Heterometrus Ehremberg, 1828

Lourenço, Wilson R., Qi, Jian-Xin & Zhu, Ming-Sheng, 2005, Description of two new species of scorpions from China (Tibet) belonging to the genera Mesobuthus Vachon (Buthidae) and Heterometrus Ehrenberg (Scorpionidae), Zootaxa 985, pp. 1-16 : 9

Genus Heterometrus Ehremberg, 1828

Historical account

After the description of the genus Heterometrus Ehrenberg , several new species were added by other authors. The first attempted revision was proposed by Pocock (1900). In this he defined several primary characters for the identification of the species. More recently, Couzijn (1981) proposed a complete monographic revision, including results of his dissertation with detailed keys. Next, Tikader and Bastawade (1983) published redescriptions and keys for the Indian scorpion fauna, and described two new species of Heterometrus .

At the beginning of this study we attempted to use the monograph of Couzijn (1981) to compare and identify the material from Chinese Tibet. Our analysis lead us to the species Heterometrus (Chersonesometrus) fastigiosus Couzijn, 1981 , described from Indian Himalaya, but which was also thought to exist in Nepal. The male holotype (SMF II/8886/ 228) and two female paratypes (MNHN­RS­0123, 0145) of this last species were examined by one of us (WRL) and noticeable differences were observed between it and the new species. We also realized that most characters proposed by Couzijn (1981) were completely inadequate for precise identification. A new revision of the genus Heterometrus was published by Kovařík (2004). Among other taxonomic decisions, this author regarded H. (C.) fastigiosus as a synonymy of Heterometrus bengalensis (C.L. Koch, 1841) , a species usually distributed further to the south of India. Seven new species were also described. The examination of the male holotype of H. (C.) fastigiosus revealed that the specimen was in fact a female. Apparently Kovařík (2004) was not aware of this mistake done by Couzijn (1981).

We agree with Kovařík’s (2004) opinion of the usefulness of the characters selected by Couzijn (1981) to define the species of Heterometrus . Moreover Kovařík’ decision to place the different subgenera of Heterometrus within a single nominal genus seems to be a step in the right direction. However, the rest of Kovařík’ (2004) revision and his attempt to define the taxonomic status of the various species, especially the new ones, lacks clarity. New species are either poorly illustrated or not even illustrated, and only large color photographs of the dorsal aspect are provided. These, however, are of little use in absence of detailed drawings.

We went through Kovařík’ (2004) monograph and attempted to compare our material with Heterometrus nepalensis Kovařík, 2004 , the first species to be found and described from Nepal. The male holotype, deposited in his personal collection was not available for examination, but comparative analysis of the original description, based mainly on color patterns and morphometric measurements, leads us to the conclusion that two different species are involved.