Difference between revisions of "Malagasyprinus perrieri"
m (Imported from ZooKeys) |
m |
||
| Line 69: | Line 69: | ||
|21= File:ZooKeys-333-055-g012.jpg|22= '''Figures 62.''' Map of distribution of ''{{Taxon name|Malagasyprinus}}'' gen. n. | |21= File:ZooKeys-333-055-g012.jpg|22= '''Figures 62.''' Map of distribution of ''{{Taxon name|Malagasyprinus}}'' gen. n. | ||
}} | }} | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Other References== | ||
| + | |||
| + | <references /> | ||
Latest revision as of 13:17, 20 September 2013
| Notice: | This page is derived from the original publication listed below, whose author(s) should always be credited. Further contributors may edit and improve the content of this page and, consequently, need to be credited as well (see page history). Any assessment of factual correctness requires a careful review of the original article as well as of subsequent contributions.
If you are uncertain whether your planned contribution is correct or not, we suggest that you use the associated discussion page instead of editing the page directly. This page should be cited as follows (rationale):
Citation formats to copy and paste
BibTeX: @article{Lackner2013ZooKeys333, RIS/ Endnote: TY - JOUR Wikipedia/ Citizendium: <ref name="Lackner2013ZooKeys333">{{Citation See also the citation download page at the journal. |
Ordo: Coleoptera
Familia: Histeridae
Genus: Malagasyprinus
Name
Malagasyprinus perrieri Lackner & Gomy, 2013 sp. n. – Wikispecies link – ZooBank link – Pensoft Profile
Type locality
Madagascar.
Type material examined
MADAGASCAR: Holotype, ♂, side-mounted on a triangular point, both antennal flagelli broken off, right fore- and mid legs missing, left mesotarsus missing, with male genitalia extracted and glued to the same mounting point as the specimen, with following labels: “♂” (printed), followed by light-green rectangular label, printed: “MUSEUM PARIS / MADAGASCAR / col. Perrier de la Bathie / 1906”; followed by hand-written label: “Saprinus / perrieri sp. n.” with a consecutive red label, printed: “Malagasyprinus perrieri / sp. n. Det. T. Lackner & / Y. Gomy 2013 HOLOTYPE” (MNHN). Paratypes: 31 exs., same data as holotype (MNHN); 1 ♂, with following labels: “♂” (written); “Madagascar N. Ouest / Ankarafantsika Ampisoro / 30.xi.1973 (written)”; “battage d’arbustes / (L. Linarès rec.) (written); “Collection / Y. Gomy (printed)”; “Malagasyprinus perrieri / sp. n. Det. T. Lackner & / Y. Gomy 2013 PARATYPE” (red label, printed)” (CYG); 2 ♀♀, with following labels: “♀” (written); “Madagascar N-Ouest / Ankarafantsika / Ampisoro 30.xi.1973 (printed label with black frame)”; “battage d’arbustes / (LLinarès rec.) (printed label with black frame)”; “Collection / Y. Gomy (printed)”; “Malagasyprinus perrieri / sp. n. Det. T. Lackner & / Y. Gomy 2013 PARATYPE” (red label, printed)” (CYG); 1 ♀, with the same labels as preceding, with an additional round, written label: “Photo / No 4 / 1ére série”; 3 ♂♂, ibid (two of the male PT are sputter coated with gold) (CYG); 1 ♀, “MADAGASCAR: Mahajanga / Province, Parc National de / Baie de Baly, 12.4 km 337° / NNW Soalala, elev. 10m / 26–30 Nov. 2002 (printed)”; “16°00'36"S, 045°15'54"E / coll. Fischer, Grislwold et al. / California Acad. of Sciences / pitfall trap - in tropical dry / forest, coll. code: BLF6815 (printed)”; “CASENT / 8065522” (CAS); 1 ♀, same data, but “CASENT / 8065523” (CAS); 1 ♀, same data, but “CASENT / 8065521” (CAS); 1 ♀, same data, but “CASENT / 8065524” (CAS); 1 ♂, same data, but “CASENT / 8065520” (CYG); 1 ♂, same data, but “CASENT / 8065525” (TLAN); 1 ♀, same data, but “CASENT / 8065526” (TLAN); 1 ♀, same data, but “CASENT / 8065519” (TLAN); 1 ♀, same data, but “CASENT / 8065518” (CYG); 1 ♀, same data, but “CASENT / 8065517” (CYG).
Diagnosis
Body measurements: PEL: 2.20–2.60 mm; APW: 0.90–1.00 mm; PPW: 1.75–2.15 mm; EL: 1.25–1.50 mm; EW: 2.00–2.50 mm. Very similar to the preceding species, differing mainly by larger size; lighter color of legs and antennae (those of Malagasyprinus perrieri are brown to dark brown whereas those of Malagasyprinus caeruleatus are rufescent; compare Figs 1–2 and 26–27) deeper longitudinal pronotal depression, sparser elytral punctuation (in Malagasyprinus perrieri the elytral striae are more discernible whereas they are almost completely obliterated by punctuation in Malagasyprinus caeruleatus); furthermore, the elytral ‘mirror’ is often larger and less densely punctate in Malagasyprinus perrieri whereas it is tiny and often densely punctate in Malagasyprinus caeruleatus (compare Figs 1 and 26). The shape the of carinal prosternal striae is likewise different between the two species, see comments to the preceding species and compare Figs 8 and 32. Aedeagi of the two species are markedly different: that one of Malagasyprinus caeruleatus is apically split in two inwardly curved halves resembling a snake’s tongue and that one of Malagasyprinus perrieri is simply pointed apically and not split (compare Figs 18 and 40). From the following new species, Malagasyprinus diana, Malagasyprinus perrieri can be best distinguished by shallower longitudinal pronotal depression (the one of Malagasyprinus diana is the deepest among the three), the area of the pronotum covered by deep longitudinal wrinkles is the largest in Malagasyprinus diana, occupying almost the entire pronotal disk, whereas in Malagasyprinus perrieri it covers mostly the lateral pronotal depression and the surface around it; furthermore, the elytral ‘mirror’ is much smaller in Malagasyprinus perrieri than in Malagasyprinus diana, where it is proportionally the largest among the three taxa, and almost impunctate (compare Figs 26 and 44). The prosternal processes of the two species are likewise different: the carinal prosternal striae of Malagasyprinus perrieri are medially slightly approximate and rather narrowly separated, whereas those of Malagasyprinus diana are not approximate medially, widely separated and slightly divergent anteriorly (compare Figs 32 and 50). The prosternal process of Malagasyprinus perrieri is slightly depressed on its apical two-thirds, whereas that of Malagasyprinus diana is even. Male aedeagi (Figs 40 and 60) are similar between Malagasyprinus diana and Malagasyprinus perrieri, but the shape of 8th sternite is different among species: in Malagasyprinus perrieri it is slightly more narrowing apically whereas in Malagasyprinus diana it is almost running parallel-sided (compare also Figs 35–36 and 53–54).
Distribution
Malagasyprinus perrieri is known from two localities, both situated in the region of Boeny, north-western Madagascar; see also Fig. 62 for the distribution of the three species).
Biology
This species has been collected by beating the thickets as well as by pitfall trapping in tropical dry forest.
Remarks
The specimens from Ankarafantsika (Ampisoro) slightly differ from those from national park of Baie de Baly in their punctuation of the ventral side of the body, but we regard these differences as variation between the two populations as the male genitalia are constant.
Etymology
Patronymic, named in the honor of the first collector of this taxon, French botanist Henri Perrier de La Bâthie (1873–1958) well-known for his numerous studies of the Madagascar flora, who nonetheless collected also insects, currently deposited at MNHN.
Original Description
- Lackner, T; Gomy, Y; 2013: Malagasyprinus, a new genus of the Saprininae from Madagascar with description of two new species (Coleoptera, Histeridae, Saprininae) (First contribution to the knowledge of the Histeridae of Madagascar) ZooKeys, 333: 55-76. doi
Images
|
![Figure 25. Malagasyprinus perrieri sp. n., apex of aedeagus, re-drawn from Dahlgren (1969)[1].](/wiki/File:ZooKeys-333-055-g005.jpg)
Other References
- ↑ Dahlgren G (1969) Beiträge zur Kenntnis der Gattung Saprinus (Col. Histeridae). IV. Opuscula Entomologica 34: 257-269.
