Caryedes cristatus (Fåhraeus, 1839)

Jorge, Isaac Reis & Ribeiro-Costa, Cibele Stramare, 2019, New Synonymies and Lectotype Designations for the Neotropical Seed Beetle Genus Caryedes Hummel, 1827 (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae: Bruchinae), The Coleopterists Bulletin 73 (2), pp. 321-328 : 323-325

Caryedes cristatus (Fåhraeus, 1839)

“ Bruchus gibbicollis Faldermann , in litteris ”: Fåhraeus in Schoenherr 1839: 122. Nomen nudum.

Bruchus cristatus Fåhraeus in Schoenherr 1839: 122 (description, distribution, host plant).

Pachymerus (Falsobruchus) cristatus: Pic 1913a: 110 (as type species of Falsobruchus ).

Pseudopachymerus (Falsobruchus) cristatus: Pic 1913b: 10 (catalog).

Pseudopachymerus cristatus: Bondar 1931: 422 (host plant); Bondar 1936: 24 (host plant).

Falsobruchus cristatus: Bridwell 1932: 105 (catalog).

Caryedes cristata: Blackwelder 1946: 758 (checklist).

Caryedes cristatus: Kingsolver and Whitehead 1974: 398 (species-group, notes); Udayagiri and Wadhi 1989: 72 (catalog).

Pseudopachymerus cristatus var. velutinotatus Pic 1936: 13 (description, distribution); Udayagiri and Wadhi 1989: 72 (catalog, as junior synonym of Bruchus cristatus ) Synonymy confirmed.

Caryedes cristata var. velutinotata: Blackwelder 1946: 758 (checklist).

Bruchus godmani Sharp 1885: 444 (description, figure, distribution). New synonymy.

Pseudopachymerus (Falsobruchus) godmani: Pic 1913b: 11 (catalog).

Caryedes godmani: Blackwelder 1946: 758 (checklist); Kingsolver and Whitehead 1974: 401 (redescription, male genitalia, species-group, key, figures, distribution, host plant); Udayagiri and Wadhi 1989: 73 (catalog).

Type Material. Bruchus cristatus (4, NHRS): Lectotype, here designated, male ( Fig. 2 ), “[handwritten] ³” “[red, printed] Paratypus ”

“[handwritten] B: cristatus. \ Hoffmannseg. \ Para, Brasilia \ Klug.” “[printed] NHRS-JONI \ 000027566” “ Lectotype / Bruchus cristatus Fåhraeus, 1839 / design. I. R. Jorge”; 1 paralectotype female ( Fig. 3 ) “[handwritten] ♀ ” “[red, printed] Paratypus ” “[handwritten] Brasilia. in \ sem: Bahuinia \ (Schnellia.) \ Faldermann.” “[printed] NHRS-JONI \ 000027567” “ Paralectotype / Bruchus cristatus Fåhraeus, 1839 / design. I. R. Jorge ” ; 1 paralectotype male ( Fig. 4 ) “[handwritten] ³” “[red, printed] Typus ” “[handwritten] Br: gibbicollis \ Fald.\ Brazil: Faldermann ” “[printed] NHRS-JONI \ 000000469” “ Paralectotype / Bruchus cristatus Fåhraeus, 1839 / design. I. R. Jorge ” ; 1 paralectotype female ( Fig.5 ) “[handwritten] Br : gibbicollis \ Fald. \ Brazil: Faldermann ” “[handwritten] ♀ ” “[red, printed] Allotypus ” “[printed] NHRS-JONI \ 000000470” “ Paralectotype / Bruchus cristatus Fåhraeus, 1839 / design. I. R. Jorge ” .

In the original description, Fahraeus in Schoenherr (1839) indicated B. gibbicollis Faldermann as a name in litt. and a synonym of B. cristatus . No specimens were designated as types. We received four specimens from the NHRS. Bruchus cristatus : one male “ PARATYPUS ” ( Fig. 2 ); one unidentified female “ PARATYPUS ” ( Fig. 3 ); B. gibbicollis : one headless male as “TYPUS” ( Fig. 4 ); and B. gibbicollis : one female “ ALLOTYPUS ” ( Fig. 5 ). Label data of all specimens match the information given in the original description of B. cristatus : type locality (“ Brazil ”), collectors (“Klug”- B. cristatus , “Faldermann”- B. gibbicollis and unidentified specimen), and alleged authorship of the species names (“Hoffmannsegg” - B. cristatus , “Faldermann” - B. gibbicollis ), host plants (“Bahuniae, Schnelliae”- unidentified specimen) ( Figs. 2–5 ). Based on this information, we are confident that Fåhraeus in Schoenherr (1839) had all these four specimens to examine.

The red type labels were probably inadvertently added later, probably not by Fåhraeus, since the red tone and letter font are different ( Figs. 2–5 ). The labels “TYPUS” and “ ALLOTYPUS ” ( Figs. 4, 5 ) are erroneous because B. gibbicollis is a nomem nudum, and those indicating “ PARATYPUS ” ( Figs. 2, 3 ) are consequences of this previous procedure. Therefore, we selected the only male specimen labeled as B. cristatus , with the red label “ PARATYPUS ” and the only male with a head, to designate as the lectotype of B. cristatus ( Fig. 2 ).

Pseudopachymerus cristatus var. velutinotatus (2, BMNH): Lectotype, here designated, male, “[handwritten] Pseudopachymerus \ cristatus Fhr \ v. velutinotatus \ Pic” “[handwritten] 1908” “ BRAZIL \ bahia \ Dr. G. Bondar” “[facing down] Pres. by \ Imp. Inst. Ent. \ B. M. 1936-531.” “ Lectotype / Pseudopachymerus cristatus var. velutinotatus Pic, 1936 / design. I. R. Jorge”; 1 paralectotype male “[handwritten, illegible word]” “[handwritten] Pseudopachymerus \ cristatus Fahraeus ” “[handwritten] v. nov. \ velutinotatus” “[handwritten] 1908” “ BRAZIL \ bahia \ Dr. G. Bondar” “[facing down] Pres. by \ Imp. Inst. Ent. \ B. M. 1936-531.” “ Paralectotype / Pseudopachymerus cristatus var. velutinotatus Pic, 1936 / design. I. R. Jorge”.

In the original description, Pic (1936) did not indicate the number of specimens he studied. However, two specimens were received from BMNH, which bear locality data identical to that given in the original description, viz., Brazil, Bahia. The color differences mentioned by Pic (1936) between P. cristatus and P. cristatus var. velutinotatus are considered herein intraspecific variation, and no other morphological differences were found. In Udayagiri and Wadhi (1989), the variety name was treated as a junior synonym of P. cristatus . However, the authors did not state if the type material was examined. We, however, had the opportunity to study firsthand two types of P. cristatus velutinotatus , and based on that, we confirm the synonymy. Thus, one well-preserved specimen is herein designated as the lectotype of P. cristatus velutinotatus .

Bruchus godmani ( 1, BMNH): Holotype, male “[handwritten, with fixed specimen] Bruchus godmani . [on left vertical] \ Type D. S. [on left vertical] \ Bugaba. \ Panama. Champion.” “[circular label with red border, printed] TYPE” “[printed] sp. Fig.d.” “[printed] Bugaba. \ Panama. \ Champion.” “[printed] B. C. A. Col. V. \ Bruchus \ godmani, \ Sharp.”.

Sharp (1885) mentioned that he only studied one specimen, which was sent to us by the BMNH with collecting data labels identical to the information given in the original description (“ Panama, Bugaba, Champion”). We are confident that this specimen is the holotype. After studying this specimen, we conclude that B. godmani is a new junior synonym of B. cristatus , since no significant morphological differences between the two were detected.

Kingsolver and Whitehead (1974) mentioned Pachymerus triquetrus Motschulsky, 1874 as a probable synonym of Caryedes cristatus . However, it was not possible to examine the type material for our study and, thereby, this possible synonymy needs to be confirmed in the future.

Figures

Figs. 2–5. Type series of Bruchus cristatus. 2) Male selelected as lectotype, previously labeled as “PARATYPUS”; 3) Female paralectotype, without identification label, previously labeled as “PARATYPUS”; 4) Headless male paralectotype, previously identified as Bruchus gibbicollis and labeled as “TYPUS”; 5) Female paralectotype, previously identified as B. gibbicollis and labeled as “ALLOTYPUS”. Photographs by J. Bergsten (© 2017 Naturhistoriska riksmuseet). Made available by the Swedish Museum of Natural History under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License, CC-BY 4.0, creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode.