , 17G View FIGURE 17 ); 1–4 posterior anepisternal macrosetae, varying from white, yellow, reddish yellow to black; antepronotal macrosetae and katatergal setae present; anatergal setae thin.

Wings: translucent ( Figs 4H View FIGURE 4 , 23H View FIGURE 23 ); sparse microtrichia present on distal half and posterior margin ( Figs 7H View FIGURE 7 , 26H View FIGURE 26 ); veins yellow or brown; crossvein r-m before half of discal cell; cell r 5 open or closed at wing margin; cells m 3 and cua closed before wing margin; halteres clavate, normally yellowish.

Legs: generally black or brown, with basal and apical femoral extremities and tibial basal extremities yellowish, reddish, or brownish, or then, fore and mid legs yellowish; tarsi yellowish, reddish, or brownish to black ( Figs 7A–B View FIGURE 7 , 13A–B View FIGURE 13 , 26A–B View FIGURE 26 ); claws pointed, black; empodium and pulvilli yellowish or brownish.

Abdomen: usually more robust on females (mostly due to the presence of eggs); black, punctate with brown or golden setae; tergites with a posterior thin band white pruinose, thicker laterally; lateral marginal macrosetae present in all tergites or restricted to T1, T2 and T6 ( Fig. 3B–C View FIGURE 3 ); sternites usually brown, sparsely pruinose, concolor or whitish setose.

Male terminalia: light brown, reddish or black; rectangular, oval, or ellipsoid in dorsal view ( Fig. 8A View FIGURE 8 ); epandrium with posterior margin concave or truncate ( Fig. 8E View FIGURE 8 ); cercus reniform, rounded, trapezoidal, or rectangular with posterolateral projections or not; subepandrial sclerite conic, rod-like, or spatulate ( Fig. 3D–G View FIGURE 3 ); gonocoxite rectangular or rounded at base, posteriorly conic, acuminate, rod-like, cuneiform, falciform, or truncate, with a fringe of setae ventrally ( Figs 8G–H View FIGURE 8 , 27G–H View FIGURE 27 , 31G–H View FIGURE 31 ); gonostylus connected internally with gonocoxite; hypandrium cordiform, deltoid, or subtrapezoidal, asetose ( Fig. 8F View FIGURE 8 ); phallus with three short prongs, tapering distally; parameral sheath posteriorly rounded, conic or trapezoidal; parameral apodeme directed ventrally, anteriorly or posteriorly; ejaculatory apodeme usually fan-shaped ( Figs 8I–K View FIGURE 8 , 18I–K View FIGURE 18 ).

Female terminalia: brown to black; T9, T10 and cercus fused ( Figs 6A–B View FIGURE 6 , 9A–B View FIGURE 9 , 31A–B View FIGURE 31 ); hypoproct generally conic with setae dorsally and ventrally; S8 with a conic projection on each corner posteriorly, bearing 1 apical macroseta, mid-posterior surface with 1 pair of macrosetae ( Figs 6C View FIGURE 6 , 9C View FIGURE 9 , 31C View FIGURE 31 ); spermathecae with at least three turns; sperm pump varies from extremely dilated to slightly evident; spermathecal ducts between sperm pump and genital fork, less sclerotized; genital fork U-shaped ( Figs 6D View FIGURE 6 , 9D View FIGURE 9 ); accessory glands oval, lanceolate, or rounded ( Fig. 31D View FIGURE 31 ); spermathecae and spermathecal ducts anterior to sperm pump with canaliculi.

Length. Body: 10.3–13.7 mm; wing: 8.7–12.3 mm.

Distribution. Mexico, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Panama, Colombia, Trinidad and Tobago, Guyana, Peru, Brazil and Argentina ( Fig. 2 View FIGURE 2 ).

Taxonomic discussion. A total of 427 specimens were examined in this study and the number of known Aphestia species was triplicated. Seven new species were described and two species had their status revalidated, elevating to 11 the number of known species. The sole species described from Australia was found to be noncongeneric and consequently, Aphestia is endemic to the Neotropical Region ( Fig. 2 View FIGURE 2 ).

This perhaps does not represent the real diversity of the genus, as this study is based on the analyses of material available only in collections. There are still several areas in the Neotropics that have not yet been surveyed. In this sense, it highlights the importance of promoting and founding research campaigns, especially in endangered/ understudied areas.A good example of this is the SISBIOTA-Diptera Brazilian Network research program, developed aiming to document the diversity of plants and animals in endangered and understudied areas and biomes in Brazil ( Lamas et al. 2023). In the present study, the type material of two new species ( Aphestia amazonica sp. nov. and A. dikowi sp. nov.) and material providing new distribution records for Aphestia brasiliensis Schiner, 1866 stat. rev., were collected during the SISBIOTA-Diptera survey, emphasising the importance of encouraging similar initiatives. Additionally, for some countries, it was not possible to borrow material due to customs bureaucracy or institutional loan policy, or there was simply no reply from the contacted institutions.

According to Artigas et al. (1991), one of the diagnostic features of Aphestia is the presence of lateral marginal macrosetae on all abdominal tergites ( Fig. 3B View FIGURE 3 ). However, during this study, it was observed that not all species possess it. In four species, these macrosetae are restricted to T1, T2 and T6 ( Fig. 3C View FIGURE 3 ). Consequently, the genus diagnosis was broadened to include these species. The absence of macrosetae on T3–5 by itself would not justify the erection of a new genus or subgenus.

It was also noted that the length of the postpedicel with about three times the length of scape and pedicel combined (as mentioned by Schiner (1866) and subsequent authors), is only approximately 2.5 times.

Additionally, it was observed that the shape of the posterior margin of male and female cercus is similar ( Fig. 3D–G View FIGURE 3 ), therefore, it is a useful feature to associate female and male specimens morphologically; this is the first time this technique has been used to associate male and female in Asilidae .

As a matter of curiosity, it was observed in a few specimens that the last abdominal tergites tapered towards the end of the abdomen. This is probably related to collecting and mounting techniques applied which occasionally bent the last abdominal tergites conferring the tapered aspect.