Hilarini (Diptera: Empididae) from the Auckland Islands New Zealand, the Homoplastic Loss of the Male Silk-Producing Basitarsus in Two Insular Species, and Notes on the Empidoidea of the Subantarctic Islands

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper provides interesting material on the family Empididae (dance flies) from  the Auckland Islands of New Zealand, where this group remains poorly studied. The authors describe two new species of the genera Hilara and Hilarempis possessing slender, non-glandular (i.e. without silk-producing capability) fore basitarsus in the male. These unique records stimulated authors to discuss possible factors of an evolution of newly discovered species, especially in relation to the environmental conditions of the Subantartic islands and their selective pressure on empidoid flies. Published data on other empidoid taxa are summarised. The contribution of the paper is new and original. The keywords and abstract clearly indicate the content of the paper. The descriptions of the new species are adequate, concise and clear; they are well differentiated and the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature is respected. Also, the descriptions of the new species addresses all relevant issues (etymology, deposition of type material, localisation of type and other localities, measurements, differential diagnosis, description). The descriptions are backed up with very good photos of the habitus and drawings of the crucial morphological features (male terminalia). The list of references is sufficiently comprehensive.

Remarks:

The title could be slightly corrected (see text).

Reference to Wikipedia (No 4) is not correct. This Empididae page of the encyclopaedia is incomplete and outdated. Empidoidea: Atelestidae, Brachystomatidae, Empididae, Homalocnemidae, Hybotidae, Dolichopodidae, Iteaphilidae, and Oreogetonidae (e.g., Manual of Afrotropical Diptera, 2017, vol. 2; Sinclair & Shamshev, 2021 [https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4968.1.1]). Sinclair & Shamshev (2021) discussed a status and position of the subfamily Ragadinae (Empididae).

Some technical remarks are marked directly in the text of the manuscript.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

I have made all major comments in the attached PDF-file. The main issues are insufficient species descriptions and unacceptable photographic material. Other issues, also major, are the disposition of the text, the content of hypthetical discussions, and inproper refencing. The manuscript could be imporved, but require major revision.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

There have been no additions or changes since the original review, the first review comments are still effective. Suggestions on how to proceed has been given to the editor.