Pinocolis Assing, 2022

Struyve, Tim, 2024, Revision of the Afrotropical Pinophilina (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae: Paederinae) Part 1: genera, Pinachenium, Pinoplanus, Pinobelus and Pinocolis, Belgian Journal of Entomology 152, pp. 1-75 : 25-26

Genus Pinocolis Assing, 2022

TYPE SPECIES: Pinophilus leucopus Kraatz, 1859 , by original designation.

Pinocolis ASSING, 2022: 50 .

Pinocolis was described by ASSING (2022) for a number of Oriental species, all previously placed in Pinophilus . In the description of the genus Pinocolis , there is no comparison with Pinophilus , but in the chapter “Generic assignments and phylogenetic considerations” there is a morphological comparison of Pinophilus with the Oriental genera. The species from Fagel’s publication (1963) placed in Pinophilus go to Pinachenium , Pinobelus , Mimopinophilus , Pinoplanus and Pinocolis . There is no doubt that the species placed in the four first genera should be there. For the remaining species that I place in Pinocolis , some are more problematic and thus I provide some explanations below. This means that Pinophilus , with the type species P. latipes Gravenhorst, 1802 , is no longer present in the Afrotropical and Oriental region, and is most likely a New World genus. However, some species from Australia still need revision.

The comparison between a selection of new world Pinophilus combined with the work of ABARBANELL & ASHE (1989), the Oriental Pinocolis based on available material and the recent descriptions, and the Afrotropical specimens led me to the following conclusions:

- Abdominal sternite IX: in Pinophilus , there is a sexual dimorphism, while there is no modifications in Oriental or in the Afrotropical species.

- The aedeagus of Oriental Pinocolis is very variable. What is remarkable is the base, which is not strongly sclerotized so it mostly looks broken off or open. Pinophilus has a more “classic” aedeagus with a well sclerotized base. For the Afrotropical material: the capensis -group and congoensis -group are remarkably uniform in structure compared with the Oriental Pinocolis , also without the sclerotized base. The collarti -group is different: the parameres are partly fused, with the remains of the aedeagus differently built compared with the other two groups, rather lobe in form of a small tube with or without slender sclerites and mostly one larger, well sclerotized sclerite. This sclerite is most likely homologous with the strong sclerite of Mimopinophilus : here the two asymmetric parameres and a strong sclerite forms the main part of the aedeagus. The base of the aedeagus is variable: in some species well sclerotized, with others weakly sclerotized, but not as weak as compared with the capensis -group and congoensis -group.

- The parameres are well visible in the Afrotropical and Oriental species. In the New World species: Volker Assing interpreted the two very small structures on the dorsal side as the parameres of Pinophilus ( ASSING, 2022) , I disagree with this interpretation and could observe in several species clear modified parameres on the ventral side. It is unclear what the dorsal structure is, but it is absent in the Afrotropical and Oriental species.

- The punctation on the pronotum in Pinophilus is sparser, mostly with an almost blank spot of the macropunctation on each side on the anterior halve. The punctation on the pronotum in the Oriental and Afrotropical species is always dense, with or without very dense micropunctation. In the Afrotropical species, the dense micropunctation occurs in all members of the congoensis - group, half of the collarti -group and only one species of the capensis -group.

To conclude, the capensis -group and congoensis -group can be clearly considered Pinocolis , and are closer to each other than to the Oriental species that have with more diverse genitalia. The collarti -group is more separated from the other species based on the morphology of the aedeagus. They can be seen as an intermediate form between Pinocolis and Mimopinophilus . Mimopinophilus differs from the collarti -group by having an asymmetric aedeagus, sparser punctation of the posterior part of the head, slightly smaller size and hardly an indication of the typical smoother V-shaped line on the head. Externally, the collarti -group can not be separated from Pinocolis by a single characteristic, so I decide to consider them also Pinocolis .

I provide two keys for the species. The first one is based on genitalia, which is the best to identify the species. For the capensis -group, the lateral protrusion of the median lobe is a good characteristic.

The protrusion is often large and visible in lateral view shortly more apical the base of the parameres. It is mostly a small structure that seems to hold the parameres, rarely broad, bilobed or absent. The mentioned distribution is only of the specimens I have seen. The second key is based on external characters and confirmed distribution, which makes the key less reliable.