Scutops marcgrafi Amorim & Vasconcelos, 1989

Freitas, Geovânia & Ale-Rocha, Rosaly, 2023, Taxonomic revision of the Neotropical genus Scutops Coquillett, 1904 (Diptera: Periscelididae), Zootaxa 5244 (5), pp. 401-427 : 414-415

Scutops marcgrafi Amorim & Vasconcelos, 1989

( Figs 11 , 19F , 22 )

Scutops marcgrafi Amorim & Vasconcelos, 1989: 42 ; Mathis & Rung, 2011: 359 (world catalog).

Diagnosis: Frons yellow: ocellar triangle brown; face shiny, whitish yellow; lateral longitudinal band with silver pruinescence on occiput extended to gena; gena and postgena yellow; scutum brown with longitudinal median yellow stripe long, almost reaching the anterior margin of scutum, narrowed anteriorly; wing with hyaline preapical band incomplete; first fore tarsomere broadened.

Holotype female. Redescription. Body: 3.5 mm; wing: 3.3 mm. Head ( Figs 11A–C ). Frons yellow; ocellar triangle brown; fronto-orbital setulae minute and yellow. Face white, shiny; dorsal region higher than wide, slightly convex with apical margin sub-triangular in frontal view, with dense silver pruinescence; lateral margin with series of thin and brown setae. Gena and postgena yellow; postgena with long and slender setae; gena with short, thin, pale brown setae. Occiput with a series with brown and thin setae; lateral longitudinal band with silver pruinescence extended to gena. Antenna yellow, pedicel with small brownish spot in the outer lateral face; pedicel with four dorsal brown and robust setae; arista (partially broken) with eight dorsal branches and two ventral, plus another short branches laterally. Buccal pieces brown except palpus dark brown. Thorax ( Figs 11A, C ). Scutum brown with lateral margin yellowish brown and a longitudinal median yellow stripe long, extended from posterior margin of scutum, almost reaching the anterior margin of scutum, narrowed anteriorly; postpronotal lobe pale whitish yellow with dense silver pruinescence; notopleuron and supra-alar region yellow, with dense silver pruinescence; scutellum yellow with lateral margin brown, with the apex slightly elevated; subscutellum brown; pleura brown, anepisternum dark brown, shiny. Setae: 1 dorsocentral; anterior katepisternal twice length of posterior seta (lost in holotype, only insertion observed); distal scutellar seta about 2/3 of the basal seta. Legs ( Fig. 11A ). Coxae and trochanters pale brown; femora brown with yellow apex; foretibia brown with base and apex yellow; mid and hind tibia yellow with base brown and an apical incomplete brown ring; tarsi yellow. Forefemur with posteroventral developed setae; mid tibia with developed black spine ventroapically; foretarsus with first tarsomere broadened. Wing ( Fig. 19F ). Brownish at distal anterior half, yellow at basal half, including the basal cells, cup and basal half of r 1 and basal 1/3 of r 2+ 3; costal cell yellow with apex darkened and slightly brown in the remaining; transversal preapical hyaline band incomplete, not reaching the costal margin; vein R 1 yellow with apical 1/4 brown. Halter yellow. Abdomen ( Fig. 11A ). Tergites and sternites brown.

Locality records: Brazil (Paraíba). ( Fig.22 )

Type material examined: Holotype female ( MZSP). BRASIL, Paraíba, Jo „o Pessoa, Campus Universitário [7°08′19.5″S 34°50′48.9″W], Malaise trap, xi.1987, D. S. Amorim col.. Identification label printed on white paper . Holotype condition: left foreleg lost, right post-pedicel lost, apical part of left arista and posterior katepisternal seta lost; not dissected.

Comments: Specimens of S. marcgrafi , S. lopesi and S. robustus sp. nov have a long medial longitudinal yellow stripe on the scutum and one pair of dorsocentral seta. Scutops marcgrafi can be distinguished from S. robustus sp. nov. by the lateral band with silver pruinescence on the occiput that is extended to the gena, the gena is yellow and the lateral portion of the face is also yellow. In S. robustus sp. nov. the lateral pruinescent band on the occiput is short, and the gena and lateral portion of the face are brown. The distinction between S. marcgrafi and S. lopesi is more difficult to determine and is based mainly on coloration of the scutum and frons, as noted in the key. Discovery and study of the male of S. marcgrafi will probably reveal some distinction between these two species.

Figures

FIGURE 11. Scutops marcgrafi Amorim & Vasconcelos, 1989. A–C (holotype).A. Habitus, lateral view; B. Head, frontal view; C. Thorax, dorsal view.

FIGURE 19. Wings. A. Scutops chapmani Curran, 1934; B. Scutops fascipennis Coquillett, 1904; C. Scutops flavithorax sp. nov. (paratype male); D. Scutops ipixunensis sp. nov. (paratype female); E. Scutops lopesi Amorim & Vasconcelos, 1989; F. Scutops marcgrafi Amorim & Vasconcelos, 1989; G. Scutops melinus sp. nov. (holotype female); H. Scutops peruanus Hennig, 1952; I. Scutops robustus sp. nov. (paratype female). J. Scutops spinophallus sp. nov. (holotype male).

FIGURE 22. Distributional map with records of S. flavithorax sp. nov., S. goianiensis, S. ipixunensis sp. nov., S. marcgrafi and S. robustus sp. nov..