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

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

1. Elytra lacking humeral angles ( Fig. 39 ).................................................... Moneilema Say, 1824

– 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 )…................................ Alcathousiella Monné, 2005

– 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 )................................................................... Apteralcidion Hovore, 1992

– 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 ).......................................................................... Xenostylus Bates, 1885

– 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 )...................................................... Nealcidion Monné, 1977

– 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 (part) ( Fig. 33 ) / Leptostylopsis Dillon, 1956 (part) ( Fig. 32 ) Obs.: See remarks in Leptostylus .

8(4). Elytral apex nearly uniformly spiniform ( Fig. 30 ).…....................................... Idephrynus Bates, 1881

– 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 )...........................................… Hexacona Bates, 1881

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

10(9). Centrobasal crest of the elytra transverse ( Fig. 8 )....................................... ... Amniscites Gilmour, 1957

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

11(10). Scape reaching about middle of prothorax ( Figs. 5–7 ).................................... ... Alphinellus Bates, 1881

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

12(11). Apex of the centrobasal crest of the elytra projected backward ( Fig. 25 )…................... Hamatastus Gilmour, 1957

– 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 )... ................................................................................ Xenocona Gilmour, 1960

– 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 ).................... Sternacutus Gilmour, 1961

– 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 )…............................................ Lophopoeum Bates, 1863

– Centrobasal crest without setae ( Figs. 57–59 ).................................. ... Trypanidius Blanchard, 1847 (part)

17(14). Scape pedunculate-clavate ( Fig. 42 )….................................................. .. Olenosus Bates, 1872

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

18(17) Metafemora noticeably slender and elongate, surpassing the elytral apex ( Fig. 43 )... Paranisopodus Monné & Martins, 1976

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

19(18).Prothorax proportionally narrow and somewhat cylindrical ( Figs. 49–50 )…................ Pseudastylopsis Dillon, 1956

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

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 )..................... Lagocheirus Dejean, 1835 (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 ).......................................................................................... .. Leptostylus LeConte, 1852 (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 )…..................... .. Mecotetartus Bates, 1872

– 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 )............................................................................... Leptostylus LeConte, 1852 (part)

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

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

– 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 )................ Acanthocinus (Acanthocinus) Dejean, 1821

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

28(27). Elytra with distinct longitudinal carina dorsally from base to near apex ( Figs. 57–59 )... Trypanidius Blanchard, 1847 (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 )...................................................................................... Lagocheirus Dejean, 1835 (part)

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

30(26). Humeral carina well-marked ( Figs. 28–29 )......................................... .. Hyperplatys Haldeman, 1847

– 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 )......... ................................................................................. Pattalinus Bates, 1881

– 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 ).................... Carphontes Bates, 1881

– 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 )....................................................... Nyssodrysternum Gilmour, 1960

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

36(35). Lower eye lobes at most slightly longer than genae ( Fig. 56 )............................. Sympagus Bates, 1881 (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 )....... Atrypanius Bates, 1864 (part)

– Distance between upper eye lobes distinctly greater than with of one upper lobe ( Fig. 52 )....... Stenolis Bates, 1864 (part)

38(34). Body slightly longer than twice humeral width ( Fig. 56 )................................ Sympagus Bates, 1881 (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 )........ Eucharitolus Bates, 1885

– Lateral tubercles of the prothorax not distinctly great, with apex not directed backward ( Fig. 27 )...... Hylettus Bates, 1864 Obs.: Only the type species of Eucharitolus 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 )... ........................................................................ 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 )............................... Pseudolepturges Gilmour, 1957

– 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 ).................................................................. Sternidius LeConte, 1873

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

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

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

44(43). Scape notched on the basal inner side ( Fig. 45 )......................................... Periestola Breuning, 1943

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

45(44). Elytra carinate dorsally ( Fig. 18 )...................................................... Cobelura Erichson, 1847

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

46(45). Outer elytral angle spiniform ( Fig. 20 ).......................................... Colobeutrypanus Tippmann , 195l

– Outer elytral angle not spiniform or, if spiniform, scape not distinctly narrow basally ( Fig. 52 )... Stenolis Bates, 1864 (part)

47(43). Elytra with small tubercles aligned ( Fig. 15 ).............................................. Carpheolus Bates, 1885

– 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 )......................................... Leptostylus LeConte, 1852 (part)

– Pronotum not tuberculate ( Figs. 57–59 )........................................ Trypanidius Blanchard, 1847 (part)

50(48). Distance between upper eye lobes distinctly smaller than width of one upper lobe ( Fig. 14 ).... Atrypanius Bates, 1864 (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 ).......................................... Proxatrypanius Gilmour, 1959

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

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

– Prothorax distinctly transverse, not narrowed toward anterolateral angles ( Fig. 55 )............... Styloleptus Dillon, 1956

Figures

FIGURES 28–42. 28–29) Hyperplatys pichinchensis, holotype female (from Nascimento et al. 2020): 28) Dorsal habitus; 29) Ventral habitus. 30) Idephrynus scaber, holotype, dorsal habitus (by Jesus Santiago Moure). 31) Lagocheirus binumeratus Thomson, 1860, female, dorsal habitus. 32) Leptostylopsis longicornis (Fisher, 1926), female, dorsal habitus. 33) Leptostylus x-griseus Bates, 1885, female, dorsal habitus. 34) Lepturges (Lepturges) elegantulus, male, dorsal habitus. 35) Lepturginus obscurellus, holotype, dorsal habitus (by Jesus Santiago Moure). 36–37) Lophopoeum carinatulum, female: 36) Dorsal habitus; 37) Ventral habitus. 38) Mecotetartus antennatus, male, dorsal habitus. 39) Moneilema annulatum, female, dorsal habitus. 40) Nealcidion nebulosum, male, dorsal habitus (from Nascimento et al. 2020). 41) Nyssodrysternum caudatum (Bates, 1864), syntype, dorsal habitus (by Jesus Santiago Moure). 42) Olenosus serrimanus, male, dorsal habitus.

FIGURES 1–14. 1) Acanthocinus (Acanthocinus) aedilis, female, dorsal habitus. 2–3) Acanthocinus (Acanthocinus) spectabilis (LeConte, 1854), male: 2) Dorsal habitus; 3) Lateral habitus. 4) Alcathousiella polyrhaphoides, male, dorsal habitus. 5–7) Alphinellus carinipennis Bates, 1885: 5) Dorsal habitus; 6) Ventral habitus; 7) Lateral habitus. 8) Amniscites pictipes, female, dorsal habitus (from Santos-Silva et al. 2019). 9–10) Anisopodus arachnoides, male: 9) Dorsal habitus; 10) Lateral habitus. 11–13) Apteralcidion lapierrei, male: 11) Dorsal habitus; 12) Ventral habitus; 13) Lateral habitus. 14) Atrypanius conspersus, female, dorsal habitus.

FIGURES 56–67. 56) Sympagus favorabilis Tippmann, 1960, female, dorsal habitus. 57) Trypanidius proximus Melzer, 1931, holotype female, dorsal habitus. 58) Trypanidius isolatus Waterhouse, 1890, holotype, dorsal habitus (by Jesus Santiago Moure). 59) Trypanidius apicalis Aurivillius, 1921, syntype, dorsal habitus (by Jesus Santiago Moure). 60–61) Urgleptes bimaculatus Gilmour, 1960, male: 60) Dorsal habitus; 61) Ventral habitus. 62-62a) Xenocona pulchra, holotype: 62) Dorsal habitus (by Jesus Santiago Moure); 62a) Apex of antennomere III (from Bezark 2020). 63) Xenostylus sublineatus, lectotype, dorsal habitus (by Jesus Santiago Moure). 64) Lepturginus tigrellus megaspilus, holotype, dorsal habitus (by Jesus Santiago Moure). 65) Lepturginus tigrellus tigrellus, lectotype, dorsal habitus (by Jesus Santiago Moure). 66) Urgleptes signatus, holotype, dorsal habitus (by Jesus Santiago Moure). 67) Urgleptes callizonus (Bates, 1885), lectotype, dorsal habitus (by Jesus Santiago Moure).

FIGURES 15–27. 15) Carpheolus sublineatus, lectotype male, dorsal habitus (by Jesus Santiago Moure). 16–17) Carphontes posticalis, male: 16) Dorsal habitus; 17) Ventral habitus. 18) Cobelura clavigera (Bates, 1884), female, dorsal habitus. 19) Coenopoeus palmeri, male, dorsal habitus. 20) Colobeutrypanus ornatus, female, dorsal habitus. 21–22) Eleothinus abstrusus, male: 21) Lateral habitus; 22) Dorsal habitus. 23) Eucharitolus lituratus (Melzer, 1934), male, dorsal habitus. 24) Eutrypanus mucoreus (Bates, 1872), female, dorsal habitus. 25) Hamatastus conspectus Monné, 1995, paratype male, dorsal habitus. 26) Hexacona armata, holotype, dorsal habitus (by Jesus Santiago Moure). 27) Hylettus coenobita, female, dorsal habitus.

FIGURES 43–55. 43) Paranisopodus heterotarsus, male, dorsal habitus (from Nascimento & Santos-Silva 2019). 44) Pattalinus charis, holotype male, dorsal habitus (by Jesus Santiago Moure). 45) Periestola strandi, male, dorsal habitus (from Santos- Silva et al. 2019). 46–48) Proxatrypanius rockefelleri, male: 46) Lateral habitus; 47) Dorsal habitus; 48) Ventral habitus. 49–50) Pseudastylopsis nebulosus, male: 49) Dorsal habitus; 50) Ventral habitus. 51) Pseudolepturges rufulus, male, dorsal habitus (from Nascimento & Perger 2018). 52) Stenolis inclusa (Bates, 1885), male, dorsal habitus. 53) Sternacutus zikani, holotype, dorsal habitus (from Monné et al. 2019). 54) Sternidius crassulus LeConte, 1873, holotype, dorsal habitus (by Jesus Santiago Moure). 55) Styloleptus rhizophorae Chemsak & Feller, 1988, holotype, dorsal habitus (from Lingafelter et al. 2020).