Copris (Copris) pueli Mollandin de Boissy, 1905

Ziani, Stefano, 2017, Morphological revision of the western Palaearctic species of the genus Copris Geoffroy, 1762 with three foretibial external teeth (Coleoptera: Scarabaeoidea: Scarabaeidae), Insecta Mundi 2017 (528), pp. 1-26 : 8-10

Copris (Copris) pueli Mollandin de Boissy, 1905

( Fig. 8–13 )

Copris pueli Mollandin de Boissy, 1905: 110 ; Bedel 1911: 42 (footnote); Gillet 1910: 28; 1911: 77; Winkler 1929: 1027; Balthasar 1929: 107; Schatzmayr 1930: 111; Porta 1932: 413; Balthasar 1935: 70; Normand 1936: 192; Paulian 1941: 59; Mackauer 1958: 49; Schaefer 1958: 46; Paulian 1959: 74; Balthasar 1963: 334; Dellacasa 1968: 139 (footnote); Zaharieva-Stoilova 1970: 42; Petrovitz 1971: 565; Baraud 1977: 29; Paulian and Baraud 1982: 241; Baraud 1985: 256; Kabakov 2006: 88; Löbl et al. 2006: 152; Maughan and Paulian 2011: 436; Král and Bezděk 2016: 169; Tonelli et al. 2016: ii.

Type locality. “Bou-Berak (Kabylie)” [ Algeria].

Type material. Eleven syntypes, 10 ♂♂ and 1 ♀, by original designation. Four probable syntypes were examined from the MNHN: 3 ♂♂ and 1 ♀.

Distribution. Algeria, Tunisia ( Král and Bezděk 2016).

Material examined. ALGERIA: “ Bou Berak / Kabjlie L. Puel ”, 4 ♂♂ and 1 ♀ (syntypes, MNHN) ; “ Bou Berak / Kabjlie L. Puel ”, 2 ♂♂ and 1 ♀ ( MNHN) ; “ Bou Berak / Kabjlie L. Puel ”, 3 ♂♂ and 6 ♀♀ ( MNHN) ; “ Bou Berak / Kabjlie L. Puel ”, 1 ♂ ( MHNG) ; “ Bou Berak ”, 1 ♂ and 1 ♀ ( MHNG) ; “ Algeria / Reitter”; “Copris / pueli”; “coll. C. Felsche / Kauf 20.1918”, 2 ♂♂ ( MTD) ; “ Massif des Mouzaia ”, 2 ♂♂ and 2 ♀♀ ( MNHN) ; “les Mouzaïa ”, 1 ♂ and 1 ♀ ( MNHN) ; “ Mouzaïa ”, 1 ♀ ( MHNG) ; “ Algerie / Mt. Edough ”, 50 ♂♂ and 1 ♀ ( MNHN) ; “ Algeria / Reitter ”, 1 ♂ ( MNHN) ; “ Gde Kabylie / Forêt d’Akfadou, 9 km W / Adekar , 1300 m ”, 17.v.1988, Besuchet, Löbl and Burckh. leg. 2 ♂♂ ( MHNG) ; “ Gde Kabylie / Forêt d’Akfadou, 22 km E / Yakouren , 1050 m ”, 16.v.1988, Besuchet, Löbl and Burckh. leg. 1 ♂ ( MHNG) ; Ben Atala , vi.1985, 1 ♀ ( SZCM) ; Tizi Ouzou prov., Afkadou forest , 1000/ 1400 m, 2.vi.1986, G. Sama leg. 1 ♂ and 1 ♀ ( SZCM) . TUNISIA: Jendouba prov., Aïn Draham , 7.vi.1982, Sláma leg. 1 ♀ ( SZCM) ; Jendouna prov., Aïn Draham , 9.iv.1995, S. and R. Ziani leg. 3 ♂♂ and 1 ♀ ( SZCM) ; Jendouba prov., Ain Essobh , 5.xi.2013, W. Ben Aba leg. 1 ♂ ( SZCM) .

Furthermore, thanks to the Internet discussion site FEI (Italian Entomologists Forum), I learned of the following unpublished Algerian record: Mila province, Hamala, ii.1985, 1 ♂ and 1 ♀.

I have also examined 1 ♂ and 1 ♀ without locality labels, both in the MNHN.

Variability of cephalic and pronotal armament. More developed males ( Fig. 8 ) bear a very long, tapering, slightly backward-curved clypeal horn situated forward of the middle of the head and as long as the maximum head width. Anteromedian pronotal prominence is transversely truncated, with upper edge of the declivity rather narrow but a little dilated at its front margin which forms a straight carina interrupted in the middle by a longitudinal groove, 1/5 the width of the whole carina in dorsal view. On each side of the dorsal elevation there is a deep groove, the outer margin produced obliquely upward and forward as a pyramidal prominence ( Fig. 10 ).

The few less-developed males examined ( Fig. 11 ) have a shorter horn, as long as the interocular distance but never female-like, and pronotum with the same structures but less pronounced, although always clearly visible.

Females ( Fig. 9 ) have a more or less elevated, transverse clypeal carina truncate at its summit and feebly bicuspid, and a slight, straight, transverse pronotal carina just behind the front margin, with two very low and vague tumescences on either side. In less developed females these tumescences are obliterated.

Aedeagus. Parameres in lateral view slender ( Fig. 13 ). Apex blunt, truncate in dorsal view, and ventrally with some short hairs ( Fig. 12 ).

Remarks. Mollandin de Boissy (1905) in the original description of C. pueli stated: “Les onze individus (10 ♂, 1 ♀, Collections Puel, J. Clermont, Delfieu et de Boissy) que j’ai eus sous les yeux proviennent tous de Bou-Berak (Kabylie), où ils ont été pris par M. Louis Puel (de Béziers)” [The eleven specimens (10 ♂, 1 ♀, Puel, J. Clermont, Delfieu et de Boissy collections) that I have had under my eyes are all from Bou-Berak (Kabylie), where they were collected by Mr. Louis Puel (de Béziers)].

I have examined 18 specimens with a label “Bou Berak / Kabjlie L. Puel”, 17 in MNHN and 1 in MHNG. It is not possible, however, to deem all these specimens as included in the type series, because unfortunately their number and sex (13 ♂♂ and 5 ♀♀) do not coincide with number and sex (10 ♂♂ and 1 ♀) of the specimens used by Mollandin de Boissy to describe the species. This notwithstanding, among these 18 specimens I noticed four critical specimens belonging to the Puel collection and preserved in the MNHN, that according to the labels could be part of the type series.

The first specimen, a male, bears the following labels:

1) White, with black square frame, printed in black “Bou Berak / Kabilie L. Puel”;

2) White, printed in black “Coll. Puel”;

3) Red, with black double square frame, printed in black “Co-Typus” [letters “Co” are handwritten];

4) White, printed in black “MUSÉUM PARIS / 1936 / COLL. A. BOUCOMONT”.

The second specimen, a male, bears the following labels:

1) White, with black square frame, printed in black “Bou Berak / Kabilie L. Puel”;

2) White, handwritten in black “Pueli”;

3) White, printed in black “Coll. Puel”;

4) Red, with black double square frame, printed in black “ Typus ”;

5) White, printed in black “MUSÉUM PARIS / 1936 / COLL. A. BOUCOMONT”.

The third specimen, a male, bears the following labels:

1) White, with black square frame, printed in black “Bou Berak / Kabilie L. Puel”;

2) Red, with black double square frame, printed in black “ Typus ”;

3) White, handwritten in black “ Copris / Pueli / de Boissy”;

4) White, printed in black “Coll. Puel”;

5) White, printed in black “MUSÉUM PARIS / 1936 / COLL. A. BOUCOMONT”.

The fourth specimen, a female, bears the following labels:

1) White, with black square frame, printed in black “Bou Berak / Kabilie L. Puel”;

2) White, handwritten in black “ Copris / Pueli / ♀ ”;

3) White, printed in black “Coll. Puel”;

4) Red, with black double square frame, printed in black “ Typus ”;

5) White, printed in black “MUSÉUM PARIS / 1936 / COLL. A. BOUCOMONT”.

On the basis of these labels, I believe that these four specimens can collectively constitute the name-bearing type of the taxon, therefore they can be considered syntypes, part of the material seen by Mollandin de Boissy. I added to every specimen a red label printed in black: “ Syntype / Copris pueli / Mollandin de Boissy, 1905 / S. Ziani vidit, 2017”. In my opinion there is no need to designate a lectotype, the taxonomic status of the species is well known and the nomenclature does not run the risk of instability.

In the collections of the MNHN there are also 52 specimens, 51 ♂♂ and 1 ♀, of C. pueli collected in Algeria, at Edough Mountain (Djebel Edough, Province of Annaba and Skikda). One male is very different from all the others, with the anterolateral pronotal teeth very weak, the upper ridge of the anteromedian declivity that bears two small and blunt prominences separated at middle by a hollow equal to their diameter, and the cephalic horn slightly dilated and feebly but clearly bifurcate at the extremity, all characters shared by males of C. felschei . On the other hand, the specimen has elytral striae very crenulated and parameres subquadrate and ciliate at the top, as in C. pueli . However, the abdomen was deliberately glued to the prothorax and the pubescence on the inner base of the pronotum and elytra is clearly of two different shades of dark yellow, which is why it is reasonable to suspect that the prothorax and the abdomen belong to two different species.

Schatzmayr (1930) assumed that this species was present in the mountains of Sicily, but this assumption has never been confirmed.

Figures

Figures 8–11. Copris pueli Molland de Boissy, 1905. 8) Habitus of male (TN-Jendouba prov., Ain Draham). 9) Habitus of female (TN-Jendouba prov., Ain Draham). 10) Head and pronotum of more developed male, posterolateral view (TN- Jendouba prov., Ain Draham). 11) Head and pronotum of less developed male, posterolateral view (syntype, DZ- Kabylie). Photographs by A. Degiovanni.

Figures 12–13. Copris pueli Molland de Boissy, 1905. 12) Parameres, dorsal view (DZ-Mt. Edough). 13) Parameres, lateral view (DZ-Mt. Edough). Photographs by A. Degiovanni.