Lonchura himalayanus

Remarks. Mey (2017) did not compare Leiothrichinirmus himalayanus against Brueelia impressifrons, despite placing the Br. impressifrons in Leiothrichinirmus. Gustafsson & Bush (2017: 105) placed Br. impressifrons in Resartor, parasitising two different subspecies of the same host species, Trochalopteron affine. The illustration of the male genitalia of L. himalayanus by Mey (2017: 94) is not complete and appears slightly distorted. Other than the angle of the lateral margins of the mesosome, there are no differences between the genitalia of L. himalayanus and those of Re. impressifrons that cannot be ascribed to the distortion of the specimen illustrated, the lack of detail in Mey’s illustration, or within-species variation. The only other characters mentioned in the description of L. himalayanus refer to illustrations of L. grammatoptiliphagus, but it is unclear whether these two species are so similar that the same illustration of the terminalia can serve to illustrate two species, or whether this is a mistake. In our experience, the chaetotaxy of the posterior segments differ among all species of Resartor. We strongly suspect that Leiothrichinirmus himalayanus is a junior synonym of Re. impressifrons, but the type material needs careful examination to confirm this hypothesis. For this reason, we consider Re. himalayanus a species inquirenda in need of redescription.