---

Piluca already checked the type material 2 years ago, when she started studying Asilinae ;) ;) And the most striking features at first sight were the smoky wings (at least this specimen has this) and above all, the proportionately short, broad an flattened abdomen, specially in the female. This is a male, but the abdomen looks anything but broad and flattened. Might be a problem of the pictures but the total lack of any dust markings, which are very bold in both holotype and paratypes, makes me seriously doubt.

Besides that, the 3rd antennal segment of T. bolivari is oval and shorter and much wider than in this creature. That is rather peculiar and striking. This creature has a somehow oval 3rd antennal segment but not like that of the holotype. Perhaps is just again a problem of the angle in the picture but there are too many features that don't fit to blame everything in lighting and angles.

Jorge, you have the specimen so you can check all this directly on the creature. Perhaps all are optical effects... But if not and still this is T. bolivari, then the species should be redescribed because with the original description, the really nice work by Peris and comparing with types, is impossible to give a possitive ID of certain specimens. If such huge variation exists, this needs to be let known to avoid misidentifications.

Peris mentions variability in several features, particularly in the colour of the dusting on the legs and of the bristles of the mystax. But, for example, he describes the occipital bristles being pale, some specimens with 1-4 black bristles (and I also checked this in the types). This creature (and also the ones by Valter, but at least those have the typical abdomen of T. bolivari) have all (or nearly) occipital bristles black.