Cecidomya aphidimyza Rondani, 1848

Sforzi, Alessandra & Sommaggio, Daniele, 2021, Catalog of the Diptera types described by Camillo Rondani, Zootaxa 4989 (1), pp. 1-438 : 78-79

publication ID	https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4989.1.1
publication LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:pub:89C63841-3CF4-491D-8C73-BEF7DCB18FB5
DOI	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4980929
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/686387A0-FF80-FFE5-5889-F8DBFB3D6344
treatment provided by	Plazi
scientific name	Cecidomya aphidimyza Rondani, 1848
status

Treatment

Cecidomya aphidimyza Rondani, 1848 View in CoL

ORIGINAL DESCRIPTION: 1848a: 443.

TYPE LOCALITY: Rondani gave no type locality in his original description but presumably it is Parma (Italy) because he referred to observations made by himself.

TYPE MATERIAL: 2 ♂♂, syntypes (each glued to a separate cardboard stage, one missing wings and abdomen, the other its left wing) ( MZUF: Box 65): Br. [= Bremia ] aphidimyza n. Rnd. / 3352.

CURRENT STATUS: valid species, as Aphidoletes aphidimyza View in CoL ( Skuhravá 1986: 224, Gagné 2010: 111, Dahl et al. 1995: 23, Gagné & Jaschhof 2017: 154).

REMARKS: Rondani (1848a: 443) described Cecidomya aphidimyza without specifying either the number or the length of the specimens but did provide specific characters for the male and female from more than one specimen. Gagné & Solinas (1996: 74) reported only two MZUF males. We also found just two male syntypes in this study. Rondani (1877a: 55) incorrectly listed this nominal species as “ aphidimisa ”, not used by subsequent authors ( Kertész 1903: 226, Skuhravá 1986: 224, Gagné 2010: 111, Dahl et al. 1995: 23, Gagné & Jaschhof 2017: 154). Therefore, the original spelling “ aphidimyza ” is to be used and “ aphidimisa ” is as an incorrect subsequent spelling. This nominal species was described under the generic name “ Cecidomya ”, which is “an incorrect subsequent spelling for Cecidomyia Meigen, 1803 ” ( O’Hara et al. 2011: 48).