Psychoda complexa, sp. nov.

(Figs 63–70)

Etymology. The species name, complexa, is based on the complex structure of the subgenital plate internal ornamentation.

Diagnosis. Palpal formula 1.0:1.2:1.0:1.25; radial and medial forks incomplete; distitarsus without apical projection; subgenital plate wider than long, with a narrow concavity between lobes; genital digit large, stretching from base to apex of subgenital plate.

Female. Head (Fig. 63): vertex, frons and clypeus pilose; hair patch of frons extending to facet row 1 or 2; eye bridge with 4 facets; eyes separated by 1.5–2.0 facet diameters; 5–6 supra-ocular setae; interocular suture sometimes present as a weak line; clypeus with 2 stronger lateral alveoli; frontoclypeal suture absent; antenna incomplete; scape cylindrical, 1.5 the length of subspherical pedicel (Fig. 64); ascoids in Y; palpal formula 1.0:1.2(1.13– 1.21):1.0:1.25 (Fig. 65); labellum with 3 apical and 1 subapical teeth, and 1 or 2 lateral setae (Fig. 66). Wing (Fig. 67): Sc vein not extending beyond base of vein Rs; radial and medial forks incomplete; vein R5 and costal cell slightly darkened. Distitarsus without apical projection (Fig. 68). Terminalia: subgenital plate wider than long, bilobed, pilose on distal half and with a narrow concavity between lobes (Fig. 69); genital digit large, going from base to apex of subgenital plate; subgenital plate internally with diagonal lines and a complex, well sclerotized structure next to apex of genital digit (Fig. 70); genital chamber oval (Fig. 69).

Male. Unknown.

Material examined. Holotype Ƥ BRAZIL, Amazonas, Silves, Saracá, 01.vi.1997, 6cdc – 1m, no collector name (INPA). Paratypes: 2 Ƥ same locality and date of holotype (MZUEFS); 1 Ƥ Amazonas, Silves, Saracá, 30.vi.1997, 6cdc – 1m, no collector name (INPA); 1 Ƥ Amazonas, Silves, Saracá, área alterada, 17.xii.1997, 6cdc – m, col. RF /FLS (INPA); 1 Ƥ BRAZIL, Paraná, Guarapuava, Est. Águas Sta. Clara, 12.i.1987, Malaise trap, Profaupar 3.4 (DZUP).

Distribution. Brazil (Amazonas and Paraná).

Comments. As the apical flagellomeres are missing, this species cannot be assigned to any subgenera.