Omorgus (Omorgus) borrei ( Harold, 1872 )

Costa-Silva, Vinícius, Strümpher, Werner P. & Vaz-de-Mello, Fernando Z., 2021, Review of the Brazilian species of Omorgus Erichson, 1847 (Coleoptera: Trogidae: Omorginae), Journal of Natural History 54 (31 - 32), pp. 1993-2024 : 2002-2005

Omorgus (Omorgus) borrei ( Harold, 1872)

( Figure 4 a-c, 9)

Trox borrei Harold, 1872: 84 (original description); Arrow 1912: 54 (catalogue); Vaurie

1962: 147 (redescription).

Trox (Omorgus) borrei: Scholtz 1982: 9 (catalogue).

Omorgus (Omorgus) borrei: Scholtz 1986: 361 (phylogenetics); Scholtz 1990: 1417 (redescription); Zídek 2013: 8 (catalogue); Zídek 2017: 98 (catalogue).

Type material examined

Lectotype, here designated: (RBINS, through photographs, Figure 4 a-c): First label [red]: ‘TYPE’ [typeset with black border]. Second label [white]: ‘det. [typeset] Harold 1872 [unknown handwriting]/ Trox /Borrei/Typ. Harold’ [Harold’s handwriting]. Third label [red]: ‘Coll. I. R. Sc. N. B./Uruguay: [typeset]/Montevidea/ex coll. de Borre [unknown handwriting]’. Paralectotype, here designated: (RBINS, through photographs): First label [orange, typeset]: ‘Para-/type’. Second label [white aged with green border]: ‘ Borrei / Har ./ Montev. Ar.’ [unknown handwriting]. Third label [red]: ‘ Coll . I . R. Sc. N. B./ Uruguay: [typeset]/ Montevideo /ex col . Candeze’ . Type locality: URUGUAY: Montevideo .

Note: The type specimens of Trox borrei cited by Scholtz (1990, p. 1418) as ‘holotype’ and ‘paratype’ are actually syntypes. When describing the species, Harold (1872) mentions one specimen from the collection of Preudhomme de Borre (without further indication of the location) and another specimen from the Candèze collection (from Montevideo), without distinguishing between primary and secondary types . To avoid future confusion on this matter, and in order to keep a single name-bearing individual, we here designate the specimen considered as primary type by Scholtz (1990, p. 1418) as the lectotype.

Additional material examined

BRAZIL: Mato Grosso do Sul, Corumbá, Passo do Lontra , 1998 [or 1999], L . Vieira leg . (1 ♂ CEMT) . Rio Grande do Sul, Cerro Largo, i .1946, no collector (1 MGAP). Specimens without precise locality data: Matto Grosso (3 MLPA) . PARAGUAY: Boquerón, Loma Plata , 20–30 .xii .1994, P . Gerlach leg . (2 ♂, 1 CVMD) . Parque Nacional Teniente Agripino Enciso , 21°11’S 61°40 ʹ W, 16–18 .ix .2002, B . Garcete leg . (1 ♂, 1 CEMT); Parque Nacional Teniente Agripino Enciso , 21°11’S 61°40 ʹ W, 4 .xi .2001, Carlos Aguilar J . leg . (1 ♂ CVMD) . Concepción, Cororo , 20 .xii .1999, Jorge Jensen leg .

(1 CVMD). ARGENTINA: Chaco, Almirante Brown, Los Frentones, Río Muerto , dry chaco with cattle, 26°7’S 61°40 ʹ W, 31 .x .2016, pitfall trap, C. Guerra-A. leg (1 CEMT); Chacabuco, Charata , x .1924, no collector (1 MLPA); Chacabuco, Charata , x.1925, no collector (1 MLPA); Chacabuco, Charata , 15 .ii .1937, Denier leg . (1 MLPA); Comandante Fernández, Presidencia Roque Sáenz Peña , 25 .xi .2001, no collector (1 IFML); San Fernando, Resistencia , x–xii .1935, J .B . Daguerre leg. (1 MACN). Misiones, Concepción , Santa María, x .1945, M .J . Viana leg. (1 MACN). Santa Fe, Vera, La Gallereta, 1907, no collector (1 MLPA); specimens without precise locality data: H . Richter (1 MLPA); Chaco , no date, C . Bruch leg . (1 MACN). Corrientes, Santo Tomé, i .1928, G . Pellerano leg . (2 MACN); Santo Tomé , i .1926, G . Pellegaro leg . (1 MACN); no precise locality, no date, C. Bruch (1 MACN); no further data: 1 ( MLPA) . Santiago del Estero, General Taboada, Añatuya, ii .1999, D . Carpintero leg . (1 ♀ CVMD); Río Salado , Wagner leg . (2 MLPA). Formosa, Formosa , 1890, C . Bruch leg . (1 MACN); Formosa, Reserva Guaycolec , 13–15 .ii .2002, R . Gomez leg . (1 CVMD); Bermejo, Reserva de Biosfera Riacho Teuquito, ‘RP 37’, Laguna Yema , 1 km S ‘ Canal’ , 24°21’S 61°18 ʹ W, 11 .xii .2008, F .C . Ocampo, G. San Blas, F. Campón leg. (11 IADIZA). La Rioja, no further data (1 MLPA) . Salta, Rosario de Lerma , Corralito, ii .1983, M . Viana leg . (1 CVMD). Entre Ríos, Colón, Pueblo Liebig, ii .1996, Mateo Zelich leg . (1 ♀ CVMD) . URUGUAY: ‘ Banda Oriental’, no further data (1 MLPA) .

Diagnosis

Omorgus borrei is very similar to O. badeni , from which it can be distinguished as discussed above. ( Figure 4 a-b). For details of the morphology, see Vaurie (1962) and Scholtz (1990).

Geographic distribution

Here, we present the first record for Brazil based on five specimens, one from MS (Pantanal biome), another from RS (Pampa), and three others citing only ‘Matto Grosso’ as the collecting locality, which may refer to either MS, MT or RO ( Figure 9 ). This species can also be found in Uruguay, Argentina and Bolivia (Scholtz 1990) as well as in Paraguay (Boquerón).

Figures

Figure 4. Lectotype (new designation) of Trox borrei Harold, 1872 (now Omorgus borrei). A, dorsal view; B, lateral view and C, lectotype labels (Photos by Jonathan Brecko, copyright RBINS). Length of specimen: 7.3 mm.

Figure 9. Distribution of Omorgus borrei, O. badeni and O. loxus in the Brazilian territory. Green triangle with small black point inside refers to approximate type locality of O. badeni (‘Ceará’).