New species and taxonomic notes for Cacostola Fairmaire and Germain, 1859 (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae: Onciderini)
Author
Wappes, James E.
Author
Santos-Silva, Antonio
text
Insecta Mundi
2019
2019-12-23
741
741
1
20
journal article
10.5281/zenodo.3676627
b5cbb023-caa7-4784-b5d4-21686e00957f
1942-1354
3676627
0F4263E0-1CBC-4046-95C8-74FDBD6D4325
Cacostola simplex
(
Pascoe, 1859
)
(
Fig. 44
)
Pachypeza simplex
Pascoe 1859: 55
;
Nearns et al. 2014: 265
(
holotype
).
Cacostola simplex
;
Bates 1866: 31
;
Thomson 1868: 68
;
Lacordaire 1872: 687
;
Prudhomme 1906: 36
(distr.);
Aurivillius 1923: 352
(cat.);
Blackwelder 1946: 605
(checklist);
Dillon and Dillon 1946: 262
;
Breuning 1949: 27
(syn.);
Buck 1959: 601
(distr.);
Marinoni and Martins 1982: 247
(reval.);
Monné and Giesbert 1994: 195
(checklist);
Monné 1994: 36
(cat.);
2005: 538
(cat.);
Monné and Hovore 2006: 275
(checklist);
Monné et al. 2012: 43
(distr.);
Morvan and Roguet 2013: 29
(distr.);
Monné 2018: 730
(cat.).
Trestonia simplex
;
Gemminger 1873: 3128
(cat.).
According to
Marinoni and Martins (1982)
(translated): “The
holotype
of
C. simplex
has features (especially those referring to pronotal pubescence) that allow identifying it as a distinct species from
volvula
and, accordingly must be revalidated.” We do not see significant differences in the pronotal pubescence of those two species. However, the distance between the upper eye lobes is distinctly greater in
P. volvula
(larger than three times width of one lobe (
Fig. 5
)) than in
C. simplex
(
Fig. 44
) (slightly narrower than twice width of one lobe) and the width of the upper eye lobes is wider in
C. simplex
(
Fig. 44
) than in
C. volvula
(
Fig. 5
) thus are character differences that do support the revalidation of
C. simplex
by
Marinoni and Martins (1982)
.