Plateros xenos Kazantsev, 2020
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.15298/rusentj.29.2.07 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03FE87E4-FFB3-FFC7-4C94-FED0FCF3FCFF |
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
scientific name |
Plateros xenos Kazantsev |
status |
sp. nov. |
Plateros xenos Kazantsev , sp.n.
Figs 36–38 View Figs 33–38 .
MATERIAL: Holotype, ♂, [ Indonesia], Sulawesi Tengah, nr. Morowali, Ranu River Area , 27.I–20.IV.1980, M.J.D. Brendell, B.M. 1980–280 ( NHML); paratype, ♀, same label ( NHML).
DESCRIPTION. Male. Yellow testaceous; antennomeres 1–2 and abdomen light brown; antennomeres 3–11 dark brown ( Fig. 36 View Figs 33–38 ).
Vertex with conspicuous round impression behind antennal prominence. Eyes moderately large, interocular distance ca. 1.5 times shorter than eye diameter. Labrum small, transverse, almost truncate anteriorly. Palps slender; ultimate palpomeres narrow, elongate, narrowing distally, widest in the middle. Antennal sockets separated by minute lamina. Antennae attaining to elytral three fourths, antennomeres 3–10 ramose, rami of antennomeres 5–7 subequal in length to stems; antennomere 3 (stem) ca. 3.3 times longer than antennomere 2 and ca. 1.5 times shorter than antennomere 4; antennomeres 3– 11 with relatively long erect pubescence ( Fig. 36 View Figs 33–38 ).
Pronotum transverse, ca. 1.4 times as wide as long, trapezoidal, moderately bisinuate basally and noticeably semi-circularly produced anteriorly, with short acute posterior and distinct blunt anterior angles. Scutellum subquadrate, slightly narrowing distally, inconspicuously emarginate at apex ( Fig. 36 View Figs 33–38 ).
Elytra long, ca. 3 times longer than wide at humeri, almost parallel-sided, with four equally developed primary costae, except noticeably stronger in proximal third humeral costa; interstices with even rows of small roundish cells; pubescence short and decumbent ( Fig. 36 View Figs 33–38 ).
Legs slender, relatively long ( Fig. 36 View Figs 33–38 ).
Median lobe of aedeagus elongate and narrow, slightly bent in distal fourth, without distinct swellings or dents ( Figs 37–38 View Figs 33–38 ).
Female. Similar to male, but eyes smaller, with interocular distance subequal in length to eye diameter, and antennae serrate, with their pubescence shorter and decumbent.
Length: 4.2–4.8 mm. Width (humerally): 1.1–1.2 mm.
ETYMOLOGY. The name of the new species is derived from the Greek for´stranger´, alluding to the strange shape of its aedeagus.
DIAGNOSIS. Plateros xenos sp.n. is separable from P. princeps (Kleine, 1939) , also with long male antennal rami, by the smaller size, testaceous antennomeres 1–2, uniformly yellow head, legs, pronotum and elytra ( Fig. 36 View Figs 33–38 ). It may be distinguished from the similarly coloured P. flavidus Kleine, 1933 , known only by the female holotype, by the smaller size, relative large female eyes and conspicuously produced forward anterior pronotal margin ( Fig. 36 View Figs 33–38 ), while the male genital structures, with narrow simple slightly bent distally median lobe ( Figs 37–38 View Figs 33–38 ), easily distinguish the new species from all Sulawesi congeners, where males have been described.
REMARKS. It is possible that the tip of the median lobe of aedeagus in the Holotype of P. xenos sp.n. is missing.
A KEY TO SPECIES OF PLATEROS FROM SULAWESI
1. Male antennae ramose ( Figs 8 View Figs 7–9 , 14 View Figs 10–14 ) ............................. 2
— Male antennae at most serrate (e.g. Figs 1–3 View Figs 1–3 , 7 View Figs 7–9 ) ........ 5
2. Upperside rusty red; male antennal rami at most 1.3 times shorter than relevant stems ( Fig. 8 View Figs 7–9 ); aedeagus with more or less simple and straight median lobe, only noticeably widened and slightly bent in distal half ( Figs 27–28 View Figs 23–32 ) ... ...................................................... P. rubiginosus sp.n.
— Upperside testaceous ................................................... 3
3. Male antennal rami about as long as relevant stems (e.g. Fig. 36 View Figs 33–38 ) ......................................................................... 4
— Male antennal rami at most 2 times shorter than relevant stems ( Fig. 14 View Figs 10–14 ); pronotum 1.6 times wider than long, anterior margin strongly produced forward, anterior angles conspicuous; aedeagus with conspicuously widened and twisted distal third ( Figs 31–32 View Figs 23–32 ) ............................. .................................................. P. wartabonensis sp.n.
4. Larger (6.5 mm); antennae and head black, legs mostly black, with only basally yellowish femurs and tibiae, pronotal disk and elytral suture infuscated .................... ............................................ P. princeps (Kleine, 1939)
— Smaller (less than 5 mm); antennomeres 1–2 testaceous; head, legs, pronotum and elytra uniformly yellow ( Fig. 36 View Figs 33–38 ); aedeagus with narrow, simple, only slightly bent median lobe ( Figs 37–38 View Figs 33–38 ) ....................... P. xenos sp.n.
5. Elytra uniformly orange or yellow testaceous ( Figs 1 View Figs 1–3 , 12 View Figs 10–14 ) ...................................................................................... 6
— Elytra dark brown to black, sometimes with paler margins, at most testaceous with wide dark sutural stripe ( Figs 2–7 View Figs 1–3 View Figs 4–6 View Figs 7–9 , 10 View Figs 10–14 ) ...................................................................... 11
6. Female antennomeres 3–10 serrate, males unknown ... 7
— Female antennomeres 3–10 almost parallel-sided, male antennae at most serrate ............................................... 8
7. Legs dark; pronotum ca. 1.45 times wider than long, anterior pronotal angles inconspicuous ......................... .............................. P. toliensis Tvardik et Bocák, 2001
— Legs yellow; pronotum ca. 1.83 times wider than long, anterior pronotal angles distinct .................................... ............................................... P. flavidus Kleine, 1933
8. Legs uniformly yellow testaceous ( Fig. 33 View Figs 33–38 ); aedeagus with relatively short and robust median lobe, with elongate rounded dents in distal half ( Figs 34–35 View Figs 33–38 ) .............. ......................................................... P. xanthellus sp.n.
— At least some parts of legs dark (e.g. Fig. 1 View Figs 1–3 ) .............. 9
9. Femurs and tibiae testaceous with dark distal parts ( Fig. 12 View Figs 10–14 ); aedeagus with elongate narrow curved median lobe; phallobase with fused lateral sutures ( Figs 29–30 View Figs 23–32 ) ....... ...................................................... P. unisuturalis sp.n.
— Femurs testaceous (e.g. Fig. 1 View Figs 1–3 ); phallobase with nonfused lateral sutures (e.g. Figs 15–16, 27–28 View Figs 23–32 ) .......... 10
10. Legs testaceous, except dark distal tarsomeres ( Fig. 1 View Figs 1–3 ); aedeagus with conspicuously widened distal two thirds ( Figs 15–16) ............................. P. bantaengensis sp.n.
— Tibiae dark distally; aedeagus with inconspicuously widened distal third ......... P. lalui Tvardik et Bocák, 2001
11. Pronotum reddish, with dark spot ............................. 12
— Pronotum dark brown to black, at most with paler margins (e.g. Figs 2–6 View Figs 1–3 View Figs 4–6 ) ............................................................ 13
12. Pronotum narrowed anteriorly, with basal dark spot ..... .................................................. P. celebensis Pic, 1921
— Pronotum not narrowed anteriorly, with anterior dark spot ( Fig. 7 View Figs 7–9 ); aedeagus with narrow straight medial lobe, abruptly bent distally, retroussé and dentate at apex ( Figs 25–26 View Figs 23–32 ) ............................................ P. rimbaensis sp.n.
13. Elytra uniformly dark brown to black (e.g. Figs 2–3 View Figs 1–3 ) .. 14
— Elytra dark brown to black with paler margins or apices, or testaceous with wide dark sutural stripe (e.g. Figs 5–6 View Figs 4–6 , 10 View Figs 10–14 ) .............................................................................. 19
14. Eye diameter greater than interocular distance (e.g. Fig. 2 View Figs 1–3 ) .................................................................................... 15
— Eye diameter shorter than interocular distance (e.g. Fig. 4 View Figs 4–6 ) .................................................................................... 17
15. Eye diameter 1.1 times greater than interocular distance; aedeagus slender, straight, widened distally .................. ......................... P. kalamensis Tvardik et Bocák, 2001
— Eye diameter 1.4–1.5 times greater than interocular distance ........................................................................... 16
16. Aedeagus with strongly curved and hooked distally medi- an lobe ................... P. milenae Tvardik et Bocák, 2001
— Median lobe of aedeagus relatively short and robust, with prominent toothed lobes in distal third ( Figs 17–18) .... ........................................................ P. curticauda sp.n.
17. Margins of pronotum lighter than disk; aedeagus slender .......................... P. orobuensis Tvardik et Bocák, 2001
— Pronotum uniformly black ......................................... 18
18. Antennomeres 3–10 serrate; aedeagus with robust, curved in apical half median lobe .............................................. ....................... P. mamasensis Tvardik et Bocák, 2001
— Antennomeres 3–10filiform ( Fig.4 View Figs 4–6 ); aedeagus with straight median lobe, distinctly constricted in basal half, distally with dorsal hook and ventral triangular projection ( Figs 21–22) .................................... P. latimojongensis sp.n.
19. Elytra testaceous with wide dark sutural stripe ( Fig. 6 View Figs 4–6 ) ........................................................ P. pangoensis sp.n.
— Elytra dark brown to black with paler margins or apices (e.g. Figs 3 View Figs 1–3 , 5 View Figs 4–6 , 10 View Figs 10–14 ) ...................................................... 20
20. Elytra with paler apices ( Fig. 10 View Figs 10–14 ) .... P. uluwayensis sp.n.
— Elytra dark with paler margins (e.g. Figs 3 View Figs 1–3 , 5 View Figs 4–6 ) ......... 21
21. Posterior pronotal angles strongly produced backwards ( Fig. 5 View Figs 4–6 ); aedeagus with curved and hooked distally medi- an lobe, with two spines in proximal half and barbed hook ventrally ( Figs 23–24 View Figs 23–32 ) ....... P. pallidimarginatus sp.n.
— Posterior pronotal angles only slightly produced backwards (e.g. Fig. 3 View Figs 1–3 ) ...................................................... 22
22. Posterior pronotal angles long and narrow ( Fig. 3 View Figs 1–3 ); aedeagus with relatively straight and narrow median lobe, conspicuously widened distally, provided with long and broad bidental blade ( Figs 19–20) .............. P. gorochovi sp.n.
— Posterior pronotal angles not very narrow ................ 23
23. Antennomeres 3–10 serrate; pronotal margins lighter than disk; aedeagus with slender, curved in the middle and widened distally median lobe; internal sac membranous .................... P. tanatorajensis Tvardik et Bocák, 2001
— Antennomeres 3–10 almost parallel-sided; pronotum uniformly black; aedeagus with robust median lobe; internal sac partly sclerotised ....................................................... .............. P. rubromamasensis Tvardik et Bocák, 2001
NHML |
Natural History Museum, Tripoli |
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |