Fidia humeralis Lefèvre

Strother, M. S. & Staines, C. L., 2008, A revision of the New World genus Fidia Baly 1863 (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae: Eumolpinae: Adoxini), Zootaxa 1798 (1), pp. 1-100 : 42-45

Fidia humeralis Lefèvre

( Figs. 13 , 69 , 82 ; Map 5)

Fidia humeralis Lefèvre 1877: 165 (original description); Jacoby 1882: 167 (faunal treatment); Lefèvre 1885: 75 (catalog); Schaeffer 1905: 170 (faunal treatment); Clavareau 1914: 76 (catalog); Blackwelder 1946: 662 (checklist); Bechyné 1953: 249 (catalog); Schultz 1970: 242 (dissertation); Wilcox 1975: 57 (checklist); Flowers 1996: 36 (checklist); Riley et al. 2003: 151 (catalog); Clark et al. 2004: 103 (host plants). Lefèvre (1877) gave single length and width measurements for F. humeralis , suggesting that he had only one specimen before him when he described this species. No evidence could be found to indicate that Lefèvre had more

than one specimen. The BMNH contains a female bearing the labels, "Type [white disc with red border] / Type. / Cuernavaca / Mexico. Salle Coll. / Fidia humeralis E. Lef. (Type) [handwritten] / Fidia humeralis Lef. apud Sallé. [handwritten] / Type. Sp. figured. / B.C.A. 167.3. [tan] / 3. Fidia humeralis . [folded]". It would appear that this is the specimen which was before Lefèvre, and it should be considered the holotype. However, because it is a female and, at present females of F. humeralis , F. comalensis , and F. dicelloposthe cannot be distinguished, it adds to the taxonomic confusion of these species. The specimen is glued on a point and is in fair condition. It has the left antennomeres 9–11 and both prothoracic legs missing, and the right elytron has a hole from the original pin.

Fidia plagiata Lefèvre 1877:165 (original description); Jacoby 1882:167 (faunal treatment); Lefèvre 1885:76 (catalog); Schaeffer 1904:227–228 (key); Clavareau 1914:76 (catalog); Leng 1920:293 (catalog); Blackwelder 1946:662 (checklist); Bechyné 1953:249 (catalog); Schultz 1970:242 (dissertation, synonymized with F. humeralis , not a valid nomenclatural act); Wilcox 1975:57 (checklist, synonymized with F. humeralis ).

Because Lefèvre described a variation "β" of F. plagiata , he clearly had at least two specimens before him when he described the species. Lectotype here designated ( BMNH): ♂ "Juquila / Type. / Mexico. Salle. Coll. / Fidia plagiata E. Lef. var. β [handwritten] / Fidia plagiata, Lef. apud Salle. [handwritten] / Type. Sp. figured. / B.C.A. 167.4. [tan] / LECTOTYPE Fidia plagiata Lefèvre design. M.S.Strother 1993 [red]". It is glued on a point with its dissected abdomen and is in very good condition with only the right antennomeres 8–11 missing. It has a hole in the right elytron from the original pin. The aedeagus and associated sclerites are preserved in glycerin in a microvial pinned beneath the specimen. Paralectotype here designated ( BMNH): ♀ "Type [white disc with red border] / Type. / Juquila / Mexico. Salle Coll. / Fidia plagiata E. Lef. Type) [handwritten] / Fidia plagiata, Lef. apud Salle. [handwritten] / Type. Sp. figured. / B.C.A. 167.4. [tan] / 4. Fidia plagiata . [folded] / PARALECTOTYPE Fidia plagiata Lefèvre design. M. S. Strother 1993 [red]". The types of F. humeralis and F. plagiata differ only in the size and shape of the reddish-brown area on the elytron, and these two names clearly apply to the same taxon .

Fidia plagiata humeralis: Leng 1920:293 (checklist).

Description. Males: TL = 3.51–4.44 mm, HW = 1.68–2.04 mm. Females: TL = 3.80–5.24 mm, HW = 1.84– 2.52 mm. Color: Extremely variable; most specimens with head, pronotum, elytral suture, and apical ½ of elytra more or less black, occasionally with faint bluish-green or purple metallic luster, with humeral area and occasionally extreme apex of elytron pale red-orange to dark red-brown; many specimens as above but with red-orange humeral area extending entire length of elytron; other specimens as above but with portions of head and pronotum pale red-orange to dark red-brown; a few specimens almost entirely pale or dark redbrown; thoracic and abdominal sterna entirely pale red-orange to entirely black with faint bluish-green to purple metallic luster; femora, tibiae, and tarsi unicolorous, pale red-brown to nearly black; pubescence ashy to silvery-white. Pronotum: Length subequal to width, widest at or immediately posteriad middle, sides moderately to distinctly arcuate in dorsal view, dorsum feebly convex to straight in lateral view; densely, coarsely punctate-reticulate; pubescence moderately dense. Mesepisternum: Entirely glabrous. Elytra: Intrahumeral callus obsolete to obsolescent; asetose punctate-striae obsolete to only feebly developed, usually slightly more evident on lateral aspect; surface moderately densely to densely, coarsely punctate-reticulate to punctateundulose; setose punctures subequal in diameter to asetose punctures; pubescence moderately dense. Abdomen: Both sexes with medial area of all sterna evenly convex. Males: often with small, impunctate, glabrous medial area on first sternum; pygidium feebly to moderately convex dorsally with broadly rounded apex. Females: medial area of first sternum uniformly punctate-pubescent; apical margin of last sternum slightly to moderately concave with small, distinct, acutely rounded or pointed medial process; pygidium flat to feebly impressed dorsally with narrowly truncate to subacutely rounded apex. Legs: Both sexes with all femora gradually tapered towards base. Male: all tibial spurs small, lacking visible surface sculpture; all basitarsi subtriangular; disco-setae present on all basitarsi. Penis: In posterior view, side only slightly tapered towards gently rounded apex; apex with small, acutely pointed to acutely rounded medial tooth. In lateral view, eudorsal surface of declivitous part more or less evenly convex, euventral surface straight to slightly concave, apex tapered to small, acute tooth; sperm guide composed of upper and lower sclerites. Spermatheca: Basal arm type.

Diagnosis. Small to medium-sized (3.51–5.24 mm.); usually very dark red-brown to blackish with humeri, entire dorsolateral aspect, or rarely entire elytra red-orange; pronotum densely, coarsely punctatereticulate; mesepisternum entirely glabrous. Male with abdominal sterna simple, lacking structural or setal

modifications; penis with small, acutely rounded or pointed apical process ( Fig. 82 ). Females with apical margin of last sternum feebly to moderately concave, bearing small, distinct, acutely pointed medial process ( Fig. 69 ).

Fidia humeralis is practically indistinguishable from F. comalensis and F. dicelloposthe based on external characters, but males of the three are easily distinguished by the shape of the apex of the penis, as given in the diagnosis under F. comalensis . Some specimens of F. pedestris are blackish with red-orange elytral humeri but are distinguished from F. humeralis by the prominent intrahumeral calli of the elytra and by having the elytra much more sparsely, finely punctate with finer, longer pubescence than F. humeralis . In addition males of F. pedestris possess distinctive secondary sexual modifications on the second and third abdominal sterna. The females of these three species are either indistinguishable or the females of F.comalensis and F. dicelloposthe are unknown.

Distribution (Map 5). Fidia humeralis occurs from the mountains of southeastern Arizona and southwestern New Mexico, along the Sierra Madre Occidental and Sierra Madre del Sur of western and south-central Mexico, respectively, as far south and east as the state of Oaxaca. Collecting elevations ranged from 1433–2439 m.

Specimens examined (163). MEXICO. COAHUILA: Matamoros, v (CASC:4). GUERRRERO: 14 mi. N Chilpancingo, no date (FSCA:1), * Amula, ix (BMNH:1). MEXICO: 4.3 mi. NE Ixtapan, vii:6:1974 (TAMU:2), Temascaltepec; Real de Arriba, 1932 (BMNH:1), Tonatico, vii:6:1974 (TAMU:3). MICHOA- CAN: San Jose Purua, vii:8–9:1987 (FSCA:1). MORELOS: Cuernavaca , vi (CASC:2). OAXACA: 19 mi S San Miguel Suchixtepec, vii:17:1985 (TAMU:1), Juquila, no date (BMNH:1). SINALOA: 25 km W El Palmito, viii:7:1983 (LACM:1), San Antonio, vi:10:1937 (UAIC:1). Locality illegible, no date (BMNH:2).

UNITED STATES. ARIZONA: Cochise Co., 1 mi. S. Portal, vii:3:1956 ( AMNH:1), 2.5–5 km W. Portal, vii:23:1989 ( EGRC:1), 3 km SW Portal, vii:24:89 ( EGRC:2), 3 mi NW Portal, vii:27:1972 ( AMNH:1, EGRC:1), 5 mi. W Portal, Chiricahua Mts., viii:12:58 ( UCDC:1), Chiric Mts, 1:7 ( USNM:2), 3:7 ( USNM:1), Chiricahua M., vii:12:53 ( OSUC:1), vii:24:55 ( OSUC:1), Chiricahua Mts., viii:4:1908 ( CASC:1), viii:10:1908 ( CASC:1), vi:20:1928 ( CUIC:1), vi:29:1968 ( FSCA:1), Chiricahua Mts., West Turkey Creek, vii:27:1989 ( EGRC:2), Dragoon Mts., West Stronghold, vii:20:1973 ( FSCA:1), Huach Mt., no date ( MCZC:3), Huach Mts., vii:11 ( USNM:2), vii:29 ( USNM:1), viii ( USNM:1), no date ( USNM:2), Huach Mts., Miller Can., vii:30 ( USNM:1), Huach Mts., Miller Cyn., viii:2:1975 ( LACM:1), Huachu. Mts., vii:11 ( OSUC:1), Huachuca Mts., vii:1905 ( AMNH:4), vii:28:07 ( OSUC:1), no date ( CASC:2), Huachuca Mts., Carr Canyon, vi:30:1956 ( CMNC:1), Huachuca Mts., Copper Cn, vii:5:77 ( TAMU:1), Huachuca Mts., Hdq., Montezuma Pass, vii:6:1956 ( CMNC:1), Huachuca Mts., Miller Cn, vii:26:76 ( TAMU:1), Huachuca Mts., Ramsey Canon, vii:15–19:1912 ( CASC:1), Huachuca Mts., Ramsey Cn., vii:11:1955 ( UAIC:1), vii:13:1955 ( UAIC:1), Huachuca Mts., Sunnyside, viii:18:1940 ( CASC:1), nr. Portal, viii:25:70 ( TAMU:1), Portal, 7:1968 ( USNM:8), viii:11:1983 ( EGRC:1), S.W. Res. Sta., vii:20:1976 ( EGRC:1), S.W. Res. Sta., 5 mi. W. Portal, viii:10–11:83 ( EGRC:1), S.W. Res. Sta., Portal, vi:24:1956 ( CMNC:1), vi:28:1956 ( CMNC:1), vi:29:1956 ( CMNC:7), vi:30:1956 ( CMNC:2), S.W. Research Station, vii:27:1987 ( CDAE:7), S.W.R.S., 5 mi. W. Portal, vi:20:1955 ( AMNH:1), vi:25:1955 ( AMNH:1), vi:1:1955 ( AMNH:1), vi:10:1957 ( AMNH:1), vi:25:1957 ( AMNH:1), S.W.R.S., Portal, vi:21:1967 ( CDAE:1), Southwest R.S., Portal, vii:14:1985 ( NDSU:17), Southwest Research Station, vii:29–31:1987 ( CDAE:2), SW Res. Sta.; 5 mi. W. Portal, viii:7:59 ( CUIC:1), SW Res. Sta.; 5 mi. W. Portal, Chiricahua Mts., vii:27:1987 ( CDAE:2), viii:12–13:1978 ( AJG:1); Gila Co., Sierra Ancha Mts.; vii ( CASC:1, UAIC:1); Pima Co., Madera Canyon, viii:5:1974 ( AJG:1), S Catalina Mts., Peppersauce Cn., viii:13:40 ( CASC:1), S Rita Mts., Madera Cn. Foothills, vii:21:1941 ( CASC:1), Santa Catalina Mts., Tucson, vi:28:58 ( BMNH:1), Santa Rita Mtns, Box Canyon, vii:27–28:1982 ( EGRC:1), Santa Rita Mts., vii ( SEMC:2), county only, viii:12:15 ( MCZC:1), vii:12:17 ( CASC:2); Santa Cruz Co., Canelo, vii:20:1946 ( CASC:2), viii:3:1956 ( UAIC:8), Madera Cyn., vii:17:1978 ( AJG:1), Patagonia L. St. Pk., viii:11:1987 ( LSUC:1), Pena Blanca Lake, vii:27:1982 ( EGRC:1, JEWC:2), Santa Rita M., vii:13:37 ( OSUC:1), Santa Rita Mts., Madera Cyn., vii:21:1968 ( FSCA:1), County not determined, Pinal Mts., viii:5:1935 ( UAIC:1); State only, no date ( USNM:2). NEW MEXICO: Hidalgo Co., Peloncillo Mts., 33 mi. E Douglas, AZ, vii:17:1973 ( TAMU:1), Peloncillo Mts., Clanton Draw, vii:9:79 ( TAMU:1); State only, no date ( SEMC:1). No locality, no date ( MCZC:3, BMNH:1).

Temporal Data. Collecting dates ranged from May to September in Mexico and 10 June to 25 August in the U.S.

Natural History. Plant associations included Cupressus sp. (Cupressaceae) and Parthenocissus quinquefolia (L.) and Vitis sp. (Vitaceae) . The record on Cupressus probably does not represent a true host record. Specimens were also taken at lights and in Malaise traps.

Taxonomic History. In 1877, Lefèvre described F. humeralis and F. plagiata , separating them on the size and location of the lighter brownish-red spots of the elytra. In addition, he described a variation "ss" of F. plagiata which had the entire lateral margin of the elytra brownish-red. Jacoby (1882) suspected that Lefèvre's names were synonymous, and Schaeffer (1905) noted that the two species differed only in the presence or absence of an apical spot on the elytra. Leng (1920) placed a lowercase "a" before F. humeralis and listed it under F. plagiata indicating that he considered it a variety, subspecies, or race of the latter. Leng's treatment of F. humeralis as an infraspecific taxon was not mentioned by subsequent authors. Schultz (1970) synonymized F. plagiata with F. humeralis but did not publish this portion of his dissertation, and this nomenclatural act is not available. Fidia plagiata was validly synonymized with F. humeralis by Wilcox (1975).

Figures

FIGURES 13–16. Dorsal habitus of Fidia species. 13. F.humeralis. 14. F. longipes. 15. F. marraverpa. 16. F. papillata.

FIGURES 61–70. Last visible abdominal sternum of female (scale bar = 1.0 mm). 61. F. rileyorum. 62. F.spuria. 63. F. delilahae. 64. F. pedestris. 65. F. papillata. 66. F. confusa. 67. F. marraverpa. 68. F. dichroma. 69. F. humeralis. 70. F. xanthonioides.

FIGURES 80–83. Distal part of male aedeagus, lateral and dorsal views (scale bar = 0.5 mm). 80. F. comalensis. 81. F. dicelloposthe. 82. F.humeralis. 83. F. tibialis. (abbreviations: ae- apical emargination; al- apical lobe; ao- apical orifice).