Anthelephila interposita, Kejval & Cz, 2010

Kejval, Zbyněk & Cz, Domažlice, 2010, Studies on the genus Anthelephila (Coleoptera: Anthicidae) 11. New species and records from India, Sri Lanka, Nepal and Oman, Acta Entomologica Musei Nationalis Pragae 50 (1), pp. 189-234 : 203-204

Anthelephila interposita sp. nov.

( Figs. 31–35 , 98 )

Type locality. India, Karnataka state, Kemmangundi, 1200–1500 m a.s.l.

Type material. HOLOTYPE: J, ‘S. India: Karnataka, Kemmangundi , 1200–1500 m, 11–16.xi.1977 Zool. Mus. Copenhagen Exp. // Formicomus sp. det. D. Telnov, 1998’ ( ZMUC).

Description (male, holotype). Body length 3.5 mm. Body piceous black, elytra with brownish tinge in apical half; legs, antennae and palpi dark brown to brown black, tarsi somewhat paler, with reddish tinge.

Head 1.3 times as long as wide, nearly evenly rounded posteriorly; tempora distinctly narrowing posteriad, their posterior angles obsolete; base distinctly differentiated from short neck. Eyes medium-sized, moderately convex. Dorsal surface less glossy, conspicuously corrugated, its punctation less distinct, obscured by corrugation. Setation pale to whitish, generally rather long, mostly subdecumbent, with scattered, more raised to erect setae. Antennae moderately enlarged in terminal third; antennomere X 1.6 times and antennomere XI 2.3 times as long as wide.

Pronotum 1.4 times as long as wide, slightly narrower than head across eyes, nearly evenly rounded anteriorly, narrowing posteriad and rather shallowly impressed laterally shortly before base in dorsal view; pronotal disc evenly shaped, without impressions or bulges, its outline more or less convex in lateral view. Dorsal surface less glossy with rather even, coarse longitudinal corrugation and with several transverse wrinkles before base, its punctation somewhat obscured by corrugation; postero-lateral impressions not wrinkled and adjacent basal area somewhat rugose and more coarsely punctate. Setation as that on head.

Mesosternum simple, with lateral arms rather narrow and less arcuate; metasternum simple.

Elytra ovoid, 1.6 times as long as wide, conjointly rounded to subtruncate apically; humeri and postscutellar impression absent. Surface rather glossy, distinctly but sparsely punctate; punctation rather evenly spaced. Setation generally longer and somewhat more raised than that on head, with numerous conspicuously long and erect setae.

Metathoracic wings strongly reduced.

Profemora simple; protibiae with short edge, projecting into small subapical protuberance on inner side; penultimate tarsomere flattened and widened distally, with terminal tarsomere articulated dorsally near its base in all tarsi. Setation normally developed.

Abdominal characters as in Figs. 31–35 ; middle lobe of sternum VII moderately impressed medially; tergum VII moderately produced and subtruncate apically; apical portion of tegmen 0.6 times as long as basal piece, with simple apex.

Differential diagnosis. Anthelephila interposita sp. nov. resembles members of A. imperatrix species-group ( KEJVAL 2007) by the reduced hind wings, less obvious sexual dimorphism (nearly simple fore legs in males) and presence of paired incisions on the exposed posterior margin of the prosternum. It is, however, more closely related to A. rufopicea (Fairmaire, 1896) and A. kanheri Kejval, 2002 , as suggested by the clear similarity of male abdominal characters; see Figs. 41–53 in KEJVAL (2002b). It can be easily distinguished from the latter two species by the combination of piceous black body, ovoid elytra lacking humeri and simple male profemora, and by many detailed differences in the morphology of male sternum VII, sternite VIII and aedeagus.

Etymology. From Latin interpositus (standing inbetween); refering to its somewhat intermediate position in the species classification (see above).

Distribution. India (Karnataka).

Figures

Figs. 31–35. Anthelephila interposita sp. nov., holotype (male). 31 – sternum VII; 32 – sternite VIII in dorsal view (one half); 33 – prong of sternite VIII in lateral view; 34 – tergite VIII; 35 – apical portion of tegmen of aedeagus. Scale = 0.2 mm:A – Figs. 31, 34; B – Figs. 32, 33, 35.

Figs. 93–100. Anthelephila spp., body in dorsal view (males, holotypes). 93 – A. adivasi sp. nov.; 94 – A. bacillipes sp. nov.; 95 – A. bheri sp. nov.; 96 – A. comes sp. nov.; 97 – A. insperata sp. nov.; 98 – A. interposita sp. nov.; 99 – A. kailasa sp. nov.; 100 – A. kali sp. nov.

Figs.41–46. Anthelephila kali sp. nov., holotype (male). 41 – profemur and tibia; 42 – sternum VII; 43 – sternite VIII in dorsal view (one half); 44 – prong of sternite VIII in lateral view; 45 – tergite VIII; 46 – apical portion of tegmen of aedeagus. Scale = 0.2 mm: A – Fig. 46; B – Fig. 43; C – Figs. 42, 44; 0.5 mm: D – Figs. 41, 45.

Figs. 47–52.Anthelephila lubopetra sp.nov., holotype (male). 47 – profemur and tibia; 48 – sternum VII; 49 – tergum VII; 50 – sternite VIII in dorsal view (one half); 51 – tergite VIII; 52 – apical portion of tegmen of aedeagus. Scale = 0.5 mm: A – Figs. 49, 51; 0.2 mm: A – Figs. 50, 52; B – Fig. 48; C – Fig. 47.

Figs. 53–58.Anthelephila maharani sp.nov., holotype (male). 53 – profemur and tibia; 54 – sternum VII; 55 – tergum VII; 56 – sternite VIII in dorsal view (one half); 57 – tergite VIII; 58 – apical portion of tegmen of aedeagus. Scale = 0.5 mm: A – Fig. 55; 0.2 mm: A – Figs. 56, 58; B – Fig. 54; C – Figs. 53, 57.