Identification, Images, & Information
For Insects, Spiders & Their Kin
For the United States & Canada
Clickable Guide
Moths Butterflies Flies Caterpillars Flies Dragonflies Flies Mantids Cockroaches Bees and Wasps Walkingsticks Earwigs Ants Termites Hoppers and Kin Hoppers and Kin Beetles True Bugs Fleas Grasshoppers and Kin Ticks Spiders Scorpions Centipedes Millipedes

Fall Fund Drive

Mycomyinae vs. more inclusive Sciophilinaeā€¸

There seems to be some issue here. Is Mycomyinae valid (in BugGuide taxonomy) or should Mycomya be moved to Sciophilinae? Peter Kerr seems to have used a different classification.


We also have 4 subfamilies with no images, but still needing validation/agreement. http://bugguide.net/node/view/12759/tree

Mycomyinae
John, what publication are you using? The world of sciaroid taxonomy isn't exclusively defined by North American publications. Sciaroid history and evolution covers the globe.

Mycomyinae is not a new idea nor a regional fad; its groundwork was thoroughly explained in Vaisanen (1984). Vaisanen (1984) is the landmark monograph of Mycomya for the Holarctic Region. Check it out, its a thumping good read!

Since 1984, its true, opinions have varied. However most currently active authorities accept Mycomyinae; this includes Chandler, Kjaerandsen, Kurina, Blagoderov, and others. Look at the literature covering this topic in the last 5 years and see for yourself. As to questions regarding Sciaroid taxonomy, I recommend www.sciaroidea.info as a trusted resource; at this site, see sidebar to the right. There are also useful bibliographies there to provide support for current taxonomies and additional research.

 
Inaccessible
I don't have Vaisanen's work nor easy access to a copy. What I do have is copies of the relevant chapters of the manuals of Nearctic, Palearctic, and Central American Diptera (Vockeroth 1981, Soli 2000, Vockeroth 2009). None of them mentions any subfamilies beyond the traditional set. Soli did not key subfamilies. Vockeroth (1981, 2009) keys the traditional subfamilies and (2009) thought the tribal divisions too unclear to be worth keying.

The subfamilies seem to be tribes promoted to fill the gap left when subfamilies were promoted to family status. The last key I have seen to tribes (= propsed subfamilies) is Shaw and Fisher 1952. I doubt that is considered current. Though the concept does not apply to family group names, these new subfamilies are effectively nomina nuda from my point of view -- bare names. Is there a useful key to identify the proposed subfamilies of the world, or a region of it including North America? Is there a summary of the biology of each subfamily?

If the old subfamilies are no longer considered valid with their former limits, does BugGuide benefit more from deleting them?

There is no shortage of proposals to promote taxa. We don't follow them all. What I have read of recent studies on taxonomy of former Mycetophilidae has mostly convinced me that splitting the old family was a mistake.

 
(the question regarding refer
(the question regarding reference publication was directed to John F. Carr (not John R. Maxwell). Sorry for any confusion!)

 
Thanks
I have proposed adding the site to our "Master List of Online Taxonomy References" - http://bugguide.net/node/view/338170

 
posted by the other John long ago...
(1)

 
Thanks Peter!
I'm looking forward to being able to move my images to their proper location. :-)

Comment viewing options
Select your preferred way to display the comments and click 'Save settings' to activate your changes.