Hemipeplus australicus Arrow, 1930

Kc, Sajan & Pollock, Darren A., 2025, Review of the Hemipeplinae (Coleoptera: Mycteridae) fauna of the world with descriptions of twenty-nine new species, Zootaxa 5574 (1), pp. 1-140 : 84-87

Hemipeplus australicus Arrow, 1930

(Figs 39.1, 39.2, 64)

Hemipeplus australicus Arrow, 1930: 228 .— Kamiya 1963: 14; Lawrence & Britton 1994: 143, Fig. 54–I; Hsiao & Pollock 2022: 11 Fig. S1 .

Taxonomic Note. Although the second author designated the lectotype in 1997, the designation was never published. This designation serves to stabilize the taxonomy of H. australicus and provide a clear reference for subsequent studies.

Type Material. Lectotype (here designated; Article 74 ( ICZN, 1999)); 1 specimen (left), sex unknown, pinned along with another specimen on same card, labeled: ‘[round label with red margin] Type / [underlined in pink] Port Darwin. [/underlined in pink] 92—2. / [label upside down] 4713 / Hemipeplus australicus type arrow / [red label] LECTOTYPE left spec. Hemipeplus australicus Arrow designated by D.A. Pollock 1997 / [with a barcode] NHMUK014663483 / [with a barcode] NHMUK014663484 ’, in BMNH (Fig. 39.1) ; Paralectotype: 1 specimen (right on same card as lectotype, ventral side up), sex unknown, labeled same as lectotype, in BMNH .

FIGURE 39.1. Hemipeplus australicus Arrow, 1930 (Lectotype). A. Dorsal habitus (with scale bar); B. Dorsal head and prothorax; C. Lateral view of head and prothorax.

FIGURE 39.2. Hemipeplus australicus Arrow, 1930 . A. Dorsal habitus (with scale bar); B. Dorsal head and prothorax; C. Lateral view of head and prothorax; D. Male genitalia dorsal view with spiculum gastrale; E. Tegmen dorsal view (with scale bar).

Other Material Examined. AUSTRALIA. Northern Territory. Adelaide River 91—49, ( BMNH, 3); Port Darwin, NW Australia, J.J. Walker, G.C. Champion leg., B.M. 1927–409, ( BMNH, 1♀, 1♂ ( Fig. 39.2), 1 sex unknown); Port Keats, N. T. 14.06S, 129.33E , 19.viii.1968, M. Mendum leg., ( ANIC, 1); Umbakumba, Little Lagoon, Groote Eylandt , 17.vii.1952, J. L. Wassell leg., at light, ( UQIC, 1) . Western Australia. W. Austl. N side Carson, R. on Gibb Rd ., 27.x.1976, FMHD #76–5016 , at light nr pool, J.B. Kethley leg., ( FMNH, 3♀) ; same locality and date, FMHD #76–5044 , at light, J.B. Kethley leg., ( FMNH, 1♂, 2♀) . Queensland. Mogill, near Brisbane, 27.ix.1958 x, J. L. Gressitt leg., Hemipeplus sp. Det. J.F. Lawrence, ( BPBM, 1♀) ; Fossill Site “B” Mt. Crosby, S.E. QU., 16.x.1963, E. Exley leg., ( UQIC, 1♀) ; Millstream Falls Via Ravenshoe , 24.xii.1964. N. Qld. H.A. Rose leg., ( UQIC, 1); Iron Range, Cape York Pen. N. Qld . 16–23.xi.1965, G. Monteith leg., ( UQIC, 1); 15.41°S 145.12°E Annan R. 3km WbyS Black Mt . 27.ix.1980 Q, J.C. Cardale leg., ex ethanol, ( ANIC, 1); Babinda NQ 11/50 93, ( ANIC, 1♀) ; Tolga , 20.x.1985, J.D. Brown leg., ex collection A Walford-Huggins, E. Gowing-Scopes collection BMNH (E) 2005–4, ( BMNH, 7). Unknown locality. ( UQIC, 6) .

Diagnosis. Hemipeplus australicus can be distinguished by its lack of temples, wide pronotal pad, elongate body, and shiny, pale color. Hemipeplus australicus has the following diagnostic features: temples absent; scape moniliform, apically dilated, externally produced on one side; eyes large (longer than scape + pedicel), wide and convex; pronotum subcordiform; anterior emargination almost absent; anterior half much wider than posterior half; pronotal pad broad and distinct; pronotal angles rounded; pronotal lobe truncate without visible median notch; body long; elytra slightly convex; color uniformly light brown/pale, shiny; distribution: Australia (Northern Territory, Queensland, Western Australia).

Re-description. Measurements (in mm)—GHW: 0.58–0.59; HL: 0.48–0.50; AL: 0.80–0.92; GPW: 0.61–0.63; PL: 0.48–0.55; GEW: 0.73–0.78; EL: 2.70–2.85; TL: 3.66–3.90.

Head (Figs 39.1B, 39.2B) wide (GHW/HL: 1.18–1.21); eyes large (longer than scape + pedicel), wide and convex; temples absent; occiput with raised areas; antennae shorter than head and pronotum length combined; antennal scape moniliform, apically dilated, externally produced on one side; pedicel small moniliform; antennomere III more elongate and apically dilated; IV short and moniliform, apically dilated; V broader, apically dilated; VI same as V but larger; VII–X subtriangular or bowl shaped, each wider than the next; XI subpyriform with apex narrowed; lateral mandibular tooth very short. Pronotum (Figs 39.1B, 39.2B) wide (GPW/PL: 1.15–1.27); anterior margin without prominent emargination, almost straight; anterolateral angles rounded, produced; lateral margins sinuate; posterior half much more contracted than anterior half; posterolateral angles obtusely rounded; pronotal lobe truncate without visible median notch; pronotal pad (Figs 39.1C, 39.2C) very wide and distinct, densely setose; pronotal pits shallow without well-developed grooves. Scutellar shield elliptical to subhexagonal, transverse, wider than long. Elytra (Figs 39.1A, 39.2A) long (EL/GEW: 3.65–3.70), slightly convex; vestiture long and dense; apical patch short and faint. Ventral surface. Prosternal process short, not extending to posterior of procoxae; hypomeral edges fused in most specimens; mesosternal process narrow and linear. Color feebly shiny, uniformly light brown/ pale.

Male Genitalia (Figs 39.2D–F). (Tegmen length = 0.25 mm (n = 1)) Lobe of basale moderately long, slender with blunt apex; shoulders obtusely angled to smooth with moderate slant; apicale and basale with distinct suture; parameres arcuate with apices thick and blunt, as if cut; penis much longer than tegmen.

Distribution (Fig. 64). Australia (Northern Territory, Queensland, Western Australia).

Natural History. According to specimen label data, adults of H. australicus have been collected from light traps.

Figures

FIGURE 1. A. Measurements taken of Hemipeplinae specimens. GHW = greatest head width; HL= head length; GPW = greatest pronotum width; PL = pronotum length; GEW = greatest combined elytral width; EL = elytral length; B. Dorsal habitus of Hemipeplus microphthalmus, showing important anatomical features; C. Ventral habitus of Hemipeplus microphthalmus, showing important anatomical features; D. Male genitalia of Hemipeplus africanus, showing important anatomical features.