African Dacus (Diptera: Tephritidae); New Species and Data, with Particular Reference to the Tel Aviv University Collection Author White, Ian M. Author Goodger, Kim F. M. text Zootaxa 2009 2127 1 49 journal article 10.5281/zenodo.274925 534e3106-2d37-4f90-98c7-fe3fab66dc7b 1175-5326 274925 Dacus ( Lophodacus ) pseudapostata sp.n. Figures 84 – 90 . Diagnosis. Differs from D. triater in lacking a black triangular mark on the scutellum (fig. 84). Differs from D. apostata in the male lacking a pecten and associated characters (no dense microtrichia adjacent end A1+Cu2; no hindtibia preapical pad). Differs from both species in the apical wing spot being larger (fig. 90). Description. Size . Small, wing length, 4 – 4.8 mm . Head (fig. 87). Pedicel+first flagellomere not longer than ptilinal suture. Face, antennal furrow without a dark spot. Frons, frontal setae 1 – 2, orbital setae absent. Thorax (figs 84, 88). Scutum black; postpronotal lobe yellow (sometimes indistinctly brownish anteromesally); notopleural callus black; notopleural xanthine absent; lateral and medial postsutural vittae absent. Scutellum yellow, without any dark patterning (except for basal dark margin which is deep in the females). Anepisternum with a yellow subtriangular xanthine from notopleural callus to (or almost to) katepisternum; anteriorly almost reaching postpronotal lobe; not extended onto katepisternum. Laterotergal xanthine confined to katatergite. Thoracic setae . Anterior notopleural seta sometimes present (present in holotype male; absent in females); anterior supra-alar seta absent. Wing (fig. 90). Basal cells bc and c without a covering of microtrichia; cell bm without microtrichia. Narrow subbasal raised section of cell br without microtrichia. Crossvein R-M beyond middle of cell dm. Costal band absent; reduced to a trace of dark colour in cell r1 and an apical spot which reaches about mid-depth of cell r4+5. Anal streak absent. Cells bc and c hyaline. Crossbanding; sometimes with an isolated crossband on R-M (the females have this; the holotype male does not). Legs (fig. 89). Femora pale (yellow) coloured. Abdomen (fig. 85). Black, except apical half of tergite V (also antero-medial area of tergite V in male holotype ). Tergites I – V all fused. Male . Tergite III without pecten; no dense microtrichia adjacent end A1+Cu2; no hindtibia preapical pad. Female (fig. 86). Aculeus pointed; no torsion. FIGURES 84–90. Dacus ( Lophodacus ) pseudapostata sp.n. 84. Mesonotum, dorsal view (holotype male). 85. Abdomen, dorsal view (holotype male). 86. Ovipositor with extended aculeus, dorsal view (paratype female [Bali- Batibo]). 87. Head, anterior view (holotype male). 88. Thorax, left lateral view (holotype male). 89. Legs, left lateral view; fore, mid, hind (holotype male). 90. Wing, dorsal view (holotype male). Scale lines = 1mm. Etymology. Descriptive name for its resemblance ( pseudo ) to D. apostata Hering, 1937 . Material. Holotype male, paratype , 1 female , CAMEROON : Bali-Batibo, Rt. N6, W. of Bamenda, 20.xi.1987 , A. Freidberg ( TAU ); paratype , 1 female , Bambalang area, 35km E. Bamenda, off Rt. N11, 1200m ., 8.xi.1987 , F. Kaplan ( TAU ). Remarks. Males of D. pseudapostata sp.n. , from West Africa, are easily separated from D. apostata , from East Africa, by the lack of a pecten. There are some minor colour differences that may help differentiate females; D. apostata has a smaller apical wing spot and usually lacks any bright colour at the apex of the abdomen. This short series of specimens also suggests some sexual dimorphism with females having the wing crossband and the male not, and the male having more colour on the abdomen apex than the females.