Sciomyzidae (Seguy, 1934)

Papp, L., 2005, Some Acalyptrate Flies (Diptera) From Taiwan, Acta Zoologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 51 (3), pp. 187-213 : 200-202

Sciomyzidae

Only three sciomyzid specimens were captured in 2000. All of them belong to a species of the genus Pherbellia ROBINEAU-DESVOIDY, 1830 . However, five species of the eight sciomyzid species hitherto reported from Taiwan are represented in the HNHM. Data of all this old material are given below.

Pherbellia causta (HENDEL, 1913) – 2 males, 1 female: Taichung Hsien , Sinshe , 585 m, N 24°09’25.2” E 120°52’9.6”, over/along Ma-Chu-Ken river and in river valley, April 6, 2003, No. 24, leg. L. PAPP & M. FÖLDVÁRI. 1 male: Formosa Sauter – Chip Chip 909. III. – “causta Hend. ” det. KERTÉSZ. The last specimen is from the same locality and with the same data as the type. However, this specimen was sold to the HNHM, thus HENDEL could not see it .

Pteromicra leucodactyla (HENDEL, 1913) – 10 males, 2 females: Formosa Sauter – Tainan 909. II. – “leucodactyla Hend. ” det. KERTÉSZ. Again, these specimens are with the same data as the type specimens. In the HNHM there is an additional specimen without head, another one without abdomen, plus a pin without specimen, all these are with the above data .

Sepedon lobifera HENDEL, 1911 – 4 syntypes with red [? HENDEL’ s] TYPUS label and with labels Formosa Sauter and “lobiferus H.” [red] “typus”, det. F. HENDEL : 1 female: Kosempo 908. III. 21 .; 1 male: Ins. Lambeh 1908. I .; 2 males: Takao 1907. VII. 19. /IV. 2. Also the following female is to be regarded as a syntype: Takao 1907. XI. 8. – “ Sepedon lobiferus H.” det. HENDEL. The following specimens were identified by K. KERTÉSZ: Formosa Sauter – “lobiferus H.” det. KERTÉSZ : 4 males 1 female: Takao 1907. XII. 20. / V./ XII. 23 .; 8 males 7 females: D/ T /aihorinsho, 1909. VIII./VII .; 8 males 2 female: Taihorin 1911. VII.; 4 females: Tainan 1912. IV .; 1 male 1 female: Ins. Lambeh 1908. I.; 1 male: Polisha 908. III .; 1 male: Koshun 908. IX .; 5 males: Kosempo 1912. V./908. I. 20. Two additional specimens (Taihorinsho 1909. VIII.) are half-eaten by Anthrenus larvae; some of the above specimens are also damaged .

Sepedon plumbella WIEDEMANN, 1830 – Formosa Sauter: 6 males, 4 females: Takao 1907. XII. 20. /XII. 23./ VI. 28./XI. 9. (one of them det. F. HENDEL.) ; 2 males, 5 females: Tainan 909. I./II. In the HNHM there are specimens also from Java and Sumatra .

Sepedon sauteri HENDEL, 1911 – 1 male syntype: Formosa Sauter – Takao, 1907. XII. 2. – “Sauteri Hend. ” [red] “typus” det. F. HENDEL; 1 male 1 female syntypes: ibid., Takao, 1907. XII. 7. / 1907. VI. 23. – “Sauteri H.”. Specimens, which are possibly also syntypes: 1 male: Formosa Sauter – Takao, 1907. VII. 19. – “Sauteri Hend. ” [red] “typus” det. F. HENDEL [I prepared its abdomen with genitalia, which are now kept in a plastic microvial with glycerol]; 1 male: Formosa Sauter – Takao 1907. VII. 10. – “violaceus H.” [red] “typus” [!] det. F. HENDEL. All the following specimens are with the first label of Formosa Sauter: 1 female: Daitorinsho 1909. VII. – “ Sepedon Sauteri H. det. HENDEL; 1 female: Tainan 909.II. – “ Sepedon violaceus H.” det. HENDEL. 6 males 6 females: Tainan 909. II. – “violaceus H.” det. KERTÉSZ; 14 males 16 females: “Sauteri H.” det. KERTÉSZ: 1 male 1 female: Tainan 909. II.; 2 males 2 females: Takao 1907. VI. 23. / XII. 20./ 908. V. 4./ XI. 18.; 3 males 4 females: D[T]aihorinsho 1909.VIII./VII.; 8 males 9 females: Taihorin 1911. VII. Sepedon sauteri HENDEL, 1911 was regarded as a junior synonym of S. sphegea (FABRICIUS, 1775) , a widespread Palaearctic species. Now I think I can deny that belief. Indeed, these two species are closely related, but one can make distinction between them even without preparing the male genitalia. Not only the cross-veins but also apical 1/3 to 2/5 of wing are brown darkened in S. sauteri . Scape and pedicel of S. sauteri are yellowish also on lateral surface, while scape and pedicel black in the European specimens (at least on lateral surface). Anterior half of katepisternum is also with light microtomentum in S. sauteri . Ventral lobe of male cerci are short (in contrast to S. sphegea ) and without macrochaetae on apical half (wholly setose in S. sphegea ); this character is discernible in many specimens even without preparation. Surstylus and other male genital characters are also different.

At present I do not know the valid name of this biological species, since there are three other names published before 1911 for the South-eastern Asian Sepedon (e.g. Sepedon violaceus HENDEL, 1909 was described from Hong Kong), which may refer to conspecific entities. However, since Sepedon sauteri HENDEL is obviously an available name, it is the only correct way to publish the above specimens from Taiwan under this name. A publication under the name S. sphegea would have been another misidentification. It is worth mentioning, that while the specimens from Europe ( Polonia, Berlin, Krefeld, Corfu, etc.) and from Asia minor (Poros, Turkey) are with Á. SOÓS’ s identification label “ S. sphegea ”, those from Taiwan are without it.