NEWS - Researchers have assigned four new species and three new synonyms to the hoverfly genus (Paramixogaster Brunetti, 1923) bringing the total number of valid species to the list to 15. This new revision of the new insects could provide a clearer map of the overall structure of the nomenclature.
.jpg "Four new species and three synonyms in the hoverfly (Paramixogaster Brunetti 1923)")
Paramixogaster has been confusing for some time due to the small number of specimens available for most of the species. This has led to uncertainties in keys and diagnoses. Menno Reemer of the Naturalis Biodiversity Center in Leiden and Hariharakrishnan Sankararaman of the Vanavarayar Institute of Agriculture in Coimbatore have described 15 species of the genus.
The four new species are Paramixogaster halmaherensis Reemer, P. jubata Reemer, P. kodaiana Sankararaman & Reemer, and P. sulawesiana Reemer. Three new synonyms are Paramicrodon decipiens de Meijere (1917) as a junior synonym of Microdon vespiformis de Meijere (1908), Paramixogaster wegneri Keiser (1964), as a junior synonym of Ceratophya indica Doleschall (1857), Microdon subpetiolatus Thompson (2020) as a junior synonym of Microdon contractus Brunetti (1923).
While Paramixogaster huoi Reemer was introduced as a replacement name for P. trifasciatus Huo & Zhao (2022) which is a primary homonym of P. trifasciatus Ssymank & Reemer (2016). Neotypes were assigned to Paramixogaster icariiformis Pendlebury (1927) and Myxogaster variegata Sack (1922). Lectotypes were assigned to Microdon vespiformis de Meijere (1908).
The researchers say that some of the taxonomy of Paramixogaster species is not entirely satisfactory. The main reason is the small number of specimens available for most species. There is at least one additional species that has not been described.
They advise caution when using the key and diagnosis by always carefully comparing specimens with descriptions and photographs. Paramixogaster luxor is very different from other Oriental species in terms of the scutellar calcar and short postpedicel.
The surstylus of the male genitalia is also very different from other species in the genus because. It appears that P. luxor is not included in Paramixogaster. Analysis of molecular traits could help in recovering the phylogenetic affinities of these species, but is not yet available.
Original research
Reemer M, Sankararaman H (2024) Revision of the Oriental species of the hoverfly genus Paramixogaster Brunetti, 1923 (Diptera, Syrphidae, Microdontinae). ZooKeys 1208: 1-48. DOI:10.3897/zookeys.1208.122829
.jpg "Four new species and three synonyms in the hoverfly (Paramixogaster Brunetti 1923)")
Paramixogaster has been confusing for some time due to the small number of specimens available for most of the species. This has led to uncertainties in keys and diagnoses. Menno Reemer of the Naturalis Biodiversity Center in Leiden and Hariharakrishnan Sankararaman of the Vanavarayar Institute of Agriculture in Coimbatore have described 15 species of the genus.
The four new species are Paramixogaster halmaherensis Reemer, P. jubata Reemer, P. kodaiana Sankararaman & Reemer, and P. sulawesiana Reemer. Three new synonyms are Paramicrodon decipiens de Meijere (1917) as a junior synonym of Microdon vespiformis de Meijere (1908), Paramixogaster wegneri Keiser (1964), as a junior synonym of Ceratophya indica Doleschall (1857), Microdon subpetiolatus Thompson (2020) as a junior synonym of Microdon contractus Brunetti (1923).
While Paramixogaster huoi Reemer was introduced as a replacement name for P. trifasciatus Huo & Zhao (2022) which is a primary homonym of P. trifasciatus Ssymank & Reemer (2016). Neotypes were assigned to Paramixogaster icariiformis Pendlebury (1927) and Myxogaster variegata Sack (1922). Lectotypes were assigned to Microdon vespiformis de Meijere (1908).
The researchers say that some of the taxonomy of Paramixogaster species is not entirely satisfactory. The main reason is the small number of specimens available for most species. There is at least one additional species that has not been described.
They advise caution when using the key and diagnosis by always carefully comparing specimens with descriptions and photographs. Paramixogaster luxor is very different from other Oriental species in terms of the scutellar calcar and short postpedicel.
The surstylus of the male genitalia is also very different from other species in the genus because. It appears that P. luxor is not included in Paramixogaster. Analysis of molecular traits could help in recovering the phylogenetic affinities of these species, but is not yet available.
Original research
Reemer M, Sankararaman H (2024) Revision of the Oriental species of the hoverfly genus Paramixogaster Brunetti, 1923 (Diptera, Syrphidae, Microdontinae). ZooKeys 1208: 1-48. DOI:10.3897/zookeys.1208.122829