Liroetis aeneipennis Weise, 1889
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.37520/aemnp.2021.030 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:06FDFB43-0B61-4DA8-B260-D78ABD62756C |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/492287F9-DB7A-FF91-FC62-AF63FC52FC66 |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Liroetis aeneipennis Weise, 1889 |
status |
|
Liroetis aeneipennis Weise, 1889
( Figs 1–8 View Figs 1–8 , 26 View Figs 26–31 , 32, 37 View Figs 32–41 )
Liroëtis aeneipennis Weise, 1889: 608 (original description).
Liroëtis aeneipennis : Wൾංඌൾ (1924): 128 (catalogue); OǤඅඈൻඅංඇ (1936): 210 (description), 405 (key).
Liroëtes aeneipennis : Jൺർඈൻඒ (1890): 216 (faunistics).
Liroetis aeneipennis : Gඋൾඌඌංඍඍ & Kංආඈඍඈ (1963): 532 (key, faunistics); Wංඅർඈඑ (1973): 475 (catalogue); JංൺඇǤ (1988): 185 (noted); YൺඇǤ (1992a): 569 (faunistics); YൺඇǤ (1992b): 338 (faunistics); YൺඇǤ et al. (1997): 878 (faunistics); YൺඇǤ (1998): 311 (faunistics); WൺඇǤ & YൺඇǤ (2006):164 (faunistics); Bൾൾඇൾඇ (2010): 478 (catalogue);YൺඇǤ et al. (2015): 247 (key), 248 (noted).
Liroetis tiemushannis Jiang, 1988: 186 , 195 (original description). New junior subjective synonym.
Liroetis tiemushannis : YൺඇǤ (1992a): 569 (faunistics); YൺඇǤ (1992b): 339 (faunistics); WൺඇǤ &YൺඇǤ (1998): 93 (faunistics); YൺඇǤ (2002): 639 (noted); WൺඇǤ & YൺඇǤ (2006): 166 (faunistics); ZIJൺඇǤ et al. (2005): 256 (faunistics); Bൾൾඇൾඇ (2010): 478 (catalogue); YൺඇǤ et al. (2015): 247 (key), 250 (noted).
Liroetis tienmushannis [sic!, incorrect subsequent spelling]: YൺඇǤ & Lං (1998): 131 (noted).
Type localities. Liroetis aeneipennis : ‘Kan-ssu’ [= China: Gansu Province]; Liroetis tiemushannis : ‘ Zhejiang: Mt. Tiemu’ [ China: Zhejiang Province: Tianmushan].
Type material examined. Liroetis aeneipennis : Sඒඇඍඒඉൾ: 1 ♀ ( Figs 1–6 View Figs 1–8 ), ‘Kan-ssu / 1885 / G. Patanin [w, p] // Zool. Mus. / Berlin [w, p] // Liroetis / aeneipennis [w, h] // SYNTYPUS / Liroetis / aeneipennis Weise, 1889 / labelled by MNHUB 2012 [r, p]’ ( MFNB).
Liroetis tiemushannis : not examined.
Material examined. CHINA: Gൺඇඌඎ: Venxian env., 18.–26.vi.1995, 2 JJ, Beneš leg. ( JBCB). SΗൺൺඇඑං: Qin Ling Mts., Xi′an env., Jiwozi, 33°50′933 N 108°48′760 E, 1800 m, 1.vii.2007, 1 J, P.Baňař leg.( JBCB); Qin Ling Shan Mts., Ho Zen Zi vill., 30 km SE of Taibai Shan Mt., 1500 m, 26.vi.1998, 2 JJ 1 ♀, O. Šafránek & M. Trýzna leg. ( JBCB); Qin Ling Shan Mts., Ho Zen Zi vill., 40 km SE of Taibai Shan Mt., 1200 m, 11.vi.1998, 1 ♀, Z. Jindra leg. ( NMPC); Qin Ling Mts., Huo Di Tang, 33°26.223′N 108°26.786′E, 1565 m, 5.vi.2013, 6 JJ, A. Konstantinov leg. ( USNM). SංർΗඎൺඇ: Xiao-Zhaizi Nature Reserve, 4 km NNE of Qingpianxiang, Zhenghecun, 32°3′27″N, 103°59′37″E, 1350–1850 m, 23.–26.vi.2017, 1 ♀, O. Konvička leg. ( OKCZ); Xiao-Zhaizi Nature Reserve, 7 km W of Qingpianxiang, Xiaozhaizi, 32°1′25″N 103°56′21″E, 1560–1700 m, 23.–26.vi.2017, 1 ♀, O. Konvička leg. ( OKCZ). ZΗൾඃංൺඇǤ: Anji,Longwang Mt., 800–1200 m, 20.vii.1995, 1 ♀, Hong Wu leg. ( IZAS); West Tianmu Shan, from ‘Blind Alley’ to ‘Immortal Peak’, 30°20.5–21.0′N 119°25.4–7′E, 1200–1500 m, 27.–28.vi.2017, 2 JJ 2 ♀♀, J. Hájek & J. Růžička leg. ( NMPC); Tianmu Shan, 22.vii.1936, 1 J, O. Piel leg. ( ZMUH).
Diagnosis. Colouration. Body and legs pale brown, elytra metallic green. Antennae pale brown or terminal antennomeres gradually darkened. Males with darkened or black short protrusions in middle of posterior margin of penultimate abdominal ventrite.
Body length. JJ: 5.7–8.0 mm, ♀♀: 6.5–8.8 mm (J ♀: 6.0–9.0 mm based on original descriptions).
Male ( Fig. 7 View Figs 1–8 ). Antennae 0.78 times as long as body. Pronotum convex, 1.53 times as wide as long, lustrous, almost impunctate, anterior margin with very narrow but complete and well visible border. Middle part of posterior margin of abdominal ventrite IV obliquely impressed, with short narrow median incision. Last abdominal ventrite with longitudinal impression narrowed in middle part ( Fig. 8 View Figs 1–8 ). Protarsomere I widened, subtriangular, metatibial spur short, tubular, with cut apex.
Aedeagus ( Fig. 26 View Figs 26–31 ). Median lobe of aedeagus 4.40 times as long as wide; basal half wide, almost parallel, apical half widely constricted, apex widely rounded with small apical incision, apex folded down. Lateral view: median lobe of aedeagus moderately rounded; lateral elevation subtriangular with moderately rounded anterior margin, placed in anterior third of aedeagus length. Dorsal process 6.30 times as long as wide, 0.80 times as long as aedeagus; narrow basally and wider apically, with sharp and bent apex.
Female. Metatibial spur absent. Last abdominal ventrite with large trapezoidal excision, posterior margin of excision convex in middle ( Fig. 5 View Figs 1–8 ). Sternite VIII transversely suboval, with three deep narrow incisions surrounding two large denticles, surface with elongate apical impression; tignum very short, 0.22 as long as sternite VIII ( Fig. 37 View Figs 32–41 ). Spermatheca with obliquely oval nodulus, cornu C-shaped with sharp apex, spermathecal duct with subglobular proximal part ( Fig. 32 View Figs 32–41 ).
Differential diagnosis. Having metallic green elytra and pale brown pronotum, Liroetis aeneipennis is similar to L. leechi . Both species can be distinguished by the colouration of head (completely pale brown in L. aeneipennis vs. with black vertex in L. leechi ). Males of both species differ in the structure of median lobe of aedeagus which is, in lateral view, more or less regularly rounded in L. aeneipennis ( Fig. 26 View Figs 26–31 ) but with straight middle part in L. leechi ( Fig. 30 View Figs 26–31 ). Females of L. aeneipennis have last abdominal ventrite with large trapezoidal excision and sternite VIII transversely suboval, with two denticles in middle of posterior margin ( Fig. 37 View Figs 32–41 ), while females of L. leechi have last abdominal ventrite with posterior margin entire and sternite VIII heart-shaped with middle part of posterior margin bisinuate ( Fig. 40 View Figs 32–41 ). Another similar species, L. coeruleus , has head, pronotum and underside orange, and dorsal process of aedeagus in lateral view apically widely divergent with V-shaped incision ( Fig. 27 View Figs 26–31 ).
Host plants. Salix sp. (Gඋൾඌඌංඍඍ & Kංආඈඍඈ 1963).
Distribution. China: Fujian (WൺඇǤ & YൺඇǤ 1998), Gansu (Wൾංඌൾ 1889, WൺඇǤ & YൺඇǤ 2006, present paper), Guizhou (YൺඇǤ 1992b, ZIJൺඇǤ et al. 2005), Henan (YൺඇǤ 1998), Hubei (Jൺർඈൻඒ 1890, Gඋൾඌඌංඍඍ & Kංආඈඍඈ 1963, YൺඇǤ et al. 1997), Hunan (YൺඇǤ 1992a), Shaanxi (present paper), Sichuan (Gඋൾඌඌංඍඍ & Kංආඈඍඈ 1963, YൺඇǤ et al. 1997, present paper), Zhejiang (JංൺඇǤ 1988, present paper). YൺඇǤ et al. (2015) listed it also from China: Ningxia without mentioning particular specimens.
Comments. Wൾංඌൾ (1889) did not specify the number of available specimens when describing Liroetis aeneipennis but mentioned body length span, so he must have had more than one specimen in hand. Consequently, the female type specimen examined in MFNB is a syntype.
JංൺඇǤ (1988) mismatched the females of Liroetis aeneipennis with some other species. Her description of L. tiemushannis is accompanied with a drawing of female abdomen which perfectly fits the female abdomen of the syntype of L. aeneipennis . Although the type specimens of L. tiemushannis were not available for this study, this drawing is sufficient to synonymize L. tiemushannis with L. aeneipennis here. The description of L. tiemushannis contains two different spellings: tiemushannis on pp. 184 and 186 and tiemuchannis on p. 195. I hereby fix tiemushannis as the correct original spelling in accordance with the Principle of the First Reviser (Art. 24.2.3., ICZN 1999).
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 |
Liroetis aeneipennis Weise, 1889
Bezděk, Jan 2021 |
Liroetis tiemushannis
JIANG S. - Q. 1988: 186 |
Liroëtis aeneipennis
WEISE J. 1889: 608 |