Harpalus impressus Roth, 1851

Kataev, Boris M., 2021, On some Afrotropical Harpalus, with description of two new species, and remarks on Hypharpax australis (Coleoptera: Carabidae): misidentification, mislabeling and introduction to the Australian region, Zootaxa 5020 (1), pp. 31-56 : 33-36

Harpalus impressus Roth, 1851

( Figs 1–9 )

Harpalus impressus Roth, 1851: 117 .

Harpalus sundaicus Schauberger, 1933: 134 , syn. n.

Type material examined. Lectotype (present designation) of H. impressus : ♂, with round piece of blue paper, and labeled “ Abyssinia ”, and “ Allotypus Harpalus impressus Roth. Staatssamml. München ” ( ZSM) . Paralectotypes: 1 ♀, with round piece of blue paper, and “ Abyssinia H. impressus Roth. Typi :”, “ Holotypus Harpalus impressus Roth. Staatssamml. München ” ( ZSM) ; 3 ♀♀, with round piece of blue paper, and “ Abyssinia ”, “ Paratypus Harpalus im- pressus Roth. Staatssamml. München” ( ZSM) .

Holotype of H. sundaicus : ♂, “Pradjekan, Java ”, “Type”, “ sundaicus Schaub. det. Dr. E. Schaub. ”, “ Harpalus sundaicus Schaub. ” ( OÖLL).

Additional material examined. Ethiopia: 1 ♀, “Abyssinia” ( ZIN) ; 2 ♂♂, 1 ♀, “ Harpalus impressus Roth (ex Syria & Abyssinia) Gemminger 43.” ( ZIN) .

Re-description (3 ♂♂ and 2 ♀♀ measured). Body length 5.3–6.7 mm. Habitus as in Fig. 1 . Dorsum shiny, bright green or copper, in many specimens head and pronotum green and elytra copper; ventral side black; one or two basal palpomeres and antennomeres, also legs brownish yellow, femora not darker than tibiae; apical palpomeres and antennomeres 2–11 or 3–11 distinctly infuscate, blackish brown.

Head moderately sized (HWmax/PWmax 0.64–0.67, HWmin/PWmax 0.51–0.53), impunctate, with large and convex eyes (HWmax/HWmin 1.21–1.30). Tempora oblique, short, flat or slightly convex. Frontal foveae small, punctiform. Supraorbital seta situated near supraorbital furrow at level of posterior margin of eye or slightly before it. Genae narrow, about as wide as antennomere 2. Labrum almost straight or slightly concave anteriorly. Mentum separated from submentum by complete suture, with prominent median tooth. Submentum with one long and one shorter lateral setae on each side. Epilobes narrow. Ligular sclerite narrow, not widened apically, with straight apical margin and with two ventroapical setae. Paraglossae wide, rounded apically, projecting slightly ahead beyond ligular sclerite, each with one marginal seta (occasionally only in one paraglossa). Basal labial palpomere not carinate ventrally; ultimate labial palpomere slightly longer and wider than penultimate one. Dorsal microsculpture fine, consisting of more or less isodiametric meshes.

Pronotum comparatively wide (PWmax/PL 1.41–1.50), almost equally narrowed apically and basally, widest in anterior third or slightly before the middle (PWmax/PWmin 1.14–1.20). Sides in apical half evenly rounded, in basal half more widely rounded or almost straight. One pair of lateral setae in widest point of pronotum. Apical margin shallowly emarginate, almost straight in middle portion, bordered only laterally. Apical angles rounded, slightly prominent. Basal angles obtuse, blunted or narrowly rounded at apices. Basal margin completely bordered, glabrous, more or less straight in middle portion, oblique laterally, slightly longer than apical margin and slightly shorter than elytral base. Surface moderately convex, without lateral depressions; basal foveae small, deepened, oval or elongate, finely punctate and occasionally also very finely wrinkled; several very fine punctures also present at basal angles. Microsculpture distinct, consisting of mixture of slightly transverse and more or less isodiametric meshes.

Elytra elongate, comparatively long (in male, EL/EW 1.44–1.52, EL/PL 2.67–2.73, EW/PWmax 1.22–1.32; in female, these indices 1.50–1.54, 2.69–2.77, and 1.20, respectively), widest about the middle; sides almost rectilinearly diverging in basal half and rounded in apical half; preapical sinuation very shallow. Shoulders slightly prominent, angularly rounded, each with very small acute denticle recognizable from behind. Basal border glabrous, forming an obtuse angle with lateral elytral margin. Sutural angle not projecting posteriorly, almost right, blunted or very narrowly rounded at tip. Striae fine, impunctate, slightly deepened apically. Parascutellar setigerous pore present. Parascutellar (abbreviate) striole short, connected basally with parascutellar pore, free at apex, occasionally highly reduced. Intervals impunctate and glabrous, very slightly convex or almost flat on disc and markedly convex at apex. Interval 3 with one discal setigerous pore at stria 2 in apical fifth; intervals 5 and 7 without discal pores. Marginal umbilicate series with moderately wide gap at middle (this gap only slightly shorter than length of anterior and posterior groups of pores). Microsculpture very distinct, consisting of isodiametric meshes.

Hind wings fully developed.

Prosternum with very fine and short setae along anterior margin. Metepisternum noticeably longer than wide, strongly narrowed posteriorly, its posterior portion very narrow.

Metacoxa only with two obligatory setigerous pores, without additional posteromedial pore (as in Fig. 13 ). Metafemur ventrally with three (occasionally four) setigerous pores along posterior margin and without pores along anterior margin. Protibia moderately widened apically, with three preapical spines on outer margin (isolated from spines on ventral side) and with one ventroapical spine (without distinct ventroapical tubercle). Tarsi glabrous dorsally; metatarsus slender, with tarsomere 1 shorter than tarsomeres 2 and 3 combined. In male, pro- and mesotarsomeres 1–4 dilated and with biseriate adhesive vestiture ventrally.

Abdominal sternites without additional long setae, only medial portions of sternites III and IV finely pubescent. Last visible abdominal sternite ( VII) without pronounced sexual dimorphism, in both sexes rounded at apex, with two pairs of marginal setae.

Female genitalia ( Figs 2, 3 ): gonocoxite moderately wide, with long setae on dorsal edge and in scrobe of outer side.

Median lobe of aedeagus ( Figs 4–9 ) S-formed, strongly, almost angularly bent ventrally just after the middle, with apical portion markedly curved dorsally and very strongly curved to the right; its apex protruding ventrally; terminal lamella in dorsal view comparatively long and narrow, almost parallel-sided, rounded apically. Apical orifice shifted to the left. Internal sac with two short spines (similar to each other in size) in middle third of median lobe and occasionally ( Figs 6–9 ) with a small spiny patch between the two spines.

Comparison. Among the East African Harpalus , this species is easily recognizable by the following combination of the distinctive characters: small body size (length less than 7.0 mm); bright green or copper coloration of body; legs brownish yellow, with femora not darker than tibiae; pronotum without coarse punctation along base and with glabrous basal edge; elytral microsculpture consisting of isodiametric meshes; metacoxa without posteromedial setigerous pore; and median lobe of aedeagus as described above. The special features distinguishing H. impressus from H. asemus Basilewsky, 1947 and from two new species described below are given in the corresponding sections under these species. Harpalus inconcinnus Chaudoir, 1876 , occurring together with H. impressus , is larger (body length about 7.5–8.5 mm) and has pronotal basal edge ciliate.

Distribution. Harpalus impressus was originally described from “ Tigré in N. Abissinien” (= Tigray, northern Ethiopia) and later recorded from many additional localities in Ethiopia and also from Eritrea, Somali, Djibouti, South Sudan, Saudi Arabia and Yemen ( Chaudoir 1876, Britton 1948, Basilewsky 1951, 1953, 1968, 1978, 1979, Clarke 1973, Mateu 1990, Abdel-Dayen et al. 2018, Kataev et al. 2020). Although Basilewsky (1960) noted that the examination of the type specimens of H. impressus confirmed his former interpretation of this species ( Basilewsky 1951), its distribution should be revised since the study of the available material and comparison with the type series of H. impressus revealed that most of the published records are actually based on misidentifications with H. asemus Basilewsky, 1947 (see below). The record of H. impressus from Somali ( Kataev et al. 2020) is based on one female belonging to a undetermined, apparently still undescribed species. Only a few old specimens from “ Abyssinia ” and “ Syria & Abyssinia ” (as well as the holotype of H. sundaicus ) corresponding to the type specimens of H. impressus were examined. Having fully developed wings, H. impressus should also occur at least in southern Eritrea.

Remarks. Harpalus impressus was originally described from several specimens (the ranges of body measurements are given), one of which is designated here as lectotype. Among the type series of this species at ZSM, there are also five specimens identical to H. inconcinnus Chaudoir, 1876 with the following label data: 1 ♀, round piece of blue paper, “ Abyssinia ”, and “ Holotypus Harp. impress. var. ochropus Roth. Staatssamml. München ”; 1 ♂, same data but labeled as “ Allotypus ”; and 3 ♀♀, same data but labeled each as “ Paratypus ”. As far as is known, the taxon “ Harpalus impressus var. ochropus Roth ” has never been described.

Harpalus sundaicus was based on one male from Pradjekan, Java ( Indonesia) and up to now it was considered as a single species of Harpalus endemic to the tropical Southeastern Asia. The study of its holotype revealed that this species is identical to H. impressus . Because there are no additional records of this taxon from Indonesia, the specimen was apparently mislabeled. Therefore, H. sundaicus is treated here as a junior synonym of H. impressus . The median lobe of the holotype with broken apex is illustrated in Figs 8, 9 .

Figures

FIGURE 1. Harpalus impressus Roth, 1851 (lectotype), habitus. Scale bar = 1.0 mm.

FIGURES 2–9. Harpalus impressus Roth, 1851 (2, 3, 6, 7, “Syria Abyssinia”, 4, 5, lectotype; 8, 9, holotype of H. sundaicus Schauberger, 1933). 2, gonocoxite; 3, laterotergite, gonosubcoxite, and gonocoxite; 4–9, median lobe of aedeagus. Lateral (2, 4, 6, 8), ventral (3), and dorsal (5, 7, 9) views. Scale bar = 0.5 mm.

FIGURES 12–19. Harpalus asemus Basilewsky, 1947 (12–15, Lac Dakka; 16, 17, “holotype” from Naivasha; 18, 19, paratype from Amboni). 12, labium; 13, left metacoxa; 14, gonocoxite; 15, laterotergite, gonosubcoxite, and gonocoxite; 16–19, median lobe of aedeagus. Ventral (12, 13, 15), lateral (14, 16, 18), and dorsal (17, 19) views. Scale bars: A = 0.5 mm (12, 14–19), B = 1.0 mm (13).