Hemipeplus neoguineensis KC & Pollock, 2025
publication ID |
https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5574.1.1 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:DA62BE83-26E8-487F-985A-1D48C3853025 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14746071 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/E14D87AE-FFEA-6E52-2A8D-FF006B8B2DF3 |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Hemipeplus neoguineensis KC & Pollock |
status |
sp. nov. |
Hemipeplus neoguineensis KC & Pollock , sp. nov.
http://zoobank.org/ urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:ED43E311-DB92-4787-929F-6FCD1DDC9527
(Figs 37, 64)
Type Material. Holotype, male, labeled: ‘ NEW GUINEA: NE LAE AREA: Lae-Bubia 6–20m. VII-21-1959 / K. beccarii / J. L. Gressitt Collector. / No temples Det. D.A. Pollock 19 / [light green label] BPBM / [dark green label] ♂ / [red label] HOLOTYPE ♂ Hemipeplus neoguineensis KC & Pollock’ , in BPBM. Ten paratypes; 2 specimens, sex unknown, labeled: ‘ NEW GUINEA: SE Murua River (S. side), 2m 17.XII.1964 / J. Sedlacek Collector BISHOP MUS.’, in BPBM; 1 specimen, female, labeled: ‘ NEW GUINEA: PAPUA Brown River 5.XI.1960 / Calamus / J. L. Gressitt Collector’, in BPBM; 1 specimen, sex unknown, labeled: ‘N. GUINEA: NE Bulolo 760m, 18.6.[illegible year] / J. Sedlacek Collector BISHOP MUS. / Hemipeplus sp. det. A. S. Slipinski 96’, in BPBM; 1 specimen, male, labeled: ‘ NEW GUINEA ( SE) Cape Rodney 3.XI.1960. / J. L. Gressitt Collector / Heterospathe’, in BPBM; 1 specimen, female, labeled: ‘ NEW GUINEA: PAPUA Keparra-Sengi, Nr. Kokoda 500m. III-26-1956 / J. L. Gressitt Collector / Sago palm’, in BPBM; 2 specimens (1 inside a capsule), sex unknown, labeled: ‘ NEW GUINEA: PAPUA Daradae Pl’n. 500m, 80km N. to Port Moresby, IX-4-1959 / T. C. Maa Collector BISHOP / Sweeping’, in BPBM; 1 specimen, sex unknown, labeled: ‘ NEW GUINEA: SE Moresby, Brown R. 10m. 16.XII.1964 / J. Sedlacek Collector BISHOP MUS.’, in BPBM; 1 specimen, sex unknown, labeled: ‘ NEW GUINEA: NETH. Waris, S. of Hollandia, 450-500m VIII-8-15-1959 / T. C. Maa Collector’, in BPBM .
Derivation of Specific Epithet. The specific name (adjective in the nominative case, in gender agreement with substantive) is given in allusion to this species’ type locality, i.e., New Guinea .
Diagnosis. Hemipeplus neoguineensis sp. nov. can be distinguished from the similar-appearing H. australicus (Figs 39.1, 39.2) by its larger eyes, browner color, and less setose pronotal pad. Hemipeplus neoguineensis sp. nov. has the following diagnostic features: temples absent; scape submoniliform, apically dilated, externally produced on one side; eyes large (as long as scape + pedicel + antennomere III), moderately wide and moderately convex; pronotum subcordiform; anterior emargination almost absent; anterior half much wider than posterior half; pronotal pad distinct; pronotal angles rounded; pronotal lobe truncate without median notch; body long; elytra slightly convex; color uniformly rufotestaceous, not shiny; distribution: New Guinea.
Description. Measurements (in mm)—GHW: 0.55; HL: 0.43–0.45; AL: 0.80–0.88; GPW: 0.58; PL: 0.48; GEW: 0.65–0.68; EL: 2.23–2.38; TL: 3.14–3.31.
Head (Fig. 37B) wide (GHW/HL: 1.22–1.28); eyes large (as long as scape + pedicel + antennomere III), moderately wide and moderately convex; temples absent; occiput with raised areas; antennae shorter than head and pronotum length combined; antennal scape submoniliform, apically dilated, externally produced on one side; pedicel small moniliform; antennomere III slightly more elongate and apically dilated; IV short and moniliform, apically dilated; V broader, apically dilated; VI same as V but larger; VII moniliform, apically dilated; VIII–X subtriangular or bowl shaped, each wider than the next; XI subpyriform with apex narrowed after the notch; lateral mandibular tooth absent. Pronotum (Fig. 37B) wide (GPW/PL: 1.21); anterior margin without prominent emargination; anterolateral angles rounded, produced; lateral margins moderately sinuate; posterior half much more contracted than anterior half; posterolateral angles obtusely rounded; pronotal lobe truncate without visible median notch; pronotal pad (Fig. 37C) distinct; pronotal pits shallow without well-developed grooves. Scutellar shield subhexagonal, transverse, about twice as wide as long. Elytra (Fig. 37A) long (EL/GEW: 3.43–3.50) and slightly convex; vestiture short and dense; apical patch long and faint. Ventral surface. Prosternal process short, not extending to posterior of procoxae; hypomeral edges very narrowly separated to fused; mesosternal process narrow and linear. Color uniformly rufotestaceous, dull.
Male Genitalia (Figs 37D–F). (Tegmen length = 0.28 mm (n = 1)) Lobe of basale short, slender with rounded apex; shoulders obtusely angled to slightly smooth with moderate slant; apicale and basale with distinct suture; parameres arcuate with apices thick and blunt, as if cut; penis slightly longer than tegmen.
Remarks. Although the male genitalia of H. neoguineensis sp. nov. is similar to that of H. australicus , there are significant morphological differences, such as those provided in the diagnosis section, which are consistent throughout the New Guinean population.
Geographical Distribution (Fig. 64). New Guinea.
Natural History. According to specimen label data, H. neoguineensis sp. nov. is associated with Calamus L. ( Acoraceae ), Cycas revoluta Thunb. or Sago Palm ( Cycadaceae ), K. beccarii [ Coelogyne beccarii? Rchb.f. ( Orchidaceae )], and Heterospathe Scheff. ( Arecaceae ).
FIGURE 37. Hemipeplus neoguineensis sp. nov. (Holotype). A. Dorsal habitus (with scale bar); B. Dorsal head and prothorax; C. Lateral view of head and prothorax; D. Male genitalia dorsal view without spiculum gastrale; E. Tegmen dorsal view (with scale bar); F. Tegmen lateral view with one paramere removed.
FIGURE 38. Hemipeplus manusicus sp. nov. (Holotype). A. Dorsal habitus (with scale bar); B. Dorsal head and prothorax; C. Lateral view of head and prothorax.
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.