Eurynotus capensis (Fabricius)

Lumen, Ryan & Kamdńskd, Marcdn J., 2024, evdsdon of the darkldng beetle genus Eurynotus (Blaptdnae: Platynotdnd % and new records of ovovdvdpary dn ºenebrdonddae, Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 201 (201), pp. 358-386 : 382-383

4. Eurynotus capensis (Fabricius)

( Figs 3E , 5E , 7D , 8K )

Helops capensis Fabricius 1794: 440 .– Fabricius 1801: 161; Thunberg 1827: 16.

Eurynotus capensis ( Fabricius 1794).– Gebien 1938: 414; Koch 1954a: 283; 1954b: 2; 1956: 26; Tschinkel 1978: 315; Iwan 2002: 12; Banaszkiewicz 2006: 63; Kamiński 2016: 236; Bouchard et al. 2021: 184.

= Eurynotus muricatus Kirby 1819: 419 .– Mulsant and Rey, 1854a: 21, 1854b: 165; Lacordaire 1859: 239; Gebien 1938: 414 (syn.); Koch 1954a: 2831954b: 2.

= Tenebrio caffer Thunberg 1821: 163 .– Ferrer 2009: 118 (syn.).

Diagnosis: Eurynotus capensis is one of the most widely dis - tributed (and well -identified) species in collections. Male spe - cimens are particularly easily identified by the modifications to the hindlegs (tibia with large, setose patches or grooves). Additionally, both males and females share a sinuation of abdom - inal ventrite V, which is absent in all other species. The closest species morphologically might be E. thermarum , E. barbosai , and E. graniderma (Fig. 3D, G, J); however, all three are sharply separable by size (length 8–13.5mm; width 4.75–7.5mm vs. E. capensis length 13.75–20 mm; width 7–10 mm) and males pos - sess an additional patch of setae on the midtibia (absent in E. capensis ). Furthermore, E. thermarum has a more strongly nar - rowing epipleura and simple punctation of abdominal ventrite V (wider and with additional large setigerous punctures in E. capensis , respectively). Eurynotus graniderma and E. thermarum both additionally have additional microtuberculation of the elytra and/or pronotum.

Redescription: Length 13.75–20 mm; width 7–10 mm. Head: Finely punctate, punctures spaced closely (≤1 puncture diam - eter) to moderately (~1 puncture diameter). Mentum with ap - ical notch. Eye with weakly impressed circumocular depression. Prothorax: Pronotum finely punctate, punctures separated by ≥1 puncture diameter. Hypomeron nearly smooth, shallowly and finely punctate with, at most, light wrinkling. Pterothorax: Elytral interval X terminates between hind coxae and elytral apex. Epipleuron subequal to elytral intervals 9 + 10. Elytral intervals not obscured by epipleuron in ventral view. Abdomen: Punctate. Abdominal ventrite V finely punctate, punctures sep - arated by ≥1 puncture diameter with larger, setigerous punc - tures intermixed. Females with median apical notch. Legs: Male hind tibiae modified with large tomentose patch. Male pro - and mesotarsi robust with large, ventral, tomentose pads. Females with fore/meso tarsi dilated or not. With wide, uninter - rupted pads on undersides of pro - and mesotarsus when dilated. Undilated female tarsi with glabrous ‘lane’ running between two rows of setae. Male terminalia: Parameres weakly tapered and rounded apically. Female terminalia: Bursa copulatrix conspicu - ously constricted in the middle (bilobate) and without sclerites, sac -shaped spermatheca with finger -like projections.

Material examined: Lectotype, here designated ( ZMUK): ‘Cap: bon: sp Paykull Mus: S:?t; L Helops capensis. F.; red label: TYPE; green square label; ZMUC 00508792 ; QR code label: 001340’.

(See Supporting Information, Appendix S1 for additional ma - terial examined.)

Note: As the original descriptions lack information defining the number or specificity of specimens used, a specimen from the presumed syntype series is here designated as lectotype to fix the taxonomic status of the species.

Distribution: South Africa (Fig. 10).

Figures

Figure 3. Eurynotus sens.nov.species. A, Eurynotus alticola Koch Lectotype; B, E.asperatus Mulsant and Rey Lectotype; C, E. rudebecki Koch syn. nov.of E. asperatus Holotype; D, E.barbosai Koch Holotype; E, E. capensis (Fabricius) Lectotype; F, E.constrictus Koch Lectotype; G, E. graniderma Koch Holotype; H, E. privisolum sp.nov.Holotype; I, E. sulcimargo Koch Lectotype; J, E. thermarum Koch Holotype.

Figure 5. Phylogeny of the subtribe Eurynotina based on morphology. The most parsimonious cladogram obtained in TNT analysis

Figure 7. Phylogeny of morphology, ovovivipary, and female reproductive structures of Eurynotina.A, Eurynotus barbosai, 1st instar larva dissected from bursa copulatrix. B, Biolus omeri, genital tubes. C, B. brunoi, spermatheca and ovipositor.D, E. capensis, genital tubes of two individuals.E, B.analisetosus, sclerite and egg dissected from bursa copulatrix. F, B. granulatus, sclerite from bursa copulatrix.G, E. asperatus, paired sclerites on distal part of bursa copulatrix. H, Oncotus cedrimontis, bursa copulatrix. Abbreviations: c1–c4, lobes of coxities. Numbers in parentheses represent characters and states used in analysis.

Figure 8. Aedeagal morphology of Eurynotina species.A, Biolus analisetosus; B, B.asperipennis; C, B. brunoi sp. nov.; D, B. denticosta; E, B. graafi; F, B. granulatus; G, B. omeri; H, B. sauroides; I, Eurynotus asperatus; J, E.barbosai; K, E. capensis; L, E. graniderma; M, Capidium tuberculatum; N, Oncotus cedrimontis; O, Heteropsectropus amaroides; P, Schyzoschelus africanus. Parameres highlighted red. Scale = 1mm.