Aphanerostethus spinosus Lewis & Kojima, 2024

Lewis, Jake H., Kojima, Hiroaki, Suenaga, Miyuki, Petsopoulos, Dimitrios, Fujisawa, Yusuke, Truong, Xuan Lam & Warren, Dan L., 2024, The era of cybertaxonomy: X-ray microtomography reveals cryptic diversity and concealed cuticular sculpture in Aphanerostethus Voss, 1957 (Coleoptera, Curculionidae), ZooKeys 1217, pp. 1-45 : 1-45

Aphanerostethus spinosus Lewis & Kojima sp. nov.

Figs 2 I – L , 4 F , 15 Q, R , 20 C, D

Specimens examined.

Holotype: Malaysia: • Borneo Island, Sabah, Kinabalu Park Headquarters , alt. 1800–2500 m, 15. III. 1993, H. Hiratate, male deposited in KUM, JHLHY_DAR_077 .

Diagnosis.

Body length 1.9 mm. Cuticle coated in dark, sandy gray, and white scales in indistinct pattern. Funicle with six articles. Procoxae contiguous. Second and odd-numbered elytral intervals with erect scales. Erect elytral scales concentrated in small bundles of two or three along second elytral interval at midpoint; evenly distributed along other intervals. Elytral interval 5 + 6 not distinctly arched at base. Femora all with large, acute tooth along ventral edge. Scutellum distinct, bulging, and covered in white scales. Prosternal cavity prominent and with steep lateral ridges. Metaventrite with a distinct elevated transverse ridge separating the meta- and mesocoxae. Metatibial uncus of male claw-shaped (Fig. 2 I – L ). Aedeagus with diagnostic, laterally expanded apex (Fig. 15 Q, R ). Internal sac with M-shaped, basal protruding structure (Fig. 15 Q, R ).

Distribution.

This species is only known from one site in Kinabalu Park, Borneo.

Etymology.

This specific name spinosus is a Latin adjective in reference to the distinctly acute, elongate tooth on the ventral side of the femora.

Comments.

Although the female is unknown it is likely the case that the metatibial uncus is sexually dimorphic as in other closely related Aphanerostethus species.

Figures

Figure 2. Metatibial unci in Aphanerostethus (males) A – D A. magnus sp. nov. (JHLHY _ DAR _ 075) E – H A. morimotoi sp. nov. (JHLHY _ DAR _ 113) I – L A. spinosus sp. nov. (JHLHY _ DAR _ 077) M – P A. nudus sp. nov. (JHLHY _ DAR _ 012).

Figure 4. X-ray microtomography generated 3 D models of Aphanerostethus pronota with scales removed, revealing otherwise hidden differences in underlying puncture morphology A Aphanerostethus armatus sp. nov. (JHLHY _ DAR _ 078) B – D Aphanerostethus bifidus sp. nov. (JHLHY _ DAR _ 092, 101, and 103, respectively) E Aphanerostethus decoratus sp. nov. (JHLHY _ DAR _ 079) F Aphanerostethus spinosus sp. nov. (JHLHY _ DAR _ 077).

Figure 15. Aedeagi of Aphanerostethus species A, B A. bifidus sp. nov. (JHLHY _ DAR _ 102) C, D A. distinctus (Morimoto & Miyakawa, 1985) (OKENT 87658) E, F A. falcatus sp. nov. (JHLHY _ DAR _ 099) G, H A. incurvatus sp. nov. (JHLHY _ DAR _ 100) I, J A. japonicus sp. nov. (JHLHY _ DAR _ 052) K, L A. magnus sp. nov. (JHLHY _ DAR _ 022) M, N A. morimotoi sp. nov. (JHLHY _ DAR _ 113) O, P A. nudus sp. nov. (JHLHY _ DAR _ 012) Q, R A. spinosus sp. nov. (JHLHY _ DAR _ 077) S, T A. taiwanus sp. nov. (JHLHY _ DAR _ 016) U, V A. vannideki Voss, 1957 (JHLHY _ DAR _ 082).

Figure 20. Lateral and dorsal photographs of Aphanerostethus species A, B Aphanerostethus morimotoi sp. nov. (JHLHY _ DAR _ 093) C, D Aphanerostethus spinosus sp. nov. (JHLHY _ DAR _ 077). Scale bars: 0.5 mm.