Aferos Kazantsev, 1992

Kazantsev, Sergey V., 2005, Review of Aferos Kazantsev (Coleoptera, Lycidae), with a note on Staepteron cyanoxanthum (Bourgeois), Zootaxa 830, pp. 1-23 : 2-19

publication ID

https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.830.1.1

DOI

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15690685

persistent identifier

https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DF2823-9126-8843-FED3-C1EFFAB4F916

treatment provided by

Plazi

scientific name

Aferos Kazantsev, 1992
status

 

Aferos Kazantsev, 1992 ( Figs. 1–42 View FIGURES 1 – 6 View FIGURES 7 – 11 View FIGURES 12 – 16 View FIGURES 17 – 21 View FIGURES 22 – 28 View FIGURES 29 – 36 View FIGURES 37 – 41 View FIGURES 42 – 45 )

Type species: Stadenus aethiops Kleine, 1933 .

Aferos Kazantsev, 1992: 44 type species: Stadenus aethiops Kleine, 1933

Slipinskia Bocák & Bocáková, 1992: 257 type species: Stadenus aethiops Kleine, 1933 Redescription

Head transverse, slightly narrowed behind eyes ( Figs. 1–2 View FIGURES 1 – 6 ). Fastigium blunt ( Fig. 3 View FIGURES 1 – 6 ). Labrum sclerotized and lying anteriad of epistoma, not or feebly emarginated medially ( Fig. 2 View FIGURES 1 – 6 ). Eyes relatively small, spherical. Mandibles projected forward and evenly rounded distally, glabrous distally and pubescent basally ( Fig. 2 View FIGURES 1 – 6 ). Maxillary palps relatively slen­ der, 4 ­segmented, with ultimate palpomere parallel­sided and flattened distally ( Fig. 1 View FIGURES 1 – 6 ). Prementum undivided, labial palps 3 ­segmented, slender, apical palpomere slightly widening and flattened distally, ligula present ( Fig. 5 View FIGURES 1 – 6 ). Gula absent, genal sclerites connected by narrow process lying anteriad of posterior tentorial pits ( Fig. 2 View FIGURES 1 – 6 ). Ventral arms of tentorium long and narrow, almost attaining cranial dorsal surface ( Fig. 3 View FIGURES 1 – 6 ). Antennal prominence relatively inconspicuous, antennal sockets approximately broadly separated ( Fig. 2 View FIGURES 1 – 6 ). Antennae 11 ­segmented, relatively short, flattened from antennomere 3; antennomere 3 longer and wider than antennomere 2, but shorter than antennomere 4 ( Fig. 4 View FIGURES 1 – 6 ); antennal pubescence sparse and decumbent in all female and male antennomeres.

Pronotum subquadrate, with conspicuously produced medially posterior margin ( Fig. 19 View FIGURES 17 – 21 ), prominent median cell and approximately developed transverse carinae; posterior angles feebly produced laterally ( Figs. 6 View FIGURES 1 – 6 , 19 View FIGURES 17 – 21 ). Prosternum short, T­shaped ( Fig. 7 View FIGURES 7 – 11 ). Thoracic spiracles well sclerotized, but not protruding laterally beyond coxal limits ( Fig. 6 View FIGURES 1 – 6 ). Mesoventrite short, with weakly sclerotized median part; mesepimeron significantly shorter than mesepisternum, but extending beyond its base ( Fig. 8 View FIGURES 7 – 11 ). Scutellum relatively small, slightly emarginate at apex. Elytra almost parallel­sided, with four approximately equally developed primary costae, interstices with double rows of subquadrate cells; sparse elytral pubescence noticeable on longitudinal costae; elytron with noticeable epipleuron basally ( Fig. 9 View FIGURES 7 – 11 ). Metasternal suture not attaining to mesoventrite ( Fig. 6 View FIGURES 1 – 6 ). Metendosternite with transverse suture and lateral arms ( Fig. 10 View FIGURES 7 – 11 ). Metathoracic wings with wedge cell and cu­a brace; Cu 2 split into two branches ( Fig. 11 View FIGURES 7 – 11 ).

Mesocoxae widely separated; metacoxae with conspicuous trochantinal suture ( Fig. 6 View FIGURES 1 – 6 ). Protrochantins considerably larger than mesotrochantins ( Fig. 6 View FIGURES 1 – 6 ). Trochanters elongate, widened distally, connected to femora distally; tibiae and femora curved, tibiae with pair of similar short apical spurs; tarsomeres 1–4 with plantar pads; all claws simple ( Fig. 12 View FIGURES 12 – 16 ). Abdominal spiracles located dorsally on sternite relatively distant from edge. Spiculum ventrale moderately long ( Fig. 13 View FIGURES 12 – 16 ); spiculum gastrale long to extremely long ( Figs. 14– 15 View FIGURES 12 – 16 ). Valvifers free, styli long and narrow, coxites fused basally with proctiger ( Fig. 16 View FIGURES 12 – 16 ). Aedeagus with elongate, semi­fused parameres and asymmetric compound phallobase; median lobe with variously modified distal processes ( Figs. 17 –18, 20– 43 View FIGURES 17 – 21 View FIGURES 22 – 28 View FIGURES 29 – 36 View FIGURES 37 – 41 View FIGURES 42 – 45 ).

Comments

Aferos, the monophyly of which is supported by the noticeable elytral epipleura and the asymmetric compound phallobase of the aedeagus, is divided into two subgenera, Aferos s. str. and Aferos subgen. Ukachaka Kazantsev, 1992, differing by the structure of maxillary and labial palps and elytral reticulation. The pointed maxillary and labial palps are hypothesized to be a plesiomorphy of Ukachaka, the reduced elytral reticulation and the very long and narrow median lobe of the aedeagus ( Figs. 42–43 View FIGURES 42 – 45 ) assumed to be its apomorphies. The approximately parallel­sided ultimate palpomeres and the shortened and variously modified distal process of the median lobe appear to be apomorphic for Aferos s. str. The relatively long and simple distal process of the median lobe of A. (s. str.) andrei and A. (s. str.) flavohumeralis ( Figs. 31 View FIGURES 29 – 36 , 40 View FIGURES 37 – 41 ) is probably in the plesiomorphic condition.

On the other hand, two groups may be distinguished within Aferos s. str., the aethiops group and the walteri group, the phylogenetic relationships of which need further study based on more representative material. The aethiops group is characterized by the flattened antennomeres 3–11 and relatively large and mostly elongate irregular elytral cells, whereas the walteri group, including two species, the second one being A. rubellus sp. n., is recognized by the filiform antennae and small and mostly square regular elytral cells.

Distribution

Eleven of the 18 known species of Aferos are endemic to South Africa, with five species occurring in Natal (A. aethiops , A. brincki , A. walteri, A. londonianus, A. natalensis sp. n.), three in Cape (A. flavocoeruleus , A. londonianus, A. rubellus sp. n.) and five in Transvaal (A. transvaalensis sp. n., A. endroedyi sp. n., A. silvestris sp. n., A. rubellus sp. n., A. youngai sp. n.). The remaining seven species of the genus are evenly distributed on the mountain ridge extending along the Eastern coast of Africa towards the equator, with one species known from each of Zimbabwe (A. leleupi), Mozambique (A. zambezianus), Malawi (A. andrei), Tanzania (A. orientalis), Rwanda (A. basilewskyi) and Congo (A. dewittei), and one species occurring in both Uganda and Kenya on the Mt. Elgon massif (A. flavohumeralis) ( Fig. 46 View FIGURE 46 ).

Biology

No preimaginal forms have been observed or collected in Aferos. The known elevations where adults of this genus were taken range from 1000 m (A. transvaalensis, Transvaal, South Africa) to 2300 m above sea level (A. basilewskyi, Rwanda). Dr. Endrödy­ Younga collected these beetles on fungous bearing tree trunks, Cussonia logs and in forest litter, including very wet litter. The most productive methods to collect Aferos species appear to be beating, grass netting, UV light collecting and using intercept traps, which yielded most of the specimens studied.

Key to the subgenera and species of Aferos

1. Elytral pubescence distributed along costae, their interstices with double rows of reticulate cells. Ultimate maxillary palpomere parallel­sided and flattened distally (Aferos s. str.) ......................................................................................................... 2

­ Elytra glabrous, at least last elytral interstice with one row of cells. Ultimate max­ illary palpomere tapering distally (Aferos subgen. Ukachaka) ............................ 18

2 (1). Elytra fulvous with darkened apices. Aedeagus ­ Fig. 31 View FIGURES 29 – 36 ....................................... ......................................................................................A. (s. str.) andrei Kazantsev

­ Elytra black, at most with rufous humeri ............................................................... 3

3 (2). Elytra uniformly black ........................................................................................... 4

­ Elytra black with rufous humeri ......................................................................... 14

4 (3). Scutellum rufous. Aedeagus ­ Fig. 32 View FIGURES 29 – 36 ................A. (s. str.) zambezianus Kazantsev

­ Scutellum black ..................................................................................................... 5

5 (4). Disk of pronotum conspicuously darkened. Aedeagus ­ Fig. 33 View FIGURES 29 – 36 ............................. ......................................................................................A. (s. str.) aethiops (Kleine)

­ Pronotum uniformly rufous or testaceous .............................................................. 6

6 (5). Elytra with erect hairs ( Fig. 19 View FIGURES 17 – 21 ). Male metatrochanters spinose. Aedeagus ­ Figs. 20–21 View FIGURES 17 – 21 ............................................................................ A. (s. str.) natalensis sp. n.

­ Elytra with decumbent pubescence. Male metatrochanters simple ....................... 7

7 (6). Antennomere 1 anteriorly brownish. Aedeagus ­ Figs. 29–30 View FIGURES 29 – 36 ................................ ...........................................................................................A. (s. str.) youngai sp. n.

­ Antennomere 1 uniformly black ............................................................................ 8

8 (7). Male metacoxae with posterior spine ..................................................................... 9

­ Male metacoxae simple ....................................................................................... 11

9 (8). Distal process of median lobe long and narrow ( Fig. 34 View FIGURES 29 – 36 )......................................... ..................................................................................... A. (s. str.) leleupi Kazantsev

­ Median process short and variously modified...................................................... 10

10 (9). Aedeagus relatively narrow; distal process of median lobe not aculeate ( Figs. 17­18 View FIGURES 17 – 21 ) ........................................................................................A. (s. str.) endroedyi sp. n.

­ Aedeagus broad; distal process of median lobe with aculeate ventral surface ( Figs. 24­25 View FIGURES 22 – 28 ) ............................................................................... A. (s. str.) silvestris sp. n.

11 (8). Aedeagus with medially produced distal process of median lobe; parameres dis­ tally outwardly hooked ( Figs. 26–28 View FIGURES 22 – 28 ) ......................A. (s. str.) transvaalensis sp. n.

­ Aedeagus with bifurcate distal process of median lobe........................................ 12

12 (11). Aedeagus with rounded apices of bifurcate distal process ( Fig. 35 View FIGURES 29 – 36 ) ....................... .................................................................................A. (s. str.) orientalis Kazantsev

­ Aedeagus with pointed apices of bifurcate distal process ................................... 13

13 (12).Aedeagus relatively narrow; distal process deeply incised ( Fig. 36 View FIGURES 29 – 36 ) ...................... ............................................................................ A. (s. str.) londonianus Kazantsev

­ Aedeagus relatively broad; distal process feebly incised ( Fig. 37 View FIGURES 37 – 41 ) ......................... ............................................................................ A. (s. str.) brincki (Gomes Alves)

14 (3). Head and basal antennomeres testaceous ............................................................. 15

­ Head and antennae uniformly black. .................................................................. 16

15 (14).Aedeagus with relatively long, distally produced parameres and widened preapical portion of median lobe ( Fig. 38 View FIGURES 37 – 41 ) ..................................A. (s. str.) walteri Kazantsev

­ Aedeagus with relatively short, not distally produced parameres and narrowed preapical portion of median lobe ( Figs. 22–23 View FIGURES 22 – 28 ) ................A. (s. str.) rubellus sp. n.

16 (14).Front tibiae testaceous. Aedeagus ­ Fig. 39 View FIGURES 37 – 41 .......A. (s. str.) flavocoeruleus (Kleine)

­ All tibiae black...................................................................................................... 17

17 (16). Humeri broadly testaceous. Aedeagus ­ Fig. 40 View FIGURES 37 – 41 ...................................................... ........................................................................A. (s. str.) flavohumeralis Kazantsev

­ Humeri with small testaceous spots. Aedeagus ­ Fig. 41 View FIGURES 37 – 41 ......................................... .....................................................................................A. (s. str.) kraatzi Kazantsev

18 (1). Median pronotal cell closed both anteriorly and posteriorly. Male antennae attain­ ing to elytral middle. Median lobe of aedeagus comparatively broad; parameres hooked inwardly ( Fig. 42 View FIGURES 42 – 45 ) ........................................ A. (U.) basilewskyi Kazantsev

­ Median pronotal cell open anteriorly. Male antennae attaining only to elytral fourth. Median lobe of aedeagus very long and narrow; parameres hooked out­ wardly ( Fig. 43 View FIGURES 42 – 45 ) ............................................................A. (U.) dewittei Kazantsev

Kingdom

Animalia

Phylum

Arthropoda

Class

Insecta

Order

Coleoptera

Family

Lycidae

Loc

Aferos Kazantsev, 1992

Kazantsev, Sergey V. 2005
2005
Loc

Stadenus aethiops

Kleine 1933
1933
GBIF Dataset (for parent article) Darwin Core Archive (for parent article) View in SIBiLS Plain XML RDF