Caryedes clitoriae ( Gyllenhal, 1839 )

Jorge, Isaac Reis & Ribeiro-Costa, Cibele Stramare, 2019, New Synonymies and Lectotype Designations for the Neotropical Seed Beetle Genus Caryedes Hummel, 1827 (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae: Bruchinae), The Coleopterists Bulletin 73 (2), pp. 321-328: 322

publication ID 10.1649/0010-065X-73.2.321

persistent identifier

treatment provided by


scientific name

Caryedes clitoriae ( Gyllenhal, 1839 )


Caryedes clitoriae ( Gyllenhal, 1839)  

Bruchus (Pachymeri) clitoriae Gyllenhal   in Schoenherr 1839: 125 (description, distribution, host plant).

Pseudopachymerus clitoriae: Pic 1913b: 10   (catalog).

Caryedes clitoriae: Kingsolver 1979: 341   (as senior synonym of Bruchus confinis   ); Johnson and Kingsolver 1981: 416 (checklist); Udayagiri and Wadhi 1989: 71 (catalog); de la Cruz Pérez et al. 2013: 52 (diagnosis, key, host plant, distribution).

Bruchus confinis Sharp 1855: 444   (description, distribution).

Pseudopachymerus confinis: Pic 1913b: 10   (catalog).

Caryedes confinis: Blackwelder 1946: 758   (checklist); Kingsolver and Whitehead, 1974: 406 (lectotype designation, redescription, male genitalia, species-group, key, figures, distribution, host plant); Kingsolver 1979: 341 (as junior synonym of B. clitoriae   ).

Pseudopachymerus multimaculatus var. paulonotatus Pic 1930: 36   (description, distribution); Kingsolver and Whitehead 1974: 408 (speciesgroup, synonymy suggestion, notes); Udayagiri and Wadhi 1989: 76 (catalog, as junior synonym of Caryedes multimaculatus   ). Synonymy confirmed.

Caryedes bicoloripes var. paulonotata: Blackwelder 1946: 757   .

Pseudopachymerus multinotatus Pic 1931: 24   (description, distribution); Bondar 1936: 24 (biology, distribution, host plant); Kingsolver and Whitehead 1974: 408 (lectotype designation, as junior synonym of Bruchus confinis   ).

Caryedes multinotata: Blackwelder 1946: 758   (checklist).

Caryedes multinotatus: Zacher 1952: 467   (host plant).

Type Material. Bruchus clitoriae   ( 1, NHRS): Lectotype, here designated, undetermined sex: “[handwritten] in clitoria \ Steven.” “[red, printed] Typus” “NHRS-JONI \ 000000471” “ Lectotype / Bruchus clitoriae Gyllenhal, 1839   / design. I. R. Jorge ”.  

Gyllenhal (1839) did not indicate, in the original description of the species, the number of specimens studied by him. However, we received images of one specimen deposited at the NHRS with identical data to that given in the original description (“in clitoria”, the host plant), and the original description perfectly matches the characteristics of the specimen. This specimen, without a head, is designated herein as a lectotype according to Article 74.6. of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature ( International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature 1999).

Pseudopachymerus multimaculatus var. paulonotatus   (1, MNHN): Lectotype, here designated, female, “[green, printed] Jatahy \ Prov. Goyas. Brésil \ Sept. a Nov. 97” “[manuscript] V. paulonotatus \ Pic” “[printed, red] TYPE” “[printed] MUSÉUM PARIS \ 1958 \ Coll. M. PIC” “ Lectotype / Pseudopachymerus multimaculatus var. paulonotatus Gyllenhal, 1839   / design. I. R. Jorge ”.

Kingsolver and Whitehead (1974) were the first to suggest the synonymy between B. clitoriae   and P. multimaculatus var. paulonotatus   , but they commented that the type material definitively must be examined for confirmation of this nomenclatural act. Later, Udayagiri and Wadhi (1989), in the catalog of the subfamily, listed B. clitoriae   as senior synonym of P. multimaculatus var. paulonotatus   and quoted Kingsolver and Whitehead (1974) as the authors of that synonymy. Udayagiri and Wadhi (1989) did not comment on whether the type was examined or not. We had the opportunity to study the type deposited in the MNHN. Based on our examination of the specimen, we confirm that the type locality given by Pic (1930) - namely, “Jatahy”, currently spelled as Jata´ı, a municipality in the Brazilian state of Goiás - matches the label data. More importantly, there are no morphological differences between the respective types. The synonymy of P. multimaculatus paulonotatus   and B. clitoriae   , first suggested by Kingsolver and Whitehead (1974) and published by Udayagiri and Wadhi (1999), is here confirmed after the study of the type material.

Pseudopachymerus multinotatus   ( 6, MNHN): Lectotype male designated by Kingsolver and Whitehead (1974) and five paralectotypes males, all of them glued to the same rectangular paper card with a letter “X” indicating the lectotype ( Fig. 1 View Fig ) “[handwritten] 1707” “[handwritten] Bahia (Bondar) \ in legumineuse” “[handwritten] Pseudopachymerus   \ n sp” “[handwritten, red] type” “[handwritten] multinotatus \ n sp” “[handwritten] G 114” “[handwritten] Lectotype ³ [red] \ x [red] Pseudopachy- \ merus \ multinotatus \ Pic \ [printed] det. \ J. M. Kingsolver ” “[manuscript] Caryedes   \ confinis (Sharp)   \ [printed] det. [handwritten] 73 \ [printed] J. M. Kingsolver ” “[handwritten] multimaculata \ Type ³ + 5 ³ Pt \ JK [black] x [red]” “[printed] MUSÉUM PARIS \ 1958 \ Coll. M. PIC”.  

In the original description, Pic (1931) did not indicate the number of specimens studied by him. We received six specimens from the MNHN, all mounted on the same pin, glued to the same rectangular paper card, and labeled with locality data identical to that by Pic (1931), viz., Bahia. The male specimen marked with the red “X” by Kingsolver is the lectotype of P. multinotatus   . The red mark was likely made by the same pen that Kingsolver used to write “ Lectotype ³ x” on the determination label. The other five specimens are paralectotypes ( Fig. 1 View Fig ). Unfortunately, Kingsolver did not detail the selection of his type material in his work (Kingsolver and Whitehead 1974). In the label sequence, it seems as though Kingsolver wrote three determination labels, which he signed. One of those labels has an error, possibly due to the similarity in the spelling of the names. The first label written by Pic corresponds to the original combination ( Pseudopachymerus multinotatus   ), the second label corresponds to a synonymy proposed in Kingsolver (1979) ( Caryedes clitoriae   = C. confinis   ), while the third label refers to a gender inflection of C. multimaculatus   (“ multimaculata ”), which refers to a different valid species in Caryedes   . Despite the similarity between the spelling of both specific names, multinotatus   and multimaculatus   , the two species belong to distinct species-groups in Caryedes   .


Swedish Museum of Natural History, Entomology Collections


Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle














Caryedes clitoriae ( Gyllenhal, 1839 )

Jorge, Isaac Reis & Ribeiro-Costa, Cibele Stramare 2019

Caryedes clitoriae: Kingsolver 1979: 341

de la Cruz Perez, A. & Romero Napoles, J. L. & Carrillo Sanchez, E. & Garc'ia Lopez, R. & Grether Gonzalez, S. 2013: 52
Kingsolver, J. M. 1979: 341

Caryedes multinotatus:

Zacher, F. 1952: 467

Caryedes confinis:

Kingsolver, J. M. 1979: 341
Blackwelder, R. E. 1946: 758

Caryedes bicoloripes var. paulonotata:

Blackwelder, R. E. 1946: 757

Caryedes multinotata:

Blackwelder, R. E. 1946: 758

Pseudopachymerus multinotatus

Bondar, G. 1936: 24
Pic, M. 1931: 24

Pseudopachymerus multimaculatus var. paulonotatus

Pic, M. 1930: 36

Pseudopachymerus clitoriae:

Pic, M. 1913: 10

Pseudopachymerus confinis:

Pic, M. 1913: 10

Bruchus (Pachymeri) clitoriae

Schoenherr, C. J. 1839: 125