Euops

Riedel, Alexander, 2009, A taxonomic study of the Indian species of Euops Schoenherr (Coleoptera: Curculionoidea: Attelabidae), Zootaxa 2125, pp. 1-56 : 5

Euops subgenus Parasynaptopsis Legalov stat. n.

Parasynaptopsis Legalov, 2003: 377 ; type species, by original designation: Euops chinensis Voss, 1922 .

Morphoeuops Legalov, 2003: 377 ; type species, by original designation: Morphoeuops yunnanicus Legalov, 2003 ; syn. n.

Euops (Macrodentipes) Liang & Li, 2005: 266 ; type species, by original designation: Euops (Macrodentipes) hefengensis Liang, 2005 ; Legalov, 2007 (syn. with Morphoeuops ).

Indoeuops Legalov, 2007: 236 ; type species, by original designation: Indoeuops ammattiensis Legalov, 2007 ; syn. n.

Diagnosis. In its current sense the subgenus Parasynaptopsis has the following diagnostic characters: 1) protibia in female with strongly bisinuate ventral margin ( Fig. 130 ) and often with distinct subtriangular ventral extension in middle; 2) tibial apex in female with uncus but without premucro ( Fig. 90 ); 3) pronotum with wrinkles vortically arranged; 4) similar structure of transfer apparatus in male genitalia.

Notes. Parasynaptopsis and Morphoeuops were described as distinct genera ( Legalov 2003), but in the present state of taxonomy of Euops this cannot be justified and both are here relegated to subgeneric level. Morphoeuops was proposed for a single species with conspicuous autapomorphic characters, such as the toothed profemur of the male, but in other, more conservative characters indistinguishable from Parasynaptopsis and no justification is evident to keep it in a separate subgenus. Parasynaptopsis and Morphoeuops are therefore here synonymised, selecting the former as the valid name (Principle of the First Revisor, Art. 24 of ICZN (1999)). Morphoeuops was redescribed as Macrodentipes ( Liang & Li 2005), a synonymy already recognised by Legalov (2007). Euops andrewesi Voss belongs to the same group, but this species was evidently unknown to Legalov and he described it again and in another new genus, as Indoeuops ammattiensis ( Legalov 2007) , so that also Indoeuops must sink into synonymy with Parasynaptopsis . Although knowing neither E. andrewesi nor the similar E. bowringii, Legalov (2007) placed both in the genus Pseudoeuops Legalov, 2003 , stating that “this genus differs from other genera of the subtribe by the Fore legs no elongated of male, mesotibiae without blades or teeth of male“ [sic]. Both species, however, do not comply with this diagnosis, as the fore legs of E. andrewesi males are quite long ( Figs. 1 , 13 ) and the mesotibia of E. bowringii males has a massive spiniform extension ( Fig. 125 ).

These synonymies and rearrangements of species can only be a starting point to clarify the current chaos of the subgeneric classification of Euops . Whether the species here included in Parasynaptopsis can ultimately remain there depends on clarification of the concepts of the subgenera Synaptops Jekel, 1860 and Kobusynaptops Kôno, 1927 . The female of the type species of Synaptops , Euops nietneri Jekel, 1860 (a synonym of Euops suffundens (Walker, 1859)) , also lacks a premucro on the tibiae, but the ventral margin of its protibia does not show the derived bisinuate condition. Parasynaptopsis may therefore only constitute a derived clade of a larger subgenus Synaptops , but a comprehensive phylogenetic analysis of Asian Euops is necessary to resolve this matter. Further, species with a strongly tuberculate upper surface, such as E. (Kobusynaptops) pustulosus Sharp , may also belong to this group, possibly derived from a common ancestor with E. yunnanicus if the vortically arranged wrinkles of the pronotum were replaced by tubercles. Females of E. pustulosus need to be studied to assess this possibility. If true, Kobusynaptops would have priority over Parasynaptopsis . Lastly, other species described as separate genera or subgenera by Legalov (2003, 2007) as based on conspicuous derived characters need to be examined to determine if any fit into the current concept of Parasynaptopsis .

Figures

FIGURES 130 – 135. Left protibia of Euops spp. females: (130) E. andrewesi (11 km SE Kotagiri); (131) E. tamilnadunsis (Ootacamund); (132) E. bowringii (lectotype); (133) E. indicus (11 km SE Kotagiri); (134) E. keiseri nilgiriensis ssp. n., female paratype; (135) E. pseudoindicus sp. n., female paratype.

FIGURES 87 – 92. Euops spp.: (87 – 88) detail of lateral area of right elytron, (87) E. indicus, (88) E. pseudoindicus sp. n., note transverse wrinkles; (89) right elytron of E. andrewesi, note vortically arranged transverse wrinkles; (90) protibia of E. andrewesi female; (91 – 92) mesotibia of E. indicus male.

FIGURES 1 – 6. Habitus of Euops spp., dorsal aspect: (1) E. andrewesi, male (11 km SE Kotagiri); (2) E. andrewesi, female (11 km SE Kotagiri); (3) E. tamilnadunsis, male (Ootacamund); (4) E. tamilnadunsis, female (Ootacamund); (5) E. bowringii, male (11 km SE Kotagiri); (6) E. bowringii, female (11 km SE Kotagiri).

FIGURES 13 – 18. Habitus of Euops spp., lateral aspect: (13) E. andrewesi, male (11 km SE Kotagiri); (14) E. andrewesi, female (11 km SE Kotagiri); (15) E. tamilnadunsis, male (Ootacamund); (16) E. tamilnadunsis, female (Ootacamund); (17) E. bowringii, male (11 km SE Kotagiri); (18) E. bowringii, female (11 km SE Kotagiri).

FIGURES 123 – 129. Left mesotibia of Euops spp. males: (123) E. andrewesi (11 km SE Kotagiri); (124) E. tamilnadunsis (Ootacamund); (125) E. bowringii (lectotype); (126) E. indicus (11 km SE Kotagiri); (127) E. keiseri nilgiriensis ssp. n., holotype; (128) E. pseudoindicus sp. n., holotype; (129) E. trichinopoliensis, holotype.