Dichoteleas rugosus Kieffer

Figs 7, 29-31

Dichoteleas rugosus Kieffer, 1907: 297 (original description); Kieffer, 1926: 351 (description, keyed); Dodd, 1926: 370 (description); Masner, 1965: 72 (type information); Galloway, 1976: 90 (type information); Johnson, 1992: 367 (catalogued, type information).

Dichoteleas pappi Szabó, 1971: 319 (original description); Galloway 1976: 90 (type information); Johnson, 1992: 367 (catalogued, type information), new synonymy.

Description.

Color of head: black. Hyperoccipital carina: absent. Frontal depression: absent. Malar striae: present. Facial striae: present. Setation of eyes: absent. Sculpture of frons: smooth above interantennal prominence, areolate laterally. Setation of frons: sparsely setose throughout. Submedian carina: absent. Interantennal process: undifferentiated. Central keel: absent. Transverse pronotal carina: present. Color of pronotum: dark brown to black. Pronotal cervical sulcus: present. Mesepimeral sulcus: present. Sulcus along mesopleural carina: foveolate. Mesoscutal suprahumeral sulcus: absent. Mesoscutal humeral sulcus: present, foveolate. Median mesoscutal line: absent. Color of mesoscutum: dark brown to black. Sculpture of mesoscutum: punctate with longitudinal striations between notauli. Notaulus: complete. Visibility of notaulus: unobscured. Parapsidal line: present. Sculpture of mesoscutellum: punctate. Shape of axillular carinae in lateral view: without a posteroventral hooklike projection. Color of axillular carina: brown. Sculpture of T3-6: rugulose and finely punctate. Median carina on T1-T4: absent.

Diagnosis.

Dichoteleas rugosus can be distinguished from D. striatus by its setose and punctate mesosoma and other Dichoteleas by its bidentate mandibles.

Distribution.

Australia (Queensland).

Material examined.

Holotype, male, D. rugosus: Australia: QLD, Mackay; OCT-1897, B.M. TYPE HYM. 9.496.; Australia: 4 females, 2 males, OSUC 367523, 367536 (ANIC), OSUC 875046-875047, 875871-875872 (CNCI).

Comments.

In the original description, Kieffer (1907) wrote that D. rugosus was missing parapsidal lines. They are present but obscured by the sculpture of the mesoscutum.