Tomopterchasia, Clarke, 2013

Clarke, Robin O. S., 2013, Bolivian Rhinotragini Vii: Provisional Report Of Higher Altitude Species (Coleoptera, Cerambycidae) With Descriptions Of New Taxa, Papéis Avulsos de Zoologia 53 (28), pp. 373-406 : 373-406

publication ID	https://doi.org/ 10.1590/S0031-10492013002800001
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03B5879C-781C-D63D-E2A2-FC2EFDFAF916
treatment provided by	Felipe
scientific name	Tomopterchasia
status	gen. nov.

Treatment

Tomopterchasia View in CoL gen. nov.

Figs. 9A, 10A View FIGURES 7‑12

Type species: Tomopterchasia sullivanorum sp. nov., here designated.

Diagnosis: Tomopterchasia gen. nov. is diagnosed by a combination of male characters which separates it from other genera with short cuneate elytra; these are: rostrum short, inferior lobes of eyes far from contiguous, procoxal cavities closed, abdominal process steeply inclined, short hind legs, and metatibia lacking dense pubescence.

Another combination of characters present in this new genus could be termed sub-diagnostic, since they are often found among other genera of Rhinotragini ( Odontocera , Phespia , Epimelitta and in most species of Tomopterus ); but among Phygopoda and related genera they are unusual. These are the form of the prothorax: quadrate, and subglobose (and uniformly convex), and the pubescence on the pronotum (with bands of dense recumbent pubescence clothing apical and basal margins).

Epimelitta and related genera have open coxal cavities, and usually densely pubescent metatibiae. Phygopoda Thomson, 1864 and related genera have long hind legs and usually densely pubescent metatibiae. Few males among the species in these two generic groups have widely spaced eyes, or a uniformly convex, quadrate prothorax (with bands of dense recumbent pubescence clothing front and hind margins).

Tomopterus has a similar shaped prothorax, and pronotum with similar bands of pubescence; but rostrum moderately long; in male eyes nearly contiguous; antennae rather short and clavate; elytra not passing metacoxae (and usually shorter); abdomen broad; and hind femora with short peduncles and long, robust claves.

The monotypic genus Carenoptomerus Tavakilian & Peñaherrera-Leiva, 2003 shares a number of characters with Tomopterchasia , as follows: short rostrum short; inferior lobes of eyes in male well separated; prothorax convex and rounded at sides (but pubescence very different); procoxal cavities just closed; wide mesosternal process; cuneate elytra; and vespiform abdomen. However Carenoptomerus guyanensis Tavakilian & Peñaherrera-Leiva, 2003 is a much more robust species (with crassate antennae, wide abdomen, and sturdy hind legs); and, moreover, may be separat- ed from Tomopterchasia by the following diagnostics: prosternum flat (in Tomopterchasia arced); prosternal process wide (in Tomopterchasia sublaminate); elytra not passing level of metacoxae (in Tomopterchasia they reach middle of urosternite I); metasternum very convex (in Tomopterchasia somewhat flattened); and metatarsomere I shorter than II + III (in Tomopterchasia I longer than II + III).

Fisher (1952) must have considered the above alternatives (with exception of the latter), and placed his species ( Ischasia cuneiformis Fisher, 1952 , here transferred to Tomopterchasia ), in the genus Ischasia Thomson, 1864 for want of further choice. However, Tomopterchasia gen. nov. may be separated from Ischasia by the following male characters (unless otherwise stated): in Tomopterchasia rostrum short, about one third length of inferior lobe of eye (in Ischasia rufina Thomson, 1864 , the type-species of its genus, rostrum more than half length of inferior lobe); in Tomopterchasia inferior lobes of eyes rather widely separated, width of one lobe 1.70 wider than interocular (in Ischasia rufina width of one lobe six times wider than interocular); in Tomopterchasia antenna slender, and antennomere III and V subequal, 0.45-0.50 mm (in Ischasia rufina antennomere III, V, VI and VII subequal, 0.50-0.55 mm); in both sexes of Tomopterchasia prothorax subglobate, quadrate to slightly transverse (in Ischasia rufina subcylindrical and elongate); in both sexes of Tomopterchasia abdomen vespiform and abdominal process steeply inclined (in both sexes of Ischasia rufina abdomen fusiform and abdominal process planar with abdomen); in Tomopterchasia urosternite V with deep soleate excavation (in Ischasia rufina urosternite V is undifferentiated); and in both sexes of Tomopterchasia hind leg short, 2.2 longer than front leg, about 0.8 body length (in both sexes of Ischasia rufina hind leg is long, 2.6 longer than front leg, 1.1 longer than body length).

Description of genus: Small (7.20-8.60 mm), forebody short and moderately wide, abdomen long and moderately narrow; ratio forebody:abdomen 0.7-0.8:1.0. Head with eyes slightly narrower than width of prothorax. Rostrum short, about one third length of inferior lobe of eye. Apical palpomeres fusiform with truncate apices. Labrum short, five times wider than long; front margin straight, but declivous. Inferior lobes of eyes convex (in female rather flat), slightly longer than wide; not contiguous, in male separated by 1.3 diameter of antennal scape (Fisher says in I. cuneiformis twice width of scape; and female three times); their distal margins lying on frons, proximal margins transverse (slightly oblique in female). Superior lobes small and narrow, the distance between them about three times their own width; with 7-8 rows of ommatidia. Mentum-submentum multicarinate and densely punctured (in quadrate patch in male, in transverse patch in female T. cuneiformis ). Antennal tubercles rather prominent, the surface between them unusually flat. Antennae moderately short, reaching middle of urosternite II in male (hardly passing metacoxae in female T. cuneiformis ); subfiliform in male (subcrassate in female I. cuneiformis ); scape subcylindrical, in male shorter than antennomere III (in female T. cuneiformis equal to III); antennomeres III and IV filiform; V weakly pedunculate-clavate; VI slightly longer than VII; VII-X incrementally shorter; VII-IX feebly serrate in male (thickened towards apex, but laterally strongly rounded), in female rather strongly serrate; X trapezoidal; XI fusiform. Prothorax Tomopterus -like, quadrate (to slightly transverse in female T. cuneiformis ); uniformly convex with rounded sides. Prosternum almost flat, but apical border strongly declivous; prosternal process arced, base sublaminate, its apex rather short, wide and triangular. Procoxal cavities rather broadly plugged at sides, just closed behind. Mesosternum not declivous, but planar and inclined (ca. 45°) from base of mesosternal process to its apex; mesosternal process with wide base (half width mesocoxal cavity in male, two-thirds width in female T. cuneiformis ), its apex short, lanceolate and depressed medially. Elytra cuneate with broadly rounded apices, short and Ischasia-like; rather flat, but transversely depressed across base of apical third, and convex to apex; about 1.6 longer than width of humeri; reaching mid urosternite I; just hiding mesosterna; humeri moderately projecting and prominent (flatter in female T. cuneiformis ); gape for apical third (but not truly dehiscent); apices rounded; each elytron with translucent panel. Metasternum broad and tumid, but flattened on disc (less prominent than mesocoxae); with straight, slightly converging sides, apical margin oblique; longitudinal suture well marked to apical third. Metepisternum moderately broad at base and subacuminate at apex. Abdomen vespiform (narrowest at apex urosternite I/base of II, widest at apex III and middle of IV); moderately narrow (in female T. cuneiformis urosternites wider, especially III). In male urosternite I and II slightly elongate, and weakly constricted towards middle; I subcylindrical; II weakly trapezoidal; III similar to II, but wider; IV cylindrical and transverse, with rounded sides. Male urosternite V trapezoidal with rounded sides; strongly differentiated: apical half with abrupt, deep, soleate excavation (n.b., not a depression), reminiscent of some Ischasia species (see Peñaherrera-Leiva & Tavakilian, 2004, fig. 26b); and alate at apex of sides. Female urosternite V subconical, contracted near apex, leaving apical third parallel-sided and slightly downturned. Abdominal process steeply inclined (slightly less in female T. cuneiformis ), apex narrow and recurved to horizontal in male (broader and blunter in female T. cuneiformis ), in male intimately inserted between coxae. Front and hind legs short; hind legs relatively short; ratio front/middle/hind leg 1.0:1.2-1.3:2.1-2.2; pedunculate-clavate. Protibiae slightly shorter than profemora, straight, narrow at base, gradually widening to apex, sides of apex with setose tubercle, apical margin oblique. Pro- and mesofemoral claves broad and abrupt (when viewed from the side), the latter flatter laterally, slightly tumid mesally (when viewed from above); profemoral peduncle short and rather broad; mesofemoral peduncle flat and narrow, about one third length of clave. Metafemoral peduncle cylindrical, narrow, about two-thirds length of clave; clave fusiform, not abrupt, apex reaching middle of urosternite III. Metatibiae bisinuate, shorter than metafemora, moderately sturdy, abruptly broadened at extreme apex, finely setose (and without brush). Metatarsus moderately long; metatarsomere I subclylindrical (gradually widening from base to apex), short, about 1.1 longer than length of II + III; II subtrapezoidal (with apex rounded); III short, the lobes diverging.

Male genitalia (examined in situ): Tegmen arced, moderately sclerotised; lateral lobes not twisted, nor divergent; moderately short and broad (about 0.20 mm);

slightly widening to rounded apex; apex and sides finely setose. Apex of median lobe appears to be well rounded.

The visible part of the tegmen looks very like that of Ephippiotragus wappesi sp. nov., as shown in Fig. 11A View FIGURES 7‑12 .

Surface ornamentation: Above and below with patches of dense, recumbent pubescence (silvery in T. sullivanorum , yellow in Tomopterchasia cuneiformis ( Fisher, 1952) comb. nov. Above, on the following: frons between eyes, moderately wide fascia on front and hind margins of pronotum, and all of scutellum. Below, generally clothed with subrecumbent, rather short pubescence: (becoming dense on hind margins of urosternites I-IV; and dense patches of shorter, recumbent pubescence (much reduced in female T. cuneiformis ) on sides of mesosternum, and basal half of metasternum. Elytra almost glabrous (according to Fisher (1952) less so in T. cuneiformis ); and rather densely punctured throughout ( Fisher (1952) says in T. cuneiformis sparse on translucent panels; confirmed in female). Punctures generally small and alveolate. Prothorax closely punctured throughout. Prosternum densely punctured; on mesosternum punctures becoming almost micropunctate; on metasternum sparse and non-alveolate; and on abdomen very dense, beveled, and somewhat confused.

Species included: Tomopterchasia sullivanorum sp.nov. and Tomopterchasia cuneiformis ( Fisher, 1952) comb. nov.

Specimen examined: Ischasia cuneiformis Fisher, 1952, BRAZIL, Santa Catarina, Nova Teutonia, 27°11’S / 52°23’W, 1 female 03. XI.1940, Fritz Plaumann col. ( MZUSP) .

Comment: Since Ischasia cuneiformis Fisher, 1952 ( Fig. 10A View FIGURES 7‑12 ) shares the combination of characters set out for the diagnosis of Tomopterchasia gen. nov., its placement in this new genus would seem to be correct.

Separation of the two species in this genus is based on the original description, Fisher (1952), of four male and two female Ischasia cuneiformis ( Fig. 10A View FIGURES 7‑12 ), and redescription of this species by Zajciw (1973); and by three male specimens of T. sullivanorum and one female of I. cuneiformis , examined by the author.