identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
03EF87EEFFDFE45EFF5CFB10FACCC709.text	03EF87EEFFDFE45EFF5CFB10FACCC709.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Stenomastigus mpumalanganus Jałoszyński 2025	<div><p>Stenomastigus mpumalanganus sp. nov.</p><p>(Figs 1–6, 13–15)</p><p>Type material.   Holotype: ♂, two labels: “ RSA, Mpumalanga 20.xi.2023 / 25°2.7’S 30°50.95’E, / Klipkraal, ind. forest / 1210m, P. Bulirsch lgt.” [white, printed], "  STENOMASTIGUS /  mpumalanganus m. / P. JAŁOSZYŃSKI, 2024 / HOLOTYPUS” [red, printed] (TMSA)  .  Paratypes (5 exx.): 2 ♂♂, 3 ♀♀, same data as for the holotype, all with yellow “PARATYPUS” label (cPB, cPJ) .</p><p>Diagnosis. Head, maxillary palps and femora dark brown, nearly black, pronotum dark umbra brown, elytra light umbra brown, antennae and distal regions of legs light to dark brown. Male (Fig. 1): protrochanter unmodified (Fig. 14); protibia with shallow subapical emargination (Fig. 13); antennae ~1.2–1.3 times as long as body; aedeagus (Figs 3–6) in abparameral view with conspicuously small and elongate basal capsule, much narrower than parameral region, ‘collar’ surrounding orifice projecting laterally beyond basal capsule, constriction separating basal capsule and parameral region distinct, paramere curved and with apex placed in long axis of aedeagus, in lateral view paramere weakly curved and directed towards abparameral side of median lobe. Female (Fig. 2): antennae ~1.1 times as long as body; elytra broadest near anterior third; each elytron with deep sub-basal impression, elytral suture in posterior 2/3 distinctly raised, elytral apex in dorsal view sharp-angled, in lateral view (Fig. 15) posterior elytral margin sinuate and oblique in relation to coronal body plane.</p><p>Description. Body of male (Fig. 1) elongate and slender, with extremely long appendages, BL 3.55–3.73 mm; pigmentation of head, maxillary palps and proximal regions of legs dark brown, nearly black, pronotum dark umbra brown, elytra light umbra brown, antennae and distal regions of legs (from tibiae) variously light to dark brown; vestiture whitish.</p><p>Head broadest at eyes, HL 0.68–0.70 mm, HW 0.65–0.70 mm; tempora in dorsal view nearly twice as long as eyes and distinctly converging posterad; median longitudinal impression of frontovertexal region distinct but diffuse; head dorsum densely covered with microscopic punctures, spaces between punctures glossy; setae extremely short, dense and recumbent. Antennae 1.23–1.34 times as long as body, AeL 4.45–4.75 mm; scape and pedicel strongly enlarged, each with five pairs of long ventral setae arranged in two longitudinal rows, all flagellomeres strongly elongate, indistinctly broadening distad.</p><p>Pronotum pear-shaped in dorsal view, elongate and broadest near anterior third, PL 0.93–1.00 mm, PW 0.68– 0.78 mm; anterior margin weakly arcuate; lateral margins strongly rounded in anterior half, strongly sinuate in posterior third; posterior margin nearly straight; pronotal disc with indistinctly marked, weakly elevated median longitudinal carina not reaching posterior margin. Surface finely microsculptured and matte, with dense, very short and recumbent vestiture.</p><p>Elytra together regularly oval, broadest near middle, EL 1.88–2.03 mm, EW 1.25–1.35 mm, EI 1.50–1.54; elytral apices separately rounded; surface covered with similar microsculpture and vestiture as pronotum.</p><p>Legs conspicuously long and slender; protrochanters unmodified (Figs 13, 14); protibiae with shallow subapical emargination (Fig. 13).</p><p>Aedeagus (Figs 3–6) conspicuously slender, AeL 1.68 mm, in abparameral view basal capsule strikingly small, elongate, much narrower than parameral region and delimited by distinct constriction; ‘collar’ surrounding orifice strongly projecting laterad beyond lateral margins of basal capsule; paramere slightly shorter than copulatory piece, curved mesad, with apex aligned with long axis of aedeagus. In lateral view, aedeagus broadest in sub-basal region, paramere weakly curved towards abparameral side of median lobe, with apical region straight.</p><p>Female (Fig. 2). Similar to male in body pigmentation, microsculpture and vestiture, differs clearly in shape of elytra and unmodified protibiae. BL 4.35–4.50 mm; HL 0.75 mm, HW 0.73–0.75 mm, AnL 4.75–4.93 mm (1.09 times as long as BL); PL 1.10–1.13 mm, PW 0.78–0.80 mm; EL 2.50–2.63 mm, EW 1.55–1.68 mm, EI 1.57–1.61. Elytra broadest near anterior third and strongly narrowing posterad, sub-basal dorsal impression on each elytron deep, suture raised roof-like from anterior third to apex, apices forming sharp angle, in some specimens short posterior adsutural region split, in others left and right elytron in dorsal view touching each other up to apex; in lateral view (Fig. 15) elytron strongly broadening posterad, with highest point situated near posterior third, posterior margin sinuate and oblique in relation to coronal body plane.</p><p>Distribution. EN region of Republic of South Africa, Mpumalanga.</p><p>Etymology. The epithet  mpumalanganus refers to the province where the type series has been collected.</p><p>Remarks. The aedeagus of  S. mpumalanganus resembles that of  S. franzi Leleup, 1968 and  S. pseudofranzi Jałoszyński, 2012b . They all share a relatively small basal capsule distinctly delimited by a deep constriction. Males and females of  S. franzi, however, are uniformly black (illustrated in Jałoszyński (2012b)), and the paramere in lateral view is strongly curved (weakly so in  S. mpumalanganus), in abparameral view distinctly longer than that in  S. mpumalanganus . Moreover, the ‘collar’ surrounding the orifice in  S. franzi is not projecting laterad beyond the basal capsule, so that in abparameral view it is not visible. The female elytron in lateral view strongly differs, in  S. mpumalanganus the highest point is near the posterior third and the distal margin is sinuate (Fig. 15), while in  S. franzi the elytron is not broadening behind middle and its distal margin is not sinuate (Fig. 19). The aedeagus of  S. pseudofranzi is similar to that of  S. mpumalanganus, and also the body pigmentation is similarly light (illustrated in Jałoszyński (2012b)). However, the basal capsule is slightly broader than the parameral region (much narrower in  S. mpumalanganus), and the paramere is longer in relation to the remaining region of the aedeagus. Also, the lateral shape of the female elytron in  S. mpumalanganus is clearly different from that in  S. pseudofranzi (Fig. 15 vs. Fig. 20). The aedeagus of  S. mpumalanganus, especially in abparameral view, resembles also copulatory organs of  S. berlinafricanus Jałoszyński, 2012a and  S. kosianus Jałoszyński, 2012a . Males of these species have strongly modified protrochanters, produced into a long distal projection, while the protrochanter in  S. mpumalanganus is unmodified, and the body pigmentation in  S. berlinafricanus and  S. kosianus is uniformly dark brown.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03EF87EEFFDFE45EFF5CFB10FACCC709	Public Domain	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Jałoszyński, Paweł	Jałoszyński, Paweł (2025): Two new species of the South African genus Stenomastigus Leleup (Coleoptera, Staphylinidae, Scydmaeninae). Zootaxa 5590 (1): 101-112, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5590.1.5
03EF87EEFFDBE453FF5CFF00FDF2C231.text	03EF87EEFFDBE453FF5CFF00FDF2C231.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Stenomastigus bulirschi Jałoszyński 2025	<div><p>Stenomastigus bulirschi sp. nov.</p><p>(Figs 7–12, 16–18)</p><p>Type material.   Holotype: ♂, two labels: “ RSA, Mpumalanga 22.xi.2023 / 24°54.7’S 30°51.1’E, Pinnacle / Rock, creek bank+swamp / ca 1450m, P. Bulirsch lgt.” [white, printed], “  STENOMASTIGUS /  bulirschi m. / P. JAŁOSZYŃSKI, 2024 / HOLOTYPUS” [red, printed] (TMSA)  .  Paratypes (7 exx.): 2 ♂♂, 5 ♀♀, same data as for the holotype, all with yellow “PARATYPUS” label (cPB, cPJ) .</p><p>Diagnosis. Head, maxillary palps, antennae, pronotum and legs except tarsi nearly black, elytra dark umbra brown, tarsi brown. Male (Fig. 7): protrochanter modified, with distoventral region slightly projecting and with sinuate distal margin (Fig. 17); protibia with shallow subapical emargination (Fig. 16); antennae ~1.1–1.25 times as long as body; aedeagus (Figs 9–12) in abparameral view with conspicuously short but broad basal capsule, as wide as parameral region, ‘collar’ surrounding orifice not projecting laterally beyond basal capsule, constriction separating basal capsule and parameral region deep, paramere curved and with apex placed outside long axis of aedeagus, in lateral view paramere weakly curved and directed distally. Female (Fig. 8): antennae about as long as body; elytra broadest near anterior third; each elytron with deep sub-basal impression, elytral suture in posterior 1/6 distinctly raised, elytral apex in dorsal view truncate, in lateral view (Fig. 118) posterior elytral margin straight and transverse in relation to coronal body plane.</p><p>Description. Body of male (Fig. 7) elongate and slender, with long appendages, BL 3.18–3.64 mm; pigmentation of head, maxillary palps, antennae, pronotum and legs except tarsi nearly black, elytra dark umbra brown, tarsi brown; vestiture whitish.</p><p>Head broadest at eyes, HL 0.60–0.70 mm, HW 0.63–0.70 mm; tempora in dorsal view 1.5 times as long as eyes and distinctly converging posterad; median longitudinal impression of frontovertexal region distinct but diffuse; head dorsum densely covered with microscopic punctures, matte; setae extremely short, dense and recumbent. Antennae 1.10–1.24 times as long as body, AnL 3.93–4.03 mm; scape and pedicel strongly enlarged, scape with five, pedicel with four pairs of long ventral setae arranged in two longitudinal rows, all flagellomeres strongly elongate, indistinctly broadening distad.</p><p>Pronotum pear-shaped in dorsal view, elongate and broadest between middle and anterior third, PL 0.83–0.98 mm, PW 0.68–0.73 mm; anterior margin weakly arcuate; lateral margins strongly rounded in anterior half, strongly sinuate in posterior third; posterior margin indistinctly arcuate; pronotal disc with barely discernible median longitudinal carina not reaching posterior margin. Surface finely microsculptured and matte, with dense, very short and recumbent vestiture.</p><p>Elytra together regularly oval, broadest near middle, EL 1.75–2.00 mm, EW 1.25–1.30 mm, EI 1.40–1.54; elytral apices separately rounded; surface covered with similar microsculpture and vestiture as pronotum.</p><p>Legs long and slender; protrochanters modified, with distoventral region slightly projecting and with sinuate distal margin (Figs 16, 17); protibiae with shallow subapical emargination (Fig. 16).</p><p>Aedeagus (Figs 9–12) slender, AeL 1.55 mm, in abparameral view basal capsule strikingly short but broad, as wide as parameral region and delimited by deep constriction; ‘collar’ surrounding orifice not projecting laterad beyond lateral margins of basal capsule; paramere about as long as copulatory piece, curved mesad, with apex placed outside long axis of aedeagus. In lateral view, aedeagus broadest in sub-basal region, paramere weakly curved with abparameral margin convex.</p><p>Female (Fig. 8). Similar to male in body pigmentation, microsculpture and vestiture, differs clearly in shape of elytra and unmodified protrochanters and protibiae. BL 3.75–4.10 mm; HL 0.70–0.75 mm, HW 0.70–0.75 mm, AnL 3.95–4.15 mm (0.99–1.05 times as long as BL); PL 1.03–1.10 mm, PW 0.75–0.80 mm; EL 2.03–2.25 mm, EW 1.50–1.75 mm, EI 1.29–1.41. Elytra broadest near anterior third and moderately strongly narrowing posterad, sub-basal dorsal impression on each elytron deep, suture raised roof-like only near apex, apices subtruncate, in dorsal view posterior elytral margins forming posteriorly concave oblique angle; in lateral view (Fig. 18) elytron strongly broadening from base to middle and then parallel-sided, posterior margin nearly straight and transverse in relation to coronal body plane.</p><p>Distribution. EN region of Republic of South Africa, Mpumalanga.</p><p>Etymology. This species is dedicated to Petr Bulirsch, who collected the type specimens.</p><p>Remarks. The aedeagus of  S. bulirschi resembles that of  S. franzi and  S. pseudofranzi . Males and females of  S. franzi are uniformly black, and the paramere is much longer than the copulatory piece; in lateral view the abparameral margin of the paramere is straight (convex in  S. bulirschi). The female elytron in lateral view strongly differs, in  S. bulirschi the posterior margin is truncate (Fig. 18), while in  S. franzi it is subtriangular (Fig. 19). The aedeagus of  S. pseudofranzi is similar to that of  S. bulirschi, but the body pigmentation is different—the pronotum and elytra in  S. pseudofranzi are reddish-brown, whereas in  S. bulirschi the pronotum is black, and the elytra brown. Moreover, the basal capsule of the aedeagus in  S. pseudofranzi is distinctly more elongate, and the paramere is longer in relation to the remaining region of the aedeagus. The lateral shape of the female elytron in  S. bulirschi is also clearly different from that in  S. pseudofranzi (Fig. 18 vs. Fig. 20). The aedeagus of  S. bulirschi, especially in abparameral view, resembles also copulatory organs of  S. berlinafricanus and  S. kosianus . Males of these species have protrochanters with much longer distal projections than that in  S. bulirschi . Moreover, the body pigmentation in  S. berlinafricanus and  S. kosianus is uniformly dark brown. The aedeagus of  S. bulirschi also resembles that of  S. varii riparius Leleup, 1968, especially in abparameral view. In the former species the widest site of the aedeagus is submedian, whereas in the latter it is situated more distally, at the level of the endophallus. In lateral view, aedeagi of these species strongly differ in the general shape. Moreover, the pronotum in  S. bulirschi is black, strongly contrasting with much lighter elytra, whereas in  S. varii riparius the pronotum and elytra are dark reddish brown. Additionally, the lateral profile of the female elytron is different. In  S. bulirschi, the posterior half of the elytron is parallel-sided, whereas in  S. varii riparius there is a clearly marked highest site situated near middle length, and posteriorly the elytron is narrowing.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03EF87EEFFDBE453FF5CFF00FDF2C231	Public Domain	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Jałoszyński, Paweł	Jałoszyński, Paweł (2025): Two new species of the South African genus Stenomastigus Leleup (Coleoptera, Staphylinidae, Scydmaeninae). Zootaxa 5590 (1): 101-112, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5590.1.5
03EF87EEFFD7E450FF5CFD40FA43C479.text	03EF87EEFFD7E450FF5CFD40FA43C479.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Stenomastigus Leleup 1968	<div><p>Species and subspecies of  Stenomastigus can be identified using the key given below (males only).</p><p>The systematics of this genus is still unclear, and the status of some subspecies requires further study. Populations of  Stenomastigus inhabit strongly fragmented habitats separated by areas transformed by humans, and specimens from such separated populations within some species differ. This problem was solved by Leleup (1968) by establishing many subspecies (not only in  Stenomastigus, but also in  Palaeostigus Newton). Some of them differ mainly in external features (e.g., pigmentation), and some show strong differences in the shape of the aedeagus. It seems that all subspecies of  S. longicornis Leleup may be in future elevated to species rank,  S. varii saxatilis Leleup and  S. varii fontinalis Leleup are candidates for synonymization and seem to represent one species separate from  S. varii varii Leleup, and  S. varii riparius Leleup also may be a separate species. Moreover,  S. holmi Franz requires redescription, because the aedeagus was illustrated only in the lateral view, and the original description is too fragmentary.</p><p>1 Protibia with subtriangular tooth with sharp-angled apex..........................................  S. kochi Leleup</p><p>- Protibia lacking subtriangular tooth with sharp-angled apex.................................................... 2</p><p>2 Distoventral region of protrochanter forming elongate projection at least as long as proximal (articulating) region of trochanter........................................................................................... 3</p><p>- If distoventral region of protrochanter is developed as elongate projection, it is much shorter than proximal region of trochanter........................................................................................... 5</p><p>3 Elytra dark brown; protrochanteral projection gradually narrowing distally; capsular region of aedeagus delimited distally by constriction as narrow as ~1/3 of its width...............................................  S. kosianus Jałoszyński</p><p>- Elytra light umbra brown; protrochanteral projection indistinctly broadening distally; capsular region of aedeagus delimited distally by constriction wider than half of its width........................................................... 4</p><p>4 Protibia widest proximad subapical emargination; paramere in lateral view with conspicuously long lateral subtriangular process opposite endophallus...........................................................  S. basilewskyi Leleup</p><p>- Protibia widest distad subapical emargination; paramere in lateral view with vestigial lateral rounded process opposite endophallus.............................................................................  S. allaeri Leleup</p><p>5 Protrochanter nearly quadrate; paramere in lateral view distad apex of copulatory piece as long as or longer than remaining region of aedeagus; and basal capsule delimited by constriction much broader than its half width or not delimited......... 6</p><p>- Protrochanter clearly elongate; paramere distad apex of copulatory piece shorter than remaining region of aedeagus, if longer, then basal capsule delimited by constriction narrower than its half width.......................................... 9</p><p>6 Parameral apex in lateral view bifurcate................................................................... 7</p><p>- Parameral apex in lateral view not bifurcate................................................................ 8</p><p>7 Paramere distad apex of endophallus much longer than remaining region of aedeagus, in lateral view largely straight, bent toward abparameral side only in subapical region.....................................  S. longicornis bicolor Leleup</p><p>- Paramere distad apex of endophallus as long as remaining region of aedeagus, in lateral view bent twice, in submedian and subapical regions......................................................  S. longicornis umkomaasiensis Leleup</p><p>8 Paramere in abparameral view bent in subapical region.........................  S. longicornis longicornis (Boheman)</p><p>- Paramere in abparameral view straight.............................................  S. longicornis errans Leleup</p><p>9 Distoventral region of protrochanter forming pointed subtriangular projection.............  S. berlinafricanus Jałoszyński</p><p>- Distoventral region of protrochanter not subtriangular....................................................... 10</p><p>10 Basal capsule in abparameral view distinctly narrower than remaining region of aedeagus........................... 11</p><p>- Basal capsule in abparameral view broader than or subequal in width to remaining region of aedeagus................. 12</p><p>11 Elytra nearly black; basal capsule in abparameral view much narrower than remaining region of aedeagus....................................................................................................  S. vulgaris (Lhoste)</p><p>- Elytra dark umbra brown; basal capsule in abparameral view as wide as remaining region of aedeagus.............................................................................................  S. mpumalanganus Jałoszyński</p><p>12 Basal capsule in abparameral view distinctly broader than remaining region of aedeagus............................ 13</p><p>- Basal capsule in abparameral view subequal in width to remaining region of aedeagus.............................. 14</p><p>13 Elytra nearly black; paramere in abparameral view nearly straight and conspicuously slender.......  S. dendrophilus Leleup</p><p>- Elytra light umbra brown; paramere in abparameral view recurved and conspicuously stout............  S. jeanneli Leleup</p><p>14 Aedeagus (together with paramere) more than 10 times as long as wide..............................  S. moori Leleup</p><p>- Aedeagus (together with paramere) at most 9 times as long as wide............................................. 15</p><p>15 Distal region of aedeagus (together with paramere) shorter than basal capsule.................................... 16</p><p>- Distal region of aedeagus (together with paramere) longer than basal capsule..................................... 17</p><p>16 In lateral view paramere strongly broadened in subapical region.............................  S. pilicornis (Boheman)</p><p>- In lateral view paramere not broadened.........................................................  S. holmi Franz</p><p>17 Elytra black..............................................................................  S. franzi Leleup</p><p>- Elytra light or dark umbra brown........................................................................ 18</p><p>18 Distal region of aedeagus (together with paramere) only slightly longer than basal capsule...........  S. inopinatus Leleup</p><p>- Distal region of aedeagus (together with paramere) several times longer than basal capsule.......................... 19</p><p>19 In abparameral view distal region of paramere subtriangular, gradually narrowing towards apex, only ~3 times as long as wide and much shorter than copulatory piece......................................................  S. joannae Leleup</p><p>- In abparameral view distal region of paramere rod-like, over 5 times as long as wide and as long as or longer than copulatory piece.............................................................................................. 20</p><p>20 In lateral view, apex of paramere broadened, spatulate....................................................... 21</p><p>- In lateral view, apex of paramere not broadened............................................................ 22</p><p>21 Head pitch brown or black, pronotum pitch brown.........................................  S. varii saxatilis Leleup</p><p>- Head dark reddish, pronotum light reddish brown........................................  S. varii fontinalis Leleup</p><p>22 Pronotum black....................................................................  S. bulirschi Jałoszyński</p><p>- Pronotum reddish brown.............................................................................. 23</p><p>23 In abparameral view basal capsule more than twice as long as wide; basal and distal regions of paramere confluent, not delimited by rapid narrowing......................................................  S. pseudofranzi Jałoszynski</p><p>- In abparameral view basal capsule at most twice as long as wide; distal region of paramere delimited from basal region by rapid narrowing.......................................................................................... 24</p><p>24 In abparameral and lateral views paramere distinctly recurved, with lateral margins sinuate............  S. varii varii Leleup</p><p>- In abparameral and lateral views paramere weakly curved, with lateral margins not sinuate.........  S. varii riparius Leleup</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03EF87EEFFD7E450FF5CFD40FA43C479	Public Domain	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Jałoszyński, Paweł	Jałoszyński, Paweł (2025): Two new species of the South African genus Stenomastigus Leleup (Coleoptera, Staphylinidae, Scydmaeninae). Zootaxa 5590 (1): 101-112, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5590.1.5
