Hesperopenna persimilis ( Kimoto, 1989 ) Bezděk, 2013

Bezděk, Jan, 2013, Revision of the genus Hesperopenna (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae: Galerucinae). I. Generic redescription, definition of species groups and taxonomy of H. medvedevi species group, Acta Entomologica Musei Nationalis Pragae 53 (2), pp. 715-746 : 725-726

Hesperopenna persimilis ( Kimoto, 1989) comb. nov.

( Figs 12 , 20 , 28 , 35 , 42 , 49 , 58–59 )

Calomicrus persimilis Kimoto, 1989: 102 (original description); WARCHAŁOWSKI (1991): 50 (key); MOHAMEDSAID & CONSTANT (2007): 167 (faunistics).

Martinella persimilis: MEDVEDEV (2000) : 169 (key).

Type locality. ‘ Laos: Sedone Prov., Pakse’.

Type material examined. HOLOTYPE: ♂, ‘ LAOS: / Sedone Prov. / Pakse / 31.V.196 [p] 5 [w, h] // Native Collector / BISHOP MUS. [w, p] // HOLOTYPE [red label, p] // Calomicrus / persimilis / n. sp. [w, h] // PHOTO [red label, p] // 14964 [pink label, h]’ ( BPBM). PARATYPES: 1 ♂ 1 ♀, ‘ LAOS: / Sedone Prov. / Pakse / 31.V.196 [p] 5 [w, h] // Native Collector / BISHOP MUS. [w, p] // PARATOPOTYPE [blue label, p] // Calomicrus / persimilis / n. sp. [w, h]’ ( BPBM) ; 2 ♂♂, ‘ LAOS: / Ile de Khong / 17.IV.1965 [w, p] // J. L. Gressitt / Collector / BISHOP MUSEUM [w, p] // PARATYPE [blue label, p] // Calomicrus / persimilis / n. sp. [w, h]’ ( BPBM).

Additional material examined (11 spec.). THAILAND: LOEI PROV.: Phu Kradung N. P., 16°52´N 101°49´E, 1000 m, 16.-17.v.1999, 1 ♀, M. Říha leg. ( JBCB). PHETCHABUN PROV.: Lom Sak – Dan Sai, 17.–19.v.1993, 6 ♂♂ 3 ♀♀, Pacholátko & Dembický leg. ( JBCB, JVCJ). LAOS: VIENTIANE PROV.: Vientiane, 1 ♂, Vitalis leg. ( NMPC).

Description. Body length: ♂♂ 6.6–7.0 mm, ♀♀ 7.2–7.5 mm.

Male ( Fig. 49 , paratype Fig. 58 ). Body completely orange, only apices of mandibles black.

Interocular space 1.5 times as wide as transverse diameter of eye. Antennae 0.80 times as long as body, length ratio of antennomeres I to XI equals 11-4-5-13-12-12-12-13-12-12- 13. Pronotum 1.42 – 1.54 times as broad as long. Elytra glabrous, 1.75 times as long as wide (measured at humeral calli), 0.70 times as long as body. Length ratio of metatarsomeres I–IV equals 9-4-4-7. Last ventrite with two very small incisions posteriorly, depression on the disc anteriorly surrounded with U-shaped ridge ( Fig. 20 ).

Aedeagus: dorsal side with deep asymmetrical incision on left side, on right side with short rounded process and wide shallow subtriangular incision; ventral side gradually tapering to triangular apex, ventral surface flat ( Fig. 12 ).

Female. Apex of last ventrite widely rounded ( Fig. 28 ), pygidium with obtusangulate apex ( Fig. 35 ). Spermatheca: nodulus subglobular, cornu regularly rounded with very long apical appendix ( Fig. 42 ).

Differential diagnosis. Due to glabrous elytra and uniformly brown legs Hesperopenna persimilis is similar to H. helferi sp. nov. and H. bonifaci sp. nov. but differs from both species in the subapical impression on the last ventrite in male, anteriorly surrounded with an U-shaped ridge (without ridge in H. helferi sp. nov. and H. bonifaci sp. nov.) ( Figs 20, 23, 24 ) and simple triangular apex of the ventral side of aedeagus (ventral side of aedeagus asymmetrical with a deep U-shaped incision in H. helferi sp. nov. and H. bonifaci sp. nov. – incision on the right side in H. helferi sp. nov., on the left side in H. bonifaci sp. nov.) ( Figs 12 , 15, 16 ). Females of H. persimilis and H. helferi sp. nov. can be separated by the shape of pygidium: apex obtusangulate in H. persimilis while with a small U-shaped incision in H. helferi sp. nov. ( Figs 35, 38 ).

Distribution. Laos ( KIMOTO 1989, present paper), Vietnam ( KIMOTO 1989), Thailand (MOHAMEDSAID & CONSTANT 2007, present paper).

Figures

Figs 11–14.Aedeagus (a – dorsal view; b – lateral view; c – ventral view). 11 – Hesperopenna medvedevi nom.nov.; 12 – H. persimilis (Kimoto, 1989); 13 – H. tibialis (Kimoto, 1989); 14 – H. arnoldi sp. nov. Scale bar 1 mm.

Figs 19–26. Last abdominal ventrite of males.19 – Hesperopenna medvedevi nom. nov.; 20 – H. persimilis (Kimoto, 1989); 21 – H. tibialis (Kimoto, 1989); 22 – H. arnoldi sp. nov.; 23 – H. bonifaci sp. nov.; 24 – H. helferi sp. nov.; 25 – H. sipekorum sp. nov.; 26 – H. zofka sp. nov. Scale bar 1 mm.

Figs 27–33.Last abdominal ventrite of females. 27 – Hesperopenna medvedevi nom.nov.; 28 – H.persimilis (Kimoto, 1989); 29 – H. tibialis (Kimoto, 1989); 30 – H. arnoldi sp. nov.; 31 – H. helferi sp. nov.; 32 – H. sipekorum sp. nov.; 33 – H. zofka sp. nov. Scale bar 1 mm.

Figs 34–40. Female pygidium. 34 – Hesperopenna medvedevi nom. nov.; 35 – H. persimilis (Kimoto, 1989); 36 – H. tibialis (Kimoto, 1989); 37 – H. arnoldi sp. nov.; 38 – H. helferi sp. nov.; 39 – H. sipekorum sp. nov.; 40 – H. zofka sp. nov. Scale bar 1 mm.

Figs 41–47. Spermatheca. 41 – Hesperopenna medvedevi nom. nov.; 42 – H. persimilis (Kimoto, 1989); 43 – H. tibialis (Kimoto, 1989); 44 – H. arnoldi sp. nov.; 45 – H. helferi sp. nov.; 46 – H. sipekorum sp. nov.; 47 – H. zofka sp. nov. Scale bar 0.25 mm.

Figs 48–51.Habitus. 48 – Hesperopenna medvedevi nom. nov.(male, Vietnam, 8.2 mm); 49 – H. persimilis (Kimoto, 1989) (male, Thailand, 6.2 mm); 50 – H. tibialis (Kimoto, 1989) (male, Laos, 9.5 mm); 51 – H. arnoldi sp. nov. (male, holotype, 8.4 mm).

Figs 56–65.Type specimens.56–57 – Hesperopenna flava Medvedev & Dang, 1981 (male, holotype, 7.6 mm); 58–59 – Calomicrus persimilis Kimoto, 1989 (male, paratype, 7.1 mm); 60–61 – Martinella merkli Medvedev, 2000 (male, paratype, 8.5 mm); 62–63 – Liroetiella englerae Medvedev, 1995 (female, paratype, 5.8 mm); 64–65 – Liroetiella warisan Mohamedsaid, 1998 (female, paratype, 4.1 mm). 56, 58, 60, 62, 64 – habitus; 57, 59, 61, 63, 65 – labels.

Figs 15–18. Aedeagus (a – dorsal view; b – lateral view; c – ventral view). 15 – H. bonifaci sp. nov.; 16 – H. helferi sp. nov.; 17 – H. sipekorum sp. nov.; 18 – H. zofka sp. nov. Scale bar 1 mm.