Hoplopyga singularis ( Gory and Percheron, 1833 )

Shaughney, Jennifer Marie & Ratcliffe, Brett C., 2015, A Monographic Revision of the Genus Hoplopyga Thomson, 1880 (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Cetoniinae: Gymnetini), The Coleopterists Bulletin 69 (4), pp. 579-638 : 630-634

Hoplopyga singularis ( Gory and Percheron, 1833)

( Figs. 115–124 )

Gymnetis singularis Gory and Percheron 1833: 73 and 369 (original combination).

Holotype male at MNHN, labeled “Type//Ex-Musaeo/Van Lansberge//singularis G&P Burm./Brasilia Type”, examined. Type locality: “ Mexique ” (but see distribution remarks below).

Gymnetis rubida Gory and Percheron 1833: 73 and 372 (original combination).

Type not found. Type locality: “ Brésil.” New synonymy .

Gymnetis monacha Gory and Percheron 1833: 73 and 373 (original combination).

Holotype male at MNHN, labeled “Bras.// monacha GP Type// ex Musaeo James Thomson//Type//Type// (G.) monacha G.P. Type male symbol/G. Ruter det. 1965”, examined. Type locality: “ Brésil.” New synonymy.

Hoplopyga corumbana Schürhoff 1942: 286 (synonym).

Lectotype male at NHMB, labeled “ Corumba / Matt. Grosso //Sammlung/Schürhoff// Hoplopyga Typ. male symbol/corumbana m./ determ. Schürhoff, Berlin”, here designated and with JMS and BCR red lectotype label. Lectoallotype female at NHMB, labeled “ Corumbana / Matto Grosso / Schürhoff // Typ. female symbol/ corumbana m./determ. Schürhoff, Berlin ”, here designated and with JMS and BCR red lectoallotype label . Paralectotype male, labeled “ Corumba / Matt. Grosso //Sammlung/Schürhoff// co-type//corumbana m”, here designated and with JMS and BCR yellow paralectotype label. Type locality: “Corumba (Matto grosso).”

Description. Length 11.2–16.4 mm; width across humeri 6.7–10.4 mm. Dorsal surface velutinous, opaque, or shiny, with mottled appearance due to fuscous or maroon clouding on most of dorsum. Ground color chalky white to yellowish to brownish yellow to bluish gray to greenish gray. Some specimens entirely maroon, shiny or black, velutinous. Head with fuscous clouding either side of midline at base in both sexes, clypeus and sometimes frons reddish brown or black, shiny in females. Pronotum with maroon or black, M-shaped mark at middle and narrow, yellow or bluish gray, longitudinal band on posterior half of midline (band absent in maroon or black specimens). Elytra with maroon or fuscous clouding at base, on costae, and laterally. Ventral surface opaque, with ground color cream-colored to brownish yellow to bluish gray to greenish gray. Metasternum entirely black, shiny, or with middle third black, shiny. Mesometasternal process entirely black, shiny, or with 2 cream-colored spots at base. Sternites with middle third of each sternite black, shiny or not, or entirely black, shiny. Setae tawny. Head: Surface with large, dense, deep, round and n-shaped punctures. Clypeal apex weakly to distinctly reflexed, distinctly emarginate at middle, distinctly angulate either side of emargination. Antennal club distinctly longer than antennomeres 2–7 combined in males, females with club subequal in length to antennomeres 2–7. Pronotum: Lateral margins obtusely angulate. Surface impunctate or punctate; punctures, when present, small, moderately dense, and n-shaped, becoming larger and denser laterally. Some female specimens with surface densely covered by large, n-shaped punctures, punctures each with a minute to short seta. Lateral and apicolateral margins with bead from apex to base. Elytra: Surface with 2 distinctly elevated, discal costae; lateral costa on each elytron interrupted and depressed on mediodiscal area. Depressions between costae with n-shaped punctures; punctures large, dense, arranged longitudinally in striae (frequently coalescing longitudinally), becoming smaller and continuing to base near scutellum in 2 columns, in small cluster on apical declivity, and behind each apical umbone (sometimes becoming elongate and vermiform from apical umbone to apex). Lateral margins moderately densely punctate. Sutural costae with longitudinal keel on posterior half. Apices at suture weakly spinose. Pygidium: Surface weakly to moderately convex in both sexes, with large, dense, concentric, n-shaped and transversely vermiform punctures, punctures with minute setae. Venter: Metasternum with large, dense, n-shaped and transversely vermiform punctures either side of middle, punctures with short to long setae. Mesometasternal process, in lateral view ( Figs. 116–117 ), subparallel to horizontal axis of body, weakly protuberant beyond mesocoxae, apex rounded in ventral view. Abdominal sternites with small to large, dense, n-shaped punctures continuing across middle of each sternite or not, lateral punctures each with a minute seta. Legs: Male protibia with 1 distinct tooth at apex and second, highly reduced tooth. Female protibia distinctly tridentate. Parameres: Form variable. Shaft weakly divergent between midpoint and apex ( Figs. 118–120 ). Lateral margins expanding from midpoint to apex. Apices each with minute or distinct lateral spur.

Distribution. Hoplopyga singularis is found in Brazil and neighboring countries ( Fig. 121 ). There is a curious discrepancy between the type locality given in Gory and Percheron (1833) and the locality label on the specimen. The type locality is supposedly “ Mexique ”, but the holotype is labeled “Brasilia”. This could be attributed to a mislabeled specimen, since the locality data indicate that this species is not found north of South America. Burmeister (1842) addressed this and noted that the species is not found in Mexico as stated by Gory and Percheron (1833).

Locality Records. 332 specimens from AMNH, BCRC, BMNH, CASC, CMNC, CMNH, FMNH, INPA, MCZC, MLUH, MNHN, MZSP, RMNH, UFRJ, UMSP, USNM, and ZMHU. ARGENTINA (6): MISIONES (5): Loreto, Pindapoy, San Pedro, San Vicente ( Misiones ). SANTIAGO DEL ESTERO (1): Santiago del Estero. BRAZIL (307): DISTRITO FEDERAL (3): Brasília. GOIÁS (68): Corumbá de Goiás, Jataí, Mineiros, Rio Verde, No data. ESPÍRITO SANTO (15): Trinidade. MATO GROSSO (157): Chapada, Corumbá, Cuiabá. MINAS GERAIS (6): Diamantina, No data. PARÁ (1): No data. PARANÁ (5): Curitiba, Parque Estadual de Vila Velha, Parque Estadual do Guartelá, Tibagi. RIO DE JANEIRO (10): Nova Friburgo, No data. RIO GRANDE DO SUL (4): Porto Alegre, Serra de Herval, No data. SANTA CATARINA (8): Nova Teutônia, No data. SÃO PAULO (19): Batatais, Botucatu, Campinas, Jundiaí, Piracicaba, No data. NO DATA (12). COLOMBIA (3): META (1): Villavicencio. NO DATA (2). PARAGUAY (1): ITAPÚA (1): No data. VENEZUELA (2): NO DATA (2). NO DATA (13) .

Temporal Distribution. January (9), February (2), August (1), September (36), October (91), November (22), December (6).

Diagnosis. Hoplopyga singularis is distinguished by the mottled appearance of its dorsum, which is created by the presence of maroon or fuscous clouding over much of the dorsal ground color. This species is similar to H. albiventris and H. gosseti but can be distinguished by the absence of two proximal, apical teeth that are a diagnostic character for those species. Hoplopyga singularis is also similar to H. liturata but can be differentiated by having punctures that continue to the base of the elytra near the scutellum, whereas in H. liturata the punctures on each elytron do not continue to the base near the scutellum.

Nomenclature. Hoplopyga singularis has significant variation in color and sculpturing ( Figs. 115 , 122–124 ), which has led to the establishment of several different names over the last two centuries. There are two general forms of the male parameres. In maroon, shiny specimens resembling the H. singularis holotype ( Fig. 115 ), the apices of the parameres each have a minute, lateral spur, and the parameres are wider ( Fig. 119 ). In the brownish yellow, opaque specimens similar to the morphotype of H. corumbana ( Fig. 124 ), the parameres are narrower and more elongate, and each apex bears a distinct, lateral spur ( Fig. 118 ). Most H. singularis specimens have parameres that resemble one or the other form, or are somewhere in between having a distinct, lateral spur and a minute, lateral spur on the apices of the parameres. We believe that, despite the variation, these two different forms represent one species. Externally, there are no consistent characters that would support two species.

Schaum (1849) synonymized H. singularis with H. albiventris , and this synonymy was not explicitly challenged until Antoine (2008) distinguished the two species. Therefore, several catalogs ( Schenkling 1921; Blackwelder 1944; Krajcik 1998) listed H. singularis as a synonym of H. albiventris . Antoine (2008) thoroughly discussed several discrepancies in Hoplopyga nomenclature over the last century and synonymized H. corumbana with H. singularis , but did not address H. rubida , a species that had gone mostly unnoticed since its description. Gory and Percheron (1833) described Gymnetis rubida as having a maroon dorsum and a reddish brown, shiny venter. After examining putative H. rubida specimens, we concluded that they are conspecific with H. singularis . The form of the male parameres, mesometasternal process, and overall gestalt are identical to maroon H. singularis specimens, and the name simply reflects a color variation. The same circumstances apply to H. monacha , which was described based on a melanistic specimen. We also place this species in junior synonymy with H. singularis based upon the similarity in character states and the form of the male parameres.

Lectotypes of H. corumbana were designated from Schürhoff’ s type series. Schürhoff (1942) designated male and female syntypes, and we here designate the male as the lectotype because the parameres are useful for circumscription of the species. We uphold Antoine’ s (2008) synonymization of H. corumbana with H. singularis . The ventral punctation and form of the mesometasternal process of H. corumbana does not differ significantly from H. singularis , and the parameres of H. corumbana have a narrower ridge along the midline in dorsal view than H. singularis parameres but are otherwise identical.

Natural History. Hoplopyga singularis has been collected at elevations up to 1,300 m (label data). Micó et al. (2001) described H. singularis larvae found in a termite nest. Puker et al. (2012) collected the larvae of H. singularis abundantly under nests of Diversitermes diversimiles (Silvestri) (Isoptera) and observed adults feeding on sap flows of Baccharis sp. (Asteraceae) .

Figures

Figs. 115–121. Hoplopyga singularis. 115) Habitus; 116–117) Variation in mesometasternal process, ventral view; 118–120) Parameres; 121) Distribution.

Figs. 122–124. Hoplopyga singularis, variation in habitus.