Ochthephilus hammondi, Makranczy, 2014

Makranczy, György, 2014, Revision of the genus Ochthephilus Mulsant & Rey, 1856 (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae, Oxytelinae), Revue suisse de Zoologie 121 (4), pp. 457-694 : 594-596

Ochthephilus hammondi sp. nov. Figs 19, 403-405, 408-410, 423-424, 549

TYPE MATERIAL: HOLOTYPE (3): “ USA: ARIZONA: Chuska Mts., Wagonwheel Campground , 2250m [*+36.05/-109.18*], 11-12.VII.1976., leg. P. M. Hammond, stream banks” ( BMNH) . – PARATYPES (12): same data as holotype ( BMNH, 1). – “ Chuska Mts., Apache Co., Wagonwheel Campground , 12.VII.1976, leg. J.M. Campbell ” ( CNCI, 1) . – “ UTAH: Manti- LaSal National Forest, Warner Campground , 9200' [*+39.64/-111.34*], 8-9.VII.1976, leg. P. M. Hammond ” ( BMNH, 1) , “ COLORADO: Delta Co., Hwy 65, 11km NW jnct. For. Rd. 100, Grand Mesa N.F., 9400ft [*+39.10/-108.15*], 9.VII.1981, leg. J.M. Campbell ” ( CNCI, 1). – “ Ouray Co. , Box Canyon Falls , Ouray , 7800ft [*+38.02/-107.68*], VII.1976, leg. L. & N. Herman (1355), from moss on rocks and log near and in water” ( AMNH, 3, CASC, 1♀, NHMW, 1♀) . – “ NEW MEXICO: Sandia Mts, Cibola N.F., Las Huertas Crk. , 7000' [*+35.23/-106.41*], 8.VII.1969, leg. A. Smetana, cascading creek, among rotting wet wood, twigs and other debris on fine gravel benches sprinkled by cascade water” ( CNCI, 1, MHNG, 13, HNHM, 1♀) .

DESCRIPTION: Forebody as in Fig. 549. Measurements (n=10): HW = 0.66 (0.60-0.69); TW = 0.62 (0.57-0.62); PW = 0.76 (0.69-0.80); SW = 0.93 (0.83-0.98); AW = 1.10 (0.98-1.21); HL = 0.51 (0.46-0.54); EL = 0.195 (0.17-0.21); TL = 0.13 (0.12-0.15); PL = 0.63 (0.60-0.66); SL = 1.10 (0.98-1.18); SC = 1.00 (0.88-1.08); FB = 2.33 (2.07-2.46); BL = 4.11 (3.72-4.49) mm. Head blackish dark brown, pronotum and abdomen dark brown with reddish tint. Elytra reddish medium to dark brown, scutellar area to shoulders darker (blackish). Legs reddish medium to dark brown, midtibiae and femora often dark brown. Mouthparts and antennae reddish medium to dark brown, occasionally middle of antennae darker, slightly blackish (base and apex remaining lighter). Body with greasy lustre due to less deep punctation but dense microsculpture covering head and pronotum and microsculpture-blurred punctation on elytra. Pubescence on elytra short but strong and rather dense (regularly spaced), in contrast with much less conspicuous setation of head and pronotum: with rather fine and moderately dense setae. Abdominal tergites with setae just as thick as elytral ones but much longer, especially at apices of tergites and adjacent to laterosternites. Head anteriad eyes and near inner posterior margin of eye with stronger and much longer bristles, as well as pronotal margin; at middle of tibiae with darker bristles. Elytral apex without conspicuously longer seta near sutural corners. Last tarsomere with a few setae only.

FIGS 379-388

(379) Ochthephilusqingyianus sp. n.; metatibiaandmetatarsus. (380-385) Antennae; O. nepalensis (Scheerpeltz) (380), O. szeli sp. n. (381), O. enigmaticus sp. n. (382), O. kirschenblatti sp. n. (383), O. qingyianus sp. n. (384), O. schuelkei sp. n. (385). (386) O. nepalensis (Scheerpeltz) ; tergiteVII. (387) O. qingyianus sp. n.; tergiteVII. (388) O. ketmenicus (Kashcheev) ; head and pronotum. All SEM, dorsal views. Scale bar = 0.32 mm for 379, 0.35 mm for 386, 0.40 mm for 382, 384, 387, 0.45 mm for 380-381, 383, 385, 0.5 mm for 388.

Forebody. Antenna as in Fig. 424. Clypeus (Fig. 423) almost impunctate (colliculate microsculptured), trapezoid, corners rounded, anterior edge gently arched; separated by impressed transversal line (frontoclypeal suture) across a shinier area. Supraantennal prominences well developed, feebly separated from clypeus/vertex by impressions. Vertex with oblique impressions in middle almost joining in V-shape. Temples (Fig. 408) slightly bulging, evenly curved, little longer than half of eye length. Neck separated by a shallowly impressed transversal groove, microsculpture much stronger than on head, with transverse cells, no setation. Pronotum with a narrow marginal bead, visible to anterior pronotal corners. Posterior pronotal angles wellformed, just slightly obtuse-angled, sides in posterior 1/4 insignificantly concave. 'Anchor' fully formed, longitudinal midline as a slightly elevated, impunctate, weakly microsculptured line, parallel to this line two gentle, semi-longitudinal elongate elevations in anterior half of disc. In corners of anchor feeble, oblique impressions directed outwards, in middle at sides of midline two smaller impressions. Elytra (Fig. 409) slightly broadening posteriorly, sutural corners narrowly rounded; apical sides slightly oblique and in inner halves more or less straight. Elytral surface rather even with two shallow, very elongate impressions behind scutellum. Head with fine coriaceous/colliculate microsculpture, fading on elevated parts, stronger in impressions, on pronotum microsculpture slightly stronger and more even. Punctation on head moderately sparse, but more dense on posterior part and sides, on pronotum more evenly spaced, average interspaces much larger than puncture diameters; elytral punctation more even and regularly spaced, average interspaces (with indistinct coriaceous microsculpture) about as puncture diameters, punctures discrete.

Abdomen. Compared to forebody, abdomen with much more sparse, finer, less distinct punctation, microsculpture on tergal apices fine coriaceous with moderately transverse cells. Tergite VII posterior margin with palisade fringe broadened in middle with more coarse spiniform processes. Tergite VIII basal edge evenly arched, with small concavity in middle of basal sclerotized band; apical edge (Fig. 410) with sinuate (protruding) corners, and broad, moderately deep emargination in between. Sternite VIII with rounded apical corners, apex in males shallowly concave laterally, gently sinuate in middle; in females slightly more sinuate (convex) in middle. Tergite X unmodified, apex very slightly wider in males than in females. Aedeagus as in Fig. 403. Female ringstructures as in Figs 404-405.

ETYMOLOGY: Named after Peter M. Hammond, collector of the holotype specimen. Peter was a leading figure of Staphylinidae taxonomy, taking on hugely difficult and diverse groups; eventually publishing very little of the vast amount of knowledge he accumulated through decades of his active period.

COMPARATIVE NOTES: Within its distribution range the largest species with rather large temples (and comparatively smaller eyes); in this area only O. forticornis is known to co-occur.

DISTRIBUTION: Currently only known from the USA, the four states that are called “Four Corners” states: Arizona, Utah, Colorado, New Mexico .

BIONOMICS: Specimens were collected on stream banks, from moss on rocks and log near and in water-cascading creek, among rotting wet wood, twigs and other debris on fine gravel benches sprinkled by cascade water.