Little known species of the Genus Oxytelus (Coleoptera, Staphylinidae) from Kamchatka
Author
Gildenkov, Mikhail Yu.
Author
Semionenkov, Oleg I.
text
Amurian Zoological Journal
2024
XVI
1
184
189
http://dx.doi.org/10.33910/2686-9519-2024-16-1-184-189
journal article
10.33910/2686-9519-2024-16-1-184-189
2686-9519
12989485
928EDBEC-86D7-42BB-B5A9-7EE34BA60904
Oxytelus
(
Tanycraerus
)
jessoensis
Bernhauer, 1907
Material.
2♂
,
6 exs.
‘
Russia
:
Kamchatka
, Bystrinsky Natural Park. Floodplain of the Kozyrevka River (
Populus
, fern, horsetail),
21.08.2015
, leg.
V
. I. Lobanova’ ‘
Oxytelus assingi
Schülke, 2012
V. B. Semenov
det. 2015’ ‘
Oxytelus jessoensis
Bernhauer, 1907
, det. M. Gildenkov, 2021’ (cMG);
1♂
,
1♀
‘
Russia
:
Kamchatka
, Bystrinsky Natural Park. Floodplain of Belaya River, near the stream (
Alnus
,
Salix
), 07.2015, leg.
V
. I. Lobanova’ ‘
Oxytelus jessoensis
Bernhauer, 1907
, det. O. Semionenkov, 2021’ (cOS);
1♂
,
3 exs.
‘
Russia
:
Kamchatka
, Bystrinsky Natural Park. Floodplain of the Kozyrevka River (
Alnus
,
Salix
),
21.08.2015
, leg.
V
. I. Lobanova’ ‘
Oxytelus jessoensis
Bernhauer, 1907
, det. M. Gildenkov, 2021’ (cMG);
5 exs.
‘
Russia
:
Kamchatka
, Bystrinsky Natural Park. Floodplain of the Kozyrevka River, hilltop (
Picea
,
Betula
), 07.2015, leg.
V
. I. Lobanova’ ‘
Oxytelus assingi
Schülke, 2012
V. B. Semenov
det. 201’ ‘
Oxytelus jessoensis
Bernhauer, 1907
, det. M. Gildenkov, 2021’ (cOS);
1♂
,
2♀
‘
Russia
:
Kamchatka
, Bystrinsky Natural Park. Floodplain of Bolshaya Romanovka River (
Picea
, fern, horsetail), 07.2015, leg.
V
. I. Lobanova’ ‘
Oxytelus jessoensis
Bernhauer, 1907
, det. O. Semionenkov, 2021’ (cOS).
Figs 1–8
.
Oxytelus
(
Tanycraerus
)
spp.:
1 —
Oxytelus jessoensis
Bernhauer, 1907
, Kamchatka, male, dorsal view;
2 —
Oxytelus laqueatus
(Marsham, 1802)
, Smolensk Area, male, dorsal view;
3 —
Oxytelus assingi
Schülke, 2012
, paratype, male, dorsal view;
4 —
Oxytelus ruthenus
Semionenkov & Gildenkov, 2022
, holotype, male, dorsal view Scale bar: 1 mm. Aedeagus, ventral view:
5 —
O. jessoensis
, Kamchatka;
6 —
O. laqueatus
, Smolensk Area;
7 —
O. assingi
, paratype;
8 —
O. ruthenus
Semionenkov & Gildenkov, 2022
, holotype. Scale bar: 0.25 mm
Рис. 1–8
.
Oxytelus
(
Tanycraerus
)
spp.:
1 —
Oxytelus jessoensis
Bernhauer, 1907
, Камчатка, самец, сверху;
2 —
Oxytelus laqueatus
(Marsham, 1802)
, СмоΛенская обΛасть, самец, сверху;
3 —
Oxytelus assingi
Schülke, 2012
, паратип, самец, сверху;
4 —
Oxytelus laqueatus
(Marsham, 1802)
, гоΛотип, самец, сверху. Масштаб: 1 мм. ЭÃеагус снизу:
5 —
O. jessoensis
, Камчатка;
6 —
O. laqueatus
, СмоΛенская обΛасть;
7 —
O. assingi
, паратип;
8 —
O. ruthenus
, гоΛотип. Масштаб: 0,25 мм
Figs 9–15
.
Oxytelus
(
Tanycraerus
)
spp., Sternite VIII:
9
—
11
O
.
jessoensis
, Kamchatka;
10 —
O
.
laqueatus
, Smolensk Area;
11 —
O
.
assingi
, paratype;
12 —
O
.
ruthenus
, holotype.Right parameres, lateral view:
13 —
O
.
assingi
, paratype;
14 —
O
.
ruthenus
, holotype;
15 —
O
.
jessoensis
, Kamchatka. Scale bar: 0.25 mm
Рис. 9–15
.
Oxytelus
(
Tanycraerus
)
spp., VIII стернит:
9 —
O
.
jessoensis
, Камчатка;
10 —
O
.
laqueatus
, СмоΛенская обΛасть;
11 —
O
.
assingi
, паратип;
12 —
O
.
ruthenus
, гоΛотип. Правые парамеры сбоку:
13 —
O
.
assingi
, паратип;
14 —
O. ruthenus
, гоΛотип; 15 —
O
.
jessoensis
, Камчатка. Масштаб: 0.25 мм
Diagnosis
. Like
O. ruthenus
,
Oxytelus jessoensis
differs from
O. assingi
in the lighter coloration of the antennal base (segments 1–4) and mouthparts (
Schülke 2012
;
Semionenkov, Gildenkov 2022
).
O
.
jessoensis
is noticeably different from them in the structure of abdominal sternite VIII (
Figs 9, 11, 12
); the differences between
O. assingi
and
O. ruthenus
are limited only to the structure of abdominal sternite VIII (
Figs 11, 12
). The width of the abdomen in
O. assingi
and
O. ruthenus
(
Figs 3, 4
) (
Schülke 2012: 1660
:
Fig. 1
) is slightly narrower than the width of the elytra, in contrast to
O. jessoensis
(
Fig. 1
), whosewidth of the abdomen noticeably exceeds the width of the elytra, both in males and females. However, the three species differ most reliably in the details of their parameres structure (
Figs 13–15
).
Some of the material we studied and presented in this article (see above), with the labels ‘
Oxytelus assingi
Schülke, 2012
V. B. Semenov
det. 2015’, was previously incorrectly identified and published (
Lobkova, Lobanova, Semenov 2017
) as
O. assingi
. Another part of the material from the same work (
Lobkova, Lobanova, Semenov 2017
) was identified by us (
Semionenkov, Gildenkov 2022
) as
O. ruthenus
. This indicates that the species
O. jessoensis
,
O. assingi
and
O
.
ruthenus
are very difficult to distinguish, and given the cohabitation of
O. jessoensis
and
O. ruthenus
in
Kamchatka
, a detailed diagnosis of the species
O. jessoensis
may be relevant.
Discussion
.
Oxytelus
(
Tanycraerus
)
jessoensis
Bernhauer, 1907
was described from
Japan
, from the island of
Hokkaido
(Jesso), vicinity of the Nemoro city, near
Tokyo
(
Bernhauer 1907
). For a long time it could only be found in catalogs. Koch (
Koch 1932
) gives the characters of
O
.
jessoensis
in the identification key, comparing it with the widespread and well-known species
Oxytelus
(
Tanycraerus
)
laqueatus
(Marsham, 1802)
. According to Koch, the abdomen of
O
.
jessoensis
at its widest part is noticeably broader than the elytra, while it is noticeably narrower than the elytra in
O
.
laqueatus
(
Figs 1, 2
). Koch also notes significantly coarser punctation of the elytra and head in
O
.
jessoensis
(
Koch 1932: 655
)
. A fairly detailed redescription of the species
O
.
jessoensis
was published in 1994 (
Ito 1994
). In addition to the description, Tateo Ito provides photographs of the
holotype
and original labels and a drawing of abdominal sternite VIII with characteristic features (
Ito 1994: 42
:
Figs 1, 2
). At the same time, the author notes that the species is known to him from a single specimen (male,
holotype
), with no data available for the female (
Ito 1994: 42
). The last mention of
O
.
jessoensis
is found in V. Kastcheev’s identification key (
Kastcheev 1999: 154
). He compares
O
.
jessoensis
with
O
.
laqueatus
and
Oxytelus
(
Tanycraerus
)
altaicus
noting a much coarser and denser punctation of the head, pronotum and elytra in
O
.
jessoensis
.
The material from
Kamchatka
(see above) was identified as
O
.
jessoensis
(
Figs 1, 5
,
9, 15
) based on the descriptions in (
Bernhauer 1907
;
Ito 1994
) and characteristic features in the structure of male abdominal sternite VIII (
Ito 1994: 42
:
Fig. 2
). Indeed,
O
.
jessoensis
(
Fig. 1
) has significantly coarser and denser punctation of the head, pronotum and elytra compared to the very similar body microsculpture of
O
.
laqueatus
(
Fig. 2
) and
O
.
altaicus
(
Gildenkov, Semionenkov 2023: 42
:
Figs 1, 2
). It is also confirmed that the width of the abdomen of
O
.
jessoensis
actually exceeds the width of the elytra (
Fig. 1
), in contrast to
O
.
laqueatus
(
Fig. 2
). The aedeagus of
O
.
jessoensis
was studied for the first time (
Fig. 5
). It should be noted that its structure is noticeably different from the structure of the aedeagus of
O
.
laqueatus
and
O
.
altaicus
(
Fig. 6
) (
Gildenkov, Semionenkov 2023: 42
:
Figs 3, 4
), with significantly more developed parameres (
Fig. 6
) (
Gildenkov, Semionenkov 2023: 42
:
Figs 3, 4, 5, 6
). At the same time,
O
.
laqueatus
and
O
.
altaicus
are very close species not only in the structure of the aedeagus, but also in the structure of male abdominal sternites VII (
Gildenkov, Semionenkov 2023: 42
:
Figs 7, 8
) and VIII (
Fig. 10
), which makes them different from
O
.
jessoensis
(
Fig. 9
). In coloration, coarse punctation of the head, pronotum and elytra, and structure of the aedeagus,
O
.
jessoensis
is most similar to the recently described (
Schülke 2012
;
Semionenkov, Gildenkov 2022
)
Oxytelus
(
Tanycraerus
)
assingi
Schülke, 2012
(
Figs 3, 7
,
11, 13
) and
Oxytelus
(
Tanycraerus
)
ruthenus
Semionenkov & Gildenkov, 2022
(
Figs 4, 8
,
12, 14
).