Hemilophopsis

Tavakilian, Gérard L. & Santos-Silva, Antonio, 2019, New Hemilophini, Aerenicini and Calliini from French Guiana, transference and notes on Hemilophini (Coleoptera, Cerambycidae, Lamiinae), Zootaxa 4555 (4), pp. 507-522: 518-519

publication ID

https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4555.4.3

publication LSID

lsid:zoobank.org:pub:66CC470E-13C7-40B2-B140-C8E0E2A5748B

persistent identifier

http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03D787FC-0348-FFB5-5FA8-F8F76BB4FAAB

treatment provided by

Plazi

scientific name

Hemilophopsis
status

gen. nov.

Hemilophopsis  , gen. nov.

Type species: Hemilophopsis simius  , sp. nov.

Etymology. From Hemilophus Audinet-Serville, 1835  , generic name and Greek: όψίς, aspect (masculine gender).

Description. Male. Small size. Frons with small gibbosity centrally close to clypeus. Eyes moderately coarsely faceted; upper eye lobes wide, with distance between them slightly shorter than width of a lobe; lower eye lobes protruding, distinctly shorter than gena. Antenna distinctly surpassing elytral apex; area of connection between ocular lobes with more three ommatidia. Scape gradually enlarged from base to about middle, then subparallel-side toward apex; without apical cicatrix. Antennomeres filiform, slender, without dense setae ventrally; antennomere III much longer than scape and remaining antennomeres. Prothorax slightly wider than long; sides unarmed, with constriction at basal third. Pronotum without distinct gibbosities. Mesoventral process without tubercle; apex widened, deeply emarginate. Metathorax notably wider than pro- and mesothorax in lateral view. Elytra dorsally flattened; humeral carina well-marked from base to near apex; with moderately well-marked carina dorsally, from base to distal third, near humeral carina; sides with another distinct carina at distal third, almost reaching apex; sides slightly narrowed from humerus to area between middle and distal third, then rounded widened (visible in dorsal view, especially in distal third); apex obliquely truncate, with outer angle acutely projected; with long, erect sparse setae. Apex of metafemora reaching about apex of abdominal ventrite IV. Mesotibiae without lateral sulcus. Metatarsomere I as long as II –III together; basal tooth of claws developed.

Remarks. The general appearance of Hemilophopsis  gen. nov. resembles more Hemilophini  than Calliini  species. However, the claws are distinctly appendiculate and not bifid.

Hemilophopsis  gen. nov. can be included in the alternative of couplet “6” from Galileo & Martins (1991) (translated):

6’(5). Elytral apex obliquely truncate........................................................ Hemilophopsis  gen. nov. - Elytral apex rounded................................................................................... 6

Mesotibiae without sulcus at outer side; upper eye lobe connected to lower eye lobe by a single row of ommatidia..........

................................................................................... Asemolea Bates, 1881  - Mesotibiae with deep sulcus at distal third of outer side; upper eye lobe connected to lower eye lobe by more than one row of

ommatidia...................................................................... Euryestola Breuning, 1940 

It is important to report that the difference between the claws in Hemilophini  , Aerenicini  and Calliini  is almost absent, since they are often very similar in the first two tribes with those of Calliini  . In other words, they frequently are much more divaricate than divergent, and not rare, what is named as appendiculate in Calliini  is so variable in Hemilophini  that it is almost impossible to be sure where to include some species. This becomes evident reading the description of the claws in Hemilophini  by Martins & Galileo (2014a) (translated): “The claws are of two types in Hemilophini  ; in the Group A they are appendiculate and divaricate, and in the other groups they are divergent and toothed. The length of internal tooth is variable: from very short, with 1/3 of the length of external tooth (for example, Corcovado  ) to subequal in length to the external tooth.” Actually, sometimes it is absolutely impossible to be sure if the claws are bifid or divaricate in Hemilophini  , but most often they cannot be defined as divergent.