Neochloropsina glabra, Riccardi & Amorim, 2020

Neochloropsina glabra View in CoL sp. nov. ( Figs 87, 170, 200–201, 204)

lsid: urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:1CEC9E31-F841-4466-98E7-CEFE300AACFF

Diagnosis: Minute yellowish species with long ocellar and outer vertical setae; ocellar triangle entirely yellow; scutum with brown stripes; tibial organ present; basiphallus oval.

Material examined: Holotype: 1 m #, MALAYSIA, Sabah, confluence of Sungai (= river) Pegalan and Sungai Tikalot , 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] GoogleMaps . Paratypes: 1 m # and 1 f#, same data as holotype [ MZUSP]; 1 f# same data, except Mahua , 5° 47’ 52.1” N, 16° 24’ 24.5” E GoogleMaps , 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 GoogleMaps , 16° 42’1 2.30” E, 497 m, 9 August 2009, canopy fogging ( Aglaia macrophylla Teijsm. & Binn. ), A. Floren leg. [ MZUSP]. Additional identified specimens at the ZSM ( Michael von Tschirnhaus personal collection) .

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.

Etymology: From the Latin adjective glaber, smooth or bald, referring to the extremely reduced chaetotaxy of the head.

Remarks: The holotype of this species was collected aspirating on Zingiberaceae , while all paratypes were collected with canopy fogging.

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 .

Mindini Paramonov, 1957 ( Figs 24, 30, 34, 96–105, 179–188)

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).

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 .

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.

Cherian & 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 .

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 .