Piezocera monochroa Bates, 1885

Santos-Silva, Antonio, Botero, Juan Pablo & Flechtmann, Carlos Alberto Hector, 2023, A new species and taxonomical and geographical notes on Neotropical Cerambycidae (Coleoptera), Papéis Avulsos de Zoologia 63, pp. 1-14 : 5

Piezocera monochroa Bates, 1885

( Figs. 2 D-2E)

Piezocera monochroa Bates, 1885: 258 .

Piezocera serraticollis Linell, 1897: 394 . Syn. nov.

Remarks: Comparing a paralectotype male of P. monochroa ( Figs. 2 D-2E) with specimens identified as P. serraticollis , from Mexico and the USA ( Figs. 2 F-2G), we could not find any morphological difference. Furthermore, the current geographical distribution of both species is overlapped in the Mexican state of Chiapas,reinforcing the indication that the two names correspond to the same species.

Martins (1976) reported about P. serraticollis (translated):"The redescription given below is restricted to topotypic specimens. Other specimens, in some cases intermediate between serraticollis and monochroa , are discussed in the item variations. Only the examination of very abundant material from Mexico and Central America will be able to elucidate the status of this species;″"Three specimens from Almolonga, Veracruz, Mexico (BMNH, MNHN) were included by Bates (1885:258) in the type series of Piezocera monochroa ; it seems to me that they actually belong to serraticollis . They are different from topotypic specimens: elytra apex with less prolonged lateral projection; erect setae on dorsal surface almost the same length as the scape.″ This later affirmation contradicts one of the differences between P. serraticollis and P. monochroa pointed out by him: erect dorsal setae shorter than length of the scape in P. serraticollis , and longer than the scape in P. monochroa . Furthermore, the elytral apex is variable in other species of the genus, which makes it evident that the same also occurs in P. monochroa . To reinforce that the differences pointed out by Martins (1976) are just specific variations, it is interesting to translate another part of his comments on variations in P.serraticollis : "Specimen from Salina Cruz, Oaxaca, Mexico: erect dorsal setae very elongated; spicule of the prothorax distinct; erect setae very abundant on entire body…″ The number of erect setae was a feature used by him to separate P. serraticollis from P. monochroa in the key: erect setae more abundant in the latter than in the former. Another feature used in the key by Martins (1976) was the sexual punctation on the abdomen: present in males of P.serraticollis ; absent in males of P. monochroa . However, in the redescription of P. monochroa , he reported that perhaps they are absent in males of this species.Therefore, based on this evidence of intraspecific morphological variation, P.serraticollis is synonymized with P.monochroa .

Material examined: 1 ♀, without labels. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Texas: Brownsville, 1 ♀, VI.1901, no collector indicated ( MZSP). MEXICO, no further data, 1 ♀, no date indicated,J. Flohr leg. ( MZSP). GUATEMALA, Baja Verapaz: San Gerónimo, paralectotype male, Champion ( MZSP).

Figures

Figure 2. (A) Gnomidolon cruciferum (Gounelle,1909), female from Brazil (Minas Geriais), dorsal habitus. (B) Microibidion bimaculatum Mehl et al., 2015, female from Brazil (Minas Gerais),dorsal habitus.(C) Pyrgotes flavipennis Zajciw,1970,holotype,dorsal habitus,by StevenW.Lingafelter.(D-E) Piezocera monochroa Bates, 1885,paralectotype male fromGuatemala:(D)Dorsal habitus;(E)Head,frontalview.(F-G) Piezocera monochroa femalefrom the USA (Texas):(F) Head,frontalview; (G) Dorsal habitus.(H) Tilloglomus spectabile Martins,1975,femalefrom Brazil (Paraná),dorsalhabitus.(I) Lepturges (Lepturges) centralis Monné,1978,female from Brazil (Mato Grosso do Sul),dorsal habitus.(J) Lepturges (Lepturges) mattogrossis Gilmour,1962,male from Brazil (Mato Grosso do Sul),dorsal habitus.