Eight new species of Regasilus Curran, 1931 (Diptera: Asilidae: Asilinae) from Peru Author Sánchez, Pável text Zootaxa 2020 2020-12-09 4894 2 221 246 journal article 9298 10.11646/zootaxa.4894.2.3 b00eef29-7f63-490c-adcc-c255c58de342 1175-5326 4315667 0445D812-2DA7-4BAE-97AC-BD91F74BE4AF Regasilus Curran, 1931 Regasilus Curran, 1931:24 . Type-species, Regasilus strigarius Curran, 1931 (as strigaria , error), by original designation. Diagnosis. Regasilus is characterized by the following combination of characters: 1. Anatergite bare; 2. Scutellum with impressed rim; 3. Mystax with about six remarkably stout macrosetae placed in a triangular area near the lower facial margin; 4. Scape and pedicel bearing conspicuous ventral and lateral macrosetae (Fig. 207, Hull 1962 ); 5. Apical third of wing darkened by dense microtrichia ( Fig. 2 ); 6. Fore femora without prominent macrosetae; 7. Eighth sternite in males bearing a dense and conspicuous band of macrosetae apically ( Fig. 4B ); 8. Hypandrium with a posterior and central excision ( Fig. 3F ); 9. Female ovipositor apubescent and laterally compressed from sixth abdominal segment ( Fig. 5B ); 10. Common duct long, with three strongly attenuated and apically-coiled spermathecae ( Fig. 5C ); and 11. Median sclerite at posterior end of furca (remnant of tergite 9) present ( Fig. 5C ). Comments. From examination of specimens of the Glaphyropyga group housed in MZUC–UCCC, as well as the illustrations in Artigas & Papavero (1995) and Artigas (1971) , Regasilus is morphologically similar to Leptoharpacticus Lynch Arribálzaga, 1880 and Megalometopon Artigas & Papavero, 1995 (a replacement name for Megametopon Artigas, 1970 , a junior homonym), since these three genera share features such as the fore femora without prominent macrosetae, eighth sternite with an apical band of macrosetae in males, presence of a median sclerite at posterior end of furca in females, and a long common duct with three strongly attenuated and apicallycoiled spermathecae. Although Leptoharpacticus is easily distinguishable owing to its shallow facial gibbosity, plus other differences, to distinguish Regasilus from Megalometopon is more difficult, since the diagnosis given for Regasilus herein also keys out to Megalometopon , except for character 3. In Megalometopon the mystacal macrosetae are uniform, nevertheless some other features of this genus are observed in the variation range of the species of Regasilus described in this work. Therefore, the relationship between these two genera needs to be reevaluated, since Artigas (1971) and Artigas & Papavero (1995) established Megalometopon without examining any specimens of Regasilus , raising the possibility that these genera are subjective synonyms.