Dichotomius (Selenocopris) Burmeister 1846

Dichotomius (Selenocopris) Burmeister 1846

(Figure 12)

Copris (selenocopris) Burmeister 1846ı p. 87

Dichotomius (Luederwaldtinia) Martínez 1951 ı p. 140. (Type species: scarabaeus nisus Olivier 1789 ı original designation) new synonym

Dichotomius (Luederwaldtinia) Vaz-de-Mello 2000 ı p. 193

Dichotomius (Luederwaldtinia) Vaz-de-Mello et al. 2011 ı p. 5

Dichotomius (Luederwaldtinia) Nunes & Vaz-de-Melloı 2013ı p. 411

Type species. Copris bicuspis Germar 1824 ı designated by Martínez (1951) [ZMHB] (Figure 12 (a)). When Burmeister (1838 – 1846) erected selenocopris as subgenus of Copris ı he did not indicated a clear type species. After naming selenocopris ı he cited some African Copris ı several tropical american species such as Copris boreus, C. carolina (currently belonging to Dichotomius s. str.)ı C. nisus, C. crinicollis (assigned to Luederwaldtinia until this work) and C. bicuspis. Luederwaldt (1929) placed all Dichotomius species with clypeal teeth but lacking clypeo-genal angle (some with abundant ventral hair) in the subgenus selenocopris; while all species having clypeo-genal angle with glabrous abdomen were assigned to the subgenus Cephagonus. Howeverı Luederwaldt never designated a type species for the subgenera that he proposedı so Martínez (1951) designated a type species for selenocopris but based on non-typeı miss-identified specimens. He considered the type species of selenocopris D. (s.) bicuspis (Germar) as having clypeal genal angulation (‘ ... el borde lateral del clípeo que es de transición entre rotundigena en el que no es marcado y bicuspis ı donde lo forma un ángulo aparente. ’). Neverthelessı Germar ’ s description (‘ ... clypeus rotundatus ı marginatusı apice acute marginatus. ’) and C. bicuspis holotype examination clearly reveal an inconsistency with what Martínez was calling D. bicuspis. This mistake is probably a replication of Luederwaldt´s misidentification of this species as most of the specimens that Luederwaldt (1922 ı 1926 ı 1929 ı 1936)ı Pereira (1944) and Martínez (1951) named with the specific name ‘ascanius’ (including some subspecies and varieties) are actually D. bicuspis.

Diagnosis. separated from other Dichotomius subgenera by the following combined characters: clypeal teeth presentı more or less strong; lacking clypeo-genal angle; clypeal and genal margin curved; ventral clypeal process bifurcated and female sixth ventrite three times to four times larger than the fifth ventriteı not modified medially.

Representatives. we have revised the brachypterous species and some species groups of this subgenus but still under the name of Luederwaldtinia (Nunes & Vaz-de-Mello 2013). It has the following species groups: D. agenor (Harold 1869) (currently under revision)ı D. assifer (Eschscholtz 1822) (revised by Nunes et al. 2016)ı D. batesi (Harold 1869) (under revision)ı D. bicuspis (Germar 1824) (taxonomic revision close to completion)ı D. carbonarius (Mannerheim 1829) ı D. crinicollis (Germar 1824) (under revision)ı D. eucranioides Pereira & D ’ Andretta 1955 (under revision)ı D. geminatus (Arrow 1913) (taxonomic revision close to completion)ı D. inachus (Erichson 1847) ı D. sericeus (Harold 1867) (revised in Valois et al. 2017)ı D. speciosus (Waterhouse 1891) (revised in Maldaner and Nunes 2015). This subgenus also includes the isolated species D. muticus (Luederwaldt 1922) ı D. nisus (Olivier) (currently in revision) and D. superbus (currently in revision) (Felsche 1901). The taxonomic work in this subgenus is advanced; howeverı three critical groups (carbonarius, batesi and inachus) need urgent revision.