Clidicus forceps Cheng, Yin & Jałoszyński, 2019

Jałoszyński, Paweł, Cheng, Zhi-Fei, Brajczewska, Nastazja & Yin, Zi-Wei, 2019, Hidden diversity of giant scydmaenines: five new species and new records of Clidicus in the Philippines (Coleoptera, Staphylinidae, Scydmaeninae), Zootaxa 4658 (3), pp. 571-584 : 572-574

Clidicus forceps Cheng, Yin & Jałoszyński sp. n.

( Figs 1–7 )

Material studied. HOLOTYPE: ♂: PHILIPPINES, with two labels: “ PHILIPPINES / Mindanao, prov. Lanao der Sur / Wao / II 2017 / leg. Ismael Lumawig (local coll.)” [white, printed], “ Clidicus / forceps Cheng et al. / HOLOTY- PUS” [red, printed] ( SNUC) . PARATYPES (7 ♂♂, 9 ♀♀): PHILIPPINES : 1 ♂, 2 ♀♀, same data as for holotype ; 1 ♀, same data as for holotype, except XII 2016 ( SNUC) ; 1 ♂, same data as for holotype, except X 2017 ; 1 ♀, same data as for holotype, except for VI 2018 ( SNUC); 2 ♀♀, same data as for holotype, except for VII 2018 ( SNUC); 1 ♂, 1 ♀, “ PHILIPPINES / Mindanao, prov. Bukidnon / Kalatungan / I 2017 / leg. Ismael Lumawig ” [white, printed] ( SNUC) ; 1 ♂, 1 ♀, “ PHILIPPINES / Mindanao, prov. Bukidnon / Kalatungan / III 2017 / leg. Ismael Lumawig (local coll.)” [white, printed] ( SNUC) ; 3 ♂♂, 1 ♀, “ PHILIPPINES: Mindanao, Araibo, / Pantukan , Compostela Valley, 900m, / Candalaga Mts. , 7°16’35.3”N, / 126°10’12.8”E, 4.5.2019, / Shavrin A.V. leg., secondary broad-leaved / for- est, sifted from wet litter near river and / under wet leaves near rocks” [white, printed] (cPJ, cAS) .

Diagnosis. Pronotum with evenly distributed, conspicuously deep and dense punctures (distances between most punctures half as long as their diameters), cuticle between punctures glossy, pronotal disc lacking posterior median longitudinal groove; aedeagus with strongly divergent distad, symmetrical subtriangular parameres, each with its very tip slightly curved mesad.

Description. Body of male ( Fig. 1 ) elongate and slender, head flattened, prothorax and elytra strongly convex; legs and antennae long and slender, BL 5.15–5.71 mm (mean 5.43 mm); cuticle glossy, pigmentation uniformly dark brown, setae indistinctly lighter than cuticle.

Head ( Fig. 2 ) broadest near middle of tempora, HL 0.90–0.95 mm (mean 0.93 mm), HW 1.25–1.33 mm (mean 1.30 mm); tempora in dorsal view nearly 3 times as long as eyes, in anterior third nearly straight and indistinctly divergent posterad, posteriorly strongly and evenly rounded; vertex with a deep subtrapezoidal posteromedian im- pression and a pair of indistinct posterior pits marking sites where dorsal tentorial arms are fused with dorsal wall of head. Sides of vertex convex, frons near each antennal insertion slightly impressed, entire frons and vertex with a narrow median longitudinal groove, supraantennal tubercles small but distinctly elevated; clypeus transverse and convex, demarcated from frons by a deep and distinct frontoclypeal groove; compound eyes small, nearly round, strongly convex but in dorsal view not projecting from head silhouette, finely faceted. Punctures on sides of vertex and frons dense, indistinct and shallow and with diffuse margins, mesal margin of each eye and posterolateral margin of each supraanternnal tubercle with an irregular group of dense punctures; supraantennal tubercles virtually impunctate. Setae moderately long, sparse, suberect to erect. Antennae ( Fig. 3 ) slender, scape slightly longer than head, antennomeres II–IX elongate (IX indistinctly so), X–XI distinctly transverse; AnL 3.10–3.44 mm (mean 3.26 mm).

Labrum with jagged anterior margin bearing a shallow subtriangular anteromedian notch.

Pronotum with subpentagonal disc and short posterior ‘collar’, broadest near anterior third; PL 1.22–1.40 mm (mean 1.33 mm), PW 1.25–1.36 mm (mean 1.30 mm); ‘collar’ demarcated by a narrow transverse groove with 14 irregular and diffuse pits; additionally, three larger pits are present on each side of pronotum in its constricted por- tion. Punctures on disc similar to those on the most densely punctate regions of head, almost evenly distributed, separated by spaces twice as wide as diameters of punctures; setae moderately long, dense, and suberect. Cuticle between punctures on pronotal disc as glossy as that on head.

Elytra oval, broadest slightly in front of middle, EL 3.00– 3.40 mm (mean 3.17 mm), EW 1.93–2.12 mm (mean 1.99 mm), EI 1.53–1.64; each elytron with five dorsal and one lateral rows of large and deep, densely distributed pits, cuticle between pits glossy, between rows with very fine and sparse setiferous punctures; setae longer and slightly thicker than those on head and pronotum, moderately dense, suberect. Apex of each elytron obliquely truncated, with lateral corner rounded and indistinct, and with adsutural corner strongly projecting posterad, sharpangled and pointed.

Hind wings absent.

Legs long and slender, unmodified.

Aedeagus ( Figs 4–5 ) strongly elongate but moderately slender, in lateral view strongly curved, AeL 1.06–1.17 mm (mean 1.12 mm); parameres long, symmetrical, in ventral view each paramere with subtriangular apex, api- ces strongly divergent distad, but with their very tips slightly curved mesad and rounded; flagellum differentiated from ductus ejaculatorius by a rapid broadening of walls near basal third of median lobe. ‘Sperm pump’ ( Fig. 6 ) 0.76–0.87 mm (mean 0.80 mm) in length, with two large ‘funnels’, distal funnel much shorter and slightly brooder than proximal one.

Female. Externally very similar to male, on average smaller and with broader elytra; BL 5.29–5.52 mm (mean 5.40 mm); HL 0.98–1.00 mm (mean 0.98 mm), HW 1.32–1.44 mm (mean 1.39 mm), AnL 3.10–3.44 mm (mean 3.28 mm); PL 1.21–1.40 mm (mean 1.29 mm), PW 1.25–1.36 mm (mean 1.31 mm); EL 3.02–3.21 mm (mean 3.12 mm), EW 1.97–2.04 mm (mean 2.00 mm), EI 1.51–1.60.

Spermatheca ( Fig. 7 ) with oval capsular part slightly flattened at insertion site of ductus spermathecae, which is connected to a projection slightly irregular in shape, width (diameter) of capsular part 0.14–0.15 mm (mean 0.145 mm); accessory gland with connecting duct conspicuously long; ductus spermathecae moderately strongly entangled; bursa copulatrix elongate, subrectangular.

Distribution. North-central and east-central Mindanao.

Etymology. The name refers to the shape of parameres which resemble forceps (the Latin “ forceps ” is a noun in apposition).

Remarks. Clidicus forceps is most similar to C. crocodylus . However, the aedeagus of C. forceps is less slender, and the parameres have a different shape. The apex of each paramere is distinctly bent mesad, so that there is a distinct angle on the lateral parameral margin in its subapical region. In C. crocodylus , the parameral apices are more slender and not bent mesad.

Some adults of this species were collected in a secondary broad-leaved forest, by sifting leaf litter near river and from under wet leaves near rocks ( Fig. 34 ).

Figures

FIGURES 1–7. Clidicus forceps Cheng et al. sp. n. Habitus of male (1); head of male in dorsal view (2), left antenna of male in dorsal view (3); aedeagus in ventral (4) and lateral (5) views; ‘sperm pump’ (6); female terminalia and spermatheca (7).

FIGURES 34–37. Collecting sites of Clidicus forceps Cheng et al. sp. n. (34) and C. shavrini Jałoszyński sp. n. (35–37). Can- dalaga Mts., Compostela Valley (34); Mt. Talomo (35–37).