Hadrocnemus aulicus ( Fabricius, 1781 ) Geiser & Bezděk, 2019

Geiser, Michael & Bezděk, Jan, 2019, On the Identity of Crioceris aulica Fabricius, 1781, a Member of Malachiidae Misplaced in Chrysomelidae (Coleoptera) and Consequent Taxonomical Changes in Atelechira Lacordaire, 1848, The Coleopterists Bulletin 73 (1), pp. 179-184 : 180-182

Hadrocnemus aulicus ( Fabricius, 1781) , new combination

Crioceris aulica Fabricius 1781: 154 .

Crioceris aulica: Fabricius 1787: 89, 1792: 9 , 1801: 458; Schoenherr 1808: 274.

Cryptocephalus (Crioceris) nitidus Gmelin 1790: 1722 (unnecessary replacement name for Crioceris aulicus Fabricius, 1787 ).

Melyris aulicus: Olivier 1792: 655, 1808 : no. 21: 4.

? = Apalochrus hilarus Evers 1987: 28–29 , pl. V, fig. 1.

? = Hadrocnemus hilarus ( Evers, 1987) : Mayor 2004: 92.

Type Material Examined. The lectotype of C. aulica ( BMNH, here designated) bears a handwritten label (presumably not written by Fabricius

or Banks himself): “Cr. Aulica / Fabr. Sp. Ins. n. 29” ( Figs. 1–5 ). This type is missing part of its abdomen and its left antennomeres 6–11 and has a small hole in the pronotum. Also, part of the underside is obscured by a large drop of brownish glue, and its left hind wing is sticking out and slightly damaged. This specimen is here designated as lectotype in accordance with International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (1999), Art. 74, to clarify the identity of this species and avoid potential confusion in case additional syntypes are discovered. No additional specimens were listed by Zimsen (1964); however, there are cases in other groups of Coleoptera where Zimsen’ s survey of Fabricius types turned out to be incomplete (e.g., Sekerka and Barclay 2014).

The holotype of A. hilarus (MFNB) has the printed labels “Casa- / mance”, “ HOLOTYPUS Ƌ ”, [handwritten] “IFAN-1948 / EX COLL. / E. FLEUTIAUX”, and [partially handwritten in A. Evers’ handwriting) “ Apalochrus / hilaris Evers / A. Evers det. 1985” ( Figs. 6–7 ). The specimen is in good condition.

A detailed description of A. hilarus was provided by Evers (1987), who also included it in his key to the African species of Apalochrus Erichson, 1840 (now Hadrocnemus Kraatz, 1895 ) and added a schematic drawing of the mesotibia. Because of an earlier type species designation, previously overlooked by Evers and other malachiid workers, the genus name Apalochrus now has to be applied to a rather small group of Palearctic species, while the much larger, primarily Afrotropical genus “ Apalochrus ” sensu Evers is now called Hadrocnemus ( Mayor 2004) . A thorough revision of the African species of Hadrocnemus is currently needed. Given the results of some recent revisions of some Asian taxa within this tribe ( Tshernyshev 2015, 2016), it seems likely that the generic definitions established by Evers (1987) cannot be maintained. As a result, this species might need to be re-classified in the future.

Members of Hadrocnemus and related genera are characterised by a combination of secondary sexual characters of the males. The genus is defined by the presence of complex modifications (“Excitatoren”) on the mesotibiae, serrate or filiform (not pectinate) antennae, and a comb-like appendage on the second protarsomere. Fortunately, the syntype of C. aulica is a male, so its placement in Hadrocnemus (sensu Mayor 2004) is unambiguous. Within the genus, H. aulicus is characterized by the complex shape of the male mesotibia ( Fig. 4 ), along with the presence of an elevated, bright yellow bulge above each antennal insertion on the frons ( Fig. 3 ). These characters were found to be identical in both the type of C. aulica and that of A. hilarus . However, the dorsal color pattern, also rather characteristic for this species, seems to show some differences between A. aulicus and A. hilarus . In the type of A. hilarus , the bluish metallic humeral macula of each elytron is rather extensive and conjoined with the postmedian macula in one point ( Fig. 6 ), while the humeral macula in the type of C. aulica is much smaller and widely separated from the postmedian macula. Also, the metallic color in the type of C. aulica is green rather than blue as in A. hilarus . These differences might be interpreted as infraspecific variability, but as long as no other specimens are known, A. hilarus is here provisionally maintained as a valid but closely related species, pending further revision.

In light of this discovery, it appears unlikely that the type of C. aulicus actually originated from “Caput Bona Spei”. Hadrocnemus is very poorly represented in South Africa and presumably absent from the Cape Region ( Evers 1987). Species of Hadrocnemus are, however, well represented in West Africa, and several relatives of the above species are also found in the area. There is no reason to question the correctness of the type locality of A. hilarus , the Casamance region of Senegal. Fabricius (1781) indicated “Dr. Forster” as the collector of the C. aulica specimen. This suggests that it was collected by Johann Reinhold Forster or his son Georg on Capt. James Cook’ s second voyage around the world. Interestingly, it appears their ship only stopped twice along the African coast: once on the Cape Verde Islands and then again at the Cape of Good Hope ( Forster 1778). No Hadrocnemus species is currently recorded from Cape Verde, so the full distribution of the species remains a mystery until more material is found.

Family Chrysomelidae Latreille, 1802

Figures

Figs. 1–7. Crioceris aulica, male syntype: 1) Dorsal habitus; 2) Lateral habitus; 3) Head, frontal view; 4) Right mesotibia; 5) Original label. Apalochrus hilarus, male holotype: 6) Dorsal habitus; 7) Original labels.