---

Hybotidae, I suppose
Slovenia, near forest, 5-7mm,

lema

---

another photo

---

I'd say Empididae, probably Empis itself.

---

Hi Nikita!
This is Brachystoma vesiculosum (Fabricius, 1794) and now it is a separate femaly Brachystomatidae.
All the best,
Igor:)

---

Thanks,

Fauna Europaea say for Brachystoma vesiculosum -Slovenia - Absent ??:o

---

I think the prey is Mycetophilidae.

---

And I think, Lema can start new family in Gallery!

---

AFAIK the status of Brachystomatidae is not yet widely accepted. Perhaps it is better to keep these flies under Empididae in the gallery at least for now. All currently existing keys will have them in Empididae in any case, so from a purely practical point of new Empididae would be best - at least for the next few years.

---

Well, that would be they way to hamper propgress of knowledge. It is the same way the Americans still not really use Limoniidae and Hybotidae as a separate families.

---

Well, I don't think that the comparison is completely valid, since (for example) the Hybotid split is 30 years old while the formal proposal for Brachystomatidae was made only a year ago. There seems to be very few papers on the family that are not written by Sinclair or Cumming.

Unsurprisingly, some researchers disgree with the family on B. on the basis of DNA evidence (which Sinclair & Cumming didn't use). I do not know if the work I've heard about is already published.

Personally I'll keep the Finnish check-list on the 'old order' until a bit of time has passed and critisism this way and that has been aired in full.

I haven't really followed the minutiae of higher-level empidoid phylogeny. Perhaps there is total agreement on the topic and I'm just ignorent :p