A new species of Speonemadus from Portugal, with the revision of the escalerai-group (Coleoptera, Leiodidae) Author Reboleira, Ana Sofa P. S. Author Fresneda, Javier Author Salgado, José Maria text European Journal of Taxonomy 2017 2017-01-19 261 1 23 journal article 32199 10.5852/ejt.2017.261 708e152e-4450-4439-84a9-3c56148cd082 885318 C59239D1-0BF0-446A-AF6E-71234D01B23D Speonemadus angusticollis ( Kraatz, 1870 ) Choleva angusticollis Kraatz, 1870: 98 . Catops angusticollis – Marseul 1884: 69 . Anemadus angusticollis – Reitter 1885: 60 . Speonemadus angusticollis – Jeannel 1936: 220 . Type locality “Cordova” ( Kraatz 1870 ). Material examined SPAIN : Córdoba : many ♁♁ and ♀♀ , Luque , Sima de Fuente del Espino I, 22 Nov. 2009 and 1 Aug. 2010 , GES-Priego leg. ( CFL , CPB , CJMS , CZULE ) ; 1 ♁, 2 ♀♀ , Sima Fuente de Alhama , 3 Apr. 2010 , GES-Priego leg. ( CFL ) ; many ♁♁ and ♀♀ , Priego de Córdoba , Cueva de la Solana , 6 Dec. 2009 and 7 Feb. 2010 , GES-Priego leg. ( CFL , CPB , CJMS ) . — Guadalajara : 1 ♁, 1 ♀ , Tamajón , Cueva de Remigín , 10 Apr. 1994 , Carabajal leg. ( CZULE ) . — Huelva : 6 ♀♀ , Fuenteheridos, Cueva del Guerrero , 23 Mar. 2013 CDP leg. ( CPB , CJMS ) ; 3 ♁♁, 4 ♀♀ , same locality, 5 Jun. 2013 , CDP leg. ( CPB , CJMS ) . — Jaén : 11 ♁♁, 28 ♀♀ , Hornos , Cueva de la Murcielaguina , 15 Nov. 2009 , GEV leg. ( CFL , CJMS ) ; 5 ♁♁, 4 ♀♀ , La Iruela , Sierra de Cazorla , Cueva Secreta del Sagreo , 30 May 1953 , Mateu & Cobos leg. ( CMCN ) ; 4 ♁♁, 2 ♀♀ , Sierra de Cazorla , Cueva del Nacimiento de Guadalquivir , 8 Aug. 1964 , Castells leg. ( CMCN ) ; many ♁♁ and ♀♀ , Siles , Cerro de Bucentaina , Sima de los 30 años, 8 Sep. 2008 and 16 Jan. 2010 , GEV leg. ( CFL , CPB , CJMS ) . — Sevilla : many ♁♁ and ♀♀ , Alanís, Sima del Paro , 23 Jan. 2013 , CDP leg. ( CFL , CPB , CJMS ) . PORTUGAL : 1 ♁, Alandroal , Estremoz-Cano massif, Algar de Santo António , 30 Mar. 2009 , A.S. Reboleira leg. (SR). Previous records SPAIN : Albacete: Riópar, Cueva del Farallón ( Blas 1989 ; Giachino & Vailati 1993 ; Fresneda et al. 2007 ); Riópar, Sierra de Segura, Cueva de la Umbría de Santiago ( Blas 1989 ; Pérez 2014 ). — Ávila: Villarejo del Valle ( Uhagón 1890 , 1898 ; Jeannel 1922 ; Blas 1977 , 1979 , 1989 ; Giachino & Vailati 1993 ).— Badajoz ( Uhagón 1890 , 1898 ; Jeannel 1922 , 1936 ; Fuente, 1925 ; Blas 1979 ): Cabeza la Vaca, Los Cortinales ( Sáez & Blanco 2010 ); Calera de León, Monasterio de Tentudía ( Sáez & Blanco 2010 ). — Cáceres ( Fuente 1925 ): Navalmoral de la Mata ( Uhagón 1898 ; Blas 1977 , 1979 ). — Ciudad Real: Horcajo de los Montes, P.N. de Cabañeros, Pinar de las Llanas ( Fresneda et al. 2007 ); Pozuelo de Calatrava ( Uhagón 1898 ; Blas 1989 ; Giachino & Vailati 1993 ); Retuerta del Bullaque, P.N. de Cabañeros, Los Palillos ( Fresneda et al. 2007 ). — Córdoba: Cabra, Cueva-Mina de Jarcas ( Fresneda et al. 2007 ; Pérez 2015 ); Cabra, La Nava ( Fresneda et al. 2007 ); Cabra, Cueva Ca-2 ( Blas 1989 ; Tinaut 1998 ); Córdoba ( Kraatz 1870 ; Uhagón 1890 ; Jeannel 1922 , 1936 ; Blas 1979 ; Giachino & Vailati 1993 ); Luque, Abuchite, L-14 ( Fresneda et al. 2007 , 2011 ); Priego de Córdoba, Cueva de los Mármoles ( Fresneda et al. 2007 , 2011 ; Pérez 2015 ); Priego de Córdoba, Castillo, in archaeological excavations under the castle ( Fresneda et al. 2007 ); Rute, Cueva la Negra ( Fresneda et al. 2007 ); Zagrilla, Manantial ( Fresneda et al. 2007 ); Zuheros, Cueva de los Murciélagos ( Fresneda et al. 2007 ; Pérez 2015 ). — Huelva:Aracena, Gruta de las Maravillas ( Blas 1979 , 1989 ). — Jaén: Hornos, Cueva de la Murcielaguina ( Fresneda et al. 2007 ); La Iruela, Sierra de Cazorla, Cueva Secreta del Sagreo ( Mateu 1953 ; Ribera 1970 ; Blas, 1976 , 1977 , 1979 , 1989 ; Giachino & Vailati 1993 ; Tinaut 1998 , Pérez & Tinaut 2005 ; Pérez & Pérez 2006 ; Pérez et al . 2013 ); Peal de Becerro, Cueva del Arroyo de la Rambla, PB-4, ( Tinaut 1998 ; Fresneda et al. 2007 ); Santa Elena ( Blas 1977 , 1979 , 1989 ); Sierra de Cazorla, Cueva del Nacimiento de Guadalquivir ( Ribera 1970 ; Blas 1976 , 1977 , 1989 ; Tinaut 1998 ; Pérez & Tinaut 2005 ; Pérez 2015 ); Siles, Cerro de Bucentaina, Sima de los 30 años ( Fresneda et al. 2007 ; Ribera et al . 2010 ). — Madrid : Escorial ( Uhagón 1890 , 1898 ; Jeannel 1922 , 1936 ; Blas 1977 , 1979 , 1989 ); Sierra de Guadarrama, Navacerrada ( Uhagón 1890 , 1898 ; Jeannel 1922 , 1936 ; Fuente 1925 ); Robledo de Chavela ( Blas 1989 ). — Sevilla: Alanís, Sima los Coscojales ( CFL ) ( Fresneda et al. 2007 ); Almadén de la Plata, Cueva de los Covachos ( Pérez 2015 ). Redescription BODY. Length 4.0– 4.6 mm (males) and 4.1–4.6 mm (females), body width 1.3–1.4 mm (males) and 1.4– 1.6 mm (females). Body shape elongate and very slim ( Fig. 2 ). Integument color light brown to darker brown, the legs, antennae and palpi of similar color; pubescence arranged uniformly, golden, moderately long and adpressed, only erected on the clypeus. Head retractable, with well-developed eyes. Antennae quite long, greyish in color, reaching the basal 1/5 part of the body; all antennomeres longer than wide, 3rd antennomere longer than 2nd antennomere, 4th and 6th antennomeres shorter than 5th one, and 8th almost 1.5 × longer than wide ( Table 1 ). PRONOTUM. Slightly transverse with surface slightly punctured ( Figs 8–9 ), maximum width/length ratio = 1.20–1.32 (males) and 1.18–1.25 (females), with maximum width in the middle third and the lateral edges regularly arcuate, converging towards the base; posterior angles obtuse and slightly rounded at apex. Pronotal base sinuate and narrower than elytral base. ELYTRA. Elliptical and very elongated, maximum length / width ratio = 2.04–2.19 (males) and 1.97– 2.11 mm (females); apex of each elytron rounded; elytral disk slightly convex and fattened in the middle. Elytral sculpture formed by very strong sutural striae and transverse strias with regular arrangement, sunken, well marked and perpendicular to the suture. Male The structure of genital segment corresponds to the typical pattern of the genus, formed by an urotergite with the apex in sharp bow, two uropleurites with apically narrow, sharp, slightly outwardly and short shaped handle ventrite. Aedeagus robust and long, between 1.2 and 1.3 mm ( Fig. 22 ); basal lamina almost 2 × shorter than middle lobe; ventral blade of tegmen short and poorly defned. Median lobe in dorsal view, similar to other species of the group, although it has the triangular apex with less protruding edge and narrower at its distal third part. Parameres robust and wide with a marked hump on the outside of distal and the apical area is beveled with a blunt tip, in this area four setae are inserted, of which three are short and thin, and the fourth is longer with a small tooth, coarse and fnely sclerotized. Inner sac showing two longitudinal chains of small sclerotized pieces, surrounded by a longer structure formed by numerous fne spines that are joined at the apex, but not tooth-shaped. Legs long with a peculiar structure of the keel protibial ( Fig. 17 ) which is long, slightly elevated, with a straight area, and fuzzy projections; in addition, the frst three protarsomeres are dilated, although frst protarsomere is narrower than anterior area of protibia; mesotibia arched and metatibia straight. Female The most signifcant external differences are observed on the antennae, pronotum, elytra, protibia and protarsomeres. Antennae very similar to those observed in males ( Table 1 ); the 2nd antennomere equal to the 5th one, and the 8th almost 1.5 × longer than wide. Pronotum slightly transverse and clearly narrower than in males ( Fig. 9 ), its sides almost straight and divergent on the posterior part; the maximum width is near the base and bell-like in form; posterior angles are almost straight with rounded angles; pronotal base is almost as wide as base of elytra. Elytra are elliptical and elongated and proportionally slightly shorter than in males. Apex of elytra is notched and toothed. Protibiae lacking keel and protarsi slender. 7th and 8th uroventrites and genital segment typical of the genus (see Giachino & Vailati 1993 ). Variability The most signifcant variation was observed in the samples from the two caves of Huelva (Gruta de la Maravillas and Cueva del Guerrero), specimens from both caves show intermediate characteristics between S. angusticollis and S. breuili , with the protibial keel more close to the frst one and female pronotum most similar to the second species. Systematic position of the specimens collected from these two caves will be solved only by further study of specimens from caves near the Sierra de Aracena. Biology and ecology This species is found in a forest environment, in leaf litter or under stones. In arid climates it tends to colonize the subterranean ecosystem, being frequently found in caves, as in Spanish Andalusia and now also in the Portuguese region of Alentejo. In less dry regions it is found to be more associated with the soil ecosystem ( Blas 1977 ). It has been also been reported ( Giachino & Vailati 1993 ) from the Superfcial Subterranean Habitat ( sensu Giachino & Vailati 2010 ). Distribution Described from Spanish Córdoba ( Kraatz 1870 ), this is an Iberian endemic with a scattered distribution in the central area of the peninsula, being more common in its southern and western parts. It is known from the Spanish provinces of Albacete, Ávila, Badajoz, Cáceres, Ciudad Real, Córdoba, Huelva, Jaén, Madrid and Sevilla and now also from southeastern Portugal ( Fig. 32 ). The present fnding in a cave of Alandroal, in the Alentejo province, is the frst confrmed record of this species for the Portuguese territory as previous records for Portugal ( Jeannel 1941 , Blas 1985 , 1989 , Reboleira 2012 , Reboleira et al. 2010 a , 2010b, 2011 a , 2012a) refer to S. algarvensis sp. nov.