Taxonomic and biogeographic revision of the genus Lamellitettigodes (Orthoptera: Tetrigidae) with description of two new species and additional notes on Lamellitettix, Probolotettix, and Scelimena
Author
Tumbrinck, Josef
text
Journal of Orthoptera Research
2019
28
2
167
180
http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/jor.28.34605
journal article
http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/jor.28.34605
1937-2426-2-167
CA0FD29D-1EE9-4176-9E1F-2EACBFFB68F1
Lamellitettigodes tricristatus (
Bolivar
, 1898)
syn. nov.
Xistra tricristata
Bolivar
, 1898: 75-76;
Hancock 1907a
: 46;
Kirby 1910
: 27;
Willemse 1930
: 30;
Willemse 1931
: 44;
Guenther
1939
: 125.
Paratettix tricristatus
:
Guenther
1935
: 263.
Lamellitettigodes contractus tricristatus
:
Guenther
1939
: 125;
Steinmann 1970a
: 228;
Paris 1994
: 251.
Lamellitettigodes tricristatus
:
Otte 1997
: 46.
Tetrix cuspidata
Hancock, 1907 (Synonym)
Tetrix cuspidatus
Hancock 1907b
: 239-240;
Hancock 1909
: 413;
Guenther
1935
: 263;
Guenther
1939
: 125;
Blackith 1992
: 100.
Acrydium cuspidata
:
Kirby 1910
: 579.
Type material.
-
LT
Lamellitettigodes tricristatus
(here designated): ♂, [Indonesia], Java, 1893, leg. H. Fruhstorfer, MNCN (Cat. Tipos No 39)
PLTs
Lamellitettigodes tricristatus
(here designated): 2♂♂+3♀♀, [Indonesia], Java, 1893, leg. H. Fruhstorfer, MNCN (Cat. Tipos No 40-44); ♂, [Indonesia], Java, Sakabumi, 1893, leg. H. Fruhstorfer, IRSNB.
Notes.
-
Bolivar
(1898)
described the species under the section Metrodorae as belonging to
Xistra
, while earlier he described
L. contractus
within the section Tettigiae, assigned to the genus
Paratettix
. The two sections were distinguished by morphology of the lateral
lobes-projected
sidewards in Metrodorae, directed downwards in Tettigiae. When comparing types, I did not see differences in this feature.
Guenther
(1939)
regarded
L. contractus tricristatus
as a subspecies of
L. contractus
, distinguished from the nominal by smaller size, sharper keeled prozonal carinae and, in lateral view, clearly visible fastigial horns (above the eyes).
L. c. tricristatus
should be slightly smaller and should have wavy margins of the fore legs (
Guenther
1935
). All these features are, however, in the range of variation of the species and are not of diagnostic value. Moreover, I did not find reported differences when comparing the types.
Otte (1997)
gave the specific status to the subspecies only with the reason of occurrence on different islands.
All these data prove that
L. tricristatus
(
Bolivar
, 1898) is conspecific with
L. contractus
.