Exorista properans Rondani, 1859

Sforzi, Alessandra & Sommaggio, Daniele, 2021, Catalog of the Diptera types described by Camillo Rondani, Zootaxa 4989 (1), pp. 1-438 : 315

Exorista properans Rondani, 1859

ORIGINAL DESCRIPTION: 1859b: 117 (key), 127 (description).

TYPE LOCALITY: Meigen (1824: 384) gave no type locality in his original description of E. festinans ( Meigen, 1824) , but presumably it is Europe because the work deals with European species.

TYPE MATERIAL: see Remarks.

CURRENT STATUS: junior synonym di Erycia fatua ( Meigen, 1824) ( Herting & Dely-Draskovits 1993: 221) .

REMARKS: Rondani (1859b: 127) considered the females of Exorista festinans ( Meigen, 1824) and the males of Exorista diluta ( Meigen, 1824) and Exorista rufoscutellata (Macquart, 1851) as the same species but, instead of applying the Principle of Priority, he incorrectly proposed the substitute name Exorista properans . Rondani (1865c: 207) treated Exorista properans as a valid species and he later ( Rondani 1868d: 583, 1872c: 211) reaffirmed having proposed it to combine Exorista festinans , Exorista diluta and Exorista rufoscutellata (the latter not included in Rondani, 1868d). Exorista properans was considered as a synonym of Exorista festinans by Schiner (1861b: 465, 1864: 95), Villeneuve (1900: 161), Strobl (1902: 487) and Mesnil (1954: 316), and of Erycia ferruginea ( Meigen, 1824) by Bezzi & Stein (1907: 296). Strobl considered properans first as a variety of Exorista ferruginea (1898: 446, 1900: 601) and then as a valid species (1904: 547). The type material for Exorista properans will be the same as for the name it was proposed to replace, i. e., Exorista festinans . Meigen (1824: 384) indicated that the E. festinans types are in Fallén’s collection. Herting (1972: 6) reported the type in the MZLU. Under the name E. properans there are one male and one male (non-types) in the MSNC.