Charidotella (s. str.) recidiva (Spaeth, 1926)

Sekerka, Lukáš, 2020, Commented catalogue of Cassidinae (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) of the state of São Paulo, Brazil, with remarks on the collection of Jaro Mráz in the National Museum in Prague, Acta Entomologica Musei Nationalis Pragae (Acta. Ent. Mus. Natl. Pragae) 60 (2), pp. 667-707 : 672

publication ID

https://doi.org/ 10.37520/aemnp.2020.048

publication LSID

lsid:zoobank.org:pub:FD33083B-91A0-4C89-B45D-A31561955027

DOI

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10536080

persistent identifier

https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03C0F621-9D08-9E15-FF7C-BBD1505BF944

treatment provided by

Carolina

scientific name

Charidotella (s. str.) recidiva (Spaeth, 1926)
status

 

* Charidotella (s. str.) recidiva (Spaeth, 1926) View in CoL

( Fig. 1 View Figs 1–7 )

Published records. São Paulo (SඉൺൾඍΗ 1926a); Barueri (Bඈඋඈඐංൾർ 1996); Jundiaí (Bඈඋඈඐංൾർ 2002).

Type material examined. Sඒඇඍඒඉൾඌ: 1 spec. ( Fig. 1 View Figs 1–7 ), glued, ‘ SAÕ PAULO | BRAS. MRÁZ LGT. | MUS.PRAGENSE [w, p, cb, bf] || Metriona | recidiva | m. cotyp. | n. sp. [w, hw by F. Spaeth, cb]’ ( NMPC); 2 spec., ‘ SAÕ PAULO | BRAS. MRÁZ LGT. | MUS.PRAGENSE [w, p, cb, bf] || Metriona | recidiva | Sp. | COTYPE [w, hw by J. Achard, cb]’ ( NMPC); 82 spec., ‘ SAÕ PAULO | BRAS. MRÁZ LGT. | MUS. PRAGENSE [w, p, cb, bf]’ ( NMPC). Each specimen was provided with an additional label: ‘ SYNTYPUS | Metriona | recidiva | Spaeth, 1926 | L. Sekerka des. 2008 [r, p, cb, bf]’.

Additional record. BRAZIL: Sඞඈ Pൺඎඅඈ: Alto da Serra, 7.iii.1912, 1 spec., G. E. Bryant leg. ( BMNH).

Distribution. Argentina and Brazil (Minas Gerais, Rio de Janeiro, Rio Grande do Sul, Santa Catarina, São Paulo).

Remarks. SඉൺൾඍΗ (1926a) described C. recidiva based on extensive material from ‘ Sao Paulo (Mráz), St. Catharina (Böttcher) , Rio Grande do Sul, Rio Janeiro’ but did not mention precise number of specimens and their depositories. NMPC holds long series of specimens collected by J. Mráz and three specimens from Mendes in Rio de Janeiro (ex coll. J. Achard), but only one specimen from Mráz’s series and two from Achard’s collection have Spaeth’s original identification labels which have ‘cotype’ written on them. Based on the primary description of C. recidiva, Spaeth did not select one representative as the ‘type’, therefore all specimens must be considered syntypes. As far as it is known to me, the series is consistent and there is no need for a lectotype designation now.

NMPC

National Museum Prague

Darwin Core Archive (for parent article) View in SIBiLS Plain XML RDF