On the taxonomy of some South American and Australo-Pacific Anthicidae Latreille, 1819 (Coleoptera) with new subfamily and tribe-rank synonymies
Author
Telnov, Dmitry
Department of Life Sciences, Natural History Museum, SW 7 5 BD London, United Kingdom & Institute of Life Sciences and Technology, Daugavpils University, Vienības iela 13, LV- 5401 Daugavpils, Latvia & Institute of Biology, University of Latvia, O. Vācieša iela 4, LV- 1004 Rīga, Latvia
text
Zootaxa
2024
2024-09-02
5501
3
401
424
http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5501.3.1
journal article
10.11646/zootaxa.5501.3.1
1175-5326
13628165
6A91B5D0-0251-4F5C-AA32-D70CAAE55F90
Copobaenus
Fairmaire & Germain, 1863
Fairmaire & Germain (1863: 236)
,
type
species
Copobaenus nobilis
Fairmaire & Germain, 1863
[subsequent designation by
Abdullah (1969)
].
=
Trichananca
Blackburn, 1891
syn. nov.
Blackburn (1891: 341)
,
type
species
Trichananca victoriensis
Blackburn (1891)
by monotypy].
The synonymy is based on the studied
type
species of
Copobaenus
and
Trichananca
which appear congeneric:
Type material examined,
C. nobilis
.
Lectotype
♂
[designated by
Abdullah (1969:335)
]
BMNH
:
28452
[handwritten] // TYPE [printed] // Germain [handwritten] // Chili Chillah [handwritten] // Fry Coll. 1905-100. [printed] // Type H.T. [printed, label circular, red frame] //
Copobaenus nobilis Germain
Chili (
Germain
) [handwritten].
Type material examined,
T. victoriensis
.
Holotype
♂
[monotypy]
BMNH
: T. 3913 A? [handwritten on a card with the specimen] // Type [printed, label circular, red frame] //
Trichananca victoriensis, Blackb.
[handwritten] // Blackburn coll. 1910-236. [printed].
FIGURE 1.
Copobaenus nobilis
Fairmaire & Germain, 1863
, ♀ from Nahuelbuta National park, Chile. A—Habitus, dorsal view; B—Forebody, dorsal view [not to scale]. Image courtesy A. Degiovanni, Bubano, Italy published in Telnov & Degiovanni (2021).
The two discussed species appear to be rather similar except that in
C. nobilis
(
Fig. 1
) the compound eye is smaller and lacks interfacetal setae (the setae are present in
T. victoriensis
), the postcoxal rests are not present (narrow but well-developed in
T. victoriensis
), the mesoventral intercoxal process is narrow (distinctly wider, with lateral edges somewhat margined in
T. victoriensis
), the metathorax is considerably longer (less so in
T. victoriensis
), the elytra are metallic blue and the ventral pterothorax and abdominal ventrites strongly glossy (slightly glossy in
T. victoriensis
), the elytral disc confusedly punctate (the punctures arranged into irregular, partially confused longitudinal rows in
T. victoriensis
), and the elytral epipleuron is present but weakly defined (well-defined in
T. victoriensis
). The listed features, however, are in my opinion not sufficient enough to treat both genera as valid, and a new generic synonym is introduced.
New combinations are therefore proposed for the species previously attributed to
Trichananca
:
Copobaenus apterus
(Lea, 1922)
comb. nov.
,
C. bicoloratus
(Gemminger in Gemminger & Harold, 1870)
comb. nov.
,
C. cheesmanae
(Telnov, 2019)
comb. nov.
,
C. concolor
(King, 1869)
comb. nov.
,
C. frenchi
(Pic, 1913)
comb. nov.
,
fulgidus
(Werner & Chandler, 1995)
comb. nov.
,
C. hornabrooki
(Uhmann, 1995)
comb. nov.
,
C. inexpectatus
(Telnov & Degiovanni, 2021)
comb. nov.
,
C. marziae
(Moore & Vidal, 2005)
comb. nov.
,
C. micromelas
(Lea, 1922)
comb. nov.
,
C. neotropicus
(Telnov & Degiovanni, 2021)
comb. nov.
,
C. nigripennis
(Lea, 1917)
comb. nov.
,
C. novacaledonicus
(Telnov, 2019)
comb. nov.
,
C. pisoniae
(Lea, 1917)
comb. nov.
,
C. poggii
(Telnov & Degiovanni, 2021)
comb. nov.
,
C. poqui
(
Guerrero
& Diéguez, 2018)
comb. nov.
,
C. rugulosus
(Uhmann, 2007)
comb. nov.
,
C. uniformis
(Lea, 1922)
comb. nov.
,
C. valenciai
(Moore & Vidal, 2005)
comb. nov.
,
C. victoriensis
(
Blackburn, 1891
)
comb. nov.
,
C. vinctus
(Erichson, 1842)
comb. nov.