Glyphidops

Enderlein, 1922

cactus flies

Glyphidops is a of in the , established by Enderlein in 1922. These belong to the group of . The genus is characterized by specific morphological features that distinguish it from related genera within Neriidae, particularly in antennal and leg structure. -level identification within Glyphidops requires examination of characters such as forecoxae coloration.

Pronunciation

How to pronounce Glyphidops: /ˈɡlɪfɪˌdɒps/

These audio files are automatically generated. While they are not always 100% accurate, they are a good starting point.

Identification

Glyphidops can be distinguished from the related Nerius by dark forecoxae (Nerius has forecoxae). From Odontoloxozus peruanus, Glyphidops differs by having a non-elongate antennal . The antennal is situated apically on the postpedicel (third ), a character shared with other that distinguishes the from nearly all other . Males possess elongate legs with spinose forefemora, though these appear to be used in sexual combat rather than as appendages.

Habitat

Associated with cactus environments, as indicated by the '' for the . Specific microhabitat preferences for Glyphidops are not well documented.

Distribution

Documented from the Brazilian Amazon region. The precise geographic range of individual within the remains incompletely characterized.

Behavior

Males of , including presumably Glyphidops, engage in sexual combat involving rearing up on hind legs and striking opponents with forelegs or surfaces, including attempts to place rivals in head-locks. This behavior has been directly observed in related but not specifically documented for Glyphidops.

Similar Taxa

  • NeriusSimilar elongate body form and antennal ; distinguished by forecoxae versus dark in Glyphidops, and by thoracic color pattern used for -level identification
  • Odontoloxozus peruanusSimilar -level characters; distinguished by elongate antennal versus non-elongate pedicel in Glyphidops

More Details

Taxonomic note

The was included in a 2008 faunal treatment of from the Brazilian Amazon (Carvalho-Filho and Esposito 2008), which provided a to . However, identification to species level requires careful interpretation of coloration characters, and specimens from southeastern Brazil may represent undescribed not included in the Amazonian key.

Tags

Sources and further reading