Creophilus, LEACH, 1819

Clarke, Dave J., 2011, Testing the phylogenetic utility of morphological character systems, with a revision of Creophilus Leach (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae), Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society (Zool. J. Linn. Soc.) 163 (3), pp. 723-812 : 725

CREOPHILUS LEACH, 1819

The ‘ Creophilus complex’, as defined here, includes Creophilus (12 spp.), Liusus Sharp, 1889 (2 spp.), Hadrotes Mäklin, 1852 (2 spp.), and the monotypic genera Hadropinus Sharp, 1889 and Thinopinus LeConte, 1852 (henceforth, Hadrotes species are abbreviated to Ht. crassus and Ht. wakefieldi , and Hadropinus fossor Sharp, 1889 to Hp. fossor ). Eight of the 18 species in this group occur in south temperate or Gondwanan regions, with the rest distributed variously in northern hemisphere or tropical regions. Eleven of the 12 Creophilus species and Hadrotes wakefieldi Cameron, 1945 are fully terrestrial, the others exclusively intertidal. The systematic goals of the analysis were therefore to test the monophyly of (1) the Creophilus -complex, (2) the genera Creophilus , Hadrotes , and Liusus , (3) the informal erythrocephalus - and maxillosus -groups within Creophilus ( Newton, 1985) , and (4) the beach-dwelling species in Hadrotes , Hadropinus , Liusus , and Thinopinus .

The type species of Creophilus Leach 1819 , C. maxillosus ( Linnaeus, 1758) , was described more than 250 years ago in the Systema naturae, and has since been widely studied taxonomically, morphologically, and ecologically (see bibliography in Herman, 2001b). The 12 species now included in Creophilus are some of the largest (up to c. 30 mm) and more attractively coloured rove beetles commonly encountered ( Fig. 1). Adults and larvae of nearly all species are primarily predators of maggots and are found almost exclusively at carrion. The biology and ecology of these beetles has attracted attention from forensic entomologists concerned with estimating minimum postmortem intervals using succession of necrophilous fauna ( Levot, 2003; Archer, 2004; Nowak, 2004), and historically has promoted interest in using these beetles for biocontrol purposes ( Fullaway, 1923; Swezey, 1923). Most historical or contemporary treatments and identification keys omit more than half the species or are based only on C. maxillosus (e.g. Moore & Legner, 1979; Naomi, 1982; Smetana & Davies, 2000), and none has included all austral species. There are still several long-standing taxonomic problems, and given the size and prominence of these beetles, the genus is a compelling example of a staphylinid group in need of a modern synthesis. It is also a sobering illustration of the amount of basic taxonomic work still needed in Staphylinidae . Improved taxonomic and biological knowledge of these species is therefore broadly useful, especially as several species occur sympatrically, look very similar, and are of interest in applied entomology. In a revision of Creophilus , the second part of this study reinforces the taxonomic value of male genitalia through detailed study of the internal sac, and also demonstrates the comparable taxonomic value of female genitalia and chaetotaxy in Creophilus .