Iteaphila macquarti Zetterstedt 1838

Material examined of Iteaphila macquarti

Lectotype

NORWAY • 1 ♂; “Werdalen, Naes”; [4 Jun.]; D. Boheman leg.; MZLU 3028:1.

Other material

SWEDEN • 1 ♂; Lappland, Kiruna kommun, Abisko nationalpark, Nuolja; 26 Jun.–15 Jul. 2006; Swedish Malaise Trap Project leg.; Malaise trap, bare mountain; DNA voucher AD7E; NHRS • 23 ♀♀; same data as for preceding; NHRS.

Eyes bare; males holoptic. Scape with setae; postpedicel tapering, at least 3 times as long as wide; stylus cylindrical (Fig. 6B). Labrum straight in both sexes (6E); epipharyngal blades and ventroapical comb absent. Postgena bare or with setae, not spine like (Fig. 6C). Prosternum separated from proepisternum and forming an isolated sclerite; laterotergite bare. Stout spine-like setae present on anterior face of fore coxa and inner ventral margin of fore trochanter absent (Fig. 6C); tubercle lacking on fore coxa; male fore tarsal claws present. Costal bristle absent; subcosta reaching costa; R 4+5 branched; CuA recurved (Fig. 9E). Females: tergite 10 fused to cercus (Fig. 8C). Males: postgonites form fused processes from hypandrium; the apex of the phallus is simple (Fig. 6H).

The genus Iteaphila is the most widely spread group within the Ragadidae, with representatives in the Nearctic, Palaearctic and Oriental regions (Shamshev & Sinclair 2009; Sinclair & Shamshev 2012).

Sinclair & Saigusa (2001) transferred Ragas setosa (Bezzi 1924) to the genus Iteaphila based on the presence of a straight labrum, the absence of spine like setae on fore coxa and postgena, the palpus projection and the shape of the male terminalia. Shamshev & Sinclair (2009) assigned this species together with several other from the southern Europe, the northern Africa and the Middle East to the ‘ Iteaphila setosa -group’. This group, however, possesses species with numerous peculiar characters such as both ventral and dorsal surstyli, costal bristle, antennal shape and modification in male hind femur, and its affinity to other species in Iteaphila is unclear. For the analysis herein, the characters present in the type species were used and the above listed characters treated as uniquely or possibly secondarily derived in the group. Further examination of morphological characters such as mouthparts, as well as DNA data is needed to clarify the phylogenetic position of this group.