Sciaphobus (Neosciaphobus) vittatus ( Gyllenhal, 1834 )

Borovec, Roman & Skuhrovec, Jiří, 2015, A review of Sciaphobus (Neosciaphobus) and descriptions of new species of Sciaphobus s. str. (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Entiminae), Acta Entomologica Musei Nationalis Pragae 55 (2), pp. 745-785 : 771-772

Sciaphobus (Neosciaphobus) vittatus ( Gyllenhal, 1834)

( Figs 3A–D , 4M–N , 5G )

Polydrusus vittatus Gyllenhal, 1834: 152 (original description).

Sciaphilus vittatus: STIERLIN (1884) : 89 (key).

Sciaphobus (Neosciaphobus) vittatus: APFELBECK (1922) : 66 (review); WINKLER (1932): 1470 (catalogue); DALLA TORRE et al. (1937): 163 (catalogue); BOROVEC (2013): 385 (catalogue).

Type locality. ‘ Istria [ Croatia]’.

Type material examined. LECTOTYPE (here designated): supposedly ♀ (5.06 mm long), ‘[blank orange small square label] / 144 [printed] / 834 Chev. Istria [grey, handwritten] / Coll. Chvrol. [printed] / Typus [red, printed] / NRM Sthlm Loan 2745/08 [green, printed] / LECTOTYPUS Polydrosus vittatus Gyllenhal, R. Borovec desig. 2013 [red, printed] / Sciaphobus vittatus (Gyllenhal) , R. Borovec det. 2013 [printed]’ ( NHRS).

Additional material examined. CROATIA: ISTRIA COUNTY: Istria, 1 spec. ( NMPC) ; Labin, 1 spec. ( RBSC). SPLIT- DALMATIA COUNTY: Mosor , 1.vii.1953, 6 spec., Novak lgt. ( NMPC) ; Muč , 2 spec., Karaman lgt. ( NMPC) ; Split , 5 spec., Karaman lgt. ( NMPC) ; Split, vii.1965, 11 spec., R. Veselý lgt. ( NMPC). ŠIBENIK- KNIN COUNTY: Miočič [= Miočić], 5.vi.1990, 3 spec., J. Janák lgt. ( RBSC) .

Redescription ( Figs 3A–D , 4M–N , 5G ). Body length 3.91–4.94 mm. Body black; femora blackish, short apical portion of femora, tibiae, tarsi and antennae red brownish, clubs slightly darker. Elytra with even intervals glabrous and odd intervals densely squamose; even intervals with inconspicuous row of short, adherent, piliform setae; odd intervals with very dense, short oval appressed scales, brightly green to yellow green with faint gold sheen, completely hiding integument, 4–6 scales across one elytral interval, forming conspicuous stripes; elytral intervals 1 and 9 on disc with scales sparser or even absent, with squamose stripes only in elytral declivity; elytral interval 8 in some specimens in basal third with stripe of sparse scales; squamose stripes in elytral intervals 3 and 7 connected in apical part of elytra. Pronotum with larger, long oval scales, transversally directed, sparser on disc with sparse adherent, irregularly scattered piliform setae; middle part of pronotum glabrous; lateral parts of pronotum with narrow glabrous longitudinal stripe. Head and rostrum with small short to long oval appressed scales of unequal size, densely placed in lateral parts, leaving glabrous longitudinal space in head and rostrum; apical part of rostrum in some specimens almost glabrous.

Head ( Figs 3A–D , 4M–N ). Rostrum short, in males isodiametric, in females 1.10× as wide as long; in basal half distinctly tapered anteriad, in apical half conspicuously enlarged anteriad with slightly rounded sides, at apex 1.10× wider than at base. Frons shiny, almost impunctate, flat, on same level as epifrons. Epifrons glabrous, with punctures only in lateral parts, shiny, with ill-defined, shallow, longitudinal depression in middle. Interocular space with thin, almost indistinct fovea. Eyes large, faintly projecting beyond outline of head.

Antennae in females slenderer than in males; in males funicle segment I 1.5–1.6× as long as wide; segment II 1.4–1.5× as long as segment I and 2.6–2.7× as long as wide; segment III 1.6–1.7× as long as wide; segments IV–VI 1.4–1.5× as long as wide; segment VII 1.3× as long as wide; in females segment I 1.5–1.6× as long as wide; segment II 1.4–1.5× as long as segment I and 2.8–2.9× as long as wide; segments III and IV twice as long as wide; segments V and VI 1.7–1.8× as long as wide; segment VII 1.5–1.6× as long as wide; clubs 2.5–2.6× as long as wide.

Pronotum ( Figs 3A–D ) wide, 1.34–1.43× as wide as long, with rounded sides, widest just behind midlength, anteriad distinctly more tapered than posteriad; disc shiny, irregularly punctate; punctures in lateral parts dense, with distance between two punctures shorter than diameter of one puncture; punctures in middle part with distance between two punctures equal to diameter of one puncture; disc with thin but visible, ill-defined impunctate stripe.

Scutellum small, triangular, glabrous.

Elytra ( Fig. 3A–D ) longoval, 1.39–1.46× as long as wide, with faintly rounded sides, in basal half subparallel-sided, in apical half regularly tapered apicad; humeral calli in short distance projecting laterally, obliquely subtruncated posteriad; intervals faintly convex, striae narrow, distinctly punctate.

Legs. Pro- and mesofemora with small but well visible tooth; metafemora with large, distinct tooth. Tarsomere II isodiametric to 1.1× as wide as long; tarsomere III 1.5–1.6× as wide as long and 1.6–1.7× as wide as II; onychium as long as tarsomere III.

Sexual dimorphism. For more details see rostrum and antennae.

Male genitalia. Aedeagus ( Fig. 5G ) long and slender, in ventral view widest at base, subparallel-sided with slightly concave sides in whole length, regularly tapered apicad with faintly rounded sides; in lateral view regularly curved and equally wide in whole length, apex regularly tapered with distinct, arrowhead-shaped denticle at apex.

Female genitalia. Spermatheca ( Fig. 6G ) shortly U-shaped, with ramus small, tuberculate and bigger, about isodiametric nodulus.

Differential diagnosis. Sciaphobus (N.) vittatus can be easily recognized by alternately squamose and glabrous elytral intervals ( Figs 3A–D ), which is a unique feature not only within Sciaphobus , but also among all Mediterranean Entiminae .

Distribution. Croatia ( BOROVEC 2013).

Remarks. GYLLENHAL (1834) described the species based on unknown number of specimens and stated ‘ Istria. Ex Musaeo Dom. Chevrolat’. Chevrolatʼs collection of Curculionidae is largely deposited in NHRS and we found only one specimen pinned under the name ‘ vittatus ’ in the collection which is here designated as a lectotype to fix the name and prevent a possible misinterpretation if additional specimens are found. The lectotype is in accordance with the present-day concept of different collections of S. vittatus . There are three more specimens pinned under the name ‘ vittatus var. beta’: one specimen ‘87 [handwritten] / Zmyria Schüppel [handwritten] / NRM Sthlm Loan 2748/08 [green, printed] / Typus [red, printed]’ and two specimens labelled just ‘Coll. Chevrolat’. The variety beta was not mentioned in the original description and the locality data also differs thus we do not consider these specimens to be a part of the original type series.

Figures

Fig. 3. Habitus of Neosciaphobus species: Sciaphobus vittatus (Gyllenhal, 1834): male (A – dorsal view, B – lateral view), female (C – dorsal view, D – lateral view).

Fig. 4. Rostra of Neosciaphobus and Sciaphobus (s. str.) species: Sciaphobus angustus sp. nov., holotype, male (A); S. globipennis Apfelbeck, 1922, male (B), female (C); S. ningnidus (Germar, 1824), female (D); S. reitteri (Stierlin, 1884), male (E), female (F); S. scheibeli Apfelbeck, 1922, male (G), female (H); S. squalidus (Gyllenhal, 1834), male (I), female (J); S. subnudus (Desbrochers des Loges, 1892), male (K), female (L); S. vittatus (Gyllenhal, 1834), male (M), female (N); S. abbreviatus (Desbrochers des Loges, 1871), male (O), female (P); S. dorsualis (Gyllenhal, 1834), male (Q), female (R); S. formaneki sp. nov., holotype, male (S), paratype, female (T); S. pelikani sp. nov., holotype, male (U), paratype, female (V); S. rasus (Seidlitz, 1867), male (W), female (Y).

Fig. 5. Aedeagus of Neosciaphobus and Sciaphobus (s. str.) species; Sciaphobus angustus sp. nov., holotype (A); S. globipennis Apfelbeck, 1922 (B); S. reitteri (Stierlin, 1884) (C); S. scheibeli Apfelbeck, 1922 (D); S. squalidus (Gyllenhal, 1834) (E); S. subnudus (Desbrochers des Loges, 1892) (F); S. vittatus (Gyllenhal, 1834) (G); S. abbreviatus (Desbrochers de Loges, 1871) (H); S. dorsualis (Gyllenhal, 1834) (I); S. formaneki sp. nov.: holotype (J); S. pelikani sp. nov.: holotype (K); S. rasus (Seidlitz, 1867) (L).

Fig. 6. Spermatheca, male tegmen and sternite IX, female ovipositor and sternite VIII of Neosciaphobus and Sciaphobus (s. str.) species; Spermatheca of Sciaphobus globipennis Apfelbeck, 1922 (A); S. ningnidus (Germar, 1824) (B); S. reitteri (Stierlin, 1884) (C); S. scheibeli Apfelbeck, 1922 (D); S. squalidus (Gyllenhal, 1834) (E); S. subnudus (Desbrochers des Loges, 1892) (F); S. vittatus (Gyllenhal, 1834) (G); S. formaneki sp. nov.: paratype (H); S. pelikani sp. nov.: paratype (I); S. rasus (Seidlitz, 1867) (J). Tegmen of Sciaphobus scheibeli (K); S. vittatus (L). Male sternite IX of Sciaphobus scheibeli (M). Ovipositor of Sciaphobus ningnidus (N). Female sternite VIII of Sciaphobus ningnidus (O).