Ladopyris, Jaschhof & Jaschhof, 2020

Jaschhof, Mathias & Jaschhof, Catrin, 2020, An update of Micromyinae (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae) taxonomy, with descriptions of a new genus and 13 new species from Northern Europe, Zootaxa 4750 (3), pp. 349-369 : 355

Ladopyris gen. nov.

Type species, Ladopyris baltica sp. nov., described below. Monotypic.

Diagnosis. This new genus, which belongs to the tribe Micromyini ( Jaschhof & Jaschhof 2009: 193) , is described here for a single species whose males bear a close resemblance to Polyardis Pritchard. Distinctions concern the genitalic structures, which in Polyardis are small, uniform, and of such simplified structure that they might reflect the hypothetical ground pattern of Micromyinae ( Jaschhof & Jaschhof 2009: fig. 18A–B). The genitalia of Ladopyris , which are larger and more complex, show the following peculiarities ( Fig. 12 ): the sclerotized apex of the tegmen is shaped like a stand-up collar (↓ 1); the parameral apodemes are strongly enlarged (↓ 2); the hypoproct is vestigial; the cerci are prominent (↓ 3); and both the gonostylar body and tooth are flattened (↓ 4). These characters are rated here as significant enough to justify the introduction of a discrete genus (see Discussion). Females and preimaginal stages of Ladopyris are unknown.

Etymology. Ladopyris is an anagram of Polyardis . The gender of the name is female.

Discussion. Within Micromyini , Ladopyris is one of three genera in which the bulk of translucent sensilla on the male antenna are slender, single-pointed hairs ( Fig. 11 ); the other such genera are Polyardis and Pseudoperomyia Jaschhof & Hippa. A singularity of Pseudoperomyia is the presence of bottle-shaped sensilla, which occur in small numbers among hair-shaped translucent sensilla ( Jaschhof & Jaschhof 2009: fig. 11 for a schematic overview of sensilla types found in Micromyinae ). Male morphology provides no clues for the assumption of closer relationship between Pseudoperomyia and Ladopyris . All the more obvious are the similarities shared by Ladopyris and Polyardis , such as the sparseness of postocular bristles, the 3-segmented palpus, the sickle-shaped claws, and the claw-long empodia. As mentioned above, the only significant differences concern genitalic structures.

New genera introduced for single species with aberrant genitalic morphology are not unproblematic, more so in the tribe Micromyini whose generic classification is in need of fundamental revision (see below the introductory remarks on Xylopriona ). That said, the pros and cons of taxonomic decisions need to be weighed as cases arrive. We have refrained from classifying L. baltica with Polyardis – in our view the only alternative possible – because this would require amending the generic definition in an inappropriate manner. It must be remembered that Polyardis is an unusually homogenous group of species, of which none shows the slightest sign of aberrant morphology. At the same time, the genitalic structure of L. baltica is unusual even with respect to Micromyini other than Polyardis , in which subtriangular, scutellate tegmina devoid of any substructures prevail. The only exception here is Pseudoperomyia , to present knowledge an exclusively Eastern Palearctic / Oriental genus, in which tegmina (as well as other genitalic structures) show a wide range of modifications unknown from other Micromyini ( Jaschhof & Hippa 1999) . The most likely explanation why L. baltica at present appears to be such an outlier among Micromyini is that its closest relatives remain undiscovered. In other words, we think it likely that further Ladopyris will be found in those parts of the Palearctic region where Micromyinae are yet unresearched.

Figures

FIGURES 11–14. Male morphology of Ladopyris baltica (11–12) and Monardia (M.) lapponica (13–14), holotypes. 11: Fourth flagellomere, lateral. 12: Genitalia, ventral. 13: Genitalia, ventral. 14: Fourth flagellomere, lateral. Scales 0.05 mm. Arrows refer to characters described in the diagnoses.