Tromodesia vibripennis Rondani, 1856

Sforzi, Alessandra & Sommaggio, Daniele, 2021, Catalog of the Diptera types described by Camillo Rondani, Zootaxa 4989 (1), pp. 1-438 : 189

Tromodesia vibripennis Rondani, 1856

ORIGINAL DESCRIPTION: 1856: 87.

TYPE LOCALITY: Rondani gave no type locality in his original description but later (1962a: 145) added “ in agri parmensis planitie et collibus [ Parmese plains and hills ( Italy)]” .

TYPE MATERIAL: 1 ♀, lectotype (missing all legs except the right hind-leg) ( MZUF: Box 20): Tromodesia Rnd. / vibripennis Rnd. / 1059 / lectotype ♀, Tromodesia vibripennis Rn., T. Pape det., 1986.

PARALECTOTYPES EXAMINED: 1 ♀ (missing left mid- and both hind- legs) ( MZUF: Box 20) : Tromodesia Rnd. / vibripennis Rnd. , ♀ / 1059; 1 ♀ (missing left mid-leg) ( MZUF: Box 20) : Tromodesia Rnd. / vibripennis Rnd. , ♂ [sic!] / 1060.

PARALECTOTYPES NOT EXAMINED: 1 ♀ (MZUF: Box F): Tromodesia R. vibripennis R., 385, ♀, Parma / 393 385; 1 specimen (sex not determinable) (MSNC: Box DIPTERA Ex collezione Rondani - I): Tromodesia vibripennis Rnd. 415 Parma / Coll. Rondani, scatola n° 5, posiz. D-16 / Museo di Storia Naturale Università di Pisa, Calci (PI) ex collezione Rondani; 1 ♀ (missing right wing) (OUMNH Verrall-Collin Coll.: Box 7): Type / Agriella vibripennis Rond. , Parma, a spec. nov.? / T. vibripennis Ex. Coll. Big. / T. vibripennis ♀ Europe, Rond. / G. Tromodesia Rondani ; 2 ♀♀ (one missing right mid-leg; the other missing right fore-leg) (OUMNH Verrall-Collin Coll.: Box 7): Type / T. vibripennis Ex. Coll. Big. / T. vibripennis ♀ Europe, Rond. / G. Tromodesia Rondani.

CURRENT STATUS: valid species, as Tromodesia vibripennis ( Pape 1989: 357, Herting 1993: 106, Pape et al. 1995: 16, Peris & González-Mora 2007: 54; Cerretti et al. 2020: 105).

REMARKS: Rondani’s (1856: 87) key for the genus Tromodesia Rondani, 1856 lists Tromodesia vibripennis as its type species, but he did not provide a detailed description, type locality, number or sex of the specimens. He later ( Rondani 1862d: 145) redescribed the species from both sexes. Pape (1989: 357) reported, incorrectly, that “[Rondani] mentions only the female sex” and that “I did not recover any males among the type material, but one female, the lectotype as standing as a male (males and females were kept separately ….), and Rondani may have made a misidentification”. Pape (1989: 357) designated a lectotype (♀) and paralectotypes (2 ♀♀), incorrectly reporting one of the latter as being numbered “1059” instead of “1060”, and did not know of a female in the MZUF, one specimen in the MSNC, and an additional three females in the OUMNH (all are paralectotypes).