PBDB

Basic info	Taxonomic history	Classification	Relationships
Morphology	Ecology and taphonomy	External Literature Search	Age range and collections

Brachycera

Insecta - Diptera

Taxonomy

Brachycera was named by Zetterstedt (1842). It is extant.

It was assigned to Diptera by Bode (1953), Carpenter (1992) and Yeates et al. (2007); and to Neodiptera by Wiegmann et al. (2011).

Subtaxa

Acanthomyites, Anthomyia atavella, Anthomyia atavina, Anthomyia burgessi, Anthomyia heymanni, Anthomyia inanimata, Anthomyia laminarum, Anthomyia latipennis, Anthomyia morio, Anthomyia persepulta, Anthomyia pulcherrima, Anthomyia winchesteri, Anthracida, Archisargoidea (syn. Eremochaetidea, Mesophantasmatidea), Arthropiella, Asilomorpha, Batgana, Chyromyidae, Dipterites, Eomyiidae, Eomyza, Eophlebomyiidae, Eostratiomyiidae, Epidia, Eucaudomyiidae, Gracilomyia, Heterodactyla, Hilarimorphidae, Homeodactyla, Ija, Leria sapromyzoides, Liassonympha, Lithotachina, Megamerinidae, Mesobrachyopteryx, Mesomphrale, Mesostratiomyia, Mongolomyia, Musca longipes, Musca resinosa, Musca setosa, Musca venosa, Muscomorpha, Oligophrynidae, Orthorrhapha, Pachyuronympha, Proneottiophilidae, Prosechamyiidae, Protobrachyceridae, Protobrachycerontidae, Protomphralidae, Pseudopomyzidae, Remalia, Shulmas, Stratiomyopsis, Syrphopsis, Trichoceromorpha, Vermilionomorpha, Xylophagomorpha

View classification of included taxa

Synonyms

Muscomorpha was named by Sharp (1894). It is extant.

It was considered an invalid subgroup of Brachycera by Shin et al. (2018).

It was assigned to Brachycera by Sharp (1894), Yeates et al. (2007) and Grimaldi et al. (2011).
Anthomyia winchesteri was named by Cockerell (1921). Its type specimen is USNM 66575, an exoskeleton, and it is a compression fossil. Its type locality is Green River (Scudder Collection), which is in a Bridgerian lacustrine - large diatomite/shale in the Green River Formation of Wyoming.

It was considered a nomen dubium by Michelsen (1996).
Anthomyia inanimata was named by Scudder (1877). Its type specimen is GSC 30(32), an exoskeleton, and it is a compression fossil. Its type locality is Quesnel, which is in an Oligocene lacustrine shale in Canada.

It was considered a nomen dubium by Michelsen (1996).
Anthomyia burgessi was named by Scudder (1877). Its type specimen is GSC 29, an exoskeleton, and it is a compression fossil. Its type locality is Quesnel, which is in an Oligocene lacustrine shale in Canada.

It was considered a nomen dubium by Michelsen (1996).
Anthomyia pulcherrima was named by Meunier (1915). Its type specimen is Coll Coquand fig 14, an exoskeleton, and it is a compression fossil.

It was considered a nomen dubium by Michelsen (1996).
Anthomyia laminarum was named by Cockerell (1917). It is a compression fossil. Its type locality is Wilson Ranch, Florissant, which is in a Chadronian lacustrine - large horizon in the Florissant Formation of Colorado.

It was considered a nomen dubium by Michelsen (1996).
Anthomyia persepulta was named by Cockerell (1917). Its type specimen is USNM 62541, an exoskeleton, and it is a compression fossil. Its type locality is Florissant (USNM Collection), which is in a Chadronian lacustrine - large shale in the Florissant Formation of Colorado.

It was considered a nomen dubium by Michelsen (1996).
Orthorrhapha was named by Brauer (1863). It is extant.

It was considered an invalid subgroup of Brachycera by Shin et al. (2018).

It was assigned to Brachycera by Wiegmann et al. (2011).
Musca venosa was named by Presl (1822). It is an inclusion in amber. Its type locality is Baltic Amber, Prague Museum collection, which is in a Priabonian terrestrial amber in the Russian Federation.

It was considered a nomen dubium by Evenhuis (1994).
Musca setosa was named by Presl (1822). It is an inclusion in amber. Its type locality is Baltic Amber, Prague Museum collection, which is in a Priabonian terrestrial amber in the Russian Federation.

It was considered a nomen dubium by Evenhuis (1994).
Musca longipes was named by Presl (1822). It is an inclusion in amber. Its type locality is Baltic Amber, Prague Museum collection, which is in a Priabonian terrestrial amber in the Russian Federation.

It was considered a nomen dubium by Evenhuis (1994).
Musca resinosa was named by Presl (1822). It is an inclusion in amber. Its type locality is Baltic Amber, Prague Museum collection, which is in a Priabonian terrestrial amber in the Russian Federation.

It was considered a nomen dubium by Evenhuis (1994).
Anthomyia atavella was named by Cockerell (1913). Its type specimen is UCM 8555, an exoskeleton, and it is a compression fossil. Its type locality is Florissant, Station 13, which is in a Chadronian lacustrine - large shale in the Florissant Formation of Colorado.

It was considered a nomen dubium by Michelsen (1996).
Leria sapromyzoides was named by Meunier (1904). It is an inclusion in amber. Its type locality is Baltic amber, Konigsberg collection, which is in a Priabonian terrestrial amber in the Russian Federation.

It was considered a nomen dubium by Evenhuis (1994).
Anthomyia atavina was named by Heer (1849). It is a compression fossil. Its type locality is Radoboj (Montanistischen Collection), which is in a Sarmatian lagoonal/restricted shallow subtidal limestone in Croatia.

It was considered a nomen dubium by Michelsen (1996).
Anthomyia latipennis was named by Heer (1849). It is a compression fossil. Its type locality is Radoboj (Montanistischen Collection), which is in a Sarmatian lagoonal/restricted shallow subtidal limestone in Croatia.

It was considered a nomen dubium by Michelsen (1996).
Anthomyia morio was named by Heer (1849). It is a compression fossil. Its type locality is Radoboj (Grätz Collection), which is in a Sarmatian lagoonal/restricted shallow subtidal limestone in Croatia.

It was considered a nomen dubium by Michelsen (1996).
Anthomyia heymanni was named by von Heyden (1870). It is a compression fossil. Its type locality is Rott (Heymann coll), which is in a MP 30 lacustrine - large shale in the Rott Formation of Germany.

It was considered a nomen dubium by Michelsen (1996).

Synonymy list

Year	Name and author
1822	Musca venosa Presl p. 203
1822	Musca setosa Presl p. 205
1822	Musca longipes Presl p. 206
1822	Musca resinosa Presl p. 207
1842	Brachycera Zetterstedt p. 1
1849	Anthomyia atavina Heer p. 248 figs. Pl 17, fig 18
1849	Anthomyia latipennis Heer p. 249 figs. Pl 17, fig 19
1849	Anthomyia morio Heer p. 249 figs. Pl 17, fig 20
1863	Orthorrhapha Brauer
1870	Anthomyia heymanni von Heyden p. 263 figs. Pl 45, fig 30
1877	Anthomyia inanimata Scudder pp. 273-274
1877	Anthomyia burgessi Scudder pp. 274-275
1890	Anthomyia inanimata Scudder p. 548 figs. Pl 3 fig 19
1890	Anthomyia burgessi Scudder p. 549 figs. Pl 3 fig 34
1894	Muscomorpha Sharp
1904	Leria sapromyzoides Meunier p. 25 fig. 8
1913	Anthomyia atavella Cockerell p. 295
1915	Anthomyia pulcherrima Meunier p. 13 fig. 14
1917	Anthomyia laminarum Cockerell p. 21
1917	Anthomyia persepulta Cockerell p. 380
1921	Anthomyia winchesteri Cockerell p. 253 figs. Pl 35, fig 6
1937	Anthomyia pulcherrima Theobald p. 355 figs. Pl XXIII fig 14
1953	Brachycera Bode
1992	Brachycera Carpenter
2007	Brachycera Yeates et al.
2007	Muscomorpha Yeates et al.
2011	Muscomorpha Grimaldi et al. p. 306
2011	Brachycera Wiegmann et al.
2011	Orthorrhapha Wiegmann et al.

Is something missing? Join the Paleobiology Database and enter the data

Rank	Name	Author
kingdom	Animalia	()
—	Bilateria
—	Eubilateria	Ax 1987
—	Protostomia
—	Ecdysozoa
—	Panarthropoda
phylum	Arthropoda	Latreille 1829
subphylum	Mandibulata
—	Pancrustacea
superclass	Hexapoda	Latreille 1825
—	Cercophora	Börner 1904
class	Insecta
—	Dicondylia

Rank	Name	Author
—	Paranotalia
subclass	Pterygota	(Brauer 1885)
—	Neopterygota	Crampton 1924
infraclass	Neoptera	Martynov 1923
—	Holometabola
—	Aparaglossata
—	Mecopterida
superorder	Antliophora
order	Diptera
—	Neodiptera	Michelsen 1994
suborder	Brachycera	Zetterstedt 1842
suborder	Brachycera	Zetterstedt 1842

If no rank is listed, the taxon is considered an unranked clade in modern classifications. Ranks may be repeated or presented in the wrong order because authors working on different parts of the classification may disagree about how to rank taxa.

Diagnosis

No diagnoses are available