Panops infrequens Glatz, sp. nov.

{zoologyFigureCitations}

https://zoobank.org/NomenclaturalActs/135307C4-B543-4236-AD96-CEB3B6AEB2AA

{botanyFigureCitations}

Figure 1. Panops infrequens sp. nov. holotype female; dorsal view.

Figure 2. Panops infrequens sp. nov. holotype female; oblique dorsolateral view.

Figure 3. Panops infrequens sp. nov. holotype female; right anterolateral (top) and lateral (bottom) views.

Figure 4. Panops infrequens sp. nov. holotype female; anterior view (top) and head (bottom).

Figure 5. Panops infrequens sp. nov. holotype female; left wing.

Panops infrequens can be separated from other known Panops spp. as follows:

Panops baudini, P. danielsi Winterton, 2012, P. boharti and P. grossi (Neboiss, 1971) all have eyes that are at least partly pilose, whereas the eyes of P. infrequens are apilose. Winterton (2012) noted that some P. baudini individuals have minute eye pilosity that is easily overlooked, however, it has postpronotal lobes concolourous with the remainder of the associated pleuron whereas P. infrequens has yellow postpronotal lobes clearly contrasting with the dark pleuron (Figs 1-4). There are also clear differences in wing venation between P. baudini and P. infrequens such as the presence of a spur vein in P. baudini.

Panops infrequens can be separated from known Panops with apilose eyes as follows:

Panops schlingeri Winterton, 2012 has a metallic green dorsum, red-brown antennal flagella in both sexes, and a short proboscis whereas in P. infrequens the scutum is black suffused with blue tinge, the flagella are black (in females at least), and the proboscis is longer than the head (Figs 1-4). Panops infrequens can be separated from P. jade Winterton, 2012, P. austrae (Neboiss, 1971), P. baudini Lamarck, 1804, and P. aurum Winterton, 2012 by their dark (concolourous) postpronotal lobes, red-brown antennal flagella, andf the presence of a spur vein (except P. aurum). In addition, P. austrae and P. aurum have a bright metallic green-blue dorsum whereas P. infrequens does not.

Panops conspicuus (Brunetti, 1926) males are the most similar looking flies to P. infrequens females in general appearance and colour, however, apart from being different sexes, there are other differences such as male

P. conspicuus having brown flagella (contrasting with head colour) and a spur vein, whereas P. infrequens females have black flagella and no spur vein (Fig 1-5). Females of P. conspicuus are yellow and brown with a globose abdomen (Winterton 2012) and so look quite different to P. infrequens females which are generally black with blue irridescence and with the abdomen weakly dorsally compressed.

Size and colour (Figs 1-5): body length 8.5mm, wing length 7.3mm, antennae 1.2mm (from base), proboscis 1.7mm. Head black with dark blue iridescence. Antennae with scape and pedicel mainly shiny red-brown; flagellum black. Ocelli orange. Proboscis yellow, pedicel brown. Postpronotal lobes yellow. Scutum, scutellum and pleuron black with dark blue iridescence; red-brown carina along the anterior margin of the scutellum. Setal pile on thorax white laterally but becoming gold-brown in the central two-thirds of the thoracic dorsum. Wings hyaline with slight brown infusion in the radial sector and costal region. Calypter white with brown margin, semi-transparent. Coxae dark brown with blue iridescence, yellow dorsally in apical half; femora dark brown with dark blue iridescence, tibiae light brown, both segments off-white near the joint. Spines of the outside surface of tibial apex light brown with a darker point. Tarsi with basal four tarsal segments light brown, fifth segment darker brown, claws black, pulvilli and empodium yellow. Haltere generally yellow with ventral surface tending brown. Abdomen mainly dark brown with dark blue iridescence; lighter brown (without iridescence) on the posterior margin of the tergites. Setal pile on dorsal surface of the abdomen mainly gold-brown and becoming white laterally.

Head (Figs 1-4): Eyes apilose; ocellar tubercule granulate and extending posterior of the ocellar triangle, three ocelli present, almost vertical. Entire occiput densely punctate, with pile. Antennal flagella almost cylindrical, weakly outcurved, tapering (mainly in the distal half) to a dull point, and approximately as long as the distance from the antennal sockets to the pronotum. Scape and pedicel subequal. Antennal sockets bound by a carina which is complete and evenly rounded anteriorly, extending posteriorly lateral to the sockets along the inner margin of the eyes almost to the ocellar triangle. Edge of oral cavity carinate. Proboscis exceeding height of the head by about one fifth its length (Fig 4).

Thorax (Figs 1-4): Scutum with a narrow medial band of reduced pilosity. Pleura generally densely punctate and pilose except for apilose, non-punctate, weakly rugose patches on the lower, posterior half of the mesopleuron, the anterior margin of the pteropleuron, and the lower half of the sternopleuron. Pteropleuron rugose along upper margin. Hypopleuron with smaller punctures and reduced pilosity. Anterior spiracle elongate and almost ovate but with parallel sides. Short carinate ridge running from upper margin of anterior spiracle to posterior margin of postpronotal lobes. Laterotergite protruding, bulbous. Calypter textured (reducing transparency), pilose, with strongly ribbed margin.

Wings (Fig 5): Vein R|⌄4⌄| without spur vein. R|⌄4⌄| and R|⌄5⌄| forming an almost rectangular cell with R|⌄4⌄| weakly diverging anteriorly towards wing apex. Vein A|⌄2⌄| very weak and short, extending beyond alula by less than alula length. Crossvein 2r-m approximately half length of stem R|⌄4+5⌄|. Wings weakly rugose, most obviously along posterior margin of cell bm and along veins CuA|⌄2⌄| and R|⌄4+5⌄|.

Legs (Figs 1-4): All legs punctate and pilose, with stout apical spine on outer surface. Pulvilli and empodium both present, lobed and subequal. Claws simple and apilose.

Abdomen (Figs 1-3): Width equal to widest part of thorax. Tergites subequal in length, with setal pile erect anteriorly and laterally but lying almost flat centrally and posteriorly. Tergites and sternites punctate.

Holotype: ♀, 35.989783°S 137.321317°E, SA, S Kangaroo Island, heathlands ≈1.5km E Seal Bay visitor centre, 03-Mar-2008, D.A. Young (SAMA 29-004869); formerly RGKI-11298). Specimen with right middle leg missing last two tarsal segments and claws, and right rear leg missing last four tarsal segments and claws.

Figure 1. Panops infrequens sp. nov. holotype female; dorsal view.

Figure 2. Panops infrequens sp. nov. holotype female; oblique dorsolateral view.

Figure 3. Panops infrequens sp. nov. holotype female; right anterolateral (top) and lateral (bottom) views.

Figure 4. Panops infrequens sp. nov. holotype female; anterior view (top) and head (bottom).

Figure 5. Panops infrequens sp. nov. holotype female; left wing.

Remarks.

This new species has been placed in Panopinae based on having the postpronotal lobes well separated; the antennae with elongate, almost cylindrical flagella without terminal setae; four radial veins present in the wings; wing cells bm, d, m|⌄3⌄| and basal r|⌄4+5⌄| present; all tibiae with a robust apical spine on the exterior margin.

Further, it has been placed into Panops based on the eyes being apilose; the antennal flagella being thickened to the apex; wings hyaline; crossvein (2r-m) joining stem vein R|⌄4+5⌄|.

Using the key to Panops spp. in Winterton (2012), P. infrequens keys to P. conspicuus. As stated in the diagnosis P. infrequens differs from P. conspicuus by having no spur vein and black antennal flagella. In addition the overall colour and habitus of P. conspicuus females differs markedly from those of P. infrequens.

A complicating factor regarding a designation of Panops is that there is some question over the boundary between Panops and closely related Mesophysa (e.g., see Gillung & Winterton 2019), which has previously been considered synonymous with Panops by some authors (most recently by Paramanov 1957). In particular, males of Panops and Mesophysa are very similar and a male specimen of P. infrequens would be required to best assess the morphological similarity with Mesophysa. The current diagnosis of Mesophysa (from Winterton 2012) includes the presence of a stem vein in the wing, whereas this is absent in P. infrequens (and may be present or absent in other Panops). Given the lack of further comparative evidence, the new species should at this time be placed in Panops. Further, if Panops and Mesophysa are subsequently synonymised, Panops is the senior synonym and so P. infrequens would not require a new combination.

Distribution & habitat.

This species is known from one location near Seal Bay on Kangaroo Island. The habitat for this location consists of sub-coastal mallee heath, in which the holotype was caught with an insect net whilst in flight.

Conservation status.

It is difficult to comment on the conservation status of P. infrequens due to the paucity of knowledge about its hosts and broader distribution. If it is a Kangaroo Island endemic then it would likely be considered threatened due its limited distribution. If the potentially limited distribution matches that of a specific host, then both species are likely threatened and there may be a risk of co-extinction of P. infrequens.

Etymology.

In 25 years of sustained collecting across Kangaroo Island, including at the type location near Seal Bay, this Panops has been seen only once, hence the specific epithet infrequens.