Massicus regius Miroshnikov, 2019

Miroshnikov, A. I., 2019, The longicorn beetle tribe Cerambycini Latreille, 1802 (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Cerambycinae) in the fauna of Asia. 6. A new or little-known species of the genus Massicus Pascoe, 1867, Russian Entomological Journal 28 (3), pp. 269-281 : 270-277

Massicus regius Miroshnikov , sp.n.

Figs 7–10, 12, 15–16, 18–19, 21–22, 24–26, 28–30,

32, 34, 36, 38–39, 42–43, 46–47, 49–50.

Massicus pascoei (non J. Thomson, 1857): Hayashi, 1975: 174, pl. 1, fig. 9 (W Malaysia, Pahang, Cameron Highlands, Tanah Rata); Miroshnikov, 2017: 225, fig. 414 (pronotum).

? Massicus pascoei (non J. Thomson, 1857): Schwarzer, 1926: 14 (Sumatra, Tambang Sawah); Abang, 2003: 28 ( Sarawak); Heffern, 2013: 10 (Borneo).

MATERIAL. Holotype, ♂ (cAM) (Fig. 7), W Malaysia, Pahang, Cameron Highlands, Tanah Rata , 01.2019 (local collector). Paratypes: 1♀ (cAM) (Fig. 9) , same label as holotype; 1♂ ( NHMD), same locality, but undated; 1♂ (Fig. 8) , 4♂, 7♀ (cAM) , W Malaysia, Perak, Tapah Hills , 500–700 m, 01.2019 (local collector); 1♂ ( BMNH), “Malay Penin: Perak F.M.S., ex coll. Perak Mus., C. Warang, 19[?]”, “ Massicus ( Conothorax, Thomson ) pascoei, J. Thomson ”, “ Ex F.M.S. Museum B.M. 1955–354”, “NHMUK 013386253”; 1♂ ( BMNH), “Malay Penin: Perak F.M.S., ex coll. Perak Mus., C. Warang, 19[?]”, “ Ex F.M.S. Museum B.M. 1955– 354”, “NHMUK 013386280”; 1♂ ( IRSN), “ Coll.Nonfried.Borneo ” .

DIAGNOSIS. This new species is very similar to M. pascoei , but differs clearly by the less convex eyes, more weakly developed at least on the ventral side of the head, as in Figs 15–16, 18–19 (cf. Figs 14, 17); the length ratio of isthmus between the lower lobes of the eyes and the transverse diameter of the lower eye lobe, as in Figs 15–16, 18–19 (cf. Figs 14, 17); the obliterated or at least distinctly less coarse sculpture of the submentum, but clearer dense puncturation, as in Figs 15–16, 18–19 (cf. Figs 14, 17); the shorter median groove on the vertex, as in Figs 7–9, 32 (cf. Figs 1–2, 5 , 31); the ratio width of the pronotum at base and at apex in the male, as in Figs 7–8 (cf. Fig. 1 ); the presence of rough, distinct, sparse punctures (besides a small dense puncturation) on several basal antennomeres of the male, starting from antennomere 3; on the average a larger body; the structure of the genitalia, mainly in the male.

Additionally, in Massicus regius sp.n., compared to M. pascoei , the pronotum is usually less convex, with two more or less well-developed spots of dense, light setae (besides numerous sparse setae) on its sides, as in Fig. 10 (cf. Fig. 11); the prosternal process at the very apex and dorsally is usually narrower and, accordingly, the apical tubercles are more closely spaced, as in Figs 24–26, 28–30 (cf. Figs 6 , 23, 27 ); the mesosternal process in the vast majority of cases is narrower, as in Figs 24–25, 28–30 (cf. Figs 6 , 23, 27 ); the antennal tubercles are usually stronger, often transverse, at least so in the male, as in Fig. 12 (cf. Fig. 13); the sculpture of male antennomere 1 is usually coarser, as in Fig. 32 (cf. Fig. 31); the constriction behind the temples in the male is less sharp, as a rule, as in Figs 15–16 (cf. Fig. 14); the apical external angle of the elytra is often more obtuse or even nearly rounded; the recumbent light setation of the submentum is usually more strongly developed, as in Figs 15–16, 18–19 (cf. Figs 14, 17); and the antennae of the female are usually slightly shorter.

The new species can also be compared to M. ivani and M. valentinae , but is distinguished very distinctly from both, partly like from M. pascoei , in the completely different shape of the prosternal process at the apex and dorsally, as in Figs 24–26, 28–30 (cf. Figs 52–54); the wider submentum, its obliterated or at least clearly less coarse sculpture; the less convex pronotum, its somewhat peculiar sculpture and usually also shape; the usually stronger antennal tubercles, often transverse, at least so in the male; the more strongly protruding apical external angle of antennomere 1, the coarser sculpture of this antennomere in the male, including the presence of well-expressed rough and coarse transverse folds in the basal part predominatly on the inner side, as in Fig. 32; the presence of rough, distinct, sparse punctures (besides a small dense puncturation) on several basal antennomeres of the male, starting from antennomere 3; the longer male antennae, as a rule, and, respectively, the more strongly elongated some antennomeres; on the average a larger body; the structure of the genitalia. Besides this, M. regius sp.n. differs from M. ivani by the slenderer and clearly less strongly inflated antennomeres 3–5 of the male in the apical part, while it differs from M. valentinae by the features of the recumbent light setation of the pronotum, including the much less numerous setae in the middle part of the disc between the clearly wider longitudinal stripes.

DESCRIPTION. Body length 55.6–76.2 or 59.2–74.3 mm, humeral width 14.8–19.95 or 17–20.1 mm in male and

11 9

Figs 7–13. Massicus spp. : 7–10, 12 — M. regius sp.n.; 11, 13 — M. pascoei ; 7, 12 — holotype; 8–10 — paratypes; 7–8, 10–13 — males; 9 — female; 7–9 — habitus, dorsal view; 10–11 — pronotum, lateral view; 12–13 — antennal tubercles, dorsal view.

Рис. 7–13. Massicus spp. : 7–10, 12 — M. regius sp.n.; 11, 13 — M. pascoei ; 7, 12 — голотип; 8–10 — паратипы; 7–8, 10–13 –самцы; 9 — самка; 7–9 — обЩий вид, сверху; 10–11 — переднеспинка, сбоку; 12–13 — усиковые бугорки, сверху.

20 21 22

Figs 14–22. Massicus spp. : 14, 17, 20 — M. pascoei ; 15–16, 18–19, 21–22 — M. regius sp.n.; 15 — holotype; 16, 18–19, 21–22 — paratypes; 14–16 — males; 17–22 — females; 14–19 — head, ventral view; 20–22 — tergite 8, dorsal view.

Рис. 14–22. Massicus spp. : 14, 17, 20 — M. pascoei ; 15–16, 18–19, 21–22 — M. regius sp.n.; 15 — голотип; 16, 18–19, 21–22 — паратипы; 14–16 — самцы; 17–22 — самки; 14–19 — голова, сниЗу; 20–22 — 8-й тергит, сверху.

female, respectively, thereby holotype one of largest in length (see also Remarks below). Head, pronotum, scutellum, basal antennomeres, partly legs black; remaining parts mainly combines dark reddish brown and reddish brown tones; sometimes venter partly or mostly, as well as elytra partly black or black-brown.

Head with very well-developed antennal tubercles, as a rule, thereby usually in large specimens, especially of males, transverse ones (while in M. pascoei , antennal tubercles never being transverse); with a distinct, narrow, median groove between bases of antennae, as well as with a wider one between eyes and partly on vertex; genae long; eyes moderately convex, thereby isthmus between their lower lobes 2.3– 3.4 times as long as transverse diameter of lower eye lobe (while in M. pascoei , isthmus between lower lobes of eyes only 1.7–1.9 times as long as transverse diameter of lower eye lobe); submentum very wide, with individual, rough, transverse folds or without ones, but with distinct dense punctures, at least partly so (while in M. pascoei , submentum with individual, coarse or very coarse, transverse folds, but only with weak, partly poorly-visible punctures); neck ventrally and gula with more or less sharp transverse folds; antennae of male much longer than body, reaching beyond apex of elytra by antennomere 7 or rarely 8, in female barely/slightly not reaching the apex of elytra or extending beyond by last antennomere; length ratio of antennomeres 1–11 in male (holotype taken as an example), 50: 10: 78: 55: 72: 87: 88: 86: 74: 71: 153, in female (one of the paratypes taken as an example), 36: 8: 51: 34: 41: 45: 40: 34: 30: 29: 42; antennomere 1 of male with coarse or very coarse sculpture, including transverse folds mainly on inner side and ventrally, in female with more or less rough folds mostly in places, like in male, apical external angle in both sexes very sharply protruding; antennomere 2 very clearly or strongly transverse; in male, antennomere 3 and several subsequent antennomeres, in addition to small dense puncturation, with somewhat peculiar, rough, sparse punctures, to varying degrees distinct, depending on angle of view (while in M. pascoei , antennomere 3 and subsequent antennomeres without rough sparse punctures, only with a small, dense, partly heterogeneous puncturation); apical external angle of antennomeres 6– 10 with a sharp denticle, most developed and sharper on antennomeres 8–10; last antennomere sharpened apically.

Pronotum 1.11–1.21 or 1.2–1.25 times as wide as long, at base 1.2–1.26 or 1.37–1.46 times as wide as apex in male and female, respectively (while in male of M. pascoei , pronotum at base 1.33–1.34 times as wide as apex, at least in specimens I have studied); slightly convex; on disc with a more or less coarse, mainly transverse folds.

Scutellum almost uniformly rounded towards apex, starting from base.

Elytra very clearly narrowed towards apex behind the middle, 2.52–2.59 times as long as humeral width; with a very small dense puncturation; apical external angle rounded or obtusely angular; sutural angle drawn into a more or less long tooth.

35

36

Figs 31–36. Massicus spp. , males: 31, 33 — M. pascoei ; 32, 34, 36 — M. regius sp.n.; 35 — M. trilineatus ; 32 — holotype; 34, 36 — paratypes; 31–32 — head and antennomeres 1–2, dorsal view; 33–36 — tergite 8, dorsal view.

Рис. 31–36. Massicus spp. , самцы: 31, 33 — M. pascoei ; 32, 34, 36 — M. regius sp.n.; 35 — M. trilineatus ; 32 — голотип; 34, 36 — паратипы; 31–32 — голова и 1–2-й членики усиков, сверху; 33–36 — 8-й тергит, сверху.

Figs 37–47. Massicus spp. , male genitalia:37, 41, 45 — M. pascoei ; 38–39, 42–43,46–47 — M. regius sp.n., paratypes; 40, 44 — M. trilineatus ; 37–40 — sternite 8, dorsal view; 41–44 — apical part of dorsal arc (of tergite 9), dorsal view; 45–47 — apical part of penis, ventral view.

Рис. 37–47. Massicus spp. , гениталии самца: 37, 41, 45 — M. pascoei ; 38–39, 42–43, 46–47 — M. regius sp.n., паратипы; 40, 44 — M. trilineatus ; 37–40 — 8-й стернит, сверху; 41–44 — верШиннаЯ часть дорсальной дуги (9-го тергита), сверху; 45–47 — верШиннаЯ часть пениса, сниЗу.

Prosternum in apical one-third tuberculiform elevated, with rough transverse folds, in middle part with coarser, partly irregular folds; prosternal process noticeably or very clearly broadened towards apex dorsally, but in about apical one-quarter or one-fifth usually distinctly narrowed towards very apex dorsally, with two tubercles on sides apically and dorsally; mesosternal process between coxae distinctly or barely wider than prosternal process; metasternum and sternites with a small dense puncturation; metasternum with a sharp median groove; last (visible) sternite at apex in male broadly truncate or almost truncate, in female broadly slightly rounded, sometimes with a poorly-visible emargination; last (visible) tergite at apex in both sexes noticeably or very clearly, sometimes barely emarginate.

Legs moderately long; metatarsomere 1 subequal to metatarsomeres 2 and 3 combined.

Recumbent dense setation, like in M. pascoei , yellow tones, entirely or almost completely covering elytra, antennomeres 1 and 2, legs, most of head dorsally and venter, on pronotal disc forming two very wide, symmetrical, longitudinal strips on sides; head, pronotum on disc and laterally, most of antennomeres in apical part, metasternum, apex of abdomen, legs mainly on trochanters with more or less long, erect or suberect, sparse or individual, thin setae.

Genitalia (Figs 21–22, 34, 36, 38–39, 42–43, 46–47, 49–50). In male, tergite 8 broadly rounded or subtruncate apically, without emargination, as in Figs 34, 36, sternite 8 with a moderately deep oblong-oval emargination apically, as in Figs 38–39, dorsal arc (tergite 9) with more or less weakly developed, few, erect setae at apex, as in Figs 42–43 (while in male of M. pascoei , tergite 8 clearly emarginate at apex, as in Fig. 33, sternite 8 apically quite deeply and angularly emarginate, as in Fig. 37, dorsal arc (tergite 9) with well-developed, relatively numerous, erect setae apically, as in Fig. 41); apical part of penis, compared to M. pascoei (Fig. 45), clearly wider, somewhat peculiarly narrowed towards the very apex, as in Figs 46–47; each paramera mainly on inner half predominantly in basal part with a strong, oblique, pocket-shaped, peculiar elevation, as indicated by arrows in Figs 49–50, but along external margin almost the entire length with a narrow bordure, as in Figs 49–50 (while in M. pascoei , each paramera on inner half without oblique pocket-shaped elevation, as in Fig. 48, but on external side mostly in middle part with a bordure being obtusangularly broadened towards inner side, as indicated by arrows in Fig. 48) (in M. pascoei , at least structure of parameres and dorsal arc (tergite 9) most similar to those of M. trilineatus (Pic, 1933) , Figs 44, 51; see also Figs 35, 40 for comparison); tergite 8 of female moderately narrowed towards apex, as in Figs 21–22 (while in M. pascoei , tergite 8 of female in apical part strongly narrowed towards apex, as in Fig. 20) (see also Remarks below).

REMARKS. Among all males in the type series only one male is relatively small, while the vast majority of males there are 66.3 mm and larger, up to the maximum length.

In addition to the above-mentioned differences in the genitalia between M. regius sp.n. and M. pascoei , it must be noted that these species are also distinguished clearly in structure of the endophallus. However, I would have preferred to consider this question at a later date.

ETYMOLOGY. The formation of the name of this new species is related to its magnificent habitus and one of the largest sizes among the congeners.

DISTRIBUTION. Peninsular Malaysia; Borneo;?Sumatra.

Figures

Figs 1–6. Massicus spp., habitus and labels: 1–2, 4–6 — M. pascoei; 3 — M.?pascoei (from “Malacca”); 4–6 — holotype (photographs by Azadeh Taghavian); 1–3, 5 — dorsal view; 6 — ventral view. Рис. 1–6. Massicus spp., обЩий вид и Этикетки: 1–2, 4–6 — M. pascoei; 3 — M.?pascoei (“Malacca”); 4–6 — голотип (фотографии АЗаде ТагвьЯн); 1–3, 5 — сверху; 6 — сниЗу.

Figs 23–30. Massicus spp., pro- and mesosternal processes: 23, 27 — M. pascoei; 24–26, 28–30 — M. regius sp.n., paratypes; 23–26 — males; 27–30 — females. Рис. 23–30. Massicus spp., отростки про- и меЗостернума: 23, 27 — M. pascoei; 24–26, 28–30 — M. regius sp.n., паратипы; 23– 26 — самцы; 27–30 — самки.