Zelia potens Valid
Creators: name: Santis, Marcelo Domingos De
name: O'Hara, James E.
name: Couri, Márcia Souto
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2024
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Insecta
Diptera
Tachinidae
Zelia
Zelia potens

description: Zelia potens (Wiedemann, 1830)
(Figs. 13–16)
Dexia potens Wiedemann, 1830: 368. Type locality: Brazil.
Leptoda potens (Wiedemann, 1830). Reference: Brauer & Bergenstamm (1891: 102, new generic combination).
Zelia potens (Wiedemann, 1830). References: Aldrich (1929: 2, new placement as Zelia and redescription of two male syntypes of Z. potens); Townsend (1931: 96, notes on type); Curran (1934: 501, distribution record in Guyana, wrongly considered as “ Scotiptera potens ”); Guimarães (1971: 102, catalogue); O’Hara et al. (2020: 84, World checklist of Tachinidae). Yahuarmayoia analis Townsend, 1927: 367. Type locality: Peru, Madre de Dios, Yahuarmayo. New synonymy.
Dexia phaeoptera Wiedemann, 1830: 370. Type locality: Brazil. New synonymy (by First Reviser action, see below). Leptoda phaeoptera (Wiedemann, 1830). Reference: Brauer and Bergenstamm (1891: 406, new combination). Yahuarmayoia phaeoptera (Wiedemann, 1830). References: Townsend (1931: 96, notes on type, synonymy of Y. analis with D. phaeoptera); Guimarães (1971: 102, catalogue); O’Hara et al. (2020: 84, World checklist of Tachinidae).
Zelia phaeoptera (Wiedemann, 1830). References: Aldrich (1929: 2, new combination and redescription of two female syntypes of Z. phaeoptera).
Remarks on the type material. Dexia potens Wiedemann, 1830 was described from an unspecified number of males from Brazil. The depository for these specimens was given as “Im Frankfurter Museum und in meiner Sammlung”. The first is the Frankfurt Museum, today the Senckenberg Research Institute and Natural History Museum, Frankfurt, whereas the second refers to the personal collection of Christian R.W. Wiedemann (1770– 1840). According to Pont (1995: 148):
“Some time before his [Wiedemann’s] death, he sold his insect collection to Wilhelm von Winthem of Hamburg, and in 1852 von Winthem’s entire collection was purchased by Vienna’s k. k. Hofmuseum (the present Natural History Museum, Vienna). Wiedemann’s collection was still kept separate as late as 1880 (Brauer 1880: 106), but sometime after this was combined with the von Winthem and other collections of Vienna Natural History Museum to form a single Diptera collection. The specimens have a printed label “det. Wiedemann” or “coll. Wiedemann”, with the species-name usually added.”
The type material of Dexia potens from NMHW was studied by Aldrich (1929: 2), who noted “ Two males, “ Brasilien Coll. Winthem,” marked as types and agreeing with description.” Some years later, Townsend (1931: 96) also considered only two males in the type series of this species at NMHW, but treated them differently from Aldrich. Townsend considered these specimens as paratypes and mentioned a male holotype in Frankfurt. Townsend also wrote that he had not seen the holotype and did not mention any other type specimens at that museum. MDS was able to study this type material through photographs from SMF and it consists of two conspecific males. Thus, the mention by Townsend (1931: 96) of a “Male Ht” in SMF cannot be regarded as a lectotype fixation because the specimen in question cannot be distinguished among the two male syntypes present in SMF. The two male syntypes in SMF are conspecific and in good condition, and labelled as follows:
1. “Brasilia/ Freireiss.”; “263” [handwritten]; “D 196” [handwritten]; “Seckenberg-/Museum/ Frankfurt/ Main”.
2. “Brasilia/ Freireiss.”; “Cotypus”; “Seckenberg-/Museum/ Frankfurt/ Main”.
Additionally, MDS was also able to study the male syntypes deposited at the NHMW. There are actually four male syntypes. The two “ paratypes ” studied by Townsend could not be recognized among them. However, a single male with Aldrich’s determination label could be found.
The four male syntypes in NHMW are conspecific and in good condition, and labelled as follows:
1. “ Brasilien ”; “potens Wd / Coll. Winthem” [‘potens’ handwritten]; “Type”; “ Zelia / potens Wd. / det. ALDRICH” [‘ Zelia potens Wd’ handwritten] “ Syntype / ♂ ” [handwritten]; “ Syntype / Dexia / potens/ examined 1999/ P. Sehnal” [‘ Dexia potens’ handwritten]; “(3)/ Typenk at./ P. Sehnal 1999”.
2. “ Brasilien ”; “potens Wd / Coll. Winthem ” [‘potens’ handwritten]; “ Syntype / ♂ ” [handwritten]; “Syntype/ Dexia / potens/ examined 1999/ P. Sehnal ” [‘ Dexia potens’ handwritten]; “(1)/ Typenk at./ P. Sehnal 1999”.
3. “ Brasilien ”; “potens Wd / Coll. Winthem” [‘potens’ handwritten]; “potens Brasil ” [handwritten]; “ Syntype / ♂ ” [handwritten]; “ Syntype / Dexia / potens/ examined 1999/ P. Sehnal” [‘ Dexia potens’ handwritten]; “(2)/ Typenk at./ P. Sehnal 1999”.
4. “ Brasilien ”; “potens Wd / Coll. Winthem ” [‘potens’ handwritten]; “ Dexia potens Wied ” [handwritten]; “ Type ”; “ Syntype / ♂ ” [handwritten]; “Syntype/ Dexia / potens/ examined 1999/ P. Sehnal ” [‘ Dexia potens’ handwritten]; “(4)/ Typenk at./ P. Sehnal 1999”.
In the interests of nomenclatural stability and to restrict the name to a single specimen, the male with Aldrich’s determination label (#1 above) is hereby designated as lectotype of Dexia potens Wiedemann, 1830.
Dexia phaeoptera Wiedemann, 1830, herein considered as a new synonym of Zelia potens, was described from an unspecified number of females from Brazil. Wiedemann stated that the specimens studied by him were “In von Winthem’s und meiner Sammlung’s auch im Frankfurter Museum”. Both Winthem’s and Wiedemann’s personal collections are deposited at NHMW (see quote above), and the material from the Frankfurt Museum, today are deposited at the Senckenberg Research Institute and Natural History Museum, Frankfurt. Currently there are three female specimens of D. phaeoptera deposited at NHMW. Aldrich (1929: 2) was the first author to study the material, writing that he examined: “ Two females, ‘Brazilien, Coll. Winthem,’ marked as types and agreeing with description…”, and labelled one of them as Zelia phaeoptera. About two years later Townsend (1931: 96) also studied this type series and labelled one female from the original type material of Wiedemann as Yahuarmayoia phaeoptera (Wiedemann, 1830). Coincidently, this female was the same one labelled by Aldrich in 1929. This female is accepted as the lectotype of Dexia phaeoptera Wiedemann, 1830 by fixation of Townsend (1931: 96) based on his mention of “Female Ht” from Brazil in NHMW and the presence of a label handwritten by Townsend that clearly distinguishes this female from the other two females in the original type series at the NHMW.
The potential additional female syntype from SMF was examined, and it consists of a single female. This female syntype is conspecific from the ones from NHMW and in fair condition, somewhat molded, and labelled as follows:
1. “Brasilia/ Freireiss.”; “D 196 b” [handwritten]; “Seckenberg-/Museum/ Frankfurt/Main”.
The three female syntypes in NHMW are conspecific and in good condition, and labelled as follows:
1. “ Brasilien ”; “phaeoptera / Wd/ Coll. Winthem” [‘phaeoptera Wd’ handwritten]; “ Dexia / phaeoptera Wied ” [handwritten]; “Type”; “ Zelia / phaeoptera/ Wd./ det. ALDRICH” [‘ Zelia phaeoptera Wd. ’ handwritten]; “ Yahuarmayoia / phaeoptera W/ Det. CHTT. ♀ ” [handwritten]; “ Syntype / Dexia / phaeoptera/ examined 1999/ P. Sehnal” [‘ Dexia phaeoptera’ handwritten]; “(1)/ Typenk at./ P. Sehnal 1999”.
2. “ Brasilien ”; “phaeoptera / Wd/ Coll. Winthem” [‘phaeoptera Wd’ handwritten]; “Type”; “ Syntype / Dexia / phaeoptera/ examined 1999/ P. Sehnal” [‘ Dexia phaeoptera’ handwritten]; “(2)/ Typenk at./ P. Sehnal 1999”.
3. “phaeoptera / Coll. Winthem ” [‘phaeoptera’ handwritten]; “ D. phaeoptera / Brasil ” [handwritten]; “ Syntype / ♀ ”[handwritten]; “Syntype/ Dexia / phaeoptera/ examined 1999/ P. Sehnal ” [‘ Dexia phaeoptera’ handwritten]; “(3)/ Typenk at./ P. Sehnal 1999”.
Note about synonymy. Dexia potens and Dexia phaeoptera were described in the same paper by Wiedemann (1830). We consider these names to be subjective synonyms, with the former based on a male and the latter on a female of the same species. Acting as the First Reviser, we select D. potens as the senior synonym (Article 24.2.2 of the Code, ICZN 1999).
Additional material examined. BRAZIL. Amazonas: Manaus, Reserva Ducke, 1 female, 13.x.1981, J.A. Rafael col. (INPA), ditto, Km 34, 1 female, 29.vii.1970, A. Faustino col. (INPA); Pará, Rio Trombetas, Oriximiná, 1 female, x.1969, Exp. Perm. Amaz. (MZSP); Espírito Santo: Linhares, Parque Sooretama [today known as “Reserva Biológica de Sooretama”], 2 males, v.1953, P.A. Tales col., coleção Campos Seabra (MZSP); Rio de Janeiro: Nova Iguaçu, Tinguá neighborhood, Serviço [de] Febre Amarela M.E.S. [Ministério da Educação e Saúde Pública - Ministry of Education and Public Health], 1 female, xii,1940, R. C. Shannon collection, ditto, 1 male, viii, (MZSP); São Paulo: Iporanga, 1 male, xii.1944, E. Deutel (MZSP); Santo André, 2 males, i.1942, R. Slitz col. (MZSP); Salesópolis, Estação Biológica de Boracéia, 850 m, 1 female, 28.ix.1962, J. Oliveira Santos col. (MZSP), ditto, 1 female, 24.iii.1965, Rabello col (MZSP), ditto 1 female, 24.xii.2008 - 07.i.2009, Nihei col, (MZSP).
Diagnosis. Eye bare. Facial carina undeveloped. Head entirely silvery pruinose. Postpedicel orange, but distal 1/4 brownish black. Palpus light yellow, but proximal 1/3 tawny yellow; cylindrical in both sexes. Katepisternum with 2+1 setae. Wing smoky. Legs completely brownish black, but in some species femur about anterior 1/3, and tibia on posteroventral region is yellowish to tawny. Abdominal tergite 3 usually without median marginal setae, but in some species, there is a poorly developed pair of setae. The color of abdomen is very similar to the male of Z. obscura, but it can be differentiated by: uninterrupted median brown longitudinal vitta (expanded in the region of the insertion of the median marginal seta) on syntergite 1+2 to tergite 4; posterior margin of tergites 1+2 to 4 brownish black, increasing in extension along the tergites; tergite 5 light brown. Female with abdominal tergite 5 golden pruinose. First instar larvae with long ventral stylets on segment 12.
Redescription. Male. Body length: 12.8 mm.
Coloration (Fig. 13). Frontal vitta and ocellar triangle dark brown to black. Fronto-orbital plate with silvery pruinosity, but some dorsal portions pale golden pruinosity, and gena brownish black. Occiput silvery pruinose with long and silver to golden setulae. Post pedicel orange, but distal 1/4 brownish black. Palpus light yellow, but proximal 1/3 tawny yellow. Thorax brown to dark brown with pale golden to grayish pruinosity; scutum with four dark vittae, in prescutum the two inner vittae are thinner than the outer, in postscutum, the inner vittae is half the length of the outer, neither reaching the scutellum. Scutellum light brown, but posterior 1/3 grayish pruinosity. Wing smoky, slightly light brown along the veins. Calypters hyaline. Halter yellow-tawny. Posterior spiracle brownish black. Legs brownish black, but femur about anterior 1/3, and tibia on posteroventral region is yellowish to tawny; tarsi darker (some species with leg totally brownish black). Claws brown, pulvilli yellow. Abdomen dark yellow, with uninterrupted median brown longitudinal vitta (expanded in the region of the insertion of the median marginal seta) on syntergite 1+2 to tergite 4; posterior margin of tergites 1+2 to 4 brownish black, increasing in extension along the tergites; tergite 5 light brown; silver pruinosity on 1/4 of anterior margin in tergite 4 and in tergite 5, except for mid small area black vitta, entirely silver pruinose.
Head (Fig. 13). Vertex about 0.16x head width in dorsal view. Frontal vitta, in the narrowest point, equal to the width of ocellar triangle. Inner vertical setae and outer vertical seta present. Fronto-orbital plate with 18–20 pairs of proclinate setae; narrower than frontal vitta and parafacial. Width of parafacial measured between inner margin of compound eye and antennal insertion is 0.3x the width of gena. Postpedicel very slender, 2.5x the combined length of scape and pedicel; longer than the dorsal, longest cilia ca. 7x basal width of arista. Facial carina not developed. Facial ridge with four to five setulae on lower third. Lower facial margin protruding, visible in profile. Eye about 0.71x the head height. Gena about 0.23x eye height. Vibrissa long, inserted above lower facial margin. Prementum 0.3x as long as head height. Labella narrow, about 0.3x the prementum.
Thorax (Fig. 13A, C). Acrostichals 2+2. Dorsocentral 3+4. Intra-alar 1+2; intra-postalar absent. Supra-alar 2+3, first postsutural weak. Postpronotal lobe with four setae, three forming an anterior row and one posterior. Anepisternum with seven strong setae and with one upward directed setulae anteriorly. Scutellum with one basal, one lateral, one apical and one discal pairs of setae. Katepisternum with 2+1 setae. Anepimeron with one long setae. Postalar callus with 2 setae. Legs. Fore coxa with many setae anteriorly; fore femur with dorsal and posteroventral rows of setae; fore tibia with 3 anterodorsal setae on apical third, 1 posteroventral seta on median third, 2 preapicals, 2 anterior and 1 posteroventral. Mid femur with one anterodorsal seta on median third, mid tibia with 2 posterodorsal setae on median third, 5 preapicals, 2 anterodorsals and 3 posteroventral. Mid tibia one median anterodorsal seta; 2 posterodorsal setae on proximal median half. Hind femur with three anteroventral setae on basal half and three ventral setae on basal half and with row of anterodorsal setae; hind tibia with 3 anterodorsal and 2 posterodorsal setae on anterior of median half, one anteroventral serae on median third, 5 preapicals, 1 anterodorsal, 1 posterodorsal, 1 posteroventral, 1 anteroventral.
Abdomen (Fig. 13A, C). Syntergite 1+2 with a pair of lateral marginal setae. Tergite 3 usually without median marginal setae, but in some species, there is a poorly developed pair of setae, and one lateral marginal seta. Tergite 4 with two to three discal setae and a marginal row of setae. Tergite 5 with three pairs of discal setae and one row of marginal setae. Tergite 5 slightly pointed apically. Terminalia (Fig. 14). Tergite 6 about 1/4 length of syntergosternite 7+8. Sternite 5 with basal plate long and slightly outwardly curved (Fig. 14C). Epandrium broad in posterior view, setulose, and closed dorsally. Anterior epandrial process poorly developed. Cerci not fused, broad, and distally slightly tapered in posterior view. Surstylus broad, not fused with epandrium, convex, and setulose in posterior view; distally tapered in lateral view (Fig. 14A–B). Epiphallus present, distally narrow, and fused with basiphallus by membranous attachment. Pregonite with setulae anteriorly, connected basally to hypandrium by a sclerotized seam. Basiphallus as long as postgonite. Extension of dorsal sclerite of distiphallus long, more than half of the length of dorsal sclerite; dorsal sclerite ventrally serrulated; granular zone about 0.9X the length of dorsal sclerite (Fig. 14D).
Female (Fig. 15). Differs from male as follows: Vertex about 0.21x head width in dorsal view. Fronto-orbital plate golden pruinose; with 2 proclinate orbitals and 1 reclinate setae. Thorax golden pruinose, mainly in the scutum. Claw and pulvilli short, shorter than tarsomere 5. Abdomen ovate. Abdomen with syntergite 1+2 brownish-black. Tergites 3 and 4 brownish-black, but posterior 1/3 reddish black; with silver pruinosity on anterior 1/3. Tergite 5 reddish yellow, laterally with yellowish pruinosity. Tergite 3 with one strong pair of median marginal seta. Tergite 4 just with a marginal row of setae. Tergite 5 with one row of marginal setae. Terminalia (Fig. 16C). Tergite 6 and 7 with setae at the posterior margin; tergite 6 without seta on midventral and ventral portions. Sternites 6 and 7 with few setae in all posterior margin. Sternite 8 with setulae mainly on the posterior margin. Sternite 9 somewhat narrow posteriorly. Sternite 10 elongated and somewhat broad posteriorly, with setulae only on the posterior margin. Cerci well developed, elongated, with several setae apically. Three spermathecae; equal sized; suboval and surface entirely rugose (Fig 16D).
First instar larvae (Fig. 16A–B). Cephaloskeleton thin and lightly sclerotized, with somewhat truncated mouth hook. Posterior spiracles on small posterior protuberances, with long ventral stylets on segment 12.
Male. Unknown.
Distribution. Guyana (Kartabo), Peru (Madre de Dios) and Brazil (Amazonas, Pará, Espírito Santo, Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo states, new records).
Remarks. Aldrich (1929: 2) argued that very probably Z. potens is the same as Z. phaeoptera, arguing that Z. potens is the male and Z. phaeoptera is the female of a single species. Aldrich further remarked that the non-sexual characters, like the setae on the abdomen and the thorax as well as the wings “agree remarkably well”. Aldrich deferred a definitive conclusion on the examination of more specimens of both species. Herein, by examining specimens of both species from the North to the Southeast of Brazil, we can confirm the thoughts of Aldrich and formally propose this synonymy.
Wiedemann (1830) described Dexia potens based upon specimens collected by Georg Wilhelm Freyreiss, a naturalist born in Frankfurt am Main on 12 July 1789. He died in Brazil, in “Villa Viçoza”, currently Nova Viçosa, Bahia, on 1 April 1825 (Urban 1906). Freyreiss was a notable ornithologist (Lindman 1900). He moved to St. Petersburg in 1809, and left Russia in 1812 with Georg Heinrich von Langsdorff (1774–1852), then the newly appointed Russian consul general in Brazil who was on his way to Rio de Janeiro. From there, Freyreiss undertook expeditions and collections between 1812–1814, through the current Brazilian administrative states of Rio de Janeiro, Espírito Santo, Minas Gerais and Bahia (Papavero 1971). Freyreiss wrote a manuscript that became a book long after his death (Freyreiss, 1982), in which he describes and discusses his travels and impressions about the Brazilian people and fauna. In this book, “Viagem ao interior do Brasil ” [Travel to the countryside of Brazil], Freyreiss writes about such places as “Fazenda Sumidouro”, in “Pedro do Rio”, currently part of Petrópolis (a city of Rio de Janeiro state) and “Congonhas do Campo”, currently part of Congonhas (a city of Minas Gerais state). The great collection efforts of Freyreiss can be appreciated by the following quote from Lindman (1900: 261): “In a letter from Bahia to Prof. Olof Swartz on April 25, 1817, he writes: ‘at the end of a two-year journey… 63 mammals, 920 birds, 19 amphibians, 7 fish, 850 plant species and 400 seed varieties will now increase the Museum Westinianum…’”. In addition to these specimens, we may add the insects, in particular dipterans and some Zelia specimens. Hence, despite not being able to provide a more precise distribution of the species other than that provided above, it is reasonable to suppose that, at least for the type material deposited in SMF, Zelia potens may have been collected in the Atlantic Forest biome or on the northern Southeast to southern Northeast Brazil.
description: Published as part of Santis, Marcelo Domingos De, O'Hara, James E. & Couri, Márcia Souto, 2024, Partial revision of the exclusively Neotropical species of Zelia Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830 (Tachinidae: Dexiinae: Dexiini), with the description of a new species, pp. 1-52 in Zootaxa 5419 (1) on pages 28-35, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5419.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/10781966