Catálogo Taxonômico da Fauna do Brasil: Setting the baseline knowledge on the animal diversity in Brazil

The limited temporal completeness and taxonomic accuracy of species lists, made available in a traditional manner in scientific publications, has always represented a problem. These lists are invariably limited to a few taxonomic groups and do not represent up-to-date knowledge of all species and classifications. In this context, the Brazilian megadiverse fauna is no exception, and the Catálogo Taxonômico da Fauna do Brasil (CTFB) (http://fauna.jbrj.gov.br/), made public in 2015, represents a database on biodiversity anchored on a list of valid and expertly recognized scientific names of animals in Brazil. The CTFB is updated in near real time by a team of more than 800 specialists. By January 1, 2024, the CTFB compiled 133,691 nominal species, with 125,138 that were considered valid. Most of the valid species were arthropods (82.3%, with more than 102,000 species) and chordates (7.69%, with over 11,000 species). These taxa were followed by a cluster composed of Mollusca (3,567 species), Platyhelminthes (2,292 species), Annelida (1,833 species), and Nematoda (1,447 species). All remaining groups had less than 1,000 species reported in Brazil, with Cnidaria (831 species), Porifera (628 species), Rotifera (606 species), and Bryozoa (520 species) representing those with more than 500 species. Analysis of the CTFB database can facilitate and direct efforts towards the discovery of new species in Brazil, but it is also fundamental in providing the best available list of valid nominal species to users, including those in science, health, conservation efforts, and any initiative involving animals. The importance of the CTFB is evidenced by the elevated number of citations in the scientific literature in diverse areas of biology, law, anthropology, education, forensic science, and veterinary science, among others

The impact of surgical delay on resectability of colorectal cancer: An international prospective cohort study

Aim The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has provided a unique opportunity to explore the impact of surgical delays on cancer resectability. This study aimed to compare resectability for colorectal cancer patients undergoing delayed versus non-delayed surgery. Methods This was an international prospective cohort study of consecutive colorectal cancer patients with a decision for curative surgery (January-April 2020). Surgical delay was defined as an operation taking place more than 4 weeks after treatment decision, in a patient who did not receive neoadjuvant therapy. A subgroup analysis explored the effects of delay in elective patients only. The impact of longer delays was explored in a sensitivity analysis. The primary outcome was complete resection, defined as curative resection with an R0 margin. Results Overall, 5453 patients from 304 hospitals in 47 countries were included, of whom 6.6% (358/5453) did not receive their planned operation. Of the 4304 operated patients without neoadjuvant therapy, 40.5% (1744/4304) were delayed beyond 4 weeks. Delayed patients were more likely to be older, men, more comorbid, have higher body mass index and have rectal cancer and early stage disease. Delayed patients had higher unadjusted rates of complete resection (93.7% vs. 91.9%, P = 0.032) and lower rates of emergency surgery (4.5% vs. 22.5%, P < 0.001). After adjustment, delay was not associated with a lower rate of complete resection (OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.90-1.55, P = 0.224), which was consistent in elective patients only (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.69-1.27, P = 0.672). Longer delays were not associated with poorer outcomes. Conclusion One in 15 colorectal cancer patients did not receive their planned operation during the first wave of COVID-19. Surgical delay did not appear to compromise resectability, raising the hypothesis that any reduction in long-term survival attributable to delays is likely to be due to micro-metastatic disease

Catálogo Taxonômico da Fauna do Brasil: setting the baseline knowledge on the animal diversity in Brazil

The limited temporal completeness and taxonomic accuracy of species lists, made available in a traditional manner in scientific publications, has always represented a problem. These lists are invariably limited to a few taxonomic groups and do not represent up-to-date knowledge of all species and classifications. In this context, the Brazilian megadiverse fauna is no exception, and the Catálogo Taxonômico da Fauna do Brasil (CTFB) (http://fauna.jbrj.gov.br/), made public in 2015, represents a database on biodiversity anchored on a list of valid and expertly recognized scientific names of animals in Brazil. The CTFB is updated in near real time by a team of more than 800 specialists. By January 1, 2024, the CTFB compiled 133,691 nominal species, with 125,138 that were considered valid. Most of the valid species were arthropods (82.3%, with more than 102,000 species) and chordates (7.69%, with over 11,000 species). These taxa were followed by a cluster composed of Mollusca (3,567 species), Platyhelminthes (2,292 species), Annelida (1,833 species), and Nematoda (1,447 species). All remaining groups had less than 1,000 species reported in Brazil, with Cnidaria (831 species), Porifera (628 species), Rotifera (606 species), and Bryozoa (520 species) representing those with more than 500 species. Analysis of the CTFB database can facilitate and direct efforts towards the discovery of new species in Brazil, but it is also fundamental in providing the best available list of valid nominal species to users, including those in science, health, conservation efforts, and any initiative involving animals. The importance of the CTFB is evidenced by the elevated number of citations in the scientific literature in diverse areas of biology, law, anthropology, education, forensic science, and veterinary science, among others

Mortality from gastrointestinal congenital anomalies at 264 hospitals in 74 low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries: a multicentre, international, prospective cohort study

Summary Background Congenital anomalies are the fifth leading cause of mortality in children younger than 5 years globally. Many gastrointestinal congenital anomalies are fatal without timely access to neonatal surgical care, but few studies have been done on these conditions in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). We compared outcomes of the seven most common gastrointestinal congenital anomalies in low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries globally, and identified factors associated with mortality. Methods We did a multicentre, international prospective cohort study of patients younger than 16 years, presenting to hospital for the first time with oesophageal atresia, congenital diaphragmatic hernia, intestinal atresia, gastroschisis, exomphalos, anorectal malformation, and Hirschsprung’s disease. Recruitment was of consecutive patients for a minimum of 1 month between October, 2018, and April, 2019. We collected data on patient demographics, clinical status, interventions, and outcomes using the REDCap platform. Patients were followed up for 30 days after primary intervention, or 30 days after admission if they did not receive an intervention. The primary outcome was all-cause, in-hospital mortality for all conditions combined and each condition individually, stratified by country income status. We did a complete case analysis. Findings We included 3849 patients with 3975 study conditions (560 with oesophageal atresia, 448 with congenital diaphragmatic hernia, 681 with intestinal atresia, 453 with gastroschisis, 325 with exomphalos, 991 with anorectal malformation, and 517 with Hirschsprung’s disease) from 264 hospitals (89 in high-income countries, 166 in middleincome countries, and nine in low-income countries) in 74 countries. Of the 3849 patients, 2231 (58·0%) were male. Median gestational age at birth was 38 weeks (IQR 36–39) and median bodyweight at presentation was 2·8 kg (2·3–3·3). Mortality among all patients was 37 (39·8%) of 93 in low-income countries, 583 (20·4%) of 2860 in middle-income countries, and 50 (5·6%) of 896 in high-income countries (p<0·0001 between all country income groups). Gastroschisis had the greatest difference in mortality between country income strata (nine [90·0%] of ten in lowincome countries, 97 [31·9%] of 304 in middle-income countries, and two [1·4%] of 139 in high-income countries; p≤0·0001 between all country income groups). Factors significantly associated with higher mortality for all patients combined included country income status (low-income vs high-income countries, risk ratio 2·78 [95% CI 1·88–4·11], p<0·0001; middle-income vs high-income countries, 2·11 [1·59–2·79], p<0·0001), sepsis at presentation (1·20 [1·04–1·40], p=0·016), higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score at primary intervention (ASA 4–5 vs ASA 1–2, 1·82 [1·40–2·35], p<0·0001; ASA 3 vs ASA 1–2, 1·58, [1·30–1·92], p<0·0001]), surgical safety checklist not used (1·39 [1·02–1·90], p=0·035), and ventilation or parenteral nutrition unavailable when needed (ventilation 1·96, [1·41–2·71], p=0·0001; parenteral nutrition 1·35, [1·05–1·74], p=0·018). Administration of parenteral nutrition (0·61, [0·47–0·79], p=0·0002) and use of a peripherally inserted central catheter (0·65 [0·50–0·86], p=0·0024) or percutaneous central line (0·69 [0·48–1·00], p=0·049) were associated with lower mortality. Interpretation Unacceptable differences in mortality exist for gastrointestinal congenital anomalies between lowincome, middle-income, and high-income countries. Improving access to quality neonatal surgical care in LMICs will be vital to achieve Sustainable Development Goal 3.2 of ending preventable deaths in neonates and children younger than 5 years by 2030

Psapharomys Grunberg

Genus PSAPHAROMYS Gr&uuml;nberg &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Psapharomys&lt;/i&gt; Gr&uuml;nberg, 1915: 50. Type species, &lt;i&gt;Psapharomys salebrosa&lt;/i&gt; Gr&uuml;nberg, 1915, by monotypy.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Brachyphleps&lt;/i&gt; Lindner, 1965: 49. Type species, &lt;i&gt;Brachyphleps tristis&lt;/i&gt; Lindner, 1965, by monotypy, &lt;b&gt;Syn. nov.&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Psapharomys salebrosa&lt;/i&gt; Gr&uuml;nberg.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Psapharomys salebrosa&lt;/i&gt; Gr&uuml;nberg, 1915: 52. ST 1 &female; [ZMHU]: Equatorial Guinea: R&iacute;o Muni, Benito region, Alen; ST 1 &male;, 2 &female; [ZMHU]: Equatorial Guinea: R&iacute;o Muni, Nkolentangan; ST 1 &female; [ZMHU]: Equatorial Guinea: R&iacute;o Muni, Uelleburg. &lt;i&gt;Brachyphleps tristis&lt;/i&gt; Lindner, 1965: 49. HT &male; [IRSNB]: Zaire: Parc National de la Garamba, &ldquo;I/b/2s&rdquo;. &lt;b&gt;Syn. nov.&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; When Lindner (1965) described &lt;i&gt;Brachyphleps tristis&lt;/i&gt;, he compared it to the genus &lt;i&gt;Meristomerinx&lt;/i&gt; Enderlein, and wondered if this new genus should be placed in the Clitellariinae because of the short stump of the vein &lt;i&gt;M3&lt;/i&gt;. The comparison with &lt;i&gt;Meristomerinx&lt;/i&gt; is strange because the two genera show many differences. For example, the pterostigma is triangular vs linear (Fig. 37); vein &lt;i&gt;R2+3&lt;/i&gt; arising distinctly distal to vs proximal to crossvein &lt;i&gt;r&ndash;m;&lt;/i&gt; as well as the differences in antennal structure. Lindner overlooked the fact that &lt;i&gt;Psapharomys&lt;/i&gt; also has a rudimentary &lt;i&gt;M3&lt;/i&gt; (&lt;i&gt;Brachyphleps&lt;/i&gt; and &lt;i&gt;Psapharomys&lt;/i&gt; are the only Afrotropical Pachygastrinae genera that have this character state). Although the male of &lt;i&gt;Psapharomys&lt;/i&gt; was also described by Gr&uuml;nberg, only the characteristic elongate female head was illustrated in the description. The male head of &lt;i&gt;Psapharomys&lt;/i&gt; is only slightly longer than high, while Lindner illustrated the male head of &lt;i&gt;Brachyphleps&lt;/i&gt; as higher than long, which does not reflect the true dimensions of the type specimen&mdash;the male type of &lt;i&gt;Brachyphleps&lt;/i&gt; has a head slightly longer than high. Lindner indicated in the illustration of the &lt;i&gt;B. tristis&lt;/i&gt; head a flange like extension below the antennae, which is present in the type and also in the female head of &lt;i&gt;Psapharomys&lt;/i&gt;. The other important character is the triangular shaped pterostigma which is illustrated in the descriptions of both genera. The unique shape of the pterostigma facilitates bending of the wing while resting. This feature is found in several other Stratiomyidae genera (&lt;i&gt;Manotes&lt;/i&gt; Kert&eacute;sz) and other Diptera, for example in the genera &lt;i&gt;Camarota&lt;/i&gt; Meigen (Chloropidae), &lt;i&gt;Stegana&lt;/i&gt; Meigen (Drosophilidae) and &lt;i&gt;Chyliza&lt;/i&gt; Fall&eacute;n (Psilidae), which are potential beetle mimics.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; We did not examine the type specimen of &lt;i&gt;Psapharomys salebrosa&lt;/i&gt;, because the illustrations and description are very detailed and we have specimens on hand which agree completely with them, but we examined the holotype of &lt;i&gt;Brachyphleps tristis&lt;/i&gt; [IRSNB] (Fig. 10) and we conclude that the two taxa are conspecific.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; We have several more specimens on hand which belong to at least three more species that also have a triangular pterostigma. All these specimens have an elevated transverse ridge on the frons above the two white pubescent spots next to the eye margin and the antennae are not inserted on the protrusion as in &lt;i&gt;P. salebrosa.&lt;/i&gt; Also, the flange between the oral cavity and the lower eye margin is not triangular as in &lt;i&gt;P. salebrosa&lt;/i&gt;, but varies from evenly curved and barely visible to a large but not triangular flange. One of the specimens has the eyes covered with setae. We still believe that these species would be best placed in this genus which is mainly defined by the triangular shaped pterostigma.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; This genus is part of a group of African genera which are defined by having vein &lt;i&gt;R2+3&lt;/i&gt; arising distinctly proximal to crossvein &lt;i&gt;r&ndash;m&lt;/i&gt;, abdomen longer than broad, head of females longer than high, male eyes holoptic; pedicel with a finger-like projection on the inner side (similar to &lt;i&gt;Ptecticus&lt;/i&gt;). The following genera belong in the &lt;i&gt;Steleoceromys-&lt;/i&gt; group: &lt;i&gt;Dactylotinda&lt;/i&gt; Lindner, 1965, &lt;i&gt;Hypoceromys&lt;/i&gt;, &lt;i&gt;Psapharomys, Pseudoxymyia,&lt;/i&gt; and &lt;i&gt;Steleoceromys.&lt;/i&gt; Further studies are needed to better define the genera and to resolve the phylogenetic relationships among the genera. Unfortunately most of these species are rather rare in collection.&lt;/p&gt;Published as part of &lt;i&gt;Hauser, Martin, Woodley, Norman E. &amp; Fachin, Diego A., 2017, Taxonomic changes in African Stratiomyidae (Diptera) in Zootaxa 4263 (1)&lt;/i&gt;, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4263.1.3, &lt;a href="http://zenodo.org/record/572548"&gt;http://zenodo.org/record/572548&lt;/a&gt

Gongrosargus Lindner

Genus GONGROSARGUS Lindner &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Gongrosargus&lt;/i&gt; Lindner, 1959: 90. Type species, &lt;i&gt;Gongrosargus stuckenbergi&lt;/i&gt; Lindner, 1959, by original designation. &lt;i&gt;Dinosargus&lt;/i&gt; Lindner, 1968: 9. Type species, &lt;i&gt;Dinosargus lateritius&lt;/i&gt; Lindner, 1968, by monotypy. &lt;b&gt;Syn. nov.&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Gongrosargus glaucus&lt;/i&gt; (Bigot). &lt;b&gt;Afrotropical:&lt;/b&gt; Madagascar.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Sargus&lt;/i&gt; ? &lt;i&gt;glaucus&lt;/i&gt; Bigot, 1859: 134. HT? [MNHN, lost]: Madagasgar: Nossi-B&eacute;. &lt;i&gt;Gongrosargus distinguendus&lt;/i&gt; Lindner, 1966b: 11. ST 1 &female; [MNHN]: Madagascar: Andranofotsy; ST 1 &male; [MRAC], 1 &female; [SMNS]: Madagascar: Maroantsetra. &lt;b&gt;Syn. nov.&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; The type specimen of Bigot&rsquo;s &lt;i&gt;Sargus glaucus&lt;/i&gt; is lost and the species is treated under &lt;i&gt;Ptecticus&lt;/i&gt; in the world catalog (Woodley 2001: 212). From the description, we can place this species clearly in the genus &lt;i&gt;Gongrosargus&lt;/i&gt;, because of the description of the thorax, being green with three brown stripes, the scutellum being black at the base and green at the apex, and the hind tarsi having a black basitarsus and the rest being white. This combination of characters is not found in any &lt;i&gt;Ptecticus&lt;/i&gt; species from Madagascar, which are all uniformly brown or dull yellow, but fits perfectly with &lt;i&gt;G. distinguendus&lt;/i&gt; Lindner 1966, with which we are synonymizing it. We have studied all syntypes of &lt;i&gt;G. distinguendus&lt;/i&gt;, the male syntype from MRAC is pictured in Fig. 18.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Gongrosargus flavipennis&lt;/i&gt; (Macquart). &lt;b&gt;Comb. nov.&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Sargus flavipennis&lt;/i&gt; Macquart, 1838: 200. HT &male; [MNHN]: Madagascar. Ptecticus flavipes: Loew, 1860: 77. Incorrect subsequent spelling.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; We have studied the male holotype [MNHN] (Fig. 19), and the species fits well with the concept of &lt;i&gt;Gongrosargus&lt;/i&gt;.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Gongrosargus lateritius&lt;/i&gt; (Lindner). &lt;b&gt;Comb. nov.&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Dinosargus lateritius&lt;/i&gt; Lindner, 1968: 9. HT &male; [MNHN]: Madagascar: Ivondro.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; We have studied the male holotype [SMNS] (Fig. 20), and the species fits well with the concept of &lt;i&gt;Gongrosargus&lt;/i&gt;.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Gongrosargus limbatus&lt;/i&gt; (Macquart). &lt;b&gt;Comb. nov.&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Sargus limbatus&lt;/i&gt; Macquart, 1838: 201. HT &male; [MNHN]: Madagascar.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; We have studied the male holotype [MNHN] (Fig 21), and the species fits well with the concept of &lt;i&gt;Gongrosargus&lt;/i&gt;. This species might be conspecific with &lt;i&gt;G. stuckenbergi&lt;/i&gt;, but because of the poor condition of the holotype and we know of several undescribed species close to &lt;i&gt;G. stuckenbergi&lt;/i&gt;, we are not formally synonymizing the two species.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Gongrosargus pallidus&lt;/i&gt; (Macquart). &lt;b&gt;Comb. nov.&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Sargus pallidus&lt;/i&gt; Macquart, 1838: 202. ST 1 &male; [MNHN], &female; [MNHN, lost]: Madagascar.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Gongrosargus univittatus&lt;/i&gt; Lindner, 1966b: 12. ST 1 &female; [MNHN], 1 &female; [MRAC]: Madagascar: Famponambo. &lt;b&gt;Syn. nov.&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Gongrosargus exclamationis&lt;/i&gt; Lindner, 1968: 11. ST 1 &male; [SMNS]: Madagascar: Ivondro, ST 1 &male; [MNHN]: Madagascar: Fort Dauphin; ST 1 &male; [MNHN]: Madagascar: Mt. Tsaratanana, Andampy, 750 m. &lt;b&gt;Syn. nov.&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; We have studied the male syntype of &lt;i&gt;Sargus pallidus&lt;/i&gt; [MNHN] (Fig. 22), and the species fits well with the concept of &lt;i&gt;Gongrosargus&lt;/i&gt;. The species was listed under the &ldquo;unplaced species of Sarginae &rdquo; in Woodley (2001: 232). Lindner likely never checked Macquart&rsquo;s types. He considered &lt;i&gt;S. pallidus&lt;/i&gt; to belong in &ldquo; &lt;i&gt;Chrysochroma&lt;/i&gt; &rdquo; rather than &lt;i&gt;Gongrosargus&lt;/i&gt;, because in Lindner&rsquo;s collection [SMNS] there are two males of &lt;i&gt;Ptectisargus punctum&lt;/i&gt; (Lindner, 1968) misidentified under the name &lt;i&gt;Gongrosargus pallidus&lt;/i&gt;. &lt;i&gt;Ptectisargus punctum&lt;/i&gt; has the same color pattern (yellow-orange with a black stripe on the thorax) as &lt;i&gt;G. pallidus&lt;/i&gt;, but has a clearly different wing venation. When Lindner described &lt;i&gt;G. univittatus&lt;/i&gt; (Fig. 23), he did not compare it with &lt;i&gt;G. pallidus&lt;/i&gt;, because he did not consider them congeneric. We examined both female syntypes (MNHN, MRAC) [Woodley (2001: 191) stated incorrectly that the &ldquo;holotype&rdquo; was in Paris], and they are both conspecific with &lt;i&gt;G. pallidus&lt;/i&gt;. Only two years later Lindner (1968) described &lt;i&gt;G. exclamationis&lt;/i&gt; (Fig. 24) without comparing it to &lt;i&gt;G. univittatus&lt;/i&gt;. We examined two of the three male syntypes of &lt;i&gt;G. exclamationis&lt;/i&gt; [MNHN, MRAC] and they are all conspecific with &lt;i&gt;G. pallidus&lt;/i&gt;. We have at least three undescribed &lt;i&gt;Gongrosargus&lt;/i&gt; on hand, which have a color pattern similar to that of &lt;i&gt;G. pallidus&lt;/i&gt; from Madagascar.&lt;/p&gt;Published as part of &lt;i&gt;Hauser, Martin, Woodley, Norman E. &amp; Fachin, Diego A., 2017, Taxonomic changes in African Stratiomyidae (Diptera) in Zootaxa 4263 (1)&lt;/i&gt;, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4263.1.3, &lt;a href="http://zenodo.org/record/572548"&gt;http://zenodo.org/record/572548&lt;/a&gt

41. STRATIOMYIDAE (Soldier Flies)

Volume: 2Start Page: 919End Page: 97

Neopachygaster Austen

Genus NEOPACHYGASTER Austen &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Neopachygaster&lt;/i&gt; Austen, 1901: 245. Type species, &lt;i&gt;Pachygaster meromelaena&lt;/i&gt; Dufour, 1841, by original designation.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Neopachygaster stigma&lt;/i&gt; Lindner.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Neopachygaster stigma&lt;/i&gt; Lindner, 1938: 30. ST 2 &male;, 1 &female; [IRSNB], 1 &male; [SMNS]: Zaire: Rutshuru; ST 1 &female; [MRAC]: Zaire: Flandria.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Neopachygaster umbrifera&lt;/i&gt; Lindner, 1966a: 360. ST 4 &male; &female; [MRAC], 1 &male; &female; [SMNS]: Zaire: Yangambi. &lt;b&gt;Syn. nov.&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; We examined a female syntype [IRSNB] of &lt;i&gt;Neopachygaster stigma&lt;/i&gt; (Fig. 7), the syntype series of &lt;i&gt;N. umbrifera&lt;/i&gt; and additional material with an apical wing spot, and we could not find any differences among the specimens, so we therefore consider the two taxa as conspecific.&lt;/p&gt;Published as part of &lt;i&gt;Hauser, Martin, Woodley, Norman E. &amp; Fachin, Diego A., 2017, Taxonomic changes in African Stratiomyidae (Diptera) in Zootaxa 4263 (1)&lt;/i&gt;, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4263.1.3, &lt;a href="http://zenodo.org/record/572548"&gt;http://zenodo.org/record/572548&lt;/a&gt

Nyplatys Seguy

Genus NYPLATYS S&eacute;guy &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Nyplatys&lt;/i&gt; S&eacute;guy, 1938: 329. Type species, &lt;i&gt;Nyplatys niger&lt;/i&gt; S&eacute;guy, 1938, by original designation.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Himantochaeta&lt;/i&gt; Lindner, 1939: 10. Type species, &lt;i&gt;Himantochaeta cultellata&lt;/i&gt; Lindner, 1939, by monotypy. &lt;b&gt;Syn. nov.&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Nyplatys cultellata&lt;/i&gt; (Lindner). &lt;b&gt;Comb. nov.&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Himantochaeta cultellata&lt;/i&gt; Lindner, 1939: 10. ST 1 &male;, 1 &female; [BMNH], 1 &male; [SMNS]: Uganda: Ruwenzori, Namwamba Valley, 6500 feet.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; We studied several syntypes [MNHN] of &lt;i&gt;Nyplatys niger&lt;/i&gt; and a syntype of &lt;i&gt;Himantochaeta cultellata&lt;/i&gt; [SMNS] as well as additional material of these species and came to the conclusion that both species are congeneric. Further studies are needed to determine how many species are in this genus, since from material on hand it seems that there are several different species in eastern Africa. In describing &lt;i&gt;Nyplatys&lt;/i&gt;, S&eacute;guy (1938) compared it with &lt;i&gt;Platynomyia&lt;/i&gt; Gr&uuml;nberg, which is strange, because &lt;i&gt;Platynomyia&lt;/i&gt; is not only nearly twice the size of &lt;i&gt;Nyplatys&lt;/i&gt;, but it has a white filiform last antennal flagellomere, while &lt;i&gt;Nyplatys&lt;/i&gt; is characterized by its black laterally flattened last antennal flagellomere.&lt;/p&gt;Published as part of &lt;i&gt;Hauser, Martin, Woodley, Norman E. &amp; Fachin, Diego A., 2017, Taxonomic changes in African Stratiomyidae (Diptera) in Zootaxa 4263 (1)&lt;/i&gt;, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4263.1.3, &lt;a href="http://zenodo.org/record/572548"&gt;http://zenodo.org/record/572548&lt;/a&gt