Aegidinus candezei (Preudhomme de Borre, 1886)

(Figure 3 (a–e,g,h,j,k))

Orphnus candezei Preudhomme de Borre, 1886: 116

Aegidinus candezei (Preudhomme de Borre); Arrow, 1912: 31; Schmidt, 1913: 76; Paulian 184: 89; Colby 2009: 17

Aegidinus sunidigea Colby, 2009, syn. nov.

Type locality. Colombia, Chocó.

Type material examined

Lectotype (designated here, Figure 3 (a,e)), male at IRSNB labelled ‘ Coll. R. I. Sc. N. B. Colombie ex coll Candeze Choco Wallis /det. P. de Borre 1886 Orphnus Candezei ♂ Type/ Holotype / Lectotypus Orphnus candezei P.d.B. Frolov des. 2018 ’.

Paralectotype (Figure 3 (f,i,l)), female at IRSNB labelled ‘ Coll. R. I. Sc. N. B. Colombie: Choco ex Wallis ex coll. Candeze /det. P. de Borre 1886 Orphnus Candezei ♀ Type/ Allotype / Aegidinus candezei (Preudhomme de Borre) det. J.B. Colby 2009 / Paralectotypus Orphnus candezei P.d.B. Frolov des. 2018 ’.

Additional material examined

COLOMBIA. Boyacá: Otanche, 5 May 1995, Arriágada leg., five females (CEMT). Santander: Puerto Araújo, Los Manantiales Ranch, May 2000, J. Noriega leg., one male (CEMT); Puerto Araújo, Las Marias, 130 m, May 2000, J. Noriega leg., one female (CEMT). Tolima: Mariquita, Municipal forest, 680 m, April 2000, J. Noriega leg., one male (CEMT). Antioquia: Medellín, forest, pitfall, April 1998, J. Noriega leg., one male (CEMT).

Diagnosis

Ae. candezei is most similar to Ae. noriegai sp. nov. but can be distinguished from it by the shorter and less asymmetrical parameres, ventroapical plate of the phallobase wider than long (Figure 3 (b – d)), and protibia with medioapical tooth.

Remarks

Aegidinus candezei was described with no explicit information about the number of the examined specimens although it was indicated that both sexes were studied. There are two specimens (Figure 3 (a,i)) in the IRSNB collection which agree with the original description and might be the only specimens studied by Preudhomme de Borre. These specimens should be considered syntypes since no lectotype had been designated so far. The male specimen bears a red printed label that reads ‘ Holotype ’ (Figure 3 (e)) and the female specimen the label ‘ Allotype ’ (Figure 3 (f)). These labels were placed by the IRSNB technical staff in 1980 – 2000 (Alain Drumont, pers. comm.). Paulian (1984) mentioned the ‘ holotype ’ apparently based on these labels. The identity and conspecificity of the two specimens were not questioned by Paulian (1984) and Colby (2009), and the latter author drew the female characters of Ae. candezei from the female syntype. However, we think that the two syntypes are not conspecific. The body punctation and the shape of the genitalia of the female syntype (Figure 3 (i,l)) do not agree with the female specimens from San Carlos (Figure 3 (h,k)) belonging to the series of both sexes with trustworthy locality data. Only the male syntype bears the original locality label ‘ Choco Wallis ’. The locality label of the female syntype was added by IRSNB technical staff later and put under an unlabelled specimen. Although it seems probable that both specimens originate from Candeze ’ s collection and might have been collected by Wallis, the locality of the female syntype is unclear since Wallis made extensive expeditions throughout South America (Veitch 1906).

Aegidinus sunidigea Colby was described from a female (Figure 3 (g,j)) from San Carlos. As discussed above, the series from San Carlos includes two species represented by both sexes, so the female characters of Ae. candezei can be inferred from these specimens with sparse punctation, including the type specimen of Ae. sunidigea . To ensure stability of the nomenclature, we here designate the male syntype (Figure 3 (a)) as the lectotype of Orphnus candezei and propose that Aegidinus sunidigea is a synonym of Orphnus candezei .