Devia prospera ( Erichson, 1839 )

Gusarov, Vladimir I., 2003, Revision of some types of North American aleocharines (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae: Aleocharinae), with synonymic notes, Zootaxa 353 (1), pp. 1-134 : 20-23

Devia prospera ( Erichson, 1839)

( Figs. 22–23 in Lohse & Smetana 1985 (as De. prospera and De. congruens ))

Oxypoda prospera Erichson, 1839: 143 .

Dasyglossa prospera: Kraatz, 1856: 131 (as valid species).

Oxypoda congruens Casey, 1893: 292 .

Dasyglossa prospera: Casey, 1906: 318 (as valid species).

Dasyglossa congruens: Casey, 1906: 318 (as synonym of Das. prospera ).

Dasyglossa prospera: Bernhauer, 1906: 348 (as valid species).

Dasyglossa prospera: Bernhauer, 1907: 402 (as valid species).

Dasyglossa prospera: Fenyes, 1920: 359 (as valid species).

Dasyglossa congruens: Fenyes, 1920: 359 (as synonym of Das. prospera ).

Dasyglossa prospera: Bernhauer & Scheerpeltz, 1926: 766 (as valid species).

Dasyglossa congruens: Bernhauer & Scheerpeltz, 1926: 766 (as synonym of Das. prospera ). Dasyglossa prospera: Lohse, 1974c: 284 (as valid species).

Devia prospera: Moore & Legner, 1975: 396 (as valid species).

Devia congruens: Moore & Legner, 1975: 396 (as synonym of De. prospera ).

Devia prospera: Seevers, 1978: 248 (as valid species).

Devia congruens: Seevers, 1978: 248 (as valid species).

Devia prospera: Muona, 1984: 228 (as valid species).

Devia prospera: Lohse & Smetana, 1985: 294 (as valid species).

Devia congruens: Lohse & Smetana, 1985: 294 (as valid species).

Devia congruens: Lohse et al., 1990: 136 (as valid species).

Devia congruens: Ashe in Newton et al., 2000: 361 (as valid species).

(Other references are omitted)

Type material. Lectotype of Oxypoda prospera (here designated): “Germ. bor. Schüppel”, “5514”, “ prospera Er. Germ. bor. Schüpp” ( ZMHB).

Lectotype of Oxypoda congruens (here designated): ♀, “ Helena Mon.[tana]”, “ Oxyp. [oda] congruens ”, “TYPE USNM 39766” (red label), “CASEY bequest 1925”, “CASEY determ. prospera ­19” ( NMNH) . Paralectotypes: ♂, “Mic.[higan]”, “ congruens PARATYPE USNM 39766” (red label), “CASEY bequest 1925”, “CASEY determ. prospera ­14” ; 2♀♀, “Mich.[igan]”, “ congruens PARATYPE USNM 39766” (red label), “CASEY bequest 1925”, “CASEY determ. prospera ” ; ♀, “: Mon [tana, Helena ( Wickham )]”, “ congruens PARATYPE USNM 39766” (red label), “CASEY bequest 1925”, “CASEY determ. prospera ­16” ( NMNH) .

Additional material. CANADA: Alberta: 18 specimens, Athabasca Riv. at Rocky Riv., 13.viii.1965 (J. & W.Ivie); 1 specimen, Little Smokey River, 6 mi. S Guy, 4.viii.1965 (J. & W.Ivie) ( AMNH); British Columbia: 1 specimen, 9 mi. NW Wonowon, 56º50’N 121º57’W, 3.viii.1968 (W.Ivie) ( AMNH); Labrador: 2 specimens, Carter Basin, willow humus, 7.ix.1958; 1 specimen, ditto but 4.viii.1958; 1 specimen, ditto but moss under willow, 7.ix.1958; 2 specimens, ditto but moss on willow, 17.viii.1958 ( BMNH); Manitoba: ♀, Aweme (N.Criddle) ( NMNH (Casey collection)); 2 specimens, Riding Mt. Nat. Park, Whirlpool River at Rt. 19, 23.vi.1975 (L. & N.Herman) ( AMNH); Ontario: 2 specimens, Ottawa ( NMNH (Casey collection)); ♂, Nepigon, 6.vi.1918 (A.Fenyes) ( NMNH (Casey collection)); CZECK REPUBLIC: 2 specimens, Moravia (Reitter) ( NMNH (Casey collection)); RUSSIA: Magadan Reg.: 7 specimens, 25 km N Magadan, in grass, 3.vii.1985 (Yu.M.Marusik); 10 specimens, 30 km N Magadan, Snezhnaya Dolina, viii­ix.1996 (Yu.M.Marusik) ( SPSU); Ul’yanovsk Reg.: ♂, ♀, Ul’yanovsk, near the Sviyaga River, 5.v.1983 (Isayev) ( SPSU); UNITED STATES: Alaska: 2 specimens, env. of Fairbanks, Chena Ridge, Chena Ridge Rd., 64º50.57'N 147º52.83'W, 100 m, forest litter (V.I.Gusarov), 20.vii.1998 ( SPSU); 1 specimen, Big Delta, 64º09’N 145º50’W, 10.viii.1968 (W.Ivie); 13 specimens, Chatanika, 65º07’N 147º30’W, 13.viii.1968 (W.Ivie); 6 specimens, Fairbanks, 13.viii.1968 (W.Ivie) ( AMNH); California: Sierra Co.: 4 specimens, 6.5 mi. E Sierra City, N. Yuba River, 5600’, 25.vi.1976 (L. & N.Herman); Siskiyou Co.: 2 specimens, 1.5 mi. S McCloud, Soda Springs, 3200’, 1.vii.1976 (L. & N.Herman) ( AMNH); Colorado: Boulder Co.: 6 specimens, Boulder ( NMNH (Casey collection)); Chaffee Co.: ♀, Buena Vista, 7900–8000’, 1–6.vii.1896 (H.F.Wickham) ( NMNH (Casey collection)); Dolores Co.: 5 specimens, near Fish Creek, 27 mi. NE Dolores, 8200’, 24.vii.1976 (L. & N.Herman) ( AMNH); Michigan: Washtenaw Co.: 2 specimen, Ann Arbor ( AMNH); Minnesota: Carlton Co.: 6 specimens, 14 km SW Carlton, Hwy. 35, 46º33.56'N 92º35.98'W, 200 m, in forest litter, Betula , Populus , 10.vii.1999 (V.I.Gusarov) ( SPSU); New Mexico: Colfax Co.: 9 specimens, Cimarron Canyon W of Ute Park, 6.x.1965 (J. & W.Ivie) ( AMNH); Oregon: Klamath Co.: 3 specimens, Kimball State Park, Wood River Spring, 2 mi. N Fort Klamath, 20.vi.1978 (J.Schuh, L. & N. Herman); 3 specimens, Wood River Spring, willow duff, 20.vi.1978 (J.Schuh & L.Herman); 2 specimens, ditto but 2.v.1974 (J.Schuh); 22 specimens, 7.5 mi. NW Klamath Falls, Geary Canal, Howard Bay of Upper Klamath Lake, 19.vi.1978 (J.Schuh, L. & N.Herman) ( AMNH); South Dakota: Custer Co.: 36 specimens, 7 mi. WSW Custer, North Pole Spring, 5500’, 15.vi.1981 (L.Herman) ( AMNH); Utah: San Juan Co.: 1 specimen, Monticello, 10.vi.1987 (L.Herman); Summit Co.: 1 specimen, 10 mi. ESE Kamas, Shingle Cr., 7700’, 10.vi.1981 (L.Herman); 15 specimens, 7 mi. ESE Kamas, Beaver Cr., 7300’, 10.vi.1981 (L.Herman) ( AMNH); Washington: Lewis Co.: 3 specimens, Packwood, Cowlitz Riv., leaf litter, 21–23.vii.1969 (L.Herman) ( AMNH); Wisconsin: Ashland Co.: 4 specimens, 9 mi. SW Marengo, near Beaver Lake, 23.vi.1981 (L.Herman); 4 specimens, ditto but 7.viii.1978 (L. & N.Herman); 8 specimens, 6 mi. S Marengo, near Brunsweiler Riv., 1400’, 7.viii.1978 (L. & N.Herman) ( AMNH); Bayfield Co.: 8 specimens, Bayfield (Wickham) ( NMNH (Casey collection)); Wyoming: Fremont Co.: 12 specimens, 10 mi. SW Lander, Middle Fork Popo Agie Riv., 7100’, 12.vi.1981 (L.Herman); 4 specimens, 16 mi. SW Lander Roaring Fork Creek, 8400’, 12.vi.1981 (L.Herman) ( AMNH).

Diagnosis. See Lohse 1974c (as Dasyglossa prospera ); Lohse et al. 1990 (as De. congruens ).

Discussion. There is some controversy on how many species of Devia occur in North America. Bernhauer and Scheerpeltz (1926) listed Das. prospera as a single valid species of Dasyglossa and considered it as a Holarctic species. They listed Das. angularis (Mäklin in Mannerheim, 1853) and Das. congruens (both described from North America) as synonyms of Das. prospera . Moore and Legner (1975) followed Bernhauer and Scheerpeltz (1926).

Seevers (1978) listed De. congruens and De. prospera as separate valid species, both represented in North America.

Muona (1984) confirmed that De. prospera occurred in North America but did not comment on the status of De. congruens , perhaps because he did not have an opportunity to examine the type of the latter species.

Lohse and Smetana (1985) designated the lectotype of Myrmedonia angularis Mäklin in Mannerheim, 1853 and transferred it to the genus Lypoglossa Fenyes, 1918 in the tribe Athetini . They considered De. prospera and De. congruens as separate species and illustrated the aedeagi for both. Lohse and Smetana (1985) were mostly interested in clarifying the status of My. angularis and provided no information on the localities of the illustrated specimens; nor did Lohse and Smetana discuss the geographical distribution of De. prospera and De. congruens . In a later paper ( Lohse et al. 1990) dealing with the Arctic North American aleocharines Lohse mentioned only De. congruens . Unfortunately, he did not explicitly state whether, in his opinion, De. prospera occurred in North America.

Ashe ( Newton et al. 2000) states that only one species of Devia (De. congruens ) occurs in North America.

My examination of the types of Oxypoda prospera and O. congruens , as well as additional specimens did not reveal any differences between the specimens from the Nearctic and Palaearctic Regions in the shape of the aedeagus and the sclerites of its internal sac. The drawings in the paper by Lohse and Smetana (1985: Figs. 22–23 ) are very schematic and the difference between them results mostly from different extent of the evertion of the internal sac in the two preparations. I consider De. congruens to be a synonym of De. prospera , a species with Holarctic distribution and the single valid species in the genus Devia .

Distribution. Devia prospera has a circumpolar distribution. In North America De. prospera is known from Canada (British Columbia, Northwest Territories ( Lohse et al. 1990), Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario and Labrador) and the United States (Alaska, Washington, Oregon, California, Montana, Wyoming, Utah, Colorado, New Mexico, South Dakota, Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan).

Figures

FIGURES 19–22. Abdominal segment 8 of Paradilacra densissima (Bernhauer) (male, lectotype of Pa. persola Casey (19–20); and female, lectotype of Pa. memnonia Casey (21–22)). 19 — male tergum 8; 20 — male sternum 8; 21 — female tergum 8; 22 — female sternum 8. Scale bar 0.2 mm.

FIGURES 23–30. Genitalia of Paradilacra densissima (Bernhauer) (male, lectotype of Pa. persola Casey (23–28); female, lectotype of Pa. memnonia Casey (29); and female, lectotype of Pa. deserticola Casey (30)). 23 — median lobe, parameral view; 24 — apex of median lobe, parameral view; 25 — median lobe, lateral view; 26 — apex of median lobe, lateral view; 27 — apex of median lobe with details of retracted internal sac, parameral view; 28 — apex of median lobe with details of retracted internal sac, lateral view; 29–30 — spermatheca. Scale bar 0.1 mm (24, 26, 29– 30), 0.2 mm (23, 25, 27–28).