Hypotelus insulanus Bierig, 1934

Bortoluzzi, Sidnei, Caron, Edilson & Ribeiro-Costa, Cibele S., 2017, Revision and phylogeny of Hypotelus Erichson: a Neotropical genus of minute rove beetles (Coleoptera, Staphylinidae, Piestinae), Zootaxa 4273 (4), pp. 451-487 : 471-472

publication ID	https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4273.4.1
publication LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:pub:310C1107-096C-4C9B-A131-B0F69DB938E8
DOI	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6017734
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DB878D-FF82-D52E-CEB5-FDA6D02CFB05
treatment provided by	Plazi
scientific name	Hypotelus insulanus Bierig, 1934
status

Treatment

Hypotelus insulanus Bierig, 1934 View in CoL

( Figs. 9 View FIGURES 9 – 19 , 52, 56 View FIGURES 48 – 58 , 61, 62 View FIGURES 59 – 74 , 76 View FIGURES 75 – 82 , 85, 86 View FIGURES 83 – 108 , 114 View FIGURE 114 )

Hypotelus insulanus Bierig, 1934: 343 View in CoL (original description, type locality: “Cuba; Aspiro (pie de la Sierra del Rosario)”); Blackwelder, 1943: 42 (review; distribution); Herman, 2001: 1785 (distribution); Peck, 2005: 65 (distribution).

Type material. Hypotelus insulanus Bierig, 1934 . Five syntypes deposited in FMNH. One male (photo, Fig. 9 View FIGURES 9 – 19 ) with labels: (1) “ ♂ ” [white label, handwritten, together with the specimen]; (2) “ Coll. Alex.Bierig /Aspiro XI.1934 ” [old white, first line printed. Locality and date, handwritten]; (3) “ Prov.P. Río, CUBA ” [old white, printed. “ P. Río ”, handwritten]; (4) “ insulanus / Brg. ” [old white, handwritten]; (5) “ insulanus / Bier. [probably Cotype]/don. C.Koch ” [red label, handwritten]; (6) “ Chicago NHMus/ M.Bernhauer / Collection ” [white label, printed in black]; (7) “FMNHINS/0000 131 008” [white label, printed in black]; (8) “ Photographed / Kelsey Keaton 2014/ Emu Catalog ” [blue label, printed in black]; (9) “ SYNTYPE / Hypotelus insulanus / Bierig, 1934 /det. S. Bortoluzzi, 2016” [red label, printed in black]. One male, body glued on white card [damaged specimen: without right hind leg], dissected [labrum, mandibles, labium, left hind tarsus, abdominal segments 8 to 10 and aedeagus fixed on acetate plastic card and covered with Canada balsam], with labels: (1) “ Aspiro, 30.III.34 . / Cuba ” [old white, handwritten]; (2) “ Field Mus. Nat. His. /1966/ A. Bierig Colln. / Acc. Z-13812” [white label, printed in black]; (3) “ SYNTYPE / Hypotelus insulanus / Bierig , 1934 /det. S. Bortoluzzi, 2016” [red label, printed in black]. One female, dissected [abdominal segments 8 to 10 and spermatheca fixed on acetate plastic card covered with Canada balsam], with labels: (1) “Aspiro, 30.III.34 . / Cuba ” [old white, handwritten]; (2) “ Field Mus. Nat. His. /1966/ A. Bierig Colln. / Acc. Z-13812” [white label, printed in black]; (3) “ SYNTYPE / Hypotelus insulanus / Bierig , 1934 /det. S. Bortoluzzi, 2016” [red label, printed in black]. One specimen, sex undetermined, with labels: (1) “Aspiro, 30.III.34 . / Cuba ” [old white, handwritten]; (2) “ Field Mus. Nat. His. /1966/ A. Bierig Colln. / Acc. Z-13812” [white label, printed in black]; (3) “ SYNTYPE / Hypotelus insulanus / Bierig , 1934 /det. S. Bortoluzzi, 2016” [red label, printed in black]. One specimen, sex undetermined, with labels: (1) “Rangel, 12.IV.34 . / Cuba ” [old white, handwritten]; (2) “ TYPUS ” [black label, handwritten]; (3) “ Hypotelus / insulanus / Brg. ” [old white, handwritten]; (4) “ Field Mus. Nat. His. / 1966/ A. Bierig Colln. / Acc. Z-13812” [white label, printed in black]; (5) “ SYNTYPE / Hypotelus insulanus / Bierig, 1934 /det. S. Bortoluzzi, 2016” [red label, printed in black].

Note: We received five specimens from FMNH all of which we are considering as syntypes. However, we note here that all of them have different dates from Bierig (1934: p. 334, “ III. 28 de 1934”): three specimens of 30.III.34, one XI. 34 and one 12.IV.34. The last one is also from a different locality, “ Rangel ”. There are at least six provinces in Cuba with localities named as Rangel, but there is one of them named as “ El Pinar del Rangel ”, in Artemisa (t. l), which can be the locality written on that label ( GeoNames 2016).

Diagnosis. Hypotelus insulanus is similar to Hypotelus pusillus and differs in abdominal segment 8: tergite 8 of male with posterior margin somewhat truncate and sternite 8 of male with posterior margin weakly pigmented ( Fig. 52 View FIGURES 48 – 58 ), apex of median lobe of aedeagus straight in lateral view ( Fig. 61 View FIGURES 59 – 74 ); sternite 8 of female with posterior margin rounded ( Fig. 76 View FIGURES 75 – 82 ).

Redescription. BL: 2.1–3.0 mm, BW: 0.5–0.7 mm. Body slightly convex; dorsal surface glossy; light brown to brown, except elytra yellowish; appendages lighter than body, except mandibles. Dorsal integument of head and pronotum entirely with fine punctures and undulate microstriae; elytra with dispersed fine punctures and only one longitudinal finely punctate stria close to elytral suture.

Male. Head. Supra-antennal area slightly prominent. Antennae reaching half-length of elytra; antennomeres 3, 5, 7, 9 and 11 with longest setae on inner face; scape with prominent tooth on inner face; antennomeres 2 and 3 of equal length, 5–11 gradually increasing in length toward antennal apex. Mandibles symmetrical. Mentum 1.6 times wider than long.

Thorax. Pronotum wider than long (PW/PL=1.3); anterior angles rounded; apical half with somewhat parallel sides and basal half gradually narrowing toward the base; with complete internal mid-longitudinal ridge and slight longitudinal median sulcus only on basal half. Elytra somewhat longer than wide (EL/BW=1.1), covering partially or not abdominal tergite 3.

Abdomen. Tergite 8 with posterior margin somewhat truncate; sternite 8 with posterior margin rounded and weakly pigmented ( Fig. 52 View FIGURES 48 – 58 ); tergite 9 with short ventral struts; sternite 9 with posterior margin truncate and with two pairs of long setae, the internal longest; tergite 10 at posterior margin emarginate, with short fringes and four setae on each side ( Fig. 56 View FIGURES 48 – 58 ). Median lobe of aedeagus with apex rounded in ventral view; curved shape and apex straight in lateral view ( Figs. 61–62 View FIGURES 59 – 74 ).

Female. Similar to male except for: antennae shorter, scape without prominent tooth on inner face and without the longest setae on antennomeres 3, 5, 7, 9 and 11; abdominal tergite 8 with posterior margin rounded; sternite 8 with posterior margin regularly pigmented and with short setae on posterior margin ( Fig. 76 View FIGURES 75 – 82 ); tergite 9 without ventral struts; tergite 10 slightly rounded at apex ( Fig. 85 View FIGURES 83 – 108 ); bursa copulatrix as H. pusillus ; ovipositor consisting of a pair of weakly pigmented hemisternites and a pair of more apical coxites, and with many long setae on apex; spermatheca as Fig. 86 View FIGURES 83 – 108 .

Geographical records. In the current study, the species was examined from Cuba (Artemisa). Blackwelder (1943) also listed the species from Cuba (Cayamas), Jamaica (Saint Thomas and Santa Isabel), Hispaniola: Dominican Republic (La Vega) and Saint Vincent. Herman (2001) listed it from the West Indies [ Caribbean islands ]. Peck (2005) listed Cienfuegos “Ci” as a province of Cayamas ( Cuba) and cited the province Pinar del Rio “PR” as the type locality of this species ( Fig. 114 View FIGURE 114 ).

Biological notes. In the original description, Bierig (1934) commented that five specimens were found under the bark of fallen “almácigo”; according to this author, they were apparently preying on fly larvae but this behavior has not been confirmed.

Blackwelder (1943) cited that the Cuban specimens were collected “on ceiba”; that is, on a silk cotton tree, presumably under the bark; the Jamaican specimens were taken from under bark of the silk cotton tree and tropic birch, as well as ‘flying at dusk’.