Adomerus fuscipennis ( Horváth, 1899 )

Aukema, Berend, Gapon, Dmitry & Heijerman, Theodoor, 2021, To the nomenclature of two species of the genus Adomerus (Heteroptera: Cydnidae), Zootaxa 4969 (2), pp. 392-400 : 397

Adomerus fuscipennis ( Horváth, 1899) , stat. resurr.

( Figs 2 C ; 3 C, D ; 4 C , C′, D, D′)

Sehirus fuscipennis Horváth, 1899: 83 [lectotype: France, Beaune]; Vidal, 1950: 43.

Sehirus (Tritomegas) fuscipennis: Stichel, 1961: 676 .

Canthophorus fuscipennis: Fuente, 1972: 64 .

Canthophorus maculipes (non Mulsant & Rey, 1852): Aukema & Constant, 2016: 45.

Adomerus maculipes (non Mulsant & Rey, 1852): Gapon, 2018: 222.

Materials examined are mainly listed in Aukema & Constant (2016) and Gapon (2018); some specimens from the first paper were re-identified. Lectotype. France: Côte-d’Or: Beaune, ♂ ( HNHM). Additional materials examined. France: Côte-d’Or: Beaune, 1 ♀ ( RMNH), 20.VII.1966, 1 ♂, 25.VII, 1966, 1 ♂, 21.VII.1971, 5 ♀♀, G. Bank leg. ( ZMAN [= RMNH]); Dijon, 1 ♂, 1 ♀ [on one pin], Puton leg. ( RMNH); Pyrenées-Atlantiques, St Jean Pied de Portes, 6.IX.1950, 1 ♀, J.G.J. Kuiper leg. ( ZMAN). Italy, Autonomous Province of Trento, Monte Brione, Lago di Garde, 1 ♀, O. Schmiedeknecht leg. ( RMNH).

Distribution ( Fig. 1 ). France, Italy, Portugal, Spain ( Aukema & Constant, 2016; Fuente, 1972; Gapon, 2018; Horváth, 1899; Lupoli & Dusoulier, 2015; Stichel, 1961).

Note. Fokker (1894) recorded Sehirus maculipes from Monte Brione, collected by Schmiedeknecht; this is probably the same specimen that the first author dissected and identified as Adomerus fuscipennis (Monte Brione, Lago di Garde, 1 ♀, O. Schmiedeknecht leg.). We did not find reliable confirmation of the record of the species for Portugal ( Stichel, 1961) in the literature, although its distribution there seems to be quite probable.

Figures

FIGURE 1. Distribution of Adomerus maculipes (Mulsant et Rey, 1852) and A. fuscipennis (Horváth, 1899), stat. resurr. Records of A. maculipes based on the examined material (1) and literature data (2); records of A. fuscipennis based on the examined material (3) and literature data (4); N—neotype of A. maculipes; L, P—lectotype and paralectotypes of A. fuscipennis.

FIGURE 2. Adomerus maculipes (A, B) and A. fuscipennis, stat. resurr. (C), type specimens and labels.A—holotype of Sehirus aeneus Walker, 1867, after Aukema & Constant (2016); B—neotype of Cydnus maculipes Mulsant et Rey 1852; C—lectotype of S. fuscipennis Horváth, 1899.

FIGURE 3. Parameres of Adomerus maculipes (A, B) and A. fuscipennis, stat. resurr. (C, D). A—right paramere in outer view, left paramere in outer-ventral and inner-dorsal views, after Aukema & Constant (2016), Madeira; B—paramere of the neotype of Sehirus maculipes Mulsant et Rey, 1852 designated here, in inner and outer-dorsal views, after Gapon (2018); C— right paramere of lectotype of Sehirus fuscipennis Horváth, 1899, in inner, outer-dorsal and ventral views; D—right paramere in inner and outer-dorsal views, after Gapon (2018), France, Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes, d’Oisans.

FIGURE 4. Aedeagus of Adomerus maculipes (A–B′) and A. fuscipennis stat. resurr. (C–D′). A, A′, uninflated aedeagus, after Aukema & Constant (2016), Madeira; B, B′, inflated aedeagus of the neotype of Sehirus maculipes Mulsant et Rey, 1852 designated here, after Gapon (2018); C, C′, lectotype of S. fuscipennis Horváth, 1899, uninflated aedeagus; D, D′, inflated aedeagus, after Gapon (2018), France, col de Vars. Dorsal (A, B, C, D) and lateral (A′, B′, C′, D′) views regarding inflated aedeagi. d.l—dorsal lobes of conjunctiva; dl.l—dorsolateral lobes of conjunctiva; vl.l—ventrolateral lobes of conjunctiva; vs—vesica.