Classification Notes
Modern attempts at Diptera
family classification are based on the work of Willi Hennig (1948, 1952, 1954,
1958, 1965, 1971), which was summarized in this treatment in the Handbook of
Zoology in 1973. This was the last united version of Diptera family classification.
Since then numerous papers on various groups have been published.
The following list follows
the hierarchy of the Manual of Nearctic Diptera Vol. 3 (Wood & Borkent,
1989, Woodley, 1989, J. F. McAlpine 1989) and families of Hennig (1973). Within each higher group the families are ordered alphabetically. For each
change from there in the higher classification we have written a note as to why, usually providing a
citation.
Decisions about the status
of several taxa are difficult because they are either a question of rank (e.g.
Mythicomyiidae) or because they are about non-monophyletic units (e.g.
Empididae, Calliphoridae) where current information is limited. One way to
decide about the question of rank is to follow Hennig (1950, 1966) in
determining the rank based on the age of the group. However, this approach is
not accepted generally. Therefore we rather follow consensus between the
participating dipterists in our classification and have largely accepted a
“splitter” classification as our classification represents a pragmatic starting
point for future research. The question
of non-monophyletic groups will resolve itself as knowledge becomes better. For
the time being we will pragmatically keep some of these groups as traditionally
defined until we know more.
In the family
classification we have added "(rank)" to all taxa which hold a basal
position within the respective family and are therefore subject to discussions
about the rank of the taxon (see above). All other subordinate taxa are treated
as "(synonym)."
A list of major references
of Diptera family classification (1950-2003) (but see also those included in
Yeates & Wiegmann 1999) are included in our Source
document and also are in the Reference database.
Tipulidae/Cylindrotomidae/Limoniidae/Pediciidae: The current European view is four separate
families: Cylindrotomidae, Pediciidae and Tipulidae are clearly monophyletic
units, Limoniidae paraphyletic (Oosterbroek 1986, Oosterbroek & Theowald
1991, Stary 1992). American view (Alexander and others (Wood & Borkent
1989)) is one very ancient diversified clade that needs its phylogenetic
relationship to be completely resolved before any subordinate clades can be
recognized or not. The European view is accepted here.
We follow Amorim (2000) in
recognizing one family Canthyloscelidae (Hyperoscelididae of
Hennig 1973), which includes Synneuridae.
The Psychodidae are
paraphyletic and perhaps polyphyletic. However, following Hennig (1972), we
accepted them as monophyletic.
Phlebotomidae are treated as a subfamily of Psychodidae in
Hennig (1973)
Leptoconopidae are a subfamily of Ceratopogonidae according
to Hennig (1973). Some authors (Remm 1988 and the Zoological Record) have
recognized this basal clade at the family level.
We follow Wood &
Borkent (1989) in recognizing Corethrellidae (formerly in Chaoboridae)
as a valid family.
Olbiogastridae and Mycetobiidae are treated as subordinate
taxa of Anisopodidae following Hennig (1973). Amorim and Tozon (1994)
treated them as valid families.
Penthetriidae and Pleciidae are basal taxa within Bibionidae
following Pinto & Amorim (2000).
Baeonotidae and Lestremiidae are subordinate groups
within Cecidomyiidae according to Gagne (1981).
Macroceridae are a subordinate group of Keroplatidae in
Hennig (1973) as well as Matile (1990, 1997)
We follow Thompson (1975,
Grimaldi & Blagoderov 2001) in recognizing the Lygistorrhinidae as a
valid family.
We follow Wood &
Borkent (1989) in recognizing Cramptonomyiidae as a subfamily of Pachyneuridae.
The Manotidae are a
subordinate rank of Mycetophilidae according to Matile (1990, 1997) and
Soli (2002).
We follow Chandler's
phylogenetic tree (2002) in placing the Heterotrichia group
within Sciaridae and the genus Pterogymnus Freeman is placed in
the Sciaridae.
The infraorder
Axymyiomorpha was proposed for the single family Axymyidae by Wood &
Borkent (1989).
The family Oreoleptidae was described by Zloty, Sinclair & Pritchard (2005) for the genus Oreoleptis. According to their phylogenetic analysis Oreoleptis is the sister taxon of Athericidae+Tabanidae and cannot thus be included in Rhagionidae.
We follow Woodley (1989)
in recognizing the Coenomyiidae and Rachiceridae as subordinate
groups of Xylophagidae. The Exeretonevridae and Heterostomidae
were placed as taxa incertae sedis within the Xylophagomorpha by Woodley, but
we follow Palmer & Yeates (2000) in recognizing them as subordinate groups
of Xylophagidae.
The family Athericidae
was erected by Stuckenberg (1973) for several genera previously associated with
Rhagionidae.
The Pelecorhynchidae
are a subordinate rank of Rhagionidae according to Stuckenberg (2001).
Following Stuckenberg
(2001), Spaniidae and Austroleptidae are recognized at family rank.
Vermileonidae were given family rank by Nagatomi (1977) and
accepted by Woodley (1989).
Apsilocephalidae were given family status by Nagatomi et al. (1991)
and accepted by Yeates et al. (2003).
The Apystomyiidae
were given family status incertae sedis in Asiloidea by Nagatomi & Liu
(1994).
We follow Woodley (1989)
and Yeates (2001) in recognizing Hilarimorphidae as a valid family.
The Mythicomyiidae
are the sister group of Bombyliidae (Yeates 1994). Following Hennig's age
criterion they are treated at family rank (Zaitzev 1991, Evenhuis 1994) in our
classification.
The new family Ocoidae
was described by Yeates et al. (2003).
The Empididae sensu Hennig
(1973) were divided into four families: Empididae, Atelestidae, Hybotidae,
and Microphoridae by Chvala (1983) and Collins & Wiegmann (2002).
However, according to Collins & Wiegmann's phylogenetic analysis the Empididae
(s. s.) are still paraphyletic with regard to the Hybotidae. Also,
Microphoridae may be paraphyletic in respect to Dolichopodidae. Hence until
there is better resolution, we continue to follow Hennig (1973).
We follow Chandler (1991)
and Cumming et al. (1995) in recognizing Opetiidae at family rank (see
also, Disney 1987, Chandler 2001).
Termitoxeniidae are a subordinate group of Phoridae according to
Hennig (1973). Sciadoceridae are a subordinate group of Phoridae
according to Disney (2001).
Microdontidae are a subordinate group of Syrphidae according to
Hennig (1973). Thompson (1969, also 1972) showed its basal position in respect
to other syrphids and this position is supported by molecular evidence (Stahls
et alia 2003)
The Calliphoridae are
marked as a polyphyletic group of convenience as at the present we are
unwilling to reduce the Oestridae to a subordinated group within a monophyletic
Calliphoridae nor to elevate a number of other groups (Polleniidae,
Helicoboscidae, and Bengaliidae) so as to properly delimit both Calliphoridae
and Oestridae. This follows from the analysis of Rognes (1997). Also, given the
relative precedence of the family group names, a broad all inclusive group
would have to be called Oestridae which would cause much confusion among
general users given the importances of both the bots and blow flies.
We follow Griffiths (1972)
in placing the Nycteribiidae and Streblidae as subordinate groups
of Hippoboscidae.
We follow J. F. McAlpine
(1989) in placing the Eginiidae as a subordinate group of Muscidae.
The Mystacinobiidae
are the sister group of all other Oestroidea according to Rognes (1997) and are
here recognized as separate family.
Cuterebridae, Gasterophilidae, and Hypodermatidae
were given subfamily rank within Oestridae by Wood (1987) and Pape
(2001).
Rhiniidae are given family rank due to their basal position
among the "calliphorids" following the analysis of Rognes (1997).
Axiniidae> are considered to belong within the Rhinophoridae
following Pape (2001).
Stackelbergomyiidae belong to the Tachinidae according to Herting
(1981).
The Pseudopomyzidae
are treated as subfamily of Cypselosomatidae following J. F. McAlpine
(1989). However, they were retained as a separate family by D. K. McAlpine
(1996).
Calobatidae, Taeniapteridae, and Tylidae are
treated as subordinate groups of Micropezidae following D. K. McAlpine
(1998).
Gobryidae were described by D. K. McAlpine (1997).
The Somatiidae were
established as a family by Hendel (1935), but were treated by Hennig (1973) as
a possible genus of Psilidae. They were removed by D. K. McAlpine (1997) from
Diopsoidea to incertae sedis. However, for pragmatic reasons we keep them in
the Diopsoidea until further research reveals a better placement.
The Tanypezidae
were removed by D. K. McAlpine (1997) from Diopsoidea to incertae sedis.
However, for pragmatic reasons we keep them in the Diopsoidea until further
research reveals a better placement.
Stylogasteridae are a subfamily of Conopidae following Hennig
(1973).
Eurygnathomyiidae are a subordinate rank of Pallopteridae
following Hennig (1973).
Neottiophilidae and Thyreophoridae were treated as
subordinate groups of Piophilidae by J. F. McAlpine (1977).
The Tachiniscidae
were placed as the basal sister to the other fruit flies in an enlarged
definition of Tephritidae by Korneyev (1999).
Phytalmiidae are a subordinate group of Tephritidae
according to Hennig (1973).
Ulidiidae/Otitidae: Kameneva & Korneyev (1994) pointed out the
priority of Ulidiidae and used it as the name for a single family consisting of
the two subfamilies Ulidiinae and Otitinae. However, in his catalog of
family-group names Sabrosky (1999) kept Otitidae as the valid family name
following the use in all modern regional catalogs except for the Palearctic
catalog. We follow Kameneva & Korneyev in recognizing a single family
Ulidiidae. Euxestidae is a subordinate group of Ulidiinae and Pterocallidae
is a subordinate group of Otitinae according to Hennig (1973).
We follow D. K. McAlpine
(1990) in recognizing Ctenostylidae as a valid family.
Cremifaniidae were treated as subfamily of Chamaemyiidae by
Hennig (1973).
Phycodromidae is an old synonymous name for Coelopidae
(Sabrosky 1999).
Helcomyzidae and Heterocheilidae are recognized as valid
families following McAlpine (1991c, 1991b).
We follow Griffiths (1972)
and Barnes (1981) in recognizing Helosciomyzidae as a valid family.
Huttoninidae are recognized as a valid family following D. K.
McAlpine (1991b, also Colless & McAlpine 1991).
Phaeomyiidae are recognized as a valid family following Griffiths
(1972).
Marginidae were described by D. K. McAlpine (1991) and
provisionally admitted to the Opomyzoidea.
We recognize Neminidae
as a valid family following Freidberg (1994).
Neurochaetidae were described by D. K. McAlpine (1978).
Stenomicra was placed in Aulacigastridae by Hennig (1973), but
was raised to family level by Papp (1984). However, we follow D. K. McAlpine
(1978, 1983) and Mathis & Papp (1992) in treating Stenomicridae as a
subordinate group of Periscelididae.
Xenasteiidae were described by Hardy (1980), followed four months
later by a description of Tunisimyiidae by Papp (1980). Tunisimyiidae
was synonomized with Xenasteiidae by J. F. McAlpine (1989).
The Acartophthalmidae
belong to the superfamily Carnoidea according to Brake (2000) and Buck (2006).
Australimyzidae were raised to family level by Griffiths (1972) and confirmed as a separate family from Carnidae by Buck (2006).
Tethinidae are paraphyletic with respect to Canacidae. Canacidae is the older name and therefore has priority (D. K. McAlpine 2006, Buck 2006).
We follow Andersson (1977)
and J. F. McAlpine (1989) in treating the Siphonellopsidae (raised to
family level by Nartshuk in 1983) as a subfamily of Chloropidae.
Inbiomyiidae were described by Buck (2006)
We follow D. K. McAlpine
(1985) in including Borboropsidae, Chiropteromyidae, Cnemospathidae,
Heteromyzidae, Notomyzidae, Rhinotoridae, and Trixoscelididae in the
family Heleomyzidae.
>Nannodastiidae were established as a separate family by
Carles-Tolra (1994), but whether this group really constitutes a valid family
remains doubtful (Papp & Mathis, 2001).
Campichoetidae> were raised to family status by Griffiths 1972 (also
Chandler 1987), however this view was rejected by J. F. McAlpine (1987). We
follow the latter in keeping the Campichoetidae as a subordinate group of Diastatidae.
Risidae are a subordinate group of Ephydridae
according to Freidberg et al. (1998).
|