Lamyra Loew,

Dikow, Torsten & Londt, J. G. H., 2000, A review of Lamyra Loew (Diptera: Asilidae: Laphriinae), African Entomology 8 (2), pp. 189-200: 191-192

publication ID 10.5281/zenodo.11279

publication LSID


persistent identifier

treatment provided by


scientific name

Lamyra Loew


Genus Lamyra Loew 

Lamyra Loew, 1851  :19 (as subgenus of Laphria  ) View Cited Treatment ; Type-species: Laphria (Lamyra) gulo Loew, 1851  , by original designation.

Hull (1962: 365) View Cited Treatment provided a full description. This was generally good and described the condition found in the type species, without emphasis on the distribution of pruinescence or setal coloration . The following notes, based on material examined, supplement Hull's description.

Head. Postpedicel (= third antennal segment) somewhat cylindrical ( L. gulo  ), widened in the middle ( L. vorax  ), or clavate ( L. greatheadi  ). Maxillary palpus unsegmented.

Thorax. Mesopleura distinctly patterned by greyish pruinescence (Figs 13, 14). Entire metapleura distinctly greyish-pruinose or with only a posterior stripe of obvious pruinescence. Proepimeron distinctly greyish-pruinose or apruinose.

Legs. Males with longer hind legs than females; first metatarsal segment more elongated in males than in females.

Abdomen. T1-3 with characteristic patterns of greyish to yellowish-gold pruinescence.


There is remarkable intraspecific variation in body size, (e.g. wing length in L. gulo  ranges from 12.0- 20.6 mm), even between specimens collected at the same locality. The reason for this is not known, but probably relates to larval nutrition.

The colour of the postpedicel (= third antennal segment) and katatergal setae, as used by Oldroyd (1974) to distinguish species, is subject to individual variation. For example, the postpedicel may be either black or orange in specimens of L. greatheadi  and L. gulo  , while katatergal setae may be either black or white. These characters are consequently unreliable for distinguishing species. While the male genitalia of all species are similar, two groups can be recognized using the shape of the distal projection of the gonocoxite and the size and development of the aedeagus. Lamyra gulo  and L. rossi  appear to be sister-species, in that the distal projection of the gonocoxite is enlarged distally and has a more hook-like appearance (Figs 4, 7). This structure is more slender and less hook-like distally in L. greatheadi  and L. vorax  (Figs 1, 10) which together may constitute another speciespair . The aedeagus in L. gulo  and L. rossi  is well developed and all three distal prongs are visible in ventral view (Figs 4, 6, 7, 9), this organ is more slender in L. greatheadi  and L. vorax  , and only two of three prongs are visible in ventral view (Figs 1,3, 10, 12).

Further support for the species-pairs recognized above is provided by the presence of diagnostically useful patterns of thoracic pruinescence. Two different patterns are evident; L. gulo  and L. rossi  having a more or less poorly developed anterodorsal patch of greyish pruinescence on the anepisternum (Fig. 13), whereas this pruinose patch is far more extensive and obvious in the L. greatheadi  and L. vorax  pair (Fig. 14).