Thinobius angusticeps Fauvel, 1889

(Figs 2, 7, 14, 23–24, 27, 42, 46–47)

Thinobius angusticeps Fauvel, 1889: 83, 84.

Thinobius (Thinophilus) allocerus Eppelsheim, 1893: 64., syn. n.

Thinobius silvaticus Bernhauer, 1899: 436. (new synonym in Schülke & Makranczy 2011)

Trogophloeus alaskanus Fall, 1926: 146., syn. n.

Thinobius peezi Scheerpeltz, 1957: 483. (new synonym in Schülke & Makranczy 2011)

Examined type material – Thinobius angusticeps Fauvel – Neotype (♀), by present designation: “ Torrent [= mountain stream] de Rabuons; Haute Tinée VII-48; [leg.] Fr.[anklin] Pierre \ angusticeps; J.J. [= Jean Jarrige] det. IL [= in litteris] \ Neotypus; Thinobius; angusticeps Fauvel; des. Makranczy, 2010 \ Thinobius; angusticeps Fauvel; det. Makranczy, 2010” (MNHP); Thinobius (Thinophilus) allocerus Eppelsheim – Lectotype (♂), by present designation: “♂ \ Ost-Sibirien; Quellgebiet; des Irkut.; Leder 1891. \ heterocerus; Epp. \ allocerus; Epp. Deutsch. ent.; Zeit. 1893. p. 64. \ c. Epplsh.; Steind. d. \ Gezeichnet!; 7.IV.1942; O. Scheerpeltz \ Typus \ Lectotypus; Thinobius; allocerus Eppelsheim; des. Makranczy, 2013 \ Thinobius; angusticeps Fauvel; det. Makranczy, 2013” (NHMW), Paralectotype (1): “ ♂ \ Ost-Sibirien.; Quellgebiet; des Irkut.; Leder 1891. \ heterocerus; Epp. \ c. Epplsh.; Steind. d. \ Co-; typus \ Paralectotypus; Thinobius; allocerus Eppelsheim; des. Makranczy, 2013 \ Thinobius; angusticeps Fauvel; det. Makranczy, 2013” (NHMW); Thinobius silvaticus Bernhauer – Lectotype (♂), by present designation: “ Bachergebg.; Bernhauer \ silvaticus Brh; Waldbach; Reifnig \ Type \ Gezeichnet!; 8.IV.1942; O. Scheerpeltz \ silvaticus Bernh.; det. O. Scheerpeltz, 1942 \ Chicago NHMus; M. Bernhauer; Collection \ Lectotypus; Thinobius; silvaticus Bernhauer; des. Makranczy, 2010 \ Thinobius; angusticeps Fauvel; det. Makranczy, 2010” (FMNH), Paralectotype (1): “ Bachergebg.; Bernhauer \ silvaticus Brnh.; Waldbach bei; Reifnig \ Type \ Type [blue card] \ Gezeichnet!; 2.IV.1942; O. Scheerpeltz \ Typus; Thinobius; silvaticus; Bernhauer [dark red card] \ ♀ \ Paralectotypus; Thinobius; silvaticus Bernhauer; des. Makranczy, 2010 \ Thinobius; angusticeps Fauvel; det. Makranczy, 2010” (1♀, NHMW); Trogophloeus alaskanus Fall – Holotype (♂): “ McKin.[ley] P[ar]k [Station]; Alaska; 7[=VII.]-9-[19]24. \ Type; alaskanus \ M.C.Z.; Type; 24054 \ H.C. Fall; Collection \ Holotypus; Trogophloeus; alaskanus Fall; ver. Makranczy, 2000 \ Thinobius; angusticeps Fauvel; det. Makranczy, 2013” (MCZN); Thinobius peezi Scheerpeltz – Lectotype (♂), by present designation: “♂ \ Altprags, Östl.; Dolomiten. S. Tirol.; Ital.; Ende VII.49. Peez \ ex coll.; Scheerpeltz \ Typus; Thinobius; (Platyderothinophilus); Peezi; O. Scheerpeltz \ Lectotypus; Thinobius; peezi Scheerpeltz; des. Makranczy, 2000 \ Thinobius; angusticeps Fauvel; det. Makranczy, 2010” (NHMW), Paralectotypes (3): same data as lectotype (1 ♂, 2 ♀, NHMW).

Other material – CANADA: Banff Sp[rings], Alberta, VI.[19]11 (1, coll. Hubbard & Schwarz, USNM); Yukon Territory, Dempster Hwy., mi55, 3300’ 13.VII.1968, leg. J. M. Campbell & A. Smetana (1, CNCI); Yukon Territory, Dempster Hwy., mi32, 2700’ 15.VII.1968, leg. J. M. Campbell & A. Smetana (2 ♂, CNCI); Yukon Territory, Dempster Hwy., mi35, 2900’ 15.VII.1968, leg. J. M. Campbell & A. Smetana (5 ♂, 6 ♀, CNCI); ROMANIA: jud. Hunedoara, P.N. Retezat, 2 km W Lunca Rotunda, Lăpuşnicu Mare, 45°19.0’N, 22°45.5’E, 1100 m, 29–30.V.2002, leg. Gy. Makranczy, from streambank sand and fine gravel, flotation (1 ♂, 1 ♀, HNHM); jud. Argeş, P.N. Piatra Craiului (Gr. Dâmboviţa Gorges), 0.3 km ESE Rucăr, end of Cheile Dâmboviţei, 45°23’08”N, 25°10’56”E, 740 m, 17.VII.2011, Gy. Makranczy (465), tip of gravel island in stream, sandy gravel, flotation (1, HNHM); RUSSIA: N-Cisbaikalia, Buryatia, Baikal Mts., left side of Kurkula riv., [Vodopadnyi stream,] 55°05’52.0’’N, 108°47’06.5’’E, 981 m, 7–8.VII.2013, leg. I. V. Enushchenko (1 ♀, 1, coll. Shavrin, 1 ♂, 1, HNHM).

Redescription – Measurements (in mm, n = 10): HW = 0.30 (0.27–0.315); TW = 0.30 (0.27–0.32); PW = 0.32 (0.30–0.35); SW = 0.36 (0.32–0.39); AW = 0.41 (0.36–0.45); HL = 0.28 (0.25–0.29); EL = 0.09 (0.08–0.09); TL = 0.10 (0.09–0.10); PL = 0.25 (0.23–0.28); SL = 0.46 (0.41– 0.50); SC = 0.41 (0.37–0.44); FB = 1.02 (0.88–1.09); BL = 1.98 (1.65–2.29). Body (Fig. 2) more or less unicoloured. Head, pronotum and abdomen blackish dark brown, elytra frequently lighter, dark brown or reddish with a darker, blackish spot behind scutellum extending to shoulders. Legs, mouthparts and antennae dark brown, only tarsi and tibiae (especially both ends) somewhat lighter. All main body parts with very fine coriaceous microsculpture intermixed with fine and rather dense punctation, making body moderately lustrous. Punctation on head (especially middle of vertex) stronger, moderately deep, pronotum slightly less strong and more dense, elytra even finer and denser, on abdomen more indistinct; on tergite VII both coriaceous microsculpture and punctation fading posteriorly (as also on mostly unexposed tergite VIII), making tip of abdomen much shinier than rest. Pubescence on forebody rather depressed, short, fine and dense (on elytra the most dense), on abdomen somewhat less dense but not longer hairs, apices of tergites with a row of conspicuously long hairs, abdominal sides and apex with a few darker and stronger bristles. Strong dark bristle on outer side of supraantennal tubercle at anterior border of eye and on posterior edge of vertex adjacent to temples, similar ones right behind anterior pronotal corner and on side at 3/5 length. Setation on head medially directed except midline and posterior part of vertex where more anterior. Pronotal setation mostly antero-medially directed, but on posterior pronotal edge and very posterior middle of disc direction more anterior. Elytra and abdomen with posteriorly directed hairs. Antennae, legs and mouthparts with very short, not conspicuous setation, except for the stiff, darker hair slightly distal from middle of each tibia and ones near apices of femora. Sides of elytra with three such stiff setae distributed on side, the middle one shifted towards apex from middle.

Head slightly wider than long, temples usually straight, sometimes with a gentle curve on the side, rounded on posterior part. Middle of vertex somewhat impressed. Anterior border of neck not marked with groove, only by change of microsculpture. Frontoclypeal suture appearing as fine, often shinier groove and dark line (visible only if head lighter) connecting supraantennal tubercles, similarly darker spots situated at both sides on middle of vertex. Supraantennal tubercles moderately developed, weakly separated from vertex. Antennae somewhat elongate (Fig. 14), 6th antennomere appearing as wide as adjacent ones.

Pronotum weakly transverse, 1.30× wider than long, just a tiny bit wider than head, pronotum with only traces of impressions at sides of unmarked midline and posterior margin. Anterior corners rather weakly rounded, posterior corners very broadly, sides gently arched. Pronotal marginal bead visible on posterior margin, anterior margin only gently arched (almost straight) with traces of a marginal bead in middle. Scutellum large, setose and dull. Elytra long, one elytron more than twice as long as broad, gently curved in cross-section and parallel-sided (very gently dilating posteriorly). Shoulders moderately developed. Along suture only with traces of marginal bead, mostly at broadly rounded sutural corners. Legs of medium length, tarsal lobes thin but relatively long, tibiae fusiform, appear much wider in middle than at ends.

Abdomen very weakly fusiform, sides more or less straight and parallel; widest in the middle, with just about the same width as elytra at broadest point. Posterior margin of tergite VII with light coloured and distinct palisade fringe.

Primary and secondary sexual features – Sexes not appearing different in regular dorsal view, but from ventral aspect the strong medio-apical incision of sternite VIII and the longitudinal impression along the whole length of sternite VII and in a much lesser extent on apex of sternite VI (Fig. 7) making the male rather easy to recognize and separate from closely related species, e.g. the ventral abdominal apex of T. procerus Eppelsheim (Fig. 9). Posterior corners of tergite VIII (similar in both sexes) gently pulled out, posterior edge otherwise straight. Male sternite VIII as in Fig. 27, tergite IX as in Fig. 23, sternite IX as in Fig. 24. Aedeagus as in Fig. 42. Female genital appendage as in Fig. 46, spermatheca as in Fig. 47.

Distribution – The distribution of this species is probably of the Siberian type (sensu DeLattin) with boreomontane disjunct areal in Europe. As opposed to the previous species it is also known from the Nearctic region (missing in the southern areas). In Central Europe it usually occurs where peaks approach an elevation of 2000 m, but on the north could also be present on more flat landscapes.

Remarks – The original type locality of Thinobius angusticeps is Chamonix, France and the name was published for Fowler’s (1888) suspected misuse of T. major Kraatz. (T. major was not known from Britain at that time.) The description indicates material seen from Charles Brisout de Barneville’s collecting. No specimens were traced in Fauvel’ s collection (in ISNB) under this name and not even in Brisout’s collection (in MNHP) (M. Tronquet, pers. comm., Sep. 2009) either. The article clearly states that Fauvel has not seen material from Britain. It was therefore felt necessary to designate a specimen from France as neotype of Thinobius angusticeps. The only such specimen available was in Jean Jarrige’s collection (in MNHP, Figs 46–47), bearing an identification label “ angusticeps ” by Jean Jarrige himself (Marc Tronquet, pers. comm., Jan. 2010). The Torrent de Rabuons runs from the Lac de Rabuons, 2494 m, 44°16’10’’N, 6°58’48’’E to the Tinée river, 1120 m, 44°14’37’’N, 6°56’22’’E, France, département 06 (Alpes-Maritimes); the nearest town is Saint-Étiennede-Tinée. For Thinobius silvaticus Bernhauer, only 2 genuine type specimens were located. One is a previously dissected male with rather distorted aedeagus. The other is a female with detached abdominal tip, but otherwise intact. The former specimen is chosen as lectotype.