taxonID	type	description	language	source
724387B7D2755044BF852F508677FC62.taxon	materials_examined	Type species Carabus reflexus Fabricius, 1781: 302	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D2755044BF852ED4807BF906.taxon	description	Sensu Chaudoir (1879: 97), this group contains only one species, C. leprieuri (Laporte de Castelnau, 1835). I accepted Bates', Burgeon's and Basilewsky's conclusions and enlarged this group according to Chaudoir's criteria to include the following species: C. cameronus Bates, 1886, C. clasispilus (Alluaud 1915), C. guineensis Basilewsky, 1987, C. merus Péringuey, 1904 and C. pseudofestivus Burgeon, 1930. C. clasispilus and C. guineensis are demoted to subspecies of C. leprieuri, and it is described C. leprieuri zambianus. C. pseudofestivus is demoted to subspecies of C. merus, and it is described C. merus lundanus. Basilewsky’s synonymization of C. peringueyi Csiki, 1919 (nom. nov. for C. laticollis Péringuey, 1904) is not thought to be correct and it is here proposed C. leprieuri peringueyi as valid subspecies. The group is here broadened of C. pretiosus Chaudoir, 1837, in agreement with the original Chaudoir‘s system of species groups with the genus Epicosmus Chaudoir, 1846. Presently the group contains four species, two of them monotypical, one with five subspecies, and one with three subspecies. Characters. Smaller and medium-sized species (13 – 18 mm). Head short, not or indistinctly constricted behind eyes. Antennae slender. Labial palps with terminal article very dilated, kidney-shaped. Metepisterna longer than wide (Fig. 23 d, e), trapeziform, but somewhat shorter than in C. reflexus group (Häckel 2016). Ventrites anteriorly not crenulated (Fig. 23 c). Elytral colouration with at least one but most commonly two isolated maculae on each elytron, one in basal half and second in apical half of elytral midlength.	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D2755044BF852ED4807BF906.taxon	distribution	Distribution remarks. The species of this group inhabit virtually the same region as those of the C. reflexus group, i. e., tropical west Africa from Senegal through high savannas of the Gulf of Guinea to the forests of central Africa, and southwards into South Africa. Some of them reach the east side of the Rift, e. g., Tanzania and Zimbabwe (see maps of Figs. 78, 79).	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D2755045BF852A7783CBFA3C.taxon	description	(Plate 2, Figs 13 – 15)	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D2755045BF852A7783CBFA3C.taxon	materials_examined	Type material. Holotype (♀): “ Cameroons // Craspedophorus / cameronus / Bates [handwritten in black on white label] // Ex-Musaeo / H. W. Bates / 1892 [printed in black on white label] // Type [printed in black on red label] ” (Plate 2, Fig. 14, MNHN, Oberthür / Bates Collection). Paratypes: 1 ♂, 1 ♀: “ Cameroons [handwritten, white label] // Craspedophorus / cameronus / Bates [handwritten, white label] // Ex-Musaeo / H. W. Bates / 1892 [printed, white label] // Paratype [printed, red label] ” (Plate 2, Fig. 13, MNHN, Oberthür / Bates Collection). Other material examined. Cameroon. [South West] 1 ♀: “ Grina ” (MRAC). DR Congo: Orientale Province. 1 ♂ [labeled as comparted with type (in MNHN) by Basilewsky], 1 ♀: “ Barumbu ”; 1 ♀: “ De Stan. [- leyville] à Irumu, km 70 ”; 1 ♂: “ Haut-Uele: Yebo; 1 ♂, 1 ♀: “ Yangambi (Lubilu River) ” (MRAC); Sud-Kivu Province. 1 ♀: “ Kitutu ” (MRAC). Equatorial Guinea. 2 ♀: “ Guinéé Espagnole, Mongo ” (MRAC). Gabon. 1 ♀: “ [Ogoué-Ivindo Prov.] Ogoué, Lambaréné ”; 1 ♀: “ Ogôué ” (MNHN); 1 ♂: “ [Estuaire Prov.] Ntoum (cDM) ”; 1 ♂, 1 ♀: “ [Ogoué-Ivindo Prov.] Makokou-Passa ” (Plate 2, Fig. 15, cMH). Guinea. 1 ♀: “ Nimba ” (MRAC). Nigeria: Cross River State. 1 ♀: “ Old Calabar [printed in black on white st upper pinned label] // Musum Paris / 1952 / Coll. A. Oberthür [printed in black on lower pinned blue label] /// pinned second from left in the series labeled: “ Lafertéi? / Murray / Afrique occident. / Sallé [handwritten in black on white box label in Chaudoir's Collection ” (MNHN). Note. This species was based on five specimens collected in Cameroon, labeled “ Mount Cameroons ”. Description (in part, see Bates 1886: 196). “ Length 15 mm. It mostly resembles C. leprieuri (Laporte de Castelnau, 1835). Almost parallel-sided, black, palps, antennae (except base), tibiae and tarsi piceo-ferrugineous, each elytron with two yellowish maculae, humeral macula reaching from V. [VI.] to VIII. interval, macular spots on VII. and VIII. intervals elongated to humerus; subapical macula smaller, reaching from V. to VIII. interval; head strongly convex, vertex and frons grossly punctured; pronotum with lateral margins widely explanated, posteriorly narrowed, rounded at midlength, anteriorly narrowing, arcuate, anterior margin deeply sinuate, posterior margins distinctly more sharp and sinuate than in C. leprieuri, denticulated, deeply emarginated in front of posterior angles, surface throughout grossly punctured; elytra striated, punctured, covered by short setae, intervals sparsely punctured ” [from Latin]. “ Belongs to the same section as C. leprieuri, in which the posterior episterna are longer than broad, the ventral segments not crenulated on their fore margins, and the neck not constricted above. The thorax has the same broad outline - much broader and more dilated anteriorly than in C. grossus and its allies, but it is narrower, especially behind, than in C. leprieuri. The scanty punctuation of the elytral interstices — the punctures not being more than 3 or 4 in a transverse row — and the great length of the red basal spot on the VII. and VIII. interstices, further amply distinguish the species ”. Burgeon (1935: 180) stated: “ Specimens collected in Barumbu [village with a hospital in the past district of Aruwimi, today west part of Orientale Province in DR Congo] (XII, 20, Ghesquière) appear to me the same as a specimen from Cameroon [type series], from which they differ by reddish antennae and tibiae, more transverse pronotum widest behind midlength, more attenuate hind part of body, and more reduced and undivided elytral maculae. ” [from French].	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D2755045BF852A7783CBFA3C.taxon	distribution	Distribution. Cameroon, DR Congo: Orientale, Sud-Kivu Provinces; Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Guinea, south-eastern Nigeria.	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D27B504BBF852B86813EFD0C.taxon	description	(Plate 2, Fig. 22; Plate 3, Fig. 24)	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D27B504BBF852B86813EFD0C.taxon	materials_examined	Type material. Lectotype (♀): “ pretio / Cap [handwritten in black on white label] // Col. Bates [handwritten in black on white label] // Cr. pretiosus Chd. [handwritten in black] / P. Basilewsky det., 19 [printed in black] 54 [handwritten in black on white label] ” (Plate 2, Fig. 22, MNHN). Paralectotype 1 (♀): “ Chaudoir / 1859 [handwritten in black on white label] // R. Dét / 1784 [printed in black] / P [handwritten in black on white label] // Musée du Congo [printed in black] / Afrique / don [handwritten in black] L. Burgeon [printed in black on white label] // pretiosus Chd. [handwritten in black] / P. Basilewsky det., 19 [printed in black on white label] (MRAC). Note. The species is based on a specimen from the Cape Province of South Africa. From the description of Chaudoir (1837: 49): “ Black, thorax hexagonal, short, coarsely punctate; elytra nearly parallel-sided and striate, each elytron with two maculae, larger close to base and smaller subapical, nearly transverse ” [from Latin, length we measured 17. 8 mm]. “ As large as [Craspedophorus] nobilis Dej., but reminds me more of description and illustration of Mr. Klug‘s P. festivus in his work on the insects of Madagascar. It differs [C. pretiosus from C. festivus] only in more pronounced indentation of the pronotum and pronotal margins anteriorly forming an oblique angle, elytra punctate and setose, with striae punctate and serrate, punctures of intervals aligned in longitudinal rows, and anteriorly and posteriorly with two maculae which seem smaller and more rounded. The species is reported (by Mr. Drége) from the Cape of Good Hope and belongs to [Craspedophorus] nobilis Klug ” [from French]. In the monograph Chaudoir (1879: 120) supplemented the description by: “ the first specimen I described came from the interior of the Cape Colony; since then I have obtained specimens also from Natal ” [from French].	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D27B504BBF852B86813EFD0C.taxon	distribution	Distribution. South Africa: Cape, KwaZulu-Natal Provinces.	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D27A5048BF852E7E806CF83E.taxon	description	This group contains sensu Chaudoir (1879: 97) only two species in two subgroups, one with four elytral maculae (1879: 100) containing C. regalis (Gory, 1833), and one without elytral maculae (1879: 101) containing C. unicolor (Chaudoir, 1879). Together with the species of hitherto revised groups (C. reflexus Häckel 2016 and C. leprieuri nov.), Chaudoir included in Craspedophorus Hope, 1838 also species forming the C. regalis group, with kidneyshaped terminal labial palpomere, especially in males. The species of the C. regalis group differ from those of the other groups by the long antennae with intermediate antennomeres moderately dilated. The anterior margin of ventrites are less distinctly crenulated. I accepted Rousseau's, Alluaud's and Basilewsky's conclusions and enlarged this group according to Chaudoir's criteria to include also C. bouvieri (Rousseau, 1905), and the consideration of C. b. imperialis (Burgeon, 1930) as a full species that includes in turn two subspecies. C. bouvieri crampeli (Alluaud, 1915) is removed from C. bouvieri, and transferred from the C. reflexus group of Häckel (2016). Therefore, the C. regalis group presently contains four species, one monotypical and three with two subspecies each. Characters. Large species (21 – 34 mm), including the largest Afrotropical species of the genus. Head mediumsized, squared, elongated, more-or-less constricted behind eyes. Antennae long and moderately dilated, mainly intermediate antennomeres (Fig. 52 c; Plate 7, Figs 53 – 55). Labial palps with terminal article very elongated, kidney-shaped. Pronotum almost hexagonal, coarsely punctured, resembling that of C. reflexus (Fabricius, 1781), pronotal base either not pedunculate (C. imperialis), weakly pedunculate (C. bouvieri), or distinctly pedunculate (as in C. regalis and C. unicolor). Metepisterna longer than wide (Fig. 52 d, e), trapeziform, but somewhat shorter than in C. reflexus group Häckel 2016. Ventrites anteriorly gently (C. imperialis) or strongly (C. bouvieri, C. regalis, C. unicolor) crenulated (Fig. 52 f). Elytral colouration ranges from two yellow maculae on each elytron (C. bouvieri, C. imperialis, C. regalis), through a reduced preapical macula (C. bouvieri), to black, without maculae (C. unicolor).	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D27A5048BF852E7E806CF83E.taxon	distribution	Distribution remarks. Species of this group inhabit large areas covering western African savanna from Senegal to western Cameroon, central Africa throughout Gabon, Republic of Central Africa and the Congo, to north of the DR Congo, reaching from upper Congo River basin, along Aruwimi (Ituri respectively), and Ubangi (Uele respectively). Distributional area of one species (C. unicolor) reaches farther south and east (Tanzania, Zimbabwe, South Africa; map in Fig. 80). PLATE 5. Habitus of Craspedophorus regalis group I. (Scale bar: 10 mm). 34. C. regalis regalis (Gory, 1833), male, central Guinea; 35. C. r. regalis (Gory, 1833), female, LT (designated by Chaudoir 1879: 100); 36. C. r. regalis (Gory, 1833), male, Senegal; 37. C. r. regalis (Gory, 1833), female, Senegal; 38. C. regalis sayersii (Hope, 1842), male, eastern Guinea (PT of C. bouvieri pseudoreflexus Basilewsky, 1954); 39. C. regalis sayersii (Hope, 1842), HT (male); 40. C. regalis sayersii (Hope, 1842), female, Ivory Coast; 41. C. unicolor (Chaudoir, 1879), male, Zambia; 42. C. unicolor (Chaudoir, 1879), HT (female).	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D27A5048BF852E7E806CF83E.taxon	description	PLATE 6. Habitus of Craspedophorus regalis group II. (Scale bar: 10 mm). 43. C. bouvieri bouvieri (Rousseau, 1905), female, Central Africa; 44. C. bouvieri bouvieri (Rousseau, 1905), female, Central Africa; 45. C. bouvieri bouvieri (Rousseau, 1905), male, Central Africa (labeled as paratype of Eudema crampeli Alluaud, 1915); 46. C. bouvieri bouvieri (Rousseau, 1905), female, Central Africa (HT of Eudema decorsei Alluaud, 1915); 47. C. bouvieri iturianus Basilewsky, 1954, HT (male), a) detail of elytron; 48. C. bouvieri iturianus Basilewsky, 1954, PT female, DR Congo: Orientale; 49. C. imperialis imperialis Burgeon, 1930, HT (male), a) detail of elytron; 50. C. imperialis imperialis Burgon, 1930, female, Togo; 51. C. imperialis dux Basilewsky, 1951, PT male, Cameroon.	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D2625050BF852A298389F94D.taxon	description	(Plate 5, Figs 41, 42)	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D2625050BF852A298389F94D.taxon	materials_examined	Type material. Holotype (♀) “ Ex Musaeo / Chaudoir [printed in red letters on white upper pinned label] // Type [printed in black on red lower pinned label ” /// pinned as a single specimen to the box labeled: “ Unicolor / Chaudoir / Zanzibar / E. Deyrolle [handwritten in black on white box label in Chaudoir's Collection] ” (Plate 5, Fig. 42, MNHN). Other material examined. Angola. Lunda Norte. 2 ♂, 3 ♀: “ env. de Dundo ”. DR Congo: Katanga. 5 ♂, 7 ♀: “ Lulua: Kapanga ”, 3 ♂, 4 ♀: “ Lulua: Tshibamba ”, 1 ♂, 2 ♀: “ Sandoa ” (MRAC); 1 ♂: “ Zaire, Kilwa ”, 1 ♀: “ Zaire, Lubumbashi ” (cDM) Malawi. 1 ♂, 1 ♀: “ Chisasira ” (MRAC); 1 ♂: “ Lilongwe-distr., Dzalanyama-For. Res., 1300 m ” (cPS); 1 ♀: “ Mzimba-distr., Vwaza-Game Res., 1100 m ” (cPS). Tanzania. 1 ♀: “ Iringa prov., 65 km NW of Iringa, road to Ruaha NP, 900 m ” (cRK), 1 ♂, 1 ♀: “ Lindi ”, 5 ♂, 7 ♀: “ [Morogoro] Uluguru Mts. ”, 1 ♀: [Ruvuma] “ Kigonsera ”, 2 ♂, 3 ♀: “ [Singida] D. O. A. [Deutsch-Ostafrika]: Kilimatinde ”, 1 ♂: “ Tabora ” (MRAC); 1 ♂: “ Kigoma Region, Uvinsa, 30 km Dir Kasalu, 1050 m ” (cMH). Zambia. 1 ♀: “ Central Prov.: Fringilla env. 30 km N Lusaka ” (cMH); 1 ♂: “ 75 km SW Kabwe Centre, 14 ° 54 ' S; 28 ° 4.82 ' E ” (Plate 5, Fig. 41, cMH); 1 ♀: “ Mkushi env. ” (cMH); 1 ♂: “ 15 km E Serenje ” (cRK); 2 ♂, 3 ♀: “ N. E. prov. [= Central Province] Kafue N. P. (cDM); 1 ♂: “ [Southern Province] 10 km E Zimba ” (cMH). Note. This species is based on a single male labeled “ Zanzibar ”, presently a semi-autonomous part of Tanzania. It is composed of the Zanzibar Archipelago in the Indian Ocean, 25 – 50 kilometres off the coast of the mainland, and consists of numerous small islands and two large ones: Unguja (the main island, referred to informally as Zanzibar) and Pemba. Description (in part see Chaudoir 1879: 100). “ Length 23 mm, width 9.7 mm. Beautiful species, throughout black, body shaped as in C. regalis (Gory, 1833) and noticeable by its long setae covering the whole surface. Head somewhat less elongated, quadrangular as in C. regalis, which it resembles more by its eyes, more convex. Pronotum not too similarly shaped, with anterior margin less sinuate, anterior half similar to the others [species], margins posteriorly more markedly and shortly sinuate; basal prolongation to peduncle longer, basal angles sharper; pronotal hind angles obtuse, but not rounded each on its top and without any excavation as in C. regalis; lateral rims narrower and less elevated, disk more convex and larger; more deeply punctured and covered by long setae, basal margins less excavated, sagittal line deeply impressed, forming a stria, not reaching base. Elytra separated from pronotum by a peduncle, quite distinct, and less elongated, humeri less angled and more marked; elytral margins widening at midlength; dorsum less convex anteriorly than at midlength, not too similar to that in C. regalis; striae punctured by larger foveoles than are those in C. impictus (Boheman, 1848), bordered more strongly from intervals, near which very rugate; intervals punctured as in C. regalis, and covered by long setae as on pronotum. Venter as in that species; antennae shorter, reaching hardly basal fourth of elytra, with shorter articles, intermediate articles somewhat more dilated; legs also somewhat shorter. A single male from Zanzibar, obtained from Mr. E. Deyrolle ” [from French]. Description of E. zambezianum (in part see Péringuey 1896: 477). “ Length 23 mm, width 10 mm. Shape, size, and coloring of C. impunctus [= impictus], but the shape of the prothorax is very different; it is truncate at the apex, the outer sides are ampliated in a semicircle from the anterior angle to past the median part, from there deeply sinuated above the posterior angle which is sharp, and the median part of the base is much produced behind, the disk is plane with the outer sides much recurved from the median part to the posterior angle, and the upper side is scrobiculate, and has a moderately dense pubescence; elytra a little less than twice as broad as the prothorax past the median part, and hardly one-third broader at the base, briefly pubescent, striate with the striae foveate, and the intervals highly carinate, and having on each side a series of smaller foveas coalescing with the broader ones in the striae; tarsi spinose underneath. Hab. Zambezia (Salisbury). ”	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D2625050BF852A298389F94D.taxon	distribution	Distribution. Angola: Lunda Norte Province; DR Congo: Katanga, Maniema, Sud-Kivu Provinces; Mozambique: Sofala Province; Tanzania: Iringa, Kigoma, Lindi, Morogoro, Ruvuma, Singida, Tabora, Zanzibar Island; Zambia, Zimbabwe.	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D2615051BF852A0C836AFDA2.taxon	materials_examined	Material examined. Cameroon: Northwest Province. 1 ♀: “ Bali ” (cPS). Ghana. 1 ♂: “ Kumasi ” (cMH). Guinea / Ivory Coast. 1 ♀: “ Mont Richard Molard [= Mt. Nimba] ” (cMH). Ivory Coast. 2 ♂, 2 ♀: “ Touba, Biemasso / Dolla ” (cPS); 1 ♂, 2 ♀: “ Comoe National Park ” (cMH, cPS). Nigeria: Oyo. 1 ♂: “ Ibadan ” (cMH). Sierra Leone. 1 ♀: “ Mabang ” (cMH).	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D2615051BF852A0C836AFDA2.taxon	distribution	Distribution. Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Ivory Coast, Cameroon: Northwest Province; Nigeria: Oyo; Sierra Leone.	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D260505EBF852F88819DFD31.taxon	materials_examined	Type material. Holotype (♂): “ Fort-Crampel / Congo-français [printed in black on white label] // n. sp. / prės imperialis / Kolbe / i. l. / prės eximius Laf. // Crampeli / Type. Alluaud / Alluaud déterm [handwritten in black on white labels] ” (Fig. 61; Plate 9, Fig. 65 left, MNHN). 1 ♂, 2 ♀: “ W Centr. Africa Rep. of, Nana-Mambéré prov. 60 km SE Bouar, 5 km NE Baoro, 600 m VI- 09 lgt. A. Kudrna jr. (HT and PTT of Craspedophorus arnosti Häckel, 2016) ” (Figs 65 right, 66 left, cMH). Other material examined. Cameroon. Centre. 2 ♂, 2 ♀: “ Joko ” (MRAC, cMH, Plate 9, Fig. 66 right); 1 ♂: “ Yaoundé ” (MRAC). Central Africa. 1 ♂: “ Oubangui Chari, Fort Crampel [= Nana-Grébizi Prefecture, Kaga Bandoro] ” (MRAC); 2 ♀: “ Fort Sibut [= Kémo Prefecture] “ (MRAC, cMH). Note. This species is based on a single specimen labeled “ Fort-Crampel, sur le haut Chari, dans le Congo français ” (see also Note to C. bouvieri bouvieri Rousseau, 1905). C. crampeli was originally (Alluaud 1915: 153) described as a subspecies of Eudema [= Isotarsus] eximia (LaFerté-Sénectere, 1851), name of another species, recently (Basilewsky 1987: 200) synonymized with C. reflexus (Fabricius, 1781). Description (in part see Alluaud 1915 a: 153). “ A large subspecies that may reach 30 mm, while E. eximia s. str. [= C. reflexus] reaches hardly 26 mm (statue decribed by La Ferté {loc. cit.}, and those specimens I collected in 1880 in Assinie, Ivory Coast). But its statue is not constant and all examined specimens of this subspecies are recognizable mainly as follows: yellow humeral fascia markedly wider, reaching from II. to VIII. interval (seven intervals), while macular spots are absent on three internal intervals (including sutural) in the type of the species [= C. reflexus]. Preapical yellow fascia variable, ranging from IV. to VIII. interval, or reduced to 2 elongated macular spots on intervals IV and VI, and, finally, totally absent. Pronotum and elytra shaped and sculptured similarly to in E. eximia [= C. reflexus]; I do not consider the form of crampeli different on specific level ” [from French].	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D260505EBF852F88819DFD31.taxon	distribution	Distribution. Cameroon: Central Province; Central African Republic.	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D26F505EBF852E258096FC3B.taxon	materials_examined	Material examined. Burkina Faso. 1 ♀ “ Haute Volta, Bobo Dioulasso ” (cMH). New record. Distribution. Burkina Faso, Gambia, Senegal.	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D26F505EBF85292081F1F9B2.taxon	materials_examined	Type material. Holotype (♂) “ Kamerun, Prov. Nord-Quest [= West] / Str. zw. Bafoussam u. Foumban / Umg. Koutaba, Mandoripa, 740 m / N 05 ° 25 ' 1. O 011 ° 00 ' 7. / leg. A. Puchner VIII / 2013 ” (cAP, Plate 9, Fig. 67 left). Paratypes. 2 ♂, same data as holotype (cAP, cMH), 1 ♀, same data as holotype except: “ 1210 m / N 05 ° 095 ' O 010 ° 464 ' / leg. J. M. Dountio VI / 2013 ” (cAP, cMH, Plate 9, Fig. 68); 1 ♀: “ Kamerun, Prov. Extrême Nord / Str. zw. Maroua u. Yagoua / Umg. Lara, 500 m / N 10 ° 09 ' 5. O 014 ° 30 ' 0. / leg. J. M. Dountio X. 2013 ” (cAP); 1 ♂: “ Kamerun, Prov. Centre / Region um Mbalmayo / Umg. Obout, 680 m / N 03 ° 30 ' 9. O 011 ° 43 ' 4. / leg. J. M. Mbida XII. 2013 ” (cAP, Plate 9, Fig. 67 right).	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D26F505EBF85292081F1F9B2.taxon	description	Description of holotype. Length 24.5 mm, width 9.8 mm. Head and pronotum as in variants of other subspecies of C. reflexus, pronotum somewhat smaller than in HT of C. r. reflexus. Statue smaller and broader, namely elytra less elongate than in C. r. crampeli. Differs from populations of C. l. reflexus and C. r. crampeli by coarser elytral sculpture. Strial punctures larger and deeper, their margins reach centers of intervals, in some instances interrupt or obliterate intervals.	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D26F505EBF85292081F1F9B2.taxon	distribution	Distribution. Cameroon: Central, Extreme North, West Provinces.	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D26F505CBF852B9B8152FC49.taxon	materials_examined	Type material. Holotype (♀), “ Musée du Congo / Haut-Uelé: Moto / - 1923 / L. Burgeon [printed in black on white label] // Type [printe in black on red label] // [DataMatrix] RMCA Ent / 0 0 0 0 20039 [printed on white label] Craspedophorus / uelensis / Type / n. sp. [handwritten in black on white label] // C. uelensis Burg. / (= savagei Hope) [handwritten in black] / P. Basilewsky det., 19 [printed in black on white label] ” (Plate 9, Fig. 70, MRAC). Other material examined. Ethiopia. 2 ♂: “ Gambela State. Gambela (Baro hotel), N 08 ° 14 ' 42 ” E 34 ° 35 ' 30 ”, 450 m (Plate 9, Fig. 69 right, cMH, cPK). South Sudan. 1 ♂: “ East Equatorial state. Akotos Prov: Lolibai Mts. ” (Plate 9, Fig. 69 left, cMH). DR Congo: Orientale. 1 ♀: “ Haut Uelé: Watsa ” (cMH).	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D26F505CBF852B9B8152FC49.taxon	distribution	Distribution. DR Congo: Orientale Province; Ethiopia: Gambela, Oromiya; South Sudan. PLATE 9. Craspedophorus reflexus (Fabricius, 1781), elytral sculpture and coloration. 62. C. reflexus reflexus (Fabricius, 1781), male, Guinea, left elytral humerus (detail); 63. C. r. reflexus, female (HT of Panagaeus savagei Hope, 1842); 64. C. r. megamacula Häckel, 2016, female, Burkina Faso, left elytral humerus (detail); 65. C. r. crampeli (Alluaud, 1915): male, HT, left elytral humerus (detail), right male (HT of C. arnosti Häckel, 2016); 66. C. r. crampeli (Alluaud, 1915): female, (PT of C. arnosti Häckel, 2016), left elytral humerus (detail), right female, Central Africa; 67. C. r. rugatus n. ssp. HT (male), right PT, male, Cameroon Centre, left elytral humerus (detail); 68. C. r. rugatus n. ssp. PT, female, Cameroon West, left elytral humerus (detail); 69. C. r. uelensis Burgeon, 1930, male South Sudan (determinated as C. bozasi Alluaud, 1930 by Häckel 2016: 508), right male Ethiopia, left lytral humerus (detail); 70. C. r. uelensis Burgeon, 1930, HT (female), left elytral humerus (detail).	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D26F505CBF852B9B8152FC49.taxon	description	PLATE 10. Craspedophorus stanleyi Alluaud, 1930, elytral coloration. 70 a. male, DR Congo, Orientale; b. male, Tanzania, Iringa; c. male Tanzania, Kidugala. 71 a. HT (female); b. female, Tanzania, Mbeya. PLATE 11. Craspedophorus reflexus (Fabricius, 1781) and C. stanleyi Alluaud, 1930, aedeagus in frontal and right lateral views: 72. C. reflexus crampeli (Alluaud, 1915), Central Africa; 73. C. r. crampeli (Alluaud, 1915), Central Africa (HT of C. arnosti Häckel, 2016); 74. C. r. uelensis Burgeon, 1930, Ethiopia; 75. C. r. rugatus n. ssp, HT; 76. C. r. reflexus (Fabricius, 1781), Guinea; 77. C. stanleyi Alluaud, 1930, Tanzania, Iringa.	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D26D505DBF85293F8079FF04.taxon	materials_examined	Type material. 1 ♂: “ Museum Paris / Monts Rouwenzori / versant oriental / zone inférieure 1600 m / Ch. Alluaud 1909 [printed, blue label] // janvier [printed white label] // TYPE [printed, red letters, white on red label] // Craspedophorus / ethmoides / Type [handwritten in black ink] / Alluaud det. 1930 [printed, brown letters, combined with handwritten corrections in black ink] ” (HT of C. ethmoides Alluaud, 1930, MNHN). Other material examined. Angola: Bié. 1 ♂: “ S of Quarenta, 1693 m ” (cPS). Lunda Norte. 3 ♂, 5 ♀: “ Dundo ” (MRAC). DR Congo: Kasaï-Occidental. 4 ♂, 5 ♀: “ Tschuapa, Lulua ” (MRAC). Katanga. 1 ♂, 2 ♀: “ Katanga ” (MRAC); Nord Kivu. 1 ♂: “ Région du Kivu ” (MNHN); 1 ♂, 1 ♀: “ Masisi ” (MRAC). Orientale. 2 ♂, 2 ♀: “ Kibali- Ituri ” (MRAC). Sud-Kivu. 2 ♂: “ Terr. Fizi ”; 1 ♂, 1 ♀: “ Kadjudju ”; 2 ♂, 3 ♀: “ Malungu ” (MRAC). Malawi. 1 ♂: “ Malawi Lake. Nkhotakota ” (cMH). South Africa: KwaZulu-Natal. “ Port Natal [= Durban env.] ” (MNHN); 1 ♂: “ KwaZulu-Natal, 25 km S Pongola, S 27 ° 34 '; E 31 ° 35 ', 500 m ” (cIB); 1 ♀: “ KwaZulu-Natal, Mtubatuba, Dukud ” (cRK). Mpumalanga. 2 ♂, 6 ♀: “ Pilgrim's Forest, Graskop ” (MRAC); 1 ♂: “ Transvaal. 25 km NE Barberton ” (cMH). Tanzania: Mwanza. 1 ♂, 1 ♀: “ Musutunguru I., Ukerewe ” (MRAC). Rukwa. 1 ♀: “ Mbizi Forest, Sumbawanga, S 07 ° 53.692 '; E 31 ° 40.697 ', 1236 m ” (BMNH). Zambia. 1 ♂, 1 ♀: [Northwestern Province] “ Hillwood, Ikelenge, S 11 ° 16 ' 02 ”; E 24 ° 18 ' 59 ”, 1400 m ”, (BMNH); 1 ♂: “ Northwestern province. 20 km E Solwezi. ” (cMH); 1 ♀: [Central Province] “ 240 km SE Mansa. 25 km SE Mukuku ”, (cMH); 1 ♀: “ near Mumbwa ” (cPS); 1 ♂, 3 ♀: “ N. E. prov. [= Central Province] Kafue N. P. (cDM); 1 ♂: [Southern Province] “ Kafue NP, Nanzhila Plains, S 16 ° 12.35 ' E 25 ° 47.40 ' ” (cPS); 1 ♂: [Southern Province] “ Bradshaw, Zamboesi [= Livingstone env.] ” (MNHN); 1 ♀: “ Southern Province, 10 km S Mazabuka ” (cIB). Zimbabwe. 1 ♀: “ Matabeleland North Region. Bulawayo. Shangani Naletale Ruins ” (cMH).	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D26D505DBF85293F8079FF04.taxon	distribution	Distribution. Angola: Bié, Lunda Norte Province; DR Congo: Kasaï-Occidental, Katanga, Nord-Kivu, Orientale, Sud-Kivu Provinces; South Africa: KwaZulu-Natal, Mpumalanga Provinces; Tanzania: Mwanza, Rukwa; Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe.	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D26C505DBF852C76810CFDA3.taxon	materials_examined	Type material. Holotype (♂): “ Ugano / 15 – 1700 m // Tanganyika-Terr., / Matengo-Hochland / wsw. v. Songea, / 21. – 31. I, ' 036. Zerny [= Tanzania, Ruvuma Region] ” Other material examined. Tanzania: Iringa. 2 ♂, 3 ♀: “ Deutsch-Ostafrika: Manow ” (MRAC). Ruvuma. 1 ♀: “ Kigonsera ” (MRAC); Singida. 1 ♂, 2 ♀: “ D. O. A. [Deutsch-Ostafrika]: Kilimatinde ” (MRAC). Tanga. 1 ♂, 1 ♀: “ A. O. A. [Afrique orientale allemagne], Amani ” (MRAC).	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D26C505DBF852C76810CFDA3.taxon	distribution	Distribution. Tanzania: Iringa, Ruvuma, Singida, Tanga.	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D26B505ABF85286A8761F888.taxon	materials_examined	Type material. Holotype (♀): “ Stanleyville [handwritten white label // Stanleyi / Type. [handwritten in black ink] / Alluaud det. 1930 [printed in brown ink, combined with handwritten corrections in black ink] ” (Plate 3, Fig. 22, MNHN, Alluaud's Collection). Other material examined. DR Congo: Équateur. 2 ♂, 3 ♀: “ Tshuapa: Bamanya (= Coquilhatville) ”; 1 ♂, 1 ♀: “ Bokuma ” (MRAC). Orientale. 1 ♂, 2 ♀: “ Barumbu ”; 1 ♂, 1 ♀: “ Yangambi ” (MRAC). Tanzania: Iringa. 1 ♂: “ Africa or., Kidugala ” (MNHN); 1 ♂: “ Mufindi, Region um Mgololo, S 06 ° 57 ' 128 “, E 38 ° 45 ' 282 “, 1080 m ” (cAP). Mbeya. 1 ♀: “ Mt. Rungwe, Kitweli forest, Umg. Rungwe, S 09 ° 07 ', E 33 ° 32 ', 1600 m ” (cAP). Uganda. 1 ♂, 1 ♀: “ Victoria Nyanza: Ukerewe ” (MRAC).	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D26B505ABF85286A8761F888.taxon	distribution	Distribution. Congo, DR Congo: Équateur, Orientale Provinces; Tanzania: Iringa, Mbeya; Uganda.	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D2525061BF852B66835AF8D4.taxon	description	In the last work devoted to the C. reflexus group (Häckel 2016: 515) I accepted Basilewsky‘s (1987: 200) synonymization of C. uelensis Burgeon, 1930 with Craspedophorus savagei (Hope, 1842). Although I could not examine Burgeon’s type the description (Burgeon 1930 b: 159) clearly indicated its assignment to the C. reflexus group. In the same work I also synonymized C. raddoni Hope, 1842 and C. savagei Hope, 1842, on the basis of sexual dimorphism, with C. reflexus reflexus. For C. raddoni I clarified Basilewsky‘s (1987: 200) synonymization, whereas the synonmy of C. savagei was new. After accepting Basilewsky’s conclusion, I provisionally assigned C. uelensis Burgeon to C. reflexus reflexus, although the distribution of Burgeon’s species differs from that of C. reflexus reflexus (and all other synonymized taxa). Now, after examination of the holotype of C. uelensis (Plate 9, Fig. 70) and of a number of specimens of the C. reflexus group in the Basilewsky collection at MRAC, I must correct that provisional assignment. In the description of C. uelensis Burgeon (1930 b: 159) stated: “ It resembles eximius Laf. [= C. reflexus], and decorsei All. [= C. b. bouvieri (Rousseau, 1905)], from which is distinguishable by distinctly lesser pronotum and much less distinctly punctate elytra ... ”, [translated from French]. In the differential diagnosis Burgeon (1930 b: 160) stated: “ C. reflexus is larger and longer … [than C. uelensis]. In C. bonnyi Bates, 1890 metepisterna are almost squared, pronotal margins sinuate at midlength, hind angles are almost rectangular, and elytra are smooth. In C. b. bouvieri the antennae are dilated and the pronotal base is weakly extended toward peduncle, as in C. regalis (Gory, 1833) and C. decorsei [= C. b. bouvieri (Rousseau, 1905) ” [translated from French]. From these characters, it seems that C. uelensis differs from C. reflexus not only in the geographic distribution but also in body size. The study of additional specimens at MRAC indicates that species of the C. reflexus complex are exceedingly difficult to distinguish (in this context “ C. reflexus species complex “ is only intended to mean the very similar taxa C. arnosti, C. crampeli, C. impictus, C. reflexus, C. ruvumanus, and C. uelensis). Some exoskeletal characters (e. g. overall size, size and shape of the pronotum, elytral color pattern) are too variable and can be only applied to certain geographically limited populations; in other species of the complex these characters tend to be constant and have been used in differential diagnoses and keys. For instance in populations of the western savanna near the shore of the Guinea Gulf (roughly in Guinea and Nigeria) the prevailing type of morphology of both sexes is the “ reflexus - holotype ”, i. e., specimens with a broad pronotum, as broader as the elytra, which show an elytral pattern with four weakly reduced maculae (Häckel 2016, plate 1, figs. 1 – 5, 7 and Plate 9: Figs 62, 63 of this paper). Basilewsky arranged his collection at MRAC so that specimens of this complex collected in the region from Guinea to northeastern DR Congo were labeled “ C. reflexus (Fabr.) ”, as far as they had a large pronotum, as wide as the elytra. Other specimens from this territory, often from the same localities and showing a smaller pronotum narrower than the elytra were labeled “ C. savagei (Hope) ”. This arrangement contradicts his own work (Basilewsky 1987: 200), because he synonymized C. raddoni (Hope, 1842) whose holotype male has a large pronotum with C. savagei (Hope, 1842), whose holotype (female) has a markedly smaller pronotum (Häckel 2016, plate 1, figs. 5, 6). In the same work he also synonymized C. eximius (LaFerté- Sénectere, 1851) with C. reflexus, whose types (both sexes) show a broad pronotum (viz Häckel 2016, plate 1, figs. 1, 2). As stated in my first contribution, where C. savagei (Hope, 1842) was synonymized with C. reflexus, in the C. reflexus complex size and width of the pronotum are not reliable characters to identify specimens (Häckel 2016: 524), nor can they distinguish between sexes. After examination of the holotype of C. uelensis (Plate 9, Fig. 70), the hereby discussed holotype of C. crampeli (Alluaud, 1915, (Fig. 61, Plate 9, Fig. 65 left, centre) and of other specimens of this group in the MRAC collection, I propose the following solution: Variable populations of the C. reflexus group inhabiting the northwest coast of Gulf of Guinea from Guinea to Nigeria which apart from similar aedeagus (Plate 11, Fig. 76) share also some exoskeletal characters, should be left in the nominotypical C. reflexus reflexus (Fabricius, 1781 see also map in Fig. 81: 3 – 11). These populations share fine punctation of striae with punctures not reaching the middle of intervals, which are micropunctate but glossy. The prevailing character is elytral pattern with two maculae, humeral and apical, which are antero-posteriorly reduced and form short transverse fasciae (Häckel 2016, plate 1, figs 1 – 7 and here Plate 9, Figs 62, 63). In some specimens the apical fascia may be absent. To the north and east (“ Senegambia “, Burkina Faso) populations maintain the same elytral sculpture but the maculae are much bigger, not antero-posteriorly reduced and roughly circular or quadrate, as in C. reflexus megamacula Häckel, 2016 (Häckel 2016, plate 1, fig. 8 and here Plate 9, Fig. 64, see also map in Fig. 81: 1 – 2). Specimens from Nigeria and adjacent western Cameroon (Bamenda) have characters intermediate between the two subspecies. Populations in western (Bafoussam), northern (Yagoua) and in part also central Cameroon (Mbalmayo) include somewhat smaller individuals with relatively smaller pronotum and highly variable elytral coloration, ranging from only slightly reduced macular fasciae (as in most specimens of C. r. reflexus) through much reduced or absent apical fascia (as in most specimens of another subspecies), to completely black specimens (Fig: 91: 12 – 14). I do not consider such variability in a population exceptional, it is well documented for the closely related panagaeine Microcosmodes persicus Häckel and Azadbakhsh (2016: 558, figs 6 – 9). A shared character of the above noted Cameroonian populations is coarser sculpture with striae punctures reaching the middle of intervals (Plate 9, Fig. 67 centre), in some specimens to the extent of interrupting and obliterating them (Plate 9, Fig. 67 right and left, Fig. 68). Such coarse sculpture justifies the description of C. reflexus rugatus ssp. nov. In central and eastern Cameroon and Central African Republic there are populations of mostly larger specimens, that show elytral sculpture similar to C. r. reflexus, in which the apical fascia is usually either strongly reduced or absent (it is fully developed in rare specimens) (Plate 9, Figs 65 right, 66). Specimens of these populations showing high variability were described as separate species and should be synonymized, as it happens with C. crampeli (Alluaud, 1915) (Fig. 61, Plate 9, Fig. 65 left). Assignment of C. crampeli to the C. reflexus group was already discussed in the paragraph devoted to the C. regalis group. Similarly, the most recently described C. arnosti Häckel, 2016 is conspecific with C. crampeli, and must be synonymized. The holotypes of these two taxa differ only in the presence of the apical macula in C. crampeli and its absence in C. arnosti (Plate 9, Fig. 65 centre and right). The Central African populations of C. reflexus thus must named as C. reflexus crampeli (Alluaud, 1915) (see also map in Fig. 81: 15 – 18). The last subspecies of C. reflexus is that inhabiting the vicinity of the East African Rift, i. e. east part of the Orientale Province in DR Congo (Upper Uele), South Sudan (Lolibai) and southwestern Ethiopia (Gambela, see map in Fig. 81: 19 – 21). In the eastern populations the size of the pronotum varies (the smaller type prevails), elytral sculpture is coarser in the west and gradually becomes finer eastward, most specimens are smaller than most C. reflexus crampeli to the west, and all four elytral maculae are present. Not all of these characters are expressed in all specimens, nevertheless they can be distinguished from the homogeneousappearing populations of the closest C. impictus (Boheman, 1848), that inhabit the southern vicinity of C. reflexus (see map in Fig. 81: 22 – 41) and C. ruvumanus Häckel, 2016 (Fig. 81: 42 – 45). Similarly to the preceding subspecies, some specimens of the eastern populations have been described as separate species. C. bozasi Alluaud, 1930 was based on three specimens from southern Ethiopia but I have not found any of them at MNHN. They were most likely gone already in 1987, when Basilewsky (1987: 200) searched the MNHN collection. The fate of these syntypes is unknown to me, and I therefore have not designated a neotype. However, on the basis of the drawing and description (Alluaud 1930: 6, fig. 3) reproduced in my work (2016: 517), I identified a male recently collected in southern Sudan as C. bozasi (Häckel 2016: 517, fig. 19, here Plate 9, Fig. 69 left) and two males from Gambela State, western Ethiopia (Plate 9, Fig. 69 right). When Alluaud (1930: 4) described C. bozasi, he was unaware of Burgeon’s description of C. uelensis published in the same year (Burgeon 1930 b: 159). I suspect that when Basilewsky synonymized C. uelensis with C. savagei (without comment), he united two very similar taxa, which however differ in pronotum proportions and convexity and sculpture of the elytra (Plate 9, Figs 62, 63 and Figs. 67, 70). The finding of a new specimen of C. bozasi (candidate for neotype) in southern Sudan supports the notion that C. bozasi and C. uelensis are conspecific. Burgeon‘s (1930) work was published on 30 July and that of Alluaud (1930) on 15 September. The priority is thus clear, C. bozasi is a synonym of C. uelensis. The name of the eastern subspecies of C. reflexus thus must be C. reflexus uelensis Burgeon, 1930. All aedeagi of the studied populations of C. reflexus have the same shape (Plate 11, Figs. 72 – 76). While studying Basilewsky’s material at MRAC I had the opportunity to observe similar variability in the size of the pronotum and elytral pattern in C. stanleyi Alluaud, 1930. This species differs from the previous not only in the elytral pattern but also in the shape of the aedeagus (Plate 11, Fig. 77). The variability of the elytral pattern is limited, which permits to distinguish C. stanleyi from the similarly variable C. reflexus at first sight. Examination of many specimens at MRAC and of other recent collections indicates that the specimen found in the Alluaud- Jeannel collection at MNHN labeled C. cf. stanleyi (Häckel 2016: 517, plate 3, fig. 21, here Plate 10, Fig. 70 c) is actually a male of that species. Also the type of C. lebaudyi Alluaud, 1932, which was not found at MNHN and is known only by a drawing (Häckel 2016: 517, plate 3, fig. 24), apparently belongs to a taxon conspecific with C. stanleyi. All differences in the description and the drawing (Alluaud 1932: 9) fall within the limits of intraspecific variation (Plate 10, Figs 70, 71). C. lebaudyi Alluaud, 1932 is therefore hereby synonymized with C. stanleyi Alluaud, 1930. A final proposed synonymy is aimed to follow Basilewsky’s intention, that could not be carried out due to his passing in 1993. Basilewsky labeled one specimen collected in Kivu (DR Congo), the type locality of C. ethmoides Alluaud, 1930, as “ C. ethmoides All. = C. impictus (Boh.) “. The study of a series of C. impictus (at MRAC) from Uganda and / or northeastern DR Congo, and the comparison with the holotype of C. ethmoides Alluaud, 1930 plus a labeled Alluaud’s specimen at MNHN collected in Kivu (Häckel 2016: 510, 518: Fig. 27), suggest that C. ethmoides Alluaud, 1930 should be synonymyzed with C. impictus (Boheman, 1848), as already proposed by Basilewsky.	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D25F506EBF852DAD8754F9F4.taxon	description	C. bonnyi Bates, 1890. DR Congo: Orientale, Nord-Kivu Provinces. C. buettneri Kolbe, 1889. DR Congo: Bandundu Province. C. carbonarius (Harold, 1879), as Eudema. Ethiopia: Oromiya; Kenya: Coast Province; Tanzania: Morogoro, Zanzibar Isl. C. impictus (Boheman, 1848), as Panagaeus. Angola: Lunda Norte Province; DR Congo: Kasaï-Occidental, Katanga, Nord-Kivu, Sud-Kivu Provinces; Malawi; Mosambique: Maputo Province; South Africa: Eastern Cape, Gauteng, Kwa-Zulu Natal, Limpopo, Mpumalanga, North West, Western Cape Provinces; Tanzania: Rukwa; Uganda; Zambia; Zimbabwe.	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D25F506EBF852DAD8754F9F4.taxon	description	C. reflexus rugatus n. ssp. Cameroon: Central, Extreme North, West Provinces. C. reflexus uelensis Burgeon, 1930, n. stat. DR Congo: Orientale Province; Ethiopia: Gambela, Oromiya; South Sudan. C. ruvumanus Häckel, 2016. Tanzania: Iringa, Ruvuma, Singida, Tanga.	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D25F506EBF852DAD8754F9F4.taxon	description	C. merus pseudofestivus Burgeon, 1930, n. stat. Burundi, DR Congo: Katanga, Orientale, Sud-Kivu Provinces; Rwanda, Tanzania: Kagera; Uganda.	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
724387B7D25F506EBF852B0D83B9F869.taxon	description	C. imperialis imperialis Burgeon, 1930, n. stat. Benin, Burkina Faso, Ghana, Ivory Coast, Togo. C. imperialis dux Basilewsky, 1951, n. stat. Northern Cameroon.	en	Häckel, Martin (2017): A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 2. Revision of the Craspedophorus leprieuri and C. regalis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Zootaxa 4236 (2): 201-243, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.2.1
