Dorytomus rufatus ( Bedel, 1888 )

Caldara, Roberto, Košt, Michael, ál & Morris, Michael G., 2013, On the complex nomenclatural situation of two common Palaearctic weevils: Dorytomus rufatus Bedel, 1888 and Orchestes pilosus Fabricius, 1781 (Coleoptera: Curculionidae), Journal of Natural History 47 (13 - 14), pp. 1009-1017 : 1010-1013

A. Dorytomus rufatus ( Bedel, 1888)

Eteophilus rufatus Bedel, 1888: 425 [replacement name].

Bedel (1884: ci) created the new name rufulus for Dorytomus pectoralis sensu Faust, 1883: 460 (non Panzer, 1795: 312). Subsequently the same Bedel (1888) replaced the name rufulus Bedel, 1884 with rufatus (as Eteophilus Bedel, 1886 , an unnecessary replacement name for Dorytomus Germar, 1817 ) because of the secondary homonymy of Dorytomus rufulus Bedel with Dorytomus rufulus (Mannerheim, 1853) (originally described in Erirhinus Schoenherr, 1825 ). Actually the vicissitudes of the name pectoralis are more complex than those reported by Bedel. Gyllenhal (1835) cited Curculio pectoralis Panzer (as Erirhinus ) as a good species. Faust (1883) claimed that Dorytomus pectoralis sensu Gyllenhal was a good species, but different from Curculio pectoralis Panzer , which he placed in synonymy with Dorytomus tortrix (Linnaeus, 1761) , although doubtfully. Moreover Faust treated Curculio fructuum Marsham, 1802 , again doubtfully, and Curculio arcuatus Panzer, 1794 (erroneously as Fabricius, 1801: 490) as varieties of Dorytomus pectoralis sensu Gyllenhal.

The type of Dorytomus rufulus Bedel does not exist because this name was given to a misidentification of Panzer’s taxon by Gyllenhal, and Bedel did not designate syntypes. We decided to designate one specimen of Dorytomus pectoralis sensu Gyllenhal in Schoenherr’s collection, which corresponds in the colour of its integument to the typical form of Dorytomus pectoralis sensu Gyllenhal, 1835 , as the neotype of Dorytomus rufulus Bedel (currently rufatus Bedel ). It is a male labelled “V. Goth. Gyl. / Michael Košt’ál repraep. 2012 / NEOTYPUS Dorytomus rufulus Bedel Caldara , Košt’ál & Morris des. 2012 [red printed] / Dorytomus rufatus (Bedel) Michael Košt’ál det. 2012”. The specimen is 3.57 mm long (rostrum excluded), well preserved with dissected genitalia. Its left antenna is broken off. It is deposited at the Naturhistoriska Riksmuseet Stockholm.

However, to establish the correct name of this species the identity of Curculio pectoralis Panzer, 1795 , must be considered, as well as that of at least three senior synonyms of Dorytomus rufatus – Curculio arcuatus Panzer, 1794 , Curculio fructuum Marsham, 1802 and Curculio simplex Faust, 1883 ( Faust 1883; Klima 1934).

1. Curculio pectoralis Panzer, 1795

Curculio pectoralis Panzer, 1795: 312

Curculio pectoralis Panzer, 1795 was described on specimens from Germany. Subsequently this taxon was placed in synonymy with Dorytomus tortrix (Linnaeus, 1761) by Faust (1883), although doubtfully, Bedel 1884 and Klima 1934. The latter author quoted Curculio pectoralis twice again: the first as sensu Gyllenhal, 1843, placed among the synonyms of Dorytomus rufatus Bedel, 1888 , and the second as sensu Thomson, 1865, among the synonyms of Dorytomus melanophthalmus (Paykull, 1792) . Therefore, due to this intricate nomenclatural situation, we tried to find syntypes of Curculio pectoralis Panzer.

In the Museum für Naturkunde Berlin under the name pectoralis we found nine historical specimens of this taxon. They were designated by Dr Frisch as follows “ SYNTYPUS Curculio pectoralis Panzer, 1796 labelled by MNHUB 2012”. On the basis of the labels we decided to designate the first specimen of the series, one pinned faded female, labelled “51614 / pectoralis Panz ! / Pectoralis F. C. pectoralis Pz.K. * Boruss. Kugel. [old handwritten label] / SYNTYPUS Curculio pectoralis Panzer, 1796 labelled by MNHUB 2012 [red printed]” as the lectotype with the label “ LECTOTYPUS Curculio pectoralis Panzer M. Košt’ál des. 2012” [red printed]. An asterisk usually indicates types in historical collections. This specimen belongs to Dorytomus melanophthalmus . Out of the remaining eight specimens, six are Dorytomus melanophthalmus , one Dorytomus rufatus and one Curculio arcuatus Panzer, 1794 (see below). All eight specimens bear only more recently written labels: “Hist.-Coll. ( Coleoptera ) Nr. 51614 Erirhinus pectoralis Fabr. Borussia – Linz. Zool. Mus. Berlin / SYNTYPUS Curculio pectoralis Panzer, 1796 labelled by MNHUB 2012 [red printed]” and were designated as paralectotypes by adding labels “ PARALECTOTYPUS Curculio pectoralis Panzer M. Košt’ál des. 2012 [red printed]”. To all paralectotypes we also added determination labels. Three paralectotypes bear the following historical labels: “... villosulus... / [illegible] / [illegible]. Two paralectotypes bear labels apparently added later: “melanophthalmus” and “arcuatus F. sec. IIIi.”.

2. Curculio arcuatus Panzer, 1794

Curculio arcuatus Panzer, 1794: 6

Curculio arcuatus Panzer, 1794 was described on specimens from Germany. In the historical series of nine specimens of Dorytomus pectoralis (as designated by Dr Frisch), we found one pinned faded female with an historical label “ arcuatus Fabr. *” and a new printed label “Hist.-Coll. ( Coleoptera ) Nr. 51614 Erirhinus pectoralis Fabr. Borussia – Linz. Zool.Mus. Berlin ”. We designated this specimen as lectotype of Curculio arcuatus Panzer adding the label “ LECTOTYPUS Curculio arcuatus Panzer M. Košt’ál des. 2012” [red printed]. This specimen belongs to Dorytomus rufatus .

3. Curculio fructuum Marsham, 1802

Curculio fructuum Marsham, 1802: 292

Curculio fructuum was described by Marsham (1802) on specimens from England, but could not be found in Marsham’s collection at the British Museum of Natural History. However, in the same Museum we found two specimens standing under that name in the Kirby collection. Marsham does not say where his specimen(s) came from, so the specimens in the Kirby collection cannot be considered syntypes. However, one of these insects is labelled: “6. fructuum [ink, in Kirby’s hand] / 6 [ink] / Kirby [printed] /? ♂ Type [pencil on blue paper]”. It is Dorytomus rufatus (as is the other specimen) and is obviously the best candidate for the neotype designation, despite having no attached locality data. Therefore we attached the following label to it: “ NEOTYPE Curculio fructuum Marsham, 1802 desig. M.G. Morris 2012”.

It is noteworthy that Marsham described another species that can definitely be identified as a Dorytomus : Curculio rubellus . This is numbered as 162 in Marsham’s work ( Marsham 1802: 293). Both it and fructuum are names included as synonyms of Dorytomus pectoralis by Walton (1851) and Waterhouse (1861). No other author or catalogue quoted this name. In the Kirby collection there are two specimens of Dorytomus standing under the name rubellus (as a synonym of pectoralis ). One is Dorytomus melanophthalmus and the other Dorytomus taeniatus . We selected the first specimen labelled “5 [ink] / Kirby [printed] / 5. rubellus [ink] /? ♂ / Type [pencil on blue paper]” as the neotype of Curculio rubellus and added the following labels to it “ NEOTYPE Curculio rubellus Marsham desig. M.G. Morris 2012 [red printed] / Dorytomus melanophthalmus (Paykull) det. M.G. Morris 2012”.

4. Dorytomus simplex Faust, 1883

Dorytomus pectoralis var. simplex Faust, 1883: 460 . Des Gozis, 1886: 30

Faust (1883) named the variety simplex of Dorytomus pectoralis sensu Gyllenhal, 1835 for specimens with “ pedibus minus crassis; tibiis gracilioribus interne subbisinuatis ”, without quoting a type locality and therefore in our opinion unambiguously at infrasubspecific rank (Art. 45.6.1). However, 2 years before Bedel (1888), Des Gozis (1886) realized that the name rufulus Bedel was unavailable due to secondary homonymy with Dorytomus rufulus (Mannerheim, 1853) . He proposed the name simplex Faust, 1883 for Bedel’s taxon. Therefore this name must be considered as available according to Art. 45.6.4.1 because Des Gozis (1886) treated it as a good species.

In the general collection of the Museum für Tierkunde Dresden, where the collection of Faust is dispersed, there is no specimen with a label “simplex” or similar, which could entitle us to consider it to be a type of Dorytomus pectoralis var. simplex Faust. Similarly , in the database of the museum, there is no record on a taxon called “simplex” among species of Dorytomus (K-D. Klass, personal communication). Since Dorytomus pectoralis sensu Faust is Dorytomus rufatus (Bedel) , we selected one historical specimen of Dorytomus rufatus from the Faust specimens and designated it as a neotype of Dorytomus pectoralis var. simplex Faust. It is a 3.63-mm long (rostrum excluded), glued, damaged male with left antenna and the whole anterior leg as well as parts of medial and posterior left tarsi missing. It is labelled: “Gall.b.... [illegible] / Coll. J.Faust Ankauf 1900 / Staatl. Museum für Tierkunde Dresden / NEOTYPUS Dorytomus pectoralis var. simplex Faust Caldara , Košt’ál & Morris des. 2012 / Dorytomus rufatus (Bedel) Michael Košt’ál det. 2012”. It is deposited in the Museum für Tierkunde Dresden.

In summary, according to the data reported at points 1–4 of Section A and to Article 29 of ICZN (1999), the junior name rufatus ( Bedel, 1888) can be maintained because Curculio arcuatus Panzer , Curculio fructuum Marsham and Dorytomus simplex Faust meet the requirements of Article 23.9.1.1 and Dorytomus rufatus meets those of Article 23.9.1.2 of ICZN (1999) by quoting the following references: Abbazzi and Maggini 2009; Abbazzi and Osella 1992; Abbazzi et al. 1995; Alonso-Zarazaga 2002; Avgin and Colonnelli 2011; Benedikt et al. 2010; Bercio and Folwaczny 1979; Braunert 2009; Colonnelli 2003; Delbol 2008; Dieckmann 1988; Endrödi 1970; Germann 2010; Lohse 1983a; Mazur 2002; Morris 2002, 2003; Pelletier 2005; Podlussány 1998, 2001; Rheinheimer and Hassler 2010; Smreczyński 1972; Telnov 2004; Tempère and Péricart 1989; Wanat and Mokrzycki 2005. Therefore we propose the acceptance of the following synonymies:

Dorytomus rufatus ( Bedel, 1888) nomen protectum

= Curculio arcuatus Panzer, 1794 nomen oblitum

= Curculio fructuum Marsham, 1802 nomen oblitum

= Dorytomus rufulus Bedel, 1884 [non (Mannerheim, 1853)]

= Dorytomus simplex Faust, 1883 nomen oblitum

and:

Dorytomus melanophthalmus (Paykull, 1792)

= Curculio pectoralis Panzer, 1795 n. syn.

= Curculio rubellus Marsham, 1802 n. syn.