Copris (Copris) felschei Reitter, 1892

Ziani, Stefano, 2017, Morphological revision of the western Palaearctic species of the genus Copris Geoffroy, 1762 with three foretibial external teeth (Coleoptera: Scarabaeoidea: Scarabaeidae), Insecta Mundi 2017 (528), pp. 1-26 : 6-8

Copris (Copris) felschei Reitter, 1892

( Fig. 1–7 )

Copris felschei Reitter, 1892: 216 ; Abeille de Perrin 1901: 69; Mollandin de Boissy 1905: 113; Reitter 1906: 730; Gillet 1910: 23 (as junior synonym of C. lunaris ); Gillet 1911: 74; Olsoufiev 1918: 79; Mancini 1926: 94; Winkler 1929: 1027; Balthasar 1935: 69; Balthasar 1963: 334; Iablokoff-Khnzorian 1967: 124 (as junior synonym of C. armeniacus ); Petrovitz 1968: 465; Zaharieva-Stoilova 1970: 40; Petrovitz 1971: 565; Carpaneto 1977: 17; Petrovitz 1980: 599; Baraud 1992: 325 (as junior synonym of C. armeniacus ); Carpaneto et al. 2000: 230 (as junior synonym of C. armeniacus ); Tauzin 2001: 115 (as junior synonym of C. armeniacus ); Kabakov 2006: 95 (as junior synonym of C. armeniacus ); Löbl et al. 2006: 152 (as junior synonym of C. armeniacus ); Maughan and Paulian 2011: 436 (as junior synonym of C. armeniacus ); Marchisio and Zunino 2012: 145 and 155 (footnotes, as junior synonym of C. armeniacus ); Ziani and Sama 2013: 461 (as junior synonym of C. armeniacus ); Král and Bezděk 2016: 168 (as junior synonym of C. armeniacus ).

Type locality. “ Armenia, Sevan” [Sevan, Gegharkunik prov., Armenia].

Type material. Not found (see “Remarks”). Neotype, a male, herein designated, in NMPC.

Distribution. Armenia, Turkey, Iran ( Král and Bezděk 2016; as C. armeniacus ), Azerbaijan ( Kabakov 2006; as C. armeniacus ), Georgia ( Marchisio and Zunino 2012; as C. armeniacus ).

Material examined. TURKEY: Ağri prov., Tahir Mts. , 2100 m, 1.v.1999, G. Fábián & L. Nádai leg. 1 ♂ ( LNCB) ; Ağrı prov., Tahir Geç. , 2200 m, 12.v.2000, Hentschel & Szabó leg. 1 ♀ ( LNCB) ; Ağrı prov., İshak Paşa Sarayı , 44°07’57”E 39°31’10”N, 1960 m, 22-23.iv.1997, D. Král leg. 2 ♂♂ ( DKCP) ; Erzurum prov., Kayaboğaz , 1.vi.1989, A. & I. Rozner leg. 2 ♀♀ ( LNCB) ; Hakkâri prov., Bajirgi [presently Esendere], 25.v.1966, 1 ♂ ( MHNG) ; Van prov., Kayabogaz , 1.vi.1989, A. & I. Rozner leg. 1 ♀ ( LNCB) ; Muş prov., Buglan geç., 1650 m, G. Sama leg. 1 ♀ ( SZCM) . ARMENIA: Gegharkunik prov., Sevan , 2100-2400 m, 10.vi.1959, Kr. Pospíšil leg. 1 ♂ (neotype, NMPC) ; Aragatzotn prov., road to Karilich 2500 m, 28.vi.2001, S. Ziani leg. 1 ♀ ( SZCM) . IRAN: Āzarbāijān-e Gharbi prov., Choplu , 46°48’E 36°32’N, 2000/ 2200 m, 30- 31.v.1999, L. Padovani e M. Malmusi leg. 1 ♂ ( SZCM) ; Āzarbāijān-e Sharqi prov., 43 km SW of Tabriz , 1 ♂ ( MHNG) ; Mazandaran prov., Polour, Alborz Mts. , R. Petrovitz leg. 1 ♀ ( MHNG) ; “ Plateau Persan Occid. / de Zendjan a Ardébil / (alt. moy. 1300 m.)” [Zenyan and Ardabil provinces], 1904, J. De Morgan leg. 1 ♂ ( MNHN) ; Mazandaran prov., 6 km W of Reine , 2600 m, 20.iv.1999, L. Nadái leg. 1 ♂ ( LNCB) ; Mazandaran prov., Alborz Mts., Minokh, Balade , Resteh-ye-Elborz , 2400 m., 51°36’381”E 36°13’409”N, 18.vi.2007, L. Nadái leg. 1 ♂ and 1 ♀ ( LNCB) ; Mazandaran prov., Alborz Mts. , 15 km E Lar-e Polur, 2580 m, 52°06’10”E 35°52’28”N, 12-13.v.2001, G. Fábián & K. Vig leg. 2 ♂♂ and 1 ♀ ( LNCB) ; Mazandaran prov., Alborz Mts. , 5 km W Pel, 2480 m, 51°36’22”E 36°13’23”N, 14.v.2001, at light, G. Fábián & K. Vig leg. 1 ♀ ( LNCB) ; Zanjan prov., 25 km N Zanjan, Kuh-e-Sendan Dagh , 2200 m, 17.vi.2006, L. Nadái leg. at light 1 ♀ ( LNCB) ; Esfahān prov., Mts. Zagros, Fereydūnshahr , 2705 m, 50°06’641”E 32°55’255”N, 4-5.v.2008, T. Hácz, K. Székely & K. Vig leg. at light 1 ♂ and 1 ♀ ( LNCB) .

Variability of cephalic and pronotal armament. More developed males ( Fig. 3 ) bear a clypeal horn subperpendicular to the basal plane of the head in its proximal half ( Fig. 5 ), as long as the interocular distance, situated in the middle of the head. Its apex is clearly dilated and bifurcate/bilobate, and slightly curved backward. Pronotum has a nearly vertical anterior declivity, the upper edge of which bears two blunt, sometimes transverse prominences located close together, separated by the length of one of them, and a vertical feeble crest on each side.

In less developed males ( Fig. 4 ) the cephalic horn is shorter, but always bilobate apically, till to be a slightly elevated point, and the pronotum is almost declivitous anteriorly, with only two anteromedian vestigial gibbosities.

Females ( Fig. 2 ) have a short, transverse, slightly elevated clypeal carina truncate at its summit and feebly acuminate on each side, sometimes reduced to a low crest, and a weak, straight, transverse carina just behind the pronotal front margin.

Aedeagus. Parameres slender, apically rounded in dorsal view ( Fig. 6 ), in lateral view not evenly tapering, more or less enlarged and flat at the top ( Fig. 7 ). Ventral side hairless apically.

Remarks. Reitter (1892) described Copris felschei on the basis of a single male. The original description follows:

“ 2’ Vorderrand des Halsschildes in der Mitte nicht ausgerandet; Unterseite des Halsschildes ohne deutliche Fühlergruben. Halsschild einfach, zum Theile rugulos punktirt.

(…)

3‘ Vorderschienen am Aussenrande nur mit drei Zähnen. Kopfhorn hinten nahe der Basis ohne Gibbosität.

Dem C. lunaris sehr ähulich, aber der Absturz der grossen Mittelerhabenheit des Halsschildes seitlich ohne Höcker beim ♂, dagegen mit einer feinen, erhabenen Längslinie in der Mitte, die Oberfläche desselben ist überall deutlich punktirt, nur in den Gruben glatt, die Flügeldecken sind deutlich länger, sehr fein lederartig gerunzelt, daher matter, die Streifen tiefer, die Zwischenräume leicht gewölbt. Long 23 mm. – Armenien – Mir liegt ein ♂ aus der Sammlung des Herrn Felsche vor. *)

*) C. armeniacus Falderm., Fn Transc. I. 238 ebenfalls aus Armenien, ist mir unbekannt. Der Beschreibung nach ist er von Felschei gewiss verschieden.”

[Anterior margin of pronotum not sinuate at middle; ventral side of pronotum without antennal hollows. Pronotal punctures simple, sometimes rugose. (…) 3’ Anterior tibiae tridentate externally. Cephalic horn with no gibbosity posteriorly, at base.

Very close to C. lunaris , but pronotum, lateral to the medial prominence, without tubercles in ♂, only with a longitudinal line slightly elevated at middle, its superior area distinctly punctate, smooth only in the hollow, elytra clearly longer, very slightly wrinkled, therefore more dull, striae deeper impressed, interstriae weakly convex. Length 23 mm. – Armenia – I have had a ♂ from the collection of Mr. Felsche. *)

*) C. armeniacus Falderm., Fn Transc. I. 238 also from Armenia, is unknown to me. From the description it is definitely different from Felschei].

According to Balthasar (1963), the type specimen of C. felschei was “supposed” to be in Felsche’s collection (MTD). Balthasar examined the presumed type and doubted that it could really be the specimen seen and described by Reitter, since it bears a label “Ganglbauer det.”, in addiction to “ C. felschei Reitt. – Typus ”. That specimen seems to no longer be in MTD. According to Balthasar (1963), the specimen was Copris lunaris .

The HNHM collection does not contain the specimen described by Reitter (O. Merkl, pers. comm.), it only has a single male with a sharp anterolateral tooth separated by a deep hollow from the dorsal prominence. This specimen, even if collected in Armenia and belonging to Reitter’s collection, does not match the original description of C. felschei , so it likely does not bear type labels. MTD houses a male with the labels “Bulghar / Maden”; “ Copris / felschei / Falderman? ”; “coll. C. Felsche / Kauf [purchase] 20.1918”, but this specimen also has two obvious anterolateral laminate prominences and, furthermore, bears a label with a locality placed in the Central Anatolia Region; it cannot be the specimen described by Reitter as Copris felschei .

The name-bearing type specimen of Reitter’s species seems untraceable. I have unsuccessfully looked for it in several museums, namely Berlin, Dresden and Paris, apart from Budapest, where Reitter’s material is supposed to be preserved. The type seems to be lost or destroyed. To define the taxon objectively, clarifying its taxonomic status and also for potential synonymic problems, I think it is necessary to designate a neotype. To satisfy article 75.3.6 of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN 1999), the neotype has to come as nearly as practicable from the original type locality, namely Armenia in this case. For this purpose, I have chosen a specimen studied by Balthasar (1963), collected in Armenia. The specimen, a male, is in NMPC and bears the following labels:

1) White, with black square frame, handwritten in black: “ Copris / felschei Rttr. ”;

2) White, printed in black on both sides; upper side: “USSR Armenia / Sevan 2100-2400m / Kr. Pospíšil lgt.”; underside: “10.6.59”;

3) White, printed in black: “ex coll. V. Balthasar / National Museum / Prague, Czech Republic ”;

4) Red, printed in black: “ Neotype / Copris felschei Reitter, 1892 / S. Ziani des., 2017”.

The specimen is consistent with the original description, and in particular has foretibiae with three lateral teeth. Furthermore, the taxon can be differentiated from the western Palaearctic species with three foretibial teeth by lacking the two strong pronotal anterolateral prominences and by the male cephalic horn dilated at apex and somewhat bifurcate.

Figures

Figures 1–4. Copris felschei Reitter, 1892. 1) Habitus of male (IR-Esfahān prov., Fereydūnshahr). 2) Habitus of female (IR-Esfahān prov., Fereydūnshahr). 3) Head and pronotum of more developed male, posterolateral view (IR-Esfahān prov., Fereydūnshahr). 4) Head and pronotum of less developed male, posterolateral view (IR-Mazandaran prov., 6 km W of Reine, 2600 m). Photographs by A. Degiovanni.

Figures 5–7. Copris felschei Reitter, 1892. 5) Head of male, lateral view (IR-Esfahān prov., Fereydūnshahr).6) Parameres, dorsal view (IR-Esfahān prov., Fereydūnshahr). 7) Parameres, lateral view (IR-Esfahān prov., Fereydūnshahr). Photographs by A. Degiovanni.