Dactylophysus hirtus, Rosa, 2014
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.1590/0031-1049.2014.54.18 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/7B52527A-241C-FFA3-759A-64BDF40CFEAB |
|
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
|
scientific name |
Dactylophysus hirtus |
| status |
sp. nov. |
Dactylophysus hirtus sp. nov.
( Figs. 12 View FIGURE 12 , 13 View FIGURE 13 , 33 View FIGURE 33 A-E, 34M)
Etymology: From Latin, hirtus = hairy; alluding to the dense pilosity of this species.
Description (male, Fig. 34M View FIGURE 34 ): Integument brown with ventral pterothorax, ventral abdomen, legs and antennae light brown; pilosity erect. Total length 10.0-11.0 mm; elytral base 1.0x as wide as prothorax, elytra 3.2-3.2x longer than pronotum. Frons ( Figs. 12F, G View FIGURE 12 ) concave; antenna ( Fig. 12S View FIGURE 12 ) surpassing the posterior angles of pronotum by one antennomere. Pronotum ( Figs. 12J, 12K View FIGURE 12 ) 1.30x wider than long, lateral margins nearly straight convergent anteriad from posterior angle, posterior angles divergent; anterior angle strongly produced, acute; hypomeron ( Fig. 12L View FIGURE 12 ) glabrous on posterior half. Lamellae of pro- and mesotarsomeres I ( Figs. 33A, B View FIGURE 33 ) 1/3 shorter and 1/2 narrower than the others, metatarsomere I with or without a minuscule lamella. Elytra subparallel on anterior 2/3 then tapering to apex; punctures of striae larger than those of the interstices.
Aedeagus ( Figs. 13E, F View FIGURE 13 ): Phallobase 0.46 times the total length of aedeagus, 1.24x longer than wide, length ratio between lateroposterior and median parts 4.6; paramere with ventral surface predominantly weakly sclerotized; penis with basal strut 0.36x its total length; ventral sclerite narrowed apicad, short; internal sac covered with microsclerotizations.
Holotype: [Santa Tereza, ES, BRAZIL 7.XII-64, C. Elias leg.], male ( DZUP).
Paratypes: [ Santa Tereza , ES, BRAZIL 11/12/1964, C. & C. T. Elias] 1 ex. ( DZUP); idem but 27/01/1966, plus [DPTº ZOOL., UF-PARANÁ] 1 ex. ( MZUSP), idem but 05/01/1967, 1 ex. ( MZUSP) .
Distribution: BRAZIL. Espírito Santo: Santa Tereza.
Remarks: Dactylophysus hirtus sp. nov. is diagnosable by the combination of the following characters: pilosity erect, lateral sides of prothorax nearly straight convergent anteriad from posterior angles, anterior pronotal angle strongly produced anteriad, elytral striae minuscule. Elytra parallel on anterior 2/3 then taperwith punctures larger than those of the interstices. Its ing to apex; punctures of striae larger than those of aedeagus is most similar to that of D. capixabensis , the interstices.
differing in its phallobase shape and in the paramere more sclerotized ventrally. Aedeagus: Phallobase 0.44x the total length of aedeagus, 1.28x longer than wide, length ratio between lateroposterior and median parts 7.7; paramere with Dactylophysus capixabensis nom. nov. ventral surface with lateral border sclerotized, median ( Figs. 14 View FIGURE 14 , 34N View FIGURE 34 ) part membranous; penis with basal strut 0.38x its total length; ventral sclerite narrowed apicad, short; Dactylophysus mendax ( Candèze, 1859) ; Fleutiaux, internal sac covered with microsclerotizations.
1892: 409, 410; Schwarz, 1906: 311; Blackwelder, 1944: 292; Golbach, 1994: 40. Lectotype (present designation): [Heterocrepidius Dactylophysus capixabensis nom. nov. for Dactylophy- mendax Cand (Chevrolat’s writing)], [Collection sus mendax sensu Fleutiaux, 1892 misidentified Chevrolat], [ mendax CANDÈZE ], [Chevrolat det., as Heterocrepidius mendax Candèze, 1859 . FLEUTIAUX det], [ Dactylophysus mendax Cand., Fleut. type, Brèsil], [TYPE], [Muséum Paris, Coll. E. Etymology: The specific name refers to “capixaba”, a Fleutiaux]. male (MNHN).
popular name for native of the state of Espírito Santo,
Brazil, where the species was found. Material examined: BRAZIL. Espírito Santo: 2 exs. ( MNHN) .
Redescription (male, Fig. 34N View FIGURE 34 ): Integument brown with pronotum darker than elytra; antenna, legs and Distribution: BRAZIL. Espírito Santo.
ventral abdomen lighter than elytra. Total length
8.0- 9.5 mm; elytral base 0.98x as wide as protho- Type material examined of Heterocrepidius mendax rax, elytra 2.6-2.8x longer than pronotum. Frons Candèze (1859): Lectotype (present designation, flattened, antenna reaching the posterior angle of Fig. 34P View FIGURE 34 ): [Elater Dicrepidius , cibricollis nihi, h. in pronotum or surpassing it by 1/2 antennomere. Brasilia D. Lacordaire], [mendax J (Candèze’s writ- Pronotum ( Fig. 14B View FIGURE 14 ) 1.2-1.3x wider than long, lat- ing)], [Coll. Janson., ex Dejean.], [SYN-, TYPE], eral margins rounded gradually convergent anteriad [Syntype, “J”, Heterocrepidius mendax Candèze from posterior angle, posterior angles parallel; an- 1859, C.M.F. von Hayek det 1985], [486a], [manterior angle slightly produced anteriad; hypomeron dible tooth, C.M.F. Von Hayek det. 198 (sic)], male glabrous on posterior 1/5. Lamella of tarsomeres I (BMNH).
Paralectotype (present designation): [ Heterocrepidius , mendax, Brès. Cdz. (Candèze’s writing)], [Coll. Janson, ex Candèze], [SYN-, TYPE], [J], [Syntype, “J”, Heterocrepidius mendax Candèze 1859 , C.M.F. von Hayek det 1985], [486a], [mandible tooth, C.M.F. Von Hayek det. 198], male (BMNH). Misidentification: [Elater Dicrepidius , mendax nihi, h. in Brasilia D. Lacordaire], [illegible] [mendax], [Coll. Janson, ex Dejean], [J], [Syntype, “ ♀ ”, Heterocrepidius mendax Candèze 1859 , C.M.F. von Hayek det 1985], [mandibles simple, C.M.F. Von Hayek det. 198], male (BMNH).
Remarks: Fleutiaux described Dactylophysus mendax based on a specimen identified by Chevrolat (in litt.) as Heterocrepidius mendax . Candèze (1859) described H. mendax based on three specimens, two of them catalogued by Dejean (1833) as Dicrepidius cibricollis and D. mendax , which Candèze considered as male and female, respectively, of the same species. Actually, as observed formerly by von Hayek (in litt.), Dejean was right about considering them as distinct species and his Dicrepidius mendax (Candèze’s female) is a male similar to Dactylophysus mendax described by Fleutiaux, with which it shares the diagnostic characters of the genus Dactylophysus . According to Article 49 of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature the specific name mendax Candèze cannot be used as an available name for that taxon. Thefore, I introduce the new replacement name, Dactylophysus capixabensis nom. nov. for this species.
The description of Heterocrepidius mendax by Candèze (1859) conforms more closely to the two syntypes that he considered males ( Fig. 34P View FIGURE 34 ). They have mandibles bidentate, antenna surpassing the prothorax by three antennomeres, prothorax gradually and little narrowed anteriad, posterior angles carinate, slender legs, abdomen with marginal plates weakly produced, ventrite 5 without stout and denser apical setae, parameres with long membranous apex and very short in relation to the penis. For this reason, I designate herein them lectotype and paralectotype of the H. mendax Candèze, 1859 .
The third syntype, which Candèze misidentified as Heterocrepidius mendax female, is most similar to Dactylophysus mendax sensu Fleutiaux, 1892 differing from it mainly in the shape of prothorax, which is most similar to that of T. tibialis . Nevertheless, as it was not possible to dissect its aedeagus, I could not confirm its identity.
Dactylophysus capixabensis nom. nov. differs from the described species of the genus in the prothoracic shape, with sides rounded, gradually convergent anteriad and anterior angles less produced, pronotum more convex, hypomeron glabrous on posterior 1/5, lamella of protarsomere I minuscule and elytra relatively shorter.
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.