CC BY
3лови
Амурский зоологический журнал, 2024, т. XVI, № 3
Amurian Zoological Journal, 2024, vol. XVI, no. 3
www.azjournal.ru
Щ Check for updates
https://www.doi.org/10.33910/2686-9519-2024-16-3-579-593 https://zoobank.org/References/548FEE74-9157-4F80-9998-CFA05590AB8B
UDC 595.773.4
Review of the genus Coremacera (Diptera, Sciomyzidae)
N. E. Vikhrev
Zoological Museum of Moscow University, 2 Bolshaya Nikitskaya, 125009, Moscow, Russia
Author
Nikita E. Vikhrev
E-mail: nikita6510@yandex.ru
SPIN: 1266-1140
Scopus Author ID: 32467511100
Abstract. According to Rozkosny (1987), the genus Coremacera consists of 10 Palaearctic taxa. C. obscuripennis Loew, 1845 and C. confluens Rondani, 1868 are synonymysed with C. marginata Fabricius, 1775, reasons for this are discussed. Generic affiliation of C. turkestanica is changed to Euthycera turkestanica Elberg, 1968 comb. nov.; E. hrabei Rozkosny, 1969 is synonymysed with E. turkestanica. An unclear taxonomic status of C. halensis is discussed. Females of two undescribed Far Eastern taxa of Coremacera are shortly characterised. For the rest six Palaearctic taxa of Coremacera illustrations, distribution and identification key are offered.
Copyright: © The Author (2024). Published by Herzen State Pedagogical
University of Russia. Open access under Keywords: Diptera, Sciomyzidae, Coremacera, Euthycera, identification CC BY-NC License 4.0. key, synonymy
Обзор рода Coremacera (Diptera, Sciomyzidae)
Н. Е. Вихрев
Зоологический музей МГУ им. М. В. Ломоносова, ул. Большая Никитская, д. 2, 125009, г. Москва, Россия
Сведения об авторе Вихрев Никита Евгеньевич E-mail: nikita6510@yandex.ru SPIN-код: 1266-1140 Scopus Author ID: 32467511100
Аннотация. Согласно Rozkosny (1987), род Coremacera состоял из 10 палеарктических таксонов. C. obscuripennis Loew, 1845 и C. confluens Rondani, 1868 были синонимизированы с C. marginata Fabricius, 1775, изложены основания такого решения. Родовая принадлежность C. turkestanica была изменена на Euthycera turkestanica Elberg, 1968, comb. nov. Euthycera hrabei Rozkosny, 1969 была синонимизирована с E. turkestanica. Обсуждается неясный таксономический статус C. halensis. Кратко охарактеризованы самки двух неописанных дальневосточных таксонов Coremacera. Для остальных шести палеарктических таксонов Coremacera предлагаются иллюстрации, уточненное распространение и идентификационный ключ.
Права: © Автор (2024). Опубликовано Российским государственным педагогическим университетом им. А. И. Герцена. Открытый доступ на условиях лицензии СС БУ-ЫС 4.0.
Ключевые слова: Diptera, Sciomyzidae, Coremacera, определительный ключ, синонимы
Introduction
Coremacera Rondani, 1856 (= Statinia Meigen, 1830 suppressed by International Commission of Zoological Nomenclature) is a genus of Tetanocerini endemic to the Palaearctic region. Li et al. (2019) reported the presence of Coremacera in the Oriental region too, although no details were provided.
Coremacera has anteriorly directed setulae at the apex of the postpedicel, this character is unique in Sciomyzidae. It shares other characters with the genus Euthycera La-treille, 1829: wing with intensive dark pattern; two pairs of orbital setae; pedicel rectangular, postpedicel triangular; arista with medium long white hairs; prosternum, anepisternum and anepimeron bare; two postalar setae; sub-alar setae absent; scutellum with two pairs of setae; hind coxa bare on inner posterior margin. Molecular, morphological and combining phylogenetic analysis also support relationship of Coremacera, Euthycera and the Ne-arctic genus Dictyacium Steyskal, 1956, see: Tothova et al. (2012); Chapman et al. (2012); Murphy et al. (2018: 135).
The list of Palaearctic Coremacera was published by Rozkosny and Elberg (1984). The list has acquired its final form three years later when Rozkosny (1987) synonymised C. trivit-tata Loew, 1860 with C. amoena and claimed Coremacera (Tetanocera) bivittata Macquart, 1835 to be a doubtful species, so that 10 taxa left in the genus:
Coremacera amoena Loew, 1853;
Coremacera catenata Loew, 1847;
Coremacera confluens Rondani, 1868;
Coremacera fabricii Rozkosny, 1981;
Coremacera halensis Loew, 1847;
Coremacera marginata marginata Fabri-cius, 1775;
Coremacera marginata pontica Elberg, 1968;
Coremacera obscuripennis Loew, 1845;
Coremacera turkestanica Elberg, 1968;
Coremacera ussuriensis Elberg, 1968.
The present publication is divided into two chapters. Chapter I consists of three parts: (1)
I dedicate this publication to the memory of Nikolay Nikolaevich Filippov (18951972): diplomat, high-ranking counterintelligence officer and entomologist, who used to assume the name Zhenzhurist for foreign trips and entomological publications.
Annotated list of species with material examined, with distributional data and taxonomic remarks for six taxa which I regard valid. (2) Discussions on the structure of male genitalia and synonymy of Coremacera. (3) Identification key for Palaearctic Coremacera.
Chapter II is devoted to several taxa of Coremacera which require clarification.
Material and methods
Localities are given as follows: country, region/state/province (in italics), and geographical coordinates in decimal-degree format. The full names of regions of Russian administrative subdivisions are an entangled result of political and historical events of no interest for zoology, so they are listed as name and word "region" (abbreviated in the text as "Reg."). Other abbreviations: L. — lake; R. — river; vill. — village.
Illustrations are original unless otherwise credited. When referring to figures, to avoid
confusion we capitalize the first letter (Fig. or Figs.) for those appearing in this paper and use lowercase (fig. or figs.) for those published elsewhere.
The specimens examined are deposited in the following museums:
ZIN — Zoological Institute, Saint Petersburg, Russia;
ZMUM — Zoological Museum of Moscow University, Russia.
Annotated list of species with material examined Coremacera amoena Loew, 1853
Fig. 1
Coremacera trivittata Loew, 1860 Coremacera manni Schiner, 1864 (as Limnia)
Material: Greece, Zakinthos Isl., Agios sostis [37.71°N, 20.85°E], 14.07.2008, G. Pennards, 1? (ZMUM); Iran, (Ker-man province), Zarand [30.8°N, 56.6°E], 2.07.1955, D. Shteiberg, 1? (ZIN); Turkey, Bolu province, Kibricik env., 40.42°N, 31.85°E, 1200 m, 1.09.2009, N. Vikhrev, 2$; Marmara Reg., Istanbul, Byuk-dere env. [41.1°N, 29.0°E], 29.08.1936, Zhenzhurist (= N. N. Filippov), 1$, 1? (ZMUM).
Distribution. S Europe: S Germany, Italy, Balkans, Romania; South-West Asia: Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Israel.
Coremacera catenata Loew, 1847 Figs 2, 8, 17
Material: Armenia, S of Lerik [38.76°N, 48.41°E], 24.06.1969, L. Zimina, 1? (ZMUM); Azerbaijan [on label as Armenia], Herher [39.71°N, 46.96°E], 13-15.06.1956, L. Zimina, 4? (ZMUM); Georgia, Khash-mi [41.75°N, 43.18°E], 31.07.1958, V. Zait-sev, 2$, 1? (ZIN); Hungary, Bacs-Kiskun [county, « 46.6°N, 19.4°E], poplar forest, 25.06.1970, K. Gorodkov, 2$, 3? (ZIN); Iran: East Azerbaijan province, Tabriz [38.0°N, 46.3°E], 6.07.1914, Andrievsky, 1? (ZIN); Isfahan province, Ghomrood R., 33.42°N, 50.12°E, 21.05.2017, O. Kosterin, 1$, 1?; Lorestan province, 16 km SE of Borujerd, 33.8°N, 48.9°E, 25.05.2017, O. Kosterin, 2$, 1?; Markazi province: Arak env., 34.03°N, 49.75°E, 2000 m, 18-30.05.2017, O. Koster-in, 4$, 1?; 7 km NW of Shazand, 33.99°N, 49.36°E, 1850 m, 20.05.2017, O. Kosterin, 4$, 1?; 9 km SW of Tafresh, 34.625°N, 49.947°E, 2300 m, 25.05.2017, O. Kosterin, 6$, 2? (all ZMUM); Moldova: Kishinev env., 1-6.07.1970, R. Kamenskaya, 2?; 26.06.1973, L. Zimina, 2?; Vatichi [47.34°N, 28.61°E], 06-08.1953, 2? (all ZMUM); Russia: Chechen Reg., Paraboch [43.47°N, 46.29°E], 13-15.07.1927, Kirichenko, 2$, 6? (ZIN); Crimea Reg.: Alma R. [« 44.84°N, 33.63°E], 10-15.08.1899, Bashenov, 6$, 4? (ZIN);
Fig. 2. C. catenata, general view of the female, dorsal and lateral; male surstyli lateral and ventral Рис. 2. C. catenata, общий вид, самка сверху и сбоку; сурстили самца снизу и сбоку
Dagestan Reg.: Shura-Ozen River floodplain, 43.10°N, 47.46°E, 5.07.2015, D. Astakhov, 1$; North slope of Shalbuzdag Mt [« 41.4°N, 47.8°E], 22.07.1983, E. Narchuk, (all ZIN); Donetsk Reg., Volnovakha Distr., 10 km E of Donskoe [47.50°N 37.65°E], 20-31.08.2008, K. Tomkovich, 1$; Krasnodar Reg.: Dak-hovskaya env., valley of Belaya R., 44.199°N, 40.170°E, 465 m, 17-23.06.2009, K. Tomkovich, 1$ (ZMUM); Lugansk Reg., Horodyshche [48.32°N, 38.64°E], 20.07.1952, B. Mamaev, 1$ (ZIN); Samara Reg., Zhiguli [53.4°N, 49.3°E], Novoderzhkin, 3.07.1938, 1$; Chis-tovsky, 3.08.1950, 1$ (ZIN); Saratov Reg., Khvalynsky Nat. Park [52.48°N, 48.03°E], 27.06.2012, D. Astakhov, 1$ (ZIN); Ulyanovsk Reg., Sengiley Hills Nat. Park, 54.0°N, 48.7°E, 16.07.2022, A. Nikolaeva, 1$ (ZMUM); Volgograd Reg., Gorodishche [48.8°N, 44.5°E], steppe, 9.06.2012, D. Astakhov, 1$ (ZIN); Kamyshin [50.1°N, 45.4°E], 25.07.1950, G. Viktorov, 1$ (ZMUM); Zaporozhye Reg., Berdyansk env. [46.8°N, 36.8°E], 08.1954, 2$ (zMUM); Turkmenistan, Ahal Reg., Kopet-Dag, Koinekesir [38.22°N, 56.92°E], 25.06.1923, E. Smirnov, 1$ (ZMUM).
Distribution. Europe and South-West Asia. It is uncommon in Western Europe from where it has been recorded from the southern and central parts. It is more common in Eastern Europe, recorded from Moldova, Crimea, the Caucasus and the Volga region, along the Volga River it is recorded in the north up to 54°N. It is also not rare in South-West Asia: Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Israel, S-W Turkmenistan. It seems that C. catenata prefers rather arid regions.
Coremacera fabricii Rozkosny, 1981 Figs 3, 7, 11, 12
Coremacera cincta Fabricius, 1794 (preocc.)
Material: Russia: Moscow Reg.: Mos-kovsky env., Meshkovo, 55.59°N, 37.33°E, 11-30.07.2017, K. Tomkovich, 3$, 1$; Podolsk env., Vesennyaya, 55.39°N, 37.53°E, 29.05.2018, K. Tomkovich, 1$; Golitsi-no [55.6°N, 37.0°E] env., 7-21.06.1980, A. Shatalkin, 2$, 2$; Chashniko-vo (56.04°N, 37.18°E) env., VI. 1973, (A. Shatalkin), 1$; Dmitrov distr., Kostino env. [56.316°N, 37.764°E], N. Vikhrev: 9-10.06.2009, 2$, 2$; 1.07.2009, 1$; 2.06.2010, 3$ (all ZMUM); Smolensk Reg.,
Fig. 3. C. fabricii, male, general view; variability of wings; surstyli ventral and lateral Рис. 3. C. fabricii, самец, общий вид; вариабельность окраски крыльев; сурстили самца снизу и сбоку
Smolenskoye Poozerye National Park [55.5°N, 31.4°E]: 5-8.06.1992, R. Zlobin, 2$; 13.06.1993, R. Zlobin (ZIN).
Distribution. Central Europe, rather uncommon species. To the north till Haapsalu, Estonia, 59°N (Elberg 1968), to the east till Moscow region. In Central European Russia mostly collected in June. Coremacera marginata marginata Fabri-cius, 1775
Figs 4, 6
Coremacera tristis Harris, 1780 Coremacera limbata Gmelin, 1790 Coremacera crinicornis Fallen, 1820 Coremacera obscuripennis Loew, 1845 syn. nov. Coremacera confluens Rondani, 1868 syn. nov.
Material: Austria, Salzburg, Hallein [47.7°N, 13.1°E], 20-24.07.2007, G. Pen-nards, 1$, 1? (ZMUM); Belarus: Gomel Reg., Mozyr env., 52.04°N, 29.32°E, 2931.07.2019, N. Vikhrev, 2?; Vitebsk Reg.: Orsha env., 54.555°N 30.630°E, 28.07.2019, N. Vikhrev, 1$ (all ZMUM); France: Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur region, Greo-lieres [43.795°N, 6.943°E], 24.08.1979, Heit-mans, 1$; Normandy, Seine Maritime foret de Brotonne [49.51°N, 0.79°E], 12.08.2009,
G. Pennards, 1$ (ZMUM); Germany, Berlin, Wernsdorfer See [52.37°N, 13.66°E], K. Gorodkov, 21.06.1981, 3$ (ZIN). Greece, Kerkini, 41.21°N, 23.10°E, 1-5.06.2007, G. Ramel, 1$ (ZMUM); Iran, Razavi Kho-rasan province, Mesched [36.3°N, 59.5°E], 15.09.1925, Jenikin, 1$ (ZIN, paratype of Coremacera marginata pontica Elberg, 1968. This is the only known to me intermediate specimen, although it is more C. m. marginata than C. m. pontica); Italy, Positano [40.63°N, 14.48°E], 2-3.09.1925, El. Miram, 2$ (ZIN); Latvia, Tervete [56.48°N, 23.42°E], 7.07.1978, S. Kuznetsov, 1$, 2$ (ZIN); Moldova: Bendery [46.8°N, 29.5°E], 27.07.1953, A. Zhelokhovtsev, 1$; Kishinev env., 21.06.1970, R. Kamen-skaya, 1$ (both ZMUM); Kishinev [47°N, 29°E], 5.06.1981, V. Korenev, 1$, 1$ (ZIN); Netherlands: Brabant, Oudland [51.55°N, 5.01°E], 2.06.2007, G. Pennards, 1$; Meers-sen [50.88°N, 5.75°E], 13.07.2009, G. Pen-nards, 1$ (ZMUM); Russia: Belgorod Reg., Les na Vorksle Nat. Res. [50.60°N, 35.98°E], 15.07.1976, Afanasieva, 1$ (ZIN); Kursk Reg.: Central Black Earth Nat. Res., oak forest [51.56°N, 36.08°E]: 24.06.1936, D. Dovnar,
Fig. 4. C. m. marginata, general view, dorsal (photo: Frank Koehler); surstyli ventral and lateral Рис. 4. C. m. marginata, общий вид сверху (фото: Frank Koehler); сурстили самца снизу и сбоку
18.06.2008, 1?; 20.07.2007, A. Ozerov, 1$; 6.09.2007, N. Vikhrev, 1?; A. Shatalkin, 1$; Oboyan env., 51.56°N, 36.08°E, 21.07.2007, A. Ozerov, 1$; Lipetsk Reg., railway station 265th km [52.62°N, 39.47°E], K. Tomkovich, 22.08.1999, 1$ (ZMUM); Mordovia Reg.: Pushta vill. env., 54.71°N, 43.22°E: 18.07.2020, K. Tomkovich, 1?; 1-5.09. 2020, N. Vikhrev, 1$; Steklyannyi forestry, 54.894°N, 43.601°E, 5-7.07.2020, G. Semishin, 1$, 1? (ZMUM). Moscow Reg.: Podolsk env., Vesennyaya, 55.39°N, 37.53°E, 2-5.08.2012, K. Tomkovich, 2$, 1?; Moskovsky env., Meshkovo,
55.59°N, 37.33°E, 26-30.07.2017, K. Tomkovich, 1$; Naro-Fominsk [55.4°N, 36.7°E] env., 26.06.2007, D. Gavryushin, 1?; Penza Reg., Nizhny_Lomov env. [53.5°N, 43.8°E], 23.06.1964, Chekanovsky, 1? (ZIN); Ryazan Reg., Kasimov env., Zelenoe, 54.969°N, 41.327°E, N. Vikhrev, 21-26.07.2013, 1? (ZMUM); Saint Petersburg Reg., Luga distr., Yaschera [59.15°N, 29.91°E], A. Stackelberg, 29.06.1955, 1$; 20.08.1962, 1$ (all ZIN); Smolensk Reg., Smolenskoye Poozerye National Park [55.5°N, 31.4°E]: 8-20.06.1992, R. Zlobin, 1$, 3?; 22.07-12.08.1991,
Fig. 5. C. ussuriensis, general view of the male, the female and male surstyli Рис. 5. C. ussuriensis, общий вид самца и самки; сурстили самца_
Q Ы ^ 8
Figs 6-9. Sternite 6 of a male of Coremacera: 6 — marginata; 7 — fabricii; 8 — catenata; 9 — ussuriensis Рис. 6-9. Стернит 6 самцов Coremacera: 6 — marginata; 7 — fabricii; 8 — catenata; 9 — ussuriensis
R. Zlobin, 4$, 4$ (ZIN); Voronezh Reg., Liski env., Divnogorye [50.97°N, 39.32°E], 4-22.07.1994, R. Zlobin, 2$, 1$ (ZIN); Serbia, Crni Vrh, 43.407°N, 22.587°E, 800 m, 1-7.07.2015, N. Vikhrev, 1$, 1$; A. Ozerov and M. Krivosheina, 1$, 1$; UK, Hartslock [51.5°N, 1.12°W], 6-7.07.1999, C. Raper, 3$; Ukraine: Kropivnytsky Reg., Elizavet-grad [Kropivnytsky, 48.5°N, 32.3°E], 5.07, E. Yatsentkovsky, 1$ (ZIN); Zakarpatsky Reg.: 15 km S of Rakhiv [47.92°N, 24.17°E], 14.07.1964, L. Zimina, 2$; 25 km N of Rakhiv [48.26°N, 24.35°E], 5.08.1964, L. Zimina, 2$ (both ZMUM); Kiev Reg., Kiev, 10.08.1902, Yu. Vagner, 1$; Odessa Reg., Odessa [46.5°N, 30.7°E], 7.08.1978, Yu. Verves, 1$; Poltava Reg., Hadiach [50.37°N, 33.98°E], Knipov-ich, 1$ (all ZIN).
Distribution. W Palaearctic. From ~60°N to ~40°N in W Europe and 46°N in E Europe. I have only seen in ZMUM and ZIN specimens collected west of the Volga River. Elberg (1968) listed specimens collected in Kazan (i.e. on the eastern bank of Volga) and from the western Urals, Perm region, Kun-gur, K. Borisova [Uchleskhoz, Preduralie NP, presently abolished, 57.36°N, 57.14°E]. However, these specimens were not found in ZIN where they should be stored. Anyway, C. m. marginata is unknown in Siberia, but appears to be present in South-West Asia: Turkey, Bolu [40.7°N, 31.6°E] and Hak-kari [37.5°N, 43.7°E] (as C. obscuripennis) (Leclercq & Schacht 1986) and Iran, Me-sched [36.3°N, 59.5°E] (as C. m. pontica) (Elberg 1968; Vikhrev et al. 2023). Recently
Fig. 10. C. halensis, male, general view Рис. 10. C. halensis, самец, общий вид
Figs 11-12. C. fabriciifrom Wernigerode, 8.05.2009: 11 — 12 — S (photo: Frank Marquard) Рис. 11-12. C. fabricii из Wernigerode, 8.05.2009: 11 — 12 — S (фото: Frank Marquard)
Khaghaninia et al. (2018) reported C. mar-ginata from East Azerbaijan province of Iran, unfortunately without indication which subspecies was found.
Coremacera marginatapontica Elberg, 1968
Material: Armenia, Tsaghkadzor [40.53°N, 44.73°E, 1900 m], 15.07.1955, L. Zimina, 1$; Azerbaijan, Nakhchivan Reg., Orduban [38.9°N, 46.0°E, 800 m], 31.07.1970, V. Rikhter, (ZIN); Georgia, Borjomi [41.84°N, 43.39°E, 900 m], 1867, Brandt, 2$, 1$ (ZIN); Russia: Chechen Reg., Vedeno [42.96°N, 46.10°E, 750 m], 5.06.1972, V. Rikhter, 2$, 1$ (ZIN); Crimea Reg.: Alushta env., Crimean Nature Reserve [« 44.7°N, 34.3°E], 9.08.1955, B. Rodendorf, 1$, 1$; 12.07.1956, B. Rodendorf, 1$, 3$; Pionerskoe [44.88°N, 34.19°E]: 4-9.07.1976, L. Zimina, 2$, 1$; 15.06.1975, A. Zhelokhovtsev, 1$; Kara-Dag [44.93°N, 35.23°E], 22.06.1982,
L. Zimina, 1?; Morskoe [44.83°N, 34.82°E], 13.08.2007, K. Tomkovich, 1$ (all ZMUM); Alma R. [« 44.84°N, 33.63°E], 10.08.1899, Bashenov, 5$, 1? (ZIN); Dagestan Reg., 15 km SW of Sergokala [« 42.33°N, 47.55°E], 15.07.1983, E. Narchuk, 15$, 7? (ZIN); Kabardino-Balkaria Reg., Nalchik [43.5°N, 43.7°E], 12.07.1915, Golovleva & Kirichenko, 1? (ZIN); Krasnodar Reg.: Goryachy Kly-uch [44.65°N, 39.15°E], 11.06.1997, K. Tomkovich, 1?; Novorossiysk env., S Ozereevka [44.68°N, 37.63°E], 16.06.2001, K. Tomkovich, 1$; Dakhovskaya env., valley of Belaya R., 44.199°N, 40.170°E, 465 m, 17-23.06.2009, K. Tomkovich, 1?; 18-31.08.2009, K. Tomkovich, 2$; (ZMUM); Osetia-Alania Reg.: Suk-hotskoe [43.68°N, 44.44°E], 2.08.1988, A. Oz-erov, 1?; Tsey [42.79°N, 43.91°E, 1800 m], 16.09.1989, A. Shatalkin, 1$; Stavropol Reg., Shpakovskoye [= Mikhaylovsk, 45.1°N, 42.0°E],
Figs 13-14. Undescribed females of Coremacera from the Far East: 13 — spl; 14 — sp2 Рис. 13-14. Неописанные самки Coremacera с Дальнего Востока: 13 — spl; 14 — sp2
Fig. 15. Euthycera (Coremacera) turkestanica, male holotype, general view Рис. 15. Euthycera (Coremacera) turkestanica, голотип, самец, общий вид
13.06.1988, S. Belokobylsky, 1? (ZIN); Essen-tuki env. [44.0°N, 42.9°E], no date, E. Shirokova, 2$ ZMUM); Volgograd reg., Sarepta [48.52°N, 44.51°E], T. Bekker, 1868, 1$, 2? (ZIN).
Distribution. Crimea and Caucasus, the latter also includes the lowlands adjacent to the north, such as the Stavropol and Volgograd regions. It is noteworthy that for the Black Sea territories west of Crimea (i.e. Odessa region and Moldova) only C. m. marginata was collected. Similar situation is in the Transcaucasian region: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Dagestan — only C. m. pontica while in Turkey — only C. m. marginata. Thus, as far as we presently know C. m. pontica and C. m. mar-ginata are nowhere sympatric, as it should be for subspecies of the same species by definition.
Coremacera turkestanica Elberg, 1968 is transferred to another genus, see Euthycera turkestanica in Chapter II.
Coremacera ussuriensis Elberg, 1968 Figs 5, 9
Type locality: Russia, Primorsky region, Lebehe [presently Tikhovodnoe, 44.44°N, 132.57°E].
Material: Russia: Jewish Reg., Listvyan-ka R. («48.10°N, 132.76°E), 12.08.2003, I. Mel-nik, 1$ (ZMUM); Primorsky Reg., 20 km S of Spassk-Dalny, Evseevka [44.4°N, 132.9°E], 9.07.1993, S. Belokobylsky, 1$ (ZIN); 30 km NW of Arseniev [44.29°N, 132.95°E], on light, 31.08.1999, Mironov, 1$ (ZIN); Kamenushka vill. [43.62°N, 132.23°E]: 14.07-1.08.1983,
Figs 16-17. Postpedicel: 16 — E. turkestanica with fine and short apical setulae; 17 — C. catenata with longer and stronger apical setulae typical for Coremacera
Рис. 16-17. Postpedicel: 16 — Е. Ьитк^Ьатса со слабыми и короткими апикальными волосками; 17 — С. саЬепаЬа с типичными для Согетасега более длинными и сильными щетинками_
Figs 18-20. E. turkestanica (18, 19), the holotype: 18 — postabdomen with surstyli, ventral and lateral; 19 — sternite 6; 20 — E. hrabei, sternite 6
Рис. 18-20. E. turkestanica (18, 19), голотип: 18 — постабдомен и сурстили, снизу и сбоку; 19 — стернит 6; 20 — E. hrabei, стернит 6
A. Shatalkin, 5$, 3$; 6-20.08.1983, A. Oz-erov, 2$, 2$; 15.07-13.08.1984, A. Shatalkin, 2$, 4$; 13-15.08.1987, A. Shatalkin, 3$;
19-23.08.1989, S. Churkin, 2$, 1$ (ZMUM);
Kedrovaya Pad' Nat. Res., [43.1°N, 131.4°E]: 23.07.1984, A. Shatalkin, 2$ (ZMUM).
Distribution. So far known only from the
Russian Far East.
Remarks. The holotype was not found in ZIN collection where it should be stored. Presumably it is still in Tartu, Estonia, where Elberg worked.
Discussion
Male genitalia. For diagnostic by the male genitalia, authors proposed to use the sur-styli (as gonostyli in Rozkosny (1987) or Vala (1989)), sternite 6, sternite 5 and the structure of inner copulatory organ.
(1) The shape of the surstyli should be species specific because they are responsible for the male to female contact during copulation. However, the visible shape of surstyli strongly depends on the angle of view. I have tried to illustrate both ventral and lateral projections, they are more or less useful depending on species.
(2) Sternite 6. Rozkosny (1987) and Vala (1989) named it so. Knutson (1987: fig. 18): named the same sclerite (in Tetanocera ple-beja) as syntergosternite 6+7. Later Rozkosny & Knutson (2006) used the term sternite 6 for this sclerite in Euthycera; and I follow the last publication. Sternite 6 is strongly sclerotized, its wide part is located on the ventral side of the abdomen, its narrow part encircles the
right lateral and dorsal sides of the abdomen. The narrow part of sternite 6 is often partially breaks off during dissection, but only the thickened ventral part is important for diagnostic purpose. Isolated sternites 6 have the shape of a hoop, so they lie flat on the slide and we look at them at about the same right angle. As follows from Figs 6-9, the shape of sternite 6 works as clear identity card of species of Coremacera.
(3) Sternite 5. I doubt that the structure of this small, soft and film-like sclerite has a diagnostic value. I don't use it for the Co-remacera genus.
(4) Comparing isolated internal copulatory organs with drawings and annotations in the literature, I have never been able to come to reliable conclusions. The shape of this organ is very intricate, the observed two-dimensional projection critically depends on the angle of view. It would make sense to return to the discussion if someone shows that there are real differences, that these are not individual variability, and suggests a reproducible way to illustrate them.
So far, the shape of sternite 6 as a main character and the shape of surstyli as additional one are enough for identification of all species which I regard as valid ones.
Synonymy. As follows from the key below, C. m. pontica reliably differs from C. m. mar-ginata only by the colour of the legs, which according to Vikhrev (2023: 840) is a weak diagnostic character. Elberg (1968) found that the genitalia of both taxa are the same, and proposed a taxonomic level of subspecies for
C. m. pontica. So far, everyone (including me) agrees with Elberg's decision. The only examined specimen with intermediate colour of legs is from the very south-eastern corner of the natural range of C. marginata, from Iran, [Razavi Khorasan province], Mesched [36.3°N, 59.5°E], 15.09.1925, Jenikin, 1$ (ZIN, indicated by Elberg (1968) as paratype of Coremacera marginata pontica).
C. marginata pontica is a good starting point to discuss the correct approach to other marginata-like species of Coremacera: C. ob-scuripennis and C. confluens. The differences between these species can be summarized as below.
a. Rozkosny (1987), Vala (1989) and Ri-vosecchi (1992) pointed out the differences of the wing pattern: C. marginata has medium large rounded pale spots, C. confluens has the larger and mostly not rounded pale spots, C. obscuripennis has the darkest wings. All these authors also provided photos of the wings: Rozkosny (1987: figs 423, 424); Vala (1989: planche 7: o, p); Rivosecchi (1992: Tav. XI: a, b, c). Indeed, the wing pattern may be darker, paler or medium dark. It is a widely and gradually variable character, but each author drew a line between these states according to his own taste. In ZMUM and ZIN collections there are specimens with different wing pattern all identified as C. margin-ata by J. Verbeke, K. Elberg and R. Rozkosny. More or less the same variability is present in specimens of isolated C. marginata pontica, should we describe C. obscuripennis/conflu-ens pontica? I am convinced that the only reasonable solution is to regard such differences of the wing pattern as intraspecific variability of C. marginata.
b. Loew (1845) characterized C. ob-scuripennis as having large dark spots around the bases of the mesonotal setulae. The same variability as above (a), and the same conclusion.
c. Loew (1845) and Rozkosny (1987) characterised C. obscuripennis as having "face with longitudinal median brown stripe". Sueyoshi (2001) and Vikhrev (2023) discussed taxonom-ic value of this character in Far Eastern Limnia.
We came to a conclusion that most probably it is intraspecific variability, either inherited or induced by external conditions. The face of C. marginata has a distinct sexual difference: in most males the face is densely dusted by yellowish-white microtrichia, while in females it is partly or entirely (most of females) bare. The bare area in the middle of the face forms a more or less distinct dark(er) median line. I don't regard this line as diagnostic character.
d. None of Sciomyzidae experts (Rozkosny, Vala, Rivosecchi) have indicated any comprehensible differences of the above considered taxa in the structure in the male genitalia.
e. C. m. marginata and C. m. pontica are geographically isolated throughout their natural ranges. Such distribution permits us to be sure that they are at least good subspecies. In contrast with it, C. marginata, C. obscuripennis and C. confluens were reported from almost the same areas. This makes it impossible to consider them as subspecies and raises additional doubts that they are valid species.
Thus, the species considered above have no comprehensible diagnosis, they only "produce unnecessary entities". I propose that Coremacera marginata Fabricius, 1775 = C. obscuripennis Loew, 1845 syn. nov. = C. confluens Rondani, 1868, syn. nov.
Key for Palaearctic Coremacera
1. Unmistakable species due to characteristic wing pattern with three brown transverse stripes in apical half as in Fig. 1. (The larger Coremacera, body length 8-9 mm, wing 7-7.5 mm. Postpedicel of short-triangular shape. Orbital spots small. Scutum with small dark spots around bases of setulae and with 3 pairs of elongated brown spots along dc rows; dc 0+2, ac 0+1. Legs pale brown. Male f3 with rows of av and pv in apical half, female f3 with 3 strong ventral setae around middle. Uncommon species known from S Europe and S-W Asia.)____amoena Loew
— Wing without three brown transverse stripes.................................2
2. Frontal spots deep black and remarkably large, about 1.5 times longer than distance between frontal setae, both frontal setae inserted from the black area. Disc of scu-
tum with dark spots around bases of setulae. Postpedicel of trapezoid shape, elongate ...................................3
— Dark frontal spots small, much smaller than distance between frontal setae, only anterior frontal seta inserted from the dark area. Disc of scutum without dark spots around setulae. Postpedicel of equilateral triangle shape, short (Fig. 17)...........5
3. Prescutellar ac absent. Costal margin of wing with large subquadrate pale spots; the rest of wing with large subquadrate or sub-pentagonal pale spots (Fig. 3). Small, body size 5-5.5 mm Dark spots around scutal setulae small. Central Europe. (Male with femora and tibiae yellow, female with darkened tibiae.). sternite 6 at ventral part with one finger-like thickening (Fig. 7); surstyli gradually narrowed from base to apex (Fig. 3)..........fabricii Rozkosny
— Prescutellar ac present. Costal margin ofwing unicolour brownish; the rest of wing with small numerous rounded pale spots (Fig. 4). Large, body size 7-8 mm, rarely 6 mm. Dark spots around scutal setulae very distinct (Fig 4). sternite 6 at ventral part with three hill-shaped thickenings (Fig. 6); surstyli wide in basal 3/4 and abruptly narrowed at apex (Fig. 4).............4 marginata Fabricius
4. At least femora brown. W Europe and temperate part of E Europe, also Turkey .................m. marginata Fabricius
— Femora and tibiae pure yellow. Caucasus with adjacent lowlands and Crimea ...........................pontica Elberg
5. Face with black spot in middle. dc 0+2; ac 0+1. Scutum yellow, with pair of grey subme-dian vittae (less distinct in male, distinct in female as in Fig. 2) and brown spots (in male 1 pair, in female 2-3 pairs). Wing: costal margin (= cell R2+3) dark with 3-5 subquadrate pale spots; the rest of wing with a reticulate pattern, but area along vein R4+5 pale-hyaline. sternite 6 at ventral part with ear-like thickening at apex and two more partly fused trapezoid thickenings (Fig. 8); surstyli gradually narrowed from base to apex (Fig. 2). $: f3 without strong ventral setae. Europe and S-W Asia.................catenata Loew
— Face without black spot. dc 0+1; ac absent. Scutum brownish with indistinct narrow vittae. Wing with costal margin (cell R2+3) mostly pale-hyaline; only in apical 1/3 to 1/4 with 2-3 small grey spots ($, Fig. 5) or in apical 1/2 with 4-5 small dark spots (?, Fig. 5). $: sternite 6 at ventral part evenly thickened and with pointed apex (Fig. 9); surstyli wider, trapezoid shape (Fig. 5). ? : f3 in apical half with strong av andpv setae. Far East..............ussuriensis Elberg
Chapter II. Taxa of Coremacera which require clarification Coremacera halensis Loew, 1847 Fig. 10
Material: France, Provence-Alpes-Cote d'Azur region, Greolieres [43.795°N, 6.943°E], 24.08.1979, Heitmans, 1$ (ZMUM). Discussion. Both Rozkosny (1987: 45-47)
and Vala (1989: 147-154) characterized C. ha-lensis as species similar to C. fabricii. According to the authors these species differ as follows:
— Anterior wing margin mainly dark brown, at most with 3-5 small pale spots. Mesonotum densely grey dusted; with large and distinct dark spots around bases of setulae (as in C. marginata) and with some larger brown spots in addition. Postpedicel of equilateral triangle shape, shorter. Femora bicolour, with dark bases...........halensis Loew.
— Anterior wing margin mainly pale, with more numerous pale spots. Mesonotum thinly dusted, brownish; with small dark spots around bases of setulae and with larger brown spots absent or indistinct. Postpedicel of trapezoid shape, elongated.
Femora unicolour.....fabricii Rozkosny.
I have a single male from France which
entirely fits C. halensis criteria (Fig. 10). All 20 specimens from Central European Russia listed here entirely fit C. fabricii criteria. This is an argument for the validity of C. halensis. However, there are serious arguments against it as well. (1) Genitalia of the male identified as C. halensis was examined and found the same as in C. fabricii. (2) To fill the lack of Western European material I examined images of C. fabricii at https://diptera.info/
photogallery.php site. I found interesting images from Germany, Wernigerode [51.8°N, 10.8°E], 8.05.2009 (Figs 11, 12). Both specimens were photographed at the same place and time, they look as typical C. fabricii except for the wing pattern. A female has the wings of C. halensis, while male has those of C. fabricii. Thus, the wing pattern can't be used as reliable diagnostic character.
Comparing this case with C. m. pontica, I believe that most probably there are two subspecies: C. halensis halensis in the very west of Europe and C. halensis fabricii in the rest of the territory, with a contact zone in Germany. More European material is required for final conclusion.
Coremacera sp1 "atypical ussuriensis" Fig. 13
Material: Russia, Primorsky Reg., Kedro-vaya Pad' Nat. Res., [43.1°N, 131.4°E]: 2829.07.2013, I. Gomyranov, 2$ (ZMUM).
Remarks. These females differ from normal specimens of C. ussuriensis as follows: mesonotum densely grey dusted, with distinct dark spots around bases of setulae and with some larger brown spots in addition; postpedicel of trapezoid shape, elongated and more densely setulose at apex (Fig. 13). It is worth noting that the other two females collected in the same locality and date but 30 years ago were typical C. ussuriensis. So far I interpret it as one more example of wide and somewhat irregular variability in Coremacera. More material is required.
Coremacera sp2
Fig. 14
Material: China, Beijing, 24.05.1935, Zhenzhurist [= N. N. Filippov], 1$ (ZMUM).
Descriptive notes. Female (Fig. 14). Body brown, legs yellow. Head with black spot around anterior orbital seta and large black or-bito-antennal spot, both distinct. Face without round dark median spot. Postpedicel of intermediate shape, with strong and distinct setulae at apex. Mesonotum thinly grey dusted; with brown spots around bases of setulae and with two pairs larger brown spots in addition. Wing brown, with numerous pale spots all over the surface. f3 in apical half with 2-3 pv setae.
Discussion. This female well differs from all other Coremacera, especially unusual is the wing pattern. However, considering above discussed variability in the genus, I prefer not to describe a new species by single female specimen.
Euthycera turkestanica Elberg, 1968 Figs 15, 16, 18-20
Coremacera turkestanica Elberg, 1968 Euthycera turkestanica Elberg, 1968, comb. nov.
Material: Holotype: $, Uzbekistan, Tashkent, Kaunchi [41° 1N, 69.1°E], 24.07.1925 (ZIN).
The holotype is in a good condition although right mid and hind legs absent. The male genitalia are in a vial with glycerol.
Descriptive notes. Head with small brown spots around anterior orbital seta and small indistinct orbito-antennal spot. Face with round dark median spot (Fig. 15). Postpedicel triangular, with 7-9 very fine and short setulae at apex. The comparison of these setulae with the same apical setulae in C. catenata is shown in Figs 16-17. Scutum evenly light-brown without distinct vittae. Chaetotaxy: dc 0+2, ac 0+1. Wing. Costal margin (= cell R2+3) mostly pale with 6-7 brown spots; the rest of wing with irregular reticulate pattern (Fig. 15).
Discussion. The difference between Co-remacera and Euthycera is only in the presence of setulae at the apex of the postpedicel in the former genus. To which genus belongs specimen with 7-8 weak and short setulae at apex of postpedicel, instead of 15-20 relatively strong and long setulae (compare Figs 16 and 17)? I suppose it belongs to Euthycera for the following reasons. (1) The male sternite 6 and surstyli are identical to those of E. hrabei Rozkosny, 1969, which also inhabits Central Asia (Figs 19 and 20). (2) Among 15 specimens identified as E. hrabei in ZMUM and ZIN collections there are female and male collected in Kazakhstan (Almaty, 43.218°N, 76.934°E, 18.06.2008, D. Gavryushin). The female has a typical for Euthycera bare postpedicel, while the male has the same weak and short setulae as the holotype of E. turkestanica but even more sparse: 1 on the left antenna and 3 on the right one. (3) The wing pattern of turkestanica is more similar to that of Euthycera than to any Coremacera.
So, the diagnosis of genus Coremacera should be clarified as follows:
— Postpedicel with strong (as in Fig. 17) setulae at apex....................Coremacera
— Postpedicel bare or rarely with few minute setulae (as in Fig. 16) at apex ... Euthycera Thus, Coremacera turkestanica Elberg, 1968 is Euthycera turkestanica comb. nov. and Euthycera turkestanica Elberg, 1968 = E. hrabei Rozkosny, 1969 syn. nov.
Apart from the fact that there is only one diagnostic character to differ Coremacera and Euthycera and this single character may be doubtful, there are several parallelisms between Coremacera, Euthycera and Dictya-cium. (1) C. catenata and E. stictica share facial spot and have very similar male genita-
lia. (2) C. catenata and E. flavostriata have the same wing pattern. (3) C. amoena shares with E. chaerophylli similar wing pattern and large body size. (4) Nearctic Dictyacium am-biguum (see: https://www.inaturalist.org/ob-servations/42206280) looks as C. marginata with elongated antenna and without setulae at apex of postpedicel.
I believe that molecular data will show, that Coremacera is at most a subgenus of Euthycera.
Acknowledgements
I thank Olga Ovchinnikova and Galina Su-leymanova (Saint Petersburg) for the opportunity to examine the important material in ZIN. I thank Oleg Kosterin (Novosibirsk) for critically reading the manuscript.
References
Chapman, E. G., Przhiboro, A. A., Harwood, J. D. et al. (2012) Widespread and persistent invasions of terrestrial habitats coincident with larval feeding behavior transitions during snail-killing fly evolution (Diptera: Sciomyzidae). BMC Evolutionary Biology, vol. 12, article 175. https://doi. org/10.1186/1471-2148-12-175 (In English) Elberg, K. J. (1968) Zur kenntnis der Statinia-arten aus der UdSSR (Diptera: Sciomyzidae). Beiträge Zur Entomologie = Contributions to Entomology, vol. 18, no. 5-6, pp. 663-670. https://www.doi. org/10.21248/contrib.entomol.18.5-6.663-670 (In German) Khaghaninia, S., Kazerani, F., Vala, J.-C. (2018) New data about snail-killing flies (Diptera, Sciomyzidae)
in Iran. Vestnik Zoologii, vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 21-30. (In English) Knutson, L. (1987) Chapter 84. Family Sciomyzidae. In: J. F. McAlpine, B. V. Peterson, G. E. Shewell et al. (eds.). Manual of Nearctic Diptera. Vol. 2. Ottawa: Research Branch Publ.; Agriculture Canada Publ., pp. 927-940. (In English) Leclercq, M., Schacht, W. (1986) The Sciomyzidae of Turkey (Diptera, Sciomyzidae). Zeitschrift fur
entomologie, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 57-61. (In English) Li, Z., Yang, D., Murphy, W. L. (2019) Review of genera of Sciomyzidae (Diptera: Acalyptratae) from China, with new records, synonyms, and notes on distribution. Zootaxa, vol. 4656, no. 1, pp. 71-98. https://www.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4656.L3 (In English) Loew, H. (1845) Dipterologische beitrage. Erster theil. In: F. G. Kiessling. Zu der öffentlichen prüfung der schuler der Königlichen Friedrich-Wilhelms-Gymnasium zu Posen, am 17. März 1845: Ladet alle beschützer, gönner undfreunde des schulwesens (Classic reprint series). Posen: Forgotten Books Publ., 76 p. (In German)
Murphy, W. L., Mathis, W. N., Knutson, L. V. (2018) Comprehensive taxonomic, faunistic, biological, and geographic inventory and analysis of the Sciomyzidae (Diptera: Acalyptratae) of the Delmarva region and nearby states in eastern North America. Zootaxa, vol. 4430, no. 1, 299 p. https://www. doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4430.1.1 (In English) Rivosecchi, L. (1992) Diptera Sciomyzidae. Vol. 30. Fauna d'Italia. Bologna: Calderini Publ., 270 p. (In Italian)
Rozkosny, R. (1987) A review of the Palaearctic Sciomyzidae (Diptera). Folia Facultatis Scientiarum
Naturalium Universitatis Purkynianae Brunensis. Biologia, vol. 86, 97 p. (In English) Rozkosny, R., Elberg, K. (1984) Family Sciomyzidae (Tetanoceridae). In: A. Soos, L. Papp (eds.). Catalogue of Palaearctic Diptera. Vol. 9. Micropezidae-Agromyzidae. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiado Publ., pp. 167-193. (In English) Sueyoshi, M. (2001) A revision of Japanese Sciomyzidae (Diptera), with description of three new species.
Entomological Science, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 485-506. (In English) Tothova, A., Rozkosny, R., Knutson, L. et al. (2012) A phylogenetic analysis of Sciomyzidae (Diptera) and some related genera. Cladistics, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 404-415. https://doi.org/10.1111/cla.12002 (In English)
Vala, J.-C. (1989) Diptères Sciomyzidae euro-méditerranéens. Vol. 72. Faune de France. Paris: Fédération Française de la Société de Sciences Naturelles Publ., 300 p. (In French)
Vikhrev, N. E. (2023a) Notes on the Palaearctic fauna of Limnia (Diptera, Sciomyzidae). Amurian Zoological Journal, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 284-292. https://www.doi.org/10.33910/2686-9519-2023-15-2-284-292 (in English)
Vikhrev, N. E. (2023b) Review of the Hydrotaea meteorica group (Diptera, Muscidae). Amurian Zoological Journal, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 838-846. https://www.doi.org/10.33910/2686-9519-2023-15-4-838-846 (In English)
Vikhrev, N. E., Yanbulat, M. O., Ilyina, E. V. (2023) A preliminary list of Sciomyzidae (Diptera) of Dagestan. Amurian Zoological Journal, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 854-857. https://www.doi.org/10.33910/2686-9519-2023-15-4-854-857 (In English)
For citation: Vikhrev, N. E. (2024) Review of the genus Coremacera (Diptera, Sciomyzidae). Amurian Zoological Journal, vol. XVI, no. 3, pp. 579-593. https://www.doi.org/10.33910/2686-9519-2024-16-3-579-593
Received 20 April 2024; reviewed 1 May 2024; accepted 16 May 2024.
Для цитирования: Вихрев, Н. Е. (2024) Обзор рода Coremacera (Diptera, Sciomyzidae). Амурский зоологический журнал, т. XVI, № 3, с. 579-593. https://www.doi.org/10.33910/2686-9519-2024-16-3-579-593 Получена 20 апреля 2024; прошла рецензирование 1 мая 2024; принята 16 мая 2024.
