Lichnia gallardoi Gutiérrez, 1943

Hawkins, Shauna Joy, 2006, A revision of the Chilean tribe Lichniini Burmeister, 1844 (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae), Zootaxa 1266 (1), pp. 1-63 : 22-26

Lichnia gallardoi Gutiérrez, 1943

( Figs. 9a , 10 )

Lichnia gallardoi Gutirrez 1943:151 (valid name).

Lichnia porteri Gutirrez 1943:152 . New synonymy.

Catalog

Lichnia gallardoi: Guti é rrez 1943:151 (original description); Hawkins 2004 (online

catalog).

Lichnia porteri: Guti é rrez 1943:152 (original description); Hawkins 2004 (online

catalog).

Type specimens

Lichnia gallardoi Gutiérrez , holotype male at UCCC labeled: a) “3154” (handwritten), b) “Chile 8.IX.1940 / Huetulame/ Coquimbo / gallardo” (handwritten), c) “ Lichnia (Neolichnia) / gallardoi Gut. / R. Gutiérrez Det. (handwritten in red ink and typeset in black ink), d) HOLOTIPO (orange label with black border, typeset), e) “Colección/ R. Gutiérrez/ 1958” (white label with blue border, typeset in blue ink), f) “Southern Neotropical Scarabs/ database #SH75980451/ Lichnia gallardoi Gutiérrez ♂ / DET: S.J. Hawkins 2004 ” (typeset, ♂ hand­drawn). Allotype female at UCCC labeled: a) “3158” (handwritten), b) ALOTIPO (orange label with black border, typeset), c) “Chile 8.IX.1940 / Hutetulame/ Coquimbo ” (handwritten), d) “Colección/ R. Gutiérrez/ 1958” (white label with blue border, typeset in blue ink), e) “Southern Neotropical Scarabs/ database #SH75980540/ Lichnia gallardoi Gutiérrez ♀ / DET: S.J. Hawkins 2004 ” (typeset, ♀ hand­drawn). There are a total of four male and two female paratypes at three institutions. Two male paratypes at UCCC labeled: a) “3156” and “3157” (handwritten), b) PARATIPO (orange label with black border, typeset), c) “Chile 8.IX.40/ Huetulame/ Coquimbo / Gallardo” (handwritten), d) “Southern Neotropical Scarabs/ database #SH75980452/ Lichnia gallardoi Gutiérrez ♂ / DET: S.J. Hawkins 2004 ” and “Southern Neotropical Scarabs/ database #SH75980453 / Lichnia gallardoi Gutiérrez ♂ / DET: S.J. Hawkins 2004 ” (typeset, ♂ hand­drawn). One male paratype at MNHN labeled: a) “Chile/ Huetulame/ Pr. Coquimbo ” (handwritten), b) “Paratipo” (handwritten), c) Lichnia (Neolichnia) / Gallardoi Gut. / R. Gutiérrez Det. 46.” (handwritten and typeset), d) “Southern Neotropical Scarabs/ database #SH75980777/ Lichnia gallardoi Gutiérrez ♂ / DET: S.J. Hawkins 2004 ” (typeset, ♂ hand­drawn). One male paratype (glued on card) at CMNC, labeled: a) “28.IX.940/ CHILE / Huetulame/ Gutiérrez Coll./ Coll Martínez” (handwritten), b) “H & A HOWDEN/ COLLECTION/ Ex. A. Martínez Coll” (black border, typeset), c) “ Paratype ” (yellow label with double black border, typeset), d) “Paratipo” (handwritten), e) Lichnia (Neolich.) / Gallardoi Gut. / ♂ R. Gutiérrez Det. 46.” (handwritten and typeset), f) “CMNEN/ 2002­0063” (typeset), g) “Southern Neotropical Scarabs/ database #SH75980455/ Lichnia gallardoi Gutiérrez ♂ / DET: S.J. Hawkins 2004 ” (typeset, ♂ hand­drawn). Two female paratypes at UCCC labeled: a) “3159” and “3165” (handwritten), b) PARATIPO (orange label with black border, typeset), c) “Chile 8.IX.40/ Huetulame/ Coquimbo / Gallardo” and “Chile 8.IX.40/ Huetulame/ Coquimbo ” (handwritten), d) “Southern Neotropical Scarabs/ database #SH75980541/ Lichnia gallardoi Gutiérrez / ♀ DET: S.J. Hawkins 2004 ” and “Southern Neotropical Scarabs/ database #SH75980542/ Lichnia gallardoi Gutiérrez / ♀ DET: S.J. Hawkins 2004 ” (typeset, ♀ hand­drawn). Type locality: Huetulame, Region IV (Coquimbo), Chile. According to Gutiérrez (1943), the type series was collected on the flowers of Senecio macropus Greenman (Asteraceae) . The location of 14 additional female paratypes from Gutiérrez’s original type series is unknown. Gutiérrez’s original description stated that the collection date of the type series was 26­IX­1940, but the collection date on most of the specimen labels is 8­IX­1940. However, because all other label data matches Gutiérrez’s original description, I consider the series labeled as 8­IX­1940 to be part of the type series.

Lichnia porteri Gutiérrez , neotype male (glued on card) at CMNC labeled: a) “Chile X.40/ Hurtado/ Coquimbo ” (handwritten), b) “H & A HOWDEN/ COLLECTION/ Ex. A. Martínez Coll” (black border, typeset), c) “ Paratype ” (yellow label with double black border, typeset), d) Lichnia (Neolich / nia) porteri Gut. / ♂ R. Gutiérrez Det. 49.” (handwritten in red ink and typeset in black ink), f) “CMNEN/ 2002­0064” (typeset), g) “Southern Neotropical Scarabs/ database #SH75980642/ Lichnia gallardoi Gutiérrez ♂ / DET: S.J. Hawkins 2005” (typeset, ♂ hand­drawn), e) “ Lichnia gallardoi / Gutiérrez/ NEOTYPE ♂ / S.J. Hawkins” (red label, typeset). Neotype here designated. The neotype was chosen from among the paratypes in the original type series. The location of two additional males (including the holotype male) and one additional female (the allotype female) from Gutiérrez’s original type series is unknown. Gutiérrez deposited these specimens in his personal collection, which was later transferred to the UCCC ( Smith 2003). Because I was unable to locate the holotype or allotype at UCCC or in any other collection from which I borrowed specimens, I consider them both lost. Type locality: Hurtado (Ovalle), Region IV (Coquimbo), Chile. There are a total of nine female paratypes from two institutions. Seven female paratypes at UCCC labeled: a) “3162,” “3163,” “3164,” “3166,” “3168,” “3169,” and “3170” (handwritten), b) PARATIPO (orange label with black border, typeset), c) “Chile 8.IX.40/ Huetulame/ Coquimbo / Gallardo” (handwritten), d) “Colección/ R. Gutiérrez/ 1958” (white label with blue border, typeset in blue ink), e) “Southern Neotropical Scarabs/ database, #SH75980634, #SH75980635, #SH75980636, #SH75980637, #SH75980638, #SH75980639, #SH75980640/ Lichnia gallardoi Gutiérrez ♀ / DET: S.J. Hawkins 2004 ” (typeset, ♀ handdrawn). One female paratype (glued on card) at CMNC, labeled: a) “28.IX.940/ CHILE / Huetulame/ Gutiérrez­leg./ Coll Martínez” (handwritten), b) “H & A HOWDEN/ COLLECTION/ Ex. A. Martínez Coll” (black border, typeset), c) “ Paratype ” (yellow label with double black border, typeset), d) “Paratipo” (handwritten), e) Lichnia (Neolichnia) / porteri Gut. / R. Gutiérrez Det. 46.” (handwritten and typeset), e) “CMNEN/ 2002­0062” (typeset), f) “Southern Neotropical Scarabs/ database #SH75980641/ Lichnia gallardoi Gutiérrez ♀ / DET: S.J. Hawkins 2004 ” (typeset, ♀ hand­drawn). One female paratype at UCCC labeled: a) “3161” (handwritten), b) PARATIPO (orange label with black border, typeset), c) “Chile Porter/ Hurtado/ Coquimbo ” (handwritten), d) “Colección/ R. Gutiérrez/ 1958” (white label with blue border, typeset in blue ink), e) “Southern Neotropical Scarabs/ database #SH75980543/ Lichnia gallardoi Gutiérrez ♀ / DET: S.J. Hawkins 2004 ” (typeset, ♀ hand­drawn).

Description

Male. Length 5.6–7.6 mm; width 3.5–4.7 mm. Color: Head, pronotum, venter, and legs black; elytral disc testaceous, margin dark brown to black. Head: Surface punctate; punctures small, dense, setose; setae long, moderately dense to dense, white. Clypeus with surface flat, punctate; punctures small, dense, setose; setae short, half as long as clypeal setae, dense, white or black; apex truncate. Labrum with surface punctate; punctures small, dense, setose; setae short, half as long as clypeal setae, dense, white or black; apex rounded with minute, recurved tooth at middle. Mandible on external surface with moderately long, dense, black setae. Labial margins with moderately long, dense, black setae. Eye canthus setose; setae long, dense, black. Antenna with pedicel setose, elongate, segment 2 globular, 3–6 subequal in length, 7–9 lamellate; club small, subequal in length to segments 3–6 ( Fig. 4b ). Pronotum: Surface punctate; punctures small, moderately dense, with long, moderately dense to dense, white setae. Anterior margin setose; setae short, dense, yellow. Lateral margins slightly rounded, setose; setae long, dense, white. Posterior margin setose; setae long, dense, white. Scutellum: Surface setose; setae long, dense, white. Elytron: Surface depressed posteriorly, punctate; punctures small, moderately dense medially, dense laterally; surface with both stout, black and slender, white setae. Propygidium: Surface exposed, covered with long, dense, white setae; setae overlaying basal 1/4 of pygidium, apices forming straight row. Pygidium: Surface slightly convex, setose; setae long, dense, black. Venter: Thorax punctate; punctures small, dense, with both black and white setae. Mes­ and metepisternum setose; setae long, dense, white. Abdominal segments densely setose on lateral margin, sparsely setose medially; setae long, white. Terminal abdominal segment setose on apical half; setae long, dense, black. Margin of apex sinuate. Legs: Surface setose; setae long, moderately dense, both black and white. Protibia slender, with 3 outer teeth and 1 inner apical tooth ( Fig. 3a ). Parameres: Fig. 9a .

Female.Females differ from males in the following respects: length 5.7–7.4 mm; width 3.6–4.9 mm. Color: Head, pronotum, venter, and legs reddish brown to black; elytral disc testaceous to red, margin dark brown to black. Head: Clypeal apex weakly rounded, without apical tooth. Pronotum: Lateral margin broadly rounded. Elytron: Surface not depressed posteriorly. Propygidium: Surface setose; setae yellow to yellowish brown, covering 1/3 of pygidium, not dense and not forming a straight row. Pygidium: Apex attenuate. Venter: Apex of terminal sternite of abdomen deeply emarginate. Legs: Protibia expanded ( Fig. 3b ).

Diagnosis

Lichnia gallardoi resembles Lichnia limbata . Males of L. gallardoi are easily diagnosed by a shorter antennal club ( Fig. 4b ) and the presence of a clypeal tooth (males of L. limbata have a longer antennal club [ Fig. 4a ] and lack a clypeal tooth). The clypeal tooth may be worn down and not visible in many specimens. When using male antennal characters to distinguish L. gallardoi from L. limbata , it must first be determined that the specimens are males by comparing the protibia, which is slender in males ( Fig. 3a ) and expanded along the entire length in females ( Fig. 3b ). Otherwise, males of L. gallardoi can be mistaken for females of L. limbata because both have short antennae ( Fig. 4b ). On average, both sexes of L. gallardoi are slightly larger than those of L. limbata . With the exception of size, females of these two species are indistinguishable and must be identified based on association with males and geographic location. The distribution of L. limbata is Region V (Valparaíso) to Region VII (Maule), whereas L. gallardoi is found further north in Region IV (Coquimbo) ( Fig. 10 ).

Remarks

Gutiérrez (1943) differentiated L. porteri from L. gallardoi based on characters such as color of setae and bristles and size difference. After studying a larger series (248 specimens) than Gutiérrez had access to, I conclude that these characters represent variation within a single species. Following Article 24.2 of the Code (International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature 1999), I, as first revisor, designate L. gallardoi as the valid name for the species because this name is most commonly used in collections and it better promotes stability. Consequently, L. porteri is here designated as a junior synonym of L. gallardoi .

Distribution Central Chile in Region IV (Coquimbo) ( Fig. 10 ).

Locality data

248 specimens were examined from ABTS, CASC, CMNC, CNCI, EMUS, FMNH, JEBC, JMEC, LACM, MNHN, MNNC, UCCC, UMRM, USNM, VMDC .

CHILE. REGION IV (COQUIMBO) (199): Canela Baja (4), Condoriaco (2), Costa Las Cardas (8), El Molle (4), El Tofo (1), Guanaqueros (1), Huentelauquén (2), Hurtado (2), Illapel (48), La Serena (2), Limari (4), Los Hornitos (27), Los Mantos (1), Los Molles (1), Mincha (21), Ovalle (2), Parque Nacional Fray Jorge (30), Puerto Oscuro (5), Quebrada El Arrayan (2), Rio Limari (5), San Lorenzo (4), Socos (1), Tongoy (6), Vicuna (1), no data (15). NO DATA (49).

Temporal data

January (7), August (2), September (16), October (125), November (43), December (6).

Figures

FIGURES 3a–b. Dorsal view of foreleg of Lichnia limbata showing sexual dimorphism in male (a) and female (b).

FIGURES 4a–c. Dorsal view of antenna showing length of club. a) Lichnia limbata male; b) L. limbata female; c) Arctodium mahdii male.

FIGURES 9a–c. Caudal (i) and lateral (ii) views of parameres. a) Lichnia gallardoi; b) L. limbata; c) Arctodium discolor.

FIGURE 10. Map of central Chile showing distribution of Lichnia gallardoi and L. limbata.