Agrilus viridicaerulans rubi Schaefer, 1937
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.1073.1.1 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:B1CD621B-8F91-4C8B-8BAE-BE3B2B911B2B |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8D142C6A-FFD7-5427-2C05-FAABFDB4FDD1 |
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
scientific name |
Agrilus viridicaerulans rubi Schaefer |
status |
|
Agrilus viridicaerulans rubi Schaefer View in CoL
= rubi Kaszab, 1940 View in CoL
= roswitha Bellamy, 2003 View in CoL syn. nov.
Agrilus rubi Schaefer, 1937: 83 View in CoL . Lectotype by present designation, sex not determined, MNHN (collection of Schaefer): “SaintChamas 27[19]36”. A single specimen from the same locality and labeled as “cotype” is deposited in NMPC and is considered as a paralectotype. The exact number of syntypes is unknown.
Type locality. “ SaintChamas [Provence Alpes Côte d’Azur, France]” .
Remarks. The name rubi was proposed by Schaefer for a species from the roscidus speciesgroup living on Rubus which had been previously confused with A. prasinus . No type locality was given, and the mention of BasseProvence (“Je désigne ainsi la forme la plus courante, au moins en BasseProvence”) cannot be considered as a type locality statement. The type locality becomes the place of origin of the lectotype (ICZN, Article 76.2).
Agrilus rubi Kaszab, 1940: 106 View in CoL , 113. Described from two specimens: “ 1 Exemplar aus Budapest: Hüvösvölgy (31. VII. 1926, leg. Dr. L. Biró) und 1 Exemplar aus Novi (leg. Dr. Horváth)”. No syntypes were located in HNHM (O. Merkl and V. Kubá ň pers. com.).
Remarks. Kaszab (1940) cited the name rubi with an inscription: “[L. Schaefer in litt.]”, making it evident that he was referring to the species of Schaefer as indicated also by his use of the same specific name ( rubi ). Kaszab (1940) was probably not aware of Schaefer’s (1937) description of the species. As a result, I consider A. rubi Kaszab to be conspecific with A. viridicaerulans rubi Schaefer. The conspecifity of both taxa is also supported by the remark of Kaszab: “steht A. roscidus so nahe” and by the fact that no other Agrilus from the roscidus speciesgroup in Europe lives on Rubus .
Agrilus roswitha Bellamy, 2003: 155 View in CoL . Proposed as a replacement name for rubi Kaszab View in CoL not rubi Schaefer. View in CoL
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 |
Agrilus viridicaerulans rubi Schaefer
Jendek, Eduard 2005 |
Agrilus roswitha
Bellamy, C. L. 2003: 155 |
Agrilus rubi
Kaszab, Z. 1940: 106 |
Agrilus rubi
Schaefer, L. 1937: 83 |