Kaszab, 1940: 953 Egorov, 2004: 649 A review of the genus Oodescelis Motschulsky, 1845 (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae Platyscelidini) from China Bai, Xing-Long Li, Xiu-Min Ren, Guo-Dong Zootaxa 2019 2019-08-15 4656 3 401 430 Kaszab, 1940 Kaszab 1940 [151,971,495,522] Insecta Tenebrionidae Oodescelis GBIF Animalia Coleoptera 6 407 Arthropoda subSpecies punctatissima Acutoodescelis emmerichi  ( Figs. 3–4, 15–16, 43–44, 70)     Oodescelis( Acutoodescelis) emmerichi  Kaszab, 1940: 953;  Egorov, 2004: 649(incorrect spelling as emerichi); 2008: 294; 2009a: 60.   Type material (studied). Syntypes: 1♂( HNHM), NW.- CHINA, S.-SCHENSI //  emmerichi, Reitter// Co-Typus,  Oodescelis emmerichi n. sp.1938, Kaszab ( Figs. 43, 70); 1♀( HNHM), NW.- CHINA, S.-SCHENSI //  emmerichi, Reitter//  emmerichi// Co-Typus,  Oodescelis emmerichi n. sp.1938, Kaszab.  Other material. CHINA: Gansu: 1♀( HNHM), Kansou S. E. // Mi tch’ing ngai // 3.V.19, Licent // Mu- seum Tientsin//  emmerichi//  Oodescelis emmerichiKasz., det. dr. Kaszab; 1 ♂, 1♀( MHBU), Mawu, Min Xian, 8.VII.2009, Guo-Dong Ren, Yi-Bin Ba & Yong Zhou leg.; 1♀( MHBU), Mawu, Min Xian, 2200 m, 8.VII.2009, Guo-Dong Ren, Yi-Bin Ba & Yong Zhou leg.;  Shaanxi: 1♀( MHBU), Taibai Shan Medicine Farm, 12.V.1983, Tong Chen leg., coll. NWAFU; 1 ♂( MHBU), Taibai Shan, Mt. Qinling, 17.VII.2002, Guo-Dong Ren leg.; 1 ♂, 2♀♀( MHBU), Niubeiliang, Zhashui, 1056 m, 22–29.VIII.2011, Xi-Chao Zhu & Yu Zhao leg.; 1 ♂, 1♀( MHBU), Hou- zhenzi, Zhouzhi, 33°50′47″ N, 107°50′00″ E, 1354 m, 27.VIII.2013, Xi-Chao Zhu & Ying Tian leg.  Distribution. China: Gansu( new record), Shaanxi( Kaszab, 1940; Egorov, 2008), Shanxi( Egorov, 2008).  Remarks.  O. emmerichiwas described from South Shaanxiand compared with  O. punctatissima Fairmaire, 1886from Beijing. Later,  O. pyripenis Ren, 1999was described from Shaanxiand compared with  O. emmerichi.  Morphology. Although,  O. emmerichi,  O. punctatissimaand  O. pyripenis, are closely related, they can be easily distinguished based on type specimens and original descriptions. In total, more than 1200 specimens were collected from different localities and examined for this study.  O. emmerichican be separated from the remaining species by having round punctures on pronotum (sometimes merging into very short longitudinal striae at sides), elytral punctures as large as those on pronotum and sparser, metatibiae straight. Meanwhile, variable characteristics were identified in  O. punctatissimaand  O. pyripenis. Lateral margins of pronotum not emarginate before base and punctures merging into long longitudinal striae at sides in many of individuals of  O. punctatissima, which are the typical characters of  O. pyripenis; lateral margins weakly emarginate before base in a paratypeof  O. pyripenis, which is exactly the typical characters of  O. punctatissimaon the contrary. However, parameres emarginate after apex at sides in  O. punctatissima( Fig. 19) whereas parameres almost parallel-sided towards apex (in the original description) in  O. pyripenis. In spite of all, aedeagus of  O. pyripenismuch longer (5.0 mm) than  O. punctatissima(ca. 3.0 mm) caused our suspicion, which also doubted by Egorov (2009a). Unfortunately, the aedeagus of holotypeof  O. pyripenishas been lost. In this case, a unique male paratypewas dissected, and its aedeagus ( 2.6 mmlong and 0.7 mmwide) is most similar to those in  O. emmerichibut differs from the latter in more parallel sides of apex of parameres ( 0.7 mmlong and 0.5 mmwide, Fig. 21).  Geographic distribution.  O. pyripenisis only known from the typelocality in South Mt. Qinling ( Fig. 3).  O. emmerichiis distributed along the Mt. Qinling from South Gansuin Western to South Shaanxiin Eastern ( Fig. 3).  O. punctatissimais widely distributed in Mt. Qinling, Loess Plateau and North ChinaPlain ( Fig. 3). In addition, two specimens of  O. punctatissimafrom Taiwanare not marked on the map.  In molecular study. Results of species delimitation using two different methods (ABGD and GMYC) and three mitochondrial gene fragments (COI, Cytb and 16s) show that  O. punctatissimaand  O. emmerichiare recovered in one clade (C1) with strong support ( Fig. 4). However, additional specimens from Henan, which are most similar to  O. emmerichi, are clustered in a separate clade (C2) with very strong support ( Fig. 4). In conclusion, we suggest that  O. punctatissimaand  O. emmerichishould be treated as two subspecies of  O. punctatissima.  O. pyripenisis not included in the phylogeny, however, it should be treated as a synonym of  O. punctatissimaaccording to morphological study at present time.