Rudolfina Rohacek 1987

Genus Rudolfina Roháček, 1987 Rudolfia Roháček, 1982: 225 (feminine, a junior homonym of Rudolfia Wilson, 1924 (Crustacea: Copepoda); type species: Limosina rozkosnyi Roháček, 1975, by monotypy). Rudolfina Roháček, 1987: 474 (feminine, nom. nov. for Rudolfia Roháček, 1982; type species: Limosina rozkosnyi Roháček, 1975, automatic). Rudolfia – Roháček 1982: 225 [formal diagnosis, phylogeny]; 1983: 152–154 [full description, phylogenetic notes]; 1987: 474 [homonymy]. — Marshall & Richards 1987: 999–1000 [diagnosis in key, illustr.]. Rudolfina – Roháček 1998: 483 [diagnosis, illustration]. — Marshall & Buck 2010: 1180–1183 [diagnosis in key, phylogenetic notes, biology]. — Su et al. 2017: 392–393 [key]. Redescription BODY. Colour light to dark brown. Length 1.4–2.3 mm. HEAD. With 3–5 interfrontal setae (of equal length or the foremost shorter), 1 (rarely 2) inclinate orbital setula and 4–10 small orbital setulae inside and below 2 strong, exclinate orbital setae; ocellar triangle with pair of strong setae and 3–5 additional small setulae; outer vertical seta strong, exclinate; inner vertical seta inclinate; occipital and paravertical setae inclinate, well-developed; postocellar seta inclinate, weakly developed. Eye-to-gena height ratio variable between species (1.5:1 to 3.5:1). Vibrissa strong. Gena with 1–2 strong subvibrissal setae and 4–9 smaller setulae. THORAX. Surface pruinose. Postpronotal lobe with 2–3 setae, outer seta strong, inner seta(e) reduced. Notopleural seta, 2 supra-alar setae and prescutellar dorsocentral seta strong. Acrostichal setulae in 4–8 rows, with 1 enlarged prescutellar acrostichal seta (almost as long as dorsocentral). Katepisternum with strong elongate posterior seta and reduced anterior seta. LEGS. Fore femur with 3–5 elongate setae dorsally (except R. exuberata sp. nov.). Fore tibia with 3–5 elongate setae ventrally. Mid femur with row of 3–10 anterodorsal setae extending from base, row of 2–5 dorsal setae on apical ¼, and basal cluster of 4–21 small setae ventrally; males usually with additional ventral seta (often in ventrobasal cluster). Mid tibia with 4 dorsal setae (basal anterodorsal, medial anterodorsal distal anterodorsal and distal posterodorsal); males with ventral comb of 4–13 setae on apical ½ or less (, R. exuberata sp. nov. and R. remiforma sp. nov. with setae of ventral comb weakly developed); females usually with midventral seta (absent in R. megepandria sp. nov.). Hind tibia with small apical ventral spur. WING. Always fully developed, with wing tip reaching or exceeding apex of abdomen. Costa extending to or just beyond end of R 4+5, and with single costagial seta> 2.0 × length of nearby setae. R 4+5 slightly curved towards costa distally. Cell dm with short stub veins of M 1 and Cu-A1 extending beyond dm-cu. Alula narrow, posterior margin straight. ABDOMEN. Sternites and tergites well sclerotized and setose (posterior and lateral margins more densely setose). Male sternite 4 usually simple (rarely densely setose medially). MALE ABDOMEN. Posterior margin of sternite 5 with lobe on each side of medial emargination (shape and size of emargination and lobes vary among species). Transverse (ventral) portion of sternite 6 narrow; straight or weakly arcuate. Ring sclerite (in the right membrane of segment 7, possibly derived from a spiracle) large and distinct. Epandrium setose, often with larger setae lateral to anal opening, and with right anteroventral corner drawn out into a finger-like process that extends to the hypandrium. Male cercus usually distinct, fused with the epandrium (reduced and obscured beneath the epandrium in a few species; e.g., R. pilosa sp. nov., R. remiforma sp. nov.). Hypandrium (Fig. 3B) Y-shaped with emarginate posteromedial extension; hypandrial arms posteriorly deeply bilobed posteriorly, with lateral lobe articulating with the epandrium and the medial lobe articulating with posterolateral corner of hypandrium. Pregonite distinct, small, near anterior base of postgonite. Postgonite generally simple and slender, with 3–4 setulae on anterior margin but modified in some species; ejaculatory apodeme small and finger-like, with small globular sperm pump, usually close to the basiphallus (easily lost during dissection); basiphallus simple (without an epiphallus); distiphallus with distinct elongate dorsal sclerite; acrophallus with dorsolateral lobes and a single ventral sac (often reduced). FEMALE ABDOMEN. Tergite 8 apparently tripartite, with two lateral triangular sclerites and a medial sclerite (reduced in several species). Epiproct bare except for usual pair of small setae and a few scattered setulae, strongly sclerotized, and fused laterally with cerci (except in R. cavernicola). Cercus with single flattened apical seta. Sternite 7 variable. Sternite 8 weak, transverse, covered in small setulae; pair of small, bispinose plates along posterior margin. Hypoproct very narrow, forming horseshoe-shaped band immediately below the cerci. Spermathecae (1 pair + 1 single) generally disc-shaped or lenticular, with thin, long sclerotized ducts. Related and similar genera All species of Rudolfina will key out to “ Rudolfia ” in the key to Nearctic Sphaeroceridae by Marshall & Richards (1987) but they will key out as “ Archiceroptera genus complex, in part” at couplet 72 in the key of Marshall & Buck (2010) to Neotropical Sphaeroceridae. This previous treatment reflected uncertainty about the limits between Rudolfina and the many undescribed Neotropical species in the Archiceroptera genus complex. The Archiceroptera complex is part of a larger group of Limosininae (including Aptilotella Duda, 1924, Archiceroptera Papp, 1977, Bitheca Marshall, 1987, Bromeoloecia Spuler, 1924, Pterogramma Spuler, 1924 and Robustagramma Marshall & Cui, 2005) characterized by an unusual process extending medially from the lower right margin of the epandrium to the hypandrium. The relationships within this group need further study but the morphological analysis by Paiero (2017) suggests that Rudolfina is closely related to Bromeloecia. Within this group, Rudolfina resembles Archiceroptera in characters of the female epiproct and cercus. However, in Archiceroptera the epiproct is completely desclerotized medially (anteriorly sclerotized in Rudolfina), the cercus is separate from the epiproct and has a partially concave inner margin, and sternite 8 is divided into a pair of elongate lateral sclerites without the paired setulose sclerites found in Rudolfina. Archiceroptera species also differ from Rudolfina in having M 1 extending as a pseudovein to the wing margin, CuA 1 rarely with a distinct stub vein, the male cercus free from the epandrium and with a distinct ventral process, and (in many, but not all species) five or more dorsal mid tibial setae and two or more inclinate orbital setulae. Biology Roháček (1987) recorded R. rozkosnyi from dung and occasionally from mud and decaying vegetation, but most of the new species considered here were collected in dung or carrion traps. Larvae remain unknown. Distribution Rudolfina has a mostly western Nearctic montane distribution, with high endemism in the southwest and the mountains of Mexico (Sierra Madre del Sur, Sierra Madre Oriental and Sierra Madre de Chiapas). Two widely separated species occur in the Palaearctic region (R. rozkosnyi and R. zhangi) and one species (R. exuberata sp. nov.) is widespread at low elevations from the southern United States to South America. Other than R. exuberata sp. nov., no true species of Rudolfina are known from south of Guatemala. Other Neotropical species previously treated as Rudolfina are discussed below. Results of the phylogenetic analysis Twenty-seven most parsimonious trees were generated, summarized here as a strict consensus tree (Fig. 5) and a majority rules consensus tree (Fig. 6). Characters were optimized on one of the equal length trees (Fig. 7) which was selected based on the recovery of several groups supported by putatively higher weight characters. Shared male genitalic morphology supported a close relationship of Rudolfina bucki sp nov. with R. megepandria sp. nov. and R. tumida sp. nov. with [R. rozkosnyi + R. digitata + R. zhangi]. The combined elongation of the epiproct and female cercus suggests that R. newtoni sp. nov. is closely related to [R. exuberata sp. nov. + R. pauca sp. nov. + R. remiforma sp. nov.], although the form of the epiproct in R. newtoni sp. nov. is apparently intermediate between the strongly elongated form found in the R. exuberata clade and the shorter epiproct of other Rudolfina. All trees recovered R. cavernicola as a sister taxon to the remaining species, which form a monophyletic group characterized by the fusion of the female cercus with the posterolateral corner of the epiproct, the elongation of the medial part of tergite 8 and by characters of the male cercus and surstylus. This tree suggests a New World origin for Rudolfina. Within Rudolfina excluding R. cavernicola, R. rozkosnyi, R. digitata and R. tumida sp. nov. appear to be a basal grade predating the origin of a clade comprising the Mexican-Guatemalan species. These four species all have a laminate lobe on the surstylus, apparently derived from the simple laminate margin of R. cavernicola (absent in other species). The largely Mexican-Guatemalan clade can be recognized by the simple, rounded anterior lobe of the male surstylus and the absence of dorsal swellings on the dorsal sclerite of the distiphallus. The R. exuberata group (including R. exuberata sp. nov., R. remiforma sp. nov. and R. pauca sp. nov.) is characterized by a small elongate male cercus, tulip-shaped epiproct, and reduction of the female cercus. Rudolfina remiforma sp. nov. and R. pauca sp. nov. are known from only a few localities at higher elevations, as is typical of the genus, but the widespread R. exuberata sp. nov. occurs at much lower elevations than its more localized congeners. Key to the New World Rudolfina Accurate identification of species of Rudolfina is largely dependent on examination of male sternite 5 and genitalic characters of both sexes; dissection may be required. Females of R. tumida sp. nov., R. bucki sp. nov., R. pilosa sp. nov. and R. zhangi are unknown. 1. Males................................................................................................................................................. 2 – Females........................................................................................................................................... 14 2. Sternite 5 with dense clusters of setae on each side of posteromedial emargination (Figs 14C, 18C)................................................................................................................................................... 3 – Sternite 5 evenly setose, without distinct clusters of setae............................................................... 4 3. Eye height ~2.5 × genal height. Sternite 4 medially with cluster of long setae (denser along posterior margin, Fig. 18C). Sternite 5 with triangular lobe on each side of triangular medial emargination on posterior margin; emargination extending anteriorly ½ length of sternite. Surstylus (in lateral view) boot-like, with 4–6 long setae originating from median knob on posterior surface; distal ⅓ evenly covered in small setulae. Postgonite with distinct apical swelling.......................... R. pilosa sp. nov. – Eye height ~1.5× genal height. Sternite 4 evenly setose (Fig. 14C). Sternite 5 with small nipple-like lobe on each side of medial emargination on posterior margin; emargination extending anteriorly almost to base of sternite. Surstylus (in lateral view) strap-like, elongate and narrow; relatively bare except for small scattered setae. Postgonite simple apically, uniformly narrow............................................................................................................................................................... R. newtoni sp. nov. 4. Posterior margin of sternite 5 with elongate, parallel-sided lobes (e.g., Fig. 9C) on each side of medial emargination; pair of long setulae on margin of desclerotized area adjacent to base of the lobes. Length of M 1 between crossveins dm-cu and r-m 1.5× dm-cu........................................................................................................................ 6 5. Second costal sector ¼ width of sternite) emargination between posterior lobes. Subanal plate complete or incomplete..................................................................................................................... 8 – Sternite 5 with small ( 1.2× genal height. Length of M 1 between crossveins dm-cu and r-m 1.5× dm-cu. Medial portion of tergite 8 distinct, well sclerotized. Cercus as long as or longer than flattened apical seta................................................................................................................................................... 17 15. Sternite 7 with posterior margin entire. Spermathecae ovoid (Fig. 20D)......... R. remiforma sp. nov. – Sternite 7 with posterior margin broadly emarginate (Fig. 10C). Spermatheca bilobed................ 16 16. Eye height 2.0× genal height. Second costal sector 0.5× third costal sector....... R. pauca sp. nov. 17. Eye height ~1.5 × genal height. Medial part of tergite 8 posteromedially emarginate (Fig. 15A). Epiproct triangular. Spermathecae mushroom-shaped......................................... R. newtoni sp. nov. – Eye height ≥1.75 × genal height. Medial part of tergite 8 posteriorly entire or desclerotized. Epiproct either trapezoidal or anteriorly rounded. Spermathecae variable.................................................... 18 18. Eye height 2.5× genal height. Length of M 1 between crossveins dm-cu and r-m 3.0× dm-cu. Medial part of tergite 8 elongate, rectangular (Fig. 4A)........................................... R. megepandria sp. nov. – Eye height ≤2.3 × genal height. Length of M 1 between crossveins dm-cu

Leptocera (Acuminiseta) prominens Duda 1925

Leptocera (Acuminiseta) prominens Duda, 1925 Leptocera (Acuminiseta) prominens Duda, 1925: 124. Remarks Leptocera (Acuminiseta) prominens was provisionally treated as Rudolfina by Roháček et al. (2001), who noted that Acuminiseta Duda, 1925 does not occur in the New World. This species does not fit into Rudolfina as defined here, but belongs elsewhere in the Archiceroptera complex and will be treated in a later paper.Published as part of Paiero, Steven Mark & Marshall, Stephen A., 2020, A revision of the genus Rudolfina Roháček (Sphaeroceridae: Limosininae), pp. 1-48 in European Journal of Taxonomy 593 on page 45, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2020.593, http://zenodo.org/record/365977

Trachyopella opuntiae

Trachyopella opuntiae (Richards, 1967) Leptocera (Trachyopella) opuntiae Richards, 1967: 531. Remarks Richards (1967) originally described this species as a Trachyopella Duda, 1918 (then a subgenus of Leptocera Olivier, 1813), a placement that was followed by Roháček & Marshall (1986) in their review of Holarctic Trachyopella. Pitkin (1989) transferred opuntiae to Rudolfina, in view of its modified female cerci. Examination of type specimens, including male and female terminalia, supports the treatment of this species as a Trachyopella.Published as part of Paiero, Steven Mark & Marshall, Stephen A., 2020, A revision of the genus Rudolfina Roháček (Sphaeroceridae: Limosininae), pp. 1-48 in European Journal of Taxonomy 593 on page 45, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2020.593, http://zenodo.org/record/365977

Rudolfina rozkosnyi

Rudolfina rozkosnyi (Roháček, 1975) Limosina rozkosnyi – Roháček, 1975: 119. Material examined CZECH REPUBLIC • 2 ♂♂, 2 ♀♀; Jezinek Mountains, Velka-Kotlina Valley; 900–1100 m a.s.l.; 16 Aug. 1986; S.A. Marshall leg.; DEBU. RUSSIA • 1 ♀; Siberia, Altai Reg., ~ 50 km SE of Teletskoya Lake; 1500 m a.s.l.; 13–15 Jul. 1991; S.A. Marshall leg.; wet area; DEBU. Description See Roháček (1975). Distribution Palaearctic: Austria, Czech Republic, Germany, Norway, Russia (North European Territory, West Siberia), Slovakia, Sweden. Remarks This species is here newly recorded from Siberia on the basis of a single female taken in pan traps near the margin of Teletskoya Lake. Previous Russian records are from the Northern European Territory.Published as part of Paiero, Steven Mark & Marshall, Stephen A., 2020, A revision of the genus Rudolfina Roháček (Sphaeroceridae: Limosininae), pp. 1-48 in European Journal of Taxonomy 593 on page 43, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2020.593, http://zenodo.org/record/365977

Rudolfina tumida Paiero & Marshall 2020, sp. nov.

Rudolfina tumida sp. nov. urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act: 1FA40DBE-98EE-4665-A029-207ABCADE8DD Figs 2–3, 21A Etymology The species epithet is from the Latin for ‘swollen’, referring to the enlarged epandrium. Material examined Holotype UNITED STATES OF AMERICA • ♂; Wyoming, Uinta Co., 8 mi. SE of Evanston; 7100 ft a.s.l.; 30 Jul.–11 Aug. 1979; S. and J. Peck leg.; sage-grass, riparian, carrion; DEBU debu01086083. Description BODY. Length: 1.8–1.9 mm. Eye height 1.0 × genal height. Head with 3 interfrontal setae and 5 small setae along inner margin of orbital plate. Gena with 2 strong setae and 4–5 smaller setulae. Acrostichal setulae in 4–6 rows. Costagial seta length unknown (broken on both sides of holotype); second costal sector shorter than third (35:40). Length of M 1 between crossveins dm-cu and r-m 4.0× dm-cu; CuA 1 stub vein ~5.0 × M 1 stub vein. Male mid femur basally with 9 strong setae present in ovoid cluster. Male mid tibia with ventral comb of 12–13 robust setae on apical ⅔. MALE ABDOMEN (Figs 2–3). Posterior margin of sternite 5 with pair of small teeth on each side of shallow emargination; emargination extending ¼ length and ¼ width of sternite 5. Transverse part of sternite 6 weakly arcuate. Epandrium swollen, wider than preceding portion of abdomen (denuded on holotype); subanal plate incomplete. Posterior lobe of surstylus elongate, with apex and posterior margin heavily setose; anterobasal lobe broadly rounded and laminate, with distal triangular projection. Cercus ovoid. Postgonite elongate with apex acute. Dorsal sclerite of distiphallus (Fig. 21 B–C) with several small swellings along length and extending beyond apex of acrophallus. Female Unknown. Remarks Rudolfina tumida sp. nov. is distinctive for the uniquely swollen epandrium and large surstylus. Described species in other genera previously treated as RudolfinaPublished as part of Paiero, Steven Mark & Marshall, Stephen A., 2020, A revision of the genus Rudolfina Roháček (Sphaeroceridae: Limosininae), pp. 1-48 in European Journal of Taxonomy 593 on pages 43-45, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2020.593, http://zenodo.org/record/365977

Rudolfina cavernicola Marshall & Fitzgerald 1997

Rudolfina cavernicola Marshall & Fitzgerald, 1997 Fig. 21A Material examined The original type series from Kremmer’s Cave was re-examined along with the following material. MEXICO • 1 ♂; San Luis Potosí, Cueva de Cinquenta y Ocho, 5 km S of San Francisco, 40 km E of San Luis Potosí, Municipio de Zaraqoza; 3000 m a.s.l.; 18 May 1972; Elliott, Ralph and Lynn leg.; DEBU. Description See Marshall and Fitzgerald 1997. Distribution Nearctic: United States of America (AZ, CO); Mexico (San Luis Potosí, newly recorded here). Remarks This species is newly recorded from Mexico. The illustration of this species that accompanied the original description (Marshall & Fitzgerald 1997: fig. 1) includes what appears to be a large seta coming off the anterior base of the surstylus; this is an unsocketed laminate lobe.Published as part of Paiero, Steven Mark & Marshall, Stephen A., 2020, A revision of the genus Rudolfina Roháček (Sphaeroceridae: Limosininae), pp. 1-48 in European Journal of Taxonomy 593 on pages 16-18, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2020.593, http://zenodo.org/record/365977

A revision of the genus Rudolfina Roháček (Sphaeroceridae: Limosininae)

The genus Rudolfina Roháček, 1987 is revised and redefined with the description of the following nine new species, all from the New World: R. bucki sp. nov. (Mexico), R. exuberata sp. nov. (widespread, from USA to Brazil), R. howdeni sp. nov. (Mexico), R. megepandria sp. nov. (Mexico), R. newtoni sp. nov. (Mexico), R. pauca sp. nov. (Guatemala, Mexico), R. pilosa sp. nov. (Mexico), R. remiforma sp. nov. (Mexico) and R. tumida sp. nov. (Mexico, USA). Rudolfina is compared to closely related genera in the Archiceroptera genus complex, which in turn is recognized as part of a large, mostly Neotropical clade including Robustagramma Marshall & Cui, 2005, Pterogramma Spuler, 1924, Aptilotella Duda, 1924, Bitheca Marshall, 1987, Bromeloecia Spuler, 1924 and Archiceroptera Papp, 1977

Rudolfina remiforma Paiero & Marshall 2020, sp. nov.

Rudolfina remiforma sp. nov. urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act: 01D37BA9-BF63-4930-9EF1-E1BB6D87C73F Figs 19–20, 21C Etymology The species name is from the Latin for ‘oar-shaped’ and refers to the posterior lobe of the surstylus. Material examined Holotype MEXICO • ♂; Chiapas, 21 mi. N of Bochil; 5500 ft a.s.l.; 18–24 Aug. 1971; A. Newton leg.; pine, oak, Liquidambar, human dung; FMNH debu01086286. Paratypes MEXICO • 2 ♀♀; same collection data as for holotype; DEBU • 1 ♀; same collection data as for holotype; FMNH. Description BODY. Length: 1.4–1.8 mm. Eye height 2.0 × genal height. Head with 4 interfrontal setae and row of 7 small setulae along inner margin of orbital plate. Gena with 1 strong seta and 8 smaller setulae. Acrostichal setulae in 4–6 rows. Costagial seta extending to humeral break; second costal sector shorter than third (20:65); length of M 1 between crossveins dm-cu and r-m 1.4× dm-cu; CuA 1 stub vein ~2.5– 3.0× M 1 stub vein. Male mid femur with 6 weak setae in ventrobasal cluster. Male mid tibia with ventral comb of 4–5 robust setae on apical ⅓. MALE ABDOMEN (Fig. 19). Posterior margin of sternite 5 with small tooth on each side of medial emargination; emargination ~⅓ × width of sternite 5. Transverse part of sternite 6 weakly arcuate. Epandrium regular, not swollen, with pair of long setae ventrolaterally and another 2–3 smaller pairs dorsolateral to longer pair; subanal plate narrow, incomplete, with narrow medial space. Surstylus with small anterior lobe and elongate posterior lobe; anterior lobe with 4–5 elongate setae apically; posterior lobe paddle-like and drawn out into rounded tip, with posterior margin weakly expanded near mid-length, anterior margin greatly expanded just before midlength, and 1 large seta near base. Cercus small and conical, projecting posteriorly; apical seta present. Postgonite simple, apex narrowly rounded. Dorsal sclerite of distiphallus without distinct swellings and not extending distally beyond acrophallus (Fig. 19 D–F). FEMALE ABDOMEN (Fig. 20). Tergite 7 with posterior margin entire. Medial part of tergite 8 poorly sclerotized or fused with epiproct. Epiproct tulip-shaped, with length of anterior narrowed portion equal or subequal to that of posterior portion. Cercus small, as long as or only slightly longer than flattened apical seta; fused anterolaterally to epiproct. Sternite 7 with posterior margin broadly rounded. Spermathecae lenticular, inner surface with conical projection connecting with duct; paired spermathecae each with duct ~2.0 × length of spermatheca before common duct; single spermathecal duct similar in length. Remarks This species is closely related to R. exuberata sp. nov. and R. pauca sp. nov. and shares the modified epiproct found in those species.Published as part of Paiero, Steven Mark & Marshall, Stephen A., 2020, A revision of the genus Rudolfina Roháček (Sphaeroceridae: Limosininae), pp. 1-48 in European Journal of Taxonomy 593 on pages 40-43, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2020.593, http://zenodo.org/record/365977

Fig. 21 in A revision of the genus Rudolfina Roháček (Sphaeroceridae: Limosininae)

Fig. 21. Distribution of species of New World Rudolfina Roháček, 1987. A. R. cavernicola Marshall & Fitzgerald, 1997, R. digitata Marshall, 1991 and R. tumida sp. nov. B. R. bucki sp. nov., R. megepandria sp. nov. and R. howdeni sp. nov. C. R. pauca sp. nov., R. pilosa sp. nov., R. newtoni sp. nov. and R. remiforma sp. nov. D. R. exuberata sp. nov.Published as part of Paiero, Steven Mark & Marshall, Stephen A., 2020, A revision of the genus Rudolfina Roháček (Sphaeroceridae: Limosininae), pp. 1-48 in European Journal of Taxonomy 593 on page 44, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2020.593, http://zenodo.org/record/365977

Rudolfina megepandria Paiero & Marshall 2020, sp. nov.

Rudolfina megepandria sp. nov. urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act: 16E7249F-BC7E-4CD0-AFCB-60A5C98CFB43 Figs 4, 13, 21B Etymology The specific name, which has been a manuscript name since Marshall (1982), refers to the unusually large epandrium. Material examined Holotype MEXICO • ♂; Jalisco, 18 mi. W of Atenquique; 9300 ft a.s.l.; A. Newton leg.; fir forest, dung; FMNH debu01086084. Paratypes MEXICO – Jalisco • 1 ♂, 1 ♀; same collection data as for holotype; DEBU. – Oaxaca • 1 ♀; Yuvila Rd; 9400 ft a.s.l.; 9–19 Aug. 1973; A. Newton leg.; mesic oak, carrion; FMNH. Description BODY. Length: 1.9–2.2 mm. Eye height 2.5 × genal height. Head with 3 interfrontal setae and row of 4–5 small setulae on inner margin of orbital plate. Gena with 2 strong setae and 7–8 smaller setulae. Acrostichal setulae in 4–6 rows. Costagial seta extending to subcostal break. Second costal sector 0.75– 0.8× third costal sector. Length of M 1 between crossveins dm-cu and r-m– 3.0× dm-cu; CuA 1 stub vein ~10.0 × M 1 stub vein (M 1 stub vein extremely reduced). Male mid femur with 14–15 strong setae in ventrobasal cluster. Male mid tibia with ventral comb of 4–5 robust, short setae on apical ½. Mid tibia without midventral seta (both sexes). MALE ABDOMEN (Fig. 13). Sternite 5 posterior margin with 2 small nipple-like teeth on each side of small emargination; emargination ~1/15 width and ~1/9 length of sternite 5. Transverse part of sternite 6 arcuate. Epandrium swollen, broader than preceding abdominal segments; subanal plate broad, complete. Surstylus with posterior lobe elongate, length ~4.0× basal width, with a hirsute medial lateral lobe; apex truncate. Cercus elongate-conical, projecting posteriorly. Postgonite elongate, narrowly rounded distally and narrow basally. Dorsal sclerite of distiphallus (Fig. 13 D–F) without dorsal swellings and not extending beyond apex of acrophallus. FEMALE ABDOMEN (Fig. 4). Tergite 7 with posterior margin entire. Medial part of tergite 8 elongate, length ~2.0–3.0 × width, with posterior margin emarginate. Epiproct broadly rounded anteriorly. Cercus ~0.75× length of epiproct; fused anterolaterally to epiproct. Sternite 7 with posterior margin broadly rounded. Spermathecae cup-shaped; paired spermathecae with stems ~1.5× width of spermatheca. Remarks Rudolfina megepandria sp. nov. is diagnosed by its swollen male epandrium and distinctively shaped sternite 5. It is most closely related to R. bucki sp. nov., which has a less pronounced epandrium and differs in details of the surstylus and cercus.Published as part of Paiero, Steven Mark & Marshall, Stephen A., 2020, A revision of the genus Rudolfina Roháček (Sphaeroceridae: Limosininae), pp. 1-48 in European Journal of Taxonomy 593 on pages 30-32, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2020.593, http://zenodo.org/record/365977