taxonID	type	description	language	source
4528878FFFC9FF9DFF14FBFEFE3082E1.taxon	description	(Fig. 1 – 2)	en	Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel, Botero, Juan Pablo, de, Francisco Eriberto, Nascimento, L. (2020): Notes, new records, new combinations, a new genus and three new species in Hemilophini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae). Insecta Mundi 2020 (785): 1-25, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5458922
4528878FFFC9FF9DFF14FBFEFE3082E1.taxon	description	Laporte (1840) described Hemilophus leuconotus (Fig. 1) from Mexico without further details. Although he had mentioned the catalog of Dejean, he did not add any additional information about the catalog (year, date, and page): “ DEJ., Cat. ” Even so, the specimens from the Dejean collection (currently deposited at BMNH) are syntypes. According to ICZN (1999: Article 74.2.1): “ The type series of a nominal speciesgroup taxon consists of all specimens included by the author in the new nominal taxon (whether directly or by bibliographic reference) … ” Additionally, ICZN (1999: Article 72.4.1.1) establishes: “ For a nominal species or subspecies established before 2000, any evidence, published or unpublished, may be taken into account to determine what specimens constitute the type series. ” The mention of the Dejean catalog is clear evidence. Thus, although the species has been mentioned as having been described based on a single specimen (holotype) (e. g. Tavakilian and Chevillotte 2020), there were at least two specimens. Later, Thomson (1857) described Cirrhicera leucronota from Mexico, also without further details, and mentioned: “ CIRRHICERA LEUCRONOTA (Dej. Cat. 3 e edit. p. 379) Thomson. ” Although the species really appears in Dejean (1836: 379 – third edition), it was present already in the second edition (Dejean 1835: 352). Again, the species has been mentioned as having been based on a single specimen (holotype) (e. g. Tavakilian and Chevillotte 2020), but there is no doubt that there were syntypes (ICZN 1999: Article 74.2.1). Thus, the syntypes of Cirrhicera leucronota and C. leuconota belonging to the Dejean collection are the same specimens. Thomson (1860) synonymized C. leucronota with C. leuconota but did not mention anything about the name “ leucronota ”. Even so, his text suggests he was making a correction: “ Espèces: C. leuconota, Cast., Hist. Nat. des Col., II, 489, et Thomson, Arch. Ent., I, p. 309 … ”. Tavakilian and Chevillotte (2020) pointed out that the synonymy occurred in Thomson (1878). However, as seen above, it occurred in Thomson (1860). The change of the name “ leucronota ” to “ leuconota ” in Thomson (1860) cannot be considered an “ emendation ”, because according to ICZN (1999: 33.2.1): “ A change in the original spelling of a name is only to be interpreted as “ demonstrably intentional ” [ICZN 1999: Article 33.2] when in the work itself, or in an author’s (or publisher’s) corrigenda, there is an explicit statement of intention, or when both the original and the changed spelling are cited and the latter is adopted in place of the former, or when two or more names in the same work are treated in a similar way. ” As seen above, none of these conditions are met in Thomson (1860). Accordingly, Cirrhicera leucronota Thomson in Thomson (1860) is an incorrect subsequent spelling (ICZN 1999: Article 33.3). It is important to highlight that as the conditions requested by the ICZN (1999: Article 32.5) are not satisfied, it is not possible to consider C. leuconota Thomson, 1860 a mandatory change. Following these arguments, it is a mistake to regard C. leucronota as an “ error ”, as it appears in Monné (2020) and Tavakilian and Chevillotte (2020). Males and females of the species in this genus exhibit sexual dimorphism in the upper eye lobes, slightly wider and distinctly closer to each other in the males. In males of C. leuconota (Fig. 2), as well as in those of C. championi Bates, 1881, the frons have very dense white or yellowish-white pubescence, while in the females (Fig. 1) it is distinctly sparser, not obscuring the integument; the vertex may or may not have dense pubescent maculae, usually absent in females; the dense pubescent maculae on the sides of the pronotum are somewhat variable, making the central area with sparse pubescence narrower or wider; the dense pubescent macula on the elytra are variable anteriorly, and may or may not reach the base. Cirrhicera leuconota has been so far recorded from Mexico (Veracruz, Oaxaca, Chiapas), and Honduras (Monné 2020).	en	Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel, Botero, Juan Pablo, de, Francisco Eriberto, Nascimento, L. (2020): Notes, new records, new combinations, a new genus and three new species in Hemilophini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae). Insecta Mundi 2020 (785): 1-25, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5458922
4528878FFFC9FF9DFF14FBFEFE3082E1.taxon	materials_examined	Material examined. GUATEMALA (New country record), IZABAL: Morales, 600 m, 1 male, VI. 2000, J. Monzon col. (DHCO).	en	Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel, Botero, Juan Pablo, de, Francisco Eriberto, Nascimento, L. (2020): Notes, new records, new combinations, a new genus and three new species in Hemilophini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae). Insecta Mundi 2020 (785): 1-25, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5458922
4528878FFFCEFF9DFF14FB08FC7283B1.taxon	description	(Fig. 3)	en	Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel, Botero, Juan Pablo, de, Francisco Eriberto, Nascimento, L. (2020): Notes, new records, new combinations, a new genus and three new species in Hemilophini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae). Insecta Mundi 2020 (785): 1-25, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5458922
4528878FFFCEFF9DFF14FB08FC7283B1.taxon	materials_examined	Material examined. MEXICO, MEXICO (New state record): San Antonio Albarranes, 1 male, 23. VIII. 1994, B. C. Kondratieff col. (DHCO, formerly CSUC).	en	Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel, Botero, Juan Pablo, de, Francisco Eriberto, Nascimento, L. (2020): Notes, new records, new combinations, a new genus and three new species in Hemilophini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae). Insecta Mundi 2020 (785): 1-25, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5458922
4528878FFFCEFF9CFF14F9F8FBE482A1.taxon	description	(Fig. 4, 7 – 12)	en	Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel, Botero, Juan Pablo, de, Francisco Eriberto, Nascimento, L. (2020): Notes, new records, new combinations, a new genus and three new species in Hemilophini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae). Insecta Mundi 2020 (785): 1-25, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5458922
4528878FFFCEFF9CFF14F9F8FBE482A1.taxon	description	The male holotype of M. humilis has the antennomere III cylindrical and almost as wide as the other antennomeres. According to the original description of Lamacoscylus, the erect setae on antennomere III in females are denser than in males. Apparently, this information was based on the antennomere III of the holotype female of Malacoscylus usingeri Linsley, 1935. According to Gahan (1892), “ One male specimen only was known to Mr. Bates when he wrote his description. Mr. H. H. Smith has since sent a long series, including both male and female examples, from the following localities in Guerrero: – Omilteme (8000 ft.), Xucumanatlan (7000 ft.), and Chilpancingo (4600 ft.). The female differs from the male by its somewhat shorter and relatively broader form; by its shorter, thicker, and more densely fringed third antennal joint; […] In some examples of both sexes the fulvous vittae of the prothorax have extended dorsally so as to cover part of the anterior half of the disk; while in one small male almost the whole upper surface of the head and prothorax is covered with fulvous pubescence. These examples differ in no other respect from the typical form, with which they are, in fact, connected by almost insensible gradations. It is otherwise with the two following varieties [M. humilis var. grisescens, and M. humilis var. fulvescens], which might indeed, with some show of reason, be regarded as distinct species. ” Although Gahan (1892) did not make very clear the general appearance of the antennomere III in females of M. humilis at his disposal, it is possible to infer that it is as in the syntype female of M. humilis var. grisescens (Fig. 6). However, the female examined by us (Fig. 10 – 12), has the antennomere III at most only slightly thicker than in the male (Fig. 7 – 9), and has the erect setae very similar. Accordingly, in our opinion Gahan (1892) confused males and females of the true M. humilis (thinking they were all males), which becomes evident because we have a couple also collected by H. H. Smith from a place listed by him. Malacoscylus humilis sensu Gahan (1892) appears to be a mix of at least two species, but most likely three species (see also comments under Schmidarius grisescens (Gahan) and S. flavescens (Gahan )).	en	Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel, Botero, Juan Pablo, de, Francisco Eriberto, Nascimento, L. (2020): Notes, new records, new combinations, a new genus and three new species in Hemilophini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae). Insecta Mundi 2020 (785): 1-25, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5458922
4528878FFFCEFF9CFF14F9F8FBE482A1.taxon	materials_examined	Material examined. MEXICO, GUERRERO: Omilteme (8000 ft.), 1 male, 1 female, July (no further details), H. H. Smith col. (MZSP – donated by F. Du C. Goodman, 1907).	en	Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel, Botero, Juan Pablo, de, Francisco Eriberto, Nascimento, L. (2020): Notes, new records, new combinations, a new genus and three new species in Hemilophini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae). Insecta Mundi 2020 (785): 1-25, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5458922
4528878FFFCFFF9FFF14FAC1FDB885EC.taxon	type_taxon	Type species. Schmidarius kondratieffi Santos-Silva, Heffern, Botero and Nascimento, sp. nov., present designation.	en	Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel, Botero, Juan Pablo, de, Francisco Eriberto, Nascimento, L. (2020): Notes, new records, new combinations, a new genus and three new species in Hemilophini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae). Insecta Mundi 2020 (785): 1-25, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5458922
4528878FFFCFFF9FFF14FAC1FDB885EC.taxon	description	Description. Female. Head not wider than prothorax; frons without projections, transverse. Gena distinctly longer than lower eye lobe. Antennal tubercles distant from each other. Eyes not divided; posterior margin of eyes distant from base of prothorax; upper eye lobes narrow, distance between them distinctly greater than width of one lobe. Antennae 11 - segmented, not reaching elytral apex; scape without basal curvature, without apical cicatrix, shorter than antennomere III; pedicel much shorter than antennomere III and scape; antennomere III distinctly tumid, with dense erect setae throughout; antennomere IV shorter than III; antennomeres IV – XI cylindrical; antennomeres IV – VIII with long, erect, sparse setae on inner surface; antennomere XI not stinger-shaped. Prothorax proportionally short, transverse, about as wide anteriorly as posteriorly; sides without tubercles or strong gibbosities. Prosternal process distinctly narrow centrally, about 0.2 times width of procoxal cavity. Mesoventral process with flap on each side near apex. Elytra not distinctly widened from base to apex; humerus rounded, not projected; humeral carina well marked from base to apex; area between humeral carina and epipleural margin without carinae, without whitish pubescence contrasting with that on dorsal surface, gradually more distinctly visible in dorsal view from basal quarter; dorsal carina from well-marked to slightly distinct; apex individually rounded, without sutural projection; sutural area without long and erect setae. Metatarsomere I slightly shorter than II – III together; tarsal claws not divided basally, with inner tooth moderately shorter than outer one.	en	Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel, Botero, Juan Pablo, de, Francisco Eriberto, Nascimento, L. (2020): Notes, new records, new combinations, a new genus and three new species in Hemilophini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae). Insecta Mundi 2020 (785): 1-25, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5458922
4528878FFFCFFF9FFF14FAC1FDB885EC.taxon	etymology	Etymology. The new genus is named in honor of Herbert Schmid (Austria), for his frequent assistance with information and photographs of the type specimens deposited in his collection; the suffix “ - arius ” is Latin, meaning “ belonging to ”. Masculine gender.	en	Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel, Botero, Juan Pablo, de, Francisco Eriberto, Nascimento, L. (2020): Notes, new records, new combinations, a new genus and three new species in Hemilophini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae). Insecta Mundi 2020 (785): 1-25, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5458922
4528878FFFCFFF9FFF14FAC1FDB885EC.taxon	discussion	Remarks. Schmidarius gen. nov. is rather similar to Lamacoscylus Martins and Galileo, 1991, from which it differs by the antennomere III distinctly tumid and with long, dense and erect setae throughout. In Lamacoscylus the antennomere III is cylindrical, similar to the other antennomeres, and the erect setae are much sparser. It differs from Malacoscylus Thomson, 1868 by the antennomere III not much longer than IV (much longer in Malacoscylus); from Sybaguasu Matins and Galileo, 1991 by the scape not curved basally, and vertex not concave (scape curved and vertex concave in Sybaguasu); from Themistonoe Thomson, 1864 by the pronotum without distinct gibbosities, and elytra with dorsal carina (pronotum with anterolateral gibbosities, and elytra without carina in Themistonoe); and from Cacupira Martins and Galileo, 1991 by the sutural apex not projected (projected in Cacupira). Martins and Galileo (1991) did not describe the shape of the antennomere III in the original description of Lamacoscylus. According to them, the setae on antennomere III are denser in females than in the males of this genus. However, male and female of L. humilis have the antennomere III nearly identical. Therefore, we believe that the shape of the antennomere III in S. usingeri (see photograph in Bezark 2020) and S. kondratieffi is not sexually dimorphic. Species included. Schmidarius kondratieffi, sp. nov.; S. usingeri (Linsley, 1935); S. grisescens (Gahan, 1892); S. flavescens (Gahan, 1892).	en	Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel, Botero, Juan Pablo, de, Francisco Eriberto, Nascimento, L. (2020): Notes, new records, new combinations, a new genus and three new species in Hemilophini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae). Insecta Mundi 2020 (785): 1-25, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5458922
4528878FFFCDFF9EFF14FE57FC058525.taxon	description	(Fig. 6)	en	Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel, Botero, Juan Pablo, de, Francisco Eriberto, Nascimento, L. (2020): Notes, new records, new combinations, a new genus and three new species in Hemilophini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae). Insecta Mundi 2020 (785): 1-25, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5458922
4528878FFFCDFF9EFF14FE57FC058525.taxon	description	We believe it is very probable that females of M. humilis flavescens and M. humilis grisescens are the same species. We did not see photographs of males of this subspecies. Accordingly, we do not know if they are Lamacoscylus humilis or another species [equal or not to males of M. humilis flavescens]. See comments under S. fulvescens to understand the reasons for not designating a lectotype for this species, and about the status of this variety described by Gahan.	en	Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel, Botero, Juan Pablo, de, Francisco Eriberto, Nascimento, L. (2020): Notes, new records, new combinations, a new genus and three new species in Hemilophini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae). Insecta Mundi 2020 (785): 1-25, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5458922
4528878FFFCDFF91FF14FC46FB8F8002.taxon	description	(Fig. 13 – 16) Description. Female. Integument mostly black; mouthparts reddish brown except nearly black palpomeres (apex of labial palpomeres I – II and maxillary palpomeres I – III narrowly yellowish brown); anteclypeus dark brown close to postclypeus, orangish brown on remaining surface; posterior half of labrum reddish brown; gulamentum mostly brown; base of antennomere III orangish brown; antennomeres IV – VIII pale yellow anteriorly (more orangish depending on light intensity), this area gradually shorter toward VIII, dark brown posteriorly; antennomeres IX – XI dark brown. Coxae partially dark reddish brown; protrochanters pale yellow; meso- and metatrochanters dark reddish brown. Head. Frons somewhat coarsely, abundantly punctate toward antennal tubercles, finer, sparser toward postclypeus, especially laterally; glabrous except superior area between eyes with dense, nearly black pubescence (this area triangularly projected toward central region); with minute whitish seta within punctures in glabrous area; with long, erect dark setae close to eyes. Vertex and area behind eyes somewhat finely, sparsely punctate (punctures coarser behind lower eye lobes); with dense black pubescence obscuring integument, except glabrous central area between antennal tubercles, nearly glabrous median groove from area between upper eye lobes, and not obscuring integument behind lower eye lobes; with long, erect, sparse dark setae on vertex and area behind upper eye lobes. Genae almost smooth; with dense, transverse white pubescent macula posteriorly close to lower eye lobe, glabrous on remaining surface; with a few long, erect dark setae near white macula. Antennal tubercles with black pubescence (more dark brown anteriorly) not obscuring integument, with long, erect dark setae interspersed. Postclypeus not distinctly separated from frons; finely sparsely punctate in wide central area (punctures sparser in center of this area), nearly smooth laterally; glabrous, with a few long, erect brownish setae centrally near anteclypeus. Labrum coplanar with anteclypeus in posterior half, oblique in anterior half; with transverse row of fine punctures in posterior half close to oblique area, with long, erect yellowish-brown seta in nearly all punctures. Gulamentum smooth, glabrous. Distance between upper eye lobes 0.37 times length of scape (0.30 times distance between outer margins of eyes); in frontal view, distance between lower eye lobes 0.78 times length of scape (0.62 times distance between outer margins of eyes). Antennae 1.25 times elytral length, almost reaching elytral apex. Scape with dense, bristly black pubescence, with long, erect black setae interspersed throughout in posterior 2 / 3. Pedicel with black pubescence, not obscuring integument dorsally, somewhat bristly, with long, erect black setae interspersed ventrally. Maximum diameter of antennomere III almost twice length of pedicel; with dense, erect black setae throughout, and longer black setae interspersed. Antennomeres IV – VIII with sparse whitish pubescence in pale yellow area, brownish in dark area (partially interspersed with whitish setae ventrally); with long, erect, sparse black setae ventrally. Antennomeres IX – XI with dark pubescence obscuring integument, with short, erect yellowish setae interspersed; ventral surface of IX may or may not have long, black erect setae (present only on left antennomere in holotype). Dorsal apex of antennomeres III – X with a few long, erect black setae (shorter toward X). Antennal formula (ratio) based on length of antennomere III: scape = 0.67; pedicel = 0.12; IV = 0.62; V = 0.33; VI = 0.27; VII = 0.25; VIII = 0.21; IX = 0.19; X = 0.17; XI = 0.24. Thorax. Pronotum coarsely, sparsely punctate, punctures coarser, more abundantly posteriorly; with dense black pubescence partially obscuring integument, bristly in some areas, with long, erect black setae interspersed. Sides of prothorax coarsely, somewhat sparsely punctate; pubescence as on pronotum. Prosternum coarsely, abundantly punctate; with grayish-white pubescence not obscuring integument, except longitudinal, narrow white pubescent band on each side. Prosternal process with sparse grayish-white pubescence; narrowest area 0.15 times width of procoxal cavity. Mesoventrite with sparse grayish-white pubescence centrally, denser, dark laterally. Mesanepisternum and mesepimeron with dense blackish pubescence. Mesoventral process with whitish pubescence not obscuring integument. Metanepisternum and metaventrite with dense nearly black pubescence, except glabrous central area of metaventrite, and bristly yellowish-white pubescence posteriorly close to glabrous area. Scutellum with nearly black pubescence partially obscuring integument. Elytra. Coarsely, abundantly punctate in basal third, punctures gradually finer toward apex; with dark brown pubescence not obscuring integument (more grayish depending on light intensity); with long, erect, somewhat abundant dark setae interspersed; dorsal carina well-marked; apex individually rounded, sutural angle absent. Legs. Femora with grayish pubescence not obscuring integument (appearing to be darker dorsally and laterally due to integument color and light intensity), with long, erect setae of same color interspersed, more abundant ventrally. Tibiae with bristly dark brown pubescence not obscuring integument, with long, erect dark brown setae interspersed; protibiae with a few erect yellowish-white setae near apex. Abdomen. Ventrites with yellowish-white pubescence not obscuring integument (more grayish depending on light intensity), with long, erect setae of same color interspersed. Apex of ventrite V emarginated centrally, with abundant, long yellowish setae. Dimensions in mm. Total length 9.05; prothoracic length 1.25; anterior prothoracic width 1.65; posterior prothoracic width 1.70; humeral width 2.60; elytral length 6.75.	en	Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel, Botero, Juan Pablo, de, Francisco Eriberto, Nascimento, L. (2020): Notes, new records, new combinations, a new genus and three new species in Hemilophini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae). Insecta Mundi 2020 (785): 1-25, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5458922
4528878FFFCDFF91FF14FC46FB8F8002.taxon	materials_examined	Type material. Holotype female from MEXICO, MEXICO: San Antonio Albarranes, 23. VIII. 1994, B. C. Kondratieff col. (TAMU, formerly CSUC).	en	Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel, Botero, Juan Pablo, de, Francisco Eriberto, Nascimento, L. (2020): Notes, new records, new combinations, a new genus and three new species in Hemilophini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae). Insecta Mundi 2020 (785): 1-25, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5458922
4528878FFFCDFF91FF14FC46FB8F8002.taxon	etymology	Etymology. It is a pleasure to name this species for Prof. Boris C. Kondratieff, educator and curator at CSUC, who has helped the second author tremendously for the last quarter century.	en	Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel, Botero, Juan Pablo, de, Francisco Eriberto, Nascimento, L. (2020): Notes, new records, new combinations, a new genus and three new species in Hemilophini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae). Insecta Mundi 2020 (785): 1-25, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5458922
4528878FFFCDFF91FF14FC46FB8F8002.taxon	discussion	Remarks. Schmidarius kondratieffi sp. nov. differs from S. usingeri by the absence of yellow pubescence in the center of the head, pronotum and scutellum (present in S. usingeri), and femora entirely dark (bicolorous in S. usingeri). It differs from S. grisescens and S. flavescens by the absence of yellow pubescence on the sides of the head and pronotum (present in both species).	en	Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel, Botero, Juan Pablo, de, Francisco Eriberto, Nascimento, L. (2020): Notes, new records, new combinations, a new genus and three new species in Hemilophini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae). Insecta Mundi 2020 (785): 1-25, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5458922
4528878FFFC2FF93FF14F9A1FC4385A1.taxon	description	Lepeletier and Audinet-Serville (1825) described Saperda phoebe and included it in their “ 2 e Division. Corps alongé ”, and in the “ 2 e Subdivion. Antennes de onze articles dans les deux sexes. ” Audinet- Serville (1835) described Agapanthia and affirmed that the antennae are 12 - segmented. Agapanthia was divided into two subgenera, A. (Agapanthia) and A. (Phoebe). The latter included three species, A. octomaculata Audinet-Serville, 1835; A. cornuta (Olivier, 1800); and A. bicornis (Olivier, 1800) (currently, all of them in Phoebe). Audinet-Serville (1835) affirmed that A. octomaculata is Saperda phoebe: “ Agapanthia octomaculata. – Saperda Phoebe, Encycl. méthod., tom. X, pag. 335, nº 2. Du Brésil. ” Apparently, Audinet-Serville (1835) was renaming the species because he was using Phoebe as a subgeneric name. Accordingly, the information regarding the number of antennal segments in Phoebe is contradictory: 11 in Lepeletier and Audinet-Serville (1825), but 12 in Audinet-Serville (1835). However, although Olivier (1800) did not report the number of antennal segments in Saperda bicornis (we do not know if the holotype survived and, if so, where it is, original source was given as collection Raye), the specimens currently assigned to this species agree well with the drawing provided by Olivier (1800), and the antennae are 11 - segmented. He also did not record the number of antennal segments in Saperda cornuta (we do not know if the holotype still exists and, if so, where it is, original source was given as collection Gevers). Unfortunately, the specimens currently assigned to this species do not agree well with the original description, and it is thus not possible to be sure if the antennae in the true S. cornuta are 11 or 12 - segmented. However, they are 11 - segmented in S. cornuta sensu auctorum. Saperda phoebe and Agapanthia (Phoebe) octomaculata will be discussed below. Laporte (1840) considered Phoebe as a genus different from Agapanthia. Pascoe (1858) described Phoebe cretifera from Brazil, but did not mention the number of antennal segments. However, photographs of the holotype show 12 segments. Desmarest (1860: 328) designated Saperda bicornis Olivier, 1800 as the type species of Phoebe: “ Un dernier genre, tantôt réuni aux Saperda, et tantôt aux Agapanthia, est celui des Phoebe, Serv., caractérisé par sa tête portant en avant une lunule sailante, dont les pointes s’élévent plus ou moins en manière de corne, à face antèrierure courte et à front bombé, et qui a un corps peu svelte: espèce typique, S. bicornis, Oliv., de Cayenne. ” Desmarest (1860) used both, “ espèce typique ” and “ type. ” However, even when he used “ espèce typique ”, he meant the type species and not a “ typical species of the genus ” (ICZN 1999: Article 67.5.1). This is very clear from some examples where he used “ genre typique ” in the same work, e. g. “ Mégalopites … MEGALOPUS, Fabr., genre typique ... ”. Thomson (1864) designated Agapanthia (Phoebe) octomaculata as the type species. Evidently, the designation by Thomson (1864) is not valid. Bates (1866) transferred Phoebe bicornis to Amphionycha Dejean, 1835 (= Adesmus Audinet-Serville, 1824). Gemminger (1873) synonymized P. cretifera with P. octomaculata. Aurivillius (1923) formalized the synonymy between Saperda phoebe and Agapanthia (Phoebe) octomaculata. According to Martins and Galileo (1992) (translated): “ There are relatively few genera in this tribe [Hemilophini] whose species have antennae with twelve articles, all so far described by Lane (1956, 1966). ” They listed Murupeaca Martins and Galileo, 1992, Phoebella Lane, 1966, Gagarinia Lane, 1956, Tabatinga Lane, 1966, Purusia Lane, 1956, and Juninia Lane, 1966. Phoebe was not mentioned, although the original description made clear that it has antennae 12 - segmented (partially incorrect information), and the species wrongly mentioned as being the type species has antennae 12 - segmented. Later, Martins and Galileo (1993) described one more genus in Hemilophini with antennae 12 - segmented: Sibapipunga. Martins and Galileo (1998, 2014 b) redescribed Phoebe phoebe, but did not mention the number of antennal segments. However, Phoebe was included in “ Grupo E ” by Martins and Galileo (2014 a), in which the antennae are 11 - segmented. Although we have not seen a photograph of the type of Saperda phoebe / Agapanthia (Phoebe) octomaculata, the original description agrees very well with the holotype of Phoebe cretaria. All specimens, male and female, examined by us or studied through photographs have the antennae distinctly 12 - segmented. Actually, it is surprising that no one has commented on this, even considering this species as the type species of Phoebe. Accordingly, this species that was wrongly considered the type species of the genus, needs to be transferred to another genus. All other species currently allocated to Phoebe have antennae 11 - segmented, except Phoebe tinga Martins and Galileo, 1998, which has antennae distinctly 12 - segmented, and is transferred to Phoebella Lane, 1966. We thus establish Phoebella tinga (Martins and Galileo, 1998) as a new combination. Lane (1976) described Leucophoebe for a single species, L. kempfi Lane, 1976. According to him (translated): “ It is distinguished from Phoebe Serville, 1835 (type P. phoebe) especially by the structure and frame of the head and by the different proportions between the lengths of the prothorax and elytra. The new genus is structurally more compact. ” Martins and Galileo (1998) separated Leucophoebe from Phoebe in the key (translated): “ Body elongated; length of the elytra = 2.5 - 3 times the humeral width; elytral carina often sub-straight; tarsomeres tumid in males … Phoebe Audinet-Serville, 1835 / Body shorter; length of the elytra about twice the humeral width; elytral carina curved; tarsomeres in male not tumid …. Leucophoebe Lane, 1976. ” In the same work they transferred Amphionycha albaria Bates, 1872 (at that time Phoebe albaria), and Phoebe pictilis Lane, 1972 to Leucophoebe. Later, Martins and Galileo (2014 b) separated Phoebe from Leucophoebe in the alternative of couplet “ 5 ” (translated): “ Lower eye lobes developed, longer than gena … 6 [leading to Phoebe] / Lower eye lobes as long as gena … 7 [leading to Leucophoebe; according to them, females of Leucophoebe cannot be separated from those of Adesmus Lepeletier and Audinet-Serville, 1825]. ” However, the body shape of the species currently included in Phoebe is variable (see photographs in Bezark 2020) and is often similar or identical to those allocated to Leucophoebe (see photographs in Bezark 2020); the elytral length is slightly longer than twice humeral width in the holotype of the type species of Leucophoebe and the holotype of L. albaria (see photograph in Bezark 2020), and almost 2.5 times in the holotype of L. pictilis (in this last case identical to that in the holotype of Phoebe fryana Lane, 1966) (see photograph in Bezark 2020); the shape of the protuberances on frons of males of the species of Phoebe is very variable (see photographs in Bezark 2020); the humeral carina is variable in Phoebe, and may be distinctly curved (e. g. P. cornuta) (see photograph in Bezark 2020) or nearly straight (e. g. P. cava (Germar, 1823 )) (see photograph in Bezark 2020); the lower eye lobes are very variable in the length (Fig. 17, 19, 20, 21, 23, 25, 27); the shape of the metatarsomeres in males are variable in the species of Phoebe (Fig. 18, 22, 24, 26, 28) and may be distinctly tumid (e. g. P. goiana Martins and Galileo, 1998) (Fig. 24) or not tumid (e. g. P. alba) (Fig. 18). Accordingly, we were unable to find a reliable character that would allow Leucophoebe to be separated from Phoebe. Thus, Leucophoebe is considered a junior synonym of Phoebe, and therefore the following changes are proposed: Phoebe kempfi (Lane, 1976) comb. new, Phoebe albaria (Bates, 1872) comb. new and Phoebe pictilis Lane, 1972 stat. restored.	en	Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel, Botero, Juan Pablo, de, Francisco Eriberto, Nascimento, L. (2020): Notes, new records, new combinations, a new genus and three new species in Hemilophini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae). Insecta Mundi 2020 (785): 1-25, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5458922
4528878FFFC0FF92FF14FBC1FD03874F.taxon	description	(Fig. 29 – 33) Redescription. Head not wider than prothorax; frons with projections in male, with or without transverse carina between projections; frons in female without projections. Antennal tubercles distant from each other. Eyes not divided; area of connection of eye lobes narrow (with 2 – 3 rows of ommatidia) or very narrow (with one row of ommatidia); distance between upper eye lobes variable. Antennae 12 - segmented, distinctly longer than body length in both sexes, especially in male; scape without basal curvature, without apical cicatrix, shorter than antennomere III; pedicel much shorter than antennomere III and scape; antennomeres cylindrical, with long, sparse, erect setae ventrally on III – V or III – VI; antennomere III not tumid, without denser long setae; antennomere IV shorter than III; antennomere XII not stingershaped. Prothorax slightly longer than wide, or slightly wider than long; about as wide anteriorly as posteriorly, or slightly wider posteriorly; sides sinuous, without tubercle. Elytra narrowed from base to apex; humeral carina well-marked from base to near apex; area between humeral carina and epipleural margin without carinae, without whitish pubescence contrasting with that on dorsal surface, gradually more distinctly visible in dorsal view from posterior after middle; dorsal surface without longitudinal carinae; apex individually rounded, without projections at outer and sutural angles or slightly obliquely truncate; sutural area without long and erect setae. Metatarsomere I tumid or not; tarsal claws not divided basally, with inner tooth moderately shorter than outer one.	en	Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel, Botero, Juan Pablo, de, Francisco Eriberto, Nascimento, L. (2020): Notes, new records, new combinations, a new genus and three new species in Hemilophini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae). Insecta Mundi 2020 (785): 1-25, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5458922
4528878FFFC0FF92FF14FBC1FD03874F.taxon	discussion	Remarks. Phoebella is very similar to Phoebe, differing only by the antennae distinctly 12 - segmented, while in Phoebe they are 11 - segmented. It is also similar to Adesmus Lepeletier and Audinet-Serville, 1825, differing by the antennae 12 - segmented (11 - segmented in Adesmus) and by the frons in male with distinct projections (absent in Adesmus). According to Martins and Galileo (2014 a) (translated): “ Frons in male with curved spine on each side of a curved elevation between the spines. ” Actually, this curved carina between the projections of frons is present or absent depending on the particular species of Phoebe, and the projections may or may not be placed near antennal tubercles (e. g. Fig. 21). Accordingly, this feature is useless to separate Phoebella from Phoebe. Species included. Phoebella albomaculata (Gahan, 1889); P. phoebe (Lepeletier and Audinet-Serville, 1825); P. tinga (Martins and Galileo, 1998).	en	Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel, Botero, Juan Pablo, de, Francisco Eriberto, Nascimento, L. (2020): Notes, new records, new combinations, a new genus and three new species in Hemilophini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae). Insecta Mundi 2020 (785): 1-25, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5458922
4528878FFFC1FF96FF14F98DFD7E802E.taxon	description	(Fig. 45 – 52) Description. Male (Fig. 45 – 48). Head mostly dark brown, almost black; mouthparts light yellowish brown; mandibles black; antennae dark brown, almost black. Prothorax mostly yellowish brown; pronotum with large T-shaped dark-brown macula anteriorly, transverse “ arm ” wider, close to anterior margin, longitudinal “ arm ” narrower, slightly surpassing middle of pronotum; prosternum both reddish and brownish anteriorly. Ventral surface of mesothorax yellowish brown, slightly lighter in some areas. Metanepisternum mostly dark brown in anterior 3 / 4, gradually reddish brown toward metaventrite, and mostly yellowish brown in posterior quarter. Metaventrite mostly yellowish brown, with L-shaped brownish macula on each side of posterior half. Basal 3 / 4 of elytra dark brown laterally, dark reddish brown centrally except dark brown sutural area; posterior quarter mostly light reddish brown, with sutural area and sides dark brown. Coxae and trochanters yellowish brown; femora yellowish brown with apex blackish; tibiae and tarsi dark brown, almost black. Ventrites yellowish brown. Head. Frons minutely, abundantly punctate; with grayish-white pubescence nearly obscuring integument, except glabrous median groove and narrow area close to eyes; with both long and moderately short, erect, sparse setae of same color interspersed. Vertex minutely, abundantly punctate, with a few fine punctures interspersed; with grayish-white pubescence centrally, sparser than on frons, especially after area between antennal tubercles, nearly glabrous laterally; with long, erect, sparse setae of same color interspersed. Area behind eyes almost glabrous close to vertex, with grayish-white pubescence not obscuring integument on remaining surface, except glabrous narrow area close to eye; with long, erect, sparse setae of same color behind upper eye lobe. Genae with grayish-white pubescence partially obscuring integument, bristly, slightly more yellowish close to postclypeus, except glabrous narrow area close to eye and apex. Wide central area of postclypeus with sculpturing and pubescence as on frons, and sides smooth and glabrous; with long, erect brownish setae interspersed in wide central area. Labrum coplanar with anteclypeus at posterior half, inclined at anterior half; posterior quarter close to anteclypeus finely, sparsely punctate, with minute, sparse, decumbent grayish-white setae; anterior quarter of coplanar area depressed, rugose-punctate, with long, erect, moderately abundantly reddish-brown setae directed forward; posterior region of inclined area with long, erect reddish-brown setae directed forward, except nearly glabrous central area, and remaining surface glabrous. Antennal tubercles with sculpturing, pubescence, and erect setae as on frons. Distance between upper eye lobes 0.28 times length of scape (0.22 times distance between outer margins of eyes); in frontal view, distance between lower eye lobes 0.78 times length of scape (0.61 times distance between outer margins of eyes). Antennae 1.9 times elytral length, reaching elytral apex at base of antennomere VII. Scape with grayishwhite pubescence not obscuring integument, denser dorsally; with moderately long, erect grayish-white setae ventrally. Pedicel with grayish-white pubescence not obscuring integument, denser dorsally; with moderately long, grayish-white erect setae ventrally, and at apex of dorsal surface. Antennomeres with grayish-white pubescent ring basally, less conspicuous ventrally, and remaining surface with short brownish pubescence; apex of antennomeres III – IV with short, slightly distinct grayish-white pubescent ring at apex; antennomeres with long, erect grayish-white setae ventrally, gradually shorter toward XI (setae more yellowish-brown depending on light intensity). Antennal formula (ratio) based on length of antennomere III: scape = 0.59; pedicel = 0.10; IV = 0.70; V = 0.41; VI = 0.38; VII = 0.35; VIII = 0.30; IX = 0.27; X = 0.22; XI = 0.27. Thorax. Prothorax transverse; sides sinuous. Pronotum gibbose on each side of central area and with elongated, subelliptical gibbosity centrally; dark area coarsely, sparsely punctate, with grayish-white pubescence not obscuring integument anterocentrally and around central gibbosity, remaining surface with minute grayish-white pubescence (top of central gibbosity glabrous) and with long, erect sparse grayish-white setae interspersed; lighter area with dense yellowish-brown pubescence and long, erect, sparse grayish-white setae interspersed. Sides of prothorax with dense yellowish-brown pubescence except margins with sparse pubescence. Ventral surface of thorax with yellowish-white pubescence not obscuring integument, sparser on prosternum, prosternal process, mesoventrite, mesoventral process and anterocentral area of metaventrite. Narrowest area of prosternal process slightly wider than 0.2 times width of procoxal cavity. Sides of mesoventral process moderately tab-shaped near apex. Scutellum with sparse grayish-white pubescence. Elytra. Coarsely abundantly punctate basally and on sides of basal 3 / 4, finely, moderately sparsely punctate in remaining basal 3 / 4, almost indistinctly punctate in posterior quarter and posterior 3 / 4 of inclined sides; with grayish-white pubescence appearing to be denser in posterior quarter depending on angle source, with short, erect, sparse setae of same color interspersed; humeral carina well-marked from humerus to near apex; carina in inclined area placed very near to humeral carina, slightly less distinct than humeral carina, especially depending on angle source. Legs. Femora with yellowish-white pubescence not obscuring integument, bristly ventrally on meso- and metafemora. Protibiae with yellowish-white pubescence dorsally and laterally, with long, erect, sparse setae of same color interspersed, and bristly, dense yellowish-brown pubescence ventrally (gradually longer toward apex); meso- and metatibiae with sparse yellowish-white pubescence except yellowish-brown, denser, bristly pubescence in central area of posterior 3 / 4 of dorsal surface and posterior third of ventral surface, and long, erect yellowish-brown setae interspersed. Abdomen. Ventrites with short yellowish-white pubescence not obscuring integument, slightly longer at apex, with long, erect, sparse setae of same color interspersed. Apex of ventrite V emarginated centrally. Female (Fig. 49 – 52). Pronotum with posterocentral brownish macula; wide central area of prosternum mostly brown; prosternal process brown basally, gradually reddish brown toward apex; mesoventrite and mesoventral process dark brown except narrow reddish-brown anterocentral macula on mesoventrite; mesanepisternum and mesepimeron dark brown toward elytra, gradually yellowish brown toward ventral surface; metanepisternum dark brown, almost black; metaventrite mostly dark brown, almost black, with anterocentral area yellowish brown (central area of this region brownish); elytra entirely dark brown; coxae and trochanters mostly dark brown; femora on base and apex yellowish brown centrally (more reddish brown depending on light intensity); ventrites I – IV dark brown, almost black; abdominal ventrite V dark brown, almost black in anterior 3 / 4, yellowish brown in posterior quarter. Vertex and area behind upper eye lobes nearly glabrous, except grayish-white pubescent band in posterocentral area of vertex; area behind eye with moderately coarse, sparse punctures interspersed; area behind lower eye lobes with moderately long, erect, sparse grayish-white setae interspersed; antennae 1.4 times elytral length, reaching elytral apex at base of antennomere XI; scape slimmer than in male; antennomeres III – IV as in male; antennomeres V – XI with dense yellowish-white pubescence, distinctly longer, bristly ventrally; antennomeres V – XI with long, moderately abundant, erect yellowish setae ventrally; abdominal pubescence distinctly more conspicuous in posterocentral area of ventrites. Dimensions in mm (holotype male / paratype female). Total length 13.35 / 13.75; prothoracic length 2.50 / 2.60; anterior prothoracic width 2.90 / 3.15; posterior prothoracic width 3.15 / 3.25; widest prothoracic width 3.25 / 3.45; humeral width 4.85 / 4.95; elytral length 9.85 / 10.15.	en	Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel, Botero, Juan Pablo, de, Francisco Eriberto, Nascimento, L. (2020): Notes, new records, new combinations, a new genus and three new species in Hemilophini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae). Insecta Mundi 2020 (785): 1-25, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5458922
4528878FFFC1FF96FF14F98DFD7E802E.taxon	materials_examined	Type material. Holotype male from PERU, JUNÍN: Satipo, Rio Venado, IX. 2012, local collector (MZSP, formerly DHCO). Paratype female, same data as holotype (DHCO).	en	Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel, Botero, Juan Pablo, de, Francisco Eriberto, Nascimento, L. (2020): Notes, new records, new combinations, a new genus and three new species in Hemilophini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae). Insecta Mundi 2020 (785): 1-25, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5458922
4528878FFFC1FF96FF14F98DFD7E802E.taxon	etymology	Etymology. The epithet of this new species refers to the Asháninka indigenous people living in the area where the holotype was collected. The name “ ashaninka ” is used as a noun in apposition.	en	Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel, Botero, Juan Pablo, de, Francisco Eriberto, Nascimento, L. (2020): Notes, new records, new combinations, a new genus and three new species in Hemilophini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae). Insecta Mundi 2020 (785): 1-25, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5458922
4528878FFFC1FF96FF14F98DFD7E802E.taxon	discussion	Remarks. As the color in the holotype and paratype are considerably different, it is expected to find more chromatic variations in the species. The male of Callanga ashaninka sp. nov. (Fig. 45 – 48) differs from that of C. trichocera (Fig. 40) by the shorter antennae, reaching elytral apex at base of antennomere VII (longer, reaching elytral apex before apex of antennomere V in C. trichocera), antennomeres dark brown (antennomeres V – XI orangish-brown in C. trichocera), and pronotum with T-shaped dark brown area anteriorly (with transverse dark brown macula in C. trichocera). The female of Callanga ashaninka sp. nov. (Fig. 49 – 52) differs from that of C. trichocera (Fig. 37 – 39) by the pubescence and erect setae shorter (Fig. 52) (longer in C. trichocera (Fig. 39 )), and pronotum with T-shaped dark brown area anteriorly (with transverse dark brown macula in C. trichocera). The female of Callanga ashaninka sp. nov. differs from that of C. tenebrosa (Fig. 34 – 36) by the pubescence and erect setae shorter (longer in C. tenebrosa (Fig. 36 )), pronotum with T-shaped dark brown anterior area (entirely dark on wide central area in C. tenebrosa), and sides of prothorax entirely yellowish-brown (Fig. 51) (brown with large, transverse yellowish-brown macula in C. tenebrosa (Fig. 35 )). The three species of Callanga were described from Peru (C. trichocera also occurs in Bolivia). Fredlanea lazulina Santos-Silva, Heffern, Botero and Nascimento, new species (Fig. 53 – 56)	en	Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel, Botero, Juan Pablo, de, Francisco Eriberto, Nascimento, L. (2020): Notes, new records, new combinations, a new genus and three new species in Hemilophini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae). Insecta Mundi 2020 (785): 1-25, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5458922
4528878FFFC1FF96FF14F98DFD7E802E.taxon	description	Description. Female. Integument mostly blackish-blue; mouthparts reddish brown except mostly brownish maxillary palpomere IV and labial palpomere III; anterior third of labrum reddish brown; elytra orangish except blackish-blue apex, and reddish-brown epipleural margin and inclined area close to dark apical apex. Head. Frons abundantly micropunctate, with fine punctures interspersed (fine punctures sparser toward clypeus); with minute, almost inconspicuous yellowish-white pubescence absent close to clypeus, denser and longer close to eyes; with a few long, erect black setae close to eyes. Area between antennal tubercles and sides of area between upper eye lobes with dense yellowish-white pubescence, continuing along vertex to prothoracic margin as two slightly divergent bands; central area between upper eye lobes with somewhat dense brown pubescence; remaining central area of vertex with short, very sparse brownish setae; central area of vertex coarsely sparsely punctate, except row of coarse punctures close to each dense pubescent band, and with long, erect, sparse black setae interspersed (absent in area close to prothorax). Area behind eyes coarsely, sparsely punctate (punctures denser, somewhat finer close to eye); with moderately dense brown pubescence close to eye, nearly glabrous on remaining surface; area of connection between eye lobes with longitudinal, dense yellowish-white pubescent band from eye to prothoracic margin. Genae abundantly micropunctate except smooth apex; with dense, large yellowishwhite pubescent macula laterally close to inferior margin of eye; with somewhat sparse yellowish-white pubescence frontally close to eye, continuing toward smooth area close to frons, nearly glabrous on remaining surface, and glabrous in smooth area. Antennal tubercles with somewhat abundant brown pubescence not obscuring integument (appearing to be dark due to integument color), with long, erect black setae interspersed. Wide central area of postclypeus densely micropunctate, punctures slightly coarser toward smooth apex; glabrous. Labrum coplanar with anteclypeus at posterior 2 / 3, oblique at anterior third; posterior 2 / 3 with slightly depressed large area close to oblique anterior third, separated by area close to anteclypeus by abrupt slope; posterior 2 / 3 densely micropunctate (punctures slightly coarser than on postclypeus); oblique area densely micropunctate (punctures finer than in central area of postclypeus); posterior 2 / 3 with minute yellowish pubescence not obscuring integument, with a few long, erect golden setae close to anteclypeus; anterior third glabrous. Gulamentum smooth, glabrous except for a few long, erect dark setae in strongly oblique anterior area. Distance between upper eye lobes 0.35 times length of scape (0.26 times distance between outer margins of eyes); in frontal view, distance between lower eye lobes 0.82 times length of scape (0.61 times distance between outer margins of eyes). Antennae 1.9 times elytral length, reaching elytral apex at apex of antennomere VII. Scape very finely, abundantly punctate except smooth apex; with dark pubescence not obscuring integument, somewhat bristly ventrally, with a few long, erect brownish setae interspersed. Pedicel with somewhat dense and bristly pubescence, with long, erect dark setae interspersed ventrally. Antennomere III with dense, bristly dark pubescence, absent in part of dorsal surface, with long, erect, abundant black setae ventrally and inferior inner area. Antennomeres IV – X with abundant, somewhat bristly (more so ventrally) dark pubescence throughout; with long, abundant, erect dark setae ventrally, gradually shorter and sparser toward X (distinctly sparser on IX and X). Antennal formula (ratio) based on length of antennomere III: scape = 0.57; pedicel = 0.09; IV = 0.63; V = 0.51; VI = 0.48; VII = 0.42; VIII = 0.37; IX = 0.33; X = 0.28; XI = 0.29. Thorax. Prothorax slightly narrower posteriorly than anteriorly. Pronotum distinctly widely convex about anterior third to posterior quarter; with distinct, rounded tubercle on each side of center of convex area, placed slightly before middle, and longitudinal, slightly distinct central gibbosity placed in convex area, and another comma-shaped tubercle on each side; coarsely, sparsely punctate (punctures absent on tubercles and gibbosity); with dense yellowish-white pubescence laterally, except glabrous commashaped tubercles, glabrous in most of central area, with yellowish-brown pubescence in anterior third, not obscuring integument and not reaching anterior margin, and yellowish-brown pubescence posteriorly (in both areas appearing to be darker due to the integument color); with long, erect, sparse brownish setae in area with dense pubescence. Sides of prothorax coarsely, somewhat sparsely punctate; with dense yellowish-white pubescence close to pronotum (continuing that on sides of pronotum), and wide pubescent yellowish-white pubescent band close to prosternum; with a few long, erect brownish setae. Prosternum finely, sparsely punctate; with yellowish-white pubescence not obscuring integument, sparser centrally. Prosternal process with yellowish-white pubescence denser than in central area of prosternum; narrowest area about 0.2 times width of procoxal cavity. Mesoventral process distinctly widened laterally in posterior half; narrowest area about 0.5 times width of mesocoxal cavity. Ventral surface of meso- and metathorax with abundant, short yellowish-white pubescence, but not entirely obscuring integument, except glabrous metathoracic discrimen; metaventrite with erect, sparse yellowish-white setae interspersed. Scutellum transverse, almost truncate posteriorly, with minute yellowish-white pubescence distinctly not obscuring integument. Elytra. Coarsely, abundantly punctate in basal half, punctures finer, sparser toward apex (nearly indistinct in posterior seventh); humeral carina distinct from base to near apex; with two dorsal carinae from base to about posterior quarter; with longitudinal carina between humeral carina and epipleural margin, from base to about middle; apex concave, with outer and sutural angles triangularly projected; with minute yellowish-white pubescence, indistinct depending on viewing angle; with a few somewhat short, erect yellowish-white setae dorsally in posterior quarter, and long, erect, brownish setae on epipleural margin (setae slightly longer and more abundant toward apex). Legs. Femora with yellowish-white pubescence not obscuring integument, slightly denser ventrally, especially on meso- and metafemora, with long, erect setae of same color ventrally, slightly more abundant in basal third. Tibiae with yellowish-white pubescence not obscuring integument, yellower and denser ventrally and in area of dorsal sulcus of mesotibiae; with long, erect dark brown setae interspersed (yellowish on anterior third). Tarsi with grayish-white pubescence dorsally, sparser on tarsomere III and part of V (pubescence denser on metatarsi). Abdomen. Ventrites with yellowish-white pubescence not obscuring integument, shorter centrally (almost indistinct depending on viewing angle); apex of ventrite V strongly emarginate centrally. Dimensions in mm. Total length 14.70; prothoracic length 2.60; anterior prothoracic width 2.90; posterior prothoracic width 2.70; widest prothoracic width 3.00; humeral width 3.60; elytral length 10.15.	en	Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel, Botero, Juan Pablo, de, Francisco Eriberto, Nascimento, L. (2020): Notes, new records, new combinations, a new genus and three new species in Hemilophini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae). Insecta Mundi 2020 (785): 1-25, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5458922
4528878FFFC1FF96FF14F98DFD7E802E.taxon	materials_examined	Type material. Holotype female from COLOMBIA, BOYACÁ: Otanche, 05. V. 2018, local collector (TAMU, formerly DHCO).	en	Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel, Botero, Juan Pablo, de, Francisco Eriberto, Nascimento, L. (2020): Notes, new records, new combinations, a new genus and three new species in Hemilophini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae). Insecta Mundi 2020 (785): 1-25, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5458922
4528878FFFC1FF96FF14F98DFD7E802E.taxon	etymology	Etymology. The epithet “ lazulina ” refers to lapis lazuli, a deep-blue mineral, alluding to the predominant blackish-blue color of the holotype.	en	Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel, Botero, Juan Pablo, de, Francisco Eriberto, Nascimento, L. (2020): Notes, new records, new combinations, a new genus and three new species in Hemilophini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae). Insecta Mundi 2020 (785): 1-25, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5458922
4528878FFFC1FF96FF14F98DFD7E802E.taxon	discussion	Remarks. Galileo and Santos-Silva (2016) discussed the differences between Fredlanea Martins and Galileo, 1996 and Eulachnesia Bates, 1872. Even so, the differences between these genera are still very problematic and, depending on the feature considered, Fredlanea may in the future prove to be a synonym of Eulachnesia. This is particularly true if the humeral carina was considered because both the type-species of Eulachnesia (Amphionycha sapphira Bates, 1866 = Saperda humeralis Fabricius, 1801) and Fredlanea (Eulachnesia velutina Lane, 1966) have very distinct humeral carina. On the other hand, there are species in both genera lacking humeral carina. The new species is allocated in Fredlanea because it has no squamiform setae on the elytra. Fredlanea lazulina sp. nov. differs from F. aequatoria (Bates, 1881), F. consobrina (Lane, 1970), F. flavipennis (Lane, 1966) and F. hiekei (Fuchs, 1970) by the setae on the antennomeres much denser (distinctly sparser in both sexes of these species). As the separation between Fredlanea and Eulachnesia is still problematic, we think better to compare the new species with some species of the latter. The general appearance of the new species resembles that of Eulachnesia boteroi Monné and Monné, 2015, but the presence of a distinct humeral carina allows the separation of them (absent in E. boteroi). Fredlanea lazulina differs from E. cobaltina Bates, 1881 by the humeral carina well-marked (slightly marked in E. cobaltina) and erect setae dense ventrally on antennomeres (sparser in E. cobaltina). It differs from E. humilis by the punctures on pronotum finer (coarser in E. cobaltina) and absence of longitudinal pubescent band in center of pronotum (present in E. cobaltina, but often absent centrally).	en	Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel, Botero, Juan Pablo, de, Francisco Eriberto, Nascimento, L. (2020): Notes, new records, new combinations, a new genus and three new species in Hemilophini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae). Insecta Mundi 2020 (785): 1-25, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5458922
4528878FFFC5FF89FF14F97DFCC58449.taxon	description	(Fig. 57 – 60)	en	Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel, Botero, Juan Pablo, de, Francisco Eriberto, Nascimento, L. (2020): Notes, new records, new combinations, a new genus and three new species in Hemilophini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae). Insecta Mundi 2020 (785): 1-25, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5458922
4528878FFFC5FF89FF14F97DFCC58449.taxon	materials_examined	Material examined. COLOMBIA, CUNDINAMARCA (new department record): Quetame, 1 female (MEFLG 48237), VI. 1946, Gallego col. (MEFLG).	en	Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel, Botero, Juan Pablo, de, Francisco Eriberto, Nascimento, L. (2020): Notes, new records, new combinations, a new genus and three new species in Hemilophini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae). Insecta Mundi 2020 (785): 1-25, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5458922
