Balthasarella Obenberger 1958

Levey, B. & Bellamy, C. L., 2013, A taxonomic revision of Neobuprestis Kerremans (Coleoptera: Buprestidae) with the description of a new genus and two new species, Zootaxa 3681 (3), pp. 225-240 : 227-228

Balthasarella Obenberger 1958

Balthasarella Obenberger 1958:487 .

Type species: Baltasarella melandryoides Obenberger 1958 (fixed by original designation).

Diagnosis. The sub-generic description of Neobuprestis (s.str.) above applies to Neobuprestis (Balthasarella) except for the following differences:

Head ( Fig. 15 ): frons in N. (B.) williamsi sp. n. strongly convex in the middle, in N. (B.) frenchi more weakly convex.

Antennae: slightly shorter, not reaching the base of the pronotum when flexed backwards; segment 3 not or scarcely expanded; expanded segments of 3 and Ƥ like those of Ƥ Neobuprestis (s.str.); segment 11 elongate ovate.

Pronotum Figs. (3, 4, 5, 6,): slightly less transverse, with the lateral margins almost parallel sided in basal half; lateral carina reaching or almost the notosternal suture; punctation with some associated setae on lateral parts.

Scutellum: slightly transverse, about one fifteenth width of elytra at base.

Elytra: apices weakly emarginate, not conjointly rounded; lateral margins very weakly to weakly serrate in apical half in both sexes; each elytron with 3 or 4 long costae, the most lateral one sometimes absent; punctation next to costae partly seriate.

Abdomen ( Fig. 22 ): ventrite 5 with apex broadly, shallowly excised, without well developed spines or a flange.

Relationships of Neobuprestis . In the last thirty years the definition and limits of the subfamilies and tribes of the Buprestidae have undergone numerous changes and many new tribes and subtribes have been erected on the basis of a few characters, whose phylogenetic significance is unclear. Bellamy 2003. Bellamy (2003) attempted to integrate all these changes into a summary of the higher classification of the Buprestoidea. We have used the subfamily and tribal assignments in the recent World Catalogue ( Bellamy 2008, 2009) which largely follows Bellamy, 2003 as the basis for the discussion that follows.

Neobuprestis is currently assigned to the subfamily Buprestinae and to the Neobuprestis generic group sensu Volkovitsh (2001). This generic group includes the Australian genus Balthasarella Obenberger which is here treated as a subgenus of Neobuprestis and Zulubuprestis Bellamy from S. Africa ( Bellamy 1991). Neobuprestis shares many characters with Zulubuprestis . The main difference is that Neobuprestis does not have an exposed anteclypeus (epistome) as possessed by Zulubuprestis .

When the Epistomentini ( Levey 1978) was defined there was uncertainty of the relationships of the Epistomentini to other tribes of the Chalcophorinae (now called Chrysochroinae ) in which subfamily it was then placed. The first author subsequently realised that the exposed anteclypeus seen in the Epistomentini also occurs in Buprestis Linnaeus , Eurythyrea Solier , Yamina Kerremans, Cypriaci s Casey, and Pygicera Kerremans , Neobubastes Blackburn and Zulubuprestis currently assigned to the Buprestinae . Volkovitsh (2001) in his study of the antennal structures in Buprestidae associates the Epistomentini with Neobuprestis , Buprestis and related genera.

The Epistomentiini and the other genera mentioned above have an essentially non tropical bihemispheric (amphipolar) distribution. This pattern of distribution is seen in a number of groups of Coleoptera, Crowson (1980) , and plant groups, Van Steenis (1972). Crowson (1980) suggests that this type of distribution may be the result of migration during the late Cretaceous from Northern to Southern hemisphere (or vice versa), when equatorial temperatures were lower.

Although Neobuprestis shows great similarity to Zulubuprestis it lacks an exposed anteclypeus. This suggests either that the exposed anteclypeus exhibits homoplasy in the Buprestinae in which case it cannot be used on its own to infer a close relationship of the Epistomentini, Zulubuprestis and Buprestis and related genera mentioned above, or if it is in fact a synapomorphy shared by these groups then Neobuprestis is not as closely related to these groups as other characters might suggest. Volkovitsh (2001) suggests that Neobuprestis and Balthasarella (then treated as a separate genus) constitute a separate Australian group from Buprestis and related genera, which tends to support the second hypothesis mentioned above. At present we do not think it is possible to draw any firm conclusions regarding the relationship of Neobuprestis to the Epistomentini and Buprestis and its related genera without a thorough cladistic analysis of the subfamily Buprestinae as a whole.

Figures

FIGURES 14 – 20. 14. head & pronotum N. williamsi sp. n. (paratype, Barrington Tops, New South Wales); 15 – 17 head: 15. N. williamsi sp. n. (paratype, Barrington Tops, New South Wales); 16. N. peroni (Gory & Laporte) Ƥ (no locality); 17. B. lobatum sp. n. (holotype); 18. antenna 3 N. peroni (Gory & Laporte) (Birchip, Victoria); 19. apical 7 antennomeres of B. lobatum sp. n. (holotype); 20. tarsal segments of B. lobatum sp. n. (holotype).

FIGURES 21 – 25. 21 – 22. apical abdominal ventrite: 21. N. peroni (Gory & Laporte) 3 (Birchip, Victoria); 22. N. williamsi sp. n. Ƥ (paratype, 60 km E. N. E. Gloucester); 23. wing of B. lobatum sp. n. (holotype); 24. aedeagus of B. lobatum sp. n. (holotype); 25. aedeagus of N. peroni (Gory & Laporte) 3 (Birchip, Victoria).