Labidostomis (Labidostomis) luristanica Warchaáowski, 2004

Bezdċk, Jan & Regalin, Renato, 2015, Identity of species-group taxa of the Western Palaearctic Clytrini (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) described by Maurice Pic and Louis Kocher, Acta Entomologica Musei Nationalis Pragae (suppl.) 55, pp. 1-114 : 30

Labidostomis (Labidostomis) luristanica Warchaáowski, 2004

( Figs 12 , 112–115 )

Labidostomis elegans var. luristanica Pic, 1920a: 6 (unavailable infrasubspeciħc name).

Labidostomis luristanica Warcha Ł owski, 2004: 557 (validation of the name as available).

Type locality. Labidostomis elegans var. luristanica : ‘Luristan’ [= Iran, Lorestan province].

Type material examined. Labidostomis elegans var. luristanica : SYNTYPE: ♀, ‘v. Bodemeyer / Persien / Luristan [w, p] // elegans [w, h] // v. luristanica / Pic [w, h] // v. luristanica Pic [b, h] // type [w, h] // TYPE [r, p] // Museum Paris [p] / Pic [w, h] // Labidostomis / shirazicus Lopatin [h] / M Rapilly dét. 19 [p] 81 [w, h]’ ( MNHN – coll. generale).

Distribution. Iran ( REGALIN & MEDVEDEV 2010b).

Comments. Labidostomis elegans var. luristanica was described in a paper containing also description of subspecies ( PIC 1920a), thus it became infrasubspeciħc according to Article 45.6.4 of the Code ( ICZN 1999). However, it was validated by WARCHA Ł OWSKI (2004) who treated it as a valid species and thus established a new name with new authorship in agreement with Article 45.5.1 ( ICZN 1999).

Labidostomis luristanica is very similar to L. shirazica Lopatin, 1979 and L. kantneri Warcha Ł owski, 2004 . After examination of the type material of all three taxa and additional specimens we are sure that all these taxa represent three distinct species. For the purposes of this paper we present drawings of the spermathecae to demonstrate the differences; however, the whole group is planned to be revised in the near future. Ductus spermathecae of L. luristanica is twice longer than in the other two species, proximally nearly straight, distally with coils ( Fig. 12 ), while that of L. kantneri is signiħcantly shorter and coiled in whole length ( Fig. 13 ), and ductus spermathecae of L. shirazica is also signiħcantly shorter than in L. luristanica and straight, not coiled ( Fig. 14 ).

Figures

Figs 11–14. 11 – Coptocephala sefrensis Pic, 1897:aedeagus (dorsal, lateral and ventral views).12–14 – spermatheca and ductus spermathecae:12 – Labidostomis luristanica WarchaŁowski, 2004; 13 – L. kantneri WarchaŁowski, 2004; 14 – L. shirazica Lopatin, 1979. Scale bars: 0.5 mm.

Figs 112–117. 112–115 – Labidostomis luristanica WarchaŁowski, 2004 (original specimen of L. elegans var. luristanicaPic, 1920, female, 5.6 mm): 112 – habitus; 113 – habitus in lateral view; 114 – head; 115 – labels. 116–117 – Labidostomis ghilianii (Lacordaire, 1848) (syntype of Cyaniris atricollis Pic, 1922, male, 4.8 mm): 116 – habitus; 117 – labels.