Merodon armipes Rondani, 1843

Sforzi, Alessandra & Sommaggio, Daniele, 2021, Catalog of the Diptera types described by Camillo Rondani, Zootaxa 4989 (1), pp. 1-438 : 255

publication ID	https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4989.1.1
publication LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:pub:89C63841-3CF4-491D-8C73-BEF7DCB18FB5
DOI	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5117255
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/686387A0-FF33-FF55-5889-FF1BFDE06294
treatment provided by	Plazi
scientific name	Merodon armipes Rondani, 1843
status

Treatment

Merodon armipes Rondani, 1843 View in CoL View at ENA

ORIGINAL DESCRIPTION: 1843b: 43.

TYPE LOCALITY: “ in colle ditionis Parmensis prope torrentem Terminam [Parmese hill near the Termina stream ( Italy)]”.

TYPE MATERIAL: 1 ♂, lectotype (missing right fore-leg and terminalia) ( MZUF: Box 2): Merodon Fb. Latr. / armipes Rnd. , ♂, Parma / 61 / lectotype of Merodon armipes R., designated W. Hurkmans 1987.

PARALECTOTYPE NOT EXAMINED: 3 ♂♂ (one missing right fore-leg) ( MZUF: Box 2): Merodon Fb. Latr. / armipes Rnd. , ♂, Parma / 61 / ♂ / Merodon armipes Rnd. , det. Hurkmans, 1987; 1 ♂ (missing left fore-, both mid-, and left hind-legs) ( MZUF: Box A): Merodon armipes Rnd. , 24, Parma / 393 24; 1 ♂ ( MSNC: Box DIPTERA Ex collezione Rondani - I): Merodon armipes R. Parma / Coll. Rondani, scatola n° 3, posiz. C-13 / Museo di Storia Naturale Università di Pisa, Calci ( PI) ex collezione Rondani; 1 ♂ ( MSNPV: Box 99): Merodon armipes Rnd. , Parma.

CURRENT STATUS: valid species ( Peck 1988: 167, Belcari et al. 1995a: 16).

REMARKS: Rondani (1843b: 43) described Merodon armipes from just the male sex, without specifying the exact number of specimens, but giving a single measurement of length: “ semel tantum marem legi [I collected the male only]”. He later ( Rondani 1845f: 262) reported two specimens: “ ho raccolto solamente due maschi [I collected only two males]”. Willem Hurkmans examined the MZUF type material, adding the label “ lectotype ” under one male, without publishing any lectotype designation. Vujić et al. (2012) examined the specimen labeled as lectotype by Hurkmans and designated it as lectotype, but did not mention an additional six males: four in the MZUF, one in the MSNC and one in the MSNPV. We are unable to single out the male paralectotype upon which Rondani based his description. We leave the recognition of this paralectotype to a future specialist. Vujić et al. (2012) considered as paralectotypes two males in the MNHUB, which do not belong to the type series because of their locality ( Switzerland and Germany). Three MZUF females numbered “61” are not included in the type series because of their sex.