Oodes (Oodes) integer Semenov, 1889

Guéorguiev, Borislav & Liang, Hongbin, 2020, Revision of the Palaearctic and Oriental representatives of Lachnocrepis LeConte and Oodes Bonelli (Coleoptera: Carabidae), with special account on Chinese species, Zootaxa 4850 (1), pp. 1-89 : 52-54

15. Oodes (Oodes) integer Semenov, 1889

( Figs 20 A–H, Table 4)

Oodes integer Semenov, 1889: 293 (type locality: ‘Wladiwostok (Sidémi)’ [БеЗверхοвο, in Russian; Bezverkhovo, in English], Russian Far East, Russia]).

References.

Oodes (Oodes) prolixus [= integer ]: Jakobson 1906: 311; Csiki 1931: 1010.

Oodes prolixus [= integer ]: Reitter 1908: 186.

Oodes integer: Habu 1956: 85 , 98 (taxonomic notes on O. helopioides tokyoensis ); Lafer 1973: 847–849 (taxonomic notes, diagnostic features, distribution and identification key); Kim et al. 1994: 130; Bousquet 2003: 445; Sundukov 2013: 190; Sundukov & Makarov 2016: 143, 146, 157 (Kunashir Island, southern Kuril Islands); Bousquet 2017: 636.

Oodes (Oodes) integer: Lafer 1989: 204–205 (diagnostic features, identification key and distribution); Kryzhanovskij et al. 1995: 158 (distribution in ex-USSR).

Lachnocrepis prolixa [= integer ]: Lorenz 1998: 304; Lorenz 2005: 325.

Type material. Oodes integer Semenov. Two syntypes present in ZIN. Not examined.

Other material examined. RUSSIA: P r i m o r s k y K r a i: 1♂ (partly immature), 1♀, ‘Russland, Ferner Osten, Primorski Kraj, Chankajski rajon Kommisarovka river, S Kommisarovo, 07.08.1994 lgt.: Schnitter / Grill’ (cDW).

TME: 2 specimens. TGE: 1♂, 1♀.

Diagnosis. Oodes integer is distinguished from other species of Oodes except O. tokyoensis by the lack of longer and denser, yellowish hairiness on the ventral surface of meso- and metatarsomeres 2–4, rather large size, 10.0– 10.5 mm ( Table 4), prosternal process with apex elongate and narrow, and discontinuous granulation in elytral marginal furrow. The species is most similar to O. tokyoensis (see “Notes”). Oodes helopioides and O. integer differ further from each other in PW/PL, EL/EW, and the shape of the prosternal process apices ( Figs 18J , 20E ).

Description. Habitus. Specimens of large size (BL: 10.1–10.3 mm, BW: 3.7–4.0 mm), with subovate and subconvex body ( Figs 20A, C ). Ratios and measurements. See Table 4. Color and luster. Body dark brown to black, pronotum laterally and posterolaterally rufous, antennae, palpi and legs rufopiceous. Integument moderately shiny, without iridescence. Punctuation. Dorsal surface without punctuation; proepisternum and sides of prosternum with punctuation rare and more scattered than that on sides of metasternum, meso- and metepisternum; proepisternum, abdominal ventrites 1–5 at sides, and ventrite 6 at apex finely rugose. Head. About half as wide as pronotum (see Table 4). Mentum tooth with apex rounded and distinct paramedial border ( Fig. 20D ). Thorax. Pronotum ( Fig. 20B ) with sides rounded toward posterior angles (PW/PB: 1.04–1.05); maximum width in posterior fifth; laterobasal impressions indistinct; base slightly sinuate; anterior angles rounded, moderately projected anteriorly. Prosternum with median longitudinal sulcus very shallow; prosternal process bordered throughout, with slightly pointed apex ( Fig. 20E ). Metepisternum longer than wide (MA/MM: 0.91–0.92), with lateral margin concave posteriorly and coadunation with epipleuron short, located anteriorly ( Fig. 20F ). Elytra. Apical sinuation moderate, well-defined. Basal margin distinct laterally, forming a minute denticle at shoulder, disappearing medially at level of stria 3. Granulation in marginal furrow discontinuous, interrupted in second fourth. Parascutellar striola and other striae punctate; stria 7 as distinct as stria 6. Intervals 1–7 rather flat, interval 8 subconvex. Legs. Metacoxal basal sulcus extending to lateral fifth. Male mesotibia moderately modified, with slight swelling in apical half. Protarsomeres 1–3 of male moderately dilated, with second segment barely wider than long (W/Lp2:1.05). Male genitalia. Not examined (see “Notes”). Female genitalia. Basal gonocoxite with six lateroapical setae arranged in line. Apical gonocoxite with single, very small dorsolateral ensiform seta, without nematiform setae ( Fig. 20G ). Spermatheca coiled apically ( Fig. 20H ).

Distribution. Eastern Palaearctic Region: Russian Far East, Korea ( Kim et al. 1994). Not yet recorded from China, but Lafer (1989) suggested it may occur in the northeastern part of the country.

Notes. The species is most similar to O. tokyoensis in the shape of prosternal process (compare Habu 1956: 86, fig. 18; Lafer 1973: 848, fig. 6; present work, Fig. 20E ) and general structure of gonocoxite which lack nematiform setae (compare Habu 1956: 101, fig. 35 and present work, Fig. 20G ). Besides, Lafer (1973, figs 9, 10) and Habu (1956, fig. 23a, d) provided drawings of the median lobes of O. integer and O. helopioides tokyoensis , respectively, which show great similarity. Without comparison and access to the type specimens of both species, it is difficult to define the diagnostic features of either.

The specimens examined from the Kommisarovka River are partly teneral, with appendages seemingly lighter than in mature specimens. The genitalia of the male specimen are not chitinized, so it was not possible to study them.

The original name of the village Bezverkhovo was Ust Sidimi (‘Усть–Сидими’, or ‘Сидими’, in Russian), named for Sidimi Bay on which coast the village was founded. Sundukov (2013: 190) stated that the type locality of O. integer is ‘Wladiwostok’ thus omitting the more precise ‘Sidémi’ (= Bezverkhovo); the latter located 35–40 km southwest of Vladivostok City.

As Lafer (1973) supposed, Jakobson (1906) was the first to formally propose the synonymy of Oodes integer with Lachnocrepis prolixa . Soon afterwards, Reitter (1908) proposed the same synonymy independently. However, Habu (1956) did not accept this identity, based on similarities of O. integer with O. helopioides tokyoensis . Lafer (1973) found and investigated the type specimens of O. integer and listed their labels: ‘Сидеми 12 IX 87 (οк. Владивοстοка). М. Янкοвский // Oodes integer m. ♂ [♀]. Тур А. Semenov // Oodes prolixus Bates. sec. Heyden // coll. Semenov-Tian-Shansky’. Most likely the labels added by Lucas von Heyden were the reason for the confusion of O. integer with L. prolixa .

Figures

FIGURE 18. Oodes helopioides (Fabricius, 1792) (A–B: Oodes parallelus Motschulsky, 1858, lectotype and its labels; C–D: Oodes parallelogrammus Motschulsky, 1858, lectotype and its labels; E–F: Oodes thessalonicensis Schatzmayr, 1909, lectotype and its labels; G: Oodes helopioides var. fiorii Porta, 1923, lectotype and its labels; H: male specimen, Bulgaria, Slānčev brjag; I: female specimen, Strandza Mt., Indipaskha; J: male specimen, France, les Collettes).A, C, E, G–H: habitus; B: left metacoxa; D: right metepisternum and metacoxa; F: left protarsomeres; I: mentum; J: prosternal process. Scale lines = 2 mm (Figs A, C, E, G–H); = 1 mm (Figs B, D); = 0.5 mm (Figs F, I–J).

FIGURE 20. Oodes integer Semenov, 1889, Russia, Primorski Kraj, Kommisarovka River (A–B: male specimen; C–H: female specimen).A, C: habitus B: pronotum and head; D: mentum; E: prosternal process; F: left metepisternum and metacoxa (arrow shows lateral end of metacoxal basal sulcus); G: left gonocoxite, ventral view; H: spermathecal complex and gonocoxites, ventral view. Scale lines = 2 mm (Figs A, C); = 1 mm (Figs B, D, F); = 0.5 mm (Figs E, H); = 0.2 mm (Fig. G).