Kameneva, E.P. & Korneyev, V.A. New nomenclatural changes in the genus Otites Latreille, 1804 (Diptera: Ulidiidae: Otitinae)

Abstract

For
the purpose of clarifying the taxonomic status of the type species of the genus Otites, a single specimen is designated as the neotype of both
Musca porcus Latreille, 1804 and Blainvillia jucunda Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830, syn.n. Otites ruficeps (Fabricius, 1805) is proposed as replacement
name for Musca formosa Panzer, 1798 (preoccupied, non Musca formosa Scopoli, 1763), since the other junior synonyms, Dictya
gangraenosa sensu Fabricius, 1805 (misidentification; non Musca gangraenosa Panzer, 1798) and Otites elegans Latreille, 1805 (proposed in
synonymy with Musca formosa Panzer, 1798) are unavailable. Based on the study of its type specimen, Otites ornata (Meigen, 1826) (= Ortalis
ornata Meigen, 1826) is shown to be the valid name for Otites bacescui Gheorghiu, 1987, syn.n.

Full text

 Українськаентомофауністика2019,10(2):23–30  Датапублікації:19.12.2019
Ukrainska Entomofaunistyka 2019 10(2)
ISSN2078–9653
Robineau-Desvoidy (predominantly Holarctic, with at
least one species in Africa), and the Holarctic genera
Otites Latreille, Tetanops Fallén and Ceroxys Macquart;
this tribe also includes the Nearctic genus Hiatus Cresson
and the strictly Palaearctic genera Dorycera Meigen and
Ulidiopsis Hennig (Kameneva & Korneyev, 2006); some
Neotropical species assigned to the genera Proterpnomyia
Blanchard and Systata Loew (Steyskal, 1968) apparently
also belong here.
The genus Otites includes about 50 species (including
nearly ten undescribed species recognized in collections—
Kameneva & Korneyev, unpublished data); see also Soós
(1984) for references.
Otites has its highest diversity in the Mediterranean
region, Balkans and Asia Minor (Hennig, 1939), with 22
species recorded from Europe (Kameneva & Greve Jensen,
2013).
Kameneva (1997) provided a preliminary revision of
the “Otites formosa group of species”, which has solved a
few problems of diagnostics but also uncovered a number
of nomenclatural problems in the “core” of the genus. Later,
Kameneva (2012) and Morgulis (2012, 2013, 2015) added
http://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3585580
urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:AE1A2C90-ADE5-4020-893C-4ED5C7853E3E
New nomenclatural changes in the genus Otites Latreille, 1804 (Diptera: Ulidiidae: Otitinae)
E. P. Kameneva & V. A. Korneyev
I.I.Schmalhausen Institute of Zoology,
National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
Bogdan Chmielnitski St. 15
Kyiv, Ukraine
E-mail: kameneva.elena@gmail.com, valery.korneyev@gmail.com
Kameneva, E.P. & Korneyev, V.A. New nomenclatural changes in the genus Otites Latreille, 1804 (Diptera: Ulidiidae: Otitinae). — For
the purpose of clarifying the taxonomic status of the type species of the genus Otites, a single specimen is designated as the neotype of both
Musca porcus Latreille, 1804 and Blainvillia jucunda Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830, syn.n. Otites ruceps (Fabricius, 1805) is proposed as re-
placement name for Musca formosa Panzer, 1798 (preoccupied, non Musca formosa Scopoli, 1763), since the other junior synonyms, Dictya
gangraenosa sensu Fabricius, 1805 (misidentication; non Musca gangraenosa Panzer, 1798) and Otites elegans Latreille, 1805 (proposed in
synonymy with Musca formosa Panzer, 1798) are unavailable. Based on the study of its type specimen, Otites ornata (Meigen, 1826) (= Ortalis
ornata Meigen, 1826) is shown to be the valid name for Otites bacescui Gheorghiu, 1987, syn.n.
Key words. Diptera, Ulidiidae, nomenclature, new synonymy.
Каменєва, О.П. і Корнєєв, В.О. Нові номенклатурні зміни в роді Otites Latreille, 1804 (Diptera: Ulidiidae: Otitinae). — З метою
прояснення таксономічного статусу типового виду роду Otites, один і той самий екземпляр ознаковано в якості неотипа і Musca porcus
Latreille, 1804, і Blainvillia jucunda Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830, syn.n. Запропоновано Otites ruceps (Fabricius, 1805) в якості замінної
назви для Musca formosa Panzer, 1798 (преокупована назва, non Musca formosa Scopoli, 1763), оскільки інші молодші синоніми є
непридатними: Dictya gangraenosa sensu Fabricius, 1805 (помилкове визначення; non Musca gangraenosa Panzer, 1798) і Otites elegans
Latreille, 1805 (запропонована як синонім Musca formosa Panzer, 1798). На основі вивчення типового екземпляра, показано, що Otites
ornata (Meigen, 1826) (= Ortalis ornata Meigen, 1826) є чинною старшою назвою для Otites bacescui Gheorghiu, 1987, syn.n.
Ключові слова. Diptera, Ulidiidae, номенклатура, нова синонімія.
Introduction
While preparing the Ulidiidae chapter for the new
edition of the “Fauna Helvetica: Diptera Checklist”
(Bächli et al., in prep.) we again ran into a problem of
confused nomenclature in the genus Otites Latreille, to
which a solution has previously been found by the authors
but not yet published, since the revision of the genus has
now been pending for almost ten years. We therefore
decided to publish this solution prior to the revision itself
in order to make the necessary nomenclature changes
available immediately for use in a wider range of faunistic
publications. These changes will be incorporated into
the forthcoming revision, together with the necessary
designations of neotypes.
Otites is the type genus of the tribe Otitini and
subfamily Otitinae, both widespread in the Palaearctic,
Nearctic, and partly Neotropical Regions (Kameneva &
Korneyev, 2006). The tribe Otitini includes the widespread
genera Herina Robineau-Desvoidy (predominantly
Palaearctic, with some Nearctic and Neotropical, Oriental
and Australasian species assigned to it) and Melieria

Українська ентомофауністика 2019 10(2)
О.П.КаменєваіВ.О.КорнєєвНовіноменклатурнізмінивродіOtites
24
and keyed several previously undescribed species from the
Near East, but some further species remain undescribed
and unnamed, and no comprehensive key to the genus has
been compiled to date.
Study of the vast collection material throughout
Europe, including extant type specimens, provided us with
a means to apply valid names to the most common species
of the genus and to establish some new synonymies.
Material
The following abbreviations refer to collections
containing specimens, and where curators assisted our
studies:
BMNH — The Natural History Museum, Department of Entomology,
England, UK (N. Wyatt);
DEI — Senckenberg Deutsche Entomologisches Institut, Müncheberg,
Germany (F. Menzel);
HMNH — Hungarian Museum of Natural History (Természettudományi
Muzeum), Budapest, Hungary (L. Papp);
MLUH — Institut für Zoologie, Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Witten-
berg, Halle-am-Saale (K. Schneider);
MNHNP: Museum National d′Histoire Naturelle, National Collection of
Insects, Paris, France (C. Daugeron, E. Delfosse);
MTD — Senckenberg National Museum of Zoology (Staatliches Mu-
seum für Tierkunde), Dresden, Germany (U. Kallweit);
Muséum d’Histoire Naturelle de Neuchâtel, Switzerland (J.-P.Haenni);
NHMW — Naturhistorisches Museum Wien, Austria (P. Sehnal),
NKMB — Museum für Naturkunde, Berlin, Germany (J. Ziegler);
RMNH — Naturalis Biodiversity Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
(B. Brugge);
SIZK — Schmalhausen Institute of Zoology, National Academy of Sci-
ences, Kyiv, Ukraine (V. Korneyev);
SMF — Forschungsinstitut und Naturmuseum Senckenberg, Frankfurt (I.
Rademacher);
SMNS — Staatliches Museum für Naturkunde Stuttgart, Germany (H.-P.
Tschorsnig);
ZFIB — Zoologisches Forschungsinstitut und Museum Alexander Koe-
nig (B. Sinclair);
ZMUC — Zoologisk Museum, Universitets Copenhagen, Denmark
(L. Vilhelmsen, T. Pape);
ZMUM — Zoological Museum of Moscow University. Russia (A. Oze-
rov);
ZSSM — Zoologische Staatssammlung, München, Germany (W. Schacht,
M. Kotrba).
Results
Otites Latreille, 1804
Otites Latreille, 1804: 196.
Type species: Musca porcus Latreille, 1804: 196 (as “Musca porcus
(Bosc)”), by monotypy.
Otites: Latreille, 1805: 383.
Blainvillia Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830: 713.
Type-species: Blainvillia formosa Robineau-Desvoidy 1830 (by
subsequent designation of Hennig, 1939: 23).
The generic concept of Otites strongly depends on
its name-bearing type species. Previous workers have
generally accepted the statement (actually a misstatement)
of Hennig (1939) that Musca porcus Latreille, 1804 is a
nomen nudum. Formally, however, the brief diagnosis
provided for the genus automatically applies to the only
species included, independently from the otherwise
uninformative diagnosis. According to Article 67.7 (ICZN,
1999), the error in attribution of authorship to Bosc is
immaterial. We therefore consider the designation of
Musca porcus by monotypy to be valid with the authorship
of Latreille, 1804.
Thompson & Pont (1993) also consider Musca porcus
an available name.
This designation of the type species is valid according
to Article 61.1.3. (ICZN, 1999): “once xed, name-bearing
types are stable… the name-bearing type… is not subject
to change except… as provided in the Article 70.3.2…”
Sabrosky (1999: 228) also gives “O. porca Latreille
1804 (mon.; as “Musca porcus Bosc,” a manuscript name
there validated by Latreille)” as the type of Otites Latreille
1804, and notes that “Otites was sometimes credited to
Latreille (1805: 383), where it appeared to be monobasic
for O. elegans Latreille, under which was cited Musca
formosa Panzer 1798 (preocc. Scopoli 1763). Soós (1984c:
47, 48) rejected both porca and elegans, but we believe that
Latreille established both names”.
Reference to Otites elegans Latreille, 1805 as the type
of the genus is incorrect, as that species was not originally
included in the genus Otites by Latreille (1804).
The following is for the purpose of clarifying the
taxonomic status of the type species of the genus Otites,
and the species closely related to it which are widespread
in Western and Central Europe, within the framework of a
continuing taxonomic revision of the genus (Kameneva &
Korneyev, in prep.).
We have come at the conclusion that the type
specimens of Musca porcus are lost, as they were not
found in the collection of MNHNP by VAK after a careful
analysis of all the specimens having Bosc’s handwritten
labels. This makes the designation of a neotype necessary.
The only other designation of a type species for
the nominal genera synonymized with Otites which
we consider below is the case of Blainvillia Robineau-
Desvoidy, 1830, since this also involves several nominal
species closely related to Musca porcus.
Hennig (1939: 23) xed one of the two included
species, Blainvillia formosa, as the type species of that
nominal genus. Robineau-Desvoidy (1830: 713) gave the
latter name in a synonymy: “Blainvillia formosa R.-D. [=]
Otites formosa Latr.”
The type specimens of the other included species,
Blainvillia jucunda, are also considered lost, as they were
not found by VAK after searching among the specimens
remaining from Robineau-Desvoidy’s material in the
collection of MNHNP.

E.P.Kameneva&V.A.Korneyev.NewnomenclaturalchangesinthegenusOtites
Ukrainska Entomofaunistyka 2019 10(2)
25
For this reason, we herewith x the concept of the
type species of Otites by a neotype designation for both
Musca porcus and Blainvillia jucunda.
We do not propose to consider the nomenclature
of the other nominal genera assigned to Otites as junior
subjective synonyms here, preferring to leave this task for
the forthcoming revision of the genus.
Otites porcus (Latreille, 1804) (Figs 1–6)
urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:FA8B22E1-6844-45F2-AD28-88861CBC48C7
Musca porcus Latreille, 1804: 196 (attributed to Bosc);
Musca porca: Thompson & Pont, 1993: 108.
Blainvillia jucunda Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830: 714;
Otites jucunda: Macquart, 1835: 425; Kameneva, 1997: 131;
Kameneva, 1997: 131; Kameneva & Greve 2004, 2013;
Ortalis jucunda: Meigen, 1838: 348; Becker, 1905: 96;
Otites formosa var. jucunda: Séguy, 1934: 57.
Otites formosa jucunda: Hennig, 1939: 29; Soós, 1984: 48; Merz,
1996: 410; 1998: 242; new synonym.
Ortalis fastuosa Rondani, 1869: 30; Becker, 1905: 95;
Otites fastuosa: Rivosecchi et al., 1995, new synonym.
Material. Type. Syntypes Musca porcus Latreille [number and sex
unknown]: France: locality and date of collecting unknown]; not located;
absent in NMHNP; considered lost.
Syntypes Blainvillia jucunda Robineau-Desvoidy [2 specimens,
sex unknown]: France: Saint-Sauveur[-en-Puisaye]; not located; absent
in NMHNP; considered lost.
Neotype (designated herein) ♀ of Musca porcus and of Blainvillia
jucunda: [France:] “Mesland, (Loir et Cher), coll. R. Boissons 1971”,
“Otites formosa” [L.Matile handwriting], “Neotype ♀ Musca porcus La-
treille Kameneva des. ‘19”, “Neotype ♀ Blainvillia jucunda R.-D. Kame-
neva des. ‘19” (MNHNP).
Non-type. France: Loir et Cher: Mesland [47.5103, 1.1233],
1971, 1♂, 1♀ (R Boissons); Fontenay. les Briis, Essonne 1.06.1975,
1♂ (M. Lachaise); “01 Soucun, 7.06.1993, 1♀ (N.Drezet); “78 Vielle
Ecuse, 15.01.1992, 1♀ (N. Drezet); “63 Orbeil”, Chenaie de Perthus,
20.06.1992, 1♀ (N. Drezet) (MNHNP); “France”,“Pres. by, Brunetti,
B. M. 1927–184”, 6.06.1889, 1♀ (BMNH); S. France (Var), La Sainte
Baume,16–28.05.1921, 1♀ (K.G.Blair) (BMNH); “Env. d. Paris”, 3♂
(DEI); Rambouillet, “VI”, 5♂ (DEI); Rambouillet, 1♂ (HMNH); Ram-
bouillet, 05.1890, 2♂; Rambouillet, “VI”, 2♂; “Coll. Hendel”, 1♀; “Coll.
Winthem”, 1♀ (NHMW); “Bulancos, 18.6.81”, “Otites formosa Panz.”,
“Tschorsnig leg.”, 1♀; “F. Drôme, Saillans, 17.07.1988, 1♀ (Tschorsnig),
(SMNS); “Rambouillet, Juni”, “48118”, 2♂ (NKMB); “France Var
Figs 1–6. Neotype ♀ of Musca porcus Latreille and Blainvillia jucunda Robineau-Desvoidy (NMHNP): 1 — habitus, left lateral view; 2 — legs,
occiput, thorax, and abdomen, lateral view; 3 — head and mesonotum, dorsal view; 4 — abdomen, dorsal view;. 5 — wing, ventral; 6 — labels.
1
2
3 4
5
6

Українська ентомофауністика 2019 10(2)
О.П.КаменєваіВ.О.КорнєєвНовіноменклатурнізмінивродіOtites
26
Figs 7–8. Syntype ♂ Musca formosa Panzer: 1 — as depicted in Panzer (1798); 2 — syntype ♂ (one lef broken off and mounted on a card, and label
with Panzer’s handwriting (MLUH) (photo by VAK, 2003).
Bormes l’Mimosas, 30.04–7.05.1989, 1♂ (Taunissen); “Alpes de Nt
Prov., Velenne”, 15.05.1909, 1♀ (Langohr); “RMNH – FRANCE,
La croix du lar”, 25.05.1987, 1♂, 1♀ (E.A.M.Speijer) (RMNH). Ger-
many: “LB Häfnerhaslach, Stromberg” 9.05.1989, 1♂, ♀ (Miksch);
“Markgröningen”, 7.05.1971, 1♀ (Herting); Kaiserstuhl, 4.06.1914,
1♂, ♀ (R.Haymons); “S-Baden, Grissheim, Rheinwald”, 27.06.1995 1♀
(Szallies); “D – BW Südbaden bai, Neuenburg Bagger-see, 11.06.1992,
1♀, LT99 (Schmid-Egger); “D – BW – Mühlacker, Lienzingen MV82,
Hamberg, 91 Ha, 1.06.1991, Ha – 6c”, 1♂, 1♀ (Schmid-Egger); “D
– BW Stromberg, Schmien Mühlacker, 7018NO 11.05.1994, s 29”,
1♀ (Schmid-Egger); “D – BW Stromberg, zwischen Sersheim u. Ho-
henhaslach, TK 7020 NW TF SO, 17.05.1993”, 3♂ (Schmid-Egger); “D
– BW Stromberg, 1 km nw Zaisers, Weiher, Reutsee, TK 6919 sw, TF 21,
”, 18.05.1993, S21a”, 1♀; (Schmid-Egger); “Bletigheim”, 14.06.1984, 2
♂ (Tschorsnig); “Umg. Stuttgart”, 2.06.1935, 1 ex. (C. Heuser), Stutt-
gart, 1921, 1♂; (Geistner); Stuttgart, “Kräherwald 191”, 7.06.1942, 1♀
(Lindner); ibidem, 26.06.1939, 1♂, 1♀; 24.05.1964”, 1♂; 6.06.1965”,
1♂; “Kräherwald, grufhoos”, 1912, 1♂; “Rotenacker”, 9.06.1935, Lind-
ner”, ♀; “Sternenfels-, Naulbreun”, 21.05.1911 1♂ (F. Härtel); Brand-
holz, Bietigh, 17.05.1974, 1♂ (Lindner); Württemberg, 1872–76, 1♀
(v. Roser);Feuerbach. Wald, 22.05.1966, 1♂ (Lindner); Herrenberg,
26.05.1936, 1♂, 1♀ (Lindner); Ehninger-Wald, 12.06.1932, 1♀ (Lindner)
(SMNS); Bonn-Rheinaue, 10.05.2003, 1♂ (B.J.Sinclair), (ZFIB); Kai-
serstuhl, 4.06.1914, 1♂ (R.Haymons); “Stuttg., v. Rod.” , “gangrenosa,
Fbr.”, 2 ♀ (NKMB); “Bavaria bor., Endsee, 25.07.1984, 1♀ (K.Marz)
(ZSSM). Switzerland: Neuchâtel, Roche De l’Ermitage, Chêmaie,
2.06.1991, 1♂ (C.Dufour) (MHNN).
Diagnosis: This species is similar to O. ruceps in
having microtrichose areas on abdominal tergites 3 and 4
laterally reaching tergite margins, but clearly differs from
it by having occiput, femora and tibiae widely orange-
yellow (entirely black in O. ruceps).
Description: see Kameneva, 1997.
Comments: Since the specimens from France
almost exclusively conform to the current concept of
O. jucunda, we have chosen as the neotype a specimen
in a good condition which was collected nearest to Paris
and belonging to the NMHNP. The entire series included
1♂ and 2♀, all with the essential characters as described
by Hennig (1939) and Kameneva (1997). The reason for
designating the same specimen as the neotype of two
nominal species was to establish objective synonymy for
them.
We consider the species name “porcus” as a noun of
masculine gender in apposition, which does not change
its ending to conform to the grammatical gender of the
generic name; this corresponds to the original binomen
Musca porcus.
Otites ruceps (Fabricius, 1805) (Figs 7–16)
Musca formosa Panzer, [1798]: 21; Thompson & Pont, 1993: 77
(preoccupied, non Musca formosa Scopoli, 1763);
urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:0381C612-E844-4779-ADBD-98379704937F
Musca formosa: Fabricius, 1805: 329 (as “Musca formosa
Pz., Fl., Germ.”, synonym of Musca gangraenosa Panz., obviously
misconception of M. formosa) (nec Musca gangraenosa Panzer, [1798]),
misidentication.
Otites formosa: Hennig, 1939: 28; Soós, 1980: 74; 1984: 48;
Kameneva, 1997: 127; Martinek, 1997: 70, 1999: 170; Kameneva &
Greve 2004, 2013.
Scatophaga ruceps Fabricius, 1805: 209;
Otites formosa ruceps: Hennig, 1939: 29 (pro parte);
Otites formosa f. ruceps: Gheorghiu, 1987: 202;
Dictya gangraenosa: Fabricius, 1805: 329 (non Musca gangraenosa
Panzer, [1796], misidentication).
Ortalis gangraenosa: Meigen, 1830: 378.
Ortalis gangraenosa: Schiner, 1860: 70; Becker, 1905: 96 (as a
synonym of Musca formosa Panzer).
Otites elegans: Thompson & Pont, 1993: 77 (as replacement name
for Musca formosa Panzer.
Material. Type. Syntype ♂ Musca formosa: “Wien, M., a. 3., for-
mosa P.” [Panzer’s handwriting, specimen spread in the manner of the
specimen depicted by Panzer] [Coll. v. Roder] (MLUH). Syntypes 2♂
Scatophaga ruceps: “S: ruceps, u Austria Andersen” (ZMUC).
7 8

E.P.Kameneva&V.A.Korneyev.NewnomenclaturalchangesinthegenusOtites
Ukrainska Entomofaunistyka 2019 10(2)
27
Figs 13–16. Otites ruceps (=formosa auctt.), noin-type ♀: 13 — habitus, lateral left view; 14 — head and mesonotum, dorsal view; 15 — abdomen,
posterior; 16— labels.
Figs 9–12. Syntypes ♂♂ (a & b) Scatophaga ruceps Fabricius (ZMUC): 9 — habitus and labels; 10 — syntype a, habitus, lateral left view; 11 — same,
head left lateral view; 12 — same, abdomen, posterior.
9
10
11
a b
12
13
15
14
16

Українська ентомофауністика 2019 10(2)
О.П.КаменєваіВ.О.КорнєєвНовіноменклатурнізмінивродіOtites
28
Non-type material. Germany: Hamburg, “Coll. Egger”, “formosa
det. Egger”, 1♂ (NHMW); Austria: “Austria”, “Coll. Egger: formosa det.
Egger”, 1♂; “ruceps det. Schiner”, 1♀; “Wien”, “gangrenosa det. Mik”,
30.05.1877, 1♂ (Mik); “formosa Alte Sammlung”, 1861, 1♂ (Rogenhof-
fer); Mödlieg, “Coll. Hendel”, 15.06.1886, 1♂; Eachhogl, 5.06.1890, 1♀;
Durindorf, 27.05.1912, 2 ♀ (Zerny); Burgerland, Moenghhof, 12.06.1932,
2 ♂ (Zerny) (NHMW); Hungary: Monot, Pater Comitat, 1♀ (Schlaiter)
(NHMW); Albania: “Alban. Exped., Kula Ljums”, 18-28.05.1918, 1♂,
2 ♀ (NHMW); Romania: “Tultscha”, “formosa Alte Sammlung”, 1865,
1♂ (Mann) (NHMW); Moldova: Ungri prope Ataci, 26.05.1988, 2 ♀; Iv-
ancea prope Orghei, 27.06.1987, 1♂; prope Cisinau, 20. VI, 13.07.1970,
2 ♀ (R. Kamenskaya); N of Benderi, 13.06.1964, 1♂, 1♀ (D. Ussachov);
Ceobruci, 28.05.1917, 20.06.1917, 30.05.1918, 19.06.1918, 5 ♂, 5 ♀
[Paramonov]; prope Tigheci, 17–18.06.1987, 17.06.1988, 1♂, 4 ♀; Boro-
tani 12 km W of Budjak, 6.06.1988, 7 ♂, 3 ♀; Ceceulia prope Cantemir,
18.06.1987, 7.06.1988, 8 ♂, 15 ♀ (Korneyev) (SIZK, ZMUM); Ukraine:
Cherkassy Uman’, 18.05 <?>, 1♂ [Paramonov]; Poltava: vicinity of Pol-
tava, 1894, 1♀ (V. N. Radzianko); Jares’ki, 10. VI, 23.07.1919, 1♂, 2 ♀
[Yu. Wagner]; “Dar-Nadezhdy Konst. distr.”, 7, 13.06.1919, 1♂, 1♀ (I.
Fabri); Kirovograd obl.: Chorniy Lis forest, 1.06.1953, 1♀ (Rohocha);
idem, 7 km S of Tsybulevo, 17.06.1988 (S. Zrazhevski); Dnipro: Synel-
nikove, 10, 15.06.1930, 2 ♂, 4 ♀ (Talitski); Odesa: “Prope Odesa, Kut-
shurhan”, 25.05–20.06.1919, 2 ♂, 1♀, Valehotsulove, Ananiyiv distr.,
29.05.1921, 2 ♀, 23.05.1925, 2 ♂, 1♀; Kochanevka, d. Balta”, 14.06.1924,
1♂; Ananiyiev, 1–15.06.1931, 23 ♂, 13 ♀ (Paramonov); Starokozache,
19.06.1984, 1♀ (Dolin); Kohil’nyk riv., prope Berezine, 3.06.1991, 1♀
(Korneyev); Kherson: Askania Nova, 14.06.1927, 1♂ (Charlemagne &
Shepel); Mykolayiv: Mykolayiv, 29.10.1927, 1♀; Mighia, 29.06.1985,
27.05.1991, 4 ♂, 5 ♀; 1-3 km N of Piski left bank of Bugh lagoon, above
Mykolayiv, 29.05.1991, 3 ♀ (Korneyev); Zaporizha: Melitopol, Tambov-
ka, forest, 7.07.1978, 1♂ (Priven); Luhansk: Provallya prope Luhansk,
14.06.1929, 4 ♂, 4 ♀ (Talitski); Crimea: Theodosia, 31.05.1904, 1♀;
Karagach, 20.05.1915, 1♀ (Vuchetich); Yalta, 9.06.1923, 1♀; Kykensiz,
10.06.1923, 1♀; Varnutka, 11.06.1923, 1♀; Karadagh, 30.06.1925, 1♀;
Ustimovka, 21.06.1933, 1♀ (Paramonov); Alushta, 24-25.06.1929, 1♀
(E. Smirnov); Pionerskoe, 2.06.1975, 2 ♂ (L. Zimina & Zhelokhovtsev);
Pereval, 16.06.1982, 1♂; (SIZK, ZMUM); Russia: Lipetsk: Galichya
Gora, 13.06.1964, 1♀ (Antonova); Belgorod obl.: Walouiki, 1♂, 1♀
(Velitchkovsky); Voronezh obl.: Borisoglebsk, 15, 20.06.1955, 1♂, 1♀
(G. VIktorov); Rostov: Taghanrogh, 28.05.1921, 1♀; Krasnodar Kray:
Ubinsk, 9–10.06.1956, 1♂ (G. VIktorov) (SIZK, ZMUM).
Diagnosis: This species is similar to O. porcus in
having microtrichose areas on abdominal tergites 3 and
4 laterally reaching tergite margins, but clearly differs
from it by having occiput, femora and tibiae entirely black
(widely orange-yellow in O. porcus). It also clearly differs
from O. ornata by the microtrichose areas on abdominal
tergites 3 and 4 laterally reaching tergite margins, and
medial and lateral surstyli of male robust and widely fused
(see Kameneva, 1997 (as “O. formosa”) (in O. ornata,
microtrichose areas on abdominal tergites 3 and 4 short,
not reaching lateral margins, surstyli narrow and separated)
Description: see Kameneva, 1997 (as “O. formosa”).
Otites ornata (Meigen, 1826) (Figs 17 –21)
urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:0434E146-5BCA-40C5-87D9-D28AF6417E8F
Ortalis ornata Meigen, 1826: 277.
Ortalis ornata: Schiner, 1860: 70; Becker, 1902: 224 (as a synonym
of Musca formosa Panzer).
Ortalis ruceps: Schiner, 1860: 71 (non Scatophaga ruceps
Fabricius; misidentication)
Otites formosa ruceps: Hennig, 1939: 29; Soós, 1984: 48 (pro parte).
Otites formosa var. ruceps: Soós, 1980: 74.
Otites bacescui Gheorghiu, 1987: 196; Kameneva, 1997: 132;
Martinek, 1997: 70, 1999: 170; Kameneva & Greve 2004, 2013; new
synonym.
urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:1A9FA9C2-727F-4987-BB81-D6082FEB37C3
17
18
2019
21
Figs 17–21. Otites ornata Meigen (= bacescui Gheorghiu), noin-type ♂: 17— habitus, lateral left view; 18 — head and mesonotum, dorsal view; 19 —
abdomen, posterior; 20 — wing; 21— labels.

E.P.Kameneva&V.A.Korneyev.NewnomenclaturalchangesinthegenusOtites
Ukrainska Entomofaunistyka 2019 10(2)
29
Material. Type. Syntype ♀: “Ortalis ornata”, “2221”, “ornata Meig.
// 2221” [“aus Baumhauerischen Museum”] (MNHNP) (examined).
Non-type. Austria: Dornbach, 28.06.1887, 1♂, 1♀ (Handlirsch);
Spitz, 05.1888, 1♂, 1♀ (Bergenstamm); Zverndorf, N.Ö. 27.05.1912,
1♂ (Zerny); Wien, 08.1841, 1♀ (Coll. H. Loew) (NKMB); Wien Ugb.,
Mader, 1♀ (B. Bertling) (SMF); Bulgaria: Nesebar, Dry hillside, in-
land from coast, 12–13.06.1969, 1♂, (B.M.1970–152. B.H., & M.C.
Cogan, R.I., & R.Vane-Wright) (BMNH); Schwarzmeer Küste, Banja,
aüdl. Varna, 7-8.06.1973, 1♂, 1♀ (Zwölfer) (SMNS). Czech Republic:
Bohemia, Kamaik bei Leitmeritz, 21.05.1935, 1♂, 1♀ (Zimmermann)
(NKMB); Germany: Dessau, Anhalt, 3 ♀ (Sieglitz. Forst) (DEI); “B.
Liebenau, 19.06”, 1♂ (DEI);; “Bruchfeld, 138”, 1♀ (DEI); “[Sashsen]-
Anhalt”, 1♂; (Millisthann) (MTD); “Pleidelsheim (Wttbg.), Stadtwald,
27.05.1954, 1♂ (F.Groschke); Stuttgart, Kräherwald, 30.05.1943, 2 ♂;
ibidem, 2.06.1940, 1♂; ibidem, 1.06.1936, 1♂, 1♀; ibidem, 15.06.1939,
1♂; ibidem, 7.06.1942, 1♀ (Lindner); Feuerbach. Wald, 4.06.1972, 1♂
(Lindner); Würtenberg, “1872–76”, 3 ♂, 2 ♀ (v. Roser) (SMNS); Op-
penheim, 15.05.1951, 1♂, 1♀ (RMNH); Stuttgart, 2 ♀ (v. Roder; Coll.,
H. Loew) (NKMB). Greece: “Kalavruta, Morea”, 1♂ (Holtz) (DEI);
France: “Belfort, 5.71”, 1♂; “Ortalis ruceps” [green paper square]
(MLUH); Camargue, Valat, 13.05.1858, ♂ (Bigot) (RBINH); Provanse:
“Ch. de Brenon”, 07.1903, 1♀; Andard, Maine et Loire, 11.06.1910, 1♀;
“Lac. de Zarrie”, “Dauphine”, “In 07”, “Ortalis ruceps Lw.”, “Coll.
Hd.”, 1♀ (NHMW); “Cher, env. de cosne, 4 ♂, 2 ♀ (A. Boucomont),
(MNHNP); “Báixas [?]”, 1.06.1912, 1♂ (DEI); (RMNH); France, Loir et
Cher), 8 km from Vendome (47º48’N, -1º04’W), along N 10, 14.06.1977,
1♀ (Ph. Pronk; 77 006) (RMNH). Hungary: “Ungarn”, 1♂; Budapest,
22 ex. (DEI); Szár, 15.06.1902, 1♂ (DEI); Pestszentimre”, 1932, 1♀ (E.
Horvath); Budapest, 3 ♂, 2 ♀ (MTD); Budapest, 14.06.1902”, “49339”
, 3 ♀, “Ortalis ruceps Fbr., det. Lichtw.”; “Ungarn”, 2 ♂ (von Frivald-
sky, Coll., H. Loew) (DEI); Budapest, 20.05.1912, 1♀ (SMNS); Italy:
Neapol, Mazzi, “2745, 1♀ (DEI); Ortalis ruceps Mcq”, “33627” [“aus
Kalorsa u. Algier” (?)], 1♀ (NKMB). Romania: “Kasan”, 7.06.1912”, 4
♂ (DEI); Trencsin, 26.07.1901”, 2 ♀(DEI); Herkulesbad, 20.05.1886”,
1♂; Orsova, 27.05.1901”, 1♂, 1♀; Mehadia, 3 ♂, 3 ♀ (DEI); Herkules-
bad, 6.06.1871, 2 ♂, “Ortalis ruceps”; idem, 1♂; 1♀ [without label]
(MLUH); “Bazias, 61481.V.” [“under Donau”], 6 ♂, 1♀; Herculesbad,
06.1891”, “Sammlung. Dr. Th. Becker”, “Ortalis ornata Mg., det. Lichtw.,
1 ex.; Herculesbad, VI. 37728, 37729”, 1♂, 1♀; Herculesbad, 6.06.1871,
1♂, 1♀ (Coll., H. Loew); Orsova, 61826.VI”, 1♂, 3 ♀; “Mehad., Erber”,
“Coll., H. Loew”, ♀; idem, “Coll.Gerst.”, “Ortalis, ruceps Fabr., Dis-
sau 5/6”, ♀ (NKMB); “Orsowa, VI.1912, ♀ (MTD). Slovakia: “Theben,
Ung.” (=Devín) 3.6.11”, ♀ (Zerny) (NHMW).
Diagnosis: This species is similar to O. porcus in
having occiput widely orange-yellow, but clearly differs
from it by having almost entirely black femora and tibiae,
microtrichose areas on abdominal tergites 3 and 4 laterally
not reaching tergite margins (see Fig 20) (in O. porcus and
O. ruceps, microtrichose areas on abdominal tergites 3
and 4 laterally reaching tergite margins). It clearly differs
from both O. porcus and O. ruceps by the lateral surstyli
of male narrow and separated from medial surstyli (see
Kameneva, 1997 (as O. bacescui) (in O. porcus and O.
ruceps surstyli robust and widely fused).
Description: see Kameneva, 1997 (as O. bacescui).
Acknowledgements
This study resulted partly from the work funded in
2001 by the Ernst Mayr Travel Grant for VAK, 2003 by
the Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst Stipend
(DAAD, Bonn) and in 2006-2010 by the I.I.Schmalhausen
Institute of Zoology of the National Academy of Sciences
of Ukraine, Kyiv for EPK. We greatly appreciate kind
assistance of collection curators. We thank Neal Evenhuis
and David Clements for reviewing this manuscript and
valuable critical comments.
References
Becker, Th. 1902. Die Meigen’schen Typen der sogen. Muscidae
acalypterae (Muscaria holometopa). Zeitschrift fur systematische
Hymenopterologie und Dipterologie. Leipzig, 2: 209-256, 289–320,
337–355.
Becker, Th. 1905. Ortalidae. In: Becker Th., Bezzi M., Kertesz K. & Stein
P. (Eds.) Katalog der paläarktischen Dipteren. Bd.4. Budapest:
92–107.
Fabricius, J.C. 1805. Systema antliatorum secundum ordines, genera,
species adiectis synonymis, locis, observationibus, descriptionibus.
Brunswigae: 1–372 + 1–30.
Gheorghiu, V. 1987. Otites bacescui n.sp. et O. bradeseui n.sp. (Diptera,
Otitidae). Travaux du Museum d’Histoire naturelle “Grigore
Antipa”. Bucureşti, 29: 189–204.
Hennig, W. 1939. 46. /47. Otitidae. In: Lindner E. (ed. ) Die Fliegen der
palaearktisclien Region. Schweizerbart, Stuttgart: E. 5 (Lfg.126-
128): l–79.
International Commission of Zoological Nomenclature. 1999.
International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. Fourth edition.
International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature, London: I–XXIX
+ 1–306.
Kameneva E. P. & Greve Jensen L. 2004. Ulidiidae. In: Pape, T. (ed.)
Fauna Europea. Insecta: Diptera. Fauna Europaea version 1.1,
http://www.faunaeur.org (accessed 1.01.2015)
Kameneva E. P. & Greve Jensen L. 2013. Ulidiidae. In: Pape, T. & Beuk,
P. (ed.) Fauna Europea. Insecta: Diptera. Fauna Europaea version
2017.06, https://fauna-eu.org (accessed 1.12.2019)
Kameneva, E. P. & Korneyev, V. A. 2006. Myennidini, a new tribe of
the subfamily Otitinae (Diptera: Ulidiidae), with discussion of
the suprageneric classication of the family. Israeli Journal of
Entomology, 35–36: 497–586.
Kameneva, E. P. 1997. A preliminary review of the Otites formosa
species-group (Diptera, Ulidiidae, Otitinae). Russian Entomological
Journal, (1996) 5(1–4): 125–133.
Kameneva, E.P. 2012. A new species of the genus Otites (Diptera,
Ulidiidae) from Crete (Greece). Vestnik zoologii: 46 (4), 375–379.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/v10058-012-0032-y
Latreille, P.A. 1804. 578. Genre. Otite, Otites. In Tableau méthodique des
Insectes, p. 129–200. In Société de Naturalistes et d’Agriculteurs,
Nouveau dictionnaire d’histoire naturelle, appliqué aux arts,
principalement á l’agriculture et á l’écomie rurale et domestique.
Tome 24 [sect. 3]: Tableaux methodiques d’histoire naturelle.
Déterville, Paris, 196.
Latreille, P.A. 1805. Histoire naturelle, générale et particulière, des
crustacés et des insectes. Tome quatrième. Dufart, Paris, 1–432 pp.
Macquart, J. P. M. 1835. Histoire naturelle des Insectes. Dipteres. Tome
deuxieme. Ouvrage accompagne de planches In: Roret N. E. (ed.)
Nouvelles suites a Buffon, formant, avec les oeuvres de cet auteur,
un cours complet d’histoire naturelle. Collection accompagnee de
planches: 82 vols. + 11 atlases. — N. E. Roret, Paris: I–IV + 1–703.
Martinek V. 1997. Otitidae. In: Chvala, M. (ed.) Check List of Diptera
(Insecta) of the Czech and Slovak Republics. Karolinum — Charles
University Press Prague: 70.
Martinek V. 1999. Otitidae. Ulidiidae. In: Schumann, H., Bährmann, R.
&, Stark, A. (eds). Checkliste der Dipteren Deutschlands. Studia
dipterologica. Supplement 2: 170.

Українська ентомофауністика 2019 10(2)
О.П.КаменєваіВ.О.КорнєєвНовіноменклатурнізмінивродіOtites
30
Meigen, J. W. 1826. Systematische Beschreibung der bekannten
europäischen zweiügeligen Insekten. Fünfter Theil. Schulz-
Wundermann, Hamm: i–xii + 1–412
Meigen, J. W. 1830. Systematische Beschreibung der bekannten
europäischen zweiügeligen Insekten. Sechster Theil. Schulz,
Hamm: i–xi + 1–401 + [1–3]
Meigen, J. W. 1838. Systematische Beschreibung der bekannten
europäischen zweiügeligen Insekten. Siebenter Theil oder
Supplementband. Schulz-Wundermann, Hamm: i–xii + 1–434 + [1].
Merz, B. 1996. Zur Faunistik der Pyrgotidae, Platystomatidae und
Ulidiidae (= Otitidae) (Diptera, Tephritoidea) der Schweiz mit
spezieller Berücksichtigung von Otites Latreille. Mitteilungen der
Schweizerischen Entomologischen Gesellschaft, 69: 405–416.
Merz, B. 1998. 61. Ulidiidae (=Otitidae). In: Merz, B., Bächli, G., Haenni,
J.-P. & Honseth, Y. (Hrsg.). Diptera — Checklist. Fauna Helvetica.
CSCF/SZKF & SES/SEG, Neuchâtel: 242–243.
Morgulis, E. 2012. Taxonomy and biology of the family Ulidiidae
(Diptera: Tephritoidea) in Israel. Thesis submitted towards the M.
Sc. Degree, Tel-Aviv University, George S. Wise Faculty of Life
Sciences, 161 pp.
Morgulis, E. 2013. Review of Otites Latreille (Diptera:
Ulidiidae) from Israel with two new species and notes
on biology and behavior. Zootaxa, 3619 (5), 541–553.
http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3619.5.3
Morgulis, E. 2015. Two peculiar new species of Otites Latreille 1804
(Diptera: Ulidiidae) with reduced phallus. Zootaxa, 3949 (4): 567–574.
http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3949.4.6
Panzer G.W.F. [1798]. Faunae Insectorum Germanicae Initiae oder
Deutschlands Insekten. Fasc.59: l-24
Robineau-Desvoidy J.-B. 1830, Essai sur les Myodaires. Mem. presentes
par divers Savants (2). Vol.2: l–813.
Rondani, С. 1869. Ortalidinae Italicae collectae, distinctae et ordinem
dispositae. Dipterologiae Italicae Prodromus, Pars VII. Fase. 3.
Linea A. Oitaloidi. Dipter. Stirps XX. Ortalidinae Rndn Bolletino
della Societa Entomologien Italiana, 1: 5-37.
Sabrosky, C.W. 1999. Family-group names in Diptera. Myia, 10: 1–360.
Schiner, J.R. 1860. Fauna Austriaca. Die Fliegen (Diptera). Teil II, H.2:
73-184.
Schiner, I. R. 1864. Fauna austriaca. Die Fliegen (Diptera). II Teil.
Nach der analytischen Methode bearbeitet, mit der Charakteristik
sammtlicher europaischer Gattungen, der Beschreibung aller in
Deutschland vorkommenden Arten und der Aufzahlung aller bisher
beschriebenen europaischen Arten. Vol. 2. Wien: I–XXXII + 1–658.
Scopoli, J. A. 1763. Entomologia carniolica exhibens insecta carnioliae
indigena et distributa in ordines, genera, species, varietates.
Methodo Linnaeana. Johannis Thomae Trattner, Vindobonae:
1–421.
Séguy, E. 1934. Diptères (Brachycères) (Muscidae Acalypterae et
Scatophagidae). Faune de France, 28: 1–832.
Soos Ä. 1980. 49. család: Otitidae — Foltoslegyek. In: Magyarorszag
Állatvilaga. Fauna Hungariae. Akademiai Kiadö,Budapest, Kötet
15, Diptera II, 2 Füzet: 67–93.
Soós, Á. 1984. Family Otitidae. In: Soós, Á. & Papp, L. (Eds.), Catalogue
of Palaearctic Diptera. Vol. 9. Micropezidae — Agromyzidae.
Elsevier, Amsterdam & Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest: 45–59.
Steyskal, G.C. 1968. 54. Family Otitidae (Ortalidae; includingPterocallidae,
Ulidiidae). In: Papavero, N. (Ed.), A Catalogue ofthe Diptera of the
Americas South of the United Stated. Departamento de Zoologia,
Secretaria de Agricultura, São Paulo, 54: 1–26.
Thompson, F.C. & Pont, A.C. 1993. Systematic Database of Musca names
(Diptera). A catalog of names associated with the genus-group name
Musca Linnaeus, with information on their classication, distribution,
and documentation. Theses Zoologicae, 20: 1–219 + [1–2].
Received 10.12.2019 Accepted 16.12.2019 Published 19.12.2019 © 2019 E. P. Kameneva & V. A. Korneyev