Mecynotarsus abductus

Mecynotarsus abductus nom. nov.

Mecynotarsus bimaculatus Pic, 1942: 16 (not Mecynotarsus algiricus var. bimaculatus Desbrochers des Loges, 1898: 4, footnote)

Notes

Desbrochers des Loges (1898) described Mecynotarsus algiricus var. bimaculatus from "Aïn-Sefra" (Algeria), which currently is placed as a synonym of M. bison (Olivier, 1811) (Heberdey 1942: 462, as M. bison ab. bimaculatus). Pic (1942) created a primary homonym when he described M. bimaculatus from " Tonkin " (Vietnam), which was later cited once (Pic 1943b). The replacement name Mecynotarsus abductus nom. nov. is proposed for the Asiatic species, and is based on the Latin adjective for removed (" abductus ").

Microhoria melanocephala (Bonelli, 1812) comb. nov.

Anthicus melanocephalus Bonelli, 1812: 173 (not Anthicus melanocephalus Marseul, 1879: 216)

Notes

Nardi (2002) placed Anthicus melanocephalus Bonelli, 1812 from Italy as a nomen dubium, and stated that it is very probably the same species as Microhoria venusta (Villa & Villa, 1833) or M. fasciata fasciata (Chevrolat, 1834). However, a new generic placement was not given, so this species is here moved to Microhoria Chevrolat, 1877.

Notoxus Geoffroy, 1762

Notoxus Geoffroy, 1762: 356

Cucullus Westwood, 1830: 57 [unavailable name]

Notes

Cucullus is a Latinization of "cuculle", a French vernacular name created by Geoffroy (1762: 356) for Notoxus Geoffroy, 1762 (see also Latreille 1829: 58; LaFerté-Sénectère 1849b: 24). Westwood (1830) listed " Cucullus Lat. [= Latreille, 1825]" as a junior synonym of Notoxus, and this name has not been made available (Article 11.6). Cucullus was overlooked for the lists of unavailable names of Anthicidae (cf. LaFerté- Sénectère 1849b; Gemminger & Harold 1870; Chandler et al. 2004). It must be not confused with the following names: Cucullus Bolten, 1798 (Mollusca), Cucullus Quoy & Gaimard in d'Urville, 1830 (Cnidaria), and Cucullus Steiner, 1994 (fossil miscellanea) (cf. Anonymous 2005).

Notoxus boviei boviei Pic, 1920

Notoxus Boviei Pic, 1920: 20.

Notoxus Boviei var. lateapicalis Pic, 1955: 129 [unavailable name] Notoxus Boviei var. pallidoapicalis Pic, 1952c: 66 syn. rev.

Notes

Notoxus boviei from " Congo " is known only from the very short description, and was later recorded from Rwanda (Pic 1955).

Notoxus boviei var. lateapicalis Pic from Rwanda was automatically placed as a subspecies (Article 45.6.4) by Telnov (2006: 67). However, this variety was described together with a new subspecies (Notoxus basilewskyi ssp. ruhegeriensis Pic, 1955: 129), so this name is unavailable (Articles 45.6.1 and 45.6.4).

Telnov (2006: 67), according to Article 45.6.4, automatically also placed Notoxus boviei var. pallidoapicalis from " Congo Belge " (Pic 1952c: 60) at the subspecies level. However, Telnov (2006) overlooked the fact that Pic (1955: 129) implicitly placed this name as a junior synonym of N. boviei when he treated it as a variety while using the subspecies rank for other names (see above), so this variety is here formally treated as a synonym of the nominate subspecies.

Notoxus boviei semitestaceus Pic, 1952

Notoxus Boviei var. semitestaceus Pic, 1952c: 66

Notes

This variety from " Congo Belge " (cf. Pic 1952c: 60) is known only from the very short description. It is here automatically placed as a subspecies (Article 45.6.4).

Notoxus brachycerus (Faldermann, 1837)

Material examined

Albania: Scutari, sd, C. Lona leg., 2 ex (MCSM).

Azerbaijan: env. Kubatly, 26.VI.1996, Kalashian leg., 1 ex (CSV). Czech Republic: " Bohême / Barg [leg.?] V", 1 ex [very old] (MZCR, C. Emery coll.).

Notes

This is the first record for Albania (cf. Nardi 2004c), whereas for Azerbaijan there has been only an obscure record available (Iablokoff-Khnzorian 1983: 51, fig. 7). Bocák (1993) did not cite this species as occurring in Bohemia (Czech Republic), in spite of some previously published historical records (e.g. Klima 1902; Uhmann 1990b) that are confirmed by the above specimen (see also Uhmann 1994c).

Truqui (1855: 341) recorded N. brachycerus from Lebanon: "Seidae (antiqua Sidone) in Syria ". This record was confirmed by Baudi di Selve (1877, 1878). Subsequent general citations for Syria (e.g. Jacobson 1915; Heberdey 1936a; Horion 1956) probably are based on these records. Uhmann et al. (2005) listed the occurrence of N. brachycerus in the Levant as in need of verification, but these authors refer only to Truqui (1855).

A general citation for Belgium (Jacobson 1915: 1022) was not confirmed by Lohse & Lucht (1992), and so was subsequently ignored by Nardi (2004c).

Uhmann et al. (2005) summarized the distribution of this species, but they did not include records for Kazakhstan (Jacobson 1915; Uhmann & Guéorguiev 2000) and Kyrgyzstan (Uhmann 1985).

Notoxus jeanneli Pic, 1914

Notoxus Jeanneli Pic, 1914: 169

Notoxus Jeanneli var. bisbinotatus Pic, 1921: 23 [unavailable name]

Notoxus Jeanneli var. innotatus Pic, 1921: 23 [unavailable name] (not Notoxus chaldeus var. innotatus Pic, 1919b: 13) Notoxus Jeanneli var. uninotatus Pic, 1921: 23 [unavailable name]

Notes

These varieties from Mount Elgon (Kenya) were described together with two new subspecies (see Pic 1921: 27, 29), so they are infrasubspecific and unavailable names (Articles 45.6.1 and 45.6.4).

Notoxus Jeanneli var. innotatus Pic, 1921 should not be confused with N. chaldeus var. innotatus Pic, 1919 b from Algeria, which was placed in synonymy with N. lancifer sedilloti Pic, 1894 by Heberdey (1936a: 139, as N. lancifer Sedilloti ab. innotatus).

Notoxus lonai Bucciarelli, 1973

Material examined

Italy: Apulia reg., Foggia prov., Bovino, 15.VII.1875, Ser. Baudi [leg.?], 1 ex, determinated as Notoxus brachycerus (MCZR, C. Emery coll.); same data, but lg, 1 ex (MCZR, C. Emery coll.); Calabria reg., Catanzaro prov., Catanzaro, sd, dono [= gift of] Cevami, 1 ex [very old] (MZUF); Emilia-Romagna reg., Parma prov., Citerna Taro, 26.VII.1957, lg, 1 ex (MZUF, S. Failla coll.); same reg. and prov., Parma, VII.1955, lg, 1 ex (MZUF, S. Failla coll.); same reg. and prov., Parmense [= Parma area], VII.1959, lg, 1 ex (MZUF, S. Failla coll.); same reg. and prov., Selva del Bocchetto, 12.VI.1955, lg, 1 ex (MZUF, S. Failla coll.); Emilia-Romagna reg., Reggio Emilia prov., Vologno, Secchia River, 440 m, 5.VII.2006, S. Rocchi leg., 5 ex (CGN, CSR); Tuscany reg., Siena prov., Castiglione d'Orcia, sd, dono [= gift of] Verdiani Bandi, 2 ex [very old] (MZUF); same reg. and prov., Piancastagnaio, Paglia Stream, VI.1963, lg, 1 ex (MCSV); Sicily reg., "Sicilia / E. Ragusa [leg.]", 6 ex (MCZR, G. E. Rasetti coll.); Sicily reg., Messina prov., Acquedolci, 13.VI.1983, Magu leg., 1 ex (CGN); same reg. and prov., mouth of the Pollina River, 26.V.1974, M. Romano leg., 1 ex (CEM); same reg. and prov., banks of the Caronia Stream, loc. Molino di Mezzo, 7-8.VI.1986, A. Liberto leg., 67 ex (CAL, CEM, CGN, MZUR); Sicily reg., [Palermo prov.?], "SICILIA, Coccamo [= Caccamo?] / Tannita / 1979. VI.27 / leg. Zombori L." [p], " Notoxus / lobicornis Reiche / det. G. Uhmann 1983" [p], 2 ex (HNHM); Sicily reg., Palermo prov., Termini Imerese, sd, Ravel leg., 6 ex, determinated as Notoxus siculus LaFerté- Sénectère, 1849 by Reitter (MCZR, P. Luigioni coll.).

Notes

No Italian specimens of N. lobicornis Reiche, 1864 were examined by Bucciarelli (1973, 1980). Uhmann (1985) attributed the above-cited Sicilian specimens (HNHM) to this species. Angelini et al. (1995), based solely on this record, included N. lobicornis in the Italian fauna, from which it must be excluded. Nardi (2004c) did not include this species in the Italian fauna, but without further comments.

Notoxus lonai was known from a few localities of the south-eastern French Alps, mainland Italy (Piedmont, Liguria, Emilia-Romagna, Basilicata, Calabria), and Sicily (Bucciarelli 1973, 1980; Bonadona 1991; Contarini 1995a, 1995b; Degiovanni 1999). The above new records better specify the Italian distribution of this localized species; moreover, it was previously unrecorded from the Apulia and Tuscany regions. The record of the closely related N. brachycerus for Apulia (Luigioni 1929) was probably based on the above misidentified specimens.

The specimens from Molino di Mezzo (Sicily) were knocked down, together with many others of Notoxus trifasciatus (Rossi, 1792), from isolated willows (Salix sp.) in the bed of a swollen river (A. Liberto, pers. comm.). The Italian phenology of this species is March to September; it lives chiefly on vegetation (Salix spp., Populus spp., etc.) along pebbly or sandy rivers, from sea level to about 800 m. It is frequently syntopic with N. brachycerus and/or N. trifasciatus.

LaFerté-Sénectère (1849a) described Notoxus brachycerus var. β from "frontières de la Savoie" (eastern France), which surely must be attributed to N. lonai, on the basis of the following diagnostic features: "élytres [...], bord postérieur noiratre [...] variété à corne très-étroite, dont le dernier segment abdominal, au lieu d'être échancré, est déprimé et canaliculé dans toute sa longueur." (see also LaFerté-Sénectère, 1849b: 26, 26-27 footnote). Unfortunately, this specimen is no longer in the LaFerté-Sénectère collection (MNHN). Baudi di Selve (1877, 1878, 1883) also identified an unnamed "race" of N. brachycerus from Piedmont (northern Italy) and Sicily, which probably also is referable to N. lonai (cf. Bucciarelli 1973: 476).

Notoxus rothschildi inapicalis Pic, 1914

Notoxus Rotschildi [sic !] var. inapicalis Pic, 1914: 168

Notes

This variety from three Kenyan localities (Pic 1914: 168) is known only from the description. It is here automatically placed as a subspecies (Article 45.6.4).

Notoxus subinnotatus coloratus Pic, 1932

Notoxus subinnotatus var. coloratus Pic, 1932: 8

Notes

This variety was described from an unspecified locality in Mozambique, and is still known only from the short original description. It is here automatically placed as a subspecies (Article 45.6.4). Discussion of the nominate subspecies follows below.

Notoxus subinnotatus subinnotatus Pic, 1915

Notoxus crenatus var. subinnotatus Pic, 1915: 7

Notes

Notoxus crenatus var. subinnotatus from "Afrique Australe: Orange" [= Republic of South Africa, Orange Free State] (Pic 1915) was raised to the species level by Pic (1932: 8), who also recorded it from Mozambique. This new rank has been adopted only by Ferreira (1963), whereas subsequent authors overlooked this opinion.

Hille (1975: 4) recorded some specimens of N. schoutedeni Krekich-Strassoldo, 1922 from Mozambique, wrongly identified as N. crenatus var. subinnotatus. Uhmann (1980: 225) recorded a specimen of "? Notoxus crenatus Pic var. subinnotatus Pic " from "Zambesi" and later (Uhmann 1981: 187) wrote that he examined some specimens identified by Pic as N. crenatus var. subinnotatus belonging actually to two species which, however, he was unable to identify. Telnov (2006) overlooked the new rank proposed by Pic (1932), and automatically placed Notoxus crenatus var. subinnotatus as N. crenatus ssp. subinnotatus (Article 45.6.4).

The type of Notoxus crenatus Pic, 1914 is probably lost (Pic 1932: 8, footnote), and no modern student has examined it and those of N. crenatus var. subinnotatus, so, following Pic (1932) this variety is here considered as a valid species. However, in this complicated framework, the relationship between N. subinnotatus subinnotatus, N. subinnotatus coloratus and N. schoutedeni needs to be studied (see also Hille 1975: 4).

Omonadus brevicornis (Pic, 1894)

Anthicus brevicornis Pic, 1894a: 86

Anthicus brevicornis Pic, 1894b: 142 n. syn.

Material examined

Algeria: "A- Sefra" [h], " type " [h], " TYPE " [p, r], 1 ex (MNHN, M. Pic coll.).

Notes

The examined specimen is the holotype (Article 73.1.2). This species is currently known only from Ain Sefra (cf. Pic 1911, as A. brevicornis) and from the surroundings of Tripoli (Libya) (Koch 1931, as A. brevicornis var. coloratus [unavailable name]; Chandler et al. 2004). Its generic placement is here confirmed by the study of the holotype.

Pic (1894a, 1894b) inadvertently published twice the original description of this species, since during 1893-1894 he would occasionally print papers in L'Échange as "Extraits" (extracts) of a few of his papers that had been previously published in other journals. They are clearly labeled as being previously published, and should not be considered as original descriptions. However, Pic (1894a) published in L'Échange an extract from the Revue Scientifique du Bourbonnais et du Centre de la France (Pic 1894b) that did not appear in print until two months later (June and August 1894, respectively). In this case the correct procedure is to treat the first paper as the original description, and the name in the second as a junior objective synonym.

This species is also discussed under Aulacoderus copiosissimus (see above).

Omonadus floralis (Linnaeus, 1758)

Material examined

Argentina: Corrientes prov., Laguna Iberá, Colonia Pellegrini, 21.I.2001, D. Macale leg., 1 ex (CGN).

Armenia: Kotayk prov., Sami env., 28.VI.1998, Kalashian leg., 1 ex (CSV).

China: Sichuan prov., 35 km W Kanding, N30'04' - E101'48', 4300 m, 26.VI.2006, V. Major leg., 2 ex (CGN).

Macedonia: Titov Veles env., 22.VII.1988, S. Zoia leg., 1 ex (CGN).

Ukraine: Crimea, Eupatoria, 28. VI.1999, lg, 3 ex (CSV); same data, but 4.VII.1999, 1 ex (CGN); same data, but 10.VII.1999, 5 ex (CSV); same data, but 4.VIII.1999, 2 ex (CGN); same data, but 12.VIII.1999, 6 ex (CGN); same data, but 20.VIII.1999, 23 ex (CSV); same data, but 28.VIII.1999, 5 ex (CGN); Crimea, Simpheropol, 30.VII.2000, lg, 7 ex (CGN, CSV); same data, but, 14.V.2001, 5 ex (CGN); Crimea, Simpheropol, Perevalnoe, 14.VI.2000, lg, 2 ex (CGN); Donetzk reg., Bakhmutka, 6. VI.1999, lg, 1 ex (CSV); Kherson reg., Golopristanskyi district, near Bolshevik village, beach of sea, 1.VI.2000, Putchkov leg., 1 ex (CSV); "Kiev / Rossia md. [= southern Russia]", 1 ex (CSV); Lugansk reg., Severodonetsk, 10.VII.2002, lg, 2 ex (CGN).

Yugoslavia: Kosovo, Kačanik, VI.1914, Mat’cha leg., 1 ex (CSV); Kosovo, Schar-Dagh, 1500 – 2510 m, sd, Mat’cha leg., 1 ex (CSV).

Notes

Omonadus floralis and O. formicarius formicarius (Goeze, 1777) are closely related, cosmopolitan species that have been frequently confused (cf. Saint-Albin 1952, as Anthicus). The illustration of the aedeagus of " Anthicus floralis L." provided by Jeannel & Paulian (1944: 82, fig. 37) and by Jeannel (1955: 49, fig. 24a) refers to O. formicarius formicarius. Hinton (1945) described the larvae and pupa of " Anthicus floralis ". This description was quoted by other authors (e.g. Abdullah 1976, as Anthicus floralis; Kitayama 1982; Young 1991; Li H.- X. 1992, as A. floralis; Delobel & Tran 1993), and always referred to Omonadus floralis. However, Hinton (1945) based his descriptions also on specimens of O. formicarius formicarius, and in fact wrote: " Pronotum [of the adult] […] low gibbosity on each side of middle at apical fifth (in a number of specimens examined there is no trace of a gibbosity here)" (Hinton 1945: 197). This last sentence clearly refers to O. formicarius, the pronotum of which lacks gibbosities; moreover, he erroneously listed Anthicus quisquilius Thomson, 1864 as a synonym of Omonadus floralis, whereas it is a synonym of O. formicarius formicarius (cf. Saint-Albin 1952; Bonadona 1953, as Anthicus formicarius). Lafer (1996, as Anthicus floralis) keyed only Omonadus floralis; nevertheless, his description of the pronotum clearly refers also to O. formicarius formicarius, whereas the specimen figured (fig. 12.2) belongs to O. floralis.

Omonadus floralis is a common and ubiquitous species, but it was apparently still unrecorded from the Ukraine, Yugoslavia (cf. Nardi 2004c) and Armenia, whereas for Macedonia and China only a few records were known: "S.-E. de Monastir" (Pic 1929, as " Anthicus floralis L. et var. quisquilius Thoms. ") and " Jugoslawien, Ohrid" (Uhmann 1985: 188), and " Chine " (Pic 1897b, as Anthicus floralis), Hunan (Li H.- X. 1992, as A. floralis) and "N. E. China " (Li J.-K. 1992, as A. floralis), respectively. Lafer (1996, as Anthicus floralis) recorded Omonadus floralis also from "SE China?" but this record would refer to O. formicarius formicarius (see above). The Chinese records of this species summarized by Hua (2002: 131, as Anthicus floralis) are unreliable since this author wrongly listed A. floralis var. quisguilius [sic !] Thomson, 1864 as its synonym; in any case he did not provide records for Sichuan.

Some of the above specimens from Ukraine (Eupatoria, 28.VI., 12.VIII. and 20.VIII.1999) were collected together with others of O. formicarius formicarius.

Nardi (2004c) overlooked the records from Balearic Islands (Tenenbaum 1915, as Anthicus floralis; Fuente 1933, as A. floralis; Uhmann 1989), Belgium (Lameere 1900, as A. floralis), see also Troukens (2006), and Moldova (Telnov 1998d), while Uhmann et al. (2005) those from Jordan (Uhmann 1988), Lebanon (Baudi di Selve 1878, as A. floralis) and Anti-Lebanon mountains (Lebanon and Syria) (Heyden 1891, as A. floralis).

The Argentinian specimen was found in the stomach contents of a Pseudopaludicola falcipes (Hensel, 1867) (Amphibia, Anura, Leptodactylidae). It is recorded here because very little is known about predators of Anthicidae (e.g. Cott 1934; Marcuzzi 1959; Shurovenkov 1975; Favilli & Eusebi 1990).

Omonadus formicarius formicarius (Goeze, 1777)

Material examined

Armenia: Vedi env., Gorovan sands, 20.VII.1995, Kalaschian leg., 1 ex (CGN); same data, but, 20- 22.VII.1996, 1 ex (CSV); same data, but, 10-11.VI.1998, 1 ex (CSV).

Italy: Liguria reg., Genoa prov., Fontanigorda, Casoni, 5.VII.1985, S. Zoia leg., 1 ex (CGN).

Macedonia: Jacupica Mts., 1000–2000 m, VII.1914, J. Mat’cha leg., 1 ex (CGN); Perister Mts., 1000– 2300 m, VII.1914, J. Mat’cha leg., 1 ex (CSV); Skopie, VI.1914, J. Mat’cha leg., 1 ex (CSV).

Russia: "[Southern Russia, Rostovskaya Oblast',] Taganrog [in Cyrillic]", "C. Ahnger [leg.]", 4 ex (CGN, CSV).

Notes

This cosmopolitan species was apparently unrecorded from southern European Russia (Nardi 2004c), whereas for Armenia it was recorded only from "Eriwan [= Yerevan]" (Schneider & Leder 1878, as Anthicus quisquilius Thoms.), "Kaukasus, Armen. Geb." and "Caucasus, Araxesthal" (Uhmann 1985: 189, as O. formicarius); however, it is unclear whether these last two records refer to the current Armenian territory or not. For Macedonia it was recorded from "S.-E. de Monastir" (Pic 1929, as " Anthicus floralis L. et var. quisquilius Thoms. ") and " Mazedonien " [Macedonia or Greece?] (Uhmann 1990a: 401, as O. formicarius). Nardi (2004c), having overlooked the first record, listed as doubtful the presence of this species in Macedonia. Nardi (2004c) also overlooked records from the Balearic Islands (Tenenbaum 1915; Fuente 1933, in both cases as A. floralis var. formicarius), Belgium (Lameere 1900, as A. quisquilius) and central European Russia (Telnov 1998d, as O. formicarius). Uhmann et al. (2005, as O. formicarius) overlooked records from Jordan (Uhmann 1988, as O. formicarius) and Lebanon (Baudi di Selve 1878, as A. quisquilius).

The above-cited Italian specimen is only 2.56 m long, significatively below the range (2.80–3.80 mm) so far known for the species (cf. Bonadona 1953, as Anthicus formicarius; Werner 1963, as A. formicarius; Bucciarelli 1980, as O. formicarius; Bonadona 1991, as O. formicarius; Uhmann 1992, as O. formicarius; Chandler & Werner 1995, as A. formicarius).

Sapintus (Sapintus) basilewskyi (Pic, 1955) comb. nov.

Anthicus Basilewskyi Pic, 1955: 130 (not Anthicus basilewskyi Buck, 1965: 276)

Material examined

" Holotypus " [p, r], " COLL. MUS. CONGO / Ruanda: Gitarama, 1850 m. terr. Nyanza, / P. Basilewskyi I- 1953 " [p], "R. DET. / B / 6530" [p], " Anthicus / Basilewskyi / nsp" [h], 1 ɗ (MRAC); " Paratypus " [p, r], " COLL. MUS. CONGO / Ruanda: Gitarama, 1850 m. terr. Nyanza, / P. Basilewskyi I-1953 " [p], "R. DET. / B / 6530" [p], 1 Ψ (MRAC).

Notes

The above " Holotypus " and " Paratypus " labels are surely not original, but were added later by a curator of the collections (M. De Meyer, pers. comm.); nevertheless, this labelling is correct (cf. Pic 1955: 125). According to Pic (1955: 130), a third paratype is kept in his collection (MNHN), but it cannot be found (A. Taghavian, pers. comm.). This species is known only from the original description, and it is here transferred from Anthicus to Sapintus (subgenus Sapintus) Casey, 1895. This species, as stated in Pic's description, is morphologically well characterized; nevertheless, the author is not familiar with all African congenerics and so cannot comment on its validity.

Stenidius tenuipes (LaFerté-Sénectère, 1849)

Material examined

Armenia: Armavir prov., Dzhrarat env., 13.IV.1989, Kalashian leg., 11 ex (CGN, CSV).

Notes

This species is recorded from Armenia (Uhmann et al. 2005), Croatia (Dalmatia), Greece, southern Russia (Daghestan), Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Asiatic Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan (cf. Kejval 2002b; Nardi 2004c), Cyprus, Israel and Lebanon (cf. Uhmann et al. 2005). A citation for Libya (Uhmann et al. 2005), without further detail, is almost certainly a misprint for Lebanon. This species was previously known for Armenia only on the basis of a simple country citation without precise collecting data (Uhmann et al. 2005). The identification was confirmed also by the examination of the male genitalia (cf. Koch 1934, fig. 2, as Anthicus tenuipes; Bucciarelli 1980, figs 215, 217).

Tenuicollis babaulti (Pic, 1921)

Anthicus Babaulti Pic, 1921: 31

Anthicus Babaulti var. atripes Pic, 1921: 31 [unavailable name] Anthicus Babaulti var. elgeyosus Pic, 1939: 163 [unavailable name]

Notes

This species, described from the confluence of the Tana and Thika Rivers (Kenya), has since been recorded from Tanzania (Hemp et al. 1999: 4, as Tenuicomus babaulti Pic) and cited in the descriptions of Anthicus brydli Pic 1924 b from "Mosamborika" (Africa) (Pic 1924b: 17, as A. Brýdli), Microhoria lomii (Pic, 1953a) from Ogaden (Ethiopia) (Pic 1953: 97–98, as A. Lomii; Telnov 2006) and two new varieties (see further on). It is here attributed to Tenuicollis Marseul, 1879 following Hemp et al. (1999) and Telnov (2006: 67, as T. babaulti elgeyosus; 2007c: 35, as T. babaulti babaulti), who, however, did not discuss their new assignment. Anthicus babaulti var. atripes from Tana River (Kenya) was placed in synonymy with Tenuicollis babaulti babaulti by Telnov (2007c: 35). However, this variety is an unavailable name (Articles 45.6.1 and 45.6.4), since it was described with two new subspecies (Pic 1921: 27, 29).

Anthicus babaulti var. elgeyosus from "Marakwet, Elgeyo escarpment, 2.500 m " (Kenya, Rift Valley prov.) was automatically placed as a subspecies (Article 45.6.4) by Telnov (2006: 67, as Tenuicollis babaulti elgeyosus). However, this variety was described together with a new subspecies (Pic 1939: 154), so also this name is unavailable (Articles 45.6.1 and 45.6.4).