identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
03E0B25EBF35E30BFC9AFB9A88EF6AFF.text	03E0B25EBF35E30BFC9AFB9A88EF6AFF.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Chloropellini Riccardi & Amorim 2020	<div><p>Chloropellini trib. nov. (Figs 39, 116)</p><p>lsid: urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act: 29899D37-3E82-462C-84CF-327EF61ED1B5</p><p>Type genus:  Chloropella Malloch, 1925 .</p><p>Diagnosis: Long ocellar setae; up to four long fronto-orbitals; frons not projected beyond level of eyes; presence of dorsocentral seta close to scutum suture; combination of 1 + 1 notopleurals; tibial organ absent; long surstyli.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E0B25EBF35E30BFC9AFB9A88EF6AFF	Public Domain	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.		Plazi	Riccardi, Paula Raile;Amorim, Dalton De Souza	Riccardi, Paula Raile, Amorim, Dalton De Souza (2020): Phylogenetic relationships and classification of the Chloropinae of the world (Diptera: Chloropidae). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 190: 889-941
03E0B25EBF3FE302FF02FE9688886D46.text	03E0B25EBF3FE302FF02FE9688886D46.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Neochloropsina glabra Riccardi & Amorim 2020	<div><p>Neochloropsina glabra sp. nov. (Figs 87, 170, 200–201, 204)</p><p>lsid: urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act: 1CEC9E31-F841- 4466-98E7-CEFE300AACFF</p><p>Diagnosis: Minute yellowish species with long ocellar and outer vertical setae; ocellar triangle entirely yellow; scutum with brown stripes; tibial organ present; basiphallus oval.</p><p>Material examined:   Holotype: 1 m #, MALAYSIA, Sabah, confluence of Sungai (= river) Pegalan and <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=116.18&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=5.3700004" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 116.18/lat 5.3700004)">Sungai Tikalot</a>, SW of Tambunan airfield, 300 km to road bridge, 5°22’12”N, 116°10’48”E, 1 September 1978, aspirator, Michael von Tschirnhaus leg. [MZUSP]  .   Paratypes: 1 m # and 1 f#, same data as holotype [MZUSP]; 1 f# same data, except <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=16.406805&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=5.7978053" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 16.406805/lat 5.7978053)">Mahua</a>, 5° 47’ 52.1” N, 16° 24’ 24.5” E ,   1075 m, 18 September 2009, canopy fogging ( Dendrocnide oblanceolata (Merr.) Chew), A. Floren leg. [MZUSP] ;   1 m # same data as holotype, except  Poring, 6° 03’ 28.02” N , 16° 42’1 2.30” E,   497 m, 9 August 2009, canopy fogging ( Aglaia macrophylla Teijsm. &amp; Binn.), A. Floren leg. [MZUSP]. Additional identified specimens at the ZSM ( Michael von Tschirnhaus personal collection)  .</p><p>Description: Male: body length, 1.6 mm; wing length, 1.5 mm. Head (Figs 200–201): Twice broader than long dorsally and slightly higher than long laterally; entirely yellow except for dark ocellar tubercle; head chaetotaxy reduced except for ocellars and outer verticals; ocellars proclinate, postocellars parallel, inner verticals thin; four to five fronto-orbitals, few interfrontals outside ocellar triangle; frons broader than long, apical margin straight; ocellar triangle shiny, extending to anterior end of frons, posterior end that is two-third of frons width, lateral margins straight; eye round, bare; face higher than broad; narrow, incomplete carina present between antennae; antennae yellow, pedicel with dorsal and ventral margins of same width, first flagellomere round, as deep as long; arista with short, dark pubescence, twice as long as first flagellomere, second aristomere over twice as long as broad; parafacial indistinct in profile; gena smaller than first flagellomere length, with few setulae, vibrissal angle right; postgena linear; occiput brown, with faint brown lines at level of posterior corner of ocellar triangle; proboscis yellow, narrow, short, with white setulae; palpus yellow with white setulae; clypeus yellow. Thorax (Figs 200–201): scutum about as long as broad, yellow, slightly polinose, with black thoracic setae; five brown stripes, central stripe slightly longer than half of scutum length, inner lateral stripe almost as long as central one, outer lateral stripe less than half central stripe length; postpronotal lobe yellow with pale seta as long as inner vertical; notopleuron with 1 + 2 setae; anterior post-alar, posterior post-alar and dorsocentral seta indistinct; pleuron yellow, entirely shining; scutellum yellow, short and triangular-shaped, with few brown setulae on disc laterals; apical scutellar setae with separation wider than distance of posterior ocelli, longer than scutellum; post-scutellum brown, shining; halter pale yellow. Wing (Fig. 87): hyaline with brown veins covered in sparse brown microtrichia; costal ratios measured from humeral vein to point where R 1 touches costa, then R 2 + 3, then R 4 + 5, then end of costa: 1.4: 1.4: 3: 0.2; cell r 1 and cell r 2 + 3 short; vein R 4 + 5 straight; veins R 4 + 5 and M 1 divergent; distance between r-m and dm-m three times dm-m length; cell dm-m narrow; anal lobe well-developed. Legs (Fig. 200): yellow, shining; posterior tibial organ concolourous, narrow, occupying half tibia. Abdomen: yellow with dark setulae; tergites brownish; underside pale yellow. Male terminalia (Figs 170, 204): epandrium elongated dorsoventrally, setae long, a pair of projections around anus slightly sclerotized; surstylus large at base, with rounded apical margin bearing several minute spines; mesolobus small, bearing a pair of apical seta. Hypandrium with arms open, slightly bilobed at base; epiphallus absent; basiphallus round; distiphallus short and membranous, not reaching hypandrium base; pre- and postgonites and phallapodemic sclerite fused, with few sensilla and two pair of setae; phallapodem short, with bifid apex. Female: same as male. Cercus short, brownish apically.</p><p>Etymology: From the Latin adjective glaber, smooth or bald, referring to the extremely reduced chaetotaxy of the head.</p><p>Remarks: The holotype of this species was collected aspirating on  Zingiberaceae, while all paratypes were collected with canopy fogging.</p><p>Comments: This species shares with  Chloropsina the presence of a tibial organ, the almost indistinct postpronotal seta, the dorsoventrally elongated epandrium, the presence of a pair of anal sclerites and the general shape of the surstylus, bearing spines. However, the long ocellar triangle, short second sector, non-bilobed hypandrium base, fused gonites and short distiphallus are exclusive to  Neochloropsina . Our phylogeny shows  Neochloropsina as sister to the remaining  Chloropsinini .</p><p>Mindini Paramonov, 1957 (Figs 24, 30, 34, 96–105, 179–188)</p><p>Diagnosis: Outer vertical seta almost indistinct (except  Neohaplegis); anterior notopleural seta absent; upper posterior notopleural reduced (forming the 0 + 1 combination of notopleurals); dorsocentral seta absent (except  Neohaplegis and  Cryptonevra); tibial organ always present and almost always oval; epiphallus sclerotized (Fig. 179).</p><p>Genera included:  Cerais Wulp, 1881,  Collessimyia Spencer, 1986,  Cryptonevra Lioy, 1864,  Homops Speiser, 1923,  Merochlorops Howlett in Maxwell-Lefroy, 1909,  Neohaplegis Beschovski, 1981,  Pemphigonotus Lamb, 1907 (=  Minda),  Siphlus Loew, 1858,  Terusa Kanmiya, 1983 and  Thressa Walker, 1860 .</p><p>The species of  Mindini have a compact body, a large head, large mesolobus, aligned gonites, a frequently elongated phallus and a tibial organ that is present in most genera (Nartshuk, 1984). Our study gathers part—  Cerais,  Collessimyia,  Coniochlorops,  Cryptonevra,  Neohaplegis,  Homops,  Merochlorops,  Pemphigonotus,  Terusa and  Thressa —of the genera in Nartshuk’s (2012) delimitation of the tribe. The remaining genera fit in different places in the phylogeny of the  Chloropinae, as mentioned above—part of which would fit into the  Chloropsinini .  Bathyparia Lamb, 1917,  Eutropha Loew, 1855 and  Trigonomma Enderlein, 1911, previously assigned to the  Mindini, are kept here as incertae sedis. In our tree, they are actually sister to the  Chloropsinini .  Chromatopterum and  Cordylosomides compose a monophyletic group nested within the  Chloropsinini .  Homalura and  Thaumatomyia together compose a small clade sister of ( Mindini + ( Pseudothaumatomyini + Lasionini)). Both genera are considered as incertae sedis at the tribal level in the  Chloropinae . Finally,  Xena is a sister of  Pseudothaumatomyia in the  Pseudothaumatomyini . This suggests that the original diagnosis of the  Mindini was composed of plastic apomorphic features, adding to a core, monophyletic mindines some additional, unrelated genera.</p><p>Cherian &amp; George (2013) proposed that  Aragara would be part of this tribe and considered  Bathyparia to be a junior synonym of  Cerais .  Bathyparia was placed somewhere else in the tree and we prefer to not accept their synonymy at this stage. In Paganelli’s (2002) system, the core group of genera of our  Mindini was also recovered ( Cerais,  Cryptonevra,  Homalura,  Pemphigonotus,  Terusa) and included  Bathyparia,  Eutropha,  Trigonomma and  Xena .</p><p>Aligned pre- and postgonites were used by Nartshuk (1984) as one of the diagnostic features for the  Mindini . This feature is also present in several other genera of the  Chloropinae, so it was necessary to emend the diagnosis of this tribe (Fig. 1). All  Mindini except  Neohaplegis and  Cryptonevra lack the dorsocentral seta (50; 1). This is a synapomorphic feature of a subclade of  Mindini, and a feature plesiomorphic in these two genera. The male terminalia of  Cryptonevra (Fig. 180) and  Neohaplegis (Fig. 179) show some of the similarities shared by the  Pseudothaumatomyini genera. However, the numerical analyses did not bring together these four genera. It may be the case that these similarities are superficial and non-homologous; however, for the time being, they are accommodated in the  Mindini .</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E0B25EBF3FE302FF02FE9688886D46	Public Domain	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.		Plazi	Riccardi, Paula Raile;Amorim, Dalton De Souza	Riccardi, Paula Raile, Amorim, Dalton De Souza (2020): Phylogenetic relationships and classification of the Chloropinae of the world (Diptera: Chloropidae). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 190: 889-941
03E0B25EBF3CE304FC88FDB78AFF6916.text	03E0B25EBF3CE304FC88FDB78AFF6916.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pseudothaumatomyini	<div><p>Pseudothaumatomyini Nartshuk, 1983</p><p>(Figs 106–107, 189–190)</p><p>Diagnosis: First flagellomere entirely black; parafacial large; eyes with converging inner margins in dorsal view; triangular pregonite; long michrotrichose distiphallus.</p><p>Genera included:  Pseudothaumatomyia Nartshuk, 1963,  Xena Nartshuk, 1964 .</p><p>Some of the features that defined this group in Nartshuk’s (1984) system — composed of  Chloropsina,  Ensiferella,  Neoloxotaenia and  Pseudothaumatomyia —are the surstyli not divided into two lobes, a pair of anal sclerites and aligned gonites. Apparently, these features are highly plastic, so unrelated genera ended up together. Nartshuk (1984) herself argued that anal sclerites may have arisen more than once in the evolution of the subfamily. In our study, a good number of characters gather  Pseudothaumatomyia and  Xena in a clade sister to the Lasionini. Ismay (1990) proposed that  Aragara is a member of this tribe; however, Nartshuk (2012) rejected his suggestion—a recommendation that finds support in our tree.</p><p>The tribe  Pseudothaumatomyini is here restricted to only two genera, which share similarities in the male genitalia (Figs 189–190). The tribe is present in previous classifications and we decided to keep the tribal status of the clade in our final classification. One of the reasons is that features connecting them to the  Lasiosinini are fragile. In other words, even if formally in the tree they are sister to the  Lasiosinini and could be made part of the tribe, the position of the  Pseudothaumatomyini may change. Scutum pruinosity, one of the features connecting both tribes, is a widespread feature in the  Chloropinae . The elongation of the epandrium, shared by both tribes, is the only reliable feature so far justifying the connection of the  Lasiosinini to these two genera.</p><p>Lasiosinini Nartshuk. 1983 (Figs 108–115, 191–197)</p><p>Diagnosis: Surstylus completely fused to epandrium; mesolobus extremely reduced (except  Desertochlorops); subepandrial sclerite developed; epiphallus absent.</p><p>Genera included:  Assuania Becker, 1903,  Desertochlorops Nartshuk, 1966,  Lagaroceras Becker, 1903,  Lasiosina Becker, 1910,  Parachlorops Cherian, 2015,  Phyladelphus Becker, 1910,  Sabeurina Deeming, 2018,  Stenophthalmus Becker, 1903,  Urubambina Paganelli, 2002 .</p><p>The original defining features for the  Lasiosinini (Nartshuk, 1984) are the surstyli strongly connected to the epandrium, the reduced or absent mesolobus and the aligned gonites. Of the genera that Nartshuk included in this tribe, only  Metopostigma appear in our analysis in a separate clade, within the  Mepachymerini mainly because the surtyli are not fused to the epandrium. Cherian (2015) described  Parachlorops and added the genus to the  Lasiosinini, because of the complete fusion of the surstyli into the epandrium and because of the extremely reduced mesolobus. Cherian (2015) assumed  Parachlorops to be close to  Desertochlorops based on the presence of a tibial organ and the shape of the phallic complex and gonites. These two genera appear in our analysis as a grade at the base of the tribe, so these characters were present at the groundplan of the tribe. We examined  Sabeurina minuta (Loew), 1860 Deeming, and its position within the  Lasiosinini shows that Sabrosky (1980) and Deeming (2018) were correct in suggesting that the species does not belong in  Eurina .</p><p>This tribe is a well-established group of the  Chloropinae, because all genera share the surstyli completely fused to the epandrium (95; 2) and the mesolobus is reduced or almost indistinct (93; 2). The most conspicuous characters gathering the genera of this tribe are related to male terminalia. However,  Urubambina (the only Neotropical genus in this tribe) is known only from females and could have been placed among other  Lasiosinini members, possibly due to the large amount of missing data. Finding the males of  Urubambina would be useful in corroborating its odd position.</p><p>DISTRIBUTION PATTERNS IN THE  CHLOROPINAE</p><p>Biogeographical evolution is so complex a process that the development of formal methods of biogeographical reconstruction led to a state that Nelson &amp; Ladiges (2001) described as a “mess of methods”. Indeed, mobility at a biotic scale in a considerable extension erases previous patterns, and many of the biogeographic methods have not been able to deal with the complexity of the biogeographical process. In this section, we address the general distribution patterns seen in the  Chloropinae using the phylogeny of the subfamily obtained here, without any of the numerical analyses available.</p><p>It is considerably well-established that Schizophora diversification started early in the Cenozoic (Grimaldi &amp; Cumming, 1999; Wiegmann et al., 2011). This clearly denies the evolution of the schizophorans in general and of its families to Jurassic-Cretaceous events, prior to the present separation between continents. Different acalyptrate families seem to have evolutionary patterns that diverge to some degree. The extinct Eocene Baltic amber  Protorygma (Evenhuis, 1994), for example, is seen either as a stem  Sepsidae or a stem  Ropalomeridae (Pont &amp; Meier, 2002), meaning either of these groups could be approximately Eocene in age. The  Sepsidae have only one or two subclades that diversify in the Neotropical region (Su et al., 2008, 2015). Hennig (1965) described the Baltic amber genera  Hemilauxania and  Chamaelauxania, which were assumed to be stem clades of the recent  Lauxaniidae . Additionally, Stuckenberg (1971: fig. 9) showed that most genera of the  Lauxaniidae with distribution present in the Neotropical region are connected to the Nearctic region; that most Afrotropical genera with wider distribution are connected to the Palaearctic and Oriental regions; and that most Australian genera with wider distribution are connected to the Oriental region. The lauxaniid subfamily  Homoneurinae, for example, is entirely absent from the Neotropical region. “Transtropical patterns” were recently explained as cases of pseudocongruence with Gondwanan distributions—or “pseudogondwanan” patterns (Amorim et al., 2018). Amorim et al. (2018) suggested that tropical Laurasian biota have expanded to the south in the Americas, into Africa and into Australia, followed by extensive extinction in the northern hemisphere in the Neogene along with global cooling. The existence of this tropical Laurasian biota allows to explain these patterns without demanding “transoceanic dispersal and without advocating Gondwanan origin. Hence, the differential expansion of clades of acalyptrate families into the southern continents and the differential extinction of these clades in the Nearctic and Palaearctic regions produced different, not necessarily congruent patterns, which are difficult to interpret.</p><p>The distribution patterns found in the  Chloropinae differ from what is seen in the sepsids and lauxaniids. Hennig (1965) considered that there should have already been some diversification of the  Chloropidae in the Eocene, because  Protoscinella electrica Hennig has features that are modified in relation to the groundplan of the family. The fossil does not belong to the  Chloropinae and may be close to the base of the  Oscinellinae .</p><p>When we look at the distribution of the genera of chloropines in the phylogeny (Fig. 1), it is clear that most clades with tribal rank have a worldwide distribution. The Eurinini have two main clades, one of which basically has a New World distribution (the “  Ectecephala group”), sister to a clade with basically an Old World distribution (the “  Eurina group”). Within the  Meromyzini, this pattern also occurs, with the “  Coroichlorops group” (New World) being sister to the  Mepachymerus group (Old World, except  Sagareocerus). The  Mindini are restricted to the Old World, while all remaining tribes except the  Chloropellini (known only from the Australian region) have species in both the Old World and the New World. This picture shows that different chloropine clades should have been present in this tropical biota over Laurasian terranes.</p><p>The evolution and diversification of the  Chloropidae lineages must have had a connection to the diversification of grasslands (Solecki et al., 2016). Greenwalt etal. (2019), forexample,describedanEocene compression fossil of  Lonchoptera (of which adults are also associated with grassy, open environments— Klymko &amp; Marshall, 2008) that is clearly sister to the set of extant species of the genus. The diversification of the crown group of the  Poaceae (i.e. BEP+PACCMAD) was dated by Bouchenak-Khelladi et al. (2010) to begin in the early Eocene, 57 Mya, which may have been followed by the diversification, e.g. of  Lonchoptera, in the Northern Hemisphere.</p><p>This set of evidence here available suggests that there was probably already some chloropine diversification during the Eocene. There are still no known fossils of the  Chloropinae; however, the association between the phylogeny and distribution patterns (Fig. 1) suggests that perhaps eight or nine clades (mostly corresponding to the tribes of the  Chloropinae) were already present early in the second half of the Cenozoic. They must have expanded from an original “pan-Laurasian tropical” distribution to the Neotropics (producing the New World patterns) and to the Afrotropical and Australian regions (producing the Old World patterns). Molecular studies of chloropine clades in the near future will provide the age of divergence for the main clades that would test this hypothesis and build a better understanding of  Chloropinae biogeography.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E0B25EBF3CE304FC88FDB78AFF6916	Public Domain	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.		Plazi	Riccardi, Paula Raile;Amorim, Dalton De Souza	Riccardi, Paula Raile, Amorim, Dalton De Souza (2020): Phylogenetic relationships and classification of the Chloropinae of the world (Diptera: Chloropidae). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 190: 889-941
