An annotated checklist of the Scarabaeoidea (Insecta: Coleoptera) of the Guianas
Author
Hielkema, Auke J.
Author
Hielkema, Meindert A.
text
Insecta Mundi
2019
2019-10-25
732
732
1
306
journal article
10.5281/zenodo.3678492
8e18452b-1d9d-462e-bac8-8c86eeb4ddc3
1942-1354
3678492
930EAB11-37FA-41B0-980A-1A4736527842
§
Oxysternon
(
Oxysternon
)
macleayi
Nevinson, 1892
Oxysternon macleayi
Nevinson 1892: 34
(
Brazil
-
LECTOTYPE
)
=
Oxysternon biimpressum
Olsoufieff 1924: 115
(
Brazil
)
Distribution.
French Guiana
:
Olsoufieff 1924: 49
, 115.
Brazil
:
Nevinson 1892: 34
;
Gillet 1911b: 87
;
Olsoufieff 1924: 49
, 115 (as
O. biimpressum
; as
O. macleayi
);
Blackwelder 1944: 210
(as
O. biimpressum
);
Vaz-de-Mello 2000: 194
(as
O.
(
Oxysternon
)
biimpressum
; as
O.
(
Oxysternon
)
macleayi
);
Arnaud 2002c: 70
(designation
LECTOTYPE
Oxysternon macleayi
);
Edmonds and Zídek 2004: 15
(designation
LECTOTYPE
Oxysternon macleayi
).
“Amazon Basin”:
Olsoufieff 1924: 49
, 115 (as
O. macleayi
).
Other:
Blackwelder 1944: 210
(
Peru
- as
O. macleayi
).
Note 1.
In 1983 Arnaud labeled a specimen of
Oxysternon macleayi
as
lectotype
, but he published this designation only in 2002 (
Arnaud 2002c
). According to
Edmonds and Zídek (2004: 17)
, this designation was invalid because it did not conform to Articles 74.7.2 and 74.7.3. Because of this, they designated another
lectotype
, which happened to be the same specimen. Contrary to
Edmonds and Zídek (2004)
, we consider Arnaud’s
lectotype
designation fully in accordance with Article 74.7.3. However, we do acknowledge that there may be room for ambiguity regarding Article 74.7.2, as the
lectotype
label was written in 1983 but the designation was only published in 2002, without reference to this discrepancy in years. We therefore consider the
lectotype
of
Edmonds and Zídek (2004)
as the valid one.
Note 2.
We are unaware of any recent records of
Oxysternon macleayi
from the Guianas,
Brazil
north of the Amazon or
Venezuela
. We consider it likely that the specimen from
French Guiana
mentioned in
Olsoufieff (1924: 115)
was mislabeled and regard this species as not occurring in the research area.