Anelaphus Linsley 1936

Lingafelter, Steven W., 2020, Review of species of Anelaphus Linsley and its new synonym Gymnopsyra Linsley from the United States and Canada with description of a new species, synonymies, distributional notes and an illustrated identification key (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Elaphidiini), Insecta Mundi 2020 (798), pp. 1-30 : 2-6

publication ID	https://doi.org/ 10.5281/zenodo.4565200
publication LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:pub:A03A123F-CB4E-409D-AF00-C1C6D17091E5
DOI	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4586436
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03CB9A08-FFE3-D118-8CE7-BC4FFCE7FEE3
treatment provided by	Felipe
scientific name	Anelaphus Linsley 1936
status

Treatment

Anelaphus Linsley 1936 View in CoL View at ENA

( Fig. 1–29 View Figure 1 View Figure 2 View Figure 3 View Figure 4 View Figure 5 View Figure 6 View Figure 7 View Figure 8 View Figure 9 View Figure 10 View Figure 11 View Figure 12 View Figure 13 View Figure 14 View Figure 15 View Figure 16 View Figure 17 View Figure 18 View Figure 19 View Figure 20 View Figure 21 View Figure 22 View Figure 23 View Figure 24 View Figure 25 View Figure 26 View Figure 27 View Figure 28 View Figure 29 )

Anelaphus Linsley 1936: 464 View in CoL .

Type species: Elaphidion spurcum LeConte 1864 View in CoL . Original designation.

Gymnopsyra Linsley, 1937 View in CoL , new synonym.

Type species: Gymnopsyra phoracanthoides Linsley, 1937 View in CoL (= Elaphidion (Anoplium) magnipunctata Knull, 1934 View in CoL ). Original designation.

Discussion. Anelaphus Linsley (1936) was originally characterized by “feebly” spinose antenna, at most only slightly longer than the body and “unarmed” femora and elytral apices. It included species originally placed in Elaphidion Audinet-Serville (1835) and Anoplium Haldeman (1847) , with Anelaphus spurcus ( LeConte, 1854) designated as the type species ( Fig. 2g View Figure 2 ).

Gymnopsyra Linsley (1937) was originally characterized by the non-carinate antennae, “rotundate” rather than emarginate or spinose elytral apices, and rounded, coarsely sculptured pronotum. It was monotypic and included Gymnopsyra phoracanthoides Linsley (a synonym of Gymnopsyra magnipunctata ( Knull, 1934) , synonymized by Linsley 1963) ( Fig. 5 View Figure 5 c–d) which was originally described in Elaphidion , subgenus Anoplium .

Linsley (1937), in his original description of Gymnopsyra ( Fig. 5 View Figure 5 a–b), briefly compared it only to Psyrassa Pascoe (1866) and Stenosphenus Haldeman (1847) , two genera that are clearly distinctive. Although he had just described Anelaphus the year before ( Linsley 1936), he made no comparison of Gymnopsyra to that genus or to species in Anoplium (whether used as a genus or subgenus of Elaphidion ), most of which would be placed subsequently in Peranoplium Linsley, 1957 . In that paper, Linsley compared those species transferred into Peranoplium only with Anopliomorpha , and again made no mention of, or comparison to, Gymnopsyra or Anelaphus .

Linsley (1963), in his monograph of the Cerambycidae of North America, acknowledged the similarity and relatedness of Anelaphus and Gymnopsyra as they appeared in the same couplet in his key to genera of Elaphidiini . There, they were distinguished by the pronotum moderately coarsely to finely punctate and pubescence partially obscuring the surface in Anelaphus , while the pronotum is very deeply, coarsely, confluently punctate, with punctures much larger than those at base of elytra and integument shining and very sparsely pubescent in Gymnopsyra .

Skiles (1985) broadened the definition of Anelaphus by synonymizing Elaphidionoides Linsley, 1957 , which included species having bispinose elytral apices, in particular, E. parallelus (Newman) and E. villosus (Fabricius) (treated later herein). He provided a redescription of Anelaphus and a modified key couplet 19 of Linsley (1963). He highlighted the pubescent patch on the antennal tubercles, apices of the mesofemur not or scarcely attaining the posterior margin of the metacoxae, and the apex of the metafemur falling far short of elytral apices as diagnostic characters of Anelaphus .

Lingafelter (1998) discussed the similarity of Anelaphus , Gymnopsyra , and Peranoplium , synonymizing the latter with Anelaphus since the characters used to distinguish it (alveolate pronotal punctures, antennae with reduced spines on antennomeres 3 and 4) were deemed as insufficient basis to maintain Peranoplium as a distinct genus. A matrix of 70 morphological characters was included in that work. It was shown that many diagnostic features such as tibial carinae, the shape and distribution of pronotal punctures and calli, and the shape of the prosternal intercoxal process were quite variable among species and genera, evolving numerous times in the Elaphidiini . The only synapomorphic character state for Anelaphus on the strict consensus tree of Lingafelter (1998) was the wide and deep posterior notch of the metepisternum. However, this character was shown to have independently evolved in other elaphidiine genera. Two other characters, the blunt shape of the apex of the metasternal notch that receives the anteromedial extension of the first abdominal ventrite and the presence or absence of a middle pronotal callus were likewise shown to be unsatisfactory for characterizing Anelaphus exclusive of other genera. Through further careful study of all the species of Anelaphus and Gymnopsyra , I have concluded that there is no basis to maintain Gymnopsyra as a distinct genus and it is synonymized with Anelaphus .

Following the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, Article 31.2, species group names that are latinized adjectives in the nominative singular must agree in gender with the generic name with which it is combined ( ICZN 1999: 38). Specific epithets that are nouns in apposition are exempted and original spelling is retained. Another exception is when the gender of the species group name was not indicated and cannot be conclusively determined from the evidence of usage, then that name is to be considered as a noun in apposition with the original spelling retained for new combinations.

Gymnopsyra was proposed by Linsley (1937), without an etymology. It is formed from Gymnos latinized from Greek, Γυμνός, meaning naked, and psyra, which is probably latinized from Greek, ψείρα, meaning louse. The “ a ” ending suggests it is a nominative singular noun and therefore feminine in gender ( Winston 1999: 149). The “ es ” ending of the type species epithet, phoracanthoides , indicates it is a fifth declension noun which is feminine in gender according to Latin grammar ( Winston 1999: 152). Therefore, it must be concluded that Gymnopsyra is feminine.

Anelaphus was proposed by Linsley (1936), also without an etymology. The name was apparently latinized elaphos from Proto-Greek, ἔ λ ᾰ φoς, meaning deer, in the nominative singular form. The ending “ us ” suggests that Anelaphus is a second declension masculine noun ( Winston 1999: 152). Therefore, all new combinations of species from the feminine Gymnopsyra must have their specific epithets modified to conform to the masculine Anelaphus , unless exempted according to subarticles of Article 31.2 ( ICZN 1999).

Diagnosis. Species of Anelaphus are nocturnally active with coarsely faceted eyes, dense pubescent patches at the apex of each antennal tubercle (rarely absent), antennae lacking carinae, antennomeres three and four, at least, mesally spinose or dentiform (antennae very rarely lacking spines), prosternal process arcuately declivous and expanded apically (rarely unexpanded at apex), scutellum mostly densely pubescent, pronotum distinctly punctate, rounded or nearly straight at sides and lacking lateral tubercles, as wide as or wider than long (rarely longer than wide), antennomere three short, one-half to two-thirds the length of the pronotum (rarely over two-thirds), antennae of males extending beyond elytral apices by no more than two antennomeres and antennae of females not or barely attaining elytral apices, elytral apices rounded apicolaterally (rarely spinose or dentiform apicolaterally), pronotum with a medial impunctate callus (rarely absent), femora gradually expanded medially, femoral apices rounded, dorsal integument light to dark brown, and length of nearly all specimens 10–20 mm.

Anelaphus is most similar to Aneflomorpha Casey , Aneflus LeConte , Anopliomorpha Linsley , Astromula Chemsak and Linsley , Elaphidion Audinet-Serville , Enaphalodes Haldeman , Eustromula Cockerell , Micranoplium Linsley , Micraneflus Linsley , Neaneflus Linsley , Orwellion Skiles , Parelaphidion Skiles , Pseudoperiboeum Linsley , Psyrassa Pascoe , and Stenelaphus Linsley. Characters distinguishing each of these genera are discussed below.

Most species of Aneflomorpha are more elongate and narrow bodied than most species of Anelaphus and have the pronotum distinctly longer than wide (as wide or wider than long in almost all Anelaphus ), have the third antennomere nearly two-thirds the length of pronotum (about half the length of the pronotum in most Anelaphus ), have antennal tubercles lacking a patch of pubescence at apex (present in most Anelaphus ), and usually have bidentate, bispinose, or truncate elytral apices (rounded apicolaterally in most Anelaphus ).

Aneflus have a more elongate form and are at least 20 mm in length with few exceptions ( Anelaphus specimens are very rarely over 20 mm long), have apicolaterally expanded antennomeres (unexpanded or weakly so in Anelaphus ), have pronounced mesal antennal spines present on at least antennomeres 3–5 and usually 3–7 and sometimes also apicolaterally, (mesal antennal spines, if present beyond antennomere five in Anelaphus , are usually very weak), have elytral apices that are almost always bispinose (typically apicolaterally rounded in Anelaphus , but if bispinose, then either smaller than 20 mm long or without the elongate form).

The small genus Anopliomorpha is characterized by having a distinct carina on basal antennal segments (absent in Anelaphus ), absence of dense pubescence on the antennal tubercles (present in most Anelaphus ), presence of very long “flying” setae scattered over the body and appendages (present in only a few species of Anelaphus , but not as extreme), absence of a pronotal callus (present in most Anelaphus ), and by its small, delicate size and proportions, with almost all specimens less than 10 mm (nearly all specimens of Anelaphus are longer than 10 mm).

The monotypic genus Astromula lacks antennal spines (present in almost all specimens of Anelaphus ) and has very short antennae barely attaining the middle of the elytra, with antennomeres 3–5 together about the length of the pronotum (antennae reaching nearly two-thirds of elytral apices and antennomeres 3–4 often about as long or longer than pronotum in most Anelaphus ).

The large and primarily Caribbean genus Elaphidion is distinguished by the abruptly declivous prosternal process between the procoxae (arcuately declivous in Anelaphus ), the more pronounced mesal (and often apicolateral) spines on most antennomeres—usually very strong mesally on antennomere 3 (restricted to antennomeres 3–6 or fewer in most species of Anelaphus ), the bispinose elytral apices in most specimens (rounded apicolaterally in most Anelaphus ) and the spinose or dentiform metafemoral apices (rounded in Anelaphus ).

Enaphalodes has similar proportions to Anelaphus , but almost all specimens are longer than 20 mm ( Anelaphus are very rarely over 20 mm long), the third antennomere is about two-thirds the length of the pronotum (shorter in most Anelaphus ), the antennal tubercles lack a distinct pubescent patch (present in most Anelaphus ), the meso- and metafemora are very slightly expanded (gradually enlarged to weakly clavate in most Anelaphus ), and the elytral apices are often bispinose (rounded apicolaterally in most Anelaphus ).

Eustromula , like Astromula , has very short antennae that barely attain the middle of the elytra and has antennomeres 3–5 together about as long as the pronotum (the antennae typically attain the apical third or more of the elytra and antennomeres 3–4 are about as long or longer than the pronotum in Anelaphus ), the antennal tubercles lack a pubescent patch (present in most Anelaphus ), and the meso- and metafemora are linear (gradually enlarged to weakly clavate in most Anelaphus ).

The monotypic genus Micranoplium is smaller than 10 mm in length (almost all specimens of Anelaphus are larger), lacks pubescent patches on the antennal tubercles (present in Anelaphus ), and lacks antennal spines (present on at least third antennomere in almost all specimens of Anelaphus ).

Micraneflus lacks pubescent patches on the antennal tubercles (present in Anelaphus ), lacks antennal spines (present on at least third antennomere in almost all specimens of Anelaphus ), and has the pronotum slightly longer than broad (usually as wide or wider than long in Anelaphus ).

Neaneflus has antennomeres expanded apicolaterally (generally unexpanded in most Anelaphus ), has weak antennal carinae present (absent in Anelaphus ), and lacks pubescent patches on the antennal tubercles (present in Anelaphus ).

Orwellion has antennomere three at least two-thirds the length of the pronotum (shorter in most Anelaphus ), has the antennae extending beyond the elytral apices by at least three antennomeres in males and by one antennomere in females (antennae are relatively shorter in Anelaphus ), lacks a distinct pubescent patch on the antennal tubercles (present in most Anelaphus ), has distinct post-ocular pubescent patches (absent in most Anelaphus ), and has the elytral apex apicolaterally spinose or dentiform (rounded in most Anelaphus ).

Parelaphidion lacks pubescent patches on the antennal tubercles (present in Anelaphus ), has the antennae usually extending beyond the elytral apices by at least two antennomeres in males and one antennomere in females (antennae are relatively shorter in most Anelaphus ), has moderately to strongly bispinose elytral apices in nearly all specimens (rounded apicolaterally in most Anelaphus ), and has the third antennomere at least twothirds the length of the pronotum (usually shorter in Anelaphus ).

The small genus Pseudoperiboeum has a lateral pronotal tubercle on each side (absent in Anelaphus ), has long “flying” setae scattered over integument (absent from most Anelaphus ), lacks pubescent patches on the antennal tubercles (present in most Anelaphus ), has the antennae extending beyond the elytral apices by at least three antennomeres in males and by nearly one antennomere in females (antennae are relatively shorter in Anelaphus ), and has the apicolateral elytral apex either spinose, dentate or truncate (rounded in most Anelaphus ).

Psyrassa has the pronotum mostly smooth and nearly impunctate (heavily punctate in Anelaphus ) and much longer than wide (as wide or wider than long in Anelaphus ), lacks pubescent patches on the antennal tubercles (present in most Anelaphus ), and has the elytra apex apicolaterally spinose in many species (rounded in most Anelaphus ).

Stenelaphus is recognized by the scattered, long, “flying” setae over the dorsum (absent from most Anelaphus ), lacks pubescent patches on the antennal tubercles (present in most Anelaphus ), and has the antennae extending beyond the elytral apices by at least three antennomeres in males and by nearly one antennomere in females (antennae are relatively shorter in Anelaphus ).