Kheper cupreus (Laporte de Castelnau, 1840)

Deschodt, Christian M. & Davis, Adrian L. V., 2022, Comparison with a syntype of Kheper cupreus (Laporte de Castelnau, 1840) confirms that Kheper namibicus Krajcik, 2006 is a synonym, Zootaxa 5169 (2), pp. 193-196 : 193-195

Following its original description, Kheper namibicus Krajcik, 2006 , was synonymized with Kheper cupreus ( Laporte de Castelnau, 1840) by Deschodt et al. (2011) but later re-erected as a valid species or subspecies ( Krajcik 2020). This paper discusses the evidence for validity versus synonymy and provides further support that Kheper namibicus is, indeed, a junior subjective synonym of

Kheper cupreus .

The description of Kheper namibicus was based on three specimens, the holotype and a paratype from near Gobabis [S22.45° E18.97°] and a paratype from near Otavi [S19.63° E17.33°] in Namibia ( Fig. 1 ). According to Krajcik (2006), K. namibicus is close to K. cupreus ( Fig. 2 ) but differs from it in (1) geographical distribution, (2) the “non-metallic colour of [the] dorsal side”, (3) the “non-lustrous elytral suture (in day light)”, (4) the darker colour than K. cupreus , (5) denticles of the front tibiae that are “not projected, rather obtuse” and (6) the shape of the parameres. Although the present authors have been unable to examine the holotype of K. namibicus , the photographs in Krajcik (2006) are sufficiently clear for comparisons with other specimens.

The synonymy of K. namibicus with K. cupreus ( Deschodt et al. 2011) was based on a reference collection containing individuals identified as K. cupreus from more than 15 localities across northern Namibia and more than 30 localities to the east ( Figs 1A, 1B ). Deschodt et al. (2011) observed that Gobabis and Otavi fell well within the known range of K. cupreus and that northern Namibian specimens were darker than the cupreous individuals found further east. With regards to type material of K. namibicus , they also explained that the “not projected” or “obtuse” condition of denticles on the front tibiae resulted from wear during soil excavation. Furthermore, the aedeagus of the holotype was comparable to a cupreous specimen from Kariba, Zimbabwe (16°31’ S, 28°46’ E) determined as K. cupreus by Richard zur Strassen, a specialist in the tribe Scarabaeini .

Subsequently, at the end of a paper dealing primarily with insects in famous artworks of ancient Egypt, Krajcik (2020) provided a seven line re-evaluation of K. namibicus and, again, elevated it to valid species or subspecies status. As regards this re-evaluation, an English translation from Czech follows in inverted commas (Google translation services, 27 May 2022): “In 2006, a description of a new species of the genus Kheper from Namibia was published, which was named Kheper namibicus ( Krajcik 2006, Animma.x, 14: 21). Deschodt et al. (2011) synonymized this species with cupreus . Apparently K. cupreus , as imagined by Deschodt and his colleagues, is in fact different from what was described by Laporte de Castelnau in 1840, and therefore K. namibicus should be recognized by a valid taxon (species or subspecies)”.

Notably, Deschodt et al. (2011) was published without our having examined type specimens of Kheper cupreus or photographs of types. This has now been rectified by an examination of photographs of a syntype habitus sent from the Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle in Paris. The specimen should be considered a syntype ( Fig. 2A ) as it is unclear if Laporte de Castelnau’s original description was based on a single or multiple individuals. However, staff of the museum have been unable to locate other specimens that might belong to a type series. As Kheper species show little, external, sexual dimorphism, dissection by museum staff has shown that the syntype is a female .

We have compared the habitus image of the female Caffraria syntype (cupreous with worn tibial and clypeal dentition) with that of the male K. namibicus holotype from Namibia (dark with a cupreous sheen and worn tibial/clypeal dentition) ( Krajcik 2006, 2020), that of the male K. cupreus specimen from Kariba in Zimbabwe (cupreous with unworn fore tibial/ clypeal dentition) ( Deschodt et al. 2011) and those of male specimens that we determined as K. cupreus comprising a dark specimen with unworn fore tibial/clypeal dentition from 20km south of Opuwo (S18.2027° E13.81305°) in Namibia as well as a cupreous specimen with unworn tibial/clypeal dentition from Orapa to the east in Botswana. All images show close similarities. Therefore , this comparison suggests that, contrary to Krajcik (2020), we have correctly understood the identity of K. cupreus as originally described in only twelve, half-column lines (78 words) by Laporte de Castelnau (1840). Furthermore , images of the aedeagi extracted from the Opuwo (dark), Orapa (cupreous), Kariba (cupreous) and K. namibicus holotype (dark with cupreous sheen) specimens ( Krajcik 2006; Deschodt et al. 2011, Fig. 3 ) are clearly identical. Therefore, after a consideration of (1) the close similarity between the habitus of the five compared specimens representing the two colour varieties ( K. cupreus syntype, K. namibicus holotype, Namibia, Botswana and Zimbabwe K. cupreus ), (2) the identical aedeagi from K. namibicus and three western and eastern specimens identified as K. cupreus and (3) the identical aedeagi from dark worn ( K. namibicus ) and dark unworn ( K. cupreus ) specimens from Namibia, we confirm the synonymy of Kheper namibicus Krajcik, 2006 , with Kheper cupreus ( Laporte de Castelnau, 1840) .

Figures

FIGURE 1. Maps of southern Africa showing the known distribution of Kheper cupreus (Laporte de Castelnau, 1840) with the type localities of Kheper namibicus Krajcik, 2006 (black squares), Kariba specimen (Deschodt et al. 2011) (black diamond) and the localities of the photographed Opuwo and Orapa specimens (black stars). Old but non-validated reports (Ferreira 1972) suggest a distribution extending northwards to southern Congo (DRC) (Lubumbashi), southern Tanzania (Kigonsera) and central Mozambique (Tete) (black triangles). However, the Congo and Tanzania records, especially, need to be validated since a close relative, Kheper rolciki Pokorný & Zidek, 2015, occurs nearby in Ruaha National Park, Tanzania. A, showing the altitude with darker blue indicating higher and darker green indicating lower altitudes; B, showing the average temperature with lighter blue indicating cooler and darker blue indicating higher average temperatures. Temperature and altitude data is from Fick & Hijmans (2017).

FIGURE 2. Habitus of Kheper cupreus (Laporte de Castelnau, 1840).A, worn syntype and label; B, unworn cupreous specimen of K.cupreus from Orapa, Botswana; C, unworn darker coloured specimen of K. cupreus from Opuwo, Namibia.Light conditions for the Orapa and Opuwo specimens were exactly the same. All specimens are pictured at the same scale.

FIGURE 3. Aedeagi of Kheper cupreus (Laporte de Castelnau, 1840) in dorsal and dorso-lateral view. A, aedeagus extracted from a cupreous specimen of K. cupreus from Orapa, Botswana; B, aedeagus extracted from a dark specimen of K. cupreus from Opuwo, Namibia.