Nycterilampus Montrouzier

Costa, Cleide, Rosa, Simone Policena & Chassain, Jacques, 2009, A taxonomic revision and revalidation of Nycterilampus Montrouzier (Coleoptera: Elateridae, Agrypninae), Zootaxa 2017, pp. 47-57 : 48-50

Nycterilampus Montrouzier , revalidated

Nycterilampus Montrouzier, 1860: 258 (original description); Fauvel, 1904: 132; Hyslop, 1921: 658. (type species: Nycterilampus lifuanus Montrouzier , monotypic); Schenkling, 1927: 478 (cat.).

Nycterolampus Fleutiaux, 1891: 391 (misspelling); Schwarz, 1906: 254, 282; Schenkling, 1927: 478 (cat.).

Redescription. Male. Body about 3.9 times longer than wide, weakly convex. Vestiture consisting of fine, short, dense and semidecumbent yellowish setae, longer on metaventrite, covering the color of the integument. Head convex, with a small longitudinal carina at base; frontal carina complete. Antenna 11 or 12 segmented ( Figs. 2, 4 ) serrate or pectinate from antennomere IV. Mouthparts directed anteroventrally. Mandibles bidentate; maxillary palps with 4 articles, apical article securiform; labium with prementum and mentum well sclerotized, labial palps with 3 articles, last article securiform.

Prothorax ( Figs. 7–9 ) parallel sided, lateral margins entirely carinate, hind angles produced and carinate, divergent, anterior angles small, rounded. Pronotum with a pair of glabrous and shiny median lateral spots. Prosternal lobe produced and with two lateral spines; prosternal process horizontal with preapical tooth. Scutellum ( Figs. 10, 11 ) pentagonal and abruptly elevated above the level of mesoscutum.

Mesoventrite ( Figs. 12–13 ) with posterior area marginated and steeply declivous to anterior borders. Mesoventral cavity deep, parallel sided, borders narrowing abruptly between the mesocoxae, floor of cavity with an elongated, narrow and shiny median band, without golden setae; mesocoxal cavity open to both mesepimeron and mesepisternum; meso-metaventral suture distinct.

Hind wing ( Fig. 17 ) about 2.5 times as long as wide; radial cell about 5 times longer than wide with proximal, posterior angle obtuse; r3 0.3 times total length of radial cell; r4 vestigial; CuA1 cross–vein-like, between MP3+4 and CuA2; apical area bearing a triangular sclerotization posteriorly to the radial cell and two narrow, elongated, oblique and convergent sclerotizations at base; medial area with 5 free veins (MP3, MP4 + CuA1, CuA2, CuA3+4 + AA1+2 and AA3+4); wedge cell absent.

Tibia compressed laterally, apices with two small and subequal spurs and a row of spiniform setae on outer and inner margins; tarsomeres simple, ventrally pilose; apex of tarsomeres 1–3 bearing a row of lateroventrally spiniform setae; tarsomere 1 longer than 5, shorter than 2–4 combined; 2+3 shorter than 1; 2 longer than 3; 4 shorter than 3. Tarsal claw ( Fig. 16 ) simple bearing one long seta at base arising from the outer flat portion; empodium sclerotized with two strong short setae.

Female. Longer than male and more convex. Antenna 11 or 12 segmented and serrate (Figs. 3,5). Baculi 3.7–4.0 times longer than coxites and bursa copulatrix without inner spines.

Discussion. Van Zwaluwenburg (1932) in a footnote mentioned that Nycterilampus should be a synonym of Tetrigus . In his paper on New Caledonian elaterids Fleutiaux (1947) accepted that synonymy.

Comparing our specimens with the characters of T. parallelus in the paper by Casari-Chen (l. c.), we noticed that Nycterilampus differs from Tetrigus (sense strict) by: frons with complete carina; mandibles bidentate, anterior prosternal lobe with a blunt spine on either side ( Fig. 9 ), tibiae with two small and subequal apical spurs; apices of parameres securiform ( Figs. 24, 25 ); baculi 3.7–4.0 times longer than coxites ( Figs. 29, 30 ); bursa copulatrix without inner spines. In Tetrigus parallelus , the mandibles are unidentate, anterior prosternal lobe without spines on either side, ventral parameres separated at base and baculi about 10.0 times longer than coxites. Although, our study does not include a cladistic analysis, these characters seem to be sufficient to indicate that Nycterilampus form a distinct monophyletic lineage and should be considered as a valid genus.

It is possible that other species of Tetrigus can be transferred to Nycterilampus , for instance, T. fleutiauxi Van Zwaluwenburg, 1933 from Ongea-ndriti, Ovalau, Kandavu, Viti Levu whose characters mentioned in the literature ( Johnson 2001) are appropriate with those of the genus Nycterilampus . However a complete revision of all Tetrigus species is necessary before that change is made. Therefore we restricted the present work to the two original species of Nycterilampus .

In order to better clarify the differences between Tetrigus parallelus and Nycterilampus as well as the Nycterilampus species we present the following key:

Figures

FIGURES 2 – 9. Nycterilampus velutinus Fleutiaux, 1891. 2, 3, antennae (male, female); 7, head and pronotum (female). N. lifuanus Montrouzier, 1860. 4, 5, antennae (male, female); 6, head; 8, head and pronotum (dorsal); 9 prothorax (ventral).

FIGURES 10 – 18. Nycterilampus lifuanus Montrouzier, 1860 (male). 10, 11, mesoscutum and scutellum (dorsal, lateral); 12, 13, mesoventrite (ventral, lateral); 14, 15, pterothorax (ventral, ventro – lateral); 16, tarsal claw; 17, hind wing; 18, metanotum.

FIGURES 19 – 26. Nycterilampus lifuanus Montrouzier, 1860 (male). 19, sternite IX; 20, tergites IX – X; 21, sternite VIII; 22, tergite VIII; 23, abdomen (ventral); 24, 25, aedeagus (dorsal, ventral). N. velutinus Fleutiaux, 1891 (male). 26, aedeagus (ventral).

FIGURES 27 – 30. Nycterilampus lifuanus Montrouzier, 1860 (female). 27, tergite VIII; 28, sternite VIII; 29, ovipositor (ventral); 30, ovipositor and reproductive organs (dorsal).