Cephennium ericinum, Assing & Meybohm, 2021

Assing, Volker & Meybohm, Heinrich, 2021, The Cephennium fauna of Turkey and the Middle East (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae: Scydmaeninae), Beiträge Zur Entomologie = Contributions to Entomology 71 (1), pp. 1-28 : 17

Cephennium ericinum spec. nov.

urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:F56474A9-C330-4019-BD58-B566E66CF58E

( Figs 6–7 , 36–37 , Map 2 )

Type material examined: Holotype : “TR [22] – Ordu, 15 km S Ordu, S Kabaduz, 990 m, mixed forest, 40°48'59N, 37°54'28E, 30.VII.2006, M. Schülke / Holotypus  Cephennium ericinum sp. n., det. V. Assing 2020” (cAss) . Paratypes: 2  [one with aedeagus lost], 3 : same data as holotype (cAss, MNB) .

Etymology: The specific epithet is an adjective derived from the Latin noun ericius (hedgehog) and alludes to the spinose internal structures of the aedeagus.

Description: Rather large species; body length 1.6–1.8 mm; length of pronotum 0.47–0.53 mm; width of pronotum 0.60–0.67 mm; length of antennae approximately 0.7 mm. Habitus as in Fig. 6 . Colouration: body dark-reddish to dark-brown.

Eyes reduced to minute rudiments without ommatidia ( Fig. 7 ). Pronotum approximately 1.25 times as broad as long, broadest in anterior half, and strongly convex in cross-section; lateral margins straight in posterior half. Elytra without tomentose impressions anteriorly; humeral carinae distinct, approximately as long as the combined length of the basal 3–4 antennomeres.

: protibia subapically curved and somewhat excavate and flattened on inner side; aedeagus ( Figs 36–37 ) 0.44–0.45 mm long; ventral process gradually narrowed apicad, of acutely triangular shape in ventral view; internal sac with long, weakly sclerotized, and apically spinose structures; parameres short and thin, not sinuate, apically extending approximately to middle of ventral process, and with rather short and thin apical seta.

Comparative notes: Cephennium ericinum is readily distinguished from other congeners known from Turkey by larger body size alone. It is additionally characterized by strongly reduced eyes, the absence of tomentose anterior impressions on the elytra, and the morphology of the aedeagus.

Distribution and natural history: The type locality is situated to the south of Ordu, Ordu province, North Anatolia ( Map 2 ). The specimens were sifted from leaf litter in a mixed forest with alder, spruce, bramble, and ivy at an altitude of 990 m.

Figures

Map 2: Distributions of Cephennium fractum (black circles) and of the species of the C. ericinum group: C. digitale (white triangle); C. spinigerum (black triangle); C. victrix (white circles); C. varispinosum (black diamond); C. ericinum (white diamond).

Figs 1–8: Male habitus in dorsal view (1–6) and head and pronotum in lateral view (7–8) of Cephennium bodemeyeri (1), C. fractum (2–3), C. infractum (4), C. immutatum (5), C. ericinum (6–7), and C. varispinosum (8). Scale bars: 1–6: 1.0 mm; 7–8: 0.5 mm.

Figs 36–47: Aedeagus in ventral view (36, 38, 40, 42, 44), internal structures of aedeagus (37, 39, 41, 43, 45), and apical portion of aedeagus in ventral view (46–47) of Cephennium ericinum (36–37), C. varispinosum (38–39), C. victrix (40–41), C. spinigerum (42–43), C. digitale (44–45), C. fractum (46), and C. infractum (47). Scale bars: 36, 38, 40, 42, 44: 0.2 mm; 37, 39, 41, 43, 45–47: 0.1 mm.