C. deltus (Edwards 1939)

Taxonomy	Biology	Distribution

Culicoides delta Edwards 1939: 48. TL Great Britain
(Kettle & Lawson 1952: 444. Early stages, key)
(Campbell & Pelham-Clinton 1960: 271. ♂, ♀, notes, keys, figs)
(Kremer 1966: 205. ♂, ♀, notes, fig)
(Havelka 1976: 220. Notes)
(Glukhova 1979: 192. Larva)
(Delecolle 1985: 33. ♂, ♀, notes, figs)
(Boorman 1986: 256. Notes)
(Glukhova 1989: 165. ♂, ♀, notes, figs)
    = lupicaris Downes & Kettle
Culicoides lupicaris Downes & Kettle 1952: 76. TL Great Britain
(Downes & Kettle 1952: 76. Notes, figs, key)
(Kettle & Lawson 1952: 444. Early stages, key)
(Campbell & Pelham-Clinton 1960: 272. ♂, ♀, notes, keys, figs)
(Kremer 1966: 204. ♂, ♀, notes, fig)
(Havelka 1976: 221. Notes)
(Delecolle 1985: 20. ♂, ♀, notes, figs)
(Boorman 1986: 257. Notes)

Diagnosis and Notes

Campbell & Pelham-Clinton separated delta and lupicaris by the absence or presence of a dark spot in the cubital cell, by the form of the mesonotal markings, and by the time of appearance (before (delta) or after (lupicaris) the end of June). Further, they stated that the larvae are readily distinguishable. Subsequent authors have tended to treat them as synonymous. Further work is needed taking all stages and the habits of the adults into consideration to confirm or deny this opinion. The female AR is 1.02-1.18; SD 3,11-15.  The wings are well marked as in the figure. The ninth tergite of the male is concave, with short lateral processes; the basistlye with a patch of short bristles and the parameres tapering to a filament with a few short hairs.
The figures are from Edwards (1939).