Xenogenus picturatum Berg, 1883
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.1080/00222933.2015.1073810 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4336930 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/72684C4B-A12F-FFB2-FE11-F9BCFB1CFEE4 |
treatment provided by |
Carolina |
scientific name |
Xenogenus picturatum Berg, 1883 |
status |
|
Xenogenus picturatum Berg, 1883 View in CoL
lsid:Coreoidea.speciesfile.org:TaxonName:452516
Xenogenus picturatum Berg 1883: 253 – 254 View in CoL (Buenos Aires); Pennington 1920: 16 ( Argentina: Litoral, Centro y Andina); Pennington 1922: 166 (Buenos Aires; La Rioja); Göllner-Scheiding 1980: 120 (Buenos Aires); Henry 1988: 653 ( Mexico to Argentina); Coscarón 1998: 4 (Buenos Aires); Carpintero and De Biase 2011: 42 (Buenos Aires: Isla Martín García); Dellapé and Carpintero 2012: 133 (Buenos Aires: Tandil); Pall and Coscarón 2012: 1455 (Buenos Aires: La Plata, Felipe Solá, J.C. Paz; Catamarca: Miraflores, Belén; Córdoba: La Huerta, La Cabaña; Corrientes; Entre Ríos; La Pampa; La Rioja: Nonogasta; Misiones; Mendoza; Neuquén: Lago Currhué; San Luis; San Juan: Villa Aberastein [sic]; Salta: Güemes, Coronel Moles; Santiago del Estero: Quimilí; Tucumán: Trancas, La Cocha); Diez and Coscarón 2015: 574 View Cited Treatment (Chubut: Esquel; Neuquén: near San Martin de los Andes).
Xenogenus picturatus [sic]: Lethierry and Severin 1894: 115 (Buenos Aires).
Xenogenus extensum Distant View in CoL (syn. by Göllner-Scheiding 1980): Brailovsky and Soria 1981: 153 – 154 ( Argentina); Pall and Coscarón 2012: 1455 ( Argentina).
Material examined
URUGUAY: Lectotype ♂, Banda Oriental ( MLP); ARGENTINA: paralectotype ♂, Buenos Aires, Jose Prini, 1883 ( MLP); Buenos Aires: 1♂, J.C. Paz, XII-1938, ( MLP); 1♂ 2♀, José C. Paz, 1940, J.A. Rosas Costa col. ( MLP); 1♂ 1♀, José C. Paz, XI-XII-1948, A.R. Bezzi col. ( MLP); Chaco: 1♂, Lag. La Azula, 26°44 ʹ 5,5 ʹʹ S, 59°26 ʹ 14,7 ʹʹ W, 26-IX-2009, P. Dellapé col. ( MLP); 1♂ 1♀, Pte. Perón (Chaco), Resistencia, 29-III-1953, J. Foerster col., J.C. Lutz coll. ( USNM); Catamarca: 1♂, Belén, 9-III-62, Torres- Ferreyra col. ( MLP); Jujuy: 3♂ 1♀, Pampa Blanca, 13-III-1939, Birabén- Scott cols. ( MLP); La Rioja: 1♀, VI-1929, Gomez col., H.M. Harris coll. ( USNM); Misiones: 3♂ 1♀, Parque Provincial Moconá, 27°9.185 ’ S, 53°54.08 ’ W, 31-III-2012, S. Montemayor col. ( MLP); Neuquén: 4♂ 2♀, RN 40, 20 NW Esquel, −42.802607600 – 71.121041000, 866 m, 24-I-2014, Dellapé, P.M. col. ( MLP); San Juan: 1♂, Dto. Pocito, Villa Aberastain, 22-I-64, Dr. Torres- Ferreyra col. ( MLP); 1♀, same data, 23-I-64; Salta: 1♂ 3♀, Güemes, 2 – 9-45, A. Martínez col.( MLP); 1♂, Cafayate, Quebrada R. Colorado, IV-97, P.P. Goodwyn col. ( MLP); Santiago del Estero: 1♀, XI-1928, Gómez col., H.M. Harris coll. ( USNM); 1♂, Quimili, 9-XII-1939, Birabén-Bezzi col. ( MLP). BRAZIL: 1♂ 1♀, Parana, Foz do Iguaçu , 19-VII-1961, Krauss col. ( USNM). GoogleMaps
Argentinean distribution
Buenos Aires, Catamarca, Chaco *, Jujuy *, La Rioja, Misiones, Neuquén, Salta, San Juan and Santiago del Estero.
Central and South American distribution
Argentina and Uruguay ( Berg 1883); North America, Middle America and South America ( Göllner-Scheiding 1983); Argentina, Bolivia, Cuba, Mexico, Puerto Rico and USA ( Brailovsky and Soria 1981); Brazil * NEW COUNTRY RECORD.
Comments
Pall and Coscarón (2012) mentioned this species from Corrientes, Entre Ríos, La Pampa, Mendoza and San Luis provinces; but there is no bibliographical record or list of material from these areas. In ‘ material studied ’ they reported two localities from each of Tucumán and Córdoba provinces, but we did not find specimens in the collection they studied ( MLP) or in any of the other collections examined, so these records could be based on misidentification . It is difficult to track the material they studied because they provide no information other than mentioning localities . Regarding the records from Neuquén, we did not find specimens from the locality they mention, but we did find six specimens from a more southern locality . They also mentioned Jujuy as a first record although they did not give a record of any material from that province .
Remarks
Pall and Coscarón (2012) include Xenogenus extensum Distant in their catalogue, overlooking that it was synonymised by Göllner-Scheiding (1980) under Xenogenus picturatum Berg.
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |
Xenogenus picturatum Berg, 1883
Melo, M. C. & Montemayor, S. I. 2015 |
Xenogenus extensum
Pall JL & Coscaron MC 2012: 1455 |
Brailovsky H & Soria F 1981: 153 |
Xenogenus picturatus
Lethierry L & Severin G 1894: 115 |
Xenogenus picturatum
Diez F & Coscaron MC 2015: 574 |
Dellape PM & Carpintero DL 2012: 133 |
Pall JL & Coscaron MC 2012: 1455 |
Carpintero DL & De Biase S 2011: 42 |
Coscaron MC 1998: 4 |
Henry TJ 1988: 653 |
Gollner-Scheiding U 1980: 120 |
Pennington MS 1922: 166 |
Pennington MS 1920: 16 |
Berg C 1883: 254 |