Spalacopsis Newman, 1842

Santos-Silva, Antonio, Bezark, Larry G. & Botero, Juan Pablo, 2025, The Cerambycidae (Coleoptera) from the James Cope collection: New species, synonymy, and taxonomical and geographical notes, Zootaxa 5723 (3), pp. 384-400 : 387-388

Spalacopsis Newman, 1842

( Figs 7–17 )

Eutheia Dejean, 1835: 353 (junior homonym of Eutheia Stephens, 1830 ).

Spalacopsis Newman, 1842: 303 .

Euthuorus Jacquelin du Val, 1857: 276. Syn. nov.

Systene Pascoe, 1858: 264 .

In the original description of Spalacopsis, Newman (1842) mentioned: “Very similar to Tetraglenes is an undescribed American genus, for which I propose the name of Spalacopsis : it may be readily distinguished from all other Lamiidae , by possessing the small circular lateral or cheek-eyes of Tetraglenes , and wanting the epicranial eyes peculiar to that genus: the antennae are approximate and about as long as the body, and are porrected in parallel lines when the insect is at rest; the first joint is longer than the head of the insect, and are somewhat pilose; the shape of the head is nearly conical, the antennae occupying the apex of the cone and the mouth its inferior basal angle; the insect is long and narrow, the head, prothorax and elytra being of nearly equal breadth; the apices of the elytra are slightly divaricating, each ending in an obtuse point; the legs are remarkably short, and the femora slightly incrassated. The only described Cerambycites which seem to approach the genera Tetraglenes and Spalacopsis are Pachypeza (Serv.) pennicornis (Germar), Megacera macrocera (Serv.) , and Hippopsis (Enc.) lemniscatus (Fab.); but the eye in each of these three genera possesses the normal form. In the cabinet of the Entomological Club are three species of Spalacopsis , to the largest of these, which is from the interior of Brazil, I propose giving the name of Spalacopsis Stellio. ” The other two species included by Newman were Spalacopsis stolata Newman, 1842 and S. suffuse Newman, 1842 . Posteriorly, Thomson (1864) designated S. stellio ( Fig. 7 ) as the type species of the genus and Gemminger (1873) transferred Hippopsis filum Klug, 1829 to Spalacopsis . Breuning (1961) listed S. stellio as a junior synonym of Spalacopsis filum .

Dejean (1835) listed three species from Cuba in Eutheia , junior homonym of Eutheia Stephens, 1830 : “Basilaris, Klug [ nomen nudum] / Precatoria, Reichnbach. [ nomen nudum] / Filum, Klug. ( Hippopsis ).” Since H. filum was the only available species originally included, it is the type species by monotypy.

Euthuorus Jacquelin du Val, 1857 is an unnecessary replacement name for Eutheia Dejean, 1835 (indicated as being by “Reichenb.”)—apparently, this author ignored Spalacopsis Newman, 1842 . Therefore, the type species must be Hippopsis filum . Additionally, although this makes no nomenclatural difference, Jacquelin du Val (1857) listed Eutheia basilaris and Eutheia precatoria under synonymy of Eutheia filum .

Systene Pascoe, 1858 is also another unnecessary replacement name for Eutheia Dejean, 1835 . Consequently, its type species is also Hippopsis filum .

Casey (1913) divided Spalacopsis into two subgenera: Euthuorus and Spalacopsis . He included in Spalacopsis ( Euthuorus) : Spalacopsis costulata Casey, 1913 ; and S. scapalis Casey, 1913 . And in Spalacopsis ( Spalacopsis) : S. suturalis Hamilton, 1896 ; S. suffusa Newman, 1842 ; S. texana Casey, 1891 ; S. stolata Newman, 1842 ; and S. pertenuis Casey, 1913 . However, this was a mistake, since Euthuorus and Spalacopsis have as type species two species that are synonyms, respectively: Hippopsis filum and Spalacopsis stellio. Furthermore, since S. filum has the elytra parallel-sided, it would need to be included in Spalacopsis ( Euthuorus) although is a senior synonym of the type species of Spalacopsis .

Breuning (1962) wrongly indicated that the type species of Spalacopsis was S. stolata . Furthermore, he did not comment on the subgenera proposed by Casey (1913).

Tyson (1973) also wrongly indicated the type species as being S. stolata and followed the subgenera proposed by Casey (1913), but in an extremely different sensu: “Elytra with suture not fused apex usually as wide or wider than middle, apices spiniform lobate, broadly rounded or tapering; species alate or apterous … Subgenus Euthuorus ;” “Elytra with suture fused, apex narrower than middle, apices tapering, slightly divergent and usually asymmetrical; apterous .. Subgenus Spalacopsis s. str. ” Again, there is a problem since the type species of S. ( Euthuorus ) is a synonym of the type species of S. ( Spalacopsis ). Therefore, the species could not be included in two different subgenera at the same time. Evidently, the mistake was due to the wrong interpretation of the type species of Spalacopsis by Breuning 1962, who omitted Spalacopsis stellio from the synonymical list of S. filum .

Linsley & Chemsak (1995) correctly indicated Spalacopsis stellio as the type species of the genus. In fact, even if the genus included subgenera, none of the names currently listed as synonyms of Spalacopsis could be used, since all have Hippopsis filum —a synonym of the type species of Spalacopsis —as their type species. Apparently, and somewhat inexplicably, catalogs and checklists began to omit the subgenera following that work, which, in fact, did not formally establish any synonymy and did not mention the real reason why the previously proposed subgenera have no nomenclatural standing.

We are formally synonymizing Euthuorus with Spalacopsis because their name-bearing types are a single taxonomic taxon.

Figures

FIGURES 7–9. Spalacopsis spp. 7) S. stellio Newman, 1842, dorsal habitus, by Jesus Santiago Moure. 8) S. macilenta, from Lacordaire (1876). 9) S. howdeni Tyson, 1970, from Tyson (1970).

FIGURES 10–13. Spalacopsis macilenta Lacordaire, 1876, holotype: 10) Dorsal habitus; 11) Lateral habitus; 12) Head, frontal view; 13) Labels.

FIGURES 14–17. Spalacopsis copei sp. nov., female holotype: 14) Dorsal habitus; 15) Ventral habitus; 16) Lateral habitus; 17) Head, frontal view.