Crossotarsus emorsus Beeson, 1937

Lai, Shengchang, Zhang, Ling, Li, You & Wang, Jianguo, 2021, A new species, a new combination, and a new record of Crossotarsus Chapuis, 1865 (Coleoptera, Curculionidae, Platypodinae) from China, ZooKeys 1028, pp. 69-83 : 69

Crossotarsus emorsus Beeson, 1937 Figures 5 , 6

Crossotarsus emorsus Beeson, 1937: 87.

Material examined.

4 males, 1 female (JXAU) China: Yunnan Province, Xishuangbanna Dai Autonomous Prefecture, Jinghong City, Nabanhe River Watershed National Nature Reserve , Guomenshan , ca 1030 m, 22°14'46"N, 100°36'10"E, 27.I.2018, log dissection, host Dalbergia assamica , Shengchang Lai leg. ; 1 male, 1 female (RAB); 1 male (JXAU) China: Yunnan Province, Xishuangbanna Dai Autonomous Prefecture, Jinghong City, Damanmi Village , ca 580 m, 22°02'50"N, 100°48'27"E, 20.I.2018, log dissection, host Cassia siamea , Shengchang Lai leg.

Diagnosis.

C. emorsus is similar to C. terminatus but can be distinguished using the characters given in Table 3 .

Distribution.

Myanmar, Thailand, Laos ( Beaver and Liu 2013; Beaver 2016). New to China (Yunnan).

Host.

The species is recorded from trees in the families Lecythidaceae , Fabaceae , Sterculiaceae and Verbenaceae ( Beeson 1937), and is presumably polyphagous ( Beaver 2016). Host plants recorded here are: Senna siamea (Lam.) H.S.Irwin & Barneby and Dalbergia assamica Benth. ( Fabaceae ).

Molecular data.

The phylogenetic tree for analyzing the evolutionary relationships of 13 taxa including the ingroups ( Crossotarsus species) and the outgroups ( P. contaminatus ) was constructed based on four genes (Fig. 7 ). The BI tree shows the new species ( C. beaveri ) and the new combination ( C. brevis ) forming a clade, with high node support. These group with Schedl’s (1972a) ' Crossotarsi coleoptrati ' ( C. fractus Sampson, 1912, C. squamulatus and C. terminatus ) and cluster with all remaining Crossotarsus species. It confirms that the taxonomic changes and the relationship of C. brevis and C. brevis are correct. It also indicates that C. emorsus , C. fractus , C. squamulatus and C. terminatus should be considered distinct species (as by Beaver and Liu 2013), and not considered synonyms or subspecies ( Schedl 1972a).

Figures

Figure 5. Male of Crossotarsus emorsus Beeson A dorsal view B head C lateral view D declivity. Scale bars: 0.5 mm.

Figure 6. Female of Crossotarsus emorsus Beeson A dorsal view B head C lateral view D declivity. Scale bars: 0.5 mm.

Figure 7. Tree topology resulting from Bayesian analysis of four genes. Posterior probabilities are given on the nodes. New species and new combination in boldface.