Labidostomis (Labidostomis) limbata ( Lacordaire, 1848 )

Bezděk, Jan, 2018, Revision of Labidostomis (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae: Cryptocephalinae: Clytrini) with large united elytral spot from Iran and adjacent countries, Zootaxa 4457 (4), pp. 501-519 : 507-508

Labidostomis (Labidostomis) limbata ( Lacordaire, 1848)

( Figs 3 , 9 , 15 , 21 , 32–34 )

Clythra (Labidostomis) limbata Lacordaire, 1848: 56 (original description); Lefèvre, 1872: 98 (as variety of L. hebraea ); Winkler 1929: 1236 (catalogue, as ab. of L. hebraea ).

Labidostomis limbata: Rapilly 1984a: 135 (valid species); Regalin & Medvedev 2010: 571 (catalogue).

Labidostomis laetus Medvedev, 1992: 51 (original description); Lopatin et al 2003: 94; Warchałowski 2010: 81 (key); Regalin & Medvedev 2010: 571 (catalogue); Bezděk 2013: 248 (synonymized with L. limbata ).

Labidostomis heinzi Lopatin, 1993: 169 (original description); Lopatin et al 2003: 94; Regalin & Medvedev 2010: 571 (catalogue); Bezděk 2013: 248 (synonymized with L. limbata ).

Type localities. Clythra limbata : “ Palestine ”; Labidostomis laetus : “ Israel, Golan Hills”; Labidostomis heinzi : “ Israel, Golan, El Rom”.

Types examined. Clythra limbata : Holotype: ♀, “[illegible, w, h] // 23058 [w, p] // limbata Lac. * [w, h] // Zool. Mus. / Berlin [w, p] // Type [r, p] // HOLOTYPE [r, p] // Labidostomis / limbata Lacordaire [h] / M. Rapilly dét. 19 [p] 83 [w, h]” (ZMHB).

Labidostomis laetus : not examined.

Labidostomis heinzi : Paratypes: 2 ♂♂, “ISRAEL [p] / Kuneitra / 6.4. [h] 19 [p] 68 [h] / leg. Bytinski—Salz [w, p] // Labidostomis / heinzi Lop. [h] / det. I. Lopatin, 19 [p] 90 [w, h] // Paratypus [p] / Labidostomis / heinzi Lopatin 1990 [r, h]” (TAU); 2 ♂♂ 6 ♀♀, “Israel / 1987 Heinz leg. [w, h] // Golan ca 1000m / El Rom 1987 / Heinz leg 14.IV. [w, p] // Paratypus [r, p] // Labidostomis / heinzi sp. n. [h] / det. I. Lopatin, 19 [p] 88 [w, h]” (USNM).

Additional material examined. 3 specimens — ISRAEL / SYRIA: Golan Heights : El Quinatirah, El Rom, 1060 m, 29.iii.1995, 1 ♂, K. Steven leg. ( NMPC); Bab El Hawa, 6.iv.1971, 1 ♀ ( TAU); Ma ´agar Bental, 33°08´N 35°47´E, 7.v.2007, 1 ♀, L. Friedman leg. ( TAU).

Diagnostic characters. Body length: ♂♂ 6.0–7.0 mm; ♀♀ 5.6–8.0 mm.

Colouration. Labrum black. Males: humeral spots present, large discal spot with anterior margin straight and reaching apex of scutellum, anterolaterally regularly emarginate around humeral spot, lateral margin parallel, posterior margin slightly oblique with outer angle more produced behind ( Fig. 32 ). Females: large discal spot covering also humeral part of elytra ( Fig. 33 ).

Head ( Fig. 15 ) dull, with large frontal impression covered with large punctures, vertex covered with large punctures mixed with small punctures. Anterior clypeal processes subtriangular, very wide, short, robust, clypeal margin between processes shallowly bisinuate. Mandibles wide, moderately rounded, with sharp dorsal keel. Only inner slopes of mandibles visible in dorsal view.

Aedeagus ( Fig. 3 ). Dorsal impression small, ca as long as wide. Apex with triangular, somewhat elevated folds separated with parallel furrow. Ventral side with narrow shallow impression along anterior margin and with two small, elongate, shallow impressions in middle part.

Everted aedeagus ( Fig. 21 ). Ejaculatory guide W-shaped in dorsal view, lateral branches connected by very narrow semicircular conjunction, in lateral view ear-like. Lateral sclerites large. Anterior sclerite relatively narrow, forming two concave plates connected in basal suture.

Spermatheca ( Fig. 9 ). Vasculum widely round, apical part gradualy narrowed towards shortly round apex, basal part wide. Bulbus very small. Ductus spermathecae twice as long as vasculum, coiled in whole lenght, coils more frequent towards the base.

Distribution. Israel ( Lacordaire 1848, Medvedev 1992, Lopatin 1993, Lopatin et al 2003, present paper), Syria ( Lopatin et al 2003).

Differential diagnosis. In L. limbata , head and pronotum are dull and labrum is black while head and pronotum are more or less lustrous and labrum is at least partly yellow or brownish in other species (except part of the specimens of L. regalini sp. nov. with black labrum). The males can be easily distinguished by the colouration of elytra with anterior margin of large elytral spot straight and reaching apex of scutellum, anterolaterally regularly emarginate around humeral spot ( Fig. 32 ). The females has humeral spot connected with large discal spot ( Fig. 33 ) what is unique within studied group.

Comments. The name Clythra limbata Lacordaire, 1848 is junior primary homonym of Clytra limbata Steven, 1806 (now Smaragdina limbata ), however may be preserved because the senior homonym was placed in other genus before 1900. The case requires an application to the Commission. Until the decision of the Commision the name Clythra limbata Lacordaire, 1848 can be used (ICZN, Art. 23.9.5).

Figures

FIGURES 1–6. Aedeagus in dorsal, lateral and ventral views (as—anterior sclerite, op—operculum, di—dorsal impression). 1—Labidostomis elegans; 2—L. kantneri; 3—L. limbata; 4—L. luristanica; 5—L. shirazica; 6—L. regalini sp. nov. Scale bar: 0.5 mm.

FIGURES 7–12. Spermatheca. 7—Labidostomis elegans; 8—L. kantneri; 9—L. limbata; 10—L. luristanica; 11—L. shirazica; 12—L. regalini sp. nov. Scale bar: 0.5 mm.

FIGURES 13–18. Male mandibles and clypeal processes. 13—Labidostomis elegans; 14—L. kantneri; 15—L. limbata; 16— L. luristanica; 17—L. shirazica; 18—L. regalini sp. nov. Scale bar: 0.5 mm.

FIGURES 19–21. Aedeagus with everted internal sac and ejaculatory guide in different views (eg—ejaculatory guide, lslateral sclerites, as—anterior sclerite). 19—Labidostomis elegans; 20—L. kantneri; 21—L. limbata. Not to scale.

FIGURES 32–37. Habitus. 32—Labidostomis limbata (paratype of L. heinzi, male, 6.6 mm); 33—L. limbata (female, 6.3 mm); 34—L. limbata (holotype, female, 8.0 mm); 35—L. luristanica (male, 7.0 mm); 36—L. luristanica (female, 5.4 mm); 37—L. luristanica (syntype, female, 5.6 mm).