Pentanodes Schaeffer, 1904

Heffern, Daniel, Botero, Juan Pablo & Santos-Silva, Antonio, 2020, A new species of Neocompsa (Neoibidionini), and a new species and new combinations in Tillomorphini (Cerambycidae, Cerambycinae), Zootaxa 4748 (2), pp. 334-350 : 342

Pentanodes Schaeffer, 1904

Pentanodes Schaeffer, 1904: 222 ; Bradley, 1930: 240; Linsley, 1935: 87; Arnett, 1962: 869, 888; Linsley, 1964: 186; Martins, 1975: 15; Zayas, 1975: 140; Monné, 2005: 553 (cat.); Monné, 2012: 53; 2019: 826 (cat.).

Redescription. Small size, cylindrical, somewhat ant-shaped. Body, antennae and legs with long, erect, moderately sparse light setae (always denser on posterior area of elytra). Head not retractile; frons distinctly transverse; last maxillary and labial palpomeres securiform (sometimes strongly widened toward apex, sometimes slightly widened). Antennal tubercles slightly elevated, widely separated. Eyes coarsely faceted; upper eye lobes absent. Genae slightly shorter than length of lower eye lobe. Antennae 11- segmented; antennomeres III–VI or III–VII incrassate in male, filiform in female; remaining antennomeres filiform in both sexes; antennomere III longer than IV and/or V in both sexes; antennomeres unarmed at apex. Prothorax, in lateral view, distinctly arched; sides unarmed. Pronotum longitudinally striate, with sparse punctures interspersed. Prosternal process distinctly narrowed centrally. Procoxal cavities closed behind. Mesoventral process with tab on each side of apex. Elytra, in lateral view, depressed toward ivory macula placed before middle; apex rounded, unarmed; basal area with distinct gibbosity dorsally. Femora pedunculate-clavate (club narrowed toward apex); metatarsomere I, at most, as long as II and III together.

Remarks. Schaeffer (1904) briefly defined Pentanodes as follows: “Differs from Tetranodes [sic] Linell by having the eyes ovate, slightly truncate inside and in the male joints three to seven of the antennae incrassate and clavate. The antennae of the females have these joints simple.” He also provided a key separating these two genera: “Eyes emarginate, pointed behind; joints 3–6 of male antennae inflated, of female slender… Tetranodes [sic]; Eyes entire, oval. Male antennal joints 3–7 inflated, slender in female… Pentanodes .”

Bradley (1930) provided another key separating Tetranodus Linell, 1897 from Pentanodes : “Eyes emarginate, pointed behind; seventh antennal segments of the male not inflated… Tetranodes [sic]; Eyes entire, oval; seventh segment of the antennae of the male inflated… Pentanodes .”

Linsley (1935) gave a third key separating these two genera: “Antennae of male with segments three to six inflated… Tetranodus ; Antennae of male with segments three to seven inflated… Pentanodes .” Finally, Linsley (1964) provided a fourth key separating them: “Eyes emarginate, pointed behind; antennal segments 3 to 6 enlarged in male… Tetranodus ; Eyes entire, oval; antennal segments 3 to 7 enlarged in male… Pentanodes .”

We believe that the number of incrassate antennomeres in male is not a generic feature. This is because it is usually variable in other groups of Cerambycinae in which the feature occurs. However, we believe that eyes without upper eye lobes in Pentanodes will distinguish it from Tetranodus .

Pentanodes albofasciatus Fisher, 1932 is not a true Pentanodes and, apparently, belongs to Anaglyptini. As this species is still under study trying to establish its tribal allocation, we choose to keep it temporarily in Pentanodes . The characteristics mentioned by diverse authors to separate Tillomorphini from Anaglyptini (and also Neocorini) appear not to be useful (see, for example, Lingafelter 2011). Thus, future studies to separate these tribes should be done.