Erratamelitta erato ( Newman, 1840 ) Clarke & Flora & Fauna & Casilla & de & Sierra & Bolivia, 2016

Clarke, Robin O. S., Flora, Hotel, Fauna, Casilla, de, Santa Cruz, Sierra & Bolivia, 2016, Provisional revision of the genus Epimelitta Bates, 1870 and associated genera, with a brief synopsis of the genus Acorethra Bates, 1873 (Coleoptera, Cerambycidae), Insecta Mundi 2016 (504), pp. 1-43 : 27

Erratamelitta erato ( Newman, 1840) , comb. nov.

( Fig. 35, 36 )

Charis erato Newman, 1840:21 .

Epimelitta erato ; Aurivillius, 1912:284 (cat.).

Acorethra chrysaspis (nec. Bates, 1873); Monné, and Giesbert, 1992:250 (syn.).

Charis bicolor Bates, 1873:124 . Syn. nov.

Measurements (mm) 2 males / 3 females: total length, 8.10-10.00/8.80-9.50; length of pronotum, 1.30- 1.50/1.35-1.50; width of pronotum, 1.40-1.50/1.50-1.55; length of elytra, 2.25-2.60/2.50-2.55; width at humeri, 1.45-1.60/1.60-1.70.

Specimens analyzed: BRAZIL, São Paulo, Itú , Faz. Pau d’Alho, 1 male, 28-29.X.1965, Martins & Biasi col. ( MZSP) ; Porto Cabral, Rio Paraná, 1 female, 15-30.X.1941, L. Travassos Filho col. ( MZSP) .

Specimens examined: BRAZIL, Santa Catarina, Nova Teutônia , male, XI.1935, J. Pohl col. ( MZSP) ; Seara, Nova Teutônia , 27º11’O /52º23’L, female, 5.XII.1941, F. Plaumann col. ( MZSP) ; Mafra, female, XII.33, F. Tippmann, Wien col. Tippmann collection #213112 ( USNM) .

Comment. When Bates described the genus Acorethra he stipulated: “the abdomen is of disproportionate extension, exceeding by one half the length of the rest of the body. When Newman described the new genus Charis he made no reference to the dimensions of the abdomen, thereby suggesting that it was of normal proportions. He placed three new species in the genus, including C. erato . The other two species, C. euphrosyne and C. aglaia do not have elongate abdomens, and there is no reason to suppose that C. erato was any different, and no reason for Monné and Giesbert (1992) to move Epimelitta erato to the genus Acorethra .

Unfortunately Newman’s ‘type’ of C. erato , thought to be in BMNH collection, cannot be found (pers. comm. Maxwell Barclay).

When Bates (1873) described Charis bicolor he stated that Newman’s C. erato was unknown to him. Among the specimens referred to above, and others in the MZSP collection, some have been identified as A. erato , others as E. bicolor , in what seems to be a random manner. Since there seems to be no defining characters to suggest that two species are present, the author has treated E. bicolor as a junior synonym of C. erato as indicated above.

Figures

Figures 31-36. Genus Charisia revalidated and Erratamelitta gen. nov. Fig. 31-32. Charisia mneme (Newman, 1841): 31) male, dorsal aspect; 32) male, ventral aspect. 33. Charisia ornaticollis Zajciw, 1973, holotype, female. 34.Erratamelitta eliasi sp. nov., paratype, male lateral aspect. Fig. 35-36. Erratamelitta erato (Newman, 1840), dorsal aspect: 35) male; 36) female.