Coprophanaeus, Olsoufieff, 1924

Edmonds, W. D. & Zidek, J., 2010, A taxonomic review of the neotropical genus Coprophanaeus Olsoufieff, 1924 (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae, Scarabaeinae), Insecta Mundi 2010 (129), pp. 1-111 : 69-71

Coprophanaeus (C.) conocephalus ( Olsoufieff, 1924)

Fig. 172 , 200-204

Phanaeus conocephalus Olsoufieff, 1924: 72

Coprophanaeus conocephalus (Olsoufieff) (recomb. by Blackwelder 1944: 209)

Phanaeus roubali Balthasar, 1939: 241 (syn. by Arnaud 1997: 7)

Coprophanaeus edmondsi Arnaud, 1997: 5 New Synonymy

Type. P. conocephalus – holotype female, Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris (examined by photo) ; P. roubali – holotype, National Museum , Prague (examined) ; C. edmondsi – holotype male, Canadian Museum of Nature, Ottawa (examined) .

Diagnosis. General – Black except for dark blue metallic coloring on pronotum and pygidium. Clypeal teeth normal, length about equal to width at base. Eyes normal, width of upper portion one-fourth to onefifth of interocular distance. Frons smooth, at most with faint puncturing behind transverse carina (stronger puncturing in female). Paraocular area completely sculptured, sculpturing weakening closer to eye. Posterior portion of pronotum virtually smooth, if puncturing visible (x10) then minute and sparse; basal pronotal fossae distinct. Anterior angle of metasternum with rounded cap (seen in profile, as in Fig. 167 ). Elytral interstriae at most only weakly convex, seldom shinier midlongitudinally. Pygidium usually lacking distinct basal grove, rarely with narrow basal groove. Length 15-20 mm.

Male ( Fig. 202-204 ) – Length of frons about one and half times that of clypeus. Teeth of cephalic carina closely set, distance between lateral teeth usually about one-half that of interocular distance. Pronotum lacking distinct fovea above lateral fossa; sometimes with prominent tubercle in front of lateral fossa ( Fig. 202 ). Pronotal prominence of large male narrow, bitumid, tumescences connected by ridge. Parameres at most with indistinct subapical tooth.

Female ( Fig. 200-201 ) – Teeth of cephalic carina closely set, distance between lateral teeth about onehalf or less of interocular distance. Lengths of frons and clypeus about equal. Transverse pronotal carina bidentate medially, followed by very weak depression.

Specimens examined – 17.

Distribution. Cauca province ( Fig. 172 ).

Collection Records. COLOMBIA: Nariño – Río Ñambi , 1 o 17’N 78 o 15’W, 1350 m (May). Valle de Cauca – Morro Frio , 1800 m (Mar) ; Q. Cristalina, AM Calima (Jul) ECUADOR: Cañar – Javin , 850- 1400 m (Feb) . Carchi, Parroquia El Goaltal, Hacienda San Francisco , 1200 m (Sep) . Guayas – Balzar (Feb). Pichincha – Chiriboga , 1500 m (Feb) ; Chiriboga Road , 9.8 km NE Hwy. 30, 00 o 13’14”S 78 o 53’20”W, 1300 m (Mar) .

Comments. There is no good reason in our opinion to maintain C. edmondsi as a distinct taxon in view of its close morphological and geographical relationship with C. conocephalus . The distribution of this species appears to parallel that of C. morenoi in Colombia and Ecuador at higher elevations (> 1000 m) along the western slopes of the cordillera (Note: The Ecuadorian portion of the range is not depicted in Fig. 172 .) Along with C. chiriquensis and C. gilli , it forms a cluster differing from the pluto subgroup by its bitumid, rather than cleat-shaped, pronotal prominence.

Figures

Figure 172. Approximate geographic distribution of Coprophanaeus (s. str.) species in the pluto species group.

Figure 200-204. Coprophanaeus conocephalus. 200-201) Female habitus. 202-203) Male habitus. 204) Aedeagus (lateral view on left; dorsal view on right).

Figure 162-170. Characters of the Coprophanaeus (s. str.) pluto species group. 162-163) Posterior view of pygidium of C. morenoi. 164) Same, C. chiriquensis. 165) Dorsal view left of elytron of C. solisi. 166) Same, C. pluto. 167) Metasternal prominence of C. pluto. 168) Same, C. pecki. 169) Dorsal view of parameres of C. pluto. 170) Lateral view, same.