A revision of the genus Photinopygus Chatzimanolis (Staphylinidae: Xanthopygina) Author Chatzimanolis, Stylianos text Zootaxa 2023 2023-05-18 5292 1 1 100 http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5292.1.1 journal article 53342 10.11646/zootaxa.5292.1.1 be05b7e2-ccc8-49cf-9173-1238edee4d40 1175-5326 7959518 8DEB1E66-92FA-4200-91A9-4631057B0600 Photinopygus tepidus ( Erichson, 1839 ) ( Figs. 93 , 213–219 ) Staphylinus tepidus Erichson, 1839: 365 . Xanthopygus tepidus (Erichson) ; Kraatz 1857: 539 . Xanthopygus nigripes Sharp, 1876: 130 . New synonymy. Xanthopygus alienus Bernhauer, 1905: 182 . New synonymy. Photinopygus tepidus (Erichson) ; Chatzimanolis 2021: 91. Photinopygus nigripes (Sharp) ; Chatzimanolis 2021: 91. Photinopygus alienus (Bernhauer) ; Chatzimanolis 2021: 91. Type material. Lectotype , here designated, female, with labels: “5908” / “Type” / “Hist. -Coll. ( Coleoptera ) Nr. 5908 Staphylinus tepidus Erichs. Cayenne, Boquet, Zool. Mus. Berlin ” / “ tepidus Er. Cayenne Buq. ” / “ Syntype Staphylinus tepidus Erichson, 1839 labelled by MFNB 2020” / “ Lectotype Staphylinus tepidus Erichson des. Chatzimanolis 2022 ”. In the collection of MFNB. FIGURES 213–216. Photinopygus tepidus (Erichson) . 213. Habitus. 214. Sternites 7–8. 215. Pronotum. 216. Antenna. Not to scale. Different specimens were selected for the photographs of the habitus, sternites and antennae to illustrate the variations in the coloration. Type material for Xanthopygus nigripes . Holotype , male with labels: “HoloType [ Holo appears to have been written later over the typical Type label]” / “ Amazon S. Paulo ” / “ S. America Brazil ” / “Sharp Coll. 1905-313” / “ Xanthopygus nigripes ♀ Type D.S.” / “Holotype ♀ Xanthopygus nigripes Sharp, 1876 det. R. G. Booth 2014”. In the collection of NHMUK. Type material for Xanthopygus alienus . Holotype , male with labels: “amazonas Bang Haas” / “heterogaster Fvl” / “ alienus Brhn Typus” / “Chicago MHNMus M. Bernhauer Collection ” / “Bernhauer Brazil types Photographed E. Caron 2017” / “FMNHINS3048921”. In the collection of FMNH. Bernhauer (1905) mentioned that he had only one specimen , which is the holotype. Additional Materials. BRAZIL : Amazonas : Manaus [-3.10°, -60.02°], Bernhauer coll., FMNHINS3975393, FMNHINS3975391 (1 ♁, 1 ♀ FMNH ) ; unknown locality, Sharp coll., Bernhauer coll., FMNHINS3975390 ( 1 ♀ FMNH ) ; Bahia : Cocos , margin of Rio Itaguari , ca. 12 km S of city [-14.18°, -44.53°], 500–600 m, 2.ii. 1986 , on Orbignya cf. oleifera (Palmae) L.R. Noblick, G. Lobo leg. FMNHINS4030565, FMNHINS4030566 (2 ♁ FMNH ) ; Goiás : Jatai [-17.88°, -51.83°], ix–xi.[18]97, FMNHINS3975394 ( 1 ♀ FMNH ) ; Mato Grosso : Corumbá [-19.01°, -57.65°], Bernhauer coll., FMNHINS3975842 ( 1 ♀ FMNH ) ; Sinop [-11.87°, -55.50°], x.1976 , M. Alvarenga leg. ( 4 ♀ CNC ) ; COLOMBIA : Vichada : PNN El Tuparro Cerro Tomás [5.35°, -67.85°], 140 m, 19–29.vii.2000 , Malaise trap , W. Vilalba leg., SM0549132 (1 ♁ SEMC ) ; ECUADOR : Esmeraldas : Bilsa [0.33°, –79.72°], 10.v.–5.vi.1996 , FIT, P. Hibbs leg., SM0092656 (1 ♁ SEMC ) ; same locality, 5.vi.–7.vii.1996 , FIT, P. Hibbs leg., SM0092786, SM0075085, SM0092783 ( 3 ♀ SEMC ) ; Sucumbios : Limoncocha [-0.40°, -76.60°], 250 m, 15–28.vi.1976 , S. & J. Peck leg. ( 1 ♀ CNC ) ; Sacha Lodge [-0.50°, -76.50°], 270 m, 4–14.iii.1994 , Malaise trap , P. Hibbs leg., SM00250032, SM00250062 ( 2 ♀ SEMC ) ; same location, 12–22.ii.1994 , Malaise trap , P. Hibbs leg., SM0020778, SM0020796 ( 2 ♀ SEMC ) ; FRENCH GUIANA : Kourou (roches de) [5.16°, -52.65°], Griveau coll., ( 1 ♀ MHNG ) ; 8.4 km SSE Roura [4.68°, -52.22°], 200 m, 23.v.1997 , FIT, J. Ashe , R. Brooks leg., SM0100336 (1 ♁ SEMC ) ; Saint-Laurent-du-Maroni [5.50°, -54.03°], 1914, R. Benoist leg., Bernhauer coll., FMNHINS3975392 (1 ♁ FMNH ); unknown locality, Le Moult coll., FMNHINS3975841, FMNHINS3975840 (1 ♁, 1 ♀ FMNH ) ; GUYANA : Cuyuni-Mazaruni : Essequibo R. [6.18°, -58.83°], J. Ogilvie leg. ( 1 ♀ MCZ ) ; MEXICO : Veracruz : Jalapilla [18.83°, -97.09°], Scheerpeltz coll. (1 ♁ NMW ) ; PANAMA : Colón : Galeta Is. [9.38°, -79.86°], ix–x.[19]38, Bierig coll., FMNHINS3989889, FMNHINS3989886, FMNHINS3989885, FMNHINS3989887, FMNHINS3989884, FMNHINS3989888 (4 ♁, 2 ♀ FMNH ) ; PERU : Huánuco : Callanga [-9.36°, -76.80°], Bierig. coll., FMNHINS3975506 ( 1 ♀ FMNH ) ; Madre de Dios : Cocha Salvador Reserved Zone Manu National Park [-12.00°, -71.53°], 310m, 20.x.2000 , flower fall, R. Brooks leg., SM0210498 (1 ♁ SEMC ) . FIGURES 217–219. Aedeagus of Photinopygus tepidus (Erichson) . 217. Lateral view. 218. Dorsal view. 219. Detail of paramere, ventral view. Diagnosis. Photinopygus tepidus belongs in the narrow pronotum species group. Photinopygus tepidus can be distinguished from all other species of Photinopygus based on the shape of antennomere 4 ( Figs. 213, 216 ), which is quadrate (longer than wide in other species). Additionally, in males, sternite 7 has a distinctly formed, small porose structure ( Fig. 214 ). Description. Forebody ( Fig. 213 ) length 5.0– 6.4 mm . Color of head, pronotum and mesoscutellum dark brown to black; antennomeres 1–4, dark orange; antennomeres 5–10 dark brown to black (some specimens antennae dark orange); legs dark brown to black except protarsi dark orange (in some specimens meso-, metatarsi light brown); elytra metallic blue with green or purple overtones; abdomen dark brown to black except segments 7–8 orange (some specimens with anterior 1/3 of segment 7 dark brown). Antenna ( Fig. 216 ) with antennomere 3 without tomentose pubescence; antennomere 4 with tomentose pubescence; antennomeres 4–6 subquadrate; antennomeres 7–10 transverse. Head transverse; HW/HL ratio = 1.38–1.56. Left mandible with bicuspid tooth. Posterior margin of head slightly extended posteriad on each side of neck. Head with medium-sized punctures, distance between punctures as wide as 2–3 punctures. Pronotum ( Fig. 215 ) subquadrate; PW/PL ratio = 1.0–1.13. Lateral margins of pronotum in dorsal view posteriad of midpoint strongly converging; pronotum with 3–4 sparse rows of punctures on each half beside median impunctate line; distance between punctures as wide as 1–2 punctures but large areas of pronotum without punctures. EL/PL ratio = 1.30–1.53. Elytra with dense punctation; distance between punctures as wide as 0.5–1 punctures. Metepisternum covered with punctures (impunctate area less than 1/3). Abdomen with tergites 3–4 setose; tergites 3–5 with curved carina (arch-like), although on some specimens curved carina not as impressed on tergite 5. In males, sternite 7 with small porose structure, sternite 7 with shallow and broad emargination posteriorly; sternite 8 with small U-shaped emargination posteriorly, emargination with ‘shaved’ margin ( Fig. 214 ). Aedeagus as in Figs. 217–219 ; in dorsal view paramere converging to rounded apex; paramere shorter and as wide as median lobe; in lateral view paramere becoming narrower near tip; paramere with peg setae as in Fig. 219 , peg setae absent on the tip. Median lobe in dorsal view converging to narrow pointed tip; in lateral view median lobe becoming narrower; median lobe with small subapical tooth. Distribution. Known from the Mesoamerican, Pacific, Boreal Brazilian, South Brazilian, and Chacoan biogeographic dominions. Distributed in the states of Amazonas, Bahia , Goiás , Mato Grosso and São Paulo in Brazil , the department of Vichada in Colombia , the provinces of Esmeraldas and Sucumbios in Ecuador , from French Guiana , the region of Cuyuni-Mazaruni in Guyana , the province of Colón in Panama , and the departments of Huánuco and Madre de Dios in Peru . The specimen from the state of Veracruz in Mexico is perhaps a mislabeled specimen since there is a large gap in the distribution between Panama and Mexico . Map is shown in Fig. 93 . Habitat. Collected at low elevations ( 140–600 m ) with flight intercept and malaise traps, and on Orbignya cf. oleifera (babassu palm) and flower falls. Remarks. Bernhauer (1905) mentioned some characters that he thought differentiated P. alienus from P. tepidus , however, his diagnosis was based on the holotype and did not consider the variation present in the species. It is possible that P. tepidus is an amalgamation of many cryptic species, however, morphology alone cannot differentiate between them. One might be willing to hypothesize that the various antenna color morphs point to different species, however these color morphs are scattered among specimens belonging to various biogeogaphic domains.