Antocha (Antocha) javanensis Alexander, 1915
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4048.4.4 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:46051D75-807F-4192-8CE7-BAB44BDF56AC |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6101559 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03D0FC39-F742-FFBF-FF18-FB34FBF62FBE |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Antocha (Antocha) javanensis Alexander, 1915 |
status |
|
Antocha (Antocha) javanensis Alexander, 1915 View in CoL
Antocha (Antocha) javanensis Alexander, 1915:171 View in CoL ; Alexander, 1920: 252.
Material examined. JAVA: Holotype: Pelaboean, Ratoe, Java, October 19, 1909, Bryant and Palmer, 1 ♀ (body on pin, wing on slide); metatype: W. Java, Soekaboemi, [altitude] 1800 feet, August 8, 1933, M. E. Walsh, No 742, 1 ♂ (slide-mounted). Non-type specimens identified by C. Alexander: W. Java, Soekaboemi, [altitude] 1800 feet, July 20, 1933, M. E. Walsh, 1 ♀; W. Java, Soekaboemi, [altitude] 1800 feet, August 8, 1933, M. E. Walsh, sex unclear, abdomen missing, probably same specimen, which parts are slide-mounted and labelled as metatype.
Remarks. Antocha javanensis was described from single female from Java ( Alexander 1915). Later, in 1917, few males of Antocha were collected by T. Shiraki at Shishito (¤ªªCae鄉獅子頭), Formosa ( Taiwan). Alexander identified them as A. javanensis and chose one male as allotype for A. javanensis ( Alexander 1920) . Edwards (1916) mentioned one female of Antocha sp. from Horisha (¤ªªªAE) ( Taiwan) and later Alexander (1920) also suggested that female specimen to be A. javanensis . We believe Alexander probably made conclusion based on distribution record without actually examining the specimen.
Since A. javanensis was based on a single female specimen, we believe that in 1920 when Alexander compared the specimens collected by T. Shiraki from Taiwan in 1917, his conclusion that those specimens were A. javanesis was solely based on the comparison of female specimens, thus it presented a very unstable status for the male allotype of A. javanesis . This has come to be evident after we have examined all the specimens that were collected by Shiraki from Taiwan later determined as A. javanensis by Alexander, and that all the males actually belong to A. bifida . Therefore, the male allotype of A. javanensis is actually male of A. bifida . None of the male Antocha specimens collected in Taiwan since could be identified as A. javanensis . We do not have more female A. javanesis specimens to conduct through comparison of these two species, but the lack of stigma in A. bifida compared to distinct stigma in A. javanesis would be sufficiently enough to separate these two species apart. We have consequently concluded that A. javanensis should be removed from the list of Taiwanese crane flies. Accordingly, male of A. javanensis remains undiscovered.
The diverse crane fly fauna of Taiwan, its geographical distribution of many species, and its relationships to that of other regions is of great interest but inadequately documented, and few recent surveys have been conducted. These plus misidentification of existing species, and only a limited number of specimens are available for examination have all contributed to the complexity in achieving a comprehensive understanding of the origins of the local fauna. The current study is the forth contribution of a faunistic research project dealing with the Tipuloidea of the island of Taiwan. The results of this study will be used to test the hypothesis concerning the origin and history of the various Taiwanese crane fly lineages.
The fact that Antocha (Antocha) is the only subgenus of Antocha that were recorded in Taiwan, a tentative hypothese may be offered, that Taiwanese Antocha shared characteristics with the northern elements of this genus, and its components have close affinity with the fauna in China, Japan, Korea and the Philippines, based on the currently known distribution. Although species delimitation in this study was primarily based on male genitalia structures, the mtDNA sequence (CO1) data have been processed for several specimens. These data were not utilized for the current study due to insufficient number of taxa and specimens needed for comparison purpose. More fresh specimens from the neighboring regions are needed to expand the testing pool in order to combine morphological and molecular data in order to achieve further accurate conclusion.
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |
Antocha (Antocha) javanensis Alexander, 1915
Podenas, Sigitas & Young, Chen W. 2015 |
Antocha (Antocha) javanensis
Alexander 1920: 252 |
Alexander 1915: 171 |