Adelaidia thailandica , Kadej, Marcin & Háva, Jiří, 2016

Kadej, Marcin & Háva, Jiří, 2016, Contribution to the Dermestidae (Coleoptera) of Thailand with description of two new species, Zootaxa 4138 (3), pp. 591-600: 596-597

publication ID

http://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4138.3.11

publication LSID

lsid:zoobank.org:pub:F43E7E00-FBD7-4EFF-9E67-1D6AD8EC1391

persistent identifier

http://treatment.plazi.org/id/C61D8735-FFE1-FFAA-FF1B-4B170CB3F81E

treatment provided by

Plazi

scientific name

Adelaidia thailandica
status

sp. nov.

Adelaidia thailandica  sp. nov.

( Figs. 10–19View FIGURES 10 – 19)

Type locality. Thailand, Sakon Nakhom Phu Phan National Park.

Material examined. Type material. Holotype (♀). THAILAND Sakon Nakhom Phu Phan NP Nam Hom Waterfall # Sao Hi 17°07.340’N 104°00.788’E 344 m Malaise trap 4–10.iii.2007 Sailom Tongboonachi leg. T2368 [left antenna, pygidium and female genitalia mounted in glycerine in microvial and pinned under the specimen; female genitalia in four parts] ( QSBG).

Paratypes: 2 ex. (♀♀): 1 ex., THAILAND Chaiyaphum Tat Tone NP Lum pa tao head water/dry evergreen 15°58.486’N 102°02.239’E 270 m Malaise trap 26.ii.–2.iii.2007 Tawit Jaraphan & Orawan Budsawong leg. T1736 (1 ex., QSBG, 1 ex., DIBEC); 1 ex., Thailand NE, Loei pr., Phu Rua NP, 17°30) N 101°21´E, 6–9.iv.1999, D. Hauck lgt. ( JHAC).

Etymology. Named after the country where the species has been first collected and recorded.

Differential diagnosis. The new species shows a close resemblance to other known Adelaidia  species, but differs from them by some characters. It is similar to Adelaidia haucki Háva, 2000  and A. rufa Háva, 2002  , but can be distinguished by: colour of the elytra: in Adelaidia haucki Háva, 2000  elytra is bicolorous (black and reddishbrown), in A. rufa Háva, 2002  integument is unicolorous—rufous, while in A. thailandica  sp. nov. integument is unicolorous—black.

From other species with unicolorous elytra newly described species differs by the colour and characteristics of the setation of dorsal body side (in A. unicolor Mroczkowski, 1966  setation is uniformly dark brown and long; in A. rigua Blackburn, 1891  it is bicolorous, black and erect as well as withe and recumbent; wile in A. thailandica  sp. nov. it is uniformly black and short). To show these difference, mentioned above, we also provide the following key:

1. Elytra unicolorous..................................................................................... 2

- Elytra bicolorous (integument black with large subtriangular reddish-brown area), setation uniformly black............................................................................................. Adelaidia haucki Háva, 2000 

2. Integument of body black............................................................................... 3

- Integument of body rufous, setation uniformly brown..................................... Adelaidia rufa Háva, 2002 

3. Setation uniform..................................................................................... 4

- Setation heterogenous.................................................................................. 5

4 Body finely punctate; setae dark brown, long................................. Adelaidia unicolor Mroczkowski, 1966 

- Body coarsely punctate; setae black, short........................................... Adelaidia thailandica  sp. nov.

5 Setation consisting of black, erect setae and white recumbent setae; the white setae create bands and spots.......................................................................................... Adelaidia rigua Blackburn, 1891 

Description. Holotype. BL: 3.95 mm; BW: 2.45 mm; PL: 1.0 mm; PW: 2.15 mm; EL: 2.95 mm. Ratio of width (across humeri) to overall length 0.6:1.0. Body rounded and dorsally flattened; widest at humeri; dorsal and ventral pubescence recumbent, black ( Figs. 10–13View FIGURES 10 – 19). Head visible from above; integument of head black; densely and distinctly punctured. Eyes iridescent, large, convex ( Figs. 11, 13View FIGURES 10 – 19), with internal, slight emargination at the base of eye (close to basal segment of antenna). Median ocellus distinct. Frons and clypeus covered with black pubescence. Clypeus dark brown. Antenna brown, with 11 antennomeres; joints I and IX–XI slightly darker than remaining segments. Antennal club with three antennomeres ( Fig. 16View FIGURES 10 – 19). Antennal club slightly longer than flagellum; relative length of terminal antennomere (XI) to length of the two preceding antennomeres (IX–X) combined 0.8:1.0. Integument of pro–, meso– and metasternum black, covered densely with fine recumbent black setae. Prosternal process distinct; distinct granulation instead of punctation present; apex rounded. On mesosternum deep groove for prosternal process present. Integument of pronotum, hypomeron and elytron black, densely and distinctly punctured ( Figs. 10–14View FIGURES 10 – 19). Pronotum covered with black pubescence. Antennal fossa deeply excavated, occupying entire hypomeron, its cavities unpolished, densely and distinctly granulated ( Fig. 14View FIGURES 10 – 19). Elytra with black pubescence ( Figs. 10–12View FIGURES 10 – 19). Scutellum small, black and triangular, almost invisible. Legs brown; dorsal surface covered with pubescence. Tibiae not spinose on lateral margin ( Figs. 11–12View FIGURES 10 – 19). Tarsus with two slightly curved claws. Integument of ventrites I–V black with black pubescence ( Figs. 11–13View FIGURES 10 – 19). Visible ventrite I with slight, shallow and oblique striae on each side extending from anterior margin of ventrite beneath trochanters. Pygidium brown, with prominent setae; distinct aggregation of setae visible, especially in apical area ( Fig. 15View FIGURES 10 – 19). Female genitalia as in figure 17. Sclerites in bursa copulatrix as in figure 18. Abdominal segment X as in figure 19.

Sexual dimorphism. Male unknown.

Variation. BL: 3.95–4.25 mm; BW: 2.45–2.60 mm; PL: 1.00– 1.10 mm; PW: 2.15–2.35 mm; EL: 2.95–3.25 mm.