Posted by Steve Gaimari on 22-09-2010 17:44
#7
KWQ wrote:
Thanks a lot, Steve! As I feared the external characters aren't much of anything in this group.
Guess I must check the literature you mentioned next.
So I perhaps should get hold of the Tanasijtshuk's 1986 paper if it contains more species than "Bei-Bienko"?
But what is the reference of that Raspi you mentioned? Sounds Italian... Does that article contain Northern European species?
I'll include the preliminary and unchecked list of Finnish Leucopis species:
Leucopis alticeps (Czerny)
annulipes (Zetterstedt)
argenticollis (Zetterstedt)
geniculata (Zetterstedt)
griseola (Fallén)
impunctata (v. Roeser)
puncticornis (Meigen)
Leucopomyia silesiaca (Egger)
Lipoleucopis praecox (de Meijere)
Neoleucopis atratula (Ratzeburg)
freyi (McAlpine)
obscura (Haliday)
orbiseta (McAlpine)
Hi - sorry for my long delay in answering. In any case, Raspi did a number of papers from the 1980's to present clarifying the identities of certain species (e.g., of Rondani), but he did not make keys. Just to make a couple of simple corrections/comments to your list:
Leucopis alticeps is in Leucopomyia. Additionally, Leucopomyia alticeps is not present in northern latitudes as far as I know. In the literature (e.g., Tiensuu 1951 for Finland), it is recorded, but is a misidentification of Leucopomyia silesiaca.
Leucopis geniculata is in Anchioleucopis.
Leucopis puncticornis is unrecognizable (types have not been found in modern times), yet is a very commonly used name in collections and in literature - due to similarities among Leucopis many many species are included.
The same is true for Leucopis griseola (many collections have specimens labelled as such that are not, and literature refers to it incorrectly a lot), but fortunately this is an easily recognizable species today.
The same is also true for Leucopis impunctata - again, used in literature a lot for different species. Not currently recognizable.
Anyway, hope this is helpful. :)
Steve