Revision of the genus Procoryphaeus Mazur, 1984 (Coleoptera: Histeridae: Histerinae: Exosternini) Author Lackner, Tomáš text Zootaxa 2015 4044 2 289 300 journal article 10.11646/zootaxa.4044.2.6 79651912-edf8-4275-b1eb-252eed801c2e 1175-5326 241292 678576B0-25E0-4AFC-9104-1F00AC16B2EE Procoryphaeus violaceus ( Lewis, 1905 ) ( Figs. 5–8 ) Coryphaeus violaceus Lewis, 1905 : 347 Procoryphaeus violaceus : Mazur (1984) : 275 ; Mazur (1997) : 41 ; Mazur (2011) : 38 . FIGURE 5. Procoryphaeus violaceus (Lewis, 1905) habitus, dorsal view. FIGURE 6. ditto, ventral view. FIGURE 7. Procoryphaeus violaceus (Lewis, 1905) head, dorsal view. FIGURE 8. Procoryphaeus violaceus (Lewis, 1905) prosternum, mesoventrite + metaventrite. FIGURE 9. Procoryphaeus violaceus (Lewis, 1905) eighth sternite + tergite, ventral view. FIGURE 10. ditto, dorsal view. FIGURE 11. ditto, lateral view. FIGURE 12. Procoryphaeus violaceus (Lewis, 1905) ninth + tenth tergite, dorsal view. FIGURE 13. ditto, lateral view. FIGURE 14. Procoryphaeus violaceus (Lewis, 1905) spiculum gastrale, ventral view. FIGURE 15. ditto, lateral view. FIGURE 16. Procoryphaeus violaceus (Lewis, 1905) aedeagus, dorsal view. FIGURE 17. ditto, lateral view. Type locality. Mountain Kina Balu, Borneo , Sabah, Malaysia . Type material examined. Coryphaeus violaceus : Lectotype (present designation), ♀, mounted at the tip of triangular mounting card, with the following labels: “♀” (printed); followed by: “Kinabalu, / Borneo, 1500m / H. Rolle, Berlin SW11” (printed); followed by: “ Coryphaeus / violaceus / Type Lewis” (written); followed by: “ Type ” (red-margined round label”; followed by: “G. Lewis Coll. / B.M. 1926-369”; followed by: “ Coryphaeus / violaceus / Lewis, 1905 / LECTOTYPE / Des. T. Lackner 2015” (NHM). This species was described based on the unknown number of specimens and the lectotype designation fixes its identity. Additional material examined. INDONESIA : Java. 1 ♀, Depok, Nierstrasz, 1899 ( MNHN ); 1 ♀, idem, but ZMHUB ; 2 ♀♀, Java, without further data ( ZMHUB ); 1 ♀, Semarang, Drescher 1908 ( ZMHUB ). Sumatra. 1 ♂ , Padang, 1890, E. Modigliani ( ZMHUB ). Papua : 1 ♀, Nouvelle Guinée , coll. v. de Poll ( MNHN ); Uncertain province. 1 ♀, Holland—Indien [=presumably Indonesia ] ( MNHN ). THAILAND : Tenasserim. 1 ♀, 15 km pt. Kaeng-Krachan NP, 11.–14.v.2009 , S. Nomura, FIT (NG-5) ( NSMT ). UNKNOWN LOCALITIES: 1 ♀, no locality ( ZMHUB ); 1 ♂ , no locality (NHM). Diagnostic description. PEL: 4.20–5.00 mm; APW: 1.50–2.00 mm; PPW: 3.50–3.70 mm ; EW: 3.80–4.00 mm; EL: 2.80–3.00 mm. Specimens lumped under this species always have only three dorsal elytral striae complete and lack a well-impressed sutural elytral stria ( Figs. 5 –6). These characters were given by Lewis (1905) in his differential diagnosis distinguishing this species from the preceding one. The sutural elytral stria is in some specimens vaguely impressed or intermittent, but never as clearly impressed as in P. wallacei . The rest of the morphological characters show little difference between this and the preceding species, and without available male genitalia it is difficult to more clearly distinguish the two species. The colour of holotype is violet-blue, but in other specimens it can be substantially darker, almost black and with only very faint metallic lustre. The fourth discal elytral stria is punctuate and more prominent in the type female than in the rest of the specimens; apparently this character varies individually since there are cases where it is almost completely absent and almost untraceable to cases where it can be discerned. Between fourth discal and sutural striae, usually punctuate traces resembling the fifth stria can be observed in some specimens. Male genitalia ( Figs. 9 –17); based on a male from Padang, Sumatra): eighth sternite ( Figs. 9 –10) apically with velum (=apical guide of eighth sternite of Caterino & Tishechkin 2013 ), divided medially; eighth tergite apically outwardly emarginated, basal emargination of eighth sternite deep, eighth tergite on apical half with pores and pseudopores; eighth sternite and tergite not connected. Ninth tergite ( Fig. 12 ) medially completely divided, strongly sclerotized laterally; tenth tergite small and slender, keel-like; spiculum gastrale (Figs. 14–15): apical flange (‘head’) inwardly arcuate, ‘stem’ gradually dilated apically, base outwardly arcuate. Aedeagus (Figs. 16–17): basal piece (phallobase) approximately twice as long as tegmen, longitudinally divided on its apical third, phallobase curved ventrad; parameres of tegmen separated on their approximate apical half; gonopore of median lobe inserted inside tegmen, apex of aedeagus curved ventrad. Remarks. As noted with the preceding species, it is possible that the two species are actually conspecific and the type specimen of P. wallacei is an aberrant individual with five complete discal and well-marked sutural elytral striae. The colour in this species is variable among individuals from different localities as is the density of elytral punctuation and indeed the coarseness of the punctures of antero-lateral pronotal band. The only available male specimen, whose genitalia are illustrated here, is from Sumatra; I have seen another male specimen, however, without known locality.