Odontogracilis violaceus ( Santos-Silva, Bezark and Martins, 2012 ) Clarke, 2015

Clarke, Robin O. S., 2015, Revision of the genus Acyphoderes Audinet-Serville, 1833, with a brief synopsis of the genus Bromiades Thomson, 1864 (Coleoptera, Cerambycidae), Insecta Mundi 2015 (401), pp. 1-92 : 63

publication ID	https://doi.org/ 10.5281/zenodo.4531694
publication LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:pub:1E971D20-D232-4729-9249-BE529F677862
DOI	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4532329
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/C50087CF-FFCC-6624-BBDF-FE6A0C98FAFF
treatment provided by	Felipe
scientific name	Odontogracilis violaceus ( Santos-Silva, Bezark and Martins, 2012 )
status	comb. nov.

Treatment

Odontogracilis violaceus ( Santos-Silva, Bezark and Martins, 2012) View in CoL comb. nov.

Acyphoderes violaceus Santos-Silva, Bezark and Martins, 2012: 78 View in CoL .

Species Concept. Based on examination of the holotype.

Diagnosis. Based on a female paratype of O. violaceus from Costa Rica, and a female O. exilis from Mexico (but, take note, both species are recorded for Costa Rica). They may be separated as follows; in O. violaceus antennomere III 1.44 longer than length of scape (in O. exilis 1.67 longer than scape); in O. violaceus length of elytra 3.42 longer than width across humeri (in O. exilis 3.24 longer than width of humeri); in O. violaceus metafemoral peduncle 1.24 longer than metafemoral clave (in O. exilis 1.66 longer than clave); and in O. violaceus length of metatarsomere I/II+III = 1.33 (in O. exilis metatarsomere I/II+III = 1.17).

Measurements (mm). 1 female, total length, 16.8; length of prothorax, 2.50; width of prothorax, 2.20; length of elytra, 8.3; width at humeri, 2.40.

Material analyzed. Holotype, COSTA RICA, Guanacaste, 3 km SE R. Naranjo , 1 female, 1-15.VIII.1993, col. F. D. Parker ( USUL).

Comment. Santos-Silva, et al. (2012) separated this species from O. cracentis and O. exilis based on the color of its hind legs (femora bicolored, peduncle with dark brown area; tibiae and tarsi black with violaceus reflection). Whereas the separation of O. violaceus from O. cracentis is probably valid (the two species are well separated geographically), its separation from O. exilis must remain provisional, since the authors seem to have compared the female holotype of O. violaceus with a male paratype of O. exilis , the female of which may share the same colored femora as O. violaceus ; and, if we describe the color of the tibia and tarsi of O. violaceus as yellowish with strong violet infusion (which they are), then O. violaceus may prove to be a junior synonym of O. exilis . However, notwithstanding the inferred synonymy, O. violaceus is considered to be a valid species (as diagnosed above) until such time that further specimens (including a male) become available to clarify its status. It should also be stated that the author only had a limited amount of time to examine the specimen of O. violaceus .