Ochthephilus strandi ( Scheerpeltz, 1950 )

Makranczy, György, 2014, Revision of the genus Ochthephilus Mulsant & Rey, 1856 (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae, Oxytelinae), Revue suisse de Zoologie 121 (4), pp. 457-694 : 584-586

Ochthephilus strandi ( Scheerpeltz, 1950) Figs 35-36, 308, 343-347, 539, 579

Ancyrophorus strandi Scheerpeltz, 1950: 62 , 72. – Palm, 1961: 11.*

Ochthephilus strandi (Scheerpeltz) . – Herman, 1970: 385.

*later Central European interpretations of this species are erroneous

TYPE MATERIAL EXAMINED: Ancyrophorus strandi – LECTOTYPE (here designated): “Lakselv Po. [*+70.05/+24.93*]; A. Strand; (on the back) c 18/6-31 \ Andr. Strand, Oslo; donavit: 2.VI.1938 \ ex coll.; Scheerpeltz \ Typus; Ancyrophorus ; strandi; O. Scheerpeltz \ Lectotypus; Ancyrophorus ; strandi Scheerpeltz ; (on the back) des. Makranczy, 1999 \ Ochthephilus ; strandi Scheerpeltz ; det. Makranczy, 1999” ( NHMW) . – PARALECTOTYPES (4): “ Framnes m. elv. [*+68.43/+17.38*]; A. Strand; (on the back) 25/6-30 \ Andr. Strand, Oslo; donavit: II.1931 \ ex coll.; Scheerpeltz \ Typus; Ancyrophorus ; strandi; O. Scheerpeltz \ Paralectotypus; Ancyrophorus ; strandi Scheerpeltz ; (on the back) des. Makranczy, 1999 \ Ochthephilus ; strandi Scheerpeltz ; det. Makranczy, 1999” ( NHMW, 1). – “Framnes m. elv.; A. Strand; (on the back) 25/6-30 \ Andr. Strand, Oslo; donavit: II.1931 \ ex coll.; Scheerpeltz \ Cotypus; Ancyrophorus ; strandi; O. Scheerpeltz \ Paralectotypus; Ancyrophorus ; strandi Scheerpeltz ; (on the back) des. Makranczy, 1999 \ Ochthephilus ; strandi Scheerpeltz ; det. Makranczy, 1999” ( NHMW, 1). – “Lakselv Po.; A. Strand \ Andr. Strand, Oslo; donavit: 2.VI.1938 \ ex coll.; Scheerpeltz \ Cotypus; Ancyrophorus ; strandi; O. Scheerpeltz \ Paralectotypus; Ancyrophorus ; strandi Scheerpeltz ; (on the back) des. Makranczy, 1999 \ Ochthephilus ; strandi Scheerpeltz ; det. Makranczy, 1999” ( NHMW, 2) .

OTHER MATERIAL: see Appendix.

REDESCRIPTION: Forebody as in Fig. 539. Measurements (n=10): HW = 0.53 (0.50-0.56); TW = 0.47 (0.43-0.50); PW = 0.58 (0.53-0.60); SW = 0.72 (0.66-0.75); AW = 0.75 (0.68-0.82); HL = 0.39 (0.37-0.42); EL = 0.20 (0.18-0.21); TL = 0.07 (0.06- 0.08); PL = 0.46 (0.43-0.51); SL = 0.93 (0.87-0.98); SC = 0.85 (0.79-0.90); FB = 1.82 (1.73-1.91); BL = 3.26 (2.83-3.43) mm. Head, pronotum and abdomen blackish dark brown. Elytra reddish dark to medium brown, scutellar area to shoulders plus a broad stripe at apex darker, blackish. Antennae and mouthparts dark brown with occasional reddish tint, legs reddish medium to dark brown. Body with greasy lustre mostly due to elytral setation plus forebody punctation and microsculpture. Pubescence rather fine and moderately dense, shorter and stronger (regularly spaced) on elytra, abdominal tergites with finer and longer setae, especially adjacent to laterosternites. Head anteriad eyes and near inner posterior margin of eye with stronger and darker bristles, as well as pronotal margin and middle of tibiae. Elytral apex without conspicuous setae. Last tarsomere with a few setae only.

Forebody. Antenna as in Fig. 579, antennomere 6 shorter and less wide than neighbours (articles 5 and 7). Clypeus almost impunctate (colliculate microsculptured), trapezoid, corners rounded, anterior edge gently arched; separated by impressed transversal line (frontoclypeal suture) across a shinier area. Supraantennal prominences well developed, feebly separated from clypeus/vertex by impressions. Vertex with oblique impressions in middle almost joining in V-shape. Temples bulging, evenly curved, little shorter than half of eye length. Neck separated by an impressed transversal groove, microsculpture much stronger than on head, with transverse cells, no setation. Pronotum with a narrow marginal bead, visible to anterior pronotal corners. Posterior pronotal angles well-formed, just slightly obtuse-angled, sides in posterior 2/3 almost straight. 'Anchor' fully formed, longitudinal midline as a slightly elevated, impunctate, weakly microsculptured line, parallel to this line two gentle, semi-longitudinal elongate elevations in anterior half of disc. In corners of anchor feeble, oblique impressions directed outwards, in middle at sides of midline two smaller impressions. Elytra slightly broadening posteriorly, sutural corners narrowly rounded; apical sides slightly oblique and in inner halves gently convex. Elytral surface rather even with two shallow, very elongate impressions behind scutellum. Head with fine coriaceous/colliculate microsculpture, fading on elevated parts, stronger in impressions, on pronotum microsculpture slightly stronger and more even. Punctation on head sparse, mostly confined to posterior part and sides, on pronotum more evenly spaced, average interspaces much larger than puncture diameters; elytral punctation more even and regularly spaced, average interspaces (with indistinct coriaceous microsculpture) about as puncture diameters, punctures discrete.

Abdomen. Compared to forebody, abdomen with much more sparse, finer, less distinct punctation, microsculpture on tergal apices fine coriaceous with moderately transverse cells. Tergite VII posterior margin with palisade fringe unmodified in middle (nearly uniform breadth). Tergite VIII (Fig. 308) basal edge evenly arched, with small concavity in middle of basal sclerotized band; apical edge with sinuate (protruding) corners, and broad, moderately deep emargination in between. Sternite VIII with rounded apical corners, apex in males shallowly concave laterally, gently sinuate in middle; in females slightly more sinuate (convex) in middle. Tergite X unmodified, apex very slightly wider in males than in females. Aedeagus as in Fig. 343, inner sclerites as in Figs 344-345. Female ringstructures as in Figs 346-347.

COMPARATIVE NOTES: This species is rather similar to O. forticornis , as evidenced by the similarity of the male genitalia and can only be separated by the differences in the apical part of the inner sclerite (details in the key). It must be remarked here that the shape of tergite VIII (as shown on Fig. 308 vs. Fig. 307) appears to be different from that of O. forticornis , but the latter species is so variable that this feature has no separation value at all. As a matter of fact, Fig. 307 shows a form frequently experienced in Japanese or Mongolian specimens of O. forticornis , just to indicate this sort of variability. Given the poor separation value of the available characters, more specimens of O. strandi may hide among those listed here under O. forticornis , females and undissected males.

DISTRIBUTION: Known from northern Scandinavia, Lapponia, Siberia to Alaska and Canada.

BIONOMICS: Specimens were collected at sandy and peaty riverbanks, from sand and gravel, mosses, leaflitter (Alnus sp.), Carex sp. and grasses, horseweed at gravelbank, sifting of straw and needle drift at riverbank.