Clinops Gerstaecker

Engel, Michael S., Falin, Zachary H. & Batelka, Jan, 2019, A new genus of Pelecotominae from Mexico, with notes on the genera Clinops and Scotoscopus and the description of new species (Coleoptera, Ripiphoridae), ZooKeys 857, pp. 59-84 : 59

Genus Clinops Gerstaecker

Clinops Gerstaecker, 1855a: 16. Type species: Clinops badius Gerstaecker, 1855, by monotypy.

Diagnosis.

Body slender; elytra 3.0 –3.4× as long as pronotal disc; coloration light to dark brown, with fine, short golden to light or dark brown setae; head with postocular genae expanded into lobes; compound eye not expanded beyond mandibular base and with a small extra-antennal sclerotous emargination; antenna with eleven antennomeres; male antenna with antennomeres I–III simple, IV–X with inner-facing, flabellate, compressed rami, XI similar in shape to preceding rami; female antenna similar to male with much shorter, pectinate, compressed rami; ultimate maxillary palpomere trapezoidal, apical width slightly less than maximum length, with blunt, truncate apex, not grossly enlarged; distal sensory duct on ultimate maxillary palpomere elongate, strongly oblique. Lateral aspect of pronotum with a ventrally bowed sulcus; pronotal disc without longitudinal medial impression; mesosternum weakly convex, without medial keel; metepisternum without elytron-receiving carina; posterior aspect of metepimeron slightly expanded. Metacoxa with strongly developed posterior flange; ventral surface of pro- and mesofemora in males without densely setose patch; tibial spur formula 0-0-2; pretarsal claws apically bifid, with or without a small, peg-like subsidiary tooth at midlength. Male genitalia with parameres weakly curved with apices widely separated from each other.

Comments.

The identity of Clinops has presented quite a historical challenge. Gerstaecker (1855a, 1855b) described the tibial spur formula for Clinops badius Gerstaecker as 0-?-2 ("tibiis anticis muticis, mediis–?, posticis bispinosis"), as both midlegs were missing in his female holotype (Figs 15-16). Falin (2003) proposed a formula of 0-0-2 for the genus, basing his conclusion on a specimen he interpreted as C. badius from TMSA (herein recognized as a separate species, vide C. inexpectatus sp. nov., infra). This interpretation for the genus is followed herein as it is consistent with what little is known of the tibial spur formulas for the three South African species we recognize: C. badius 0-?-2, C. inexpectatus 0-0-2, and C. perpessus sp. nov. 0-0-?. Accordingly, the tibial spur formula for Clinops differs from that of Scotoscopus Brenske and Reitter (vide infra), and the two genera are considered distinct, pending phylogenetic work throughout the subfamily.

There is a possibility that the differences observed between C. inexpectatus and C. perpessus are only sex differences rather than species distinctions. There are sexual dimorphisms known among pelecotomines, such as differences in the ultimate maxillary palpomeres of Ancholaemus Gerstaecker or color of the pronotal disc in Scotoscopus . Nonetheless, we believe the differences in head and pronotal shape reflect features specific to species, particularly as these are not known to be sexually variable in any other pelecotomines. Accordingly, we believe that the material described here represents distinct taxa. Naturally, the discovery of further material from a variety of localities will allow for further testing of this hypothesis.

It is interesting to note that while the form of the pretarsal claws has historically been used as a distinguishing feature for many genera, such as the conditions of bifid or pectinate, and in many cases such a difference does concord with other attributes, there is variation within Clinops . Among the species included here are those with strictly bifid claws, i.e., with a subapical ramus (tooth) that opposes the apical terminus of the claw, as well as one ( C. inexpectatus ) that has the typical bifid form coupled with the presence of a smaller, subsidiary tooth at about midlength (Fig. 26). It is therefore fascinating that with the addition of more and more such subsidiary teeth one progresses naturally into a pectinate condition. The claw of Scotoscopus (vide infra: Fig. 29) is somewhat similar albeit less pronounced, in that there is at least one, exceptionally short and blunt projection (appearing like a worn tooth) proximal to the initial ramus forming the bifid claw. It will be illuminating to more fully explore the complete ranges of variation in claw structure across the subfamily once more material and more species are discovered, and to develop clear homologies for the various elements in both bifid and pectinate claws and see how these various homologous elements distribute in a cladistic framework.

Distribution.

The genus is presently recorded only from South Africa. The precise locality from which Gerstaecker’s holotype of C. badius was collected is not known. Gerstaecker (1855a, 1855b) indicated the type locality only as “Caffraria”. This name (properly Kaffraria) was a historical, descriptive term for the southeastern region of the Eastern Cape (in which case the type locality was somewhere more southward coastally from the localities where the other two species were found). The newly described species, C. inexpectatus and C. perpessus , were collected on the eastern coast of South Africa, the former northeast of Durban toward Swaziland, and the latter somewhere in the region of Durban. Franciscolo (1952: antenna in his fig. 37) reported a female of " Pelecotoma sp." from Cape Town, undoubtedly a misidentification for a specimen of Clinops ( Batelka 2005), but the whereabouts of this specimen is unknown to us. The genus is probably widely distributed in woodlands of South Africa, perhaps escaping the attention of entomologists owing to its parasitoid biology.