Posted by Andrew Whittington on 10-04-2009 17:32
#5
Certainly, Nikita is right, this is Platystomatidae, but I'm not convinced
Elassogaster is correct. I agree that it is in the group of genera associated with
Elassogaster sometimes referred to as Stenopterinini.
There is no postpronotal seta and r4+5 cell appears to be apically constricted placing this specimen in the
Plagiostenopterina -
Elassogaster group of genera.
Elassogaster is separated from other members of that group by the presence of small hair-bearing tubercules ventrally on the fore leg. I see no evidence of these tubercles, although a lateral view would be necessary to be sure. Secondly, the angle of r-m would be significant, but that is obscured by the position of the legs.
Therefore, looking at other related genera, we move onto the
Plagiostenopterina and associated genera. To be certain, a facial view is needed, because
Plagiostenopterina s.str. is separated from the other genera formerly placed as subgenera (sensu Malloch, 1931:
Carolimyia,
Meringomeria &
Peronotrochus) by the presence of facial hair.
As far as I know,
Carolimyia&
Peronotrochus are only distributed in the Philippines, so they can probably (but not necessarily) be excluded. The presence of the post-ocular seta is clear and suggests to me that this specimen belongs to
Plagiostenopterina s.str., but I have to confess, I do not know for sure that the bristle is absent in
Meringomeria (or the other genera).
Beyond genus, it becomes a bit of a guessing game without actually examining the specimen under the microscope, but the shiny frons, wing markings and colour of the notal iridescence points toward
Plagiostenopterina dubiosaMalloch, 1931. This species is widely distributed in the Oriental region, so is a possibility, but I would by no means treat this identification as certain.
Edited by Andrew Whittington on 10-04-2009 17:32
