Alevonota species

Wunderle, Volker Assing Paul, 2008, On the Alevonota species of the Western Palaearctic region (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae: Aleocharinae: Athetini), Beiträge Zur Entomologie = Contributions to Entomology 58 (5), pp. 145-189 : 147-148

The Alevonota species of the Western Palaearctic region

The present study focusses primarily on the winged and wing-dimorphic species of the Western Palaearctic region. The Canarian representatives were studied earlier ( ASSING 2002a), but are included in the key to species and in the catalogue at the end of this paper. Three species were not studied either because the type material was not found in the collections of the MNHNP ( A. lentipes (PEYERIMHOFF) , A. fulvastra (PEYERIMHOFF) (TAGHAVIAN, e-mail 4 March, 2008) or because an interpretation was possible based on the original description, as was the case for the locally endemic species A. melitensis PACE.

Morphologically, the genus is weakly defined. Alevonota species generally share the following characteristics: subparallel body shape (not applicable to most Canarian representatives); weakly transverse pronotum; small (often completely reduced) to moderately large eyes; usually more or less pale-coloured antennae; antennomeres V-X moderately to strongly transverse; postgenal carinae more or less reduced (usually visible only posteriorly in lateral view); short and slender, apically bifid ligula; pubescence of pronotal midline directed caudad (occasionally except for anterior 1/5); metatarsomeres I and II of subequal length; abdomen sparsely punctate; median lobe of aedeagus of the usual athetine morphology, without distinctly sclerotised structures in internal sac; apical lobe of paramere rather slender; spermatheca more or less S-shaped.

Based on morphological evidence, the genus group name Liota MULSANT & REY, 1874 is revalidated to include the type species of Liota , A. gracilenta ; for a more detailed discussion see the section on this species. The remaining Western Palaearctic representatives of the genus, including also A. sollemnis ASSING , but exclusive of other Canarian species, are attributed to the nominal subgenus. Owing to the highly derived morphology of the vast majority of Canarian Alevonota , which can be explained as the result of an adaptation to subterranean crevices and other endogean habitats, their phylogenetic affiliations are difficult to assess based on morphological data alone.

Within the nominal subgenus, two species groups can be distinguished. The species of the A. rufotestacea group are characterised by strongly transverse antennomeres IV-X (2.5-3 times as wide as long), pronounced microreticulation of the head and pronotum, and by the unmodified male abdominal tergite VII. The members of the A. kiesenwetteri group, on the other hand, share antennae with less transverse antennomeres IV-X, a usually less pronounced microsculpture of the forebody, and a pronounced, clearly synapomorphic sexual dimorphism of the male abdominal tergite VII. The latter group includes A. kiesenwetteri , A. ocaloides , A. egregia , and A. laeviceps . The remaining species, including the Canarian A. sollemnis , refer to the A. rufotestacea group.

All Western Palaearctic representatives of the genus seem to have a subterranean habitat. The microphthalmous and anophthalmous species are usually collected only by methods such as soilwashing, soil sifting, and traps placed in deeper soil strata or cave systems. The winged or wingdimorphic species are mostly recorded - more or less accidentally, either on the wing or with pitfall traps, rarely with other methods - during their dispersal period in spring and summer; records from other seasons are extremely rare or absent. According to previous authors (e. g. BENICK & LOHSE 1974), they are associated with burrows of mammals, but this hypothesis is supported neither by systematic studies of the entomofauna of mammal nests and burrows, nor by other evidence. The true reproduction habitats of these species are essentially unknown. Thus, the ecological data available are remarkably similar to those known for the previously revised aleocharine genera Callicerus GRAVENHORST, 1802 and Pseudosemiris MACHULKA, 1935 of the Athetini , as well as Ilyobates KRAATZ, 1856 and Amarochara THOMSON, 1858 of the Oxypodini ( ASSING 1999a, 2001a, 2002b).