Liroetis Weise, 1889

Bezděk, Jan, 2021, Redefinition of Liroetis, with descriptions of two new species and an annotated list of species (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae: Galerucinae), Acta Entomologica Musei Nationalis Pragae 61 (2), pp. 529-614 : 530-532

Liroetis Weise, 1889

Liroëtis Weise, 1889: 607 . Type species: Liroetis aeneipennis Weise, 1889 , designated by Mൺඎඅංĸ (1936).

Liroëtis : Wൾංඌൾ (1924):128 (catalogue); OǤඅඈൻඅංඇ (1936): 207 (description).

Liroetis : Mൺඎඅංĸ (1936): 292 (key), 311 (description); Gඋൾඌඌංඍඍ & Kංආඈඍඈ (1963): 394 (key), 532; Kංආඈඍඈ (1964): 288 (key); Kංආඈඍඈ (1965): 374 (noted); Wංඅർඈඑ (1973): 475 (catalogue); Sൾൾඇඈ & Wංඅർඈඑ (1982): 111 (catalogue); Kංආඈඍඈ (1985): 8 (catalogue); Kංආඈඍඈ (1989a): 6 (key), 82 (noted); Kංආඈඍඈ & Tൺĸංඓൺඐൺ (1994): 231 (key), 310 (noted); Jඈඅංඏൾඍ & Hൺඐĸൾඌඐඈඈൽ (1995): 103 (host plants); Kංආඈඍඈ (2005): 56 (catalogue); Mൾൽඏൾൽൾඏ & SඉඋൾർIJൾඋ-Uൾ- ൻൾඋඌൺඑ (2005): 314 (key); Bൾൾඇൾඇ (2010): 478 (catalogue);YൺඇǤ et al. (2015): 90 (key), 246 (noted).

Liroëtes : Jൺർඈൻඒ (1890): 215 (noted).

Siemssenius Weise, 1922: 73 . Type species: Siemssenius modestus Weise, 1922 , by monotypy. New junior subjective synonym.

Siemssenius : Wൾංඌൾ (1924): 131 (catalogue); Gඋൾඌඌංඍඍ &Kංආඈඍඈ (1963): 395 (key), 555 (noted); Wංඅർඈඑ (1971): 60 (catalogue); Sൾൾඇඈ & Wංඅർඈඑ (1982): 111 (catalogue); Kංආඈඍඈ (1989a): 5 (key), 73 (noted); Jඈඅංඏൾඍ & Hൺඐĸൾඌඐඈඈൽ (1995): 103 (host plants); Kංආඈඍඈ & Tൺĸංඓൺඐൺ (1997): 297 (key), 379 (noted); Kංආඈඍඈ (2005): 72 (catalogue); ZIJൺඇǤ et al. (2008b): 126 (description); Bൾൾඇൾඇ (2010): 488 (catalogue); YൺඇǤ et al. (2015): 89 (key), 251 (noted).

Pseudoliroetis Laboissière, 1929: 280 . Type species: Liroetis fulvipennis Jacoby, 1890 , by original designation. New junior subjective synonym.

Pseudoliroetis : Gඋൾඌඌංඍඍ & Kංආඈඍඈ (1963): 394 (key), 529 (noted); Wංඅ- ർඈඑ (1973): 477 (catalogue); Sൾൾඇඈ & Wංඅർඈඑ (1982): 111 (catalogue, as synonym of Siemssenius ); Kංආඈඍඈ & CIJඎ (1996): 70 (noted).

Pseudoliroëtis: OǤ අඈൻඅංඇ (1936): 204 (description); CIJǙඃත (1962): 15 (key), 176 (description).

Zangia Chen, 1976 in CIJൾඇ et al. (1976: 208, 220). Type species: Zangia latispina Chen, 1976 , by original designation. New junior subjective synonym.

Zangia : Sൾൾඇඈ & Wංඅർඈඑ (1982): 112 (catalogue); JංൺඇǤ (1990): 141 (revision); Bൾൾඇൾඇ (2010): 490 (catalogue); YൺඇǤ et al. (2015): 91 (key), 274 (noted).

Redescription. Body elongate to elongate oval, convex to moderately flat, body length 5.7–15.0 mm.

Head. Eyes moderately large. Labrum and clypeus not modified. Frontal tubercles subtriangular or transversely subtriangular with divergent anterior tips. Antennae thin or filiform, 11-segmented, 0.57–0.96 times as long as body.

Pronotum flat to moderately convex, without discal depressions, 1.34–2.00 times as wide as long, broadest in middle or in posterior half.Anterior pronotal border present in whole length, or visible only laterally, or completely absent. Lateral and posterior borders always present. Lateral margins rounded or subparallel. All angles with setigerous pore bearing long seta.

Elytra. Surface glabrous or with indistinct scattered erect setae on apical and lateral lobes. Elytra covered with dense fine confused punctures. Humeral calli well developed. Epipleura moderately wide in basal half, then gradually narrowed, disappearing in apical half or before apex. Macropterous.

Legs unmodified. Metatibia with apical spine present in both sexes (e.g., L. aurantiacus species-group, L. pallidulus , L. violaceipennis ), present in males only (e.g., L. aeneipennis species-group, L. apicicornis ), or absent in both sexes (e.g., L. flavipennis species-group, L. grandis species-group). Length of metatarsomere I about equal to following two tarsomeres combined. Tarsomeres unmodified. Tarsal claws appendiculate.

Ventral side. Anterior coxal cavities open posteriorly, or, rarely, semiopen ( L. aurantiacus species-group). Male abdomen with last ventrite apically trilobate, incisions deep and narrow, surface with large longitudinal impression in middle. Ventrite IV often with impressed posterior margin forming small subtriangular plates with small median incision, rarely with small hook-like vertical process directed posteriorly ( L. aurantiacus species-group). Posterior margin of last ventrite in females regularly rounded, or with V-shaped incision ( L. violaceipennis ), or with large trapezoidal incision (some species of L. aeneipennis group).

Aedeagus with well developed dorsal process, always shorter than median lobe of aedeagus. Apex folded or not folded. Triangular or subtriangular lateral elevation present in apical eighth to half of aedeagus length, very rarely absent ( L. apicicornis ) or with distinct cavity ( L. aurantiacus species-group).

Female genitalia. Spermatheca with C-shaped cornu, nodulus usually well developed, rarely poorly developed or nearly absent. Sternite VIII very large, well sclerotized, tignum short, 0.15–1.00 times as long as sternite VIII, rarely nearly absent ( L. coeruleipennis or L. nigricollis ) or asymmetrical. Gonocoxae reduced.

Differential diagnosis. Liroetis can be distinguished from Coeligetes by anterior coxal cavities open (closed in Coeligetes ). Metatibial spurs are present or absent in Liroetis but always absent in Coeligetes . Aedeagus of Liroetis species is comparatively longer, with smaller tuft of setae (larger tuft in Coeligetes ).

The genus Luperogala differs from Liroetis in the presence of a large long sword-like process from posterior margin of abdominal ventrite IV directed posteriorly (see Bൾඓൽෂĸ et al. 2014, Bൾඓൽෂĸ 2017), which is absent in all remaining genera of the group.

The representatives of the genus Liroetoides have closed anterior coxal cavities (open in Liroetis ), posterior margin of abdominal ventrite V in male with three more or less developed subtriangular processes (cf. drawings in Bൾඓൽෂĸ (2013), processes missing in Liroetis ), and aedeagus long and narrow, without elevated lateral subtriangular plates (present in Liroetis ).

Coeligetoides trifurcatus Bezděk, 2016 , the only representative of Coeligetoides Bezděk, 2016 , shares posterior margin of open anterior coxal cavities with Liroetis , but has unspined tibiae (metatibiae with or without spine in Liroetis ), very unusual wide and flat median lobe of aedeagus with dorsal process thin and trifurcate (aedeagus of different general structure, see present paper), claws bifid (appendiculate in Liroetis ), anterior part of head flat with wide posterior tip (elevated and convex with posterior tip narrower in Liroetis ), and spermatheca with poorly delimited nodulus (nodulus usually well developed in Liroetis ). Etymology. Liroetis is a word of Greek origin composed of the root lir - (λιρός, brave) and masculine suffix - etis with the meaning ‘having quality’. In the original description Wൾංඌൾ (1889) did not specify the gender of Liroetis and included two species names ( aeneipennis and coeruleipennis ) with common masculine and feminine ending - is. Subsequent authors treated Liroetis as either masculine (Lඈඉൺඍංඇ 2004b, Mൾൽඏൾൽൾඏ 2004), feminine (e.g. OǤඅඈൻඅංඇ 1936, Gඋൾඌඌංඍඍ & Kංආඈඍඈ 1963, Wංඅർඈඑ 1973, JංൺඇǤ 1988, Bൾൾඇൾඇ 2010, Lඈඉൺඍංඇ 2013), or used both versions (YൺඇǤ et al. 2015). However, in agreement with the Article 30.1.2 of the Code ( ICZN 1999) the name Liroetis is masculine.

Comments on proposed synonymies. In the original description, the genus Zangia Chen, 1976 was formally placed in the tribe Luperini without any comparison with a particular genus nor with any description or drawings of the aedeagus. The presence of the apical spine on posterior tibiae (broad and spoon-shaped in males, thickened and spiniform in females) was stated as the main character to distinguish Zangia from other genera (CIJൾඇ et al. 1976). JංൺඇǤ (1990) revised the genus and described additional four species from China, and the drawings of aedeagi of all the species were provided. In their identification key YൺඇǤ et al. (2015) used the presence ( Zangia ) and absence ( Liroetis and Siemssenius ) of metatibial spines as the main diagnostic character to distinguish those genera. However, as shown below, the presence or absence of the metatibial spines is a variable character even within Liroetis species groups. I had an opportunity to study paratypes of three species and photographs of the holotypes of all five species with the conclusion that Zangia is undoubtedly a synonym of Liroetis .

Traditionally, Siemssenius Weise, 1922 (= Pseudoliroetis Laboissière, 1929 ) was separated from Liroetis by the absence ( Siemssenius ) and presence ( Liroetis ) of the anterior pronotal border (e.g. Kංආඈඍඈ 1989, YൺඇǤ et al. 2015). The border on the anterior pronotal margin is a variable character. Some species have this border well developed, while in others it is visible only laterally or completely absent.As there is no difference in the structure of aedeagus, I hereby propose Siemssenius as a new synonym of Liroetis .