Dinidor vicarius Horváth, 1893

Kment, Petr & Rédei, Dávid, 2018, A revision of the types of Heteroptera species described by Géza Horváth based on specimens from collections of Ladislav Duda and Emil Holub, Acta Entomologica Musei Nationalis Pragae 58 (1), pp. 275-295 : 287

Dinidor vicarius Horváth, 1893

( Figs 46–49 )

Dinidor vicarius Horváth, 1893: 259 (original description).

Dinidor vicarius : LETHIERRY & SEVERIN (1893): 235 (catalogue); KIR- KALDY (1909b): 254 (catalogue); SCHOUTEDEN (1909): 74 (listed, suspected mislabelling); SCHOUTEDEN (1913a): 4–5 (catalogue, suspected mislabelling); DURAI (1987): 234 (listed, nomen dubium); LIS (1990): 144 (listed, nomen dubium); LIS (1995): 27 –28 (distribution in Africa, nomen dubium); ROLSTON et al. (1996): 60 (catalogue, nomen dubium).

Type locality. ‘Africa centralis (HOLUB)’ (in error).

Type material examined. HOLOTYPE: ♀ ( HNHM), Holub [p, pink label] // vicarius [Horváth’s hw, underlined in red hw] / det. Horváth [p]’ (pinned through scutellum, distiflagella of both antennae, both fore tarsi, and apex of right hind tarsus lacking) ( Figs 46–49 ).

Current status. New junior subjective synonym of Dinidor impicticollis Stål, 1870 (see below).

Distribution of Dinidor impicticollis . Colombia ( STÅL 1870, type locality; SCHOUTEDEN 1913a), Ecuador ( DURAI 1987),? Suriname ( SCHOUTEDEN 1913a, as questionable). Remarks. Dinidor vicarius was described from ‘Central Africa’ and it has remained of unknown identity so far (cf. DURAI 1987, LIS 1990, ROLSTON et al. 1996). The remark ‘[a]rticulus quartus antennarum exempli descripti mutilatus’ [= fourth antennal segment of the described specimen mutilated] ( HORVÁTH 1893: 259) implies that the original description was based on a single specimen, to be treated as the holotype ( ICZN 1999: Art. 73.1.2); the respective specimen is now deposited in the HNHM.

HORVÁTH (1893) compared his new species with D. impicticollis Stål, 1870 , and pointed out (in Latin) that it ‘seems to differ’ from the latter species by its somewhat narrower habitus and the ‘acetabula’ [= supracoxal lobes] lacking markings. A re-examination of the lectotype of D. impicticollis (type locality: Bogota, Colombia) (NHRS) and additional non-types of the latter species from Colombia, however, revealed that these differences are insignificant, and all specimens are recognized as conspecific. Accordingly, the following new synonymy is proposed: Dinidor impicticollis Stål, 1870 = D. vicarius Horváth, 1893 , syn. nov.

Figures

Figs 38–49. Habitus and labels of type specimens. 38–40 – Niamia angulosa Horváth, 1893, ♀, syntype; 41–43 – Cryptacrus princeps Horváth, 1893 [= C. comes comes (Fabricius, 1803)], ♀, syntype; 44–45 – Polytodes ochraceus Horváth, 1893 [= Polytes tigrinus (Vollenhoven, 1868)],?sex, holotype; 46–49 – Dinidor vicarius Horváth, 1893 [= D. impicticollis Stål, 1870], ♀, holotype. Scale bars in mm. (Photo: 38–43, 46–49 – D. Rédei, 44–45 – Ch. Marshall)