Neocollyris (Mesocollyris) shyamrupi Saha (Saha and Halder, 1986)

Wiesner, Jürgen & Anichtchenko, Alexander, 2021, Taxonomic changes among some tiger beetles from India (Coleoptera, Cicindelidae), Baltic Journal of Coleopterology 21 (1), pp. 81-86 : 82-86

2. Neocollyris (Mesocollyris) shyamrupi Saha and Halder, 1986

Neocollyris (Mesocollyris) metallica Naviaux, 2004 new synonymy

Robert Acciavatti (Pittsburgh, PA) pointed us to an article published by Saha and Halder in 1986

The body length of N. crassicornis is 11 – 18 mm, (Naviaux gives 11 – 15.5 mm, 1995: 149), especially females from South India, Mysore State, in the collection of the first author, are generally larger with 18.0 mm body length. The sculpture of the elytra surface is variable - the larger the speci-

Fig. 1–2. Habitus. 1) Lectotype female of men the coarser the sculpture.

Neocollyris (Orthocollyris) crassicornis andamana (Bates, 1878) syn. nov., digital image The Andamans fit seamlessly into the distribu-

by Azadeh Taghavian, MNHN. 2) Neocollyris tion range of N. crassicornis : Sri Lanka, India

(Orthocollyris) crassicornis (Dejean, 1825) female,

from N India, Uttarakhand, 5km N Ramnagar. Scale

= 5 mm in the Records of the Zoological Survey of India. there is no doubt about the identity. The type of In it is a description of Neocollyris shyamrupi N. nilgirica is therefore also the type of the spe- (1986: 138–140). Unfortunately, this article was cies N. fowleri .

unknown not only to us, but also to Roger

Naviaux, the deceased specialist of the We speculate why Naviaux placed the species Collyridini. Naviaux described (2004:117, 118) nilgirica in the subgenus Stenocollyris Naviaux , Neocollyris (Mesocollyris) metallica , which 1995. The shape of the labrum and the formation should be conspecific to shyamrupi according of its teeth is a good feature to distinguish the to both descriptions. To verify this, we tried to subgenera Mesocollyris Naviaux, 1995 and borrow the type of the species for study or at Stenocollyris . In Mesocollyris the middle labial least to get a picture of the type. In the work of teeth are not protruded but on the same level as Saha and Halder it is mentioned that holotype the rest of the apical teeth. In Stenocollyris , the male and two paratype females are preserved in middle labial teeth are preferred; all teeth are the Zoological Survey of India, Kolkata. With longer than in Mesocollyris . Fowler writes noththe support of Prof. V. P. Uniyal (Dehradun, In- ing about the shape of the labrum and the formadia) we have tried to locate these specimens. tion of the teeth in the description of nilgirica . Unfortunately, without success. The person in But because Naviaux compares nilgirica with charge of the beetle section at ZSI informed us Neocollyris (Stenocollyris) andrewesi (Horn, that the specimens are untraceable. Because of 1894), we assume that he presupposed a similar this fact, a recovery of “typical ” shyamrupi is labrum with protruding long teeth for nilgirica , not expected in the foreseeable future, and be- which is typical of the Mesocollyris -labrum. cause the descriptions of both species are virtu- Based on these details, we place Neocollyris ally identical, N. metallica Naviaux, 2004 is placed (Mesocollyris) fowleri into synonymy with into synonymy of N. shyamrupi Saha and Halder , Neocollyris (Stenocollyris) nilgirica , which is 1986. moved into the subgenus Mesocollyris .

4. Cicindela (Ancylia) zingaroana Werner &

3. Neocollyris (Mesocollyris) nilgirica Fowler, Wiesner, 2008 bona species

1912 new combination

Neocollyris (Stenocollyris) nilgirica Fowler , Cicindela (Ancylia) andrewesi zingaroana was 1912 described by Werner and Wiesner in 2008 (2008: Neocollyris (Mesocollyris) fowleri Naviaux, 1995 16). During a re-examination of the material of C. new synonymy andrewesi zingaroana ( Fig. 9), we noticed some additional features not mentioned in the original

The basis on which Roger Naviaux described the description. In all studied specimens, the frontal species Neocollyris (Mesocollyris) fowleri is not grooves converge with each other at an acute obvious. He described this species (1985: 79, 80) angle along the midline ( Fig. 6 ), while in from a female specimen that is housed in the nominotypical subspecies frontal grooves are BMNH (Beulah Garner called this to our atten- always parallel ( Fig. 7 ). No clear differences in tion, Fig. 5), and it is labeled as the holotype of the structure of the endofalus were found be- Neocollyris nilgirica . In the opinion of Naviaux tween C. andrewesi s. str. and C. a. zingaroana ; (1995: 80), this specimen does not match Fowl- however, in C. a. zingaroana the apex of the er’s description, and it likely is mislabeled. Else- aedeagus is slightly bent downward ( Fig.11), where (1995: 106, 107) Naviaux reproduced Fowl- which was also noted in the figure in the original er’s original description (1912: 260, 261) of N. description ( Werner & Wiesner 2008). Based on nilgirica because he could not find the holotype these characters, along with the previously specimen of the species. However, the female from known differences in elytral pattern ( Figs. 8-9), BMNH with the type label of N. nilgirica com- we propose that Cicindela (Ancylia) zingaroana pletely agrees with Fowler’s description, and

Werner and Wiesner, 2008 be elevated to a bona species.

Figures

Fig. 6-7. Frons. 6) Cicindela (Ancylia) andrewesi (Horn, 1894). 7) Cicindela (Ancylia) zingaroana Werner and Wiesner, 2008 bon. spec.