Neosisyphus rubrus ( Paschalidis, 1974 )

Daniel, Gimo M., Davis, Adrian Lv., Sole, Catherine L. & Scholtz, Clarke H., 2020, Taxonomic review of the tribe Sisyphini sensu stricto Mulsant, 1842 (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Scarabaeinae) in southern Africa, including new species descriptions, Insect Systematics & Evolution 51 (1), pp. 1-61 : 56-57

Neosisyphus rubrus ( Paschalidis, 1974) ( Figs. 29 , 30B )

Montreuil 2015b: 20, 28

Sisyphus rubrus Paschalidis 1974

Paschalidis, 1974b: 299

Type locality: Castle Gorge ( South Africa)

Size: Male: length: 9.0–6.0 mm; width: 4.1–3.0 mm. Female: length: 8.7–6.0 mm; width: 4.0–3.0 mm.

Diagnosis: N. rubrus closely resembles N. macrorubrus ( Paschalidis 1974) . However, the species can be distinguished by the lateral protrusions at the apices of the parameres in N. rubrus ( Fig. 30B ), which are lacking in N. macrorubrus .

Examined type material

Holotype: (♂ SANC) / SOUTH AFRICA, TVL, Castle Gorge (42 mi W Pretoria), 15.v.1971, leg: Bornemissza & Insley /; /283a/, /ex coll. CSIRO, Div. Entomology; S. African Station /; red label / Holotype ♂, Sisyphus rubrus spec. nov, det. KM Paschalidis, 1974 /, white label /SANC TYPH 00723/.

Paratypes: (5 ♂, 1 ♀ SAM) / RHODESIA, Sebakwe /, / Sisyphus rubripes Pér , det. Dr. Haaf, 1954/. (15♂, 15 ♀ SANC) SOUTH AFRICA, TVL, Castle Gorge (42 mi W Pretoria), 15.v.1971, leg: Bornemissza & Insley. (2♂, 1 ♀ SANC) SOUTH AFRICA, OFS, Vredefort (20 mi S), 03.xi.1971, leg: Bornemissza & Kirk. (3♂, 5 ♀ SANC) SOUTH AFRICA, CP, Mafeking, 22.v.1972, leg: Davis. (2♂, 1 ♀ SANC) SOUTH AFRICA, SE. TVL, Bergen, 1.v.1972, leg: Kirk. (1♂, 5 ♀ SANC) SOUTH AFRI- CA, N. TVL, Louis Trichardt (11 mi N), 14.xii.1971, leg: Olsen. (2♂, 1 ♀ SANC) SOUTH AFRICA, CP, Aliwal North (22 mi S), 4.iii.1971, leg: Aschenborn, (50♂, 47 ♀ SANC) SOUTH AFRICA, E. TVL, Bosbokrand (5 mi N), 6.ii.1971, leg: Olsen. (2♂, 3♀ SANC) SOUTH AFRICA, Transkei, Umtata (10 mi N), 19.v.1971, leg: Aschenborn. (1♂, 2♀ SANC) MOZAMBIQUE, Vila Pery, (5 mi E), 10.iv.1971, leg: Bornemissza & Aschenborn. (1♂ SANC) SOUTH AFRICA, Vryburg, N. CP, (15 mi E, Leeuwrand Farm), 7.x.1972, leg: Kluge .

Sisyphus rubripes Péringuey, 1901 : Lectotype: (♂ SAM) /Natal, Durban/; / Sisyphus rubripes Pér , det. Dr. Haaf, 1954/; red label / Sisyphus rubripes Pér , Lectotype, det: E. Haaf, 1954/.

Examined non-type material: See Supplementary information.

Distribution: N. rubrus is distributed in upland and coastal, moist grassland and savanna ( Davis et al. 1999) in southeast Africa ( Fig. 31 ).

Conservation status: N. macrorubrus and N. rubrus are listed as Least Concern species on the IUCN Red Data List ( Davis 2013 e, f).

Remarks: It has been suggested that on grounds of gender, the spelling of N. rubrus and N. macrorubrus should be changed to N. ruber and N. macroruber respectively (Davis et. al. 1999; Davis et al. 2008, Davis 2013 e, f). It should be noted that; “ ruber ” is a masculine classical adjective, which has been used in a rare case as an alternative form of ‘ rubrus ’ (Brown, 1954). However, the original description of each species does not specify the etymological meaning of the specific name ‘ rubrus ’ ( Paschalidis, 1974 b). According to ICZN (article: 31.2.2) “Where the author of a species-group name did not indicate whether he or she regarded it as a noun or as an adjective, and where it may be regarded as either and the evidence of usage is not decisive, it is to be treated as a noun in apposition to the name of its genus”. Therefore, rubrus and macrorubrus must be treated as indeclinable names.

Figures

Fig. 29. Images of the habitus of the rubrus species-group, arrow showing the main diagnostic feature for the species-group: A. N. macrorubrus; B. N. rubrus.

Fig. 30. Images of the aedeagi of the rubrus species-group: A. N. macrorubrus; B. N. rubrus.

Fig. 31. Distribution map for the rubrus species-group.