Pharaonus (Pharaonus) farsensis Keith, Sabatinelli

Pharaonus (Pharaonus) farsensis Keith, Sabatinelli, and Uliana, new species

(Figs. 6, 14, 18)

Diagnosis. a species of Pharaonus (Pharaonus) with dark body integuments, except for yellowish-brown elytra. Clypeus strongly transverse (2.1–2.4 times as wide as long), with right angles. Head and pronotum with long, erect pilosity, elytra with scattered long pilosity, more dense on odd intervals. Pronotum impressed along the midline, punctation dense and coarse. Pygidium with a large impunctate area. Antennal club of the male 1.13–1.16 as long as the clypeus width. Protibiae bidentate.

Examined material. Holotype: Iran, Darab, VI.1960, s/blé [= on wheat], [leg.] Rémaudière, ♂ (MNHN). Paratypes: same data of the holotype, 3 ♂ (1 DKCC, 2 MNHN).

Description of the male holotype. Length (from the anterior margin of the clypeus to the apex of the elytra) 9.2 mm.

Head, pronotum and underside black; antenna light brown with apex of antennomere 1 and club darker; legs black with dark brown tarsi; elytra yellowish-brown, darker along the suture and the epipleural margin.

Head: clypeus very transverse (2.3 times as wide as long), almost rectangular, with margins distinctly raised. Anterior margin straight; anterior angles right, broadly rounded. Integument glabrous with large, shallow, irregular punctures; defining a coarse and reticulate sculpture. Frontoclypeal suture almost invisible but marked by a dense tuft of long, yellowish gray, erect pilosity. Frons with sculpture similar to that of clypeus, and with pilosity becoming shorter and sparser going from the frontoclypeal suture towards the vertex. Ocular canthus strong; eyes small, not strongly protruding. Antennae with 9 antennomeres; club with 3 antennomeres, 2.0 times longer than funicle (antennomeres 2–6) and 1.12 times as long as clypeus width. Scape noticeably enlarged at the apex; antennomere 2 wider than long; antennomeres 3, 4, 5 increasing in length; antennomere 6 discoidal.

Pronotum transverse, 1.45 times wider than long. Sides subparallel in the basal two thirds, strongly convergent in the anterior third; slightly concave in the basal portion, almost straight in the distal one. Anterior angles acute, posterior angles rounded and right. Base broadly truncate in front of scutellum. Anterior margin unconspicuous; lateral and basal margins distinct, basal margins broader laterally and visible in front of the scutellum. Punctation dense, forming irregular series of rough punctures, open dorsally. Surface with long, greyish-yellow, erect pilosity. Median, longitudinal furrow weakly defined over the entire length. Scutellum semi-elliptical, with sculpture and pilosity similar to those of the pronotum, punctures evenly distributed.

Elytra quite flat with 7 poorly defined striae of punctures, with sparse punctures over entire surface, punctures less dense than on the pronotum. First (sutural) interval raised over entire length. Humeral callus strong, more finely punctate than the surrounding integument. Apical callus also distinct, but weaker. Surface with sparse, raised setae; the longest setae being about half the length of the pronotal setae; setae denser and forming weak rows on interstriae 3, 5, 7. Epipleural margin broad and inflated under the humeral callus, then flattened and narrowing until the middle of the elytra; from the middle of the elytra to the apex again with relief in the form of a narrow border. Membranous margin of the epipleura gradually widening from the basal third to the apex, where it is conspicuous. Suture prolonged in a short apical spine.

Propygidium punctate over entire surface, without apical fringe of pilosity. Pygidium convex, with a glabrous central band; central band smooth at the base and sparsely punctate on its apical half. Distinct punctate triangular area on either side of central band bearing a patch of almost adpressed, greyish-white, long pilosity. Apical margin with erect pilosity.

Protibiae bidentate, basal tooth obtuse, apical tooth slightly curved. Apical inner spur short, inconspicuous. Protarsomeres 1–4 slightly and gradually widened. Protarsomere 5 approximately of the same length as protarsomeres 1–4 combined. Inner claw of protarsomeres broad, bifid; outer claw narrow. Mesotibiae and metatibiae clearly enlarged in the middle, with two rows of spiniform setae. Claws of mesotarsi and metatarsi simple and elongate.

Labrum appearing weakly bilobate. Terminal maxillary palpomere elongate, fusiform, with a sulcus in the basal two thirds.

Aedeagus as in Fig. 18.

Female: unknown.

Variability. Size ranging between 9.1–9.3 mm; clypeus 2.1–2.4 times as wide as long, antennal club of the male 1.13–1.16 as long as the clypeus width. Scutellum with punctures evenly distributed or with punctures smaller and denser laterally. Protibiae basal tooth either acute or obtuse. No other relevant variation was observed on the small number of examined specimens.

Etymology. Based on the Iranian province of Fars, where this species is known to occur.

Discussion. Based on their habitus, the two new species are close to Pharaonus caucasicus and to P. fasciculatus. From the former, they can be easily distinguished by the punctation, which is much stronger and rougher over the entire dorsal surface, with coalescent punctures (finer and not coalescent in P. caucasicus). In addition, the two new species have the proximal tooth of the protibiae quite similar to the distal one (broader and less elongate in P. caucasicus), and the longitudinal glabrous band of the pygidium much more developed and less punctate than P. caucasicus, and with thinner patches of setae laterally.

Pharaonus adelphus and P. farsensis are very similar to P. fasciculatus, and are distinct mainly by the presence of a smooth region in the medial area of the pygidium and by the presence of a longitudinal impression along the midline of the pronotum. In addition, the protarsi and the inner proclaw are stouter.

Pharaonus aldephus and P. farsensis are very similar each other and occur in close proximity (their type localities in southeastern Iran, are separated by a distance of about 300 km), nevertheless the two species are clearly distinct by the different state of elytral pilosity (see Figs. 13–14) and by the different lengths of male antennal club. The latter difference appears trivial, but is statistically significant: a Student’s t -test calculated on the ratio length of antennal club/width of clypeus of the available males (two-tailed test for groups with unequal variance). The results were P = 0.0012, which strongly support the hypothesis that there is a difference between the two groups. A further slight difference was noted in the different degree of inflation of the sutural interval, which appear more raised in P. farsensis, in particular in the basal half. This character may be just intraspecific variation and needs to be tested using larger samples. The parameres of P. farsensis appear to be more slender than those of P. adelphus in lateral view. However the intraspecific variation observed in the small sample of P. adelphus appear considerable in comparison with the interspecific variation, suggesting caution in the evaluation of this character (see Figs. 15 c, d, 18).