Catonura complanata ( Germain, 1855 ) Lasoń & Hájek & Jelínek, 2021

Lasoń, Andrzej, Hájek, Jiří & Jelínek, Josef, 2021, The Nitidula carnaria complex, with description of a new species from Central Asia, and a key to world species of the genus (Coleoptera: Nitidulidae), Acta Entomologica Musei Nationalis Pragae 61 (2), pp. 503-516 : 514

Catonura complanata ( Germain, 1855) , comb. nov.

( Fig. 26 )

Nitidula complanata Germain, 1855: 396 .

Epuraea ruficollis Reitter, 1873: 29 ; syn. nov.

Catonura ruficollis : Rൾංඍඍൾඋ (1875: 61).

Catonura rufithorax Reitter, 1883: 74 (unnecessary replacement name); syn. nov.

Material examined. 1 spec., Chili, ex. Fairm., Epuraea ruficollis Sol. (MNHN) ; 2 spec., Chili, ruficollis Sol. Reitt. (MNHN) ; 12 spec., Chile, VII. R., Alto Vilches, 35°35.949–71°02.947, 1400–1800 m, 14.–16.i.2005, S. Bílý leg. ( NMPC).

Comments to classification. The brief but accurate original description of Nitidula complanata fits perfectly to Catonura ruficollis ( Reitter, 1873) . The latter species was described by Rൾංඍඍൾඋ (1873: 29) as ‘ Epuraea ruficollis Sol. i.litt. [=] E. chilensis Germain i.litt.’. Rൾංඍඍൾඋ (1873) was evidently not aware that both nominal taxa were already described as Nitidula ruficollis Solier, 1849 (Sඈඅංൾඋ 1849) and Nitidula chilensis Germain, 1855 (see above) respectively. Later Rൾංඍඍൾඋ (1883) realized his error and proposed replacement name Catonura rufithorax Reitter, 1883 for his presumed junior homonym. Nevertheless, whatever the current status of Nitidula ruficollis Solier, 1849 may be, it has never been combined either with Epuraea Erichson, 1843 or with Catonura Reitter, 1875 and it has never been catalogued in Nitidulidae (Gඋඈඎ- ඏൾඅඅൾ 1913, BඅൺർKඐൾඅൽൾඋ 1945). Thus, it could not be senior homonym of Epuraea ruficollis Reitter, 1873 , and Catonura rufithorax Reitter, 1883 remains an unnecessary replacement name. The genus Catonura was placed by KංඋൾඃඍඌHඎK (2008) as Cratonura [incorrect subsequent spelling] in Nitidulinae : Nitidulini , Perilopsis -complex along with genera Epuraeopsis Reitter, 1875 , Perilopsis Reitter, 1875 and Testudoraea Kirejtshuk, 1986 (raised to generic status by Lൺඐඋൾඇർൾ 2019).

The type material of Nitidula complanata could not be found in the Paris museum neither during the visit of JJ in 1983, nor recently by Ms. Taghavian and the type is probably lost. Unfortunately, also the type of Epuraea ruficollis could not be undoubtedly identified within the Grouvelle’s collection in MNHN. However, the identity of Catonura ruficollis has never been questioned and we have no doubts about its conspecificity with Nitidula complanata . Therefore, we establish here their formal synonymy: Catonura complanata ( Germain, 1855) , comb. nov. = Catonura ruficollis ( Reitter, 1873) , syn. nov. = Catonura rufithorax Reitter, 1883 , syn. nov.

Figures

Figs 24–27. Habitus of Neotropical species previously classified in the genus Nitidula Fabricius, 1775. 24 – Mystrops bourgeoisi (Grouvelle, 1914) (syntype; Ecuador; 5.5 mm); 25 – Cryptarcha chilensis (Germain, 1855) (Chile, 2.8 mm); 26 – Catonura complanata (Germain, 1855) (Chile, 3.7 mm); Mystrops rufidens (Reitter, 1873) (syntype; Venezuela; 2.4 mm).