Cephaloleia fernandoi ( Bondar, 1940 )

Sekerka, Lukáš, 2017, Taxonomic changes within Imatidiini and Hybosispini (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae: Cassidinae), Acta Entomologica Musei Nationalis Pragae (Acta. Ent. Mus. Natl. Pragae) 57 (2), pp. 351-380 : 355-356

Cephaloleia fernandoi ( Bondar, 1940) stat. restit.

( Fig. 3 )

Himatidium fernandoi Bondar, 1940: 38 (original description).

Cephaloleia opaca (misidentifications): UHMANN (1968): 125 (partim, material from Bahia); STAINES & GARCÍA- RO- BLEDO (2014): 239 (partim, material from Bahia).

Type locality. Brazil, Bahia, ‘municípios de Jequié e Nazarethʼ.

Type material examined. PARATYPES: 8 spec., glued in pairs and pinned on one pin ‘cotipo [r, s, hw] || Himatidium 2861 | fernandoi Bond. | n. sp. [w, hw, cb, bf] || 395 [w, hw, cb]ʼ ( MNRJ); 1 spec., same data ( LSPC); 1 spec., glued ‘Brasil | Bahia | Bondar [w, hw, cb] || Himatidium | fernandesi [sic!] | Bondar [w, hw by Monrós, cb] || cotipo [r, hw, s] || Himatidium | fernandoi | Bondar [w, hw, s] || Cephaloleia [hw] | opaca [hw] | Baly [hw] | F. Monrós det. 19[p]24[hw] [w, p + hw by Monrós, cb] || F.Monros | Collection | 1959 [w, p, cb] || NOT A TYPE | Described from one | specimen deposited | in the British Museum. | C.L. Staines 1987 [w, hw by Staines, s, red frame]ʼ ( USNM); 4 spec., glued on separate cards pinned on one pin, ‘ BRASIL | BAHIA | Bondar leg. [w, hw, cb] || F.Monros | Collection | 1959 [w, p, cb]ʼ ( USNM).

Remarks. BONDAR (1940) described H. fernandoi based on a long series of specimens collected in Jequié and Nazareth in Brazilian state of Bahia. He collected the material on inflorescence of Calathea ovata (Nees & Mart.) Lindl. and C. virginalis Linden ex Regel. (Maranthaceae) . Bondar did not specify the exact number of specimens but explicitly stated that the type is in his collection and cotypes in BMNH and MNRJ. I did not have the opportunity to study the collection of Bondar to see how he labelled the type. But since he explicitly mentioned type and cotypes I consider for now the specimens in MNRJ as paratypes. It is also unclear, which of the two municipalities is the actual type locality, therefore I cite both in the original spelling.

MONRÓS (1945) compared two paratypes of H. fernandoi (ex collection Bosq) with one specimen identified as Cephaloleia opaca Baly, 1859 by J. Weise (ex collection Bruch) and concluded that they belong to the same species thus he proposed the synonymy. Since that time H. fernandoi was listed as synonym of C. opaca (e.g. UHMANN 1957b; STAINES & GARCÍA- ROBLEDO 2014). UHMANN (1968) reported additional material of C. opaca : three specimens from Bahia collected by Bondar and three specimens from Santa Catarina. He supposed that specimens from Bahia could belong to H. fernandoi and noticed differences between the two populations, and suggested that more material should be studied to resolve these taxa. Finally, STAINES & GARCÍA- ROBLEDO (2014) published a redescription of C. opaca , which however, contains also characters of C. fernandoi . I reexamined their material and all records from Bahia belong to C. fernandoi . Moreover these specimens represent actual paratypes of that species. One of the USNM specimens bears red label ‘cotipoʼ. Based on additional label pinned under the specimen Staines suggested that it is not a type because the species [ C. opaca ] was described from a single specimen in BMNH. However, he misjudged the specimen as the cotype label is identical to MNRJ specimens and was most likely handwritten by Bondar, therefore it is surely part of the type series of C. fernandoi . I consider also the four remaining USNM specimens as paratypes as they were most likely pinned on one pin with the first specimen and provided only with the cotype label (like many additional paratypes in MNRJ). Monrós certainly remounted the material but I have no doubts that all specimens belong to the original type series. See additional information under C. opaca .

Recently I had opportunity to study types of both taxa and without doubt H. fernandoi belongs to the genus Cephaloleia , however in my opinion it is distinct from C. opaca and thus I hereby restore its species rank. These two species form a distinct and unique speciesgroup of Cephaloleia characterized by moderately large body (ca. 6 mm), distinctly impressed rows of punctures and elevated intervals while all other species of Cephaloleia lack markedly elevated intervals. Cephaloleia fernandoi can be easily separated by markedly thick antennae. See Table 1 for morphological differences among the two species.

Distribution. Brazil: Bahia ( BONDAR 1940).

Figures

Figs. 1–8. 1 – Cephaloleia apertura (Staines, 2013) (holotype, 4.3 mm); 2 – Cephaloleia atripes (Pic, 1926) (holotype, 5.1 mm); 3 – Cephaloleia fernandoi (Bondar, 1940) (paratype, LSPC, 6.3 mm); 4 – Cephaloleia opaca Baly, 1859 (Rio de Janeiro: Trinidad, LSPC, 6.0 mm); 5 – Cephaloleia impressa Uhmann, 1930 (holotype, 3.5 mm); 6 – Demothispa clermonti Pic, 1934 (holotype, 3.5 mm); 7 – Cephaloleia jataiensis (Pic, 1923) (holotype, 4.2 mm); 14 – Xenispa aeneipennis (Baly, 1859) (holotype, 3.7 mm).