Eristalinus tabanoides ( Jaennicke, 1867 )

Dawah, Hassan A., Abdullah, Mohammed A., Ahmad, Syed Kamran, Al-Dhafer, Hathal & Turner, James, 2020, An overview of the Syrphidae (Diptera) of Saudi Arabia, Zootaxa 4855 (1), pp. 1-69 : 22

Eristalinus tabanoides ( Jaennicke, 1867)

( Figs 19–20 )

Eristalis tabanoides Jaennicke, 1867: 402

Examined specimens. 1♀ Asir, Maraba, Al-Hudaithy Fruit Farm , 22.iv.2013, Malaise trap, H.A. Dawah ( CERS) ; 1♂, Al-Riyadh, Al Aziziyah , 20.iv.1980, sweeping, A. Talhouk ( KSMA) .

Distribution. This species was previously recorded from Saudi Arabia by Walker & Pittaway (1987) as E. megacephalus , but it was E. tabanoides as stated by Smit et al. (2017: 578). It was described from Eritrea and is further recorded from the Palaearctic Region: Egypt, Israel, Tunisia; Afrotropical Region: Djibouti, Madagaster ( Smith & Vockeroth 1980; Peck 1988; Dirickx 1994; Whittington 2003); Oriental Region: India and Pakistan ( Ghorpadé 2014; Sengupta et al. 2016). There are some specimens of E. tabanoides in NMWC from Nigeria and Oman. Smit et al. (2017: 612) listed E. tabanoides as being recorded from Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Yemen and Socotra Island.

Remarks. E. tabanoides is very closely related to E. megacephalus , the differences between them are detailed and figured in Speight and Goy (2016). Smit et al. (2017: 574) produced a key for the separation of three species whose identification was in a state of confusion namely: E. megacephalus , E. quinquelineatus ( Fabricius 1781) , and E. tabanoides . Smit et al. (2017) reported that their key was “based on: Becker (1903), who described the male of E. megacephalus under the name E. quinquelineatus ; Becker & Stein (1913) who described the male of E. tabanoides and separated this from the previous species; Collin (1949) who reported the differences between E. megacephalus and E. tabanoides under their respective correct names; and Curran (1939), who clarified the true identity of E. quinquelineatus ”. We verified the identification of E. tabanoides , and E. megacephalus using the key of Smit et al. (2017). There being some confusion about the identification of E. tabanoides and E. megacephalus , we have also compared our specimens with identified Egyptian material of E. megacephalus and Arabian E. tabanoides in NMWC. Nurul Huda et al. (2015) reported that E. tabanoides in Malaysia play a role in the pollination of mango. In this study E. tabanoides was collected from Asir, Maraba, Al-Hudaithy Fruit Farm, which is a mango farm ( Table 2). We speculate that it might have a role in mango pollination but this needs to be investigated. We do not know if E. tabanoides is a generalist or specialist in its role in relation to mango pollination.

Figures

FIGURE 19–20. Habitus of Eristalinus tabanoides (Jaennicke, 1867). 19) Male, dorsal view, 20) Female, lateral view.