Menieroclerus Bartlett & Gerstmeier
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4168.2.12 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:D6AE160B-7442-47D5-B57F-584CC4BBB1F2 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6079839 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/997887F5-6A56-FFC9-FF00-40D9D1116DAD |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Menieroclerus Bartlett & Gerstmeier |
status |
gen. nov. |
Menieroclerus Bartlett & Gerstmeier , gen. nov.
Type species. Opilo nigropiceus Kuwert, 1893 (by present designation).
Diagnosis. The strongly bilobate condition of the labrum ( Fig. 11 View FIGURES 1 – 13 ) is possibly unique among Cleridae ; however, even if it is not unique then the following characters in combination are diagnostic for Menieroclerus gen. n.: terminal maxillary palpomeres securiform ( Fig. 13 View FIGURES 1 – 13 ); gular sutures very weakly divergent (appearing parallel); elytron with ten rows of deep, laterally nodulate punctures ( Fig. 12 View FIGURES 1 – 13 b); tibiae longitudinally carinate; tibial spur formula 2–2–2; tarsal pad formula 4–4–4 (basitarsal pads substantially smaller than those of tarsomeres 2–4), tarsal pads not divided into paired lobes ( Fig. 15 View FIGURES 14 – 16 ).
Menieroclerus gen. n. differs from Thanasimodes (= ‘T’) in the following character states: Labrum bilobate (emarginate in ‘T’); gular sutures parallel (convergent in ‘T’); procoxal cavities posteriorly broadly open (narrowly open to completely closed in ‘T’); tarsal pads not incised (incised in ‘T’); two protibial spurs (none in ‘T’); pretarsal claws appendiculate (simple in ‘T’); elytral punctation nodulate (without nodules in ‘T’); base of CuA1+2 of hindwing detached from CuA (attached to CuA in ‘T’); tegminal phallobasic struts not fused to apodeme (fused to apodeme in ‘T’).
Description. Head. Eyes large, coarsely facetted, frontal rim strongly margined, emarginate above antennal socket; antennae with 11 antennomeres, flagellomeres increasingly dilated towards A 9, A 9–10 cupuliform, A 11 subovate; terminal labial palpomere securiform, maxillary palpomere securiform ( Fig. 13 View FIGURES 1 – 13 ); labrum strongly bilobate, lobes extending over mandibles ( Fig. 11 View FIGURES 1 – 13 ); gular sutures very weakly divergent (appearing parallel), post gular process a short, slender, bifurcated central sclerite with paired, weakly defined, setose lobes. Thorax. Pronotal disc without median sulcus, subapical depression reasonably well-defined; postero-lateral pits present ( Fig. 12 View FIGURES 1 – 13 a); procoxal cavities broadly open, prosternal process with small terminal expansion; mesoventrite with rounded anterior process; elytron elongate, disc with ten rows of deep punctures, punctures laterally nodulate ( Fig. 12 View FIGURES 1 – 13 b), discal vestiture composed of paired sensilla (i.e., each long seta with minute accompanying sensillum at its base), each stria with a single setal pair on the upper anterior rim of each puncture, each interstria with single row of setal pairs; metathoracic wing with CuA1+2 vein narrowly separated from CuA (may appear connected due to continuation of pigmentation to CuA; see Fig. 1 View FIGURES 1 – 13 ); metendosternite as in Figure 10 View FIGURES 1 – 13 . Legs. Lateral surfaces of tibiae longitudinally carinate; tibial spur formula 2–2–2; tarsomere formula 5–5–5; all basitarsi reduced in length (no visible dorsal surface); tarsal pad formula 4–4–4, basitarsal pads extremely small, pads of T2–4 conspicuous, increasing is size towards T4, pads not divided into paired lobes (i.e., apical margins not divided or emarginate) ( Fig. 15 View FIGURES 14 – 16 ); each side of pretarsal claw with a triangular basal denticle. Abdomen. Six ventrites. Male genitalia. Tegmen with phallobasic struts not fused to apodeme ( Figs. 2, 3 View FIGURES 1 – 13 ); phallus relatively simple with slender distal process ( Fig. 4 View FIGURES 1 – 13 ).
Gender. Masculine.
Systematic placement. By process of elimination, Menieroclerus nigropiceus comb. n. is negatively defined as a member of the subfamily Clerinae simply due to the absence of the following morphological attributes: fourth tarsosomeres minute and hidden between lobes of third tarsomeres (= Korynetinae sensu lato); first tarsomeres well developed, dorsally visible between second tarsomere and tibial distal margin and pretarsal claw tripartite (= Tillinae ); apodeme of male tegmen long and membranously connected to phallobase (= Epiclininae); labrum large, generally not emarginate and eyes with ocular notch absent or minutely developed (= Hydnocerinae ). No formallyestablished genus-groupings (i.e., tribes) have been proposed for Clerinae . Several informal clerine sub-groups, however, have been preliminarily proposed: the Clerus -series (containing Thanasimus , Stigmatium and Omadius genus-groups), and the Orthrius -group ( Gerstmeier 2002; Gerstmeier & Eberle 2011), though the securiform terminal maxillary palpomeres of M. nigropiceus comb. n. prevent its inclusion in any of them.
The taxon-diverse subfamily Clerinae is yet to be adequately defined morphologically or established as a monophylum ( Kolibáč 1997; Opitz 2010). A preliminary molecular phylogeny-estimate of Cleridae suggested that the exclusion of Hydnocerinae from Clerinae renders the latter paraphyletic ( Gunter et al. 2013). A morphologybased character analysis of clerine and hydnocerine (plus anthicoclerine) genera could be a first step in understanding if/how the genera of Clerinae and Hydnocerinae are related. The threefold usefulness of such a study would be to: a) test the monophyly of Clerinae in relation to the inclusion/exclusion of Hydnocerinae ; b) test the monophyly of previously proposed informal clerine groupings; and, c) potentially identify genus-groupings among genera not yet arranged into informal groupings. A moderately large scale study such as this would be necessary before the systematic position of Menieroclerus gen. n. within Clerinae is understood.
Known distribution ( Fig. 16 View FIGURES 14 – 16 ). Ethiopia, Kenya, Namibia, Republic of South Africa, Tanzania, Yemen, Zimbabwe.
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.