Anelaphus undulatus ( Bates, 1880 )
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.5048.3.4 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:6BB63C32-4F47-4A27-9826-AE37F1128A22 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5569492 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03D087FA-8D47-B938-FF3A-E84FFEEFFE0E |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Anelaphus undulatus ( Bates, 1880 ) |
status |
|
Anelaphus undulatus ( Bates, 1880) View in CoL
( Figs 29–37 View FIGURES 29–39. 29–33 )
Hypermallus undulatus Bates, 1880: 25 View in CoL ; Lameere, 1883: 18 (cat.); Bates, 1885: 249; Chemsak, 1967: 76 (lect.).
Elaphidion undulatum View in CoL ; Aurivillius, 1912: 89 (cat.); Blackwelder, 1946: 566 (checklist).
Peranoplium undulatum View in CoL ; Linsley, 1961: 41; Chemsak et al., 1980: 30 (distr.); Chemsak et al., 1992: 46 (cat.); Monné, 1993: 60 (cat.); Maes et al., 1994: 20 (distr.); Monné & Giesbert, 1994: 59 (checklist); Noguera & Chemsak, 1996: 399 (cat.); Maes, 1998: 893 (distr.).
Anelaphus undulatum View in CoL ; Lingafelter, 1998: 52; Turnbow et al., 2003: 9 (distr.); Monné, 2005: 197 (cat.); Hovore, 2006: 372 (distr.); Swift et al., 2010: 16 (distr.); Maes et al., 2010: 170 (distr.); Audureau, 2010: 8 (distr.); Noguera et al., 2018: 461 (distr.); Bezark et al., 2019: 120 (distr.); Monné, 2021: 312 (cat.).
Remarks. Hypermallus undulatus was described from Mexico (Trapiche). According to Selander and Vaurie (1962) it is not possible to know where Trapiche is placed in Mexico because there are several villages of this name in the country. Bates (1880) provided a single measure (5 ½ lin. = 11.65 mm), suggesting that he had a single specimen. Even so, Chemsak (1967) designated a lectotype. Currently, the species is known from Mexico (Veracruz, Oaxaca), Honduras, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica ( Monné 2021). However, Bates (1885) also indicated that the species occurs in “Ventanas”, a place in the Mexican state of Durango (Selander and Vaurie 1962), and Hovore (2006) recorded Guatemala.
The material examined expands the geographical distribution to the Mexican states of Quintana Roo and Yucatán. In the typical specimens, the general color in A. undulatus varies from brown to nearly black, the middle elytral pubescent macula may be very well-marked or not, and the distal pubescent macula on the elytra may be very well-marked, as in the lectotype (see photographs on Bezark 2021a) or almost absent ( Fig. 29 View FIGURES 29–39. 29–33 ). At first glance, the female specimen from Yucatán ( Figs 29–33 View FIGURES 29–39. 29–33 ) appears to belong to a different species. This is because the general pubescence is sparser, the scutellum is glabrous, and the white maculae on the elytra are almost absent. However, I hypothesize that the specimen is just an extreme variation of the species. The prothoracic sculpturing is equal to that in the typical specimens, including that on sides of the prothorax ( Figs 33, 35 View FIGURES 29–39. 29–33 ), and the prothoracic and elytral maculae are in the same place, although are almost indistinct on the elytra. In side view, the female from Yucatán ( Fig. 31 View FIGURES 29–39. 29–33 ) also appears to be flatter than the typical specimens ( Fig. 34 View FIGURES 29–39. 29–33 ), but we believe this is also just a variation .
Anelaphus undulatus is very similar to A. subdepressus (Schaeffer, 1904) , but differs especially by the sculpturing on the sides of the prothorax being somewhat coarser and sparser ( Figs 33, 35 View FIGURES 29–39. 29–33 ), and the sparser general pubescence, especially the white setae. In A. subdepressus ( Fig. 39 View FIGURES 29–39. 29–33 ), the sculpturing on the sides of the prothorax is slightly finer and denser ( Fig. 38 View FIGURES 29–39. 29–33 ), and the general pubescence is denser, especially the white setae.
Material examined. MEXICO, Yucatán (new state record): 1-2 km E Chichén Itzá , 1 female, 25-27.V.1984, J.E. Wappes leg. ( FSCA) . Quintana Roo (new state record): no further detail, 2 females, IV.1967, no collector indicated ( MZSP) .
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |
Anelaphus undulatus ( Bates, 1880 )
Santos-Silva, Antonio 2021 |
Anelaphus undulatum
Monne, M. A. 2021: 312 |
Bezark, L. B. & Zack, R. S. & Monzon-Sierra, J. & Landolt, P. J. 2019: 120 |
Swift, I. & Bezark, L. G. & Nearns, E. H. & Solis, A. & Hovore, F. T. 2010: 16 |
Maes, J. - M. & Berghe, E. & Dauber, D. & Audureau, A. & Nearns, E. & Skillman, F. & Heffern, D. & Monne, M. A. 2010: 170 |
Audureau, A. 2010: 8 |
Hovore, F. T. 2006: 372 |
Monne, M. A. 2005: 197 |
Turnbow, R. H. & Cave, R. D. & Thomas, M. C. 2003: 9 |
Lingafelter, S. W. 1998: 52 |
Peranoplium undulatum
Maes, J. - M. 1998: 893 |
Noguera, F. A. & Chemsak, J. A. 1996: 399 |
Maes, J. - M. & Allen, A. & Monne, M. A. & Hovore, F. T. 1994: 20 |
Monne, M. A. & Giesbert, E. F. 1994: 59 |
Monne, M. A. 1993: 60 |
Chemsak, J. A. & Linsley, E. G. & Noguera, F. A. 1992: 46 |
Chemsak, J. A. & Linsley, E. G. & Mankins, J. V. 1980: 30 |
Linsley, E. G. 1961: 41 |
Elaphidion undulatum
Blackwelder, R. E. 1946: 566 |
Aurivillius, C. 1912: 89 |
Hypermallus undulatus
Chemsak, J. A. 1967: 76 |
Bates, H. W. 1885: 249 |
Lameere, A. A. 1883: 18 |
Bates, H. W. 1880: 25 |