Aphaniosoma Becker, 1903

Ebejer, Martin J., 2023, The genus Aphaniosoma Becker, 1903 (Diptera: Chyromyidae) in the Eastern Mediterranean and Middle East, with descriptions of new species, European Journal of Taxonomy 872, pp. 1-161 : 6-13

Key to species of Aphaniosoma Becker, 1903 for Easter Mediterranean and Middle East

1. Scutum with well-developed presutural dorsocentral setae (not much shorter than hindmost seta); number of strong dorsocentral setae not more than 5, usually 1+3 or 2+3; prescutellar acrostichal setae usually present and almost always distinctly larger than other acrostichals ............................ 2

– Scutum without well-developed presutural dorsocentral setae, these always very much shorter than hindmost seta; acrostichal setae rarely extend as far back as hindmost dorsocentral or posterior to it ......................................................................................................................................................... 14

2. No presutural intra-alar seta or setula present and usually 1+3 dorsocentral setae present ............. 3

– A long or short presutural intra-alar seta and usually 2+3 dorsocentral setae .................................. 5

3. Presutural dorsocentral seta as long as distance between its base and that of the seta on the opposite side; male tarsomeres yellow and tergite 5 2–3 × as long as tergite 4 ( Fig. 77B–C ); male hind trochanter without any special development; female 5 th tarsomere black and apical abdominal tergites with long, dense setulae ............................................................... A. setigerum Collin, 1949

– Presutural dorsocentral seta about as long as ⅔ distance between its base and that of the seta on the opposite side; 5 th tarsomeres black in both sexes; male 5 th tergite narrow at middle dorsally, and laterally about 1.5–2.0 × as long as 4 th tergite; posterior female abdominal segments not exceptionally long setose ........................................................................................................................................ 4

4. Male hind trochanter with short narrow projection ( Fig. 5A ); female tarsomeres 3–4 brown ........... .......................................................................................................................... A. aegyptium sp. nov.

– Male without special development on hind trochanter ( Fig.84A ); female tarsomeres 3 and 4 yellow ............................................................................................................... A. verecundum Ebejer, 1998

5. Males ................................................................................................................................................. 6

– Females ........................................................................................................................................... 12

6. Hind trochanter normal, without distinctive projection .................................................................... 7

– Hind trochanter with distinctive projection (sometimes difficult to see) ( Figs 17B , 40B , 72D ) ........ ........................................................................................................................................................... 8

7. Dorsally at middle, tergite 6 twice as long as tergite 5 ( Fig. 26B ); ventro-lateral margin of tergite 5 with minute black denticles ( Fig. 25B–C ); cerci of normal shape; 4 th and 5 th tarsomeres yellow ...... ..................................................................................................................... A. denticulosum sp. nov.

– Tergite 6 not longer than tergite 5; tergite 5 without denticles on ventro-lateral margin; cerci markedly elongated ( Fig. 62B ); 4 th –5 th tarsomeres black ( Fig 62A ) ................................ A. miricercus sp. nov.

8. Hind trochanter with narrow projection shorter than diameter of femur and hind femur without tubercle or process ( Fig. 40B ); tergites 4–5 more or less equal in length ........................................ 9

– Hind trochanter with longer or different shaped projection and hind femur with tubercle or process at extreme base ( Figs 17B , 72D ); male tergite 5 various ................................................................ 10

9. Hind trochanter with conspicuous but narrow projection slightly curved at tip, apex sometimes slightly darkened; all tarsomeres yellow ( Ebejer 2021a: 6, fig. 11) .... A. hackmani Lyneborg, 1973

– Hind trochanter with short and inconspicuous projection ( Fig. 40B ); at least 5 th tarsomeres of all legs black .............................................................................................................. A. harteni Ebejer, 1996

10. Hind trochanter with long narrow, truncate projection; femur with broad quadrate flange at extreme base ( Fig. 72D ); 5 th tarsomeres black .............................................................. A. praeditum sp. nov.

– Hind trochanter of distinctly different shape; base of femur with small tubercle; 5 th tarsomeres various ..............................................................................................................................................11

11. Hind trochanter with broad semilunate crest without marginal denticles ( Fig. 17B ); 5 th tarsomeres of all legs yellow .................................................................................................... A. cristatum sp. nov.

– Hind trochanter with very large spatulate projection about half as long as femur and on all around postero-medial margin with numerous minute black denticles ( Ebejer 2021a: 9, fig.14); 5 th tarsomeres of all legs black ........................................................................................... A. pteropus Ebejer, 2021

12. Tarsomeres of all legs yellow ..................................................................... A. denticulosum sp. nov. A. hackmani Lyneborg, 1973 ( A. cristatum sp. nov., unknown but probably keys out here)

– At least 5 th tarsomere of all legs black............................................................................................. 13

13. Tarsomeres 4 and 5 of all legs black ................................................................ A. miricercus sp. nov.

– Only tarsomere 5 of all legs black; occasionally the 4 th a little brownish .... A. harteni Ebejer, 1996 A. praeditum sp. nov...................................................................................................................... A. pteropus Ebejer, 2021

14. Scutum shiny black with minimal fine pollinosity and contrasting with cream-white scutellum, sometimes with a few scattered setulae between the acrostichal and the dorsocentral rows of setae ( Fig. 53B ) ............................................................................................................. A. lucidum sp. nov.

– Scutum always significantly microtomentose, if black, then not particularly shining and scutellum never cream-white, even in pale yellow species; acrostichals always in two rows ........................ 15

15. Gena prognathous; mouthparts elongated with geniculate labellum ( Fig. 51B ) ................................ ........................................................................................................................ A. longilingua sp. nov.

– Gena not prognathous; mouthparts short and labellum not geniculate ( Fig. 82A ) ......................... 16

16. Species predominantly yellow coloured with or without brownish or deeper yellow scutal vittae; scutellum always yellow and of the same tint as the scutum; occiput and pleura mainly or entirely yellow ( Figs 57 , 85B ) ..................................................................................................................... 17

– Species predominantly dark grey or brown coloured ( Fig. 12B ) or at least appearing variegated ( Fig. 22B ); scutal vittae when present usually black or grey, though often appearing paler because of microtomentum and often partly confluent anteriorly; occiput and pleura extensively darkened ...... ......................................................................................................................................................... 27

17. Smaller (0.7–1.2 mm) pale yellow species with mostly yellow tergites; 3–5 short and weak fronto-orbital setae; 2+5 dorsocentral setae or less ................................................................................... 18

– Larger (1.0– 1.8 mm) orange yellow to greyish yellow species with abdominal tergites mostly brown; 2 strong posterior fronto-orbital setae with 2–3 short setulae anterior to them; 3+8 dorsocentral setae (at least 2+7) ................................................................................................................................... 25

18. Mediotergite black or dark brown; scutum sometimes with dark vittae; some abdominal tergites with brown bands .................................................................................................................................... 19

– Mediotergite yellow, if appearing dark due to post-mortem change, then scutal vittae at most pale brown, often indistinct, and abdomen with mostly yellow tergites ................................................ 22

19. Head distinctly higher than long; frons with pair of distinctly longer setae at middle in front of anterior ocellus; viewed from the side, at middle, height of gena about the same as eye height; scutum with dark grey vittae; brown bands on abdominal tergites much reduced, never reaching hind margin or sides of tergites .......................................................................... A. egregium Ebejer, 1998

– Head distinctly longer than high; frons with or without longer setae at middle; height of gena about half eye height; scutal vittae pale brown (sometimes dark in A. incudisternum and A. platystylum ); abdomen all yellow or when with brown bands, these reach sides and or posterior margin on at least some tergites ................................................................................................................................... 20

20. Frons with pair of longer setae in front of anterior ocellus (as in Fig. 10 ); scutal vittae pale brown; abdomen with most tergites having brown bands ........................................................................... 21

– Frons without pair of longer setae in front of anterior ocellus; scutal vittae, if present, only of deeper yellow colour; tergites all yellow .......................................................... A. perpallidum Ebejer, 2008

21. Abdominal tergites with pale brown bands on anterior half, scutal vittae pale brown and indistinct at middle, male hypopygium ( Fig. 41C ) with some structures dark ........... A. impeditum Ebejer, 2008

– Abdomen with broad dark brown bands, scutal vittae brown and distinct, male hypopygium pale yellow, only aedeagus may be brown ( Fig. 45 ) ................................ A. incudisternum Ebejer, 2008

22. Head longer than high; eye about 3 × as long as high; 2 strong posterior fronto-orbital setae; a strong, long pair of setae in front of the anterior ocellus placed forward to the middle of the frons; pale brown lateral scutal vittae appear to continue on to the lateral border of the scutellum, male with black aedeagus ( Fig. 35B–C ) ............................................................................ A. freidbergi sp. nov.

– Head equal to height or longer; but eye length not more than twice height; setae when present are placed in middle of frons and not significantly long or strong; scutal vittae only of a deeper yellow hue; scutellum entirely yellow; aedeagus yellow or brownish ....................................................... 23

23. Male hypopygium viewed obliquely from behind or laterally with very pale, long, and posteriorly curved postgonites clearly visible ( Fig. 19C ) ................................................. A. curvistylus sp. nov.

– Male hypopygium without such distinctive curved postgonites ..................................................... 24

24. Head distinctly longer than high; eye about 2 × as long as high; hypopygium viewed laterally, with long straight surstylus clearly visible; epandrium easily visible, distinctly shining bright yellow and broad relative to tergite 6 ( Fig. 33 ) .................................................................... A. flavipyga sp. nov.

– Head as long as high or very slightly longer; hypopygium viewed laterally, with short, broad-based, antero-ventrally curved surstylus clearly visible, epandrium mostly hidden by tergite 6 and with no distinctive features ( Fig. 58 ) ................................................................................ A. meltseri sp. nov.

25. Viewed dorsally at middle, tergite 5 about 2 × as long as tergite 4 and about 4 × as long as tergite 6; tergite 5 laterally with very long narrow lobe ( Fig. 87A ) ...................................... A. yaromi sp. nov.

– Viewed dorsally at middle, tergite 5 about as long as tergite 4 and no more than twice as long as tergite 6; tergite 5 laterally without modification ........................................................................... 26

26. Hypopygium mainly yellow; pregonite large, pale and curved; postgonite black and long, longer than cerci, easily visible without dissection; medial surface of ventral margin of tergite 6 without spine ( Ebejer 1998: 207, fig. 25) ............................................................. A. falciferum Ebejer, 1998

– Hypopygium mainly black; pregonite small and not visible without dissection; postgonite black and shorter than cerci; tergite 6 with distinct black spine on medial surface of ventral margin ( Fig. 47 ) .......................................................................................................... A. interispina sp. nov.

27. Occiput, scutum, scutellum and pleura black or dark grey, at most postpronotal lobe, some sutures of pleura and apical margin of scutellum yellow (similar to Fig. 70A ) .......................................... 28

– Species of a more mixed colour pattern (similar to Fig. 79B ); scutal vittae almost always discernible; pleura, when with dark markings on sclerites, these are broadly bordered in yellow; scutellum yellow, only rarely almost as dark as area of scutum anterior to it ............................................................. 40

28. Femora and tibiae brown for much of their length, dull brownish black species with short fronto-orbital setae ..................................................................................................................................... 29

– Femora and tibiae all yellow throughout their length; 2 posterior fronto-orbital setae usually stronger than others anterior to them ............................................................................................................ 30

29. Palpus brown; basal flagellomere dark brown in both sexes .................... A. brunnipes Ebejer, 1996

– Palpus yellow; basal flagellomere dark brown in female and yellow in male .................................... .......................................................................................................................... A. captiosum sp. nov.

30. Pleura mostly yellow; scutum usually all grey but sometimes vittate posterior to the transverse suture ...................................................................................................... A. dhofaricum Ebejer, 1996

– Most of pleura black, leaving only narrow yellow margins to some sclerites; scutum uniformly dark without distinct vittae ..................................................................................................................... 31

31. Males ............................................................................................................................................... 32

– Females ........................................................................................................................................... 38

32. Scutum and scutellum completely dark greyish brown to black; pleural sclerites yellow only on sutures; abdominal tergites only very narrowly yellow on hind margins ....................................... 33

– Scutum often a little paler posteriorly with a hint of vittae or pale spot appearing near posterior callus; scutellum paler greyish brown and sometimes with yellow apical margin; pleural sclerites and abdominal tergites more broadly and variably yellow on sutures and margins ....................... 36

33. Tergite 5 dorsally at middle, a little longer than tergite 4 .............................. A. nigrum Ebejer 1998

– Tergite 5 dorsally at middle, a little shorter than tergite 4 .............................................................. 34

34. Postgonite narrow in approximately its apical half and blunt at apex; pregenital sternite with heavily sclerotized midline appearing as a long spine directed caudally ( Ebejer 1998: 225, figs 74–75) ...... ................................................................................................................. A. spiniventre Ebejer, 1998

– Postgonite broader and proportionately larger with slightly sinuous and pointed apex ................. 35

35. Each lobe of the bilobed distiphallus broad, about twice as long as high ( Ebejer 1998: 205, fig. 22); sternite 5 weakly and uniformly sclerotized throughout, transversely more or less rectangular in shape ( Fig. 16C ) ......................................................................................... A. creperum Collin, 1949

– Each lobe of the bilobed distiphallus narrow in distal half, about 3 × as long as high; sternite 5 membranous over middle third and leaving weakly sclerotized more or less rectangular parts on lateral third on each side ( Ebejer 1998: 214, fig. 42) .............................. A. nigricauda Ebejer, 1998

36. Lower lateral margin of tergite 6 with a broad almost rectangular lobe directed ventrally; surstylus broad basally and markedly twisted apically ( Ebejer 1998: 213, fig. 39) .......................................... .............................................................................................................. A. necopinatum Ebejer, 1998

– Lower lateral margin of tergite 6 with a narrow lobe directed ventro-medially; surstylus of different shape ............................................................................................................................................... 37

37. Surstylus and postgonite dark sclerotized; pregenital sternite more or less transverse rectangular with lateral margins only slightly curved; apex of basiphallus/ epiphallus dark, blunt and often a little notched dorsally ( Ebejer 1998: 204, figs 16–17) ............................... A. claridgei Ebejer, 1995

– Surstylus and postgonite pale; pregenital sternite, laterally almost triangularly extended and posterior magin with two short narrow lobes; apex of basiphallus /epiphallus translucent and smoothly rounded ( Fig. 49 ) .......................................................................................... A. kravchenkoi sp. nov.

38. Basal flagellomere yellow; scutum often a little paler posteriorly with a hint of vittae or pale spot appearing near posterior callus; scutellum paler greyish brown and sometimes with yellow apical margin; pleural sclerites and abdominal tergites usually with broader and variable yellow on sutures and margins ................................................................................................. A. claridgei Ebejer, 1995 A. kravchenkoi sp. nov. A. necopinatum Ebejer, 1998

– Basal flagellomere dark brown; scutum and scutellum completely dark greyish brown to black; pleural sclerites narrowly yellow only on sutures; abdominal tergites only very narrowly yellow on hind margins ................................................................................................................................... 39

39. Scutellum black and very similar in hue to scutum ................................... A. creperum Collin, 1949 A. nigrum Ebejer, 1998

– Scutellum often a little paler or of a different hue to scutum ................. A. nigricauda Ebejer, 1998 A. spiniventre Ebejer, 1998

40. 2–3 strong posterior fronto-orbital setae (except in A. seticauda , which has 3–4 short setae); acrostichals usually numerous, about 7–10 pairs and prescutellar acrostichal setae or setulae present and situated level with or posterior to the hindmost dorsocentral setae ......................................... 41

– Fronto-orbital setae various; acrostichal setae less numerous, about 4–7 pairs rarely reach hindmost dorsocentral and no prescutellar setae/ setulae present .................................................................. 45

41. Fore tarsus with broad, black fifth tarsomere and elongate empodium, distinctly so in the male ( Fig. 60B ), less obvious in the female unless compared to 5 th tarsomeres of other legs; species with very little, if any dark markings on pleura .......................................................................................... ...................................................................................................... A. micromacro Carles-Tolrá, 2001

– Fore tarsus normal, not broad in either sex and empodium normal; species usually with more dark markings on pleura ......................................................................................................................... 42

42. 2–3 posterior fronto-orbitals that are distinctly longer and stronger than any setae or setulae anterior to them ............................................................................................................................................ 43

– 3–4 short posterior fronto-orbitals not distinctly longer or stronger than any setae or setulae anterior to them ....................................................................................................... A. seticauda Ebejer, 1998

43. Setulae or setae on frons all more or less of uniform size; male tergite 4 large and modified into caudally directed lobes ( Fig. 56 ) ............................................................... A. melitense Ebejer, 1993

– A pair of longer setulae present on the frons in front of the anterior ocellus; male without modification of tergite 4 ....................................................................................................................................... 44

44. Yellow and brown coloured species with 3 fronto-orbitals; eye 2 × as long as high; anepisternum yellow; brown bands on abdominal tergites more or less microtomentose and merge diffusely into paler hind margins ( Ebejer 2021a: 4, fig. 5) ....................................................... A. cypriense Ebejer ,

– Dark grey species with 2 fronto-orbitals; eye at most 1.5 × as long as high; anepisternum always with distinct grey or black mark; abdomen black, weakly microtomentose, appearing subshining with contrasting pale margins clearly defined ( Fig. 22A ) ................................ A. daedalum sp. nov.

45. 3+8 dorsocentral setae (only rarely 2+7), all quite short except for the hindmost seta; a pair of longer setae on frons in front of the anterior ocellus usually present, but often difficult to see because of the very pale colour; body colouration very variable, but usually with greyish brown vittae and dull yellow scutellum ............................................................................................................................. 46

– 2+5 dorsocentral setae (rarely 2+7), short but distinct, only hindmost seta well-developed; species with a distinct pair of stronger setae in front of anterior ocellus, sometimes not easily seen; body colour variable, but generally presents a variegated pattern of contrasting pale and dark areas with more distinct dark scutal vittae, scutellum and a large area anterior to it clear yellow; sometimes scutum and scutellum uniformly grey and grey pollinose .............................................................. 49

46. Frons with only 2 pairs of very pale setae placed one anterior to the other in front of anterior ocellus ( Fig. 31A ); no other setae on mesofrons; a species of variable colouration often showing a dark aedeagus and 3 pale appendages in the hypopygium: a narrow almost straight postgonite, surstylus, and rounded pregonite ( Fig. 31B–C ) .............................................................. A. fissum Collin, 1949

– Several very short setae on frons, sometimes including a longer pair in front of anterior ocellus; hypopygium and appendages of different structure ........................................................................ 47

47. Male abdomen viewed from behind with large, black, flat shiny patch on each side of tergite 6 ( Fig. 68B ); female with small shiny patch dorso-laterally on tergite 7; both sexes with 8–10 dorsocentral setae and head longer than high ......................................... A. oculicauda Collin, 1949

– Male abdomen without distinctive shiny black patch on tergite 6, but with long broad, yellow to brown surstylus, often easily visible; female without shiny patch on tergite 7; dorsocentral setae various, within the range of 8–12 ................................................................................................... 48

48. Male with surstylus very broad and longer than height of epandrium ( Fig. 50C ); 10–12 dorsocentral setae; head about as long as high ............................................................ A. lamellatum Collin, 1949

– Male with surstylus shorter than height of epandrium ( Fig.71B ); 8–10 dorsocentral setae; head a little longer than high ........................................................................................ A. platystylus Ebejer ,

49. Scutum of yellowish brown colour with the scutal vittae usually represented only by a confluent dark postsutural patch in the middle and adjacent short lateral vittae ( Fig. 88 ); male with large, completely black hypopygium ( Ebejer 2008: 691, pl. 1) with prominent, broad-based, thick, black, curved postgonite ............................................................................................... A. yittii Ebejer, 1996

– Scutum vittate or uniformly grey; male hypopygium never so large or completely black ............ 50

50. Scutum completely grey, only postpronotal lobe and narrow strip on notopleuron yellow; scutellum grey or brownish ............................................................................................................................. 51

– Scutum vittate, though usually with confluent light or dark grey area anterior to transverse suture with vittae appearing more posteriorly, scutellum and area anterior to it usually of the same clear yellow colouration (only in A. scutellare scutum sometimes completely grey while scutellum clear yellow) ............................................................................................................................................ 59

51. Scutum and scutellum pale grey; abdomen also pale greyish brown with yellow apical margins; male hypopygium pale yellowish brown with small shiny brown spot on dorsal part of epandrium ..... 52

– Scutum and scutellum dark grey; abdomen dark brown to black with yellow apical margins; male hypopygium, various ...................................................................................................................... 53

52. Pleura mostly pale yellow;both sexes with small shiny brown spot on last tergite;male without modified setae on lower lateral margins of tergite 6; postgonite narrow, more or less pointed; pregenital sternite triangular with apex directed apically ( Ebejer 2009: 408, fig. 52) ...... A. suboculicauda Frey, 1958

– Pleura with variable grey marks on sclerites; both sexes without small shiny brown spot on last tergite; male with three broad pale setae on each side of lower lateral margin of tergite 6; postgonite narrow, curved at apex; pregenital sternite more complex in structure ( Ebejer 1998: 226, fig. 78) ... ...................................................................................................................... A. trisetum Ebejer, 1998

53. Males ............................................................................................................................................... 54

– Females ........................................................................................................................................... 57

54. Viewed from behind, epandrium barely visible and not divided into large globular halves; surstylus large, visible as a broad yellow structure sharply curved apically ( Fig. 70B ); a dark species with abdomen mostly subshining black ( Fig. 69A ); the species appears variegated because dark and pale areas are more clearly demarcated than usual in this genus ......................... A. palestinense sp. nov.

– Viewed from behind, epandrium divided dorsally and each with its dorsal half appearing, in situ, as a globular sclerite ( Figs 67B , 75B ); surstylus small and narrow; species appearing less variegated in colour pattern .................................................................................................................................. 55

55. Posterior 2 fronto-orbital setae longer and stronger than setae/ setulae anterior to them; postgonite narrow and curved at apex; about as long as globular part of epandrium; aedeagus dark ................. ................................................................................................................... A. scutellare Ebejer, 1998 ( A. notatum Collin, 1949 may key out here if further material should be of a dark form)

– Posterior 2 fronto-orbital setae similar to setae anterior to them, all more or less gradually becoming shorter from back to front without a distinct gradation between the posterior two setae and those anterior to them; postgonite narrow and longer than half height of epandrium; aedeagus variable ... ......................................................................................................................................................... 56

56. Postgonite rather straight and pointed; pregenital sternite more or less oval, large, about half length of abdomen and with a long process on each posterior side directed antero-ventrally ( Ebejer 1996: 293, figs 10–11) ....................................................................................... A. gallagheri Ebejer, 1996

– Postgonite curved apically and blunt; pregenital sternite small, about a quarter of length of abdomen, divided into two sclerotized rectangular halves each with a short lateral process directed posteroventrally ( Ebejer 1998: 220, figs 62–64) ................................................. A. proximum Ebejer, 1998

57. Basal flagellomere dark brown ....................................................................................................... 58

– Basal flagellomere yellow; frons always yellow ..................................... A. gallagheri Ebejer, 1996 A. proximum Ebejer, 1998 A. scutellare Ebejer, 1998

58. Frons with well-demarcated dark brown transverse band across the middle ( Fig. 69C ); abdominal tergites subshining with sparse microtomentum; sternites 2, 6–7 with well-sclerotized dark middle part ................................................................................................................ A. palestinense sp. nov.

– Frons, pale but if darkened this is irregular with diffuse margins; abdomen more densely microtomentose leaving very little shine; only sternite 7 with small sclerotized dark central area ... ................................................................................................................... A. scutellare Ebejer, 1998

59. Pleura and sides of apical 2–3 tergites mostly bright yellow ( Figs 1A , 6A ) .................................. 60

– Pleura and sides of apical 2–3 tergites dark with narrow yellow borders ( Figs 37A , 67A ) ........... 61

60. Scutum with dark grey to black vittae; male tergite 4 with short obtuse angled postero-lateral projection ( Fig. 1B ) and tergite 5 with long acute process at postero-lateral margin on each side ( Fig. 3C ) ............................................................................................................ A. acitergum sp. nov.

– Scutum with brown to pale brown vittae; male tergite 4 with short acute angled antero-ventral margin on each side ( Fig. 8A ) and tergite 5 without any special development ...... A. angulitergum sp. nov.

61. Scutum with well-demarcated black vittae contrasting with the pale yellow areas even when scutum densely microtomentose ................................................................................................................. 62

– Scutum brown or grey vittate with margins not usually well-demarcated and anteriorly vittae most often confluent to form a broad dark area over most of the scutum anterior to the transverse suture ......................................................................................................................................................... 63

62. Anepisternum and anepimeron mostly black; male epandrium with globular dorsal parts on each side ( Fig. 67B ); male postgonite short, narrow, pale brown and curved at apex; female unknown ... ...................................................................................................................... A. notatum Collin, 1949

– Anepisternum and anepimeron mostly yellow; male epandrium not appearing globular on each side; postgonite broad, dark brown and rounded at apex ( Fig. 80 ); female similar to male except for hypopygial characters .................................................................................... A. sodalis Collin, 1949

63. Males ............................................................................................................................................... 64

– Females ........................................................................................................................................... 69

64. Tergite 6 with 3 distinct, broad, pale setae at ventral margin on each side ( Fig. 82C ) ....................... ...................................................................................................................... A. trisetum Ebejer, 1998

– Tergite 6 without such distinctive setae .......................................................................................... 65

65. Tergite 6, laterally on each side with postero-medially directed projection ................................... 66

– Tergite 6, laterally on each side without projection ........................................................................ 67

66. Posterior projection at lower lateral margin of tergite 6 short and broad ( Ebejer 2008: 684, fig. 1) .. .......................................................................................................... A. approximatum Becker, 1903

– Posterior projection at lower lateral margin of tergite 6 long, narrow, and slightly sinuous ( Ebejer 1995: 204, fig. 1) ................................................................................................................................. ............................ A. brevivittatum Ebejer, 1995 (females of A. approximatum and A. brevivittatum cannot be reliably separated, and both species are very variable in colouration and pattern.)

67. Posterior 2 fronto-orbital setae longer and stronger than setae/setulae anterior to them; postgonite narrow and curved at apex; about as long as globular part of epandrium; pregenital sternite more or less hexagonal; aedeagus dark ( Ebejer 1998: 222, figs 68–70) ................ A. scutellare Ebejer, 1998 ( A. notatum Collin, 1949 may key out here if further material should be of a dark form)

– Posterior 2 fronto-orbital setae similar to setae anterior to them, all more or less gradually becoming shorter from back to front without a distinct gradation between the posterior two setae and those anterior to them ............................................................................................................................... 68

68. Postgonite rather straight and pointed; pregenital sternite more or less oval, large, U-shaped and about half length of abdomen and with a long process on each posterior side directed antero-ventrally ( Ebejer 2009: 401, fig. 46a–b) ................................................................. A. gallagheri Ebejer, 1996

– Postgonite curved apically, less pointed; pregenital sternite small, about a quarter of length of abdomen, sclerotized into two rectangular halves each with a short lateral process directed posteroventrally ( Ebejer 1998: 220, fig. 64) ........................................................ A. proximum Ebejer, 1998

69. Frons and basal flagellomere always yellow; setae and setulae on frons most often short and very pale, sometimes white; often difficult to see ............................................... A. trisetum Ebejer, 1998

– Frons and basal flagellomere various; setae and setulae on frons usually brown, longer; more distinctly visible .............................................................................................................................. 70

70 Basal flagellomere dark brown ....................................................................................................... 71

– Basal flagellomere yellow; frons always yellow ...................................... A. gallagheri Ebejer,1996 A. proximum Ebejer, 1998 ................................................................................................................... A. scutellare Ebejer, 1998

71. Frons with demarcated dark brown transverse band across the middle; sternites 2, 6–7 broadly dark brown to black sclerotized at middle ............................................................ A. palestinense sp. nov.

– Frons, if darkened, this is irregular with more diffuse margins; only sternite 7 with small, narrow, sclerotized area at middle ......................................................................... A. scutellare Ebejer, 1998

Figures

Fig. 77. Aphaniosoma setigerum Collin, 1949. A–B. ♂, holotype (NHMUK, B.M. 1935–354, bar code 013435847). A. Habitus, lateral view. B. Posterior segments of abdomen showing large tergite 5 (note: artifact dorsally caused by Lepidoptera scale stuck to tergite 3). C. ♂ (SMNHTAU) from Israel, habitus, lateral view.

Fig. 5. Aphaniosoma aegyptium sp. nov., ♂, holotype (CUSLP). A. Hind trochanters, posterior view. B. Hypopygium, lateral view. C. Pregenital sternites, ventral view. Abbreviations: See Material and methods. Scale bars: B–C = 0.15 mm.

Fig. 84. Aphaniosoma verecundum Ebejer, 1998, ♂ (MJE). A. Hind trochanter and femur. B–C. Hypopygium in situ. B. Postero-ventral view. C. Postero-lateral view.

Fig. 17. Aphaniosoma cristatum sp. nov. A. ♂, holotype (OUMNH DIPT0800-01), habitus, lateral view. B. ♂, paratype (OUMNH DIPT0800-02), hind trochanter and hypopygium in situ, ventro-lateral view.

Fig. 40. Aphaniosoma harteni Ebejer, 1996, ♂, holotype (NMWC), hypopygium in situ. A. Lateral view. B. Ventro-lateral view.

Fig. 72. Aphaniosoma praeditum sp. nov., ♂, holotype (MHNG-ENTO-00097309). A. Habitus, lateral view. B–C. Hypopygium in situ. B. Lateral view. C. Posterior view. D. Hind coxa, trochanter and base of femur, lateral view.

Fig. 26. Aphaniosoma denticulosum sp. nov, ♂, paratype (CUSLP). A. Hypopygium, lateral view. B. Tergites 5 and 6, lateral view. C. Sternite 6, ventral view. Abberviations: See Material and methods.

Fig. 25. Aphaniosoma denticulosum sp. nov., ♂, holotype (CUSLP). A. Habitus, lateral view. B–C. Hypopygium in situ. B. Posterior view. C. Ventro-lateral view.

Fig. 62. Aphaniosoma miricercus sp. nov., ♂, holotype (MHNG-ENTO-00097873), hypopygium in situ. A. Ventro-lateral view. B. Posterior view.

Fig. 53. Aphaniosoma lucidum sp. nov. A. ♂, holotype (SMNHTAU 405827), habitus, lateral view. B. ♀, paratype (SMNHTAU), head, lateral view and thorax, dorsal view.

Fig. 51. Aphaniosoma longilingua sp. nov. A. ♂, holotype (SMNHTAU 405826), habitus, lateral view. B–C. ♀, paratype (SMNHTAU). B. Head and thorax, lateral view. C. Habitus, lateral view.

Fig. 82. Aphaniosoma trisetum Ebejer, 1998, ♂ (SMNHTAU). A. Head, lateral view. B. Hypopygium, posterior view. C. Pregenital sternites, ventral view. Abbreviations: See Material and methods.

Fig. 57. Aphaniosoma meltseri sp. nov. A. ♂, holotype (SMNHTAU 405828), habitus, lateral view. B. ♂, paratype (MJE), head, lateral view and thorax, dorsal view.

Fig. 85. Aphaniosoma yaromi sp. nov., ♂, holotype (SMNHTAU 405830). A. Habitus, lateral view. B. Head and thorax, dorsal view.

Fig. 12. Aphaniosoma captiosum sp. nov. A. ♂, holotype (SMNHTAU 405820), habitus, lateral view. B–C. ♀, paratype (SMNHTAU). B. Habitus, lateral view. C. Head, frontal view.

Fig. 22. Aphaniosoma daedalum sp. nov., ♂, holotype (SMNHTAU 405822). A. Habitus, lateral view. B. Head and thorax, dorsal view.

Fig. 10. Aphaniosoma approximatum Becker, 1903, ♀ (MJE), head and thorax, dorsal view.

Fig. 41. Aphaniosoma impeditum Ebejer, 2008, ♂ (MJE). A. Habitus, lateral view. B. Thorax, dorsal. C. Hypopygium, ventro-lateral oblique view.

Fig. 45. Aphaniosoma incudisternum Ebejer, 2008, ♂ (MJE), hypopygium in situ A. Posterior view. B. Postero-lateral view.

Fig. 35. Aphaniosoma freidbergi sp. nov., ♂, holotype (SMNHTAU 405824). A. Habitus, lateral view. B. Hypopygium in situ, lateral view. C. Hypopygium in situ, posterior view.

Fig. 19. Aphaniosoma curvistylus sp. nov., ♂, holotype (SMNHTAU 405821). A. Habitus, lateral view. B. Hypopygium in situ, lateral view.

Fig. 33. Aphaniosoma flavipyga sp. nov., ♂, paratype (SMNHTAU), hypopygium in situ. A. Lateral view. B. Posterior view.

Fig. 58. Aphaniosoma meltseri sp. nov., ♂, paratype (SMNHTAU), hypopygium in situ. A. Posteroventral view. B. Lateral view.

Fig. 87. Aphaniosoma yaromi sp. nov., ♂, paratype, (SMNHTAU). A. Hypopygium, lateral view. B. Pregenital sternites, lateral view.C. Hypopygium and pregenital sternites, ventral view.Abbreviations: See Material and methods.

Fig. 47. Aphaniosoma interispina sp. nov., ♂, holotype (OUMNH DIPTO801), hypopygium in situ. A. Ventro-lateral oblique view. B. Posterior view.

Fig. 70. Aphaniosoma palestinense sp. nov.A. ♀, paratype (MJE) head and thorax, dorsal view. B–E. ♂, paratype (SMNHTAU). B. Hypopygium in situ, postero-ventral view. C. Pregenital sternites, ventral view. D. Hypopygium, lateral view. E. Surstylus enlarged, postero-ventral view. Abbreviations: See Material and methods.

Fig. 79. Aphaniosoma sodalis Collin, 1949, ♂, lectotype (NHMUK, B.M. 1935–354, bar code 013435848). A. Habitus, lateral view. B. Head and thorax, dorsal view.

Fig. 16. Aphaniosoma creperum Collin, 1949. A–B. ♂, specimen from Cairo, Egypt (MJE). A. Habitus, lateral view. B. Hypopygium in situ, lateral view. C. ♂, specimen from Israel, pregenital sternites, ventral view. Abbreviations: See Material and methods.

Fig. 49. Aphaniosoma kravchenkoi sp. nov., ♂, paratype (SMNHTAU). A. Hypopygium, lateral view. B. Sternite 6, ventral view. Abbreviations: See Material and methods.

Fig. 60. Aphaniosoma micromacro Carles-Tolrá, 2001. A. ♂ (MJE), habitus, lateral view. B. ♂, fore tarsus, dorsal view.

Fig. 56. Aphaniosoma melitense Ebejer, 1993, ♂ (SMNHTAU), habitus, lateral view.

Fig. 31. Aphaniosoma fissum Collin, 1949. A–B.(MJE). A. Head and thorax, antero-dorsal view, head showing the two pairs of setae on middle of frons. B. Hypopygium, ventro-lateral oblique view. C. Different specimen, (MJE) with extended hypopygium in alcohol, lateral view.

Fig. 68. Aphaniosoma oculicauda Collin, 1949, ♂, (MJE). A. Head, lateral view and thorax, dorsal oblique view. B–C. Hypopygium in situ. B. Posterior view. C. Ventro-lateral oblique view.

Fig. 50. Aphaniosoma lamellatum Collin, 1949, ♂ (SMNHTAU). A. Habitus, lateral view. B. Head, lateral view. C. Hypopygium in situ, posterior view.

Fig. 71. Aphaniosoma platystylus Ebejer, 2008, ♂, paratype (MJE). A. Habitus, lateral view. B. Hypopygium in situ, posterior view.

Fig. 88. Aphaniosoma yittii Ebejer, 1996, ♂ (MJE), head and thorax, dorsal view (note: posterior part of thorax and base of scutellum shrunken).

Fig. 69. Aphaniosoma palestinense sp. nov. A. ♂, holotype (SMNHTAU 405829). B–C. ♀, paratype (SMNHTAU). B. Habitus, lateral view. C. Head, antero-dorsal oblique view.

Fig. 67. Aphaniosoma notatum Collin, 1949, ♂, holotype (NHMUK, B.M. 1935–354, bar code 013435846). A. Habitus, lateral view. B. Hypopygium in situ, posterior view.

Fig. 75. Aphaniosoma scutellare Ebejer, 1998, ♂ (MJE). A. Head, dorso-lateral oblique view, and thorax, dorsal view. B. Hypopygium in situ, posterior view.

Fig. 1. Aphaniosoma acitergum sp. nov., ♂, holotype (SMNHTAU 405818). A. Habitus, lateral view. B. Hypopygium in situ, lateral view.

Fig. 6. Aphaniosoma angulitergum sp. nov., ♂, holotype (SMNHTAU 405819). A. Habitus, lateral view. B. Hypopygium in situ, posterior view.

Fig. 37. Aphaniosoma gallgheri Ebejer, 1996, ♂ (MJE). A. Habitus, lateral view. B. Head and thorax, dorsal view.

Fig. 3. Aphaniosoma acitergum sp. nov., ♂, paratype (SMNHTAU). A. Hypopygium, lateral view. B. Tergite 6, postero-ventral view. C. Tergite 5, lateral view. D. Pregenital sternites, top, lateral view, bottom, ventral view. Abbreviations: See Material and methods. Scale bars = 0.15 mm.

Fig. 8. Aphaniosoma angulitergum sp. nov., ♂, paratype (MJE). A. Hypopygium in situ, extended in alcohol, lateral view. B–C. ♂, paratype (SMNHTAU). B. Hypopygium, lateral view. C. Sternite 6, ventral view. Abbreviations: See Material and methods. Scale bar: B–C = 0.15 mm.

Fig. 80. Aphaniosoma sodalis Collin, 1949, ♂, lectotype (NHMUK, B.M. 1935–354, bar code 013435848), hypopygium in situ, postero-lateral view.