identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
724387B7D2755044BF852F508677FC62.text	724387B7D2755044BF852F508677FC62.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Craspedophorus Hope 1838	<div><p>Craspedophorus Hope, 1838: 165</p><p>Type species Carabus reflexus Fabricius, 1781: 302</p><p>Eudema Laporte de Castelnau, 1840: 137; type species Panagaeus regalis Gory, 1833</p><p>Isotarsus LaFerté-Sénectere, 1851: 217; type species Panagaeus regalis Gory, 1833</p><p>Epicosmus Chaudoir, 1846: 512; type species Panagaeus tomentosus Vigors, 1825 [= Craspedophorus angulatus (Fabricius, 1781)]</p><p>Brachyonychus Chaudoir, 1878: 85; type species Epicosmus sublaevis Chaudoir, 1869</p><p>Acanthocosmus Jeannel, 1949: 855 (Subgenus); type species Eudema nigrita Künckel ďHerculais, 1891</p><p>Brachycosmus Jeannel, 1949: 857 (Subgenus); type species Panagaeus festivus Klug, 1833</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/724387B7D2755044BF852F508677FC62	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Häckel, Martin	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.text	724387B7D2755044BF852ED4807BF906.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Craspedophorus leprieuri	<div><p>Craspedophorus leprieuri species group (nov.)</p><p>(= see Chaudoir 1879: 97; Basilewsky 1987: 188)</p><p>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.</p><p>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. 23c). 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.</p><p>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).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/724387B7D2755044BF852ED4807BF906	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Häckel, Martin	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.text	724387B7D2755045BF852A7783CBFA3C.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Craspedophorus cameronus Bates 1886	<div><p>1. Craspedophorus cameronus Bates, 1886</p><p>(Plate 2, Figs 13–15)</p><p>Craspedophorus cameronus Bates, 1886: 196 (type loc. “ Mount Cameroons ” [= South West Region, Cameroon]). Burgeon 1930b: 158, 1935: 180, Jeannel 1949: 853, Basilewsky 1954: 247, Lorenz 2005: 320, Häckel et Farkač 2012: 80.</p><p>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).</p><p>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) .</p><p>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”.</p><p>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].</p><p>Distribution. Cameroon, DR Congo: Orientale, Sud-Kivu Provinces; Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Guinea, south-eastern Nigeria.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/724387B7D2755045BF852A7783CBFA3C	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Häckel, Martin	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.text	724387B7D27B504BBF852B86813EFD0C.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Craspedophorus pretiosus (Chaudoir 1837) Chaudoir 1837	<div><p>4. Craspedophorus pretiosus (Chaudoir, 1837)</p><p>(Plate 2, Fig. 22; Plate 3, Fig. 24)</p><p>Panagaeus pretiosus Chaudoir, 1837: 49 . (type loc. “ Cap de Bone Espérance [= Republic of South Africa: Cape Province]”). Schaum 1853: 434. Epicosmus pretiosus Chaudoir 1861: 342, 1879: 119 . Eudema pretiosum Quedenfeldt, 1883: 259 . Eudema (Epicosmus) pretiosum Péringuey, 1896: 480, 1904: 188 . Craspedophorus pretiosus Lorenz 2005: 321, Häckel et Farkač 2012: 82.</p><p>Isotarsus amplicollis Chaudoir 1861: 342 (nec. Schaum). Schaum 1862: xxiii, syn. nov.</p><p>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. 8mm]. “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].</p><p>Distribution. South Africa: Cape, KwaZulu-Natal Provinces.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/724387B7D27B504BBF852B86813EFD0C	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Häckel, Martin	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.text	724387B7D27A5048BF852E7E806CF83E.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Craspedophorus regalis	<div><p>Craspedophorus regalis species group (nov.)</p><p>(= see Chaudoir 1879: 100; Basilewsky 1954: 246)</p><p>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.</p><p>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. 52c; 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).</p><p>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).</p><p>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).</p><p>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.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/724387B7D27A5048BF852E7E806CF83E	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Häckel, Martin	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.text	724387B7D2625050BF852A298389F94D.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Craspedophorus unicolor Chaudoir 1879	<div><p>4. Craspedophorus unicolor Chaudoir, 1879</p><p>(Plate 5, Figs 41, 42)</p><p>Craspedophorus unicolor Chaudoir, 1879: 100 (type loc. “Zanzibar”). Burgeon 1930b: 160, 1935: 182, Basilewsky 1953: 171, Lorenz 2005: 321, Häckel et Farkač 2012: 83,</p><p>Eudema (Craspedophorus) zambezianum Péringuey, 1896: 477, 1926: 580 . Craspedophorus zambezianus Csiki, 1929: 360 . Burgeon 1930b: 160, 1935: 182, syn. nov., Ferreira 1963: 120.</p><p>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).</p><p>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).</p><p>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].</p><p>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).”</p><p>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.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/724387B7D2625050BF852A298389F94D	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Häckel, Martin	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.text	724387B7D2615051BF852A0C836AFDA2.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Craspedophorus reflexus subsp. reflexus (Fabricius 1791) Fabricius 1791	<div><p>Craspedophorus reflexus reflexus (Fabricius, 1791)</p><p>(Plate 9, Figs 62–63)</p><p>Carabus reflexus Fabricius, 1781 (nec 1801): 302 (type loc. “Habitat in Coromandel” [in error sn. Andrewes 1919: 126, = “W. Africa”]). Craspedophorus reflexus Andrewes 1919: 126 . Burgeon 1930b: 160, Basilewsky 1953: 170, 1954: 247, 1963: 382, 1968: 93, Häckel et Farkač 2012: 82 [erroneous data].</p><p>Panagaeus eximius LaFerté-Sénectere, 1850: 292 . Isotarsus eximius LaFerté-Sénectere 1851: 221 . Schaum 1853: 435. Epicosmus eximius Chaudoir 1861: 339 . Eudema eximia Alluaud 1915: 152 . Craspedophorus eximius Chaudoir 1879: 98 . Alluaud 1930: 2, Burgeon 1935: 181, Basilewsky 1953: 171, syn. nov., published also 1954: 245, 1956: 83, 1987: 200. Panagaeus raddoni Hope, 1842: 93 . Schaum 1853: 434. Chaudoir 1861: 350, 1879: 96. Craspedophorus savagei Basilewsky, 1987: 200 syn. nov.</p><p>Panagaeus savagei Hope, 1842: 93 . Schaum 1853: 434. Epicosmus savagei Chaudoir, 1861: 350 . Craspedophorus savagei Chaudoir, 1879: 96, Basilewsky, 1987: 200, Häckel et Farkač 2012: 83, Häckel 2016: 513 syn. nov.</p><p>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).</p><p>Distribution. Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Ivory Coast, Cameroon: Northwest Province; Nigeria: Oyo; Sierra Leone.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/724387B7D2615051BF852A0C836AFDA2	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Häckel, Martin	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.text	724387B7D260505EBF852F88819DFD31.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Craspedophorus reflexus subsp. crampeli (Alluaud 1915) Alluaud 1915	<div><p>Craspedophorus reflexus crampeli (Alluaud, 1915) n. stat.</p><p>(Fig. 61, Plate 9, Figs 65–66)</p><p>Eudema eximia crampeli Alluaud, 1915: 153 (type loc. “ Fort-Crampel, sur le haut Chari, dans le Congo français” [= Central African Republic: Nana Grébizi Prefecture: Kaga Bandoro]).</p><p>Craspedophorus crampeli Burgeon, 1930b: 159 .</p><p>Craspedophorus eximius var. crampeli Burgeon, 1935: 181 .</p><p>Craspedophorus arnosti Häckel, 2016: 507, syn. nov.</p><p>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).</p><p>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).</p><p>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 1915a: 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].</p><p>Distribution. Cameroon: Central Province; Central African Republic.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/724387B7D260505EBF852F88819DFD31	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Häckel, Martin	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.text	724387B7D26F505EBF852E258096FC3B.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Craspedophorus reflexus subsp. megamacula Hackel 2016	<div><p>Craspedophorus reflexus megamacula Häckel, 2016</p><p>(Plate 9, Fig. 64)</p><p>Material examined. Burkina Faso. 1♀ “Haute Volta, Bobo Dioulasso ” (cMH). New record. Distribution. Burkina Faso, Gambia, Senegal .</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/724387B7D26F505EBF852E258096FC3B	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Häckel, Martin	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.text	724387B7D26F505EBF85292081F1F9B2.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Craspedophorus reflexus subsp. rugatus	<div><p>Craspedophorus reflexus rugatus n. ssp.</p><p>(Plate 9, Figs 67–68)</p><p>Type material. Holotype (♂) “ Kamerun, Prov. Nord-Quest [= West] / Str. zw. Bafoussam u. Foumban / Umg. Koutaba, Mandoripa, 740m / 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: “ 1210m / 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, 500m / N 10°09' 5 . O 014°30'0. / leg. J. M. Dountio X. 2013 ” (cAP); 1♂: “ Kamerun, Prov. Centre / Region um Mbalmayo / Umg. Obout, 680m / N 03°30' 9 . O 011°43'4. / leg. J. M. Mbida XII. 2013 ” (cAP, Plate 9, Fig. 67 right).</p><p>Description of holotype. Length 24.5 mm, width 9.8 mm.</p><p>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.</p><p>Distribution. Cameroon: Central, Extreme North, West Provinces.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/724387B7D26F505EBF85292081F1F9B2	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Häckel, Martin	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.text	724387B7D26F505CBF852B9B8152FC49.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Craspedophorus reflexus subsp. uelensis Burgeon 1930	<div><p>Craspedophorus reflexus uelensis Burgeon, 1930 stat. n., valid subspecies</p><p>(Plate 9, Figs 69–70)</p><p>Craspedophorus uelensis Burgeon, 1930b: 159 . 1935: 181. Basilewsky 1948: 37.</p><p>Craspedophorus savagei Basilewsky 1987: 200 syn. nov., Lorenz 2005: 321, Häckel et Farkač 2012: 83. Craspedophorus reflexus reflexus (Fabricius, 1781): Häckel 2016: 512 syn. nov.</p><p>Craspedophorus bozasi Alluaud, 1930: 4 . Lorenz 2005: 320, Häckel et Farkač 2012: 80. Häckel 2016: 508. syn. nov.</p><p>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).</p><p>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).</p><p>Distribution. DR Congo: Orientale Province; Ethiopia: Gambela, Oromiya; South Sudan.</p><p>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).</p><p>PLATE 10. Craspedophorus stanleyi Alluaud, 1930, elytral coloration. 70a. male, DR Congo, Orientale ; b. male, Tanzania, Iringa; c. male Tanzania, Kidugala. 71a. HT (female); b. female, Tanzania, Mbeya .</p><p>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.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/724387B7D26F505CBF852B9B8152FC49	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Häckel, Martin	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.text	724387B7D26D505DBF85293F8079FF04.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Craspedophorus impictus (Boheman 1848) Boheman 1848	<div><p>Craspedophorus impictus (Boheman, 1848)</p><p>Panagaeus impictus Boheman, 1848: 124 (type loc. “Caffraria interior” [=South Africa: Limpopo, Mpumalanga, North West provinces; Zambia, Zimbabwe]). Isotarsus impictus Schaum 1853: 434 . Epicosmus impictus Chaudoir 1861: 347 . Eudema impictum Harold 1879: 20 . Quedenfeldt, 1883: 259, Péringuey 1896: 476. Craspedophorus impictus Chaudoir 1879: 99 . Alluaud 1930: 7, Burgeon 1930b: 160, 1935: 182, Basilewsky 1953: 172, Ferreira 1963: 120, Häckel et Farkač 2012: 81.</p><p>Craspedophorus aequalitas Thomson, 1856: 481 . Harold 1879: 20 syn. nov.</p><p>Craspedophorus alloderus Chaudoir in litt.</p><p>Craspedophorus ethmoides Alluaud, 1930: 8 . Häckel et Farkač 2012: 80. syn. nov.</p><p>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).</p><p>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, S27°34' ; E31°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, S07°53.692' ; E31°40.697', 1236 m ” (BMNH). Zambia . 1♂, 1♀: [Northwestern Province] “ Hillwood, Ikelenge, S11°16'02”; E24°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, <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=25.79&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=-16.205833" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 25.79/lat -16.205833)">Nanzhila Plains</a>, 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).</p><p>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.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/724387B7D26D505DBF85293F8079FF04	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Häckel, Martin	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.text	724387B7D26C505DBF852C76810CFDA3.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Craspedophorus ruvumanus Hackel 2016	<div><p>Craspedophorus ruvumanus Häckel, 2016</p><p>Type material. Holotype (♂): “ Ugano / 15–1700 m // Tanganyika-Terr., / Matengo-Hochland / wsw. v. Songea, / 21.–31.I, '036. Zerny [= Tanzania, Ruvuma Region]”</p><p>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).</p><p>Distribution. Tanzania: Iringa, Ruvuma, Singida, Tanga.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/724387B7D26C505DBF852C76810CFDA3	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Häckel, Martin	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.text	724387B7D26B505ABF85286A8761F888.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Craspedophorus stanleyi Alluaud 1930	<div><p>Craspedophorus stanleyi Alluaud, 1930</p><p>(Plate 10, Figs 70, 71; Plate 11, Fig.77)</p><p>Craspedophorus stanleyi Alluaud, 1930: 5 (type loc. “ Stanleyville ” [=Democratic Congo: Orientale Province: Kisangani]). Burgeon 1935: 181, Häckel et Farkač 2012: 83.</p><p>Craspedophorus lebaudyi Alluaud, 1932: 9 syn. nov.</p><p>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).</p><p>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“, 1080m ” (cAP). Mbeya. 1♀: “ Mt. Rungwe, Kitweli forest, Umg. Rungwe , S 09°07', E 33°32', 1600m ” (cAP). Uganda. 1♂, 1♀: “Victoria Nyanza: Ukerewe ” (MRAC).</p><p>Distribution. Congo, DR Congo: Équateur, Orientale Provinces; Tanzania: Iringa, Mbeya; Uganda.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/724387B7D26B505ABF85286A8761F888	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Häckel, Martin	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
724387B7D26A5058BF85289387D8FF36.text	724387B7D26A5058BF85289387D8FF36.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Craspedophorus Hope 1838	<div><p>Key to species groups of Craspedophorus Hope, 1838</p><p>(Afrotropical region)</p><p>1 Terminal labial palpomere (mainly in males) weakly dilated, elongated, more or less kidney-shaped. If male terminal palpom- ere strongly dilated and not too elongated (securiform or triangular) then pronotum cordiform, with lateral margins strongly sinuate posteriorly.................................................................................... 2</p><p>- Terminal labial palpomere in males strongly dilated, more triangular, securiform........ .. species groups not included here.</p><p>2 Antennae long and moderately dilated, mainly in intermediate antennomeres (Plate 7, Figs 53–55).... C. regalis species group</p><p>- Antennae slender, antennomeres not dilated (Fig. 61c –d)...................................................... 3</p><p>3 Ventrites not crenulated anteriorly........................................................................ 4</p><p>- Ventrites distinctly or strongly crenulated anteriorly.................................species groups not included here.</p><p>4 Pronotum cordiform or hexagonal, with margins rounded only anteriorly......................................... 5</p><p>- Pronotum almost semicircular, with margins widely rounded lengthwise, more-or-less evenly....................................................................................................species groups not included here.</p><p>5 Metepisterna rhombiform, approximately as long as wide........................... species groups not included here.</p><p>- Metepisterna trapeziform, longer than wide, proximally wider than distally (Figs 21d, e; Fig. 61 i, j)................... 6</p><p>6 Head long, markedly constricted behind eyes. Pronotum less transverse (length to width ratio &lt;1.4). Larger species (± 18 mm). If body not too large ( C. latemaculatus Alluaud, 1930, 18– 19 mm), elytra with four orange maculae, each markedly larger than in other aspecies.................................................................. C. reflexus species group</p><p>- Head short, not constricted behind eyes or constriction indistinct. Pronotum more transverse (length to width ratio&gt; 1.4). Smaller species (Ĺ 18 mm).......................................................... C. leprieuri species group</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/724387B7D26A5058BF85289387D8FF36	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Häckel, Martin	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
724387B7D2695059BF852B3787D8FEF8.text	724387B7D2695059BF852B3787D8FEF8.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Craspedophorus leprieuri	<div><p>Key to species of Craspedophorus leprieuri group</p><p>1 Pronotum more transverse (length to width ratio&gt; 1.6), with maximum width at midlength or immediately behind it, anterior angles widely lobed, strongly protruded anteriorly (Plate 3, Fig. 25). Smaller species (&lt;17 mm). Western, central to east and south-central Africa................................................................................... 2</p><p>- Pronotum less transverse (length to width ratio &lt;1.6), with maximum width more behind midlength, anterior angles not or weakly lobed and protruded anteriorly. Larger species (&gt; 17 mm). Central, eastern to South Africa .....................3</p><p>2 Labial palps, antennae (except base), tibiae and tarsi mostly piceo-ferrugineous; elytra with two orange maculae rounded, not fragmented, macular margins not serrate; humeral macula reaching from V. (or VI.) to VIII. interval, with outer macular spots gradually elongate and reaching to humerus, preapical reaching from V. to VIII. interval. Length 15–16 mm. Cameroon, Guinea, northern DR Congo, Gabon, south-eastern Nigeria................................... C. cameronus Bates, 1886</p><p>- Labial palps, antennae, tibiae and tarsi black. Elytra with maculae transverse, fragmented; humeral fascia reaching from II., III., IV., V. to VIII. interval, with outer macular spots moved more to base but not longer than most of inner spots, never reaching humerus....................................................... C. leprieuri (Laporte de Castelnau, 1835)</p><p>3 Pronotum with anterior angles weakly lobed and protruded anteriorly, base weakly extened posteriorly. Elytra with maculae transverse, more-or-less fragmented (Plate 3, Figs 26, 27). East-central to south-central Africa along the Rift..............</p><p>................................................................................ C. merus Péringuey, 1904 - Pronotum with anterior angles rounded but not lobed or protruded anteriorly, anterior margin almost parallel with base (Plate 3, Fig. 24). Elytra with maculae circular, not fragmented. South Africa: Cape Province, KwaZulu-Natal ................................................................................................. C. pretiosus (Chaudoir, 1837)</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/724387B7D2695059BF852B3787D8FEF8	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Häckel, Martin	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
724387B7D2685059BF852C6F87D8FD0F.text	724387B7D2685059BF852C6F87D8FD0F.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Craspedophorus regalis	<div><p>Key to species of Craspedophorus regalis group</p><p>1 Pronotum with sides of base emarginate, causing center of base to extend toward elytra as a weak peduncle.............. 2</p><p>- Pronotal base straight, hind angles rounded.................................................................3</p><p>2 Pronotum markedly pedunculate, elytra without maculae, black species (region of the Rift and east Africa from DR Congo and Tanzania to Mozambique and Zambia)............................................... C. unicolor (Chaudoir, 1879)</p><p>- Pronotum only weakly pedunculate, each elytron with two orange maculae, humeral macula always fascia-shaped ( west Africa from Senegal to Togo)................................................................ C. regalis (Gory, 1833)</p><p>3 Pronotum with evenly rounded sides, broadly rounded hind angles, and straight base. Elytral striae coarsely punctate, punctures do not extend into intervals (Plate 6, Fig. 49a). Larger species (28 – 33 mm), ( west Africa: Ivory Coast – Cameroon)................................................................................. .. C. imperialis Burgeon, 1930</p><p>- Pronotum with straight base and sides in front of hind angles always with an indentation, sometimes with a minor tooth at angles. Elytral striae coarsely punctate, punctures extend to centers of intervals and markedly dislocate them (Plate 6, Fig. 47a). Smaller species (21–28.2 mm) ( central Africa: RCA and northeastern DR Congo)....... C. bouvieri (Rousseau, 1905)</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/724387B7D2685059BF852C6F87D8FD0F	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Häckel, Martin	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.text	724387B7D2525061BF852B66835AF8D4.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Craspedophorus reflexus	<div><p>Notes to C. reflexus group Häckel 2016</p><p>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 1930b: 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 (1930b: 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 (1930b: 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 1930b: 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).</p><p>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. 70c) 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 .</p><p>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.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/724387B7D2525061BF852B66835AF8D4	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Häckel, Martin	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.text	724387B7D25F506EBF852DAD8754F9F4.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Craspedophorus reflexus	<div><p>a) C. reflexus species group Häckel, 2016 (8 species)</p><p>C. bonnyi Bates, 1890 . DR Congo: Orientale, Nord-Kivu Provinces.</p><p>C. buettneri Kolbe, 1889 . DR Congo: Bandundu Province .</p><p>C. carbonarius (Harold, 1879), as Eudema . Ethiopia: Oromiya ; Kenya: Coast Province; Tanzania: Morogoro, Zanzibar Isl.</p><p>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.</p><p>C. latemaculatus Alluaud, 1930 . Central Cameroon.</p><p>C. reflexus reflexus (Fabricius, 1781), as Carabus . Cameroon: Northwest Province; Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Ivory Coast, Liberia, Nigeria: Oyo; Sierra Leone.</p><p>C. reflexus crampeli (Alluaud 1915), n. stat. as Eudema . Cameroon: Central Province ; Central African Republic.</p><p>C. reflexus megamacula Häckel, 2016 . Burkina Faso, Gambia, Senegal.</p><p>C. reflexus rugatus n. ssp. Cameroon: Central, Extreme North, West Provinces .</p><p>C. reflexus uelensis Burgeon, 1930, n. stat. DR Congo: Orientale Province; Ethiopia: Gambela, Oromiya; South Sudan.</p><p>C. ruvumanus Häckel, 2016 . Tanzania: Iringa, Ruvuma, Singida, Tanga.</p><p>C. stanleyi Alluaud, 1930 . Congo (Brazzaville), DR Congo: Équateur, Orientale Provinces; Tanzania: Iringa, Mbeya; Uganda.</p><p>b) C. leprieuri species group nov. (4 species)</p><p>C. cameronus Bates, 1886 . Cameroon, DR Congo : Orientale, Sud-Kivu Provinces; Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Guinea, Nigeria: Cross River State .</p><p>C. leprieuri leprieuri (Laporte de Castelnau, 1835), as Panagaeus . Cameroon, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Ivory Coast, Senegal, Togo.</p><p>C. leprieuri clasispilus (Alluaud 1915), as Eudema, n. stat. Northern, central Cameroon , Central Africa, northern Congo, northeastern DR Congo: northern Orientale Province .</p><p>C. leprieuri guineensis Basilewsky, 1987, n. stat. Coast of Guinea-Bissau and Senegal.</p><p>C. leprieuri peringueyi Csiki, 1929, n. stat. Mozambique: Niassa Province ; Tanzania: Morogoro, Ruvuma; eastern Zambia, eastern Zimbabwe.</p><p>C. leprieuri zambianus n. ssp. Angola: Lunda Norte Province ; Burundi, Congo, DR Congo: Bandundu, Bas- Congo, Kasaï-Occidental, Katanga, Kinshasa, Sud-Kivu Provinces; Rwanda, Zambia.</p><p>C. merus merus Péringuey, 1904 . DR Congo: Kasaï-Occidental, Kasaï-Oriental, Katanga, Maniema, Orientale Provinces; Tanzania: Iringa, Ruvuma; Zimbabwe.</p><p>C. merus lundanus n. ssp. Angola: Lunda Norte Province ; DR Congo: Kasaï-Oriental, Katanga Provinces .</p><p>C. merus pseudofestivus Burgeon, 1930, n. stat. Burundi, DR Congo : Katanga, Orientale, Sud-Kivu Provinces; Rwanda, Tanzania: Kagera; Uganda.</p><p>C. pretiosus (Chaudoir, 1837), as Panagaeus . South Africa: KwaZulu-Natal, Western Cape Provinces .</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/724387B7D25F506EBF852DAD8754F9F4	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Häckel, Martin	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.text	724387B7D25F506EBF852B0D83B9F869.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Craspedophorus regalis	<div><p>c) C. regalis species group nov. (4 species)</p><p>C. bouvieri bouvieri (Rousseau, 1905) . Central Cameroon, Central African Republic, Congo.</p><p>C. bouvieri iturianus Basilewsky, 1956 . DR Congo: Orientale Province .</p><p>C. imperialis imperialis Burgeon, 1930, n. stat. Benin, Burkina Faso, Ghana, Ivory Coast, Togo.</p><p>C. imperialis dux Basilewsky, 1951, n. stat. Northern Cameroon.</p><p>C. regalis regalis (Gory, 1833), as Panagaeus . Northern, central Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Senegal.</p><p>C. regalis sayersii (Hope, 1842), as Panagaeus, n. stat. Ghana, South-eastern Guinea, Ivory Coast, Liberia, Togo.</p><p>C. unicolor Chaudoir, 1879 . Angola, Lunda Norte Province ; DR Congo: Katanga, Maniema Provinces; Malawi, Mozambique: Sofala Province; Tanzania: Kigoma, Lindi, Morogoro, Ruvuma, Singida, Tabora, Zanzibar Island; Zambia, Zimbabwe.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/724387B7D25F506EBF852B0D83B9F869	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Häckel, Martin	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
