Aneflomorpha seminuda Casey, 1912

Lingafelter, Steven W., 2022, Revision of Aneflomorpha Casey and Neaneflus Linsley (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) of the United States with an illustrated key to species, Insecta Mundi 2022 (954), pp. 1-59 : 41

publication ID	https://doi.org/ 10.5281/zenodo.7399054
publication LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:pub:08BF4EE0-E69C-4E09-BECA-26481D49BFDE
DOI	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7470056
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03B887C8-FFDA-FFF1-FF45-0990FD7C976D
treatment provided by	Felipe
scientific name	Aneflomorpha seminuda Casey
status

Treatment

Aneflomorpha seminuda Casey View in CoL

( Fig. 2i View Figure 2 , 6s View Figure 6 , 7s View Figure 7 , 8q View Figure 8 , 9p View Figure 9 , 10s View Figure 10 , 11i View Figure 11 , 16f View Figure 16 )

Aneflomorpha seminuda Casey 1912: 294 View in CoL .

Diagnosis. Length 11–16 mm, pronotum as long as wide, elytra together 3.40 times longer than wide ( Fig. 2i View Figure 2 ). Integument light testaceous. Basal antennomeres very weakly carinate ( Fig. 9p View Figure 9 ). Spine of third antennomere slightly longer than second antennomere and spine of fourth antennomere, projecting away from antennal plane less than 35 degrees, acute at apex ( Fig. 9p View Figure 9 ). Pronotum with dense punctures of uneven size and placement, some contiguous and others not; punctures mostly unobscured by fine, recumbent pubescence; some specimens with a very small impunctate, post-median callus ( Fig. 6s View Figure 6 ). Elytral apices strongly bidentate and concave between projections ( Fig. 8q View Figure 8 ). Elytral pubescence fine, translucent and off-white, recumbent and recurved, with a few scattered long erect to suberect setae ( Fig. 7s View Figure 7 ). Procoxal cavities narrowly open by less than half the width of the broadly expanded prosternal process ( Fig. 10s View Figure 10 ). Protibia slender, gradually widening apically with the dorsal margin straight and non-carinate ( Fig. 11i View Figure 11 ).

Discussion. Aneflomorpha seminuda is most similar to A. rectilinea in size and coloration. Aneflomorpha rectilinea has prominent antennal carinae and a well-developed spine on the third antennomere ( Fig. 9o View Figure 9 ). In A. seminuda , the antennal carinae are barely evident, the spine of the third antennomere is only a little longer than the second antennomere and the spine of the fourth antennomere, and it does not project from the antennal plane by more than 35 degrees ( Fig. 9p View Figure 9 ). The pronotum in A. rectilinea is longer than wide ( Fig. 6q, r View Figure 6 ), unlike that of A. seminuda which is about as wide as long ( Fig. 6s View Figure 6 ). As discussed in the A. rectilinea account, most specimens of that species have gradual darkening of the elytral apices and/or sternites ( Fig. 1d View Figure 1 , 2h View Figure 2 , 16d, e View Figure 16 ) unlike A. seminuda which has more uniform testaceous coloration without darkening of the elytral apices or abdominal sternites ( Fig. 2i View Figure 2 , 16f View Figure 16 ). Although A. rectilinea is highly variable, on average, that species has longer, narrower proportions (elytra averaging 3.7 times as long as wide) compared to A. seminuda (elytra 3.4 times as long as wide). Material of the common and widespread A. rectilinea (especially from Texas and Oklahoma) should be carefully reviewed for potential misidentified specimens of A. seminuda . Chemsak (1962) stated that A. texana (formerly A. werneri ) is closely related to A. seminuda , but they share few similar features and A. texana is herein removed from synonymy. The mostly suberect setae of the pronotum and elytral base in A. texana and relatively sparse recumbent setae and presence of a well-developed antennal carina distinguishes it most easily from A. seminuda which has mostly recurved, recumbent pubescence ( Fig. 7s View Figure 7 ) and lacks a distinct carina on the basal antennomeres ( Fig. 9p View Figure 9 ). Aneflomorpha seminuda is similar to A. fisheri , but has more symmetrically bispinose elytral apices ( Fig. 8q View Figure 8 ) unlike the apicolaterally dentate and suturally spinose apices of A. fisheri ( Fig. 8f View Figure 8 ).

Distribution and biology. This species, known only from Texas, has likely been misidentified previously (e.g., Turnbow and Wappes 1978; Lingafelter and Horner 1993), so distribution records in southern and northern Texas, respectively cannot be confirmed.

Material examined. USA: Texas (no further data) (holotype, USNM) ; Dickens Co., White River Res., Fermented Bait Trap, 11 July 1988, R. F. Morris ( DJHC) ; Dickens Co., 7 mi. W. Dickens, 27–28 July 1981, Marlin E. Rice (2, TAMU); Crosby Co., 8 mi. E. Crosbyton, 4 August 1980, Marlin E. Rice (3, TAMU) ; Parker Co., Brazos River at Dennis, E. G. Riley, 24–25 June 1989 ( EGRC) .