Contributions to the knowledge of the “ Staphylinus-complex ” (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae: Staphylinini) of China. Part 21. The genus Ocypus Leach, 1819, subgenus Pseudocypus Mulsant & Rey, 1876. Section 4 Author Smetana, Aleš text Zootaxa 2009 2286 1 30 journal article 10.5281/zenodo.191273 d2982f3f-a5f5-46ff-bbd8-a1e186245a89 1175-5326 191273 Ocypus ( Pseudocypus ) shiretokensis Hayashi, 2008 ( Figs. 29–35 ) shiretokensis Hayashi, 2008 , 199 ( Ocypus ; subg. Pseudocypus ). Type material. Hayashi (2008: 199) described the species from three male specimens from Hokkaido. The holotype with the label “Shiretoko pass (Alt. 730 m ), Hokkaido, 29.vii.1989 , H. Nomura leg.”is deposited in the collection of Osaka Museum of Natural History. I have not seen the type material, but I have sent one male specimen of the series dealt with in this paper to Hayashi, who compared it with the holotype of O . shiretokensis and confirmed that the specimen is conspecific. Material studied. JAPAN : ”(Mt. Kurodake) Mts. Daisedtsuzan, Hokkaido, Japan , VII.21.1981, Coll. N. Yasuda” (4) ( ASC , YSC); ”Mt. Kitoushi, 1000 m , Rikubetsu, Hokkaido, June 26th 1993 , Kôichi Shibata leg.” (3) ( ASC , YSC). Diagnosis. Medium-sized species, sharing most character states with O . inexspectatus , but distinct by base of second abdominal tergite lacking punctation and pubescence, fifth visible abdominal tergite lacking pale apical seem of palisade setae, and by differently shaped aedoeagus. Description. In all character states similar to O . inexspectatus , but different as follows: average size smaller, body form more slender; pronotum slightly narrower (ratio length / width = 1.12; as long as wide in O . inexspectatus ); punctation of elytra more distinctly granulose and coarser; base of second abdominal tergite (in front of first visible tergit) impunctate and glabrous; fifth visible abdominal tergite lacking pale apical seem of palisade setae; punctation of abdominal tergites coarser and less dense. Male. Area behind anterior angles of pronotum densely punctate. Sternite 7 with medioapical emargination similar to that of O . inexspectatus , but narrower and less deep. Genital segment with tergite 10 rather short and wide, evenly narrowed toward subtruncate apex, setose as in Fig. 29 ; sternite 9 with acute basal portion, apical portion with subacute apex, setose as in Fig. 30 . Aedoeagus ( Figs. 31–34 ) similar to that of O . inexspectatus , but right lateral portion of median lobe in ventral view less conspicuously dilated and apex of median lobe shorter. Paramere situated on median lobe quite asymmetrically, of similar shape ( Fig. 33) but narrower, especially in basal portion, and more straight, with acute apex almost reaching apex of median lobe; underside of paramere lacking sensory peg setae, but with fine sensory setae situated as in Fig. 34 . Female. Area behind anterior angles of pronotum sparingly punctate on ground with very fine submeshed microsculpture. Tergite 10 of genital segment rather wide, evenly narrowed toward broadly arcuate apex ( Fig. 35 ). Body length 11.0–14 0 mm. FIGURES 29–35. Details of Ocypus shiretokensis . 29—tergite 10 of male genital segment; 30—sternite 9 of male genital segment (1.5 mm); 31—aedoeagus, ventral view (1.6 mm); 32—aedoeagus, lateral view (1.6 mm); 33— underside of paramere (1.1 mm); 34—apical portion of underside of paramere; 35—tergite 10 of female genital segment (1.1 mm). Recognition and comments. Ocypus shiretokensis is in general habitus and most external characters (coloration and pubescence of the body, coloration of the appendages) most similar to O . inexspectatus , as it has been shown above. However, O. shiretokensis differs at once, in addition to the different aedoeagus, by the base of the second abdominal tergite lacking punctation and pubescence, and the fifth visible abdominal tergite lacking the pale apical seem of palisade setae. Hayashi (2008, 199) stated that O . shiretokensis is very similar in general appearance to O . nigroaeneus and at the same time postulated close relationship of the species with O . helleni . The similarity of O . shiretokensis with O . nigroaeneus is in fact limited only to the fact that both species belong to the same lineage within Pseudocypus and share the character states of this lineage. But O . nigroaeneus differs from O . shiretokensis , in addition to the differently shaped aedoeagus and tergite 10 of the female genital segment ( Figs. 31 , 52 , 35 , 56 ), by several important external characters, such as the presence of a variably large impunctate area on the pronotum on each side of the impunctate midline, and the presence of the pale apical seam of palisade setae on the fifth visible abdominal tergite; additional different character states are the dark metallic surface of the fore body, the distinctly double punctation of the dorsal surface of the head and the pronotum, and the darker color of the appendages in O . nigroaeneus . The postulated close relationship of O . shiretokensis with O . helleni , based on “similar structure of dentition of mandibles”, is misleading. The presence or absence of mandibular teeth, in addition to some other character states, such as the presence of subbasal indentation in members of the genera Protocypus Müller, 1925 ( Smetana 2003: 130 ) , Nelmanwaslus Smetana, 2006 ( Smetana 2006: 40 ) , or Agelosus Sharp, 1889 ( Smetana 2003: 61 ) , belong to the character states important at the generic level for distinguishing genera of the ‘Staphylinus-complex” ( Smetana & Davies 2000 ). But at the species level, the shape and number of mandibular teeth varies among members of many genus level taxa, and Pseudocypus is one of them. In addition, the development of mandibular teeth in some members of Pseudocypus is sexually dimorphic (e.g., in O . picipennis , see Smetana 2003 : 62, Figs. 1–4 ). It is therefore obvious that any attempt to establish “relationships” among the members of this subgenus, based solely on the development of mandicular teeth, must lead to wrong results. The “relationship” of O . shiretokensis and O . helleni ends at the level that both are members of the subgenus Pseudocypus , but they each belong to a different lineage: O . shiretokensis to the fuscatus- lineage, O . helleni to the picipennis -lineage (see above).