Selman diana (Handlirsch, 1890), new combination

Monedula diana Handlirsch, 1890 . Holotype female, Brazil (HNHM; examined through photographs).

After its original description, only a few references have been made to Monedula diana in the literature. Lohrmann (1948) briefly commented on its relation to Hemidula singularis (Taschenberg, 1870) . In Bohart & Menke (1976), Handlirsch’s species was transferred to Editha, in the new combination E. diana . Later, Menke (1983) proposed a new combination for the species, transferring it to Stictia, in an erratum to Bohart & Menke’s (1976). In any case, none of the previous authors has restudied the type material and in subsequent catalogs the name was maintained in the genus Editha (Amarante 2002, 2005; Pulawski 2014).

Study of the female holotype (Figs. 1–4), and an additional female (Figs. 5–7) deposited in the HNHM (see Type Material below), revealed that Monedula diana belongs in the genus Selman, with the following features supporting this new placement: F1 longer than scape; inner eye margins slightly diverging below; ocelli circular to semicircular and possessing partly translucent lenses; distance between lateral ocellus and eye margin about as long as diameter of mid ocellus; vertex raised medially and depressed laterally; mandibles with two subapical teeth; palpal formula 6–4; hindwing media diverging at cu-a (contrary to Bohart & Menke 1976: 541; see Parker 1929: 5). In Stictia, F1 is at most as long as the scape or shorter, the ocelli are surrounded by a line of long setae and have dark, entirely opaque lenses, the vertex is depressed medially, and the mandibles have three subapical teeth. In Editha, the inner eye margins strongly diverge below, the mid ocellus is semicircular, the distance between the lateral ocellus and the eye margin is distinctly shorter than the mid ocellus diameter, the vertex is flat medially and only weakly depressed laterally, and the hindwing media diverges beyond cu-a.

Selman diana is very similar to S. notatus, differing structurally in the shape of the clypeus. In S. diana, the clypeus is less protuberant (Fig. 7), its upper portion being more or less continuous with the disc, the disc has a pair of weak depressions (Figs. 3, 6) and its punctation is very shallow. In S. notatus, the clypeus is more protuberant (Fig. 11), the upper portion being distinctly separated from the disc by a sharp angle (Figs. 10, 11), the disc is flat and has conspicuous punctation (Fig. 10). In general, S. diana exhibits a darker color pattern (Figs. 1–3, 5–7), compared to that of S. notatus (Figs. 8–11), with the yellow maculae less extensive on the dorsal part of the meso- and metasoma. It differs from S. notatus in the following details (condition of the latter in parentheses): clypeus bright yellow as in remainder of body (pale yellow); upper portion of clypeus with a continuous black stripe (two dark spots); a yellow spot on upper frons, below mid ocellus (spot lacking); supraclypeal yellow macula not extending to upper tangent of antennal torulli (extending to upper tangent); genal stripe continuing dorsally behind ocelli (ending at upper eye margin); yellow maculae on mesoscutum shorter (discal pair wider and lateral stripe complete); scutellum with a pair of yellow spots (a continuous stripe); metanotum black (mostly yellow); stripes on metaposnotum interrupted (continuous); pair of discal yellow maculae on T1 separate from lateral maculae (continuous); yellow stripes on T2–T5 broadly interrupted medially (narrowly interrupted); T6 and S5 completely black (with yellow maculae).

Type material. There are two specimens of Monedula diana in the HNHM collection, both with the labels “747/ 110” and “ Brazilia ”, but only one bears an identification label, “ Monedula Diana Handl. ” (Fig. 4). In the original description, Handlirsch (1890) states clearly that only a single specimen from Brazil, and deposited in the HNHM collection, was examined. Therefore, the specimen with the identification label is here considered the holotype. The second female, despite being identical to the holotype and having the same label data, cannot be treated as a type specimen.

Remarks on the type locality. The specimens registered under number 747 in the HNHM accession book are indicated as coming from the Brazilian state of Piauí [as Piauhy] and were accessioned in 1886 (Fig. 12). The heading for these records in the accession book (Fig. 12 A) reads “Brazilian Hymenoptera specimens from the Piauhy province bought by the Museum (from Merkl)” (translation provided by Dr. Zoltán Vas). Merkl (cited as E.

“Menkl” by Rasmussen & Vivallo 2014) likely refers to Eduard Merkl and Joseph Merkl, brothers who were insect dealers in the last quarter of the 19th century in Hungary (living in places now part of Romania) (Horn et al. 1990: 260). There are several bee taxa described by both Friese and Mocsáry also indicated in the original descriptions as coming from “Piauhy”, as for example Oxaea ferruginea Friese, 1898 (currently placed in the genus Notoxaea) and Centris fusciventris Mocsáry, 1899 (junior synonym of Centris quadrimaculata Packard, 1869) (see also Rasmussen & Vivallo 2014). Most of these taxa, however, have never been found in Piauí, and in some cases their distribution ranges are very far from this Brazilian state. We suspect that most likely these specimens did not come from Piauí. Therefore, it seems quite possible that S. diana will be found elsewhere. It seems probable that the Merkl brothers did not collect the insects themselves, but rather acquired them from a collector, or dealer, based in Piauí, and therefore labelled the insects from that state, ignoring the fact that they might have been collected elsewhere in Brazil or even in other countries from South America.