Dendrocellus Schmidt-Goebel, 1846

Sciaky, Riccardo & Anichtchenko, Alexander, 2020, Taxonomic notes on the tribe Dryptini Bonelli, 1810 with description of a new genus and species from China (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Dryptini), Zootaxa 4731 (4), pp. 522-530 : 524

publication ID

publication LSID


persistent identifier

treatment provided by


scientific name

Dendrocellus Schmidt-Goebel, 1846


Dendrocellus Schmidt-Goebel, 1846  

Type species: Dendrocellus discolor Schmidt-Goebel, 1846   (= Desera nepalensis Hope, 1831   )= Desera Hope, 1831   (nec Dejean, 1825) Type species: Desera nepalensis Hope, 1831  

Bousquet (2002) and Liang et al. (2004) have correctly reconstructed the complex nomenclatorial history of this genus, reaching the conclusion that its valid generic name is Dendrocellus Schmidt-Goebel, 1846   , instead of Desera Dejean, 1825   , as it was frequently considered previously. We only observe that back in 1949 Jeannel already wrote: “Les Dendrocellus Schm.   -Goeb. (type: discolor Schm.   -Goeb.,= nepalensis Hope   ) sont généralement classés à tort sous le nom de Desera   . … Malgré leurs ongles tarsaux pectinés, ils sont très voisins des Drypta   s. str. ” ( Jeannel, 1949). So, it seems the french author had already reached the same conclusions.

This genus, recently revised by Liang & Kavanaugh (2007), contains 22 species occuring in Africa, Asia and Australia. Systematically it is extremely close to Drypta   , differing only in its tarsal claws pectinate instead of smooth. The genitalic characters of both sexes are the same, the external resemblance among members of the two genera is sometimes puzzling and a few species of Dendrocellus   show very slight tarsal pectination, sometimes leaving a doubt on their generic pertinence; only a comparative study of all the characters of the species belonging to the two genera will allow to decide whether they can be really maintained as separate genera. Already in 1968 Darlington observed: “ Desera   differs from Drypta   only in having pectinate tarsal claws. A modern revision of the species is needed to show whether both genera are really monophyletic and distinct” ( Darlington, 1968, p. 218).

The unique combination of characters distinguishing this genus from the others of the tribe is: pronotal bead absent or very rudimental (fig. 10); punctuation on head and pronotum dense, regular, the punctures usually well distinct from each other; pronotum very feebly constricted towards base; elytral microsculpture well developed; elytral pubescence dense, usually arranged in two-three more or less regular rows; scutellar pore constantly single; intervals flat or slightly convex; tarsal claws slender, more or less pectinate on inner side; two to five evident setae on outer side of stylomere ( fig. 8 View FIGS ).