Mythicomyia huk, Sánchez & Evenhuis, 2024

Sánchez, Pável & Evenhuis, Neal, 2024, New Mythicomyia Coquillett, 1893 (Diptera: Mythicomyiidae: Mythicomyiinae) from Peru, Zootaxa 5541 (4), pp. 513-538 : 514-517

Mythicomyia huk sp. nov.

( Figs 1–17 )

Diagnosis. Male. Proboscis shorter than height of eye; anterior ocellus much larger than posterior ones; legs dark brown, except distal third, yellow; middle tibia straight; extreme base of cell dm anterior to R 2+3 bifurcation ( Fig. 5 ); pseudo-surstylus somewhat jaw-shaped in lateral view ( Figs 7–8 ); anterior arms of parameral sheath somewhat clavate in lateral view ( Figs 7–8 ). Female. Scutellum whitish yellow ( Fig. 15 ); abdomen more extensively yellow, with subtriangular dark spots on tergites III–VII, that become abruptly smaller from tergite V ( Fig. 16 ); sperm pump stake-shaped, relatively large, subequal in length to spermathecal reservoir, which is digitiform, translucent on basal fifth and without glandular trichomes ( Fig. 17 ).

Description of the male holotype. Length: body, 2.7 mm; wing, 1.75 mm. Head ( Figs 2, 4 ). Predominantly dark brown to black, gray pruinose; eyes contiguous for 8 facets, separated at vertex by about 1.5 times the width of anterior ocellus, this latter much larger than the posterior ones, ocelli whitish yellow; a pair of rather robust setae on ocellar triangle (stouter than occipital ones); frons white, thin dark line along eye margin ( Fig. 4 ); face predominantly whitish yellow, except brown suffusion on upper third and dark brown along lower margin; antenna brown; scape minute, wider than long; pedicel as long as wide; first flagellomere linear-lanceolate, almost three times as long as pedicel; second flagellomere lanceolate, about half the length of first one, with subbasal stylus; proboscis brown, length beyond oral margin shorter than height of eye; occiput white setose. Thorax ( Figs 1, 3 ). Predominantly dark brown, shining; mesonotum quite humped, as high as two thirds its length, grey pruinose except medially; postpronotal lobe, postalar callus, and narrow margin on notopleural and supraalar region, yellowish; pleura cinerous pruinose, with whitish yellow markings on narrow margins of anepisternum, posterior margin of anepimeron, upper margins of proepimeron and katepisternum; white setae on mesonotum, postpronotal lobe, anepisternum and scutellum. Legs ( Fig. 1 ). Coxae dark brown, except apically, yellow; femora dark brown, except on apical third, yellow; tibiae yellow except apex of hind one, dark brown; tarsi predominantly brown, except basal two thirds of first tarsomeres, yellow; pulvilli as long as claws. Wing ( Fig 5 , 89 A, B ). Hyaline, microtrichose; veins brownish yellow; costal vein ending in R 4+5; vein Sc incomplete, ending later than of Rs origin; Rs evanescent at connection with R 1; R 2+3 arising approximately ¾ distance from origin of Rs to r-m crossvein, this latter placed at about basal ¼ of dm cell (first portion of M 1+2, before r-m, subequal to first portion of M 4); vein separating cells br and bm barely evident; cell dm six-sided, about three times as long as wide, with extreme base anterior to R 2+3 bifurcation; m-m cross vein about as long as r-m and about ¼ the length of vein dm -m; R 4+5 slightly curved downward, ending after M 1; vein M 1 curved downward; M 2, M 4 and CuA slightly sinuous; CuP evanescent; anal lobe developed; haltere whitish, except knob, brown dorsally. Abdomen ( Figs 1, 3 ). White setose; predominantly dark brown, except on posterior margins of abdominal segments II–VII, with yellowish bands, bands thinner on segments IV–VII. Terminalia ( Figs 6–12 ). Reddish brown, except pseudo-surstylus, whitish yellow ( Fig. 6 ); epandrium elongate, somewhat triangular-shaped with rounded apex in lateral view ( Figs. 7–8 ), semi-circular with scattered setae dorsally in posterior view ( Figs 9–10 ); pseudo-surstylus relatively broad, downward directed, somewhat jaw-shaped in lateral view ( Figs 7–8 ), somewhat triangular-shaped with truncate apex in posterior view ( Figs 9– 10 ); cercus triangular-shaped, with scattered setae on the upper half in lateral view ( Figs 7–8 ), pad-shaped with scattered setae on the upper half in posterior view ( Figs 9–10 ); ejaculatory apodeme thickened, wide, somewhat rounded and gently excavated dorsally in lateral view ( Figs 7–8 ), long and thin in dorsal view ( Figs 11–12 ); lateral ejaculatory process translucid on basal third, with acute apex, gently upward-directed in lateral view ( Figs 7–8 ), sideways-directed and about half the length of ejaculatory apodeme in dorsal view ( Figs 11–12 ); phallus drop-shaped, distiphallus simple with single apical opening, about a fourth the length of basiphallus; parameral sheath large, almost as wide as long, with two tips sideways directed and one tip united posteromedially; anterior arms of parameral sheath elongate, thickened, with apex somewhat clavate in lateral view ( Figs 7–8 ), almost extending to level of ejaculatory apodeme and more or less parallel in dorsal view ( Figs 11–12 ); gonocoxa subdivided, with a subtriangular anterior lobe and a subrectangular posterior lobe; gonostylus large, with acute apex, upward-directed, subequal in length to ejaculatory apodeme.

Female ( Figs 13–17 ). Differs from the male by the following: Head. Eyes dichoptic, separated at vertex by about 1.5 times the width of ocellar triangle ( Fig. 14 ); anterior ocellus only slightly larger than posterior ones; ocellar triangle with short setae; frons whitish yellow, except right below the ocellar triangle, dark brown. Thorax ( Fig. 15 ). Mesonotum little humped, predominantly dark brown dorsally, except anteriorly on sides (behind postpronotal lobe) yellow; notopleural and supraalar regions yellow as well (broadly emarginate above notopleural suture, in front and behind); scutellum whitish yellow; pleura mainly yellowish on upper half, anepisternum and anepimeron with brown suffusion restricted to lower third, predominantly brown on lower half, upper margins of katepisternum and meron whitish yellow. Legs. Yellow, except tarsi, brownish from apex of first tarsomeres. Wing. Haltere entirely white. Abdomen ( Fig. 16 ). Tergite I only with faint suffusion, tergite II almost entirely brown, except on posterior margin, tergites III–VII somewhat with triangular brown spots, abruptly smaller from tergite V. Terminalia ( Fig. 17 ). Genital fork U-shaped, anterior margin arched with lower margin truncated and elongate in a membranous process, posterior margin bifurcate, inner arms as long as outer ones; sperm pump stake-shaped, cylindrical with a conspicuous disc-shaped valve apically and pointed basally, relatively large, subequal in length to spermathecal reservoir and 1.5 times as long as genital fork; proximal spermathecal duct thinner than distal; distal spermathecal about four times the length of proximal duct, translucent, gradually broadening from anterior half towards base of spermathecal reservoir; three digitiform spermathecal reservoirs, extending to abdominal segment three, elongate, with basal fifth translucent; without glandular trichomes.

Type material. HOLOTYPE. Male: PERU. Depto Amazonas; 1 km W Bagua Chica; sclerophyll vegetation with cactus; Malaise above wash on plane; 14–17.xii.2005; ME Irwin; 525 m; 5°43.58’S, 78°37.83’W . Holotype in CAS . PARATYPES. Same as holotype (6 ♂, 2 ♀). Paratypes in CAS (3 ♂, 1 ♀) and MUSM (3 ♂, 1 ♀) .

Etymology. The specific epithet is a masculine noun in apposition, huk is the Quechua word for “one”.

Distribution ( Fig. 91). Northern Peru; Amazonas (Bagua).

Remarks. In males, the most similar species to M. huk sp. nov. are M. iskay sp. nov. and M. hyalinipennis , as these species share the short proboscis and entirely dark scutellum, however M. hyalinipennis presents differences in antenna (first flagellomere ovoid, not much longer than wide vs flagellomere rod-like and much longer than wide in M. huk sp. nov.) and pseudo-surstylus (elongate and narrow vs broad and somewhat triangular-shaped in M. huk sp. nov.); while M. huk sp. nov. and M. iskay sp. nov. can be distinguished based on differences on leg coloration (coxae and femora yellow on distal third in the former vs coxae and femora predominantly dark brown in the latter) and anterior arms of parameral sheath (somewhat clavate vs spatulate with straight border respectively). On the other hand, in females, the species mentioned above are very different (especially for the black legs in M. hyalinipennis and the abdominal tergites only narrowly yellow on posterior margins of tergites in M. iskay sp. nov.) and the most similar species is M. trepta Hall, 1976 except for the frons predominantly black in the latter, while in M. huk sp. nov. the frons is only darkened on middle of the upper third.

Figures

FIGURE 89. Wing interference patterns. A–B. Mythicomyia huk sp. nov., C–D. Mythicomyia iskay sp. nov., E–F. Mythicomyia kinsa sp. nov.

FIGURES 1–6. Mythicomyia huk sp. nov. Male holotype. 1. Lateral habitus, 2. Head, lateral view, 3. Dorsal habitus, 4. Head, dorsal view, 5. Wing, 6. Terminalia.

FIGURES 7–12. Mythicomyia huk sp. nov. Male terminalia (based on paratype). 7–8. Lateral view, 9–10. Posterior view, 11–12. Dorsal view.

FIGURES 13–17. Mythicomyia huk sp. nov. Female. 13. Lateral view, 14. Head, frontal view, 15. Thorax, dorsal view, 16. Abdomen, dorsal view, 17. Terminalia.