Phileurus carinatus declivis Prell, 1914

Grossi, Paschoal Coelho & Saltin, Jochen-P., 2014, Description of the female of Phileurus bucculentus Ohaus, with new country records and remarks for Phileurus carinatus Prell (Coleoptera, Scarabaeoidea, Dynastinae), Insecta Mundi 2014 (348), pp. 1-16 : 6-10

Phileurus carinatus declivis Prell, 1914 revised status

( Figures 7–9 )

Phileurus declivis Prell, 1914: 222 .

Phileurus carinatus declivis Prell. Endrödi (1978: 106) .

Since its description, no additional Venezuelan specimens of P. declivis have been recorded in the literature. Endrödi (1978) downgraded P. declivis to a subspecies of P. carinatus . In his Phileurini revision, Endrödi (1978) separated the subspecies based only in the distribution, size of the pronotal tubercle and pygidial punctures. The distribution, as presented by Endrödi, was not enough to distinguish these two forms, and this was the basis for Ratcliffe (2003), Ratcliffe and Cave (2006) and Krajcik (2005) to consider P. c. declivis as a synonym of P. carinatus . After revising many specimens, including the types of both P. carinatus and P. declivis , we concluded that P. c. declivis is a good subspecies and retain the use of Endrödi’s classification.

Based on our observations, we make some remarks on the variation we found within the material we studied of P. carinatus carinatus and P. carinatus declivis . Endrödi (1978, 1985) pointed out that P. c. carinatus was the Central America population that had a more developed pronotal tubercle on males, while P. c. declivis was the South American population with a less developed pronotal tubercle, as in the holotype. What we have found is that in South America, from north to south, there are also male specimens with a well developed pronotal tubercle (this character is only comparable between males, as all females have it clearly developed). More surprisingly, there are male specimens with no pronotal tubercle, which can be used as a dimorphic character easily diagnosable. The 16 males examined are all from French Guiana and neighboring regions Guyana and Suriname. Also, these specimens have a deep and sloping pronotal furrow, and this probably influenced Prell (1914) to describe P. declivis as a separate species. However, Prell’s specimen has a minute pronotal tubercle, removed from the anterior margin ( Fig. 9B, J ), whereas the pronotum is high and the furrow corresponds to the ones from French Guiana, except for the small tubercle, also present in the only male we examined from Suriname ( Fig. 9C, F ).

Phileurus carinatus declivis does not have the pronotal tubercle, or has it obsolete in a few specimens from Venezuela and Suriname ( Fig. 9B, J, C ). The females in these cases always have the pronotal tubercle both slightly removed from or near the anterior pronotal margin, and this character seems to vary independently among the material we studied (11 females).

In specimens from both Suriname and Venezuela, the pronotum is high laterally, making the furrow deep, and the anterior declivity more sloping than in males where the pronotal tubercle is present. Those males lacking a tubercle also have the condition of a high pronotum as opposed to the remaining males. We also found that the parameres ( Fig. 3F , 4F , Fig. 6H, I and 7F , 9G, H ) are slightly variable among the specimens and range from almost parallel to widely dilated in the apical third, and with apex somewhat truncate to elongate. All the females have the pronotal tubercle well developed, and this feature is not diagnosable among them. What we noticed is that the punctures can be used to separate the population from French Guiana and neighboring countries from the remaining ones. In particular, the pronotal punctures are stronger and more evident in P. c. carinatus females than in P. c. declivis ( Fig. 5A, B, D, H and 8A, B, D, H ); the ocular canthus is subquadrate in P. c. declivis , and rounded in P. c. carinatus ( Fig. 5 and 6A, D ); the elytra are more punctate in P. c. declivis than in P. c. carinatus , and is more conspicuous between the first and second striae from elytral suture ( Fig. 5F, 5G , and 8F, 8G ); lastly, the last abdominal sternite is more punctate in P. c. carinatus and more rounded distally ( Fig. 5C, E ), as opposed to a somewhat more elongated and less punctate sternite in P. c. declivis females ( Fig. 8C, E ).

Distribution. Type material examined. Holotype male, ZMHB, labeled ( Fig. 9B, E, G, H, J ): a) typed label, “ Venezuela / San Fernando de Apure / L. Laglaize 5-10 1897 ”; b) red handwritten label, “ Phileurus / declivis / Prell male symbol-Type”; c) white red bordered typed and handwritten label, “ Holotypus / Phileurus / declivis Prell ”.

Additional material examined. Among the material we were able to study there was one NEW COUNTRY RECORD for Phileurus carinatus declivis as follows, and all the male specimens have no pronotal tubercle: GUYANA (3 specimens): Rio Demerara (2 males) ( MNHN) ; Georgetown, Demerara, (1 female) ( MNHN). Other male specimens with an unarmed pronotum were examined, and the females from the same localities were considered to be conspecific, as follows: FRENCH GUIANA (22 specimens): Montsinéry, Piste de S. Elie , PK 16, PL (1 male) ( EPGC) ; Patawa (1 male) ( EPGC) ; Route de Petit Saut, PK 9 (1 male and 1 female) ( FDC), (1 male) ( JPSC) ; Rivière Lunier (1 male) ( MNHN) ; Cayenne (1 male and 2 females) ( MNHN) ; Route de Regina, PK 62 (1 male) ( MNHN) ; PK 29 PL, Route de Kaw, (1 male) ( JPSC) ; Wayabo , (1 male and 1 female) ( JPSC) ; Piste Bélizon , PK15 (1 female) ( FDC) ; Piste de Kaw, PK 47 (1 female) ( FDC) ; Route de Kaw PK 37 + 3 PL (1 male) ( JPSC) ; Cacao (1 female) ( FDC) ; Saint-Jeandu-Maroni (1 female) ( MNHN) ; Piste Bélizon , PK23 (1 female) ( MNHN) ; Piste Coralie , PK2 (1 female) ( MNHN) ; French Guiana (1 male) ( IRSNB) ; Saint-Laurent du Maroni (1 male) ( IRSNB). SURINAME (1 specimen): Paramaribo, (1 male) ( HNHM) ( Fig. 9C, F ) .

Figures

Figure 3. Phileurus carinatus carinatus Prell, large male. A) Dorsal view. B) Lateral view. C) Ventral view. D) Head and pronotum, detail. E) Abdominal sternum, detail. F) Parameres in lateral and caudal views. G) Scutellum. H) Elytral disc, detail. I) Head and pronotum, in perspective view.

Figure 4. Phileurus carinatus carinatus Prell, small male. A) Dorsal view. B) Lateral view. C) Ventral view. D) Head and pronotum, detail. E) Abdominal sternum, detail. F) Parameres in lateral and caudal views. G) Scutellum. H) Elytral disc detail. I) Head and pronotum, in perspective view.

Figure 5. Phileurus carinatus carinatus Prell, female. A) Dorsal view. B) Lateral view. C) Ventral view. D) Head and pronotum, detail. E) Abdominal sternum, detail. F) Scutellum. G) Elytral disc, detail. H) Head and pronotum, in perspective view.

Figure 6. Phileurus carinatus carinatus Prell. A) Large male from Peru, detail of head and pronotum. B) Small male from Peru, detail of head and pronotum. C) Holotype male (ZMHB) detail of head and pronotum. D) Small female from Peru, detail of head and pronotum. E) Large female from Argentina, detail of head and pronotum. F) Holotype labels. G) Pygidium of a male from Peru. H) Parameres in caudal view, specimen from Peru. I) Original drawing from Prell (1914). J) Holotype male in dorsal view (ZMHB).

Figure 7. Phileurus carinatus declivis Prell, male. A) Dorsal view. B) Lateral view. C) Ventral view. D) Head and pronotum, detail. E) Abdominal sternum, detail. F) Parameres in lateral and caudal views. G) Scutellum. H) Elytral disc, detail. I) Head and pronotum, in perspective view.

Figure 8. Phileurus carinatus declivis Prell, female. A) Dorsal view. B) Lateral view. C) Ventral view. D) Head and pronotum, detail. E) Abdominal sternum, detail. F) Scutellum. G) Elytral disc, detail. H) Head and pronotum, in perspective view.

Figure 9. Phileurus carinatus declivis Prell. A) Male from French Guiana, detail of head and pronotum. B) Holotype male (ZMHB), detail of head and pronotum. C) Male (HNHM), detail of head and pronotum. D) Female from French Guiana, detail of head and pronotum. E) Holotype aedeagus and labels. F) Labels from C). G) Original drawing from Prell (1914). H) Parameres of holotype, in caudal view. I) Pygidium of male from French Guiana. J) Holotype male, in dorsal view (ZMHB).