Revision of the genus Celebargiolestes Kennedy, 1925 (Odonata: Argiolestidae) Author Vincent J. Kalkman text Odonatologica 2016 2016-12-01 45 3 235 269 journal article 10.5281/zenodo.163451 f9566778-1df4-44d6-9a4c-849de39a4b6c 163451 Celebargiolestes sp. Material studied Sulawesi Tenggara 2♀, Tenggara, Palau Kabaena, 1 km S of Tangkeno, 550m, 08−09-xi-1989, R. de Jong & J. Huisman leg. Figures 34–39 . Appendages of Celebargiolestes males. 34 – C. cinctus , Ranotongkor , 02-viii-1940, JvT6476, dorsal view; 35 – C. cinctus , Ranotongkor , 02-viii-1940, JvT6476, lateral view; 36 – Ranotongkor, 02-viii-1940, JvT6476, ventral view; 37 – C. askewi sp. nov. , holotype, dorsal view; 38 – C. askewi sp. nov. , holotype, lateral view; 39 – C. askewi sp. nov. , holotype, ventral view. The two available females from this locality have a face resembling that of C. orri : labrum and clypeus black, genae and mandibles dark brown to black grading to yellow-brown in the upper posterior corner, front of head tawny-brown with the centre of the frons with mottled dark brown to black in one specimen but largely tawny brown in the other specimen, top of head including sockets of antennae black. This locality is isolated from the main range of C. orri and it is not unlikely that these specimens belong to a yet undescribed species. More material, including males, is needed to confirm this. Figures 40–45. Appendages of Celebargiolestes males. 40 – C. toli sp. nov. , holotype, dorsal view; 41 – C. toli sp. nov. , holotype, lateral view; 42 – C. toli sp. nov. , holotype, ventral view; 43 – C. orri sp. nov. , holotype, dorsal view; 44 – C. orri sp. nov. , holotype, lateral view; 45 – C. orri sp. nov. , JvT6646, ventral view. Discussion Rationale for the taxonomic decisions The species of Celebargiolestes are all closely related and show no clear differences except for the pattern on the head, the shape of the head of the genital ligula and the shape of the inferior appendages. Based on these, four groups can easily be recognized. They are here described as species. Within three of these there is variability in the shape of the inferior appendages between localities sometimes coinciding with small variability in coloration. The differences in the shape of the inferior appendages are slight, difficult to judge without direct comparison of material and the use of this character for reliable identification is limited. Material from other locations might show that there is gradual change between regions. For this reason I refrained from giving names and regard them as regional differences within species. It is remarkable that C. cinctus is found in two disjunct areas; however the populations in these disjunct regions share the same pattern on the face and have the same shape of the head of the genital ligula. Celebargiolestes askewi sp. nov. has the same pattern on the face and shape of the head of the genital ligula as C. orri sp. nov. but differs from the latter by the clearly shorter lower appendages. It could be that C. askewi represents just one of the more clearly differentiated regional forms of C. orri which would make the latter paraphyletic.