Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-x4r87 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T10:53:48.230Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A REVISED CLASSIFICATION OF THE PIOPHILIDAE, INCLUDING ‘NEOTTIOPHILIDAE’ AND ‘THYREOPHORIDAE’ (DIPTERA: SCHIZOPHORA)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

J. F. McAlpine
Get access

Abstract

The systematic position of the Piophilidae sens. lat. within a group of nine schizophorous families with tephritid-like ovipositors (Lonchaeidae, Otitidae, Platystomatidae, Pyrgotidae, Tephritidae, Tachiniscidae, Richardiidae, Pallopteridae, and Piophilidae) is elucidated. It is shown to be a sister-group of the Pallopteridae, and these two families together with the Richardiidae comprise a monophyletic suprafamily unit within the larger group of families. The evolutionary changes that occurred within the Piophilidae are analyzed and the supposed phylogeny of its component taxa is portrayed. The family is redefined to include neottiophilids and thyreophorids and is classified into two subfamilies, Neottiophilinae and Piophilinae; the latter is divided into two tribes, Mycetaulini and Piophilini (with subtribes Piophilina and Thyreophorina). Twenty-three genera are recognized and taxonomically defined; this includes description of two new genera, Neopiophila and Parapiophila. Clusina Curran is synonymized withProtopiophila Duda (new synonymy), and four nominal species are placed in synonymy for the first time, i.e. Piophila anomala Malloch and Piophila setosa Melander and Spuler = Parapiophila vulgaris (Fallén) (new synonymy), Piophila flavifacies Brunetti = P. casei (Linnaeus) (new synonymy), and Mycetaulus pulchellus Banks = Mycetaulus longipennis Loew (new synonymy). Six new species, Actenoptera avalona (Newfoundland), Neopiophila setaluna (Northwest Territories), Protopiophila atrichosa (Peru and British Honduras), Protopiophila pallida (Peru and British Guiana), Prochyliza azteca (Mexico), and Prochyliza inca (Peru) are described. The following 20 new combinations are made: Mycetaulus lituratus (Melander and Spuler), Allopiophila testacea (Melander), Protopiophila nigriventris (Curran), Prochyliza lundbecki (Duda), nigricornis (Meigen), nigricoxa (Melander and Spuler) and nigrimana (Meigen), Arctopiophila arctica (Holmgren), Parapiophila atrifrons (Melander and Spuler), calceata (Duda), coerulescens (Zetterstedt), dudai (Frey), flavipes (Holmgren), lonchaeoides (Zetterstedt), nitidissima (Melander and Spuler), pectiniventris (Duda), penicillata (Steyskal), vulgaris (Fallén), and xanthopoda (Melander and Spuler). In all, 67 valid species are placed, their geographic distributions are outlined, and the zoogeographic implications are discussed. A lectotype is designated for Piophila flavitarsis Meigen = Madiza glabra Fallén (Milichiidae).A key to subfamilies, tribes, and genera is provided, and keys to world species are given where needed. An annotated world list of all names referred to the family (sens. lat.) is provided. The paper includes 58 figures, two tables, and 122 literature references.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Memoirs of the Entomological Society of Canada , Volume 109 , Supplement S103 , 1977 , pp. 1 - 66
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1977

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Albuquerque, D. de O. 1953. Sôbre um Gênero e uma espécie nova de Thyreophoridae do Brasil (Diptera, Haplostomata). Revta bras. Biol. 13(2): 110–112, 5 figs.Google Scholar
Albuquerque, D. de O. 1957. Descriçāo do alótipo fêmea de Bocainamyia necrophila Albuquerque, 1953, e considerações sôbre o gênero (Diptera, Thyreophoridae). Revta bras. Biol. 17(4): 563–566, 5 figs.Google Scholar
Banks, N. 1915. A new species of Mycetaulus (Diptera, Sepsidae). Proc. ent. Soc. Wash. 17: 145.Google Scholar
Becker, T. 1897. Beiträg zur Dipteren-Fauna von Nowaja-Semlja. (Akad. Nauk S.S.S.R.). Imp. Akad. Nauk St. Petersburg, Zool. Muz. Ezheg. (Acad. Imp. Sci. St. Pétersbourg, Zool. Mus. Annls.) 2: 396–404.Google Scholar
Becker, T. 1902. Die Meigen'schen Typen der sogen. Muscidae acalyptrae (Muscaria holometopa) in Paris und Wien. Z. Hymenopt. Dipt. 2(H4): 209–355.Google Scholar
Becker, T. 1905. Katalog der Paläarktischen Dipteren IV. 328 pp. Budapest.Google Scholar
Becker, T. 1914. Diptères nouveaux récoltés par Mm. Ch. Allaud et R. Jeannel en Afrique Orientale 1911–12. Annls Soc. ent. Fr. 83: 120–130.Google Scholar
Bigot, J. M. F. 1881. Diptères nouveaux ou peu connus, 17e partie (1) XXVI. Annls Soc. ent. Fr. (ser. 5) 10: 363–371.Google Scholar
Brullée, A. 1832. Expedition scientifique Morée Bd. 3. Teil 2, Insectes. Paris, Levrault, pp. 1–29, 64–395, 22 pls.Google Scholar
Brunetti, E. 1909. XXVII. New Oriental Sepsinae. Rec. Indian Mus. 3: 343–372, 1 pl.Google Scholar
Cockburn, A., Barraco, R. A., Reyman, T. A., and Peck, W. H.. 1975. Autopsy on an Egyptian Mummy. Science, N.Y. 187: 1155–1160, 2 figs.Google Scholar
Cogan, B. and Dear, J. P.. 1975. Additions and corrections to the list of British Acalyptrate Diptera. Entomologist's mon. Mag. 110: 173–181, 9 figs.Google Scholar
Colless, D. H. and McAlpine, D. K.. 1970. Chap. 34. Diptera, pp. 656–740, 36 figs. Insects of Australia, Melbourne Univ. Press. 1029 pp.Google Scholar
Coquillett, D. W. 1907. New genera and species of Diptera. Can. Ent. 39: 75–76.Google Scholar
Cresson, E. T. 1919. Dipterological notes and descriptions. Proc. Acad. natn. Sci. Philad. 71: 171–194.Google Scholar
Curran, C. H. 1934. The Diptera of Kartabo, Bartica District, British Guiana. Bull. Am. Mus. nat. Hist. 66(3): 287–532, 53 figs.Google Scholar
Curran, C. H. 1935. New American Diptera. Am. Mus. Novit. 812. 24 pp.Google Scholar
Czerny, L. 1904. Revision der Helomyziden. I. Teil. Wien. ent. Ztg. 23: 199–244, 263–286, 1 pl.Google Scholar
Czerny, L. 1930. Neottiophilidae. In Lindner, E., Fliegen palaearkt. Reg. 5, Teil 38b: 9–15, 16 figs.Google Scholar
Duda, O. 1924. Revision des europäischen u. grönländischen sowie einiger südostasiat. Arten der Gattung Piophila Fallen (Diptera). Konowia 3: 97–203.Google Scholar
Duda, O. 1927. Pygopiophila sikorae und Mycetaulus hispanicus, zwei neue Piophiliden (Dipteren). Konowia 6: 212–218, 2 figs.Google Scholar
Dufour, L. 1844. Histoire des métamorphoses et de l'anatomie du Piophila petasionis. Annls Sci. nat. (3) 1: 365–388, 1 pl.Google Scholar
Enderlein, G. 1921. Dipterologische Studien. XVII. Zool. Anz. 52: 219–232.Google Scholar
Fabricius, J. C. 1781. Species insectorum exhibentes eorum differentias specificas, synonyma, auctorum, loca natalia, metamorphosis. Vol. 2, 517 pp. Hamburgi et Kilonii (= Hamburg and Kiel).Google Scholar
Fabricius, J. C. 1794. Entomologia systematica emendata et aucta. Vol. 4, 472 pp. Hafniae (= Copenhagen).Google Scholar
Fallén, C. F. 1810. Specim. entomolog. novam Diptera disponendi methodum exhibens. 26 pp, 1 p1. Lund.Google Scholar
Fallén, C. F. 1820. Opomyzides Sveciae. 16 pp. Lundae.Google Scholar
Fallén, C. F. 1823. Geomyzides Sveciae. 12 pp. Lundae.Google Scholar
Frauenfeld, von G. R. 1868. Zoologische Miscellen XV. Verh. zool.-hot. Ges. Wien. XVIII: 885–902.Google Scholar
Frey, R. 1930. Neue Diptera Brachycera aus Finnland und angrenzenden Ländern. Notul. Ent. 10: 82–94, 6 figs.Google Scholar
Greene, C. T. 1919. A new genus in Scatophagidae (Diptera). Proc. ent. Soc. Wash. 21: 126–129, 1 fig.Google Scholar
Gregor, F. 1971. New species of Mycetaulus Loew (Piophilidae) and Meoneura Rond. (Milichiidae) from Hindukush (Diptera). Acta ent. Bohemoslov. 68(1): 52–57, 2 pls.Google Scholar
Griffiths, G. C. D. 1972. The phylogenetic classification of Diptera Cyclorrhapha, with special reference to the structure of the male postabdomen. Series Entomologica, Vol. 8, 340 pp., 154 figs., 2 pls. Junk, the Hague.Google Scholar
Haliday, A. H. 1833. Catalogue of Diptera occurring about Holywood in Downshire. Ent. Mag., Lond. 1: 147–180.Google Scholar
Harrison, R. A. 1959. Acalyptrate Diptera of New Zealand. Bull. N.Z. Dept. Scient. ind. Res. 128. VII + 382 pp., 438 figs.Google Scholar
Harrison, R. A. 1960 a. A revision of the genus Protopiophila Duda (Diptera: Piophilidae). Proc. Roy. ent. Soc. Lond. (B) 29(1–2): 1–6.Google Scholar
Harrison, R. A. 1960 a. An additional note on the genus Protopiophila Duda (Diptera: Piophilidae). Proc. Roy. ent. Soc. Lond. (B) 29(9–10): 133–134.Google Scholar
Hendel, F. 1903. Cenlrophlebomyia nov. gen. Thyreophorinae (Dipt.). Z. Hymenopt. Dipt. 13: 215–216.Google Scholar
Hendel, F. 1913. Acalyptrate Muscidae (Dipt.) II. Suppl. Ent. 2: 77–112, 7 figs.Google Scholar
Hendel, F. 1917. Beiträge zur Kenntnis der Acalyptraten Musciden. Dt. ent. Z. 1917: 33–47, 3 figs.Google Scholar
Hendel, F. 1933. Von Dr. Ziircher in den Jahren 1913–1918 in Paraguay gesamelte acalyptrate Dipteren. Revue Ent. 3: 213–224.Google Scholar
Hennig, W. 1937. Milichiidae et Carnidae in Lindner, E. Fliegen palaearkt. Reg. 6, Teil 60a. 91 pp., 100 figs.Google Scholar
Hennig, W. 1943. Piophilidae in Lindner, E. Fliegen palaearkt. Reg. 5, Teil 40. 52 pp., 32 text figs., 3 Taf.Google Scholar
Hennig, W. 1951. Neue Acalyptraten aus Europa and Sudafrika (Diptera: Piophilidae, Helomyzidae, Lauxaniidae). Beitr. Ent. 1(1): 70–76, 8 figs.Google Scholar
Hennig, W. 1954. Piophilidae and Sepsidae aus Ost-Afrika. Beitr. Ent. 4(5–6): 641–643.Google Scholar
Hennig, W. 1958. Die Familien der Diptera Schizophora und ihre phylogenetischen Verwandtschaftsbeziehungen. Beitr. Ent. 8(5–6): 505–688, 365 figs.Google Scholar
Hennig, W. 1960. Die Dipteren fauna von Neuseeland als systematisches und tiergeographisches Problem. Beitre. Ent. 10: 221–329, 27 figs.Google Scholar
Hennig, W. 1966. (English translation by Wygodzinsky, Peter. The Diptera fauna of New Zealand as a problem in systematics and zoogeography.) Pacif. Insects Monogr. 9. 81 pp., 27 figs.Google Scholar
Hennig, W. 1969. Neue Übersicht über die aus dem Baltischen Bernstein bekannten Acalyptratae (Diptera: Cyclorrhapha). Stuttg. Beitr. Naturk. 209: 1–42, 43 figs.Google Scholar
Hennig, W. 1971. Neue Untersuchungen über die Familien der Diptera Schizophora. (Diptera: Cyclorrhapha). Stuttg. Beirt. Naturk. 226. 76 pp., 108 figs.Google Scholar
Hennig, W. 1973. Ordnung Diptera (Zweiflügler). Handb. Zool. 4(2) 2/31: 1–337, 143 figs. (Lieferung 20).Google Scholar
Holmgren, A. E. 1883. Diptera, pp. 162–190. In Holmgren, A. E. and Aurivillius, C., Insecta a viris doctissimis Nordenskiöld illun ducem sequentibus in insulis Waigatsch et Novaja Semlia anno 1875 collecta. Ent. Tidskr. 4. 139–194, 8 pls.Google Scholar
Hutton, F. W. 1901. Synopsis of the Diptera Brachycera of New Zealand. Trans. Proc. N.Z. Inst. (1900) 33: 1–95.Google Scholar
Johnson, C. W. 1922. New genera and species of Diptera. Occ. Pap. Boston Soc. nat. Hist. 5: 21–26, 11 figs.Google Scholar
Kirby, W. and Spence, W.. 1826. An introduction to entomology, or elements of the natural history of insects (Ed. 1), Vol. 4, 634 pp., plus. 21–30. London.Google Scholar
Lindner, E. 1949. Handbuch, in Lindner, E., Dipt, palaearkt. Reg. 1: 1–422, 481 figs., 28 pls.Google Scholar
Linnaeus, C. 1758. Systema naturae per regna tria naturae. Ed. 10, Vol. 1, 822 pp. Homiae (= Stockholm).Google Scholar
Lioy, P. 1864. I ditteri distribuiu secondo un nuovo método di classificazione naturale. I.R. 1st Veneto Sci., Let. Ani. Atli (ser. 3), 9: 499–518, 569–604. 719–771, 879–910, 989–1027, 1087–1126, 1311–1352.Google Scholar
Loew, H. 1845. Dipterologischer Beiträg I. K. Friedrich-Wilhems-Gymnasiums zu Posen. Offentl. Prüf. d. Schüler 1845, pp. 1–52, 1 pl.Google Scholar
Loew, H. 1869. Diptera Americae septentrionalis indigena. Centúria nona. Berl. Ent. Z. 13: 129–186.Google Scholar
Lundbeck, W. 1901 (1900). Diptera groenlandica (concl.). Vidensk. Meddel. dansk. naturh. Foren (Kjobenhavn) ( = ser. 6, 2): 281–316, 5 figs.Google Scholar
Macquart, M. 1835. Histoire naturelle des Insects Diptères 2: 703 pp., 12 pls. In Roret, N. E. (Ed.), Collection des suites à Buffon, Paris.Google Scholar
Macquart, J. 1843. Diptères exotiques nouveaux ou peu connus. Mém. Soc. Roy Sci., Agr. et Arts, Lille 1842: 162–460, 36 pls. Also published separately as his “Diptères exotiques nouveaux on peu connus”, Vol. 2, Pt. 3, pp. 5–304, 36 pls. Paris, 1843.Google Scholar
Macquart, J. 1851. Diptères exotiques nouveaux on peu connus. Suite du 4e supplément. Mém. Soc. natn. Sci., Agr. et Arts, Lille 1850: 134–282 (text), 283–294, explanation of figs., index) pls. 15–28. Also published separately under same title. Suppl. IV (part), pp. 161–309 (text), 317–323 (explanation of figs.), 324–336 (combined index of the 2 parts of this supplement), pls. 15–28. Paris, 1851.Google Scholar
Malloch, J. R. 1919. The Diptera collected by the Canadian Expedition, 1913–1918 (excluding the Tipulidae and Culicidae), pp. 34–90, pls. 7–10. In Anderson, R. M. (Ed.), Rep. Can. Arctic Exped. 1913–18: 3: Insects, Pt. C: Diptera, 90 pp., 2 figs., 10 pls. Ottawa, Ontario.Google Scholar
Malloch, J. R. 1923. Insects, arachnids, and chilopods of the Pribilof Islands, Alaska. Diptera (except Tipulidae, Rhyphidae and Calliphoridae). North Am. Fauna 46: 170–227, pls. 12–15.Google Scholar
Malloch, J. R. 1928. Notes on Australian Diptera. No. XIV. Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W. 53: 295–309.Google Scholar
Malloch, J. R. 1931. Notes on Australian Diptera XXIV. Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W. 56(4): 292–298.Google Scholar
McAlpine, D. K. 1972. Insects and continental drift. Aust. nat. Hist. 17(8): 274–298, 3 figs.Google Scholar
McAlpine, J. F. 1962. The evolution of the Lonchaeidae (Diptera). Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. of Illinois. Published on demand by University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Mich., IV and 233 pp., 234 figs., 13 tabs., 8 dendrograms.Google Scholar
McAlpine, J. F. 1976. Systematic position of the genus Omomyia Coquillett and its transference to the Richardiidae (Diptera). Can. Ent. 108: 849–853, 3 figs., 1 table.Google Scholar
McAlpine, J. F. and Munroe, D. D.. 1968. Swarming of lonchaeid flies and other insects, with descriptions of four new species of Lonchaeidae (Diptera). Can. Ent. 100: 1154–1178, 16 figs.Google Scholar
Meigen, J. W. 1803. Versuch einer neuen Gattungseintheilung der europäischen zweiflügeligen Insekten. Mag. Insektenkunda 2: 259–281.Google Scholar
Meigen, J. W. 1826. Systematische Beschrcibung de bekannten europäischen zweiflügeligen Insekten, Vol. 5, XII + 412 pp., pls. 42–54. Hamm.Google Scholar
Meigen, J. W. 1830. Systematische Beschreibung de bekannten europäischen zweiflügeligen Insekten, Vol. 6, IV + 401 pp., pls. 55–66. Hamm.Google Scholar
Meigen, J. W. 1838. Systematische reschreibung de bekannten europäischen zweitlügeligen Insekten, Vol. 7: “oder Supplement-band”, XII + 434 pp., pls. 67–74. Hamm.Google Scholar
Melander, A. L. 1924. Review of the dipterous family Piophilidae. Psyche, Camb. 31: 78–86.Google Scholar
Melander, A. L. and Spuler, A.. 1917. The dipterous families Sepsidae and Piophilidae. Bull. St. Coll. Wash, agric. Exp. Sin 143. 97 pp. + index, 28 figs.Google Scholar
Miller, D. 1950. Catalogue of the Diptera of the New Zealand Sub-Region. Bull. Dep. scient. ind. Res. N.Z. 100. 194 pp. Stiles, Nelson, N.Z.Google Scholar
Motter, J. 1898. A contribution to the study of the fauna of the grave. A study of one hundred and fifty disinterments, with some additional experimental observations. Jl N.Y. ent. Soc. 6: 201–231.Google Scholar
Nielsen, P., Ringdahl, O., and Tuxen, S. L.. 1954. Diptera I (exclusive) of Cetatopogonidae and Chironomidae). Zool. Iceland 3(48a): 1–189.Google Scholar
Osten Sacken, C. R. 1881–1882. Thyreophora antipodttm, new species of Diptera. Entomologist's mon. Mag. 18: 35.Google Scholar
Pandellé, L. 1898–1902. Études sur les muscides de France. Revue ent. (juillet 1898-avril 1902): 303–492.Google Scholar
Panzer, G. W. F. 1798. Faunae insectorum germanicae oder Deutschlands Insecten H. 54 (1794), 24 pp., 24 pls. Nürnberg.Google Scholar
Papavero, N. 1971. Um novo Thyreophoridae da Amazonia Brasileira (Diptera, Acalyptratae). Papéis Avulsos Zool., S. Paulo 25(13): 105–109, 11 figs.Google Scholar
Paramanov, S. J. 1954. Notes on Australian Diptera (XIII-XV). Ann. Mag. nat. Hist. (12)7: 275–297.Google Scholar
Robineau-Desvoidy, J. B. 1830. Essai sur les Myodaires. (Paris), Inst, de France, (CI. des) Sci. Math. et Phys., Acad. Roy. Sci., Mém. presentes par divers Savans (Ser. 2) 2: 1–813.Google Scholar
Robineau-Desvoidy, J. B. 1841. Note sur le Thyreophora cynophila. Annls Soc. ent. Fr. X: 273.Google Scholar
Robineau-Desvoidy, J. B. 1849. Note sur le genre Thyreophora. Annls Soc. ent. Fr. (2) VII: V.Google Scholar
Rondani, A. C. 1874. Species Italicae ordinis dipterorum (Muscaria Rndn.) collectae et observatae. Stirps XXII, Loncheinae Rndn. Bull. Soc. ent. Ital. VI: 243–274.Google Scholar
Sabrosky, C. W. 1958. New species and notes on North American acalyptrate Diptera. Ent. News 69: 169–176.Google Scholar
Sabrosky, C. W. 1965. Family Anthomyzidae, pp. 819–820. In Stone, et al. , A catalogue of the Diptera of America north of Mexico. Agriculture Handb. lib. 1696 pp.Google Scholar
Sack, P. 1939. Thyreophoridae. In E. Lindner. Fliegen palaearkt. Reg. 5, Teil 62b: 7 pp., 9 figs.Google Scholar
Séguy, E. 1932. Contribution a l'etude des mouches phytophages de l'Europe occidentale. Encycl. ent., Sér. B II, Diptera 6: 145–212, figs. 103–123, 6 pls.Google Scholar
Séguy, E. 1934. Diptères (Brachycéres). Faune Fr. 28: 1–832, 903 figs., 27 pls.Google Scholar
Shannon, R. C. 1926. The occurrence of an American genus in Europe and a European genus in America (Diptera: Syrphidae; Sepsidae). Proc. ent. Soc. Wash. 28: 112–114.Google Scholar
Speight, M. C. D. 1969. The prothoracic morphology of acalpytrates (Diptera) and its use in systematics. Trans. R. ent. Soc. Lond. 121(9): 325–421, 68 figs.Google Scholar
Staeger, C. 1845. Grønlands antliater. Naturh. Tidsskr. (1844–1845) (ser. 2) 1: 346–369.Google Scholar
Steyskal, G. 1958. Notes on North American Piophilidae (Diptera). Proc. ent. Soc. Wash. 60(b): 246.Google Scholar
Steyskal, G. 1964. Notes on North American Piophilidae 11 (Diptera). Proc. ent. Soc. Wash. 66(3): 177–181, 3 figs.Google Scholar
Steyskal, G. 1965 a, b. Family Piophilidae, pp. 710–713, and family Thyreophoridae, pp. 713–714. In Stone, A. et al. , A catalogue of the Diptera of America north of Mexico. Agriculture Handb. 276. 1696 pp.Google Scholar
Steyskal, G. 1967. 68. Family Piophilidae. In A catalogue of the Diptera of the Americas south of the United Staes. 2 pp. Sao Paulo.Google Scholar
Steyskal, G. 1968. Notes on North American Piophilidae III (Diptera). Proc. eni. Soc. Wash. 70(1): 25–27, 2 figs.Google Scholar
Steyskal, G. 1973. The genera of the family Thyreophoridae and the species of the genus Omomyia, with one new species (Diptera). Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 66(4): 849–852, 9 figs.Google Scholar
Steyskal, G. 1975. The North American species of Piophila subgenus Allopiophila with black forecoxa (Diptera: Piophilidae). Proc. ent. Soc. Wash. 77(2): 212–213, 1 fig.Google Scholar
Strobl, G. 1894 (1893). Die Dipteren von Steiermark. II. Theil. Mitt, naturw. Ver. Steiermark 30: 1–152.Google Scholar
Strobl, G. 1909. Die Dipteren von Steiermark (V. Theil). Mitt, naturw. Ver. Steiermark 46: 45–293.Google Scholar
Thomson, C. G. 1869. 6. Diptera. Species nova descripsit, pp. 443–614, pl. 9 (= h. 12, no. 2).Google Scholar
In VetenskAkad, K. svenska., Kongliga svenska fregatten Eugenies resa omkring jorden. Pt. 2: Zoologie (Sec.) 1: Insekter, 617 pp., 9 pls. Stockholm, 1868.Google Scholar
van der Wulp, F. M. 1867. Eenige Noord-Americaansche Diptera. Tidjschr. Ent. 10 (ser. 2, 2): 125–164, pl. 3–5.Google Scholar
van der Wulp, F. M. 1892. In Midden-Sumatra. Reizen en Onderzoekingen der Sumatra-Expeditie, uitgerust door het Aardrijkskundig Genooschap, 1877–1879, beschreven door de Leden der Expeditie, onder Toezicht van Prof. P. J., Veth. Vierde Deel. Natuurlijke Historie, Eerste Gedeelte. Fauna. Laatste Helft. Bijdragen tot de Kennis der Fauna van Midden-Sumatra door Joh. F. Snelleman, Lid der Sumatra-Expeditie, met Medewerking van Verschillende Gebeerden, Tweede Deel. 63 pp. 3 pl. Brill, Leiden.Google Scholar
Vockeroth, J. R. 1969. A revision of the genera of the Syrphini (Diptera: Syrphidae). Mem. ent. Soc. Can. 62. 176 pp., 100 figs.Google Scholar
von Frauenfeld, G. R. 1868. Zoologische Miscellen XV. Verh. zool.-bot. Ges. Wien XVIII: 885–902.Google Scholar
von Roser, C. 1840. Erster Nachtrag zu dem in Jahre 1834 bekannt gemachten Verzeichnisse in Wiirttemberg vorkommender zweigliigliger Insekten. K. Wurttemb. Landw. Ver., Stuttg., Corres pondenzbl. 37: (= n. Ser., 17) (1): 49–64.Google Scholar
Wahlberg, P. F. 1845 (1844). Nytt dipter slägt frán Luleá, Lappmark. K. svenska VetenskAkad. Ofversight af … Forhandl. 1: 217–219, 1 pl.Google Scholar
Walker, F. 1849. List of the specimens of dipterous insects in the collection of the British Museum. 4: 689–1172, London.Google Scholar
Walker, F. 1860. Catalogue of the dipterous insects collected at Makessar in the Celebes by Mr. A. R. Wallace with descriptions of new species. J. Linn. Soc. Lond. 4: 90–172.Google Scholar
Walker, F. 1865. Descriptions of new species of dipterous insects of New Guinea. J. Linn. Soc. (Zool.) 8: 102–130.Google Scholar
Westwood, J. O. 1848. The celery stem-fly. Gdnrs' Chron. 21: 332, 1 fig.Google Scholar
Zetterstedt, J. W. 1838. Dipterologia Scandinaviae. Sect. 3. Diptera, pp. 447–868. In his Insecta Lapponica VI + 1140 pp. Lipsiae (= Leipzig).Google Scholar
Zetterstedt, J. W. 1847. Diptera Scandinaviae. Disposita et descripta 6: 2163–2580. Lund.Google Scholar
Zuska, J. and Lastovka, P.. 1965. A review of the Czechoslovak species of the family Piophilidae with special references to their importance to food industry (Diptera, Acalyptrata). Acta ent. bohem. 62(2): 141–157, 11 figs.Google Scholar