Smaragdina graeca ( Kraatz, 1872 )

Bezdċk, Jan & Regalin, Renato, 2015, Identity of species-group taxa of the Western Palaearctic Clytrini (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) described by Maurice Pic and Louis Kocher, Acta Entomologica Musei Nationalis Pragae (suppl.) 55, pp. 1-114 : 39

Smaragdina graeca ( Kraatz, 1872)

Gynandrophthalma graeca Kraatz, 1872: 217 (original description).

Gynandrophthalma graeca Lefèvre, 1872: 346 (original description, primary homonym).

Gynandrophthalma brucki Pic, 1897a: 85 (new substitute name for Gynandrophthalma graeca Lefèvre, 1872 ).

Type localities. Gynandrophthalma graeca Kraatz : ‘Griechenland’. Gynandrophthalma graeca Lefèvre : ‘ Grèce: au mont Parnès’ [= Greece, Parnitha Mt.].

Type material examined. Gynandrophthalma graeca Kraatz : Not exmained.

Gynandrophthalma graeca Lefèvre : SYNTYPE: 1 ♀, ‘ Grèce / Mt. Parnès [w, h] // Type [p] ♀ [w, h] // Ex-Musaeo / LEFÈVRE / 1894 [w, p] // Muséum Paris / Coll. Oberthur / ex. Lefèvre [w, h] // TYPE [r, p] // SINTYPUS / R. Regalin / vid. 2006 [r, h]’ ( MNHN – coll. Lefèvre).

Additional material examined. Gynandrophthalma brucki : 1♀, ‘Apfelbeck / Jannina / Dr.Christos [w, p] // Muséum Paris / Coll. M. Pic [w, p] // TYPE [r, p] // Brucki Pic [w, h]’ and 2 ♀♀ (on the same pin), ‘Muséum Paris / Coll. M. Pic [w, p] // TYPE [r, p] // Brucki Pic / graeca Lef. [w, h]’.

Distribution. Bulgaria, Greece, Macedonia, Serbia ( REGALIN & MEDVEDEV 2010b), Turkey ( ÖZDIKMEN 2011).

Comments. Smaragdina graeca has distinct sexual dimorphism: males have pronotum red with wide median black stripe while females have pronotum uniformly red. By coincidence, it was described twice in one year under the same name. Priority is given to Gynandrophthalma graeca Kraatz, 1872 (published in November 1872 as written on the content pages of the respective volume) over Gynandrophthalma graeca Lefèvre, 1872 (published on 31 st December 1872, based on LEFÈVRE (1885)). KRAATZ (1872) described the taxon based on a male. Although he had also a female at disposal he associated it with male with some doubts. On the contrary, LEFÈVRE (1872) described the taxon from females only. The above mentioned sexual dimorphism probably led PIC (1897a) to treat both taxa as separate species and to propose a new substitute name Gynandrophthalma brucki for Lefèvre ̓ s species.

Pic ̓ s collection in MNHN contains also three females labelled as type specimens of Gynandrophthalma brucki (see additional material examined). We treat these specimens as invalid types, because Gynandrophthalma brucki was without any doubts proposed as a new substitute name for Lefèvre ̓ s G. graeca and thus both names are objective synonyms and have the same name bearing type, in agreement with Article 72.7 ( ICZN 1999).