Pseudopristilophus Méquignon, 1930

Etzler, Frank E., 2024, Generic Changes for Some Nearctic Prosternini (Coleoptera: Elateridae: Dendrometrinae: Neopristilophus Buysson, 1894 and Pristilophus Latreille, 1834) to Align with Palearctic Concepts, The Coleopterists Bulletin 78 (2), pp. 125-140 : 128-132

Pseudopristilophus Méquignon, 1930

Pseudopristilophus Méquignon 1930: 93 ; Fleutiaux 1930: 307; Laurent 1974: 20; Girard 2017: 10, 333, 361. Not exhaustive. Type species: Pristilophus sericans Germar, 1843 , by original designation. Catalog of sub-Saharan species: Girard (2017). Madagascar species overview: Piguet (2005), majority not included here.

Pseudopristilophus amaurus ( Candèze, 1863) ( Corymbites )

Pseudopristilophus attenuatus (Boheman, 1851) ( Pristilophus )

Pseudopristilophus badius Laurent, 1974 [not treated by Tarnawski 1996, 2001]

Pseudopristilophus famulus ( Germar, 1843) ( Pristilophus )*

Pseudopristilophus leptus ( Candèze, 1863) ( Corymbites )

Pseudopristilophus longus (Candèze, 1889) ( Corymbites )

Pseudopristilophus macilentus ( Candèze, 1863) ( Corymbites )

Pseudopristilophus madagascariensis (Fleutiaux, 1899) ( Hemirrhaphes )

Pseudopristilophus mocquerysi (Fleutiaux, 1899) ( Pristilophus )

Pseudopristilophus mucronatus ( Candèze, 1863) ( Corymbites )

Corymbites aurulentus Candèze, 1863 . Synonymized by Girard (2017).

Pseudopristilophus pellos ( Germar, 1843) ( Pristilophus )*

Pseudopristilophus peringueyi (Candèze, 1889) ( Corymbites )

Pseudopristilophus piciventris (Candèze, 1889) ( Corymbites )

Pseudopristilophus pseudalaus ( Candèze, 1863) ( Corymbites )

Pseudopristilophus rhomalocerus ( Candèze, 1863) ( Corymbites )

Pseudopristilophus sericans ( Germar, 1843) ( Pristilophus )*

Pseudopristilophus servus ( Germar, 1843) ( Pristilophus )*

Pseudopristilophus summus ( Candèze, 1863) ( Corymbites )

Pseudopristilophus velutinipes ( Candèze, 1863) ( Corymbites )

Diagnosis. Neopristilophus can be distinguished from other Prosternini genera by the following combination of characters: pronotum about as wide as long and with majority of setae directed laterally from midline (e.g., Fig. 1C ), pronotal hind angles with dorsal carina (e.g., Fig. 1D ), elytral setae not forming a pattern (e.g., Fig. 1A ), and parameres with blunt or rounded apex without lateral projections or setae ( Fig. 2D ) or ovipositor with blunt, setose gonocoxites that are longer than paraprocts and with well developed proctiger ( Fig. 2G ).

Genus Redescription . Length 8 to 22 mm. Body integument in most unicolorous, red-brown to black, a few with sides of pronotum paler; legs variable, paler to same color as body. Head: Mouthparts prognathous, mandible bidentate with outer tooth longer; labrum sclerotized, truncate to semicircular; supra-antennal carina directed toward posterior edge of labrum, incomplete medially; frons flat to impressed antero-medially; punctures subumbilicate with density correlated to puncture size; antenna with sensory elements beginning on third or fourth antennomere, third antennomere shape variable, subcylindrical to subtriangular, length variable, shorter than or equal in length to antennomere 4, antennomere 4–10 shape variable, nearly filiform (2× longer than wide) to strongly serrate (as long as wide), apex of antennomere 11 variable, constricted or not, antennal length variable, not reaching to surpassing posterior pronotal hind angles. Pronotum: Slightly wider than long to slightly longer than wide with most about as wide as long, majority of setae directed laterally from midline, medial impression length variable, limited to posterior part of pronotum to throughout entire length, punctures subumbilicate and similar in size to punctures on head, denser laterally than medially, pronotal hind angles unicarinate, sublateral plicae present or absent. Hypomeron with dense (nearly touching), subumbilicate punctures on anterior four-fifths; posterior edge with hind angle visible ventro-laterally, medial two-thirds thickened posteriad impunctate region of hypomeron, with two blunt tubercles medially, of which one is behind procoxa, remainder of thickened region variable, with additional tubercles, bumps, or ridges; without medial hypomeral bead. Prosternum with sides straight, pronotosternal sutures closed anteriorly, anterior lobe broadly rounded and on same plane as rest of prosternum, prosternal process straight posteriad procoxae, unidentate. Pterothorax: Mesocoxal cavity open to mesanepisternum and mesepimeron, mesosternal fossa with sides gradually sloping. Scutellar shield subrectangular, rounded anteriorly and posteriorly, sides concave. Elytra with striae punctate and impressed. Aedeagus: Parameres rounded apically and without subapical lateral expansion, without apical setae ( Figs. 2D, F ), median lobe variable, subparal- lel laterally and narrowing at apex to blunt point ( Figs. 2D, F ) or narrowing throughout entire length, or with medial lateral expansions, phallobase variable, one-third of total length ( Fig. 2D ) or one-half of total length. Ovipositor (o; Figs. 2C, E ): Short and robust, paraprocts (pa; Fig. 2G ) shorter than gonocoxite (g; Fig. 2G ), gonocoxite broadly rounded apically and setose, without styli, proctiger (pr; Fig. 2G ) well developed. Internal female genitalia: vagina (v; Figs. 2C, E ) with lateral sclerotiza- tions (clearest in Fig. 2E ), with two large colleterial glands (cg; Figs. 2C, E ; shrunken in Fig. 2E ) lateral of opening to bursa copulatrix; bursa copulatrix (bc; Figs. 2C, E ) elongate and tubular, without scleroti- zations, accessory gland (acg; Figs. 2C, E ) tubular and arising from end of bursa copulatrix, terminal element (te; Figs. 2C, E ) corkscrew shaped (unrav- eled in Fig. 2C ).

Comments. Johnson (1992) originally compared Billbrownia (as Brownia , a manuscript name at the time) to Neopristilophus . These two genera were separated based on characters of the antennae (moderately serrate vs. strongly serrate, respectively) and characters of the elytral striae and inter- striae. Johnson (1992: 110) stated that Billbrownia had elytral intervals convex and punctures subequal to strial punctures, while Neopristilophus had elytral intervals flat with punctures larger than strial punctures. These characters of antennae and elytra are often difficult to use to distinguish divisions higher than the species level in other elaterid genera and are often subjective. Antennal serration can be highly variable within genera and often varies between sexes within a species. The elytral interval characters are also difficult to use (compare Figs. 1A and B to Figs. 1C and D ). This is made all the more difficult in that, in the generic descriptions, Johnson (1992: 112; also in description in Mathison 2021: 326) stated that Brownia has the elytral intervals “flat to shallowly convex” and Neopristilophus has elytral intervals “shallowly convex” ( Johnson 1992: 118). This difference between the key to species and the generic descriptions implies that the elytral interval character is not useful in defining these genera.

An additional difficulty arises with N. signaticollis . This species was placed in Billbrownia, but the antennal serration is similar to that of North American species of Neopristilophus , with the third antennomere similar to that found in N. cribrosus . The generic description in Mathison (2021: 326) also states that the third antennomere in Billbrownia (= Brownia ) is subcylindrical, which is immediately contrasted with N. signaticollis which has the third antennomere “similar to following antennomeres” which are described as serrate ( Mathison 2021: 327). Brown (1935c) also considered N. signaticollis to be closely related to his cribrosus -group (= North American Neopristilophus ). Additionally, LeConte (1853) compared N. coniungens , the type of Billbrownia, to N. aethiops in his original description. Together, this highlights the difficulty of utilizing the presented antennal characters to distinguish the groups of species that are placed in Billbrownia and Neopristilophus , as well as historical comparisons of species that have been placed in each genus.

There are, however, many characters that can be used to unify these two groups. All species have a similar, somewhat dorso-ventrally compressed body ( Figs. 2A, B ). The aedeagi of all species have parameres with a blunt or rounded apex and without lateral expansions or points and lacking setae ( Figs. 2D, F ). Most importantly, they share similar internal female genitalia ( Figs. 2C, E ) with developed colleterial glands and an elongate, tubular bursa copulatrix with a corkscrew-shaped tubular extension, and an apparently unique ovipositor for Elateridae bearing a well developed proctiger.These characters all support a synonymy of Billbrownia with Neopristilophus , and a clear generic concept for North America.

There are also some species that are listed in Neopristilophus in the Ctenicerini (= Prosternini and Selatosomini ) catalogs by Tarnawski (1996, 2001) that had or have been moved to other genera and need cor- recting. Calder and Hayek (1992) moved the southeast Asian Neopristilophus to Anthracalaus in their revision of the latter genus, moves supported by multiple morphological characters. These generic transfers were missed by Tarnawski, who also listed some of the combinations with Neopristilophus as new in the 1996 catalog despite being used in combination with Neopristilophus in older works (e.g., Fleutiaux 1947). Anthracalaus novaguinensis was originally described in Neopristilophus , but was not present in any of Tarnawski’s catalogs. Calder and Hayek (1992) also synonymized two species described by Fleutiaux under A. morosus (see list above). Tarnawski (1996, 2001) also mentioned Pristilophus tonkinensis Fleutiaux, 1924 , stating this species is distinct from Corymbitodes tonkinensis Fleutiaux, 1918 currently in the genus Gnathodicrus Fleutiaux, 1934 ( Fleutiaux 1947; Tarnawski 2001). However, no species with the original combination of Pristilophus tonkinensis Fleutiaux, 1924 or with that species name was included in Neopristilophus when it was later reviewed by Fleutiaux (1947) for southeastAsia.Due to the confusion about its status and the fact that the author of the species did not include it in Neopristilophus , it is not included here. Additionally, Anthracalaus is in the subfamilyAgrypninae and the tribe Pseudomelanactini ( Calder and Hayek 1992; Kundrata et al. 2019), very different from Neopristilophus , which is in the subfamily Dendrometrinae and the tribe Prosternini ( Johnson 2002) .

Species from southern Africa and Madagascar that were in Neopristilophus in Tarnawski’s (1996, 2001) catalogs are currently in Pseudopristilophus ( Girard 2017) . Girard (2017) provided a list of species in Pseudopristilophus for continental Africa. Seven additional species are known from Madagascar ( Piguet 2005), two of which appear on the list above. Pseudopristilophus is in the subfamily Dendrometrinae and the tribe Prosternini ( Girard 2017, as Denticollinae and Ctenicerini , respectively), similar to Neopristilophus . However, it is possible that Pseudopristilophus is better placed in Parablacinae due to similarities of male genitalia (compare figures in Piguet 2005 and Calder 1996). However, this should be confirmed using morphological and molecular techniques. Evidently, the genus Neopristilophus is Holarctic in distribution, Pseudopristilophus is Afrotropical, and Anthracalaus is Indomalayan and Australasian with a lone exception in North America.

The list of species provided above now correctly places all species in the appropriate genus for their region and should prevent confusion going forward. Additionally, photographs of the type specimen of Corymbites rupestris Germar were seen (Bernd Jaeger, in litt.). While the name C. rupestris was often associated with specimens currently in the genus Laneganus Johnson, 2021 due to misidentifications dating back to Van Dyke (1932), the type specimen evidently belongs to Neopristilophus . It is very close in appearance to N. coniungens and N. praeses and is likely confused in collections under the former name. Montana N. praeses populations show some variation of male genitalia, and due to possible cryptic species, are listed with county data in figure captions to aid in future study. The genus Neopristilophus will need revision, par- ticularly for North America.

Figures

Fig. 1. Dorsal habitus of Neopristilophus species. A) N. coniungens, male, California, USA, B) N. praeses, male, Lincoln Co., Montana, USA, C) N. aethiops, male, Maryland, USA, D) N. maurus, male, California, USA. Not to scale.

Fig. 2. Characters of Neopristilophus. N. aethiops: A) Habitus, lateral view, female, Ohio, USA, C) Internal female genitalia and ovipositor, dorsal view, Ohio, D) Male genitalia, ventral view, Ohio, USA. N. praeses: B) Habitus, lateral view, male, Lincoln Co., Montana, USA, E) Internal female genitalia and ovipositor, dorsal view, F) Male genitalia, ventral view, Gallatin Co., Montana, USA, G) Female ovipositor only, not to scale, Wyoming, USA. Terms for internal female genitalia (C and E)—acg: accessory gland; bc: bursa copulatrix; cg: colleterial gland; o: ovipositor; v: vagina; te: terminal element. Terms for ovipositor (G)—g: gonocoxite; pa: paraproct; pr: proctiger.