Polydrusus (Conocetus, Desbrochers, 1874
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5852/ejt.2018.392 |
|
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:70196F37-3767-49B4-8F49-91FE6538B740 |
|
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5962136 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/A93C2B02-FFD2-5802-32B8-FEF80801B39E |
|
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
|
scientific name |
Polydrusus (Conocetus |
| status |
subgen. nov. |
Key to the species of Polydrusus (Conocetus View in CoL ) and P. (Denticonocetus ) subgen. nov.
1. All femora toothed ( Fig. 1A–B View Fig. 1 ) ..................... P. (Denticonocetus subgen. nov.) kahri Kirsch, 1865 View in CoL
– Femorae untoothed ...................................................................................................... ( Conocetus View in CoL ) 2
2. Elytra oval, shoulders not pronounced (brachypterous; Fig. 1C–D View Fig. 1 ); scutellum with densely standing scales; eyes big and convex ........................................................................ P. festae ( F. Solari, 1925) View in CoL
– Elytra long oval or parallel sided (males) or parallel at least at basal half, then widened towards apex (females), shoulders pronounced (hind wings present; not verified in P. longus View in CoL ); scutellum with inconspicuous vestiture; eyes of various shape ................................................................................ 3
3. Elytra 3 times as long as width of both elytra .................. P. (incertae sedis) longus ( Stierlin, 1884) View in CoL
– Elytra less than 3 times as long as width of both elytra.................................................................... 4
4. Legs with either whitish hairs or hairs with green lustre, no scales ................................................. 5
– Legs with hairs plus oval or lanceolate scales.................................................................................. 6
5. Legs reddish-brown with very long, raised, white hairs with a pearl-like lustre. Eyes less bulged, long oval drop-shaped as in P. angustus View in CoL ( Figs 2E–F View Fig.2 , 3C–D View Fig. 3 )............... P. rhodiacus ( Schilsky, 1912) View in CoL
– Legs bright reddish-brown to yellowish, with shorter hairs with green lustre. Eyes oval, clearly bulged ( Fig. 3A–B View Fig. 3 ) ................................................................................................ P. crinipes View in CoL sp. nov.
6. Head very robust (especially in females); eyes remarkably small, placed laterally, oval and bulging; temples mostly longer than diameter of an eye. Frons and epifrons bulged, therefore head and rostrum appear swollen ( Figs 1E–F View Fig. 1 , 5C View Fig. 5 ) ................................................. P. stierlini ( Schilsky, 1910) View in CoL
– Head different ................................................................................................................................... 7
7. Bigger and long-oval, elongate species with apex of elytra elongately pointed ( Fig. 3C–F View Fig. 3 ); scales oval, dense, standing, with blue-greenish sheen; femora robust; body colour dark-brown to blackish; eyes either conspicuously long-oval ( Fig. 5D View Fig. 5 ) or circular and bulging ........................................... 8
– Smaller species with parallel sided elytra, apex of elytra not elongately pointed; scales brighter golden-greenish or other (coppery, brownish, or whitish to pearl-like); body colour brighter; eyes oval but not long-oval....................................................................................................................... 9
8. Eyes conspicuously long-oval drop shaped and less bulged ( Figs 3C–D View Fig. 3 , 5D View Fig. 5 ) ................................... .................................................................................................................. P. angustus ( Lucas, 1854) View in CoL
– Eyes circular and bulged ( Fig. 3E–F View Fig. 3 ) ...................................................... P. calabricus ( Faust, 1890) View in CoL
9. Hairs on head, pronotum and elytra whitish, conspicuous, long and semi-raised (at least 45° angle). Body colour mostly well visible through rather scarce, often spotty standing, oval to lanceolate whitish scales with a greenish pearl-like lustre; scales on sides of pronotum mostly denser standing....... 10
– Hairs less conspicuous, shorter and more adjacent; scales on elytra and pronotum different......... 11
10. Eyes big ( Fig. 5A View Fig. 5 ), protruding (note: males have bigger eyes than females); body mostly dark brown; scales generally narrower, lanceolate-oval, sparsely standing (often spotty), with whitish to pearl-like lustre (only exceptionally slightly greenish); penis more robust, tip longer, truncated ( Fig. 6A–D View Fig. 6 )................................................................. P. grandiceps View in CoL (Desbrochers des Loges, 1875)
– Eyes small ( Fig. 5B View Fig. 5 ), less protruding (note: males have bigger eyes than females); body colour brighter brown; scales generally more rounded-oval, denser and more regular standing with greenish pearl lustre; penis more gracile, tip shorter, slightly rounded ( Fig. 6E–H View Fig. 6 ) ......................................... .................................................................................................................... P. transjordanus View in CoL sp. nov.
11. Scales on upper side of body vivid green, circular, dense and regularly standing, hairs in-between short and adjacent ( Fig. 4A–B View Fig. 4 )................................................................. P. bardus Gyllenhal, 1834 View in CoL
– Scales on elytra generally circular, but with lanceolate ones intermixed, therefore appearing spotty or cloudy (except males of P. baudii View in CoL , see below), hairs in-between longer. Colour varying from greenish to brownish, more lanceolate scales around disc of pronotum (thus disc appearing bare)............. 12
12. Males............................................................................................................................................... 13
– Females (the females of the two following species are very similar, and thus difficult to distinguish) ..................................................................................................................................... 14
13. Males more robust, broad, laterally and dorsally bulged. Elytra broader. Vestiture cloudy, with lanceolate scales intermixed ( Fig. 4C–D View Fig. 4 ). Penis robust ( Fig. 8C View Fig. 8 ), internal sac with long and slender sclerite ( Fig 9M View Fig.9 ); males only known from Turkey, possible parthenogenetic reproduction elsewhere (= geographical parthenogenesis).................................................... P. marcidus Kiesenwetter, 1864 View in CoL
– Males more gracile and of about the same size as females; narrower, weakly rounded laterally and hardly bulged dorsally. Elytra long-oval, parallel along middle, pointed towards apex. Vestiture with regular-standing circular scales ( Fig. 4E–F View Fig. 4 ). Penis gracile ( Fig. 8D View Fig. 8 ), internal sac with short and stout sclerite ( Fig. 9N View Fig.9 ). Known from Cyprus only.................................................. P. baudii ( Faust, 1889) View in CoL
14. Elytral hairs brighter, mostly whitish ( Fig. 4D View Fig. 4 ) .............................. P. marcidus Kiesenwetter, 1864 View in CoL
– Elytral hairs mostly (but not always) darker ( Fig. 4F View Fig. 4 ). Known from Cyprus only ............................. ........................................................................................................................ P. baudii ( Faust, 1889) View in CoL
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.