Lepidiota consobrina Girault, 1918

Allsopp, Peter G., 2020, Clarification of the status of the types of Australian Melolonthini (Coleoptera Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae) described before 1950, Zootaxa 4885 (4), pp. 451-486 : 461-462

Lepidiota consobrina Girault, 1918

Lepidiota consobrina Girault, 1918: 183 .

Girault’s (1918) description is headed “Female” but in it he compares the antennal clubs of both genders and then describes the raster pattern of the larva. Hence, he did not define the type series (vide Articles 73.1.2, 72.1.1). However, he noted “Types” from Gordonvale that were deposited in QM; this was repeated in Girault (1920). Britton (1978), Houston & Weir (1992), and Miller & Allsopp (2000) referred to a female “ holotype ” from Gordonvale in QM.

However, QM has only one specimen with what appears to be a Girault label; it is a male from Kuranda, and is labelled “ TYPE ”, with the catalogue number of C/2185 ( Fig. 16 ). The latter indicates it was received by QM on 29 November 1923 from an unrecorded source; this was after which Girault had left employment as a sugarcane entomologist in Gordonvale and was living in Brisbane ( Dahms 1978). Searches of ANIC and Sugar Research Australia’s collection at Meringa (Gordonvale) failed to find any potential adult or larval syntypes. However, QDAF has one adult female from Kuranda with same printed label as the QM specimen, and one adult male labelled simply “C.900” .

In his work on Hymenoptera, there are “cases where Girault has failed to give the length of his type-series and some or all of the data with his published descriptions” ( Dahms 1983). Given the pest status of L. consobrina in northern Queensland sugarcane and that Girault and Alan Dodd had reared many larvae through to adults, it is conceivable that Girault had access to specimens from both Gordonvale and Kuranda. However, as only Gordonvale is mentioned in his description, the Kuranda specimens cannot be considered syntypes .

I consider that any syntypes from Gordonvale have been lost or are unidentifiable and were replaced by the QM specimen before it was sent from Gordonvale in 1923. There is no need to designate a neotype as adults and larvae are well characterised, e.g., Britton (1978), Miller & Allsopp (2000).

Figures

FIGURES 8–16. Labels on types. 8. Lepidioderma lansbergei Brenske, 1895 (junior synonym of Dermolepida albohirtum (Waterhouse, 1875)). 9. Lepidioderma waterhousei Brenske, 1895 (junior synonym of Dermolepida albohirtum (Waterhouse, 1875)). 10–11. Lepidioderma lixi Nonfried, 1894 (now Dermolepida lixi). 10, lectotype; 11, paralectotype. 12–13. Lepidioderma glaber Brenske, 1895 (junior synonym of Dermolepida lixi). 12, lectotype; 13, paralectotype. 14–15. Lepidiota clypealis Moser, 1913. 14, lectotype male; 15, paralectotype female. 16. Purported holotype of Lepidiota consobrina Girault, 1918. Figs. 8–15 courtesy of Museum für Naturkunde.