Mniophila turcica L. MEDVEDEV , 1970

Nadein, Konstantin S., 2009, Revision of the genus Mniophila S, 1831 (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae), Beiträge Zur Entomologie = Contributions to Entomology 59 (1), pp. 103-131 : 118-119

Mniophila turcica L. MEDVEDEV, 1970 stat. n.

( Figs 4 , 10 )

Mniophila muscorum turcica L. MEDVEDEV, 1970: 317 , figs 1a, b. – GRUEV & DÖBERL 1997: 241. – ASLAN et al. 1999: 397.

Type material:

Holotype: Turkey: Between Yol-Üstü and Rize, 600 m., 15.V.1967, C. Besuchet leg., male. – Paratypes: the same label as holotype, 8 specimens. – Hopa-Arhavi, 14.V.1967, C. Besuchet leg., 3 specimens. – deposited in the Museum of Natural History of Geneva. Two paratype specimens studied (labels numbered): 1. Turquie Rize yol üstu / Rize 600 m, 14.V.67 Cl. Besuchet; 2. Paratypus Mniophila muscorum turcica L. Medv. – male and female (LM).

Type locality: Turkey: Rize.

Distribution:

Turkey (Rize, Artvin) .

Redescription:

Body dark brown with weak bronzy luster; legs and antennae brown. Body almost rounded with weakly elongated elytral apices. Head large, long, eyes moderately convex; frons long, frontal ridge strongly convex; antennal grooves rather deep. Head surface covered with shagrination. Antennae not thick, segments short. Pronotum moderately long with wide and widely rounded base. Its surface covered with well developed shagrination, impunctate. Elytra smooth, punctation weakly developed, punctures large, poorly visible, shallow; in apical third invisible. Punctures arranged in partly confused striae; secondary punctation not developed. Notch between metathoracic cavities concave. Legs rather thick, clearly curved. First protarsomere of male moderately wide, not very long; metafemora wide. Aedeagus ventrally with apical third gradually narrowed to apex; apex almost straight with large denticle; basal 2/3 gradually widened toward apical third; from lateral view apical 2/3 almost straight, slightly curved apically.

Body length – 1.2-1.5 mm, width – 0.98 mm.

Differential diagnosis:

From M. transcaucasica sp. n. differs: in structure of aedeagus ( Fig. 4I, J ), apex almost straight instead of apex obtuse; structure of head ( Fig. 4H ), particularly in more convex eyes, frontal ridge more convex and more developed, antennal grooves deeper, frontal calli more developed; notch between metathoracic cavities concave; first metatarsomere longer and narrower ( Fig. 4C ); dorsal punctation poorly developed. From M. caucasica sp. n. differs: in structure of aedeagus, apex almost straight instead of aedeagal apex rather wide, straight, apical 1/ 4 in posterior view more or less sharply narrowed to apex; apical segments of antennae shorter; tibiae thicker and more curved; first protarsomere ( Fig. 4D ) and that of mesotarsomere of males shorter and wider; dorsal punctation poorly developed and shagrination well developed. From M. bosnica differs: in structure of aedeagus, ventrally with apical third gradually narrowed to apex, the latter almost straight with large denticle instead of aedeagal apex with rounded sides and apex, the latter without denticle; pronotum impunctate; tibiae usually more curved ( Fig. 4E, F ), antennal segments thinner ( Fig. 4G ).

Figures

Fig. 4: Mniophila turcica L. MEDVEDEV: A - body outline, male; B – pronotum outline; C – hind tarsus of male; D – fore tarsus of male; E – fore tibia of male; F– hind tibia of male; G – antenna; H – head; I – aedeagus, ventral view; J – aedeagus, lateral view. Scale bar: A– 1 mm, B-J – 0.5 mm.

Fig. 10: Distribution of the Mniophila species.Rhomb – Mniophila taurica sp. n.; circle – Mniophila caucasica sp. n.; triangle – Mniophila transcaucasica sp. n.; square – Mniophila turcica L. MEDVEDEV.