---

Hi y'all,

Hope this is the right place for this question:
Is there any list available on the net with all genusses (?) of Syrphidae, but NOT alphabetically, but sytematically (I mean the biologically/genetically closely related gen. closely together). I think BugGuide has its list like that, but they don't have all the gen. we have, do they?

Thanks,

Andr?

NB: I derived this from BugGuide. Any good?

Syrphinae
Tribe Bacchini
Genus Melanostoma
Genus Platycheirus

Tribe Paragini
Genus Paragus

Tribe Syrphini
Genus Allograpta
Genus Scaeva
Genus Sphaerophoria
Genus Syrphus
Genus Eupeodes
Genus Chrysotoxum
Genus Ocyptamus
Genus Pseudodoros
Genus Xanthogramma
Genus Melangyna
Genus Dasysyrphus
Genus Meliscaeva
Genus Epistrophe
Genus Didea

Tribe Toxomerini
Genus Toxomerus

Tribe Pipizini
Genus Arctophila
Genus Pipiza



Eristalinae
Tribe Brachyopini
Genus Orthonevra
Genus Sphegina
Genus Brachyopa
Genus Chrysogaster
Genus Myolepta

Tribe Eristalini
Genus Eristalinus
Genus Eristalis
Genus Helophilus
Genus Mallota
Genus Meromacrus
Genus Myatropha
Genus Palpada
Genus Parhelophilus
Genus Polydontomyia
Genus Anasimyia
Genus Asemosyrphus

Tribe Merodontini
Genus Merodon
Genus Eumerus
Genus Nausigaster

Tribe Milesiini
Genus Milesia
Genus Spilomyia
Genus Chalcosyrphus
Genus Blera
Genus Temnostoma
Genus Pterallastes
Genus Brachypalpus
Genus Tropidia
Genus Teuchocnemis>
Genus Sphecomyia
Genus Criorhina

Tribe Rhingiini
Genus Rhingia
Genus Cheilosia

Tribe Sericomyiini
Genus Sericomyia
Genus Condidea
Genus Somula

Tribe Volucellini
Genus Copestylum
Genus Ornidia

Tribe Xylotini
Genus Syritta
Genus Cynorhinella
Genus Xylota

Tribe Ceriini
Genus Polybiomyia
Genus Ceriana
Genus Sphiximorpha


Microdontinae
Genus Microdon

---

Hi Andre
As genus is a latin term, the plural is genera, rather than genusses. ;)

As for systematic arrangements of species, the old British Checklist was organised on a systematic basis, but there were so many arguments about the exact placement of genera and species, and everyone found it diffficult to use, that it was decided to stick with an alphabetic arrangement.
This has several advantages -
1. It's much easier for a beginner (and most experts!) to find things.
2. It doesn't change as new studies discover different relationships between genera.
3. It doesn't mislead you into false conclusions about relationships. After all, the relationship between genera and species cannot be described in one dimension. You need at least three (if not four) to represent relationships accurately. A systematic checklist (which is one-dimensional) must obscure some relationships as it shows others.

The disadvantage of the alphabetical list is that if a name is changed, the species' place in the checklist changes, but it's just as easy to find the new name!
You may have good reason to want a systematic arrangement, but I wouldn't spend too much time searching for the perfect one, because it doesn't exist! :(

---

Thank you so far Tony.
The reason I'd like to have a list like that is that I'm making a private, visual database of as many species of Diptera (so Syrphidae aswell) in Europe as possible. I do this for two reasons:
1. I come across all species in a playfull manner, manipulating the images
2. I create an easy to use list that enables me to narrow down the possibilities of what I filmed or photographed.

So right now it doesn't really matter if it's one dimensional. First I'd like to get the feel for the animals and than I'll dive in deeper.

Andr