Adelopsis portevini, new species

(Figs. 54–61)

Holotype, male (MNHN). Type locality and data: Venezuela: Distrito Capital: Caracas region, Sallé, 1848. Labels: “[?] 9 48 / Sallé 1848 Env. de Caracas // det. G. Portevin, 1902”. Specimen here illustrated. Note: specimen misidentified as Adelopsis ascutellaris (Murray, 1856) — Gnaspini, 1996: 540, and see Notes under A. ascutellaris, above.

Length: Head and pronotum are missing, but we judge that the specimen would measure around 1.6–1.7 mm.

Short Description. Head and pronotum are missing. Data on wings not observed. No posterior projections on male ventrites. Apex of the right lobe of the aedeagus as an upside-down trapezoid with the apical margin almost straight, slightly concave (Figs. 55, 57). Flagellum much shorter (about 1/ 4 in length) than aedeagus (Fig. 55). Proportion aedeagus/elytron = 0.34. Anterior sides of spiculum gastrale of the genital segment widening towards the apex, resulting in a pawn-shaped spiculum gastrale, with the apical width slightly wider than the rounded conic base (Fig. 58). Male mesotibia regularly curved internally (Fig. 60). Female unknown.

Etymology. The name is given in honor of G. Portevin, who examined the specimen, for his large contribution to systematics of cholevines and many other beetle groups.

Distribution. Venezuela: Distrito Capital: known only from type locality.

Taxonomic Remarks. The species can be separated from others in the group by a combination of characters. The flagellum of the aedeagus is very short, which seems to be unusual in the group. The male mesotibia is curved, as in A. azzalii Szymczakowski, 1975 n. stat. and A. brevicollis Szymczakowski, 1975 n. stat., and different of A. ascutellaris (Murray, 1856) and A. ovalis Jeannel, 1936 . The tip of the aedeagus is similar to that of A. orcina Szymczakowski, 1975 n. stat., which also has a curved male mesotibia, but the spiculum gastrale of the genital segment is markedly different between the two species.

Although it is based on a single and incomplete male, we believe that it is appropriate to describe a new species because the specimen is already placed in a collection, with a mistaken identification label, and, if kept this way, it may create more confusion for future taxonomists of the group.