A Checklist and New Species ofEleodesEschscholtz (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) Pertaining to the SubgenusPromusLeconte, with a Key to United States Species Author Johnston, M. Andrew text The Coleopterists Bulletin 2015 2015-03-31 69 1 11 19 http://dx.doi.org/10.1649/0010-065x-69.1.11 journal article 10.1649/0010-065X-69.1.11 5331184 52ED5896-72C3-4D1F-B12D-E7A02FDB7346 Eleodes ( Promus ) compositus Casey 1891 , revised status ( Fig. 1 ) The well-known coleopterist Thomas L. Casey described 15 species of Eleodes , of which four are currently considered valid. Eleodes compositus was described in 1891 and subsequently synonymized by Blaisdell (1909) with Eleodes hispilabris (Say) , albeit without reexamining the type or any specimens that could be ascribed to this newly designated infrasubspecific forma composita ( Blaisdell 1909 ). Blaisdell assessed that the aberrant form of the pronotum which Casey described “is no proof that it is specifically distinct. Analogous aberrations are observed in dentipes in particular, and hispilabris is fully as variable as that species” ( Blaisdell 1909 ). Indeed, the pronotum of E. compositus ( Fig. 1 ) is subquadrate, evenly arcuate laterally, and only slightly constricted posteriorly unlike the pronotum of E. hispilabris , which is distinctly constricted posteriorly, widest anterior of midline, and with very prominent anterior projections. The name E. compositus has since been listed as a synonym of E. hispilabris in several publications and its status has not been reconsidered in the literature ( Papp 1961 ; Tanner 1961 ). Fig. 1. Eleodes compositus . A) Holotype male, lateral habitus, scale bar = 1 cm, B) Dorsal habitus. As part of an ongoing effort to reassess every type specimen within the genus Eleodes , the type of Eleodes compositus , residing at the USNM, was examined. In doing so, it became apparent that this specimen did not represent E. hispilabris , nor was it even a member of the subgenus Eleodes where E. hispilabris is placed. In fact, this specimen belongs to the subgenus Promus as clearly evidenced by the holotype male having the combined characters of spined profemora and the first two segments of the protarsi with pads of tomentose setae, a combination found in no other subgenus. The heavily sulcate elytral striae clearly distinguish this species from all other described Promus species. The holotype , with the locality given as “ Texas ”, remains as the only known specimen of this enigmatic species. Eleodes compositus Casey is hereby returned to valid, species-level standing and placed in the subgenus Promus .