Proeme Martins, 1978

Santos-Silva, Antonio, Nascimento, Francisco Eriberto de L. & Botero, Juan Pablo, 2023, Taxonomy of Oemini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Cerambycinae), with key to American genera, notes and new taxa, Journal of Natural History 57 (41 - 44), pp. 1917-1948 : 1937

Proeme Martins, 1978

( Figures 66–70 )

According to Martins (1978b) in the description of Proeme , the appearance of the insertion of the prosternal process and the shape of the mesoventral process is identical to those in the species of group I of Temnopis (inserted below the level of the prosternum). Still according to him, in Proeme , the lower eye lobes are as long as the genae and do not reach the inferior area of the head, the prothorax does not have a lateral spicule, the elytra are coarsely rugose-punctate or are finely pubescent, and the basal antennomeres, especially in females, are densely setose. However, the size of lower and upper eye lobes, size of ommatidia, and length of the area of connection of lobes ( Figures 66–70 ) are very variable in the species currently included in Proeme . In fact, the eyes may or may not be divided, partially divided or imperfectly divided. Furthermore, there are species in Temnopis with or without spicule on sides of the prothorax (′sides usually with spicule laterally̍ – Martins 1978b, p. 127), the elytral sculpturing and pubescence appear to be somewhat variable in both genera, and the basal antennomeres are not as described in females of most species of Proeme . These issues make it difficult to separate species of Proeme from those of Temnopis (group I). Therefore, the inclusion of Proeme (at least some species) in Oemina or Methioidina would be questionable. Furthermore, Proeme includes species with elytra parallel-sided (eg P. bucki , Figures 43–48 ) or distinctly expanded towards the posterior area (eg Proeme latipennis (Lane, 1973)) . Therefore, Proeme is composed of more than one genus. A full revision of Proeme , Temnopis , and some other genera will be necessary to be sure about the correct allocation of their species, and the actual features that truly set them apart. Some species, for example P. bucki ( Figures 43– 48 ) and P. seabrai ( Figure 70 ), appear to fit much better in Oemina than in Methioidina (both sensu Martins 1997). There are a few species in which the ommatidia are really fine, as in Methioides cicatricosa Chemsak and Linsley, 1967 ( Figure 71 ), type species of the type genus of Methioidina .

Figures

Figures 66–71. Eyes, lateral view. (66) Proeme cyanescens (Aurivillius, 1910), female from Brazil (Espírito Santo; Santa Tereza). (67) Proeme lyciformis Martins, 1978, holotype male from Brazil (Mato Grosso). (68) Proeme plagiata (Buquet, 1860), male from Brazil (Santa Catarina; Nova Teutônia). (69) Proeme rufoscapus (Aurivillius, 1910), male from Brazil (Minas Gerais; Mar de Espanha). (70) Proeme seabrai Martins, 1978, paratype male from Brazil (Mato Grosso, Sinop). (71) Methioides cicatricosa Chemsak and Linsley, 1967, male from Brazil (Espírito Santo, Colatina).

Figures 42–48. (42) Neoeme quinquelineata Zajciw, 1958, female from Brazil (Espírito Santo, Santa Teresa), prosternal and mesoventral processes. (43–48) Proeme bucki (Melzer, 1931), female from Espírito Santo: (43) dorsal habitus; (44) ventral habitus; (45) lateral habitus; (46) prosternal and mesoventral processes; (47) head, frontal view; (48) head, lateral view.