Aneflomorpha crypta Lingafelter, new species

(Fig. 1e, 5e, 7e, 8d, 9d, 10e, 12a,b)

Diagnosis. Antennae carinate (Fig. 9d). Spine of third antennomere distinctly longer than second antennomere, projecting away from antennal plane by less than 45 degrees, acute at apex (Fig. 9d). Pronotum with pronounced punctures unobscured by pubescence, sometimes with small, matte, impunctate, post-median callus (Fig. 5e). Elytral apices truncate to very weakly bidentate (Fig. 8d). Elytral pubescence semitranslucent to white or offwhite, recumbent and recurved, with a few scattered long erect to suberect setae (Fig. 7e). Procoxal cavities nearly closed by broadly expanded prosternal process (Fig. 10e).

Description. Length 7–10 mm. Integument dark rufous to piceous. Head with sparse, short, recurved, recumbent, semitranslucent setae mostly each mostly arising from a separate puncture; a few longer, erect setae present on vertex. Interantennal impression weak; antennal tubercles rounded and not strongly elevated. Gula semi-rugose with sparse punctures and setae. Antennae extending beyond elytral apices by 1–2 antennomeres; last antennomere 1.2 times length of penultimate in male with weak constriction at apical third; slightly shorter and less constricted in female. Antennomere four of both sexes slightly shorter than three and five. Antennomere three with acute apicomesal spine about 1.5 times length of antennomere two, projecting away from antennal plane by less than 45 degrees; smaller acute spine on antennomere four that is shorter than antennomere two; very short spine on antennomere five; dentiform on antennomere six. Antennomeres distinctly carinate dorsomesally on three through five, less pronounced on successive antennomeres. Antennomeres of subequal width subbasally and apically; not produced apicolaterally. Antennae with dense but inconspicuous, short, appressed pubescence with scattered, sparse, longer, suberect setae ventro-mesally and apically on most antennomeres. Pronotum dark rufous; distinctly longer than wide (average 1.18 times longer than wide); slightly wider at middle and evenly rounded at sides except for anterior and posterior constrictions; anterior and posterior ends of equal width; much narrower than base of elytra. Pronotum with sparse, short, recurved, recumbent, semi-translucent to white setae, each mostly arising from a separate puncture and not obscuring them; most punctures pronounced, contiguous; relatively larger and deeper than those of elytral base; vague, small posteromedian impunctate callus sometimes present. Prosternum dark rufous, irregularly punctate at posterior three-fourths and base of prosternal process; smooth and coarsely rugose at anterior fourth. Prosternal intercoxal process narrow between procoxae; arcuately declivous and broadly expanded at apex, nearly closing procoxal cavities posteriorly. Mesosternum dark rufous, sparsely punctate, with anterior collar undivided at middle. Metasternum dark rufous to piceous, shallowly punctate. Elytra dark rufous, together average 3.93 times longer than wide (Fig. 1e); with sparse, uniformly distributed, semitranslucent to white, short, recurved, recumbent setae, each arising out of a separate, distinct, mostly noncontiguous puncture. Elytral apices subtruncate to very weakly bidentate. Scutellum broadly rounded posteriorly, with sparse to moderate appressed white setae. Legs with femora dark rufous, of similar color to elytra and pronotum, tibiae and tarsi slightly lighter in color; short with pro-, meso-, and metafemora progressively longer; metafemora extending to about apex of third ventrite. Femoral pubescence mostly short, sparse, semitranslucent to white, recumbent to suberect, but not recurved. Tibiae with scattered, longer, erect setae in addition to shorter, semi-recumbent setae. Femoral apices rounded mesad and laterad, without spines. Tibiae cylindrical; only slightly enlarged apically; weakly laterally carinate; not dorsally carinate. Abdomen dark rufous to piceous; last ventrite broad and truncate in males; slightly, shallowly notched medially in females.

Etymology. The name crypta refers to its similarity to, and confusion with, A. minuta and small individuals of A. rectilinea .

Discussion. This species is known only from southeastern Arizona. It is most similar to A. minuta Chemsak due to its small size and proportions. The relatively smooth, sparsely punctate and rugose gula (Fig. 12a) distinguishes it from A. minuta which has the gula densely punctate (Fig. 12c). The pronotum of A. minuta has, in most specimens, a prominent, shiny impunctate post-median callus (Fig. 3l) unlike A. crypta which has, at most, a small, matte, post-median impunctate region (Fig. 5e). These two species are further distinguished by the anterior margin of the mesosternum which is undivided in A. crypta (Fig. 12b) and divided in A. minuta (Fig. 12d); however this character is usually visible only through dissection and partial clearing. Specimens of A. crypta have legs rufous and very similar to the overall ventral coloration unlike A. minuta which have pale testaceous legs that are distinctly lighter in color from the venter of the pro- and mesothorax, at least. The spine of the third antennomere in A. crypta is more acute at the apex than specimens examined of A. minuta . The leg color and antennal spine characters should be used with caution since larger series could reveal variability as has been seen in some specimens of other species.

Aneflomorpha crypta is similar in size to small examples of A. cazieri . Most specimens of A. cazieri are easily distinguished by the blunt spine of antennomere three. For those specimens of A. cazieri without a very blunt spine on antennomere three, the presence of a basal antennal carina on antennomere three (Fig. 9d) in A. crypta will distinguished it from A. cazieri which lack antennal carinae (Fig. 9b). The open procoxal cavities of A. cazieri (Fig. 10c) which are closed (or very nearly so) in A. crypta (Fig. 10e) aid in distinguishing them. Both have a similar weakly punctate gular region, but in that region punctation is limited to the anterior half in A. crypta (Fig. 12a) and extends to the posterior margin of the lower eye lobes in A. cazieri (as in Fig. 12c). The anterior margin of the mesosternum is undivided at the middle in A. crypta (Fig. 12b) and divided in A. cazieri (as in Fig. 12d). The pronotum of A. crypta typically has sparse, inconspicuous setae on the disk, exposing large, separate punctures of nearly same size as those on elytral base (Fig. 5e), while in A. cazieri, the pronotum usually has the setae more prevalent, partially concealing punctures that are mostly smaller than those of the elytral base (Fig. 5c).

This species might also be confused with small examples of A. rectilinea, but it can be distinguished by the less strongly carinate antennae (Fig. 9d) which are boldly carinate in A. rectilinea (Fig. 9o) and the less distinctly pubescent pronotum with the punctures exposed (Fig. 5e) unlike most A. rectilinea which have denser pronotal setae that obscure many punctures (Fig. 6q, r). Further, most A. rectilinea have strongly bidentate or weakly bispinose elytral apices unlike A. crypta which have the apices truncate or very weakly bidentate. Another character that distinguishes them is the anterior collar of the mesosternum which is divided in A. rectilinea (Fig. 12e) and undivided in A. crypta (Fig. 12b).

Distribution and biology. All specimens have been collected at ultraviolet and mercury vapor lights in July and August at the base of the Huachuca Mountains in Arizona at an elevation of 1500 meters (pers. obs.). The larval hosts are unknown, however the immediate habitat where adults have been collected is dominated by Emory oaks ( Quercus emoryi Torr.) and Arizona Blue oaks ( Quercus oblongifolia Torr.), and it is presumed that one, or both, of these trees are the larval host plant.

Type material. Holotype: USA: Arizona: Cochise Co., Hereford, 8920 S. Bryerly Ct., N 31°24′14″, W 110°13′52″, 1500m, July 3–4, 2016, uv lights, S. W. Lingafelter (male, USNM) . Paratypes (all USA: Arizona): Cochise Co., Hereford, 8920 S. Bryerly Ct., N 31°24′14″, W 110°13′52″, 1500m, July 3–4, 2016, uv lights, S. W. Lingafelter (1 male, disarticulated in alcohol, SWLC) ; Cochise Co., Hereford, 8920 S. Bryerly Ct., N 31°24′14″, W 110°13′52″, 1500m, 13–15 July 2018, uv lights, J. E. Wappes (1 female, FSCA) ; Cochise Co., Hereford, 8920 S. Bryerly Ct., N 31°24′14″, W 110°13′52″, 1500m, 20 July 2017, uv lights, J. E. Wappes (1 female, SWLC); Cochise Co., Hereford, 8920 S. Bryerly Ct., N 31°24′14″, W 110°13′52″, 1500m, 5 July 2016, uv lights, N. E. Woodley (1 male, SWLC) ; Cochise Co., Hereford, 8920 S. Bryerly Ct., N 31°24′14″, W 110°13′52″, 1500m, 13–15 July 2018, uv lights, J. E. Wappes (1 female, FSCA) ; Cochise Co., Ash Canyon, McFarland′ s, 23 July 2010, Wappes and Sullivan (1 female, SWLC) .