Coprophilus (Zonyptilus) longicornis Bernhauer, 1903, syn. n.

(Figs. 4, 11)

Coprophilus longicornis Bernhauer, 1903: 188

Coprophilus longicornis: Bernhauer and Schubert, 1911: 89 Coprophilus longicornis: Scheerpeltz, 1933: 1076

Coprophilus longicornis: Herman, 1970: 368

Coprophilus (Zonoptilus) longicornis: Tóth, 1991: 92

Coprophilus (Zonoptilus) longicornis: Tóth, 1992: 376 Coprophilus (Zonoptilus) longicornis: Kashcheev, 1999: 150 Coprophilus longicornis: Herman, 2001: 1313

Coprophilus (Zonyptilus) longicornis: Smetana, 2004: 511 Coprophilus (Zonyptilus) longicornis: Schülke and Smetana, 2015: 766

Type material examined. Holotype ♂ “Turkestan 25/2 899” “ sellula Slsk ded Splichal?” “ longicornis Bernh. Type” “Chicago NHMus M. Bernhauer Collection” “Holotypus 1990 ♂ C. (Zonoptilus) longicornis Bernhauer, 1903 | det. dr. Tóth L.” “ Coprophilus (Zonyptilus) pentatoma Fauvel, 1897 | det. M. Gildenkov, 2014” (FMNH).

Discussion. The structure of the body and the aedeagus of the holotype of C. longicornis are identical to those of the lectotype of C. pentatoma . The holotype of C. longicornis differs only in having yellow apices of the elytra, which cannot be regarded as a sufficient reason to retain the validity of the species. Thus, the new synonymy is established: Coprophilus (Zonyptilus) pentatoma Fauvel, 1897 = C. (Z.) longicornis Bernhauer, 1903, syn. n.

Remarks. A detailed discussion on C. longicornis as a valid species and the illustrations of its aedeagus (Tóth 1991: 97), which are allegedly different from the illustrations of the aedeagus of C. pentatoma (Tóth 1991: 100), should be regarded as erroneous.