Coleoxestia julietae Galileo & Martins, 2006

Galileo, Maria Helena M. & Santos-Silva, Antonio, 2016, New taxa, new records and notes on Coleoxestia Aurivillius, 1912 (Coleoptera, Cerambycidae, Cerambycinae), Zootaxa 4136 (1) : -

Coleoxestia julietae Galileo & Martins, 2006

( Figs. 1–4 )

Coleoxestia julietae Galileo & Martins, 2006: 706 ; Wappes et al., 2009: 2 (type); Monné, 2016: 97 (cat.).

Remarks. Galileo & Martins (2006) described Coleoxestia julietae as follows (translated): “Head, antennae and prothorax reddish-brown. Scape punctate, glabrous. Antennomeres III–V nodose at apex. Remaining antennomeres apically projected at outer side. Pronotum with irregular wrinkles, transverse and slightly deep and interspersed with rare punctures; on anterior region of pronotum these wrinkles surround two small gibbosities. Elytra dark brown, shagreened; middle of each elytron with longitudinal reddish band. Elytral apices with two spines. Femora orangish with black apex. Tibiae orangish with black base.”

We examined a considerable number of specimens (over 70—only part are listed below) that show a remarkable chromatic variation ( Figs. 1–4 ), notably on the elytra: uniformly dark reddish-brown; uniformly light reddish-brown; dark reddish-brown with apex black; dark reddish-brown with apex and outer side near apex black (often, this latter extending to humerus and enlarged about middle—with or without sutural band); dark reddishbrown with apex and outer side near apex black and with elongate, reddish-brown area dorsally near apex (from slightly to very distinct); light reddish-brown with wide reddish-brown band along suture and outer side; reddishbrown with wide dark reddish-brown band along suture and outer side. Additionally, the elytra vary from distinct shagreened (as in the holotype, see Bezark 2016) to shiny (one paratype deposited at MZSP has the elytra intermediate), and the lighter area of femora varies from yellowish-brown to reddish-brown (sometimes slightly dark). In some specimens it is possible to see a slightly darker band along elytral suture, almost invisible depending on angle of light.

According to Galileo & Martins (2006) (translated): “ Coleoxestia julietae sp. nov. has femora reddish with apex blackish and elytra brownish with longitudinal reddish band. This set of features is similar to C. femorata ( Gounelle, 1909) , C. guttula Martins & Monné, 2005 , C. vittata (Thomson, 1860) , C. nigripes Martins & Monné, 2005 and C. rufosemivittata Tippmann, 1960 . C. julietae differs from C. femorata by the absence of pilosity on scape; by the pronotal wrinkles almost without punctures interspersed; by the absence of short setae at inner side of elytral punctures and by the presence of longitudinal reddish band on elytra. In C. femorata the scape and pronotum are pilose; the pronotal surface has wrinkles and coarse punctures; presence of short setae at inner side of elytral punctures and elytra with single color.” Actually, C. julietae differs from C. femorata mainly by the elytra slightly shinier (more opaque in C. femorata ), by the antennomere III shorter (ca. 1.4 times length of scape) (ca. 1.6 times in C. femorata ), and by the elytra without setae on punctures (with microscopic setae in C. femorata ). The scape usually has long setae, from sparse to moderately abundant, as also occurs in C. femorata , and has short, sparse setae as in C. femorata . The pronotal punctation is variable, as well as in C. femorata , therefore no difference between these species. In C. julietae the elytra can or cannot have the sutural band. Thus the difference with C. femorata regarding this feature is not constant.

Still according to Galileo & Martins (2006) (translated): “It differs from C. guttula by the elytra with reddish longitudinal band; by the pronotum with wrinkles, almost without punctures and without smooth areas. In C. guttula the elytra only have a reddish macula on basal half and the pronotum has coarse punctures interspersed with fine wrinkles.” Actually, as seen above, the elytral color in C. julietae is too variable. The mainly difference between these species is the sculpture of the pronotum: with very well-marked wrinkles interspersed with coarse, moderately not abundant punctures, while in C. guttula the wrinkles are less distinct and the punctures are very abundant.

On the differences between C. julietae and C. vittata, Galileo & Martins (2006) reported (translated): “It can be separated from C. vittata by the pronotal sculpture. In C. vittata the pronotum has punctures interspersed with wrinkles.” However, the difference pointed out does not exist, since in both species the pronotal sculpture is variable, as we could see examining a large number of specimens of C. vittata deposited at MZSP collection. The most notable difference between these species is the femora. In C. vittata the lighter area of femora is distinctly darker than in C. julietae . Furthermore, the femora in C. vittata are more elongate and slightly clavate, while in C. julietae they are proportionally shorter and very distinctly clavate.

Finally, Galileo & Martins (2006) recorded (translated): “In C. nigripes the legs are black. In C. rufosemivittata the pronotum also has wrinkles interspersed with punctures.” The difference with C. nigripes is correct. However, no differences were indicated between C. julietae and C. rufosemivittata . In C. julietae , the pronotal punctation is variable and does not allow separating these species. But in all specimens of C. rufosemivittata examined the elytra are always notably shagreened (not so in C. julietae ) and the femora are not distinctly bicolorous (distinctly bicolorous in C. julietae ).

Additionally, C. julietae differs from C. sanguinipes (Bates, 1884) by the antennomere III shorter (ca. 1.4 times length of scape) (ca. 1.7 times in C. sanguinipes), and by the upper eye lobes slightly apart than width of one lobe (almost twice width of on lobe in C. sanguinipes).

Material examined. BOLIVIA, Santa Cruz: Hotel Flora & Fauna, 1 male, 14–20.XI.2008, Galileo, Vanin & Martins col. ( MZSP); (3.7 km SSE Buenavista, 430 m), 3 males, 3 females, 10–29.XI.2003, B. K. Dozier col. ( ACMT); (4–6 km SSE Buenavista), female, 17–19.X.2000, Wappes & Morris col. ( ACMT); 1 male, 27– 29.X.2000, Wappes & Morris col. ( ACMT); 1 male, 22–31.X.2002, Wappes & Morris col. ( MZSP); 2 males, 1 female, 21–24.XI.2003, Wappes, Morris & Nearns col. ( ACMT); 1 female, 2–14.X.2003, R. Clarke col. ( ACMT); 1 female, 1–8.XII.2003, R. Clarke col. ( ACMT); 1 male, 3–8.X.2004, Wappes & Morris col. ( ACMT); (vicinity of Hotel Flora & Fauna), 1 male, 22–26.X.2002, Morris & Wappes col. ( ACMT); Potrerillo del Guendá (40 km NW Santa Cruz, 17º40.3’S / 63º27.4’W), 5 females, 22.XI–12.XII.2005, B. K. Dozier col. ( ACMT); (17º40.26’S / 63º27.44’W, 2 males, 2 females, 5–20.XI.2004, B. K. Dozier col. (1 female, MZSP; 2 males, 1 female, ACMT); 6 females, 9–28.XI.2006, B. K. Dozier & J. Romero col. (1 MZSP; 5 ACMT). Cochabamba (new department record): Villa Tunari (Hotel de Selva el Puente, 1158 ft., 16º59’S / 65º24’W), 2 females, 10–12.IX.2012, Wappes, Skelley, Bonaso & Hamel col. ( ACMT). PERU, San Martin: Moyobamba (vic. Hospedaje Ecologico “Rumipata”, 06º04’32.0”S / 76º58’07.5”W, 970 m), 1 female, 13–18.X.2012, J. E. Eger ( RFMC).

Figures

FIGURES 1 – 7. 1 – 4, Coleoxestia julietae, chromatic variation, dorsal habitus: 1 – 3, male; 4, female. 5 – 7, Coleoxestia rufosemivittata, male: 5, dorsal habitus; 6, prothorax with lateral spine; 7, prothorax without lateral spine.