Uroplectes Peters, 1861

Kovařík, František, Lowe, Graeme, Hoferek, David, Plíšková, Jana & Šťáhlavský, František, 2016, Scorpions of Ethiopia. Part IV. Genus Uroplectes Peters, 1861 (Scorpiones: Buthidae), Euscorpius 217, pp. 1-14 : 1-2

Genus Uroplectes Peters, 1861

( Figs. 1–46, Table 1)

Uroplectes Peters, 1861: 512 ; Fet & Lowe, 2000: 266 (complete reference list until 1998); Kovařík, 2009: 31.

= Lepreus Thorell, 1876: 7 (type species Lepreus pilosus Thorell, 1876: 7 ) (syn. by Kraepelin, 1908: 256).

= Tityolepreus Kraepelin, 1891: 232 (type species Tityus chinchoxensis Karsch, 1879b: 370 ) (syn. by Kraepelin, 1895: 79, 87).

= Scorpiobuthus Werner, 1939: 361 (type species Scorpiobuthus apatris Werner, 1939: 361 ) (syn. by Fet & Sissom, 1997: 408).

= Uroplectoides Lourenço, 1998: 313 (type species Uroplectoides abyssinicus Lourenço, 1998: 313 ) Syn. n.

TYPE SPECIES. Uroplectes ornatus Peters, 1861 (= Uroplectes flavoviridis Peters, 1861 )

DIAGNOSIS. Medium sized buthids, adults 30–60 mm in length. Sternum type 1, subtriangular in shape. Pedipalps orthobothriotaxic, α- configuration, femur trichobothrium d 2 dorsal, patella trichobothrium d 3 external to DMc carina. Pectines with fulcra. Median denticle ( MD) row of pedipalp chelal finger arranged in oblique groups. Chelicerae with typical buthid dentition, fixed finger smooth, lacking denticles on ventral surface. Tergites I – VI with one or three carinae. Carapace without distinct carinae. Metasoma elongate. Telson with or without subaculear tooth. Legs III and IV with well developed tibial spur .

COMMENTS. We examined the female holotype of the type species Uroplectoides abyssinicus Lourenço, 1998 from ZMUH, which is the only known specimen of this species. We found that the female holotype is definitely different from the specimen illustrated as the female holotype in the original description ( Figs. 1a–1b, and fig. 1 in Lourenço, 1998: 310). Several years ago, the first author (FK) discussed this problem with H. Dastych, curator at ZMUH, who excluded the possibility of the specimen being mislabeled. The identity of the specimen which we studied and photographed ( Fig. 1a) was thus confirmed to be the holotype of Uroplectoides abyssinicus . We suggest that the published figure of the holotype female ( Fig. 1b) is an error and actually represents the male of another species, maybe from the Uroplectes vittatus "complex". Morphometrics of the body and metasomal segments in that figure differ from those of the holotype. Also, the metasoma of the holotype is bent backward, not forward as illustrated in the figure. The narrower body of the illustrated scorpion suggests that it is a male, not a female. Another striking difference is that the holotype shows no trace of the median dark stripe on the carapace and paired dark stripes on the tergites drawn in the figure. Study of the holotype of Uroplectoides abyssinicus , lectotype and paralectotype of Uroplectes fischeri , and our additional new specimens from Ethiopia reveals that all of these specimens represent the same species, i.e. Uroplectes fischeri (= Uroplectoides abyssinicus syn. n.). Here we also synon- ymize the genera Uroplectes Peters, 1861 and Uroplectoides Lourenço, 1998 . The genus Uroplectoides , nominally containing two species ( U. abysinnicus and U. emiliae ) was based on the simple conjunction of 3 character states (concave anterior margin of carapace, metasoma with carinae weak and surface smooth with punctuations, telson with strong subaculear tooth) that are actually expressed to varying degrees in other species of Uroplectes . This synthetic approach can lead to polyphyletic or paraphyletic groupings. Although we suspect that Uroplectes may indeed contain more than one monophyletic lineage that could comprise additional genera, their composition is still unclear and it will be necessary to study more species and perform detailed comparative analyses of characters to define these clades. From a nomenclatural perspective, Lourenço (1998) also ignored three generic names already synonymized under Uroplectes . The type species for two of those genera, Tityolepreus Kraepelin, 1891 (type species Tityus chinchoxensis Karsch, 1879 = Uroplectes occidentalis Simon, 1876 ) and Scorpiobuthus Werner, 1939 (type species Scorpiobuthus apatris Werner, 1939 = Uroplectes chubbi Hirst, 1911 ) appear to belong to the same species group as the type species of Uroplectoides and they share characters cited in the diagnosis of Uroplectoides . Hence, these names have precedence over Uroplectoides .