identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
0387D223B01219334F98FD19D93353D1.text	0387D223B01219334F98FD19D93353D1.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pholeuonopsis Apfelbeck 1901	<div><p>Genus Pholeuonopsis Apfelbeck, 1901.</p> <p>Pholeuonopsis Apfelbeck, 1901: 14. Type species: Pholeuonopsis ganglbaueri Apfelbeck, 1901: 14, by monotypy.</p> <p>Pholeuonopsis Apfelbeck: Reitter, 1904: 153; Apfelbeck, 1907a: 402; Apfelbeck, 1907b: 304; Jeannel, 1910: 40; Jeannel, 1911: 461; Breit, 1913a: 357; Breit, 1913b: 309; Breit, 1914: 61; Reitter, 1913: 155; Jeannel, 1914: 41; Jeannel, 1924: 255; Zariquiey, 1927: 157; Knirsch, 1927: 103; Knirsch, 1928: 92; Jeannel, 1930: 228; Pretner, 1968: 17; Guéorguiev, 1976: 101; Perreau, 2000: 238; Ćurčić &amp; Brajković, 2002: 43; S. Ćurčić et al. 2006: 497; S. Ćurčić et al. 2014: 178; Perreau, 2015: 209; S. Ćurčić et al. 2015: 394; Hlaváč et al. 2017: 96; S. Ćurčić et al. 2018: 539.</p> <p>subgenus Silphanillus Reitter, 1903: 210. Type species: Pholeuonopsis (Silphanillus) leonhardi Reitter, 1903: 211, by monotypy.</p> <p>subgenus Scotosites Knirsch, 1928: 88. Type species: Pholeuonopsis (Scotosites) spaethi Knirsch, 1928: 88, original designa- tion.</p> <p>Blattodromus Reitter, 1904: 153. Type species: Pholeuonopsis (Blattodromus) herculeana Reitter, 1904: 153, original designation. New synonymy.</p> <p>Blattodromus Reitter: Breit, 1913b: 308; Jeannel, 1914: 42; Jeannel, 1924: 264; Pretner, 1968: 19; Pretner, 1970: 158; Guéorguiev, 1976: 101; Perreau, 2000: 235; Perreau, 2015: 206; Hlaváč et al. 2017: 92.</p> <p>Serbopholeuonopsis S. Ćurčić &amp; Boškova, 2002: 11. Type species: Pholeuonopsis cvijici S. Ćurčić &amp; Brajković, 2002: 43, by monotypy, synonymy in S. Ćurčić et al. 2015: 399.</p> <p>Diagnosis. A member of the subterranean tribe Leptodirini, subtribe Bathysciina, group Théléomorphes, division II sensu Jeannel 1924, defined by: pholeuonoid body shape, pronotum bell–shaped and very variable, with maximum width approximately in the middle of the length, or maximum width on its base on the hind angles level and variable also in the length and shape of hind angles, protarsi with four tarsomeres in both sexes, protibiae lacking comb (pecten) along lateral external margin, lacking external apical spurs, inner sac (endophallus) of median lobe contains sclerotized structures.</p> <p>Redescription. BL: 3.50–5.90 mm. Head (Figs 5, 6) longer than wide if head not retracted in pronotum, eyes completely absent, with posterior neck region and genae more or less glabrous. Transverse occipital crest present but weakly–defined. Antennae inserted approximately in the middle of the median third of the head. Clypeus rectangular, clypeofrontal suture distinct, frontoclypeus and labrum densely setose. Mandibles relatively robust, with proximal and subapical incisors and a tooth or teeth between. Terminal maxillary palpomere conical, apically pointed, slender and much shorter than the wide penultimate palpomere. The ventral surface of head (not illustrated) setose but of lower density if compared with dorsal surface. Gula glabrous, gular sutures well defined, genae with some transversal wrinkles and several lateral setae. Submentum separated from gula, separated from mentum by transverse suture. Submentum covered with numerous medium sized and fine setae. Mentum with some longer, medium sized and some thin setae. Cardo with several fine setae, transverse, subtriangular, basistipes and mediostipes subtriangular, basistipes with several fine setae. All antennomeres longer than wide and pubescent. Length/maxi- mum width ratio of antennomeres is species characteristic.Antennal length approximately 0.6–0.8 of the length (L). Antennomere 8 subglobose or cylindrical, from slightly to strongly longitudinal.</p> <p>Pronotum (Figs 3, 4) bell–shaped and very variable, wider than long. Pronotum widest in mid–length, or mid– width same as width in posterior corners, or widest in posterior corners. Hind corners variable, from obtuse to acute, slightly or strongly protruding backwards and more or less pronounced. Dorsal surface pubescent. Pronotal disc with two basal shallow impressions. Prosternal surface and hypomeron almost glabrous, only slightly pubescent with several fine setae. Procoxal cavities separated by narrow prosternal process (not illustrated). Prosternal process with medial notch forming projection–edge between procoxal cavities, fully visible only if procoxae are free of trochanters, with more or less pronounced median edge.</p> <p>Elytra (Figs 1, 2) oval, slightly variable, more or less elongate, pubescent, with maximum width approximately at mid–length, apex rounded, longitudinal parasutural striae absent. Elytra wider than pronotum. Marginal furrows distinct, relatively shallow, gradually narrowing towards elytral apex. Punctation more or less dense and deep or shallow and weak, weak punctation and pubescence on apical part of elytra. Scutellum triangular and less pubescent.</p> <p>Venter (Figs 7, 8). Mesoventral and metaventral surface sparsely pubescent. Mesocoxal cavities separated, mesoventral process well developed. Metacoxae separated by bifid posterior metaventral process. Mesoventral carina well developed, very variable (Figs 9, 10), prolonged posteriorly, not extended over metaventrite, with backwardly oriented setae. Sternites with short and fine setae.</p> <p>Metatergal apparatus (Figs 12, 14) slightly variable, with relatively narrow and straight metascutum, than slightly curved, alacrista with moderately long basal apophysis. Metendosternite slightly variable, rather of “Y”shape (Figs 11, 13).</p> <p>Protarsi with four undilated segments in both sexes, first protarsomeres slightly longer than second and third, fourth longest. Mesotarsi and metatarsi pentamerous in both sexes. Claws relatively wide and well developed, empodiums with one bifurcate seta. Protibiae more or less straight or slightly curved, armed with spines, internal subapical side with one shorter and one longer subapical multi–toothed spurs. Mesotibiae and metatibiae relatively narrow and straight, armed with lateral spines, with apical crown of spines (two extrenal spines distinctly longer) of unequal length (Gnaspini et al. 2020) and two internal apical multi–toothed spurs.</p> <p>Aedeagus (Figs 15–17, 22–24) more or less large and relatively robust, elongate, sclerotised. Endophallus lobe elongate, tubular and with developed chitinized structures along its length. Median lobe from dorsal aspect sub–parallel, slightly widened and distinctly narrowed towards rounded apex which is beak–shaped and more or less sharp. Median lobe in lateral aspect elongate, almost straight basally, more or less curved anteriorly, gradually more or less narrowing apically with pointed beak–shaped apex. Parameres (Figs 15, 18, 22, 25) shorter than median lobe or slightly longer than median lobe, relatively thin, slightly expanded apically, more or less straight in dorsal and lateral aspect or curved inward apically, apex with three or four setae. Endophallus consists of sclerotized structures along its length: reinforcement bands, featherlike structures, connection nodules and basal phanera, with special differences according to species. Median lobe laterally pointed, apical slerotized structures more or less protruding from the median lobe.</p> <p>Female ventrite VIII pubescent with anterior expansion stout (Fig. 19). Each style with four setae, stylus cylindrical, with one long seta (Fig. 20). Spermatheca (Figs 21, 26, 27, 28) sclerotized, slightly or strongly curved and more or less narrowing apically, with basal, medial and apical regions.</p> <p>Distribution: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia and Montenegro (Central and Southern Dinarides; Fig. 30).</p> <p>Remarks: The genus Pholeuonopsis is currentlyclassified in the Leonhardella phyletic line (Jeannel, 1911; 1924). The genus is distinguished from the morphologically most similar genera Anillocharis, Blattochaeta and Leonhardella as follows:</p> <p>• from Anillocharis: by having protarsi with four undilated tarsomeres in both sexes against two dilated protarsomeres in males in Anillocharis. Additionaly both genera differ each other by the different general shape of the aedeagus.</p> <p>• from Blattochaeta: by the pholeuonoid body–shape with bell–shaped and extremely variable pronotal disc against the bathysciod body shape with evenly convex and trapezoidal shape of the pronotal disc in Blattochaeta. Adittionaly Blattochaeta shows some similarities with Pholeuonopsis on the shape and size of the aedeagus, but the structure of the internal sac is slightly different.</p> <p>• from Leonhardella: by the shape of elytra, more or less inflated against more or less flattened in Pholeuonopsis; by the shape of metendosternite with a shorter basal part against comparatively longer basal part in Pholeuonopsis and by alacrista (metatergal apparatus) with comparatively shorter basal apophysis against longer basal apophysis in Leonhardella. Additionaly Pholeuonopsis and Leonhardella share some similarities on the shape of the aedeagus but the genus Leonhardella has the apex of the median lobe slightly prolonged.</p> <p>Reasons supporting the placement of Blattodromus inside Pholeuonopsis:</p> <p>• The body size, the antennal length, proportions of antennomeres 8, the shape of the mesoventral carina is in general extremely variable even at the species level in numerous genera of Leptodirini e.g., Anthroherpon, Blattochaeta, Drimeotus, Leonhardella, Pholeuon, Sophrochaeta etc... and therefore they can not be considered as diagnostic characters for the validation of Blattodromus as a valid genus.</p> <p>• The pronotum varies considerably within the whole genus Pholeuonopsis. Blattodromus with its differences on hind angles, which are acute and strongly protruding backwards, more pronounced compared with that of other Pholeuonopsis species can be considered only as a diagnostic character for the definition of species within the genus.</p> <p>• The aedeagus of Blattodromus is in general of very similar shape and shows similar internal structures as in other species of Pholeuonopsis. The diferenrences like larger size or slightly longer parameres can be considered only as a species level diagnostic characters. Parameres in Blattodromus are bearing three (also mentioned in Pretner, 1970) or four apical setae, it is not unusual that one paramera has three setae while another one has four. Therefore these characters cannot be used as a diagnostic character for the genus.</p> <p>• The spermatheca in some Blattodromus females is slightly curved (Fig. 21) or curved, usual character state than in Pholeuonopis (Figs 26–28). These differences can be considered as the intra–species morphological variabilities.</p> <p>Additionaly, no other significant differences between Blattodromus and Pholeuonopsis were observed in the comparison with morphologicaly close genera mentioned above.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/0387D223B01219334F98FD19D93353D1	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	Čeplík, Dávid	Čeplík, Dávid (2021): Restoring an old concept of Pholeuonopsis (= Blattodromus syn. nov.) and new recombination for one species from the Balkan Peninsula (Insecta, Coleoptera, Leiodidae, Cholevinae, Leptodirini). Zootaxa 5016 (4): 559-570, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5016.4.6
0387D223B01019384F98FBD5D8B75563.text	0387D223B01019384F98FBD5D8B75563.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pholeuonopsis herculeana Reitter 1904	<div><p>Pholeuonopsis (s. str.) herculeana Reitter, 1904. Recomb. nov.</p> <p>(Figs 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 12, 15–21)</p> <p>Pholeuonopsis (Blattodromus) herculeana Reitter, 1904: 153. Type locality: Grotte Velina pečina (Feengrotte) am Gipfel des Lebrsnik (1850 m), im Bosnisch–herzegowiner Grenzgebirge [= Bosnia and Herzegovina, Lebršnik Mts., Vilina pećina cave], (Fig. 29).</p> <p>Pholeuonopsis herculeanus Reitter: Jeannel, 1910: 40; Jeannel, 1911: 462.</p> <p>Blattodromus herculeanus Reitter: Breit, 1913b: 308 (generic status); Jeannel, 1914: 42; Jeannel, 1924: 264; Pretner, 1968: 19; Pretner, 1970: 158 (B. herculeus —an unknown change in species name); Guéorguiev, 1976: 101; Perreau, 2000: 235; Perreau, 2015: 206; Hlaváč et al. 2017: 92.</p> <p>Material studied. Type locality: 1 ♂: Bosnia and Herzegovina, <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=18.637306&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=43.215557" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 18.637306/lat 43.215557)">Vilina</a> pećina cave, coordinates 43°12‘56.0“N, 18°38‘14.3“E (WGS 84), Lebršnik Mts., trap, 10.08.2009 – 30.10.2009, D. Čeplík, G. Dunay &amp; R. Lohaj lgt. (PCDČ); 1 ♂, 1 ♀, 9 specimens sex not determined: same locality, trap, but 30.10.2011 – 29.07.2014, J. Lakota lgt. (PCDČ, PCJL); 6 ♂♂, 3 ♀♀: same locality, trap, but 06.2016 –06.2017, E. Quéinnec &amp; E. Ollivier lgt. (PCEO, PCEQ); 11 ♂♂, 5 ♀♀, Bosnia and Herzegovina, nameless pit (– 25 m) located near the <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=-6.2018&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=7.2017" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long -6.2018/lat 7.2017)">Vilina</a> pećina cave, trap 07.2017 –06.2018, E. Quéinnec &amp; E. Ollivier lgt. (PCDČ, PCEO, PCEQ, PCJC, PCPH); 5 ♂♂, 3 ♀♀: same local- ity, trap, but 06.2018 –06.2019, E. Quéinnec &amp; E. Ollivier lgt. (PCEO, PCEQ); 4 ♂♂, 1 ♀: same locality, trap, but 06.2019 –08.2020, E. Quéinnec (PCEQ).</p> <p>Diagnosis: Pholeuonopsis (Pholeuonopsis) herculeana differs from all other species of the genus by the combination of following characters:</p> <p>• Much longer antennae with AL respresenting about 80 % of the length (L). AL: 3.59–3.88 mm, slightly shorter in females. Antennomeres densely pubescent, length/maximum width ratios: (1) 1.53–1.90, (2) 3.18, (3) 3.50, (4) 2.50–2.60, (5) 3.45–3.72, (6) 2.63, (7) 3.38–3.61, (8) 2.00, (9) 2.92–3.38, (10) 2.50–2.92 and (11) 2.69– 3.38. Antennomere 8 about twice as long as wide.</p> <p>• Pronotum bell–shaped with acute hind angles, strongly pronounced and strongly protruding backwards (Fig. 3). PL: 1.15–1.31 mm, PW: 1.88–2.00 mm.</p> <p>1 According to Article 30.1.2 of the Code (ICZN), all generic names ending in -opsis are feminine. Thus the correct spelling here is the original one: Pholeuonopsis herculeana.</p> <p>Note: Similar shape of the pronotum which is widest at its base at the hind angles is defined and illustrated e.g., in Pholeuonopsis (Pholeuonopsis) intermedia Knirsch, 1928, Pholeuonopsis (Scotosites) spaethi Knirsch, 1928, Pholeuonopsis (Pholeuonopsis) cvijici Ćurčić &amp; Brajković 2002, and Pholeuonopsis (Pholeuonopsis) perucensis S. Ćurčić et al. 2014. • Punctation of elytra shallow and weak. EL: 3.37–3.48 mm, EW: 2.28–2.50. • Larger aedeagus (Figs 15, 16, 17), 1.37–1.40 mm long, median lobe maximum width 0.49 mm, basal lamina maximum width 0.59 mm. • Parameres slightly longer than median lobe, at apex with three or four setae (Figs 15, 18). • Larger body size which exceeding 5.50 mm. BL: 5.60–5.92 mm, L: 4.62–4.73 mm.</p> <p>Biology: cavernicolous species.</p> <p>Distribution: Bosnia and Herzegovina (Lebšnik Mts.; Volujak Mts., Živanj planina– Pretner 1970; 1977), Mon- tenegro (Durmitor Mts.– Pretner 1970; 1977).</p> <p>Remarks: Blattodromus herculeana was described in the genus Pholeuonopsis, subgenus Blattodromus, based on two female specimens collected in Vilina pećina cave (“Feengrotteˮ, Reitter 1904) situated almost on the top of the northern side of Lebršnik Mts., in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The differential diagnosis given in the original descrip- tion to separate the subgenus from the nominal subgenus Pholeuonopsis was based on the larger body size, the shape of mesoventral carina and the sparse punctation on the elytra. Jeannel (1910; 1911) treated Blattodromus as a synonym of Pholeuonopsis, he changed the species name, from herculeana to herculeanus, and provided additional taxon differences: 1) hind angles of pronotum pronounced and acute, 2) antennae longer, especially antennomere 8 much longer compared with other species of the genus Pholeuonopsis. Later Breit (1913b) gave to Blattodromus the generic status. He based it on the bell–shaped pronotum with pronounced and acute hind angles, the longer antennae having antennomere 8 much longer than wide and by generally larger body size. Consequently Blattodromus was treated as a separate monotypic genus, different from the genus Pholeuonopsis mainly by the characters mentioned above. Guéorguiev (1976) provided the information of the aedeagus, he mentioned that parameres have four preapical setae. The present detailed morphological study of Blattodromus herculeana and its comparison with other Pholeuonopsis species has shown that Blattodromus is congeneric with Pholeuonopsis. A further study of Pholeuonopsis is needed to clarify the status of its three existing subgenera.</p> <p>Additional material studied. Pholeuonopsis grabowskii grabowskii Apfelbeck, 1907a (Figs 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 13, 14, 22–25): Type locality: 1 ♂: Bosnia and Herzegovina, <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=18.076752&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=43.24861" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 18.076752/lat 43.24861)">Novakuša</a> pećina cave, coordinates 43°14‘55.0“N, 18°04‘36.3“E (WGS 84), Bišina, Nevesinje, trap, 12.06.2004 – 26.09.2004, D. Čeplík, G. Dunay &amp; R. Lohaj lgt. (PCDČ); Pholeuonopsis grabowskii ssps.: 1 ♂: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Konjic, Borci, Crno polje, 07.2019, super- ficial subterranean habitat, E. Quéinnec lgt. (PCDČ).</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/0387D223B01019384F98FBD5D8B75563	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	Čeplík, Dávid	Čeplík, Dávid (2021): Restoring an old concept of Pholeuonopsis (= Blattodromus syn. nov.) and new recombination for one species from the Balkan Peninsula (Insecta, Coleoptera, Leiodidae, Cholevinae, Leptodirini). Zootaxa 5016 (4): 559-570, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5016.4.6
