Adelopsis simoni, (Portevin, 1903 a: 167)

Peck, Stewart B., Gnaspini, Pedro & Newton, Alfred F., 2020, Updated catalog and generic keys of the Leiodidae (Insecta: Coleoptera) of the Neotropical region (“ Latin America ”: Mexico, the West Indies, and Central and South America), Zootaxa 4741 (1), pp. 1-114 : 55-56

P. simoni ( Portevin, 1903a: 167)

(Catops), 1914a: 193 comb. (to Pseudonemadus ); Jeannel, 1936: 66 comb. (to Adelopsis , not stated as taxonomic change) [but see Notes 1 and 3]; Szymczakowski, 1968: 14 [but see Notes 1 and 4]; Gnaspini, 1996: 538 comb. (holotype seen); Gnaspini & Peck, 2019: 49 (holotype and topotypes seen).

Holotype female [a single specimen in original description, assumed as holotype] in MNHN [original description refers to [probably] Grouvelle collection; Jeannel, 1936 refers to Pic collection].

Type locality: Colonia Tovar [as “Towar” in Jeannel, 1936], [Aragua State], Venezuela.

Distribution: Venezuela: Aragua State: known only from type locality.

Note 1: Specimens and records of Jeannel (1936: 66) BMNH ( Brazil: São Paulo) and Szymczakowski (1968: 14) MNHN ( Venezuela: Aragua: Rancho Grande) and NMPC ( Mexico: Coatepeque) actually belong to three different species (Gnaspini, 1996: 540). They refer to P. jeanneli , P. aragua , and P. coatepec ( Gnaspini & Peck, 2019: 50, 53, 54, 55).

Note 2: The record in Szymczakowski (1963: 671) (NMPC specimens, Brazil: São Paulo) was considered a misidentification of P. claudicans (Szymczakowski) [1980] in Gnaspini (1996: 540), but Gnaspini & Peck (2019: 50, 52) discuss that it may refer to a different (probably undescribed) species, but it is certainly a misidentification.

Note 3: Jeannel, 1936 Figs. 79 and 97 refered to the illustrated male as “from Venezuela ”, but he had 1 female from Venezuela and 1 male from Brazil; therefore at least Fig. 97 (if not both) refers to the male from Brazil, and not from Venezuela, as already mentioned in Szymczakowski (1968: 14). This male illustrated does not belong in P. simoni (see Note 1). It refers to P. jeanneli ( Gnaspini & Peck, 2019: 50, 55).

Note 4: Szymczakowski (1968: 14) also adds a discussion about the high variability in P. simoni , which is due to misidentification (as discussed in Gnaspini, 1996, and highlighted in the Notes above). None of the figures refers to P. simoni (see Notes 1 and 2).

Note 5: The record in Salgado, 2014a: 16 ( Peru) was considered a misidentification in Gnaspini & Peck (2019: 50). It refers to P. consuelo ( Gnaspini & Peck, 2019: 50, 55).