Meoneura cf. biseta Deeming, 1976

Papp, L., 2013, New Species And Records Of Meoneura Rondani, 1856 From The Old World Tropics (Diptera, Carnidae), Acta Zoologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 59 (3), pp. 213-227 : 223

Meoneura cf. biseta Deeming, 1976

( Figs 26–29 )

Material examined ( BMSA): 2 males 1 female (1 m in HNHM): Namibia, Khorixas district , Leeukop 664, 19°53’15’’S 14°21’44’’E, 26–30.x.2001, A. H. Kirk-Spriggs & E. Marais, Malaise trap sample riverbed. 3 females (1 f in HNHM): ibid., Karibib district, Tsaobismund at: 22°22’40’’S 15°44’58’’E, 13–15.iv.2001, A. H. Kirk-Spriggs & E. Marais, Malaise trap sample .

It was described on the basis of a male from N Nigeria, Zaria, Samaru. I had no chance to study that unique specimen in the Natural History Museum, London. I think I risk not too much describing and depicting the male genita- lia of the specimens from Namibia under that name. Male preabdominal sternites ( Fig. 26 ) comparatively large, sternite 4 about twice longer than broad, sternite 5 about as long as broad with several setae (not only marginal ones), one pair of ca. 0.035 seta emerges from latero-caudal part. Subepandrial sclerite large (contours on Fig. 28 ) and looks bipartite: central 1/3 transparent and weakly sclerotised. Epandrium ( Fig. 28 ) rather long with 2 pairs of long and thick, not marginal setae on its dorsal part; a similar third pair of setae present on ventral edge sub-caudally. Surstylus ( Figs 27–28 ) long, medially curved and anteriorly curved even in the view of its broadest extension. Base of its setulae on apical part continued in demelanised narrow stripes towards base of surstylus ( Fig. 27 ). Postgonite ( Fig. 29 ) very broad, almost as broad basally as long, also apical part broad with a small anterior apex.

Deeming’ s (1976) figure on the surstylus is markedly different from my figures. However, surstylus in views other than the broadest extension view is misleading in numerous cases. I think the large pair of epandrial setae as more informative, so I think our specimens are conspecific with the holotype of M. biseta Deeming. It is a matter of course that this presentiment must be corroborated by a study of the holotype.

Figures

Figs 26–33. Meoneura species, male genitalia. 26–29 = M. biseta Deeming, male terminalia: 26 = abdominal sternites 3 to 5, ventral view, 27 = left surstylus in broadest extension, a sublateral, slightly subventral view, 28 = epandrium, basal part of hypandrium, right surstylus and contours of subepandrial sclerite laterally, 29 = postgonite in broadest extension (a sublateral view). 30–33 = M. nigrohalterata sp. n., paratype male: 30 = contours of epandrium, cerci and subepandrial sclerite, caudal view (subepandrial sclerite dashed, epandrial setae omitted), 31 = surstylus in broadest extension, sublateral view, 32 = same, inner (medial)