Timarcha goettingensis
| 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{Vela2020ZooKeys986, RIS/ Endnote: TY - JOUR Wikipedia/ Citizendium: <ref name="Vela2020ZooKeys986">{{Citation See also the citation download page at the journal. |
Ordo: Coleoptera
Familia: Chrysomelidae
Genus: Timarcha
Name
Timarcha goettingensis (Linnaeus, 1758) – Wikispecies link – Pensoft Profile
- Chrysomela goettingensis Linnaeus 1758[1]: 368 (original description).
- Tenebrio latipes Linnaeus 1767[2]: 678 (original description), syn. nov.
Type localities
Chrysomela goettingensis: “Germania”. Tenebrio latipes: “Africa” [type locality wrong].
Type material
Chrysomela goettingensis: not examined. The images of the lectotype (♂, presently designated, Fig. 1), labelled “goettingensis [w, h, Linnaeus’ handwriting] // 4 [w, p]” (LSUK, code LINN 5537), are available at http://linnean-online.org/22922/.
Tenebrio latipes: Lectotype (♀, presently designated, Fig. 2): “LSL INS 6579 [p] // latipes [h, Linnaeus’ handwriting] // 30” (LSUK, code LINN 6579). Examined by one of us (MAAZ), images are also available at http://linnean-online.org/23904/.
Comments
In the Linnean collections there are two different species under Chrysomela goettingensis. One of them, specimen LINN 5537 labelled “goettingensis” [w, h, Linnaeus’ handwriting] (http://linnean-online.org/22922/), is the lectotype of Chrysomela goettingensis Linnaeus, 1758: 368 (presently in Timarcha, Fig. 1). The other species have the codes LINN 5536 (labelled “goettingensis” [w, h, Linnaeus’ handwriting]) (http://linnean-online.org/22921/), LINN 5538 (no labelled) (http://linnean-online.org/22923/), LINN 5539 (no labelled) (http://linnean-online.org/22924/), and are to be considered syntypes of Chrysomela goettingensis Linnaeus, 1760: 160, although this species is currently known as Chrysolina sturmi (Westhoff 1882: 268) (see Waterhouse 1864[3]: 18; Weise 1916[4]: 96; Bieńkowski 2001[5]: 162). An additional specimen, LINN 5540 (http://linnean-online.org/22925/), is also the latter species but cannot be a syntype because it comes from Fenwick Skrimshire, who was born after the publication of Linnaeus’s work.
Authors such as Weise (1916[4]: 207), Winkler (1930[6]: 1298), Bechynĕ (1945a[7]: 103, 1947a[8]: 59, 1948[9]: 50), Jolivet (1967a[10]: 225); Warchałowski (2010[11]: 629), and Gómez-Zurita and Kippenberg (2010[12]: 440 (pars)) have identified as “Timarcha latipes (Linnaeus)” specimens belonging to T. punctella Marseul, 1871 species group (Daccordi and Vela unpubl. data). However, the original description of Tenebrio latipes Linnaeus, 1767 clearly says that it is half the size of T. laevigata. In fact, the lectotype of T. latipes measures 8.4 mm (Fig. 2), obviously much smaller than T. punctella or species similar to it from North Africa. The type locality “Africa” given by Linnaeus (1867) for T. latipes is incorrect.
Diagnosis
Males: 7.4–12.6 mm (lectotype of T. goettingensis: 8.7 mm; Fig. 1); females: 8.4–14.5 mm (lectotype of T. latipes is an unextended specimen measuring 8.4 mm; Fig. 2). Black or black with bluish luster (Fig. 3). Highly variable species in brightness, puncturation, form of the pronotum and elytra, and size. Sides of the pronotum regularly, slightly curved or almost straight, with the widest point in the basal third or at base, never cordiform, completely margined or with lateral margins obliterated at different extent (Fig. 4). Puncturation on the pronotum and elytra dense, regular, heavily or weakly marked, usually stronger on the elytra, not or conspicuously vermiculated (Figs 3, 4). Mesoventrite variable with apophysis a bit prominent, slightly forked, or more or less emarginated or almost straight, never clearly bituberculated. Vestiture of the female tarsi: (1, 1, 1/3–3/4; 1, 1, 1/3–3/4; 1, 4/5–1, 1/2–3/4). The aedeagus is slender and progressively narrowed towards the apex in dorsal view and regularly curved in side view (Fig. 5). Sclerites of the internal sac of the aedeagus (Fig. 6) with a paired phanera in romboid form, which is an important diagnostic character to separate this from other closely related species. The inflated endophallus of an approximate locotype (coming near Göttinga in central Germany) (Fig. 7) is shown. A number of species and subspecies, whose taxonomical rank has yet to be studied, have been described in association with this species (Winkelman and Debreuil 2008[13]; Warchałowski 2010[11]; Gómez-Zurita and Kippenberg 2010[12]).
Distribution
Most of Europe, from northern Spain to European Russia, and reaching Great Britain and Sweden (Gómez-Zurita and Kippenberg 2010[12])
Host plants
Scabiosa atropurpurea L. (= S. maritima L.) (Caprifoliaceae); Plantago lanceolata L., P. coronopus L. (Plantaginaceae), Cruciata laevipes Opiz, Galium aparine L., G. arenarium Loisel., G. mollugo L., G. odoratum (L.) Scop. (= Asperula odorata L.), G. saxatile L., G. uliginosum L., G. verum L., Rubia peregrina L. (Rubiaceae) (Jolivet and Petitpierre 1973[14]; Winkelman and Debreuil 2008[13]; Tiberghien 2016[15]).
Taxon Treatment
- Vela, J; Alonso-Zarazaga, M; Daccordi, M; 2020: The species of Timarcha Samouelle, 1819 described by Linnaeus (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae) ZooKeys, 986: 55-80. doi
Images
|
![Figures 5–7. Timarcha goettingensis5 aedeagi of Germany, Erfurt in dorsal (a) and side view (b) and Germany, Bad Frankenhausen in dorsal (c) and side (d) view 6 sclerite of the endophallus from Germany, Bad Frankenhausen, in dorsolateral view (taken from Daccordi et al. 2020[16]) 7 everted endophallus from Germany, Frankenhausen in dorsal (a) and side (b) view (taken from Daccordi et al. 2020[16]). Scale bars: 1 mm (5), 0.5 mm (6).](/wiki/File:Zookeys-986-055-g002.jpg)
Other References
- ↑ Linnaeus C (1758) Systema Naturae per Regna Tria Naturae, Secundum Clases, Ordines, Genera, Species, cum Characteribus, Differentiis, Synonymies, Locis. Tomus I. Editio decima, reformata.Impensis Direct, Laurentii Salvii, Holmiae, 824 pp. https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/726886
- ↑ Linnaeus C (1767) Systema Naturae per regna tria naturae, secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, cum characteribus diferentiis, synonymis, locis. Editio duodecima, reformata. Tomus I, Pars II. Laurentii Salvii, Holmiae, [2] + 533–1327 + [37] pp. https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/57766250
- ↑ Waterhouse G (1864) Notes on Chrysomelidae in the Linnaean and Banksian collections. Transactions of the Entomological Society of London (3rd series) 1(1): 18–28.
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 Weise J (1916) ChrysomelidaeChrysomelinae, pars 69. In: Schenkling S (Ed.) Coleopterorum Catalogus. W.Junk, Berlin, 255 pp.
- ↑ Bieńkowski A (2001) A study on the genus Chrysolina Motschulsky, 1860, with a checklist of all the described subgenera, species, subspecies, and synonyms (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae: Chrysomelinae).Genus12(2): 105–235.
- ↑ Winkler A (1930) Catalogus Coleopterorum Regiones Palaearcticae. Albert Winkler, Wien, 1265–1392.
- ↑ Bechynĕ J (1945a) De sectionis Timarchae latipes Linn. speciebus (Col. Phytoph. Chrysomelidae).Časopis Československé Společnosti Entomologické42: 101–103.
- ↑ Bechynĕ J (1947a) Notulae ad cognitionem generis Timarcha Latr. VIII (Col. Phytoph. Chrysomelidae).Acta Entomologica Musei Nationalis Pragae25: 55–61.
- ↑ Bechynĕ J (1948) Contribution à la connaissance du genre Timarcha Latr. 12: études phylogénétiques et zoogéographiques (Col. Phytophaga, Chrysomelidae). Sborník Národního Musea v Praze 4B(2): 1–62.
- ↑ Jolivet P (1967a) Notes écologiques sur les Timarcha tuniso-lybiens (Col. Chrysomelidae).Bulletin de la Societé entomologique de France72: 224–239.
- ↑ 11.0 11.1 Warchałowski A (2010) The Palaearctic Chrysomelidae. Identification Keys.Natura Optima Dux Foundation, Warszawa, 2 vols, 1211 pp.
- ↑ 12.0 12.1 12.2 Gómez-Zurita J, Kippenberg H (2010) Chrysomelinae, tribe Timarchini. In: Löbl I Smetana A (Eds) Catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera: Chrysomeloidea (Vol.6). Apollo Books, Stenstrup, 437–443.
- ↑ 13.0 13.1 Winkelman J, Debreuil M (2008) Les Chrysomelinae de France (Col. Chrysomelidae).Association des Coléoptéristes Amateurs du Sud de la Fran ce, Supplément Rutilans, Villelongue-dels-Monts, 188 pp.
- ↑ Jolivet P, Petitpierre E (1973) Plantes-hôtes connues de Timarcha Latreille (Col. Chrys.). Quelques considérations sur les raisons possibles du trophisme sélectif.Bulletin de la Societé Entomologique de France78(1–2): 9–25.
- ↑ Tiberghien G (2016) Observations biologiques sur les Chrysomelinae: nouvelle contribution pour les Timarcha (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae).Le Coléoptériste19(1): 39–45.
- ↑ 16.0 16.1 Daccordi M, Bollino M, Vela J (2020) Some techniques for the study of useful characters in the taxonomy of the genus Timarcha Samouelle, 1819 (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae).European Journal of Taxonomy630: 1–14. https://doi.org/10.5852/ejt.2020.630
