Euryphlegon parallelus, , Otto, 2017

Otto, Robert L., 2017, A revision of Phlegoninae (Coleoptera: Eucnemidae), with descriptions of a new genus and four new species, Insecta Mundi 2017 (569), pp. 1-27 : 15-17

publication ID	https://doi.org/ 10.5281/zenodo.5169054
publication LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:pub:5265BC7E-7076-4225-B659-678E3990B42C
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/2F512934-1A4E-4B9D-8270-FFC010825559
taxon LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:act:2F512934-1A4E-4B9D-8270-FFC010825559
treatment provided by	Felipe
scientific name	Euryphlegon parallelus
status	sp. nov.

Treatment

Euryphlegon parallelus sp. nov.

Fig. 38–42 View Figures 38–42

Diagnosis. Apically divergent pronotal hind angles distinguish E. parallelus from E. jacqueschassaini . Reddish-brown dorsum and Central American distribution distinguish it from E. degallieri .

Type Material. Male holotype: “ BELISE: Orange Walk Dist., Rio Bravo Conserv. Area, (rd. to Archeological site), 17°50’56”N, 89°02’34”W, 25-IV to 5-V-1996, C. Car-,lton #101, flt intcpt trap #1” / “ HOLOTYPE:, Euryphlegon , parallelus, Otto , det. R.L. Otto, 2016” (♂ handwritten behind species name on label) [red printed label]. Holotype deposited in SEMC. GoogleMaps

Paratypes. 2 ♂♂, 6 ♀♀: BELIZE: 1 ♀, “ BELISE: Orange Walk Dist., Rio Bravo Conserv. Area, (rd. to Archeological site), 17°50’22”N, 89°01’12”W, 18–25-IV-1996, C. Carlton, ex: flight intercept trap #1” / “ PARATYPE:, Euryphlegon , parallelus, Otto , det. R.L. Otto, 2016” (♀ handwritten behind species name on label) [yellow printed label] ( SEMC); 1 ♀, “ BELISE: Orange Walk Dist., Rio Bravo Conserv. Area, (rd. to Archeological site), 17°50’49”N, 89°02’37”W, 25–30-IV-1996, C. Car-,lton #065, flt intpt trap #1” / “ PARATYPE:, Euryphlegon , parallelus, Otto , det. R.L. Otto, 2016” (♀ handwritten behind species name on label) [yellow printed label] ( SEMC); 1 ♀, “ BELISE: Orange Walk Dist., Rio Bravo Conserv. Area, (rd. to Archeological site), 17°50’56”N, 89°02’34”W, 25-IV to 5-V-1996, C. Car-,lton #101, flt intcpt trap #1” / “ PARATYPE:, Euryphlegon , parallelus, Otto , det. R.L. Otto, 2016” (♀ handwritten behind species name on label) [yellow printed label] ( SEMC); COSTA RICA: 1 ♀, “Prov. Guanacaste, Est. Mariza, 600m, Lado O Vol(ano) Orosi, Malaise trap, 1988, L-N 326900, 37300” / “ PARATYPE:, Euryphlegon , parallelus, Otto , det. R.L. Otto, 2017” (♀ handwritten behind species name on label) [yellow printed label] ( INBC); 2 ♀♀, “Prov. Guanacaste, Est. Mariza, 600m, Lado O Vol(ano) Orosi, Malaise trap, 1990, L-N 326900, 37300” / “ PARATYPE:, Euryphlegon , parallelus, Otto , det. R.L. Otto, 2017” (♀ handwritten behind species name on label) [yellow printed label] (1, INBC; 1, JMC); 1 ♂, “Prov. Puntarenas, Est. Sirena, P.N. Corcovado, Malaise, Mar-Jun. 1991, L-N 270500, 508300” / “ PARATYPE:, Euryphlegon , parallelus, Otto , det. R.L. Otto, 2017” (♂ handwritten behind species name on label) [yellow printed label] ( JMC); 2 ♀♀, “Prov. Guanacaste, Est. Mariza, 600m, Lado O Vol(ano) Orosi, Malaise trap, 1992, L-N 326900, 37300” / “ PARATYPE:, Euryphlegon , parallelus, Otto , det. R.L. Otto, 2017” (♀ handwritten behind species name on label) [yellow printed label] (1, INBC; 1 JMC); 1 ♀, “COSTA RICA Guan., 3km SE R. Naranjo, 15–19 Mar 1993, F.D. Parker” / “Collection of the Global, Eucnemid Research Project, (Robert L. Otto)” (green framed white label) / “ PARATYPE:, Euryphlegon , parallelus, Otto , det. R.L. Otto, 2016” (♀ handwritten behind species name on label) [yellow printed label] ( GERP); 1 ♀, “Prov. Guanacaste, Est. Murziélago, 8 km S.O. Cuajiniquil 18 Feb–25 Mar 1994, E. Araya, Malaise, L-N 32000, 347200 #2832” / “ PARATYPE:, Euryphlegon , parallelus, Otto , det. R.L. Otto, 2017” (♀ handwritten behind species name on label) [yellow printed label] ( IMBC); 1 ♂, “Prov. Puntarenas, Est. Agujas, Sendero Ajo, 300m, Malaise, 19–24 Mar 1997, M. Lobo, L-S 276750, 526550, #45574” / “ PARATYPE:, Euryphlegon , parallelus, Otto , det. R.L. Otto, 2017” (♂ handwritten behind species name on label) [yellow printed label] ( INBC). Paratypes are deposited in GERP, INBC, JMC and SEMC.

Description. Male holotype: Length 7.0 mm, width 2.0 mm. Body color uniformly dark reddish brown ( Fig. 38 View Figures 38–42 ).

Head: Subspherical, with median carina extending from vertex to frons just above base of frontoclypeal region; surface shiny; punctures deep, closely spaced; eyes protuberant.

Antennae: Capitate, about 2/3 of body length; lateral carina present on antennomeres IX–X; antennomere XI weakly asymmetrical; dark reddish brown ( Fig. 39 View Figures 38–42 ).

Pronotum: Dark reddish brown; surface shiny, with somewhat elongate, yellow recumbent setae; punctures deep, closely spaced, almost rugose; as long as wide, with large, sharp, apically divergent hind angles; sides subparallel; disc convex; base sinuous.

Scutellum: Dark reddish brown, apically darker, somewhat shiny, setose, punctures shallow, subtriangular and distally rounded.

Elytron: Convex, elongate, gradually narrowed from humeri to apices; conjoined tightly at apex; somewhat shiny, with elongate, yellow recumbent setae; dark reddish brown; length 5.0 mm, width 1.0 mm at humeri; humeri with striae indicated as smooth lines; disc with punctate striae; interstices flattened, transversely rugose; apices ( Fig. 40 View Figures 38–42 ) with two rows of deep, round cavities in deep, parallel grooves near elytral suture.

Legs: Femora, tibiae and tarsi reddish brown; surface somewhat shiny; punctures shallow, with yellow recumbent setae.

Venter: Dark reddish brown; surface somewhat shiny, with elongate, yellow recumbent setae; punctate, except anterior 3/4 near lateral side of hypomeron.

Variation. The female paratypes (e.g. Fig. 41 View Figures 38–42 ) are 8.0–9.0 mm long and 2.0– 2.5 mm wide, all of them longer than and just as wide as or wider than the holotype. Females differ from the male holotype with respect to the antennal and pronotal structures. The terminal three antennomeres of the females are shorter than those of the holotype. Antennomere XI is as long as either IX or X ( Fig. 42 View Figures 38–42 ). The pronotal surface is more punctate than rugose in two of the four paratypes. The remaining two paratypes have pronotal surface features similar to the holotype.

Distribution. This species is known from several localities within the conservation area in northwestern Belize and a single locality in Costa Rica.

Biology. Four of the five specimens were taken from flight intercept traps placed near a subtropical forest. Larvae and pupae are unknown.

Etymology. The specific epithet is derived from the parallel-sided pronotum in both sexes.

Discussion. The placement of Euryphlegon posed an interesting challenge. The new genus is superficially similar to one of the Phlegon species and the macraulacine Euryptychus . There is a number of characters distinguishing Euryphlegon from both Phlegon and Euryptychus . Series of short, specialized spines along the lateral sides of the protibiae opposite of the apical spur ( Fig. 43 View Figures 43–51 ) are present in Euryptychus . Clusters of elongate, apical spines opposite of the protibial apical spur ( Fig. 44 View Figures 43–51 ) are present in Euryphlegon . These structures are absent ( Fig. 45 View Figures 43–51 ) in Phlegon .

Other characters include tarsomere IV simple in Euryptychus , weakly lobed in Euryphlegon and strongly lobed in Phlegon . Straight sex combs on protarsomere I are present in male Euryptychus , but absent in both Phlegon and Euryphlegon . Setae and simple spines are present along the lateral sides of the meso- and metatibiae ( Fig. 46–47 View Figures 43–51 ) in both Phlegon and Euryphlegon . Setae and transverse rows of spines are present along the lateral sides of the meso- and metatibiae ( Fig. 48 View Figures 43–51 ) in Euryptychus . The protibiae bear two apical spurs in Phlegon and one apical spur in both Euryphlegon and Euryptychus . A lateral spine is present just below the attachment of the pedicel on the scape ( Fig. 49 View Figures 43–51 ) in Euryphlegon , but is absent ( Fig. 50–51 View Figures 43–51 ) in both Phlegon and Euryptychus .

The lobed tarsomere IV, along with the absence of sex combs on protarsomere I and presence of setae and single spines along the lateral sides of the meso- and metatibiae, are shared between Phlegon and Euryphlegon . Only one character, presence of one apical spur on the protibiae, is shared between Euryphlegon and Euryptychus .

Euryphlegon was further compared against eight species within five genera in two other macraulacine tribes, Echthrogasterini and Orodotini , available for study. Within the tribe Echthrogasterini , Euryphlegon was compared against several species of Hemiopsida Macleay , Henecocerus angusticollis Bonvouloir and Monrosina anelastoides Cobos. The lateral spine just below the attachment of the pedicel on the scape is absent in all species of Hemiopsida and H. angusticollis . A lateral spine was observed in M. anelastoides . Muona (1993) was uncertain about the placement of Monrosina within the tribe due to the unavailability of the type. Based on the presence of the lateral spine on the scape, Monrosina is perhaps best placed in the tribe Orodotini rather than retaining the genus in Echthrogasterini .

Euryphlegon was further compared against two species of Ceratogonys Perty and Eudorus irianiensis Lucht. A lateral spine on the scape is present in all species of Ceratogonys and E. irianiensis . A cluster of elongate spines at the apices of the protibiae opposite the spur is evident in both species of Ceratogonys and E. irianiensis . These structures are also present in M. anelastoides . Based on the presence of these external character traits shared amongst these species present in the tribe, Euryphlegon is therefore placed in the tribe Orodotini .