Acanthocinini, Blanchard, 1845

Monné, Miguel A., Santos-Silva, Antonio & Monné, Marcela L., 2020, Key to Mexico and Central America genera of Acanthocinini (Coleoptera Cerambycidae, Lamiinae) without erect setae on elytral surface, excluding the Caribbean Islands, Zootaxa 4861 (3), pp. 301-337 : 302-305

publication ID

https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4861.3.1

publication LSID

lsid:zoobank.org:pub:981ED0C6-9C4F-4F38-977C-B402A80493EE

DOI

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4426987

persistent identifier

https://treatment.plazi.org/id/6703A549-FFBF-493E-FF1D-FC7EF8A21905

treatment provided by

Plazi

scientific name

Acanthocinini
status

 

Key to Mexico and Central America genera of Acanthocinini View in CoL View at ENA (Coleoptera, Cerambycidae, Lamiinae) without erect setae on elytral surface, excluding the Caribbean Islands

1. Elytra lacking humeral angles ( Fig. 39 View FIGURES 28–42. 28–29 ).................................................... Moneilema Say, 1824 View in CoL

– Elytra with humeri angled.............................................................................. 2

2(1). Elytra with centrobasal crest............................................................................ 3

– Elytra without centrobasal crest, or at most slightly gibbous on this area, or with a small tubercle..................... 24

3(2). Scape with spiniform projection at inner apex ( Fig. 4 View FIGURES 1–14. 1 )…................................ Alcathousiella Monné, 2005 View in CoL

– Scape not spiniform at apex (the scape can be projected at inner apex, but this projection is not spiniform)................ 4

4(3). Prothorax lacking lateral tubercle or at most with rounded lateral tubercles…...................................... 5

– Prothorax with distinct lateral tubercles.................................................................... 8

5(4). Metaventrite about as long as mesoventrite; elytral apex strongly acuminate (outer and sutural angles individually separated) ( Figs. 11–13 View FIGURES 1–14. 1 )................................................................... Apteralcidion Hovore, 1992 View in CoL

– Metaventrite distinctly longer than mesoventrite; elytral apex uniformly rounded, truncate, or with outer angle spiniform, but distinctly separated from sutural angle…................................................................... 6

6(5). Scape distinctly surpassing humeral angles, almost reaching apex of elytral centrobasal crest; elytral apex narrowly rounded ( Fig. 63 View FIGURES 56–67. 56 ).......................................................................... Xenostylus Bates, 1885 View in CoL

– Scape at most slightly surpassing humeral angles; elytral apex not narrowly rounded, usually truncate with outer angle spiniform…............................................................................................. 7

7(6). Scape sinuous in inner margin and/or elytra with distinct dorsal carina, or elytral apex uniformly acuminate, or antenna more than twice body in male ( Fig. 40 View FIGURES 28–42. 28–29 )...................................................... Nealcidion Monné, 1977 View in CoL

– Scape not sinuous in inner margin, elytra not carinate dorsally and not uniformly acuminate apically, and antennae distinctly shorter than twice body length in male…................................................................................................ ... Leptostylus LeConte, 1852 View in CoL (part) ( Fig. 33 View FIGURES 28–42. 28–29 ) / Leptostylopsis Dillon, 1956 View in CoL (part) ( Fig. 32 View FIGURES 28–42. 28–29 ) Obs.: See remarks in Leptostylus View in CoL .

8(4). Elytral apex nearly uniformly spiniform ( Fig. 30 View FIGURES 28–42. 28–29 ).…....................................... Idephrynus Bates, 1881 View in CoL

– Elytral apex not uniformly spiniform, often rounded, truncate, with outer angle spiniform, but distinctly separated from sutural angle, or uniformly narrowed, but not spiniform............................................................. 9

9(8). Scape strongly projected at inner apex ( Fig. 26 View FIGURES 15–27. 15 )...........................................… Hexacona Bates, 1881 View in CoL

– Scape not projected at inner apex........................................................................ 10

10(9). Centrobasal crest of the elytra transverse ( Fig. 8 View FIGURES 1–14. 1 )....................................... ... Amniscites Gilmour, 1957 View in CoL

– Centrobasal crest of the elytra longitudinal................................................................ 11

11(10). Scape reaching about middle of prothorax ( Figs. 5–7 View FIGURES 1–14. 1 ).................................... ... Alphinellus Bates, 1881 View in CoL

– Scape distinctly surpassing middle of prothorax….......................................................... 12

12(11). Apex of the centrobasal crest of the elytra projected backward ( Fig. 25 View FIGURES 15–27. 15 )…................... Hamatastus Gilmour, 1957 View in CoL

– Apex of the centrobasal crest of the elytra not projected backward…............................................ 13

13(12). Antennomere III with spiniform projection in males (in some species with dense set of setae on inner side) ( Figs. 62, 62a View FIGURES 56–67. 56 )... ................................................................................ Xenocona Gilmour, 1960 View in CoL

– Antennomere III without projection in both sexes........................................................... 14

14(13).Elytral surface uniform, lacking prominent dorsal carinae and/or distinct tubercles…............................... 15

– Elytral surface not uniform, with prominent dorsal carina and/or distinct tubercles................................. 17

15(14). Lateral tubercles of the prothorax spiniform, directed backward ( Fig. 53 View FIGURES 43–55. 43 ).................... Sternacutus Gilmour, 1961 View in CoL

– Lateral tubercles of the prothorax not spiniform, not directed backward, or large and as a distinct prolongation of the rounded anterior sides of the prothorax, with apex directed backward.…................................................ 16

16(15). Centrobasal crest with setae ( Figs. 36–37 View FIGURES 28–42. 28–29 )…............................................ Lophopoeum Bates, 1863 View in CoL

– Centrobasal crest without setae ( Figs. 57–59 View FIGURES 56–67. 56 ).................................. ... Trypanidius Blanchard, 1847 View in CoL (part)

17(14). Scape pedunculate-clavate ( Fig. 42 View FIGURES 28–42. 28–29 )….................................................. .. Olenosus Bates, 1872 View in CoL

– Scape not pedunculate-clavate…........................................................................ 18

18(17) Metafemora noticeably slender and elongate, surpassing the elytral apex ( Fig. 43 View FIGURES 43–55. 43 )... Paranisopodus Monné & Martins, 1976 View in CoL

– Metafemora not distinctly slender and elongate…........................................................... 19

19(18).Prothorax proportionally narrow and somewhat cylindrical ( Figs. 49–50 View FIGURES 43–55. 43 )…................ Pseudastylopsis Dillon, 1956 View in CoL

– Prothorax proportionally wide and not cylindrical…......................................................... 20 Obs.: See remarks in Pseudastylopsis View in CoL .

20(19). Lateral tubercles of the prothorax placed in middle or closer to middle than posterolateral angles..................... 21

– Lateral tubercles of the prothorax placed closer to posterolateral angles than middle................................ 22

21(20). Males with projection on inner apex of the antennomere VI (rarely absent); protarsi in male with long setae laterally; lateral tubercles of the prothorax large, often acute in both sexes ( Fig. 31 View FIGURES 28–42. 28–29 )..................... Lagocheirus Dejean, 1835 View in CoL (part)

– Males lacking projection on inner apex of the antennomere VI; protarsi in male without long setae laterally; lateral tubercles of the prothorax often rounded or with distinctly blunt apex in both sexes (rarely more triangular) ( Fig. 33 View FIGURES 28–42. 28–29 ).......................................................................................... .. Leptostylus LeConte, 1852 View in CoL (part)

22(20). Antennae in male longer than three times body length, with the antennomere III longer than twice scape length, and IV much longer than III; antennomere IV in female longer than scape ( Fig. 38 View FIGURES 28–42. 28–29 )…..................... .. Mecotetartus Bates, 1872 View in CoL

– Antennae in male much shorter than three times body length, and antennomeres III and IV not noticeably longer than scape; antennomere IV in female not or slightly longer than scape…................................................. 23

23(22). Lateral tubercles of the prothorax rounded or with distinct blunt apex, but not somewhat projected backward ( Fig. 33 View FIGURES 28–42. 28–29 )............................................................................... Leptostylus LeConte, 1852 View in CoL (part)

– Lateral tubercles of the prothorax with acute apex, slightly projected backward ( Figs. 21–22 View FIGURES 15–27. 15 )…........................................................................................................ .. Eleothinus Bates, 1881 Obs. View in CoL : See remarks in Eleothinus View in CoL .

24(2). Hind legs very long, especially in male (metafemora surpassing elytral apex) ( Figs. 9–10 View FIGURES 1–14. 1 )......... Anisopodus White, 1855 View in CoL

– Hind legs proportionally short.......................................................................... 25

25(24). Prothorax with lateral tubercle present and at least somewhat acute apically....................................... 26

– Prothorax lacking lateral tubercle or lateral tubercle as a rounded projection...................................... 43

26(25).Lateral tubercles of the prothorax placed in middle or closer to middle than posterolateral angles...................... 27

– Lateral tubercles of the prothorax placed in posterior third, closer to posterolateral angles than middle................. 30

27(26). Body length at least three times the humeral width ( Figs. 1–3 View FIGURES 1–14. 1 )................ Acanthocinus (Acanthocinus) Dejean, 1821

– Body length shorter than three times the humeral width...................................................... 28 Obs.: See remarks in Acanthocinus View in CoL .

28(27). Elytra with distinct longitudinal carina dorsally from base to near apex ( Figs. 57–59 View FIGURES 56–67. 56 )... Trypanidius Blanchard, 1847 View in CoL (part)

– Elytra lacking distinct longitudinal carina dorsally.......................................................... 29

29(28). Body distinctly stout; antennomere VI in male with apical projection; female lacking long ovipositor ( Fig. 31 View FIGURES 28–42. 28–29 )...................................................................................... Lagocheirus Dejean, 1835 View in CoL (part)

– Body more slender; antennomere VI in male without apical projection; female with long ovipositor ( Fig. 24 View FIGURES 15–27. 15 )........................................................................................... Eutrypanus Erichson, 1847 View in CoL

30(26). Humeral carina well-marked ( Figs. 28–29 View FIGURES 28–42. 28–29 )......................................... .. Hyperplatys Haldeman, 1847 View in CoL

– Humeral carina absent or at most slightly marked........................................................... 31

31(30). Male antennae with internal projection on apex of some antennomeres, or with this area distinctly tumid ( Fig. 44 View FIGURES 43–55. 43 )......... ................................................................................. Pattalinus Bates, 1881 View in CoL

– Male antennae lacking internal projection on apex of the antennomeres......................................... 32

32(31). Mesoventral process about as wide as mesocoxal cavity...................................................... 33

– Mesoventral process distinctly narrower than mesocoxal cavity….............................................. 40

33(32). Body distinctly stout, slightly longer than twice humeral width ( Figs. 16–17 View FIGURES 15–27. 15 ).................... Carphontes Bates, 1881 View in CoL

– Body more slender, distinctly longer than twice humeral width….............................................. 34

34(33). Lateral tubercles of the prothorax very small, often nearly spicule-shaped........................................ 35

– Lateral tubercles of the prothorax very conspicuous…....................................................... 38

35(34). Body elongate ( Fig. 41 View FIGURES 28–42. 28–29 )....................................................... Nyssodrysternum Gilmour, 1960 View in CoL

– Body stouter…...................................................................................... 36 Obs.: Nyssodrysternum View in CoL presents in Central America View in CoL and Mexico various species with intermediate characters with Stenolis View in CoL . Accordingly, it is possible to separate Nyssodrysternum View in CoL from Sympagus View in CoL and Stenolis View in CoL only using the type species. It is only possible to separate Sympagus View in CoL from Stenolis View in CoL using the type species: body shorter in Sympagus View in CoL ; somewhat longer in Stenolis View in CoL .

36(35). Lower eye lobes at most slightly longer than genae ( Fig. 56 View FIGURES 56–67. 56 )............................. Sympagus Bates, 1881 View in CoL (part)

– Lower eye lobes distinctly longer than genae.............................................................. 37

37(36). Distance between upper eye lobes at most as wide as width of one upper lobe ( Fig. 14 View FIGURES 1–14. 1 )....... Atrypanius Bates, 1864 View in CoL (part)

– Distance between upper eye lobes distinctly greater than with of one upper lobe ( Fig. 52 View FIGURES 43–55. 43 )....... Stenolis Bates, 1864 View in CoL (part)

38(34). Body slightly longer than twice humeral width ( Fig. 56 View FIGURES 56–67. 56 )................................ Sympagus Bates, 1881 View in CoL (part)

– Body distinctly longer than twice humeral width, often almost three times....................................... 39

39(38). Lateral tubercles of the prothorax distinctly great, with apex directed backward ( Fig. 23 View FIGURES 15–27. 15 )........ Eucharitolus Bates, 1885 View in CoL

– Lateral tubercles of the prothorax not distinctly great, with apex not directed backward ( Fig. 27 View FIGURES 15–27. 15 )...... Hylettus Bates, 1864 View in CoL Obs.: Only the type species of Eucharitolus View in CoL is considered with respect to the width of the mesoventral process.

40(32). Transverse basal sulcus of the pronotum does not continue laterally behind the lateral tubercles of the prothorax ( Fig. 34 View FIGURES 28–42. 28–29 )... ........................................................................ Lepturges (Lepturges) Bates, 1863

– Transverse basal sulcus of the pronotum continues laterally behind the lateral tubercles of the prothorax............... 41

41(40). Lower eye lobes distinctly shorter than genae ( Fig. 51 View FIGURES 43–55. 43 )............................... Pseudolepturges Gilmour, 1957 View in CoL

– Lower eye lobes at least as long as genae…............................................................... 42

42(41). Mesoventral process one-third or more as wide as a mesocoxal cavity, usually two or more times as broad as the prosternal process ( Fig. 54 View FIGURES 43–55. 43 ).................................................................. Sternidius LeConte, 1873 View in CoL

– Mesoventral process much less than one-third as broad as a mesocoxal cavity, not much broader than prosternal process............................... Urgleptes Dillon, 1956 View in CoL ( Figs. 60–61, 66–67 View FIGURES 56–67. 56 ) / Lepturginus Gilmour, 1959 View in CoL ( Figs. 35 View FIGURES 28–42. 28–29 , 64–65 View FIGURES 56–67. 56 ) Obs.: See remarks in Lepturginus View in CoL .

43(25). Body slender, elongate (body length often greater than three times the humeral width, e.g. Fig. 45 View FIGURES 43–55. 43 ).................... 44

– Body stout, not elongate (body length often shorter than 2.5 times the humeral width, e.g. Fig. 56 View FIGURES 56–67. 56 ).................... 47

44(43). Scape notched on the basal inner side ( Fig. 45 View FIGURES 43–55. 43 )......................................... Periestola Breuning, 1943 View in CoL

– Scape not notched on the basal inner side................................................................. 45

45(44). Elytra carinate dorsally ( Fig. 18 View FIGURES 15–27. 15 )...................................................... Cobelura Erichson, 1847 View in CoL

– Elytra not or very slightly carinate dorsally................................................................ 46

46(45). Outer elytral angle spiniform ( Fig. 20 View FIGURES 15–27. 15 ).......................................... Colobeutrypanus Tippmann View in CoL , 195l

– Outer elytral angle not spiniform or, if spiniform, scape not distinctly narrow basally ( Fig. 52 View FIGURES 43–55. 43 )... Stenolis Bates, 1864 View in CoL (part)

47(43). Elytra with small tubercles aligned ( Fig. 15 View FIGURES 15–27. 15 ).............................................. Carpheolus Bates, 1885 View in CoL

– Elytra lacking tubercles aligned......................................................................... 48

48(47). Elytra with dorsal carina and/or somewhat rough........................................................... 49

– Elytra lacking dorsal carina and not rough................................................................. 50

49(48). Pronotum distinctly tuberculate ( Fig. 33 View FIGURES 28–42. 28–29 )......................................... Leptostylus LeConte, 1852 View in CoL (part)

– Pronotum not tuberculate ( Figs. 57–59 View FIGURES 56–67. 56 )........................................ Trypanidius Blanchard, 1847 View in CoL (part)

50(48). Distance between upper eye lobes distinctly smaller than width of one upper lobe ( Fig. 14 View FIGURES 1–14. 1 ).... Atrypanius Bates, 1864 View in CoL (part)

– Distance between upper eye lobes distinctly greater than width of one upper lobe.................................. 51

51(50). Elytral apex rounded................................................................................. 52

– Elytral apex truncate.................................................................................. 53

52(51). Antennae in male distinctly longer than body; scape reaching or nearly reaching base of elytra; elytra gradually narrowed toward apex from the middle ( Figs. 46–48 View FIGURES 43–55. 43 ).......................................... Proxatrypanius Gilmour, 1959 View in CoL

– Antennae in male slightly longer than body; scape not reaching middle of prothorax; elytra not distinctly narrowed toward apex from the middle ( Fig. 19 View FIGURES 15–27. 15 )........................................................... .. Coenopoeus Horn, 1880 View in CoL

53(51). Prothorax somewhat elongate, distinctly narrowed from near base to anterolateral angles ( Fig. 56 View FIGURES 56–67. 56 )….................... ............................................................................. Sympagus Bates, 1881 View in CoL (part)

– Prothorax distinctly transverse, not narrowed toward anterolateral angles ( Fig. 55 View FIGURES 43–55. 43 )............... Styloleptus Dillon, 1956 View in CoL

Kingdom

Animalia

Phylum

Arthropoda

Class

Insecta

Order

Coleoptera

Family

Cerambycidae

GBIF Dataset (for parent article) Darwin Core Archive (for parent article) View in SIBiLS Plain XML RDF