Cassida laticollis Gressitt, 1952

Sekerka, Lukáš, Jia, Fenglong, Pang, Hong & Borowiec, Lech, 2016, Cassidinae (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) types deposited at Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China, Zootaxa 4084 (1), pp. 50-78 : 58

Cassida laticollis Gressitt, 1952

( Fig. 8 )

Cassida (s. str.) laticollis Gressitt, 1952: 510 ; Chen et al., 1986: 475 (synonymy).

Type locality. China, Hubei prov., Lichuan Co., Shuishaba village.

Original type series. Described only from the holotype ( CAS).

Type material examined. Holotype, glued: ‘Suisapa, 1000 M. | Lichuan Distr. | W. Hupeh, China | VII- [p]24[hw]-48 [w, p, cb] || 5 [w, hw, cb] || L-115 [w, t, cb] || HOLOTYPE | CASSIDA [hw] | LATICOLLIS [hw] | J.L.Gressitt [r, p + hw by Gressitt, cb] || CASSIDA | LATICOLLIS | GRESS. | J.L.G. Det 1950 [w, hw by Gressitt, cb] || En-289735 | [Data Matrix barcode] SYS [w. p, cb]’.

Current status. Synonym of Cassida fuscorufa Motschulsky, 1866 .

Remarks. Gressitt (1952) stated that the holotype is in CAS, however, there is no such specimen. Because the LMHN specimen agrees with the locality data and posses the original Gressittʼs labels it should be the original holotype. It particularly agrees with the description in its artificially pale colouration being result of its teneral nature and colouration of fully sclerotized specimen would be much darker. Gressitt separated this species by the width of pronotum being equal to span of humeral angles. Chen et al. (1986) synonymized C. laticollis with C. fuscorufa . The latter is a very variable species and in addition the proportion of the width of the pronotum and the elytra is sexually dimorphic. The holotype has weakly convex elytra and is fully within instraspecific variability of C. fuscorufa .

The type locality refers to Shuishaba village situated approximately in the middle of the Shuishaba valley in the Lichuan district and the specimen was collected during the expedition lead by Gressitt to explore Dawn- Redwood ( Metasequoia glyptostroboides Hu & W.C.Cheng ), for details see Gressitt (1953b). Chu & Cooper (1950) published a rough map of the Shuishaba valley (as Shui-hsa-pa), however, the coordinates seems to be quite off the true place hence are not accepted here. Exact geographic position of the type locality is unknown to us.

Figures

FIGURES 4 – 11. 4. Cassida expansa Gressitt, 1952 (holotype, 6.7 mm); 5. C. imitatrix Gressitt, 1952 (holotype, 4.8 mm); 6. C. juglans Gressitt, 1942 (holotype, 4.8 mm); 7. C. inflata Gressitt, 1952 (holotype, 7.0 mm); 8. C. laticollis Gressitt, 1952 (holotype, 6.0 mm); 9. C. spaethi Gressitt, 1942 (holotype, 6.9 mm); 10. Glyphocassis tetrasticta Gressitt, 1942 (holotype, 5.4 mm); 11. G. trilineata szechuana Gressitt, 1952 (holotype, 5.5 mm).