Quedius (Microsaurus) koltzei Eppelsheim, 1887

Salnitska, Maria & Solodovnikov, Alexey, 2018, Revision of the Quedius fauna of Middle Asia (Coleoptera, Staphylinidae, Staphylininae), Deutsche Entomologische Zeitschrift 2, pp. 117-159: 126-127

publication ID

http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/dez.65.27033

publication LSID

lsid:zoobank.org:pub:B1A8523C-A463-4FC4-A0C3-072C2E78BA02

persistent identifier

http://treatment.plazi.org/id/5EF2C032-40BD-A0AB-D40C-296A416FE6FF

treatment provided by

Deutsche Entomologische Zeitschrift by Pensoft

scientific name

Quedius (Microsaurus) koltzei Eppelsheim, 1887
status

 

Quedius (Microsaurus) koltzei Eppelsheim, 1887  Fig. 2D

Quedius koltzei  Eppelsheim, 1887, 420 (original description); Bernhauer and Schubert1916, 425 (calalog); Gridelli 1924, 24 (characters, new records); Scheerpeltz 1933, 1445 (catalog); Coiffait 1978, 164 (new records, characters, first illustration of the aedeagus); Smetana 1998, 115 (study of the holotype, redescription, comments); Smetana 2015b, (new records, characters).

Material examined.

Kazakhstan: 2 ♂, 1 ♀, Dzhungarskiy Alatau, Keskenterek River, 10-20.VII.1988, V.A. Kastcheev leg.; 3 ♂, same locality and collector, but 20-30.VIII.1988 ( ZIN); 1 ♂, Aksu-Dzhabagly, Taldy-Bulak River, 10-20.IV.1979, B.V. Iskakov leg. ( ZIN); 3 ♂, Terskey-Alatoo, VI.1957, Skopin leg. ( MNHN).

Comments on taxonomy, type material and distribution.

Quedius koltzei  was described by Eppelsheim (1887) from “Chabarovka” [Khabarovsk, Far East, Russia] based on a single female specimen. Gridelli (1924) basically repeated the original description. Coiffait (1978) interpreted a few males as that species from Terskey-Alatoo, a mountain range in Kazakhstan very far from the type locality of Q. koltzei  . Based on that material, he redescribed Q. koltzei  again and provided the illustration of the aedeagus for the first time. Smetana (1998) also redescribed Q. koltzei  , but based on the holotype. Later, Smetana (2015b) determined one male and one female from Heilongjiang province of China as Q. koltzei  and illustrated their genital structures. Smetana’s comparison of the Chinese specimens with the type material and geographic proximity of Heilongjiang province to the type locality of Q. koltzei  corroborate his identification. Our examination of the male specimens from Terskey-Alatoo from Henry Coiffait’s collection that he identified as Q. koltzei  revealed that they match as far as we can observe, with the illustrations of Q. koltzei  from China in Smetana (2015b). But since Smetana (2015b) did not illustrate the lateral view of the aedeagus, only the re-examination of Chinese and, preferably, additional material may help to clarify the status of Middle Asian specimens from Terskey-Alatoo. In the absence of neg ative evidence, we consider Q. koltzei  as a potentially widespread Asian species. It is also possible that Q. rufilabris  , whose identity currently remains ambiguous, is conspecific with Q. koltzei  (for details see the former species below).

Quedius koltzei  differs from other similar Middle Asian Microsaurus  as follows: from Q. fusicornis  , Q. capitalis  and Q. solskyi  in peg setae on paramere arranged in irregular lines or groups; from Q. ochripennis  , Q. puncticollis  and Q. tadjikiscus  in median lobe (in lateral view) narrowing into a blunt, but clear apex and peg setae on paramere arranged in four irregular groups. From Q. bucharensis  , a species whose identity remains ambiguous (for details see that species below) Q. koltzei  differs in the chaetotaxy of head (posterior frontal puncture situated closer to nuchal ridge than to posterior margin of eye) and pronotum (two punctures in dorsal row and sublateral group always situated before or at most at the same level as large lateral puncture).

Based on the material examined here, we have additional records for Q. koltzei  from Kazakhstan. Bionomics remains unknown.