Rhagoletis Loew, 1862

Korneyev, V. A., Mishustin, R. I. & Korneyev, S. V., 2017, The Carpomyini Fruit Flies Diptera: Tephritidae Of Europe Caucasus And Middle East: New Records Of Pests With Improved Keys, Vestnik Zoologii 51 (6), pp. 453-470 : 459-460

Rhagoletis Loew, 1862

Rhagoletis Loew, 1862b: 44

Type species: Rhagoletis cerasi ( Linnaeus, 1758) (by monotypy).

Zonosema Loew 1862b: 43

Type species: Tephritis alternata Fallén , by subsequent designation of Rondani, 1870: 6.

Microrrhagoletis Rohdendorf, 1961: 187

Type species: Microrrhagoletis samojlovitshae Rohdendorf (by original designation).

Megarrhagoletis Rohdendorf, 1961: 196 .

Type species: Megarrhagoletis magniterebra Rohdendorf (by original designation).

Diagnosis. Medium-sized (3.0–8.0 mm) fruit flies with 3 frontal and 2 orbital setae, pale or dark postocellar seta, short head, pointed apex of flagellomere 1 (except in R. kurentsovi ( Rohdendorf, 1961) from Far East Russia and some Neotropical species); either pale yellow to orange, or mostly black with creamy white or yellow scutellum except base and postpronotal lobes, long and variously acute posterior lobe of surstylus of male, oviscape with T-shaped desclerotized posteromedial area ventrally, and aculeus uniformly tapered apically. Third instar larva with variable number (from 3 to 20) of oral ridges and stomal sensory organ with or without preoral teeth.

Remarks. Rhagoletis is a heterogeneous genus with five to seven groups of species associated with different host plant families ( Rhamnaceae, Berberidacea , Solanaceae , etc.) in the Palaearctic, Nearctic, and Neotropical Regions (and a few species in montane areas in the northern Oriental Region), with the relationships among them and the other genera of the tribe Carpomyini (e. g., Carpomya and Zonosemata ) still poorly resolved and understood.

In the case Carpomya is found to be an in-group within Rhagoletis , the latter either would incorporate its species and become a junior synonym of the latter, or should be split into several monophyletic genera ( V. Korneyev, unpublished data; J. Jenkins, unpublished data; J. Smith et al., in prep.). Here, we abstain from any taxonomic changes until phylogenetic relationships in Rhagoletis are better understood.