Revision of some types of North American aleocharines (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae: Aleocharinae), with synonymic notes
Author
Gusarov, Vladimir I.
text
Zootaxa
2003
2003-11-17
353
1
1
134
https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.353.1.1
journal article
5458
10.11646/zootaxa.353.1.1
740af13a-ed5c-40d0-b0c1-8d3fd2b92f56
11755334
5019783
104E9C0B-B207-41E6-816C-E91FC1C7DBA0
Atheta
Thomson, 1858
Atheta
Thomson, 1858: 36
(
type
species:
Aleochara graminicola
Gravenhorst, 1806
, by monotypy, fixed by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (
ICZN 1961
)).
Megista
Mulsant & Rey, 1874a: 623
(as subgenus of
Liogluta
;
type
species:
Aleochara graminicola
Gravenhorst, 1806
, by monotypy).
Megista
Mulsant & Rey, 1874b: 591
(as subgenus of
Liogluta
; synonymic homonym of
Megista
Mulsant & Rey, 1874a
).
Atheta
:
Ganglbauer, 1895: 136
(as valid genus).
Elytrusa
Casey, 1906: 334
(
type
species:
Homalota granulata
Mannerheim, 1846
, by original designation).
Atheta
(
Megista
)
:
Casey, 1910a: 15
(as valid subgenus).
Atheta
:
Bernhauer & Scheerpeltz, 1926: 604
(as valid genus; in subtribe
Athetina
).
Atheta
(
Megista
)
:
Bernhauer & Scheerpeltz, 1926: 658
(as valid subgenus).
Atheta
(
Elytrusa
)
:
Bernhauer & Scheerpeltz, 1926: 658
(as synonym of
Atheta
(
Megista
)).
Atheta
:
Benick & Lohse, 1974: 124
(as valid genus; in tribe
Callicerini
Lohse, 1969
).
Atheta
:
Muona, 1979b: 24
(as valid genus; in subtribe
Athetina
).
Atheta
:
Lohse
et al.
, 1990: 188
(as valid genus; in subtribe
Athetina
).
(Other references are omitted)
Discussion.
The magnitude of the genus
Atheta
varies in different contemporary works (
Benick & Lohse 1974
;
Muona 1979b
;
Lohse
et al.
1990
). In the narrowest sense (
e.g.
,
Lohse
et al
. 1990
, where it is equivalent to
Atheta
s. str.
of
Benick and Lohse 1974
)
Atheta
includes the athetines with pronotal setation of
type
I (
Benick & Lohse 1974
), with hypomera fully visible in lateral view and with distinctly shaped spermatheca with thick distal portion and thin coiled proximal portion (
Figs.
150–155
in
Strand & Vik 1964
). In other interpretations (
Benick & Lohse 1974
;
Muona 1979b
), which can be traced back to
Ganglbauer (1895)
,
Atheta
is a much wider group. If this wider interpretation of the genus is accepted it is hard to say what the autapomorphies are which define it. In the key by
Benick and Lohse (1974
; pp. 72–79) one arrives at
Atheta
at the very end of the key, after having eliminated all other athetine genera, and essentially the genus is characterized by the features it lacks. Further analysis is needed to determine whether
Atheta
in the broad sense can be maintained as a monophyletic group.