Cosmiomorpha (Cosmiomorpha) sauteri Bourgoin, 1931
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.3745.4.1 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:F158CE77-9392-45A4-93F9-28FB1F5FF85A |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6151408 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/9D180B59-FFA5-FFA0-798A-FA09C577F823 |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Cosmiomorpha (Cosmiomorpha) sauteri Bourgoin, 1931 |
status |
|
Cosmiomorpha (Cosmiomorpha) sauteri Bourgoin, 1931
( Figs. 10 View FIGURES 1 – 20 , 25–26 View FIGURES 21 – 34 , 39–40 View FIGURES 35 – 47 , 52–53 View FIGURES 48 – 60 , 66–67 View FIGURES 61 – 75 , 126–132 View FIGURES 126 – 132 , 153, 160 View FIGURES 151 – 164 , 167 View FIGURES 165 – 171 )
Cosmiomorpha sauteri Bourgoin, 1931: 45 (type locality: “Kosempo ( Formosa)”); Mikšić 1977: 365, plate 6, fig. 2 ♂; Masumoto & Sakai 1988: 116, figs. 1 ♂, 2 ♀; Krajčik, 1998: 19; Sakai & Nagai 1998: 235, plate 60, figs. 672-1– 2 ♂, 672- 3 ♀; Yu et al. 1998: 95, plate 3, figs. 1a–g ♂, 1h–j ♀; Smetana 2006: 301.
Male. TL: 21.5–25.0 mm, TW: 11.0–12.5 mm. Body usually brown or black ( Figs. 126–129 View FIGURES 126 – 132 ). Body highly similar to C. decliva but dorsal surface brighter; scales much sparser and smaller; protibia slenderer; the deflexed tooth indistinct ( Figs. 52–53 View FIGURES 48 – 60 ); the middle and proximal teeth on outer margin usually reduced or absent ( Figs. 39–40 View FIGURES 35 – 47 ). Mesometasternal process long with a constriction in the middle, apex truncated ( Fig. 10 View FIGURES 1 – 20 ). Parameres very similar to C. decliva ( Fig. 153 View FIGURES 151 – 164 ).
Female. TL: 21.0–21.5 mm, TW: 10.0–10.5 mm. Color similar to male ( Figs. 130–132 View FIGURES 126 – 132 ). Clypeus shorter, subrectangular. Mesometasternal process short and oval. Legs shorter, protibia with three large teeth on outer margin.
Variation. In both sexes, there are three general color forms: 1) a single color, e.g., entirely brown, dark orange, reddish brown, black, or some intermediate color ( Figs. 126, 128, 130, 132 View FIGURES 126 – 132 ); 2) two or more colors, usually the pronotum is black and the elytra are brown; 3) has two or three markings on pronotum similar to C. decliva ( Fig. 129 View FIGURES 126 – 132 ). Scales on dorsal surface vary in size ( Figs. 66–67 View FIGURES 61 – 75 ).
Material examined. CHINA: Taiwan: 3♂♂, 2♀♀ (QCCC), 27.VII.2005, Mamei, Jianshi, Hsinchu County, alt. 1400 m, Chang-Chin Chen leg.
Distribution. China: Taiwan.
Remarks. This species was originally described by Bourgoin (1931) based on a single female from Taiwan. The holotype (automatically fixed by monotypy) was not found in BMNH. The type locality is “ Formosa, Kosempo ” (now Jiaxian, Kaohsiung), other localities, such as Taoyuan County, Hualien County, and Nantou County were recorded by Masumoto & Sakai (1988) and Yu et al. (1988).
This species is probably the most variable of this subgenus (Sakai & Nagai, 1988; Yu et al. 1988). The third color form mentioned above is very similar to C.decliva , and it is difficult to distinguish between them, unless the specimen’s locality is known, C. sauteri is endemic to Taiwan while C. decliva is distributed in mainland China and northern Vietnam. However, a pair of C. decliva collected from Fuzhou (closest to Taiwan), are interesting ( Figs. 93–95 View FIGURES 89 – 96 ). Although the male is of large size, the deflexed tooth ( Fig. 51 View FIGURES 48 – 60 ) is short with two tips, just like some individuals of C. sauteri ( Fig. 53 View FIGURES 48 – 60 ). The large dark area on the pronotal disc typical of C. decliva from other regions is much more diffuse and nearly absent in these specimens. Furthermore, the scales are much smaller on the dorsal surface in this pair ( Fig. 65 View FIGURES 61 – 75 ), the same as in C. sauteri ( Fig. 67 View FIGURES 61 – 75 ). Due to these similar characters, it is possible that C. sauteri should be considered a subspecies or merely a synonym of C. decliva . To verify this hypothesis, the holotype of C. sauteri and more specimens need to be examined.
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |