Xenopygus peruvianus (Solsky)

Caron, Edilson, De Castro, Jessica C., Da Silva, Maycon R. & Ribeiro-Costa, Cibele S., 2016, Phylogeny and revision of a colorful Neotropical genus of rove beetles: Xenopygus Bernhauer (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae), Zootaxa 4138 (1), pp. 59-82 : 77

Xenopygus peruvianus (Solsky)

Xanthopygus peruvianus: Solsky, 1872: 306 (original description, type locality: ‘Monte-Rico’, Peru, cited as Xanthopygius). Lampropygus peruvianus: Bernhauer & Schubert, 1914: 406 (catalog).

Xenopygus peruvianus: Scheerpeltz, 1933: 1416 (catalog); Irmler, 1979: 31 (considered species incerta).

Remarks. This species was described primarily in Xanthopygus by Solsky, 1872 (cited as Xanthopygius), based on individuals from Monte Rico, Peru. In the original description, the author stated that this species is similar to X. bicolor . Irmler (1982) was looking for the species in Solsky’s collection, which is partially deposited in ZIN (Zoological Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, Saint Petersburg, Russia) and ZMMU (Zoological Museum of Moscow University, Moscow, Russia), and reported X. peruvianus as species incerta, since he did not find the type specimen ( Irmler 1982).

In this study, new searches for the X. peruvianus material were performed in Solsky collection (ZIM and ZMMU) and in IRSNB collection (Institut Royal des Sciences Naturelles de Belgique, Brussels, Belgium). There are known cases where Solsky remitted material to Charles Fauvel, with deposited collection in IRSNB (see Caron et al. 2012). Additionally, several staphylinids researchers were consulted to try to determinate the probable location of the type material of X. peruvianus . However, there were no positive responses.

Since there was no specimen identified as X. peruvanus in the examined collections and the type material is considered lost since 1982 (from Irmler 1982), X. peruvianus is here considered as species inquirenda, meaning, a name of doubtful identity, and in need of further investigation.

The term species inquirenda is defined by the ICZN (1999) glossary and substitutes the term species incerta cited by Irmler (1982), and this does not have definition by the code and can generate different interpretation. Besides, Solsky, in 1872 described the species analyzing a specimen from Monte Rico, Peru, which, is temporarily lost. In this case, the term nomen dubium should not be considered.