Macrelmis granigera,

Passos, Maria Inês Silva Dos, Miranda, Gustavo Silva De & Nessimian, Jorge Luiz, 2015, Three new species of Macrelmis Motschulsky (Coleoptera: Elmidae: Elminae) from Southeastern Brazil with new definition of species groups to the genus, Zootaxa 4058 (2), pp. 195-210: 205

publication ID

publication LSID

persistent identifier

treatment provided by


scientific name

Macrelmis granigera


granigera  species group Hinton 1940

Diagnostic character: aedeagus with truncated apex, and with a constriction two thirds before the apex ( Figs. 4 A – CView FIGURE 4 A – F).

Species: Macrelmis granigera  , M. scutellaris  and M. shoemakei  .

Distribution ( Fig. 7View FIGURE 7): Costa Rica: Cache ( Sharp 1882). Mexico: Temascaltepec ( Hinton 1934; Hinton 1940), Coahuila ( Brown 1971). USA: Texas ( Brown 1971).

History of the group: Hinton (1940) stated that M. granigera  and M. scutellaris  form a group characterized by pronotum with a prominent gibbosity in front of the scutellum. Additionally, Hinton (1940) described some larval characters that supported the group, such as "a short but prominent median longitudinal carina on the base of both the metasternum and the first abdominal sternite". Hinton (1945) added M. germaini  , M. peruviana  and M. amazonica  to the group and emmended that all species have elytron apex obliquely truncate, except for M. scutellaris  . Manzo (2003) included one more species, M. saltensis  , which also has pronotum with gibbosity. M. bispo  was the last species added to this group due its "obovate gibbosity near the middle of pronotal base" ( Barbosa et al. 2013). Despite the external similarities of these species (gibbosity on pronotum), the male genitalia of most of them is completely different, so, according to the current definition, species with different shape of genitalia should not be included in the group. M. peruviana  was described based on a female and a redescription was never carried out; so, according to our proposed organization of the groups, it cannot be placed in any of them. M. saltensis  has a unique aedeagal morphology and should be considered as belonging to its own group, also taking into account its tibia unusual shape, which is unique in the genus. M. bispo  has an unusual shape of male aedeagus as well and should have its own group. M. germaini  does not have description and illustration of the male genitalia, so, according to our organization, it should not be included until its proper publication.