Pleurotroppopsis pilosa (Risbec, 1952)

(Fig. 16)

Eurycranium pilosum Risbec, 1952: 327.

Lectotype ♀, MNHN (not examined), designated by Bouček, 1976: 678–679. Cotterellia pilosa (Risbec, 1952), Bouček, 1976: 678–679.

Pleurotroppopsis pilosa (Risbec, 1952), Bouček, 1988: 711.

Diagnosis. FEMALE. Scape brown with basal 1/3 whitish ventrally (Fig. 16d). Fore wing broadly infuscate below MV, with speculum reduced (Fig. 16a). Tibiae, especially metatibia, progressively paler towards apex; fore leg with tarsi infuscate, mid and hind legs with tarsomeres 1–3 pale yellow, and tarsomere 4 dark brown (Fig. 16e). Frontovertex with a median groove below anterior ocellus and extending to frontal carina (Fig. 16f). Face between frontal carina and toruli hardly depressed, upper margin of scrobes not incised medially, and frontal carina straight (Fig. 16f). Ocelli in a nearly right-angled (slightly obtuse) triangle. MLM with a narrow median groove, distinct at least in posterior 2/3 (Fig. 16a). Scutellum with sublateral and posterior grooves expressed as punctures and with engraved reticulation between scutellar grooves (Figs 16a, 16b). Axilla weakly sculptured with 5 or 6 setae. Dorsellum with longitudinal carinae as in P. podagrica. Propodeum with submedian areas sculptured with irregular transverse carinae and weakly engraved reticulation. Gt 1 with dorsal surface polished and with numerous setae laterally. Metafemur without teeth along ventral margin.

MALE. Differs from female in the following characters. Ocelli in an obtuse-angled triangle. Dorsellum with a row of punctures along anterior margin. Legs with whitish tarsomeres. Gaster without punctures.

Material examined. 1♀, Abyssinia: Edge of Djem-Djem Forest. circa 9,000 ft. 4.X.1926, coll. Dr. H. Scott, det. Z. Bouček (NHMUK); 1♂, NE. Madagascar: Sambava, VIII.1974, per D. Mariau (IRHO), ex. Coelaenomenodera perrieri on Balyana sp., with identification label “ Cotterellia pilosa (Risbec) det. Z. Bouček, 1975” (NHMUK); 1♀, S. Africa. R. E. Turner. Brit. Mus. 1924-109. Port St. John, Pondoland, 29.I–5.II.1924, Z. Bouček (NHMUK).

Biology. A male identified as P. pilosa by Bouček was recorded from Coelaenomenodera perrieri Fairmaire (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae: Hispinae), which represents a new host record. However, this host record needs to be verified by confirming the conspecificity with the lectotype (see remarks under this species).

Distribution. Ethiopia; Madagascar; South Africa (Bouček 1976).

Remarks. As noted by Bouček (1976), P. pilosa resembles P. podagrica in the following characters: ocelli forming an acute triangle, pronotal collar pilose, MLM with a distinct median groove, and stout gaster distinctly piliferous-punctate. However, a key difference, the absence of teeth along the ventral margin of the metafemur, directs P. pilosa away from P. podagrica in the key to species (see couplet 4). In the large clade comprising the bottom half of the most parsimonious tree in Fig. 19, P. pilosa and P. peukscutella are the only ones without metafemoral teeth, whereas the other six species have ventral teeth on the metafemur. Bouček (1976) used the lateral angles of the pronotum to distinguish P. podagrica from P. javana and P. pilosa, but this character is not very useful to distinguish Pleurotroppopsis species because almost all have the lateral angles closely attached to mesoscutal sides, with only slight interspecific differences. Bouček (1976) mentioned that intra- versus interspecific morphological variation in P. pilosa and P. podagrica was uncertain because of insufficient sampling. Nevertheless, a female collected in South Africa, and deposited in NHMUK, which has similar scutellum sculpture to Parahorismenus, was identified as P. pilosa by Bouček. This specimen probably belongs to an undescribed species based on the sculpture of the scutellum, which has punctures and engraved reticulation on a large disc between lateral and posterior grooves. This indicates that the female is likely closely related to P. peukscutella. This potentially new species is not described here because of insufficient number of specimens. The relationship between P. pilosa and P. podagrica as well as their relationship to other Pleurotroppopsis species is uncertain because of the lack of specimens and evidence other than morphology, as is indicated by the results of the parsimony analysis. The differences between male and female P. pilosa are based on a single male deposited in NHMUK and identified by Bouček as listed in the material examined. Based on its morphology and Bouček’s identification we considered this male to be conspecific with the known females of P. pilosa, but this remains to be confirmed.