Dylobolus rotundicollis Thomson, 1868

Santos-Silva, Antonio & Androw, Robert A., 2022, New species, new synonymies, a new rank, and new records in Desmiphorini, Saperdini, and Hemilophini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae), Insecta Mundi 2022 (938), pp. 1-14 : 11

Dylobolus rotundicollis Thomson, 1868

( Fig. 28–29 )

Dylobolus rotundicollis Thomson 1868: 196 . Mecas ruficollis Horn 1878: 44 . Mecas laticeps Bates 1881: 204 . Mecas mexicana Bates 1881: 204 . Mecas vitticollis Casey 1913: 363 . Pannychis atripennis Bates 1885: 427 ; Aurivillius 1923: 599 (cat.); Blackwelder 1946: 626 (checklist). New synonym. Pannychina atripennis ; Gilmour 1962: 138; 1965: 646 (cat.); Chemsak et al. 1992: 161 (checklist); Monné and Giesbert

1994: 293 (checklist); Monné 1995: 70 (cat.); Martins and Galileo 1998: 128; Monné 2005: 619 (cat.); Monné and

Hovore 2006: 291 (checklist); Monné 2022: 1061 (cat.). Pannychella atripennis ; Noguera and Chemsak 1996: 408 (cat.; wrong genus). Note: For full references on Dylobolus rotundicollis see Monné (2022), Tavakilian and Chevillotte (2021), and Monné and

Nearns (2022).

Remarks. Thomson (1868) described Dylobolus to include D. rotundicollis Thomson, 1868 (translated): “Body elongated, cylindrical; frons convex; antennae simple, slender, slightly surpassing middle of the body, 11-segmented, scape short, subclavate, antennomere III the longest, IV slightly longer than V, VI–XI gradually shorter; prothorax quadrate, rounded laterally, without lateral tubercles; elytra cylindrical, elongated, apex obliquely lunate; prosternal process and mesoventral process laminiform; legs short, robust, subequal; tarsal claws slightly divergent, very bidentate basally.” Bates (1881) considered Dylobolus as a junior synonym of Mecas . Later, Chemsak and Linsley (1973) revalidated Dylobolus and considered it as a subgenus of Mecas . As mentioned in the introduction, Souza et al. (2020) considered Dylobolus as a genus different from Mecas .

Gilmour (1962) described Pannychina in Aerenicini to include Pannychis atripennis Bates, 1885 : “Elongate, subcylindrical. Frons subquadrate. Prothorax subcylindrical, not rotundate laterally. Antennae slightly shorter than body, basal segments fringed beneath. Elytra smooth, not costate; apices obliquely truncate against the suture. Mesotibiae without a dorsal sulcus; tarsal claws fissile.” Martins and Galileo (1998), based on the opinion of Lane (1974), transferred Pannychina to Phytoeciini .

The definition of Mecas (Dylobolus) by Chemsak and Linsley (1973) suggests that Pannychina atripennis is just one of the variations of Dylobolus rotundicollis . The shape of the prothorax in P. atripennis , not rounded laterally, probably is just a variation, since there are specimens of D. rotundicollis with the prothorax not distinctly rounded laterally. Based on the photographs of the types of both species at our disposal, original descriptions, and redescriptions, and synonymies proposed by Chemsak and Linsley (1973), Pannychis atripennis (= Pannychina atripennis ) is also a junior synonym of Dylobolus rotundicollis . In fact, comparing the photograph of the holotype of Mecas vitticollis Casey, 1913 (see Lingafelter et al. 2022) with the holotype of Pannychis atripennis ( Fig. 29 ), it is possible to see that they are nearly identical, although the sides of the prothorax are slightly more rounded in the former. This reinforces that this feature used by Gilmour (1962) in Pannychina is just a morphological variation in D. rotundicollis . Therefore, Pannychina is a junior synonym of Dylobolus , currently, a genus allocated in Hemilophini, because their type species are synonyms (each of these genera has only the type species included in it).

Figures

Figures 25–32. Pannychis and Pannychina spp. 25) Pannychis callicera Bates, 1881, holotype female. 26) Pannychis sericea Thomson, 1864, left side, not type, identified as male, right side, holotype. 27) Pannychis ducalis Bates, 1881, type. 28) Pannychina atripennis (Bates, 1885), holotype. 29–32) Elytral apex: 29) Pannychis atripennis, holotype; 30) Pannychis callicera, holotype female; 31) Pannychis ducalis, type; 32) Pannychis sericea, holotype. All by Jesus Santiago Moure.