| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Sergi |
Posted - 25/01/2015 : 15:49:44
 
From China, Sichuan.
Sizes: 16-17 mm respectively.
Maybe Grammographus notabilis cuneatus (Fairmaire, 1888)???? |
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Francesco |
Posted - 03/03/2015 : 18:36:47
Reading Titan Base, Grammographus was possibly revalided by Ohbayashi (1960) on the basis of Japanese materials; thus, incorrectly.
With respect to Demonax, this taxon shows shorter antennal spines... an evident risible character for everyone has at least 2 different species of Demonax in his own collection.
The only thing to write is to transfer Grammographus submaculatus Hayashi, 1974 and G. taiwanensis Hayashi, 1966 (the only two species never considered as a Demonax) to the genus Demonax. Maybe the next paper on this genus?  |
| Xavier |
Posted - 03/03/2015 : 18:04:21
True, and we have to publish it... |
| Francesco |
Posted - 03/03/2015 : 13:28:28
quote:
Originally posted by Xavier
G. Tavakilian change right now Grammographus -> Demonax for this species.
It was just a mistake.
Now it is a mistake.
No published paper supports the revalidation of Grammographus!  |
| nalslan |
Posted - 27/01/2015 : 00:25:14
Good to know.
It reminds me I have a couple of specimen like this and I have trouble to id them. |
| Xavier |
Posted - 26/01/2015 : 19:50:31
G. Tavakilian change right now Grammographus -> Demonax for this species.
It was just a mistake.
To see the modification, we have to wait the next version updated. |
| Francesco |
Posted - 26/01/2015 : 19:02:34
I'd only add that Grammographus lineatus does not belong to the species-group of Demonax notabilis either but to a group of species with 3 black lines, which nobody considers as Grammographus (see BioLib).
Grammographus lineatus Chevrolat, 1863 in Gahan (1906)
On the contrary, the species of the group notabilis shows a pattern made of small triangles. |
| Sergi |
Posted - 26/01/2015 : 18:51:52
Ok Francesco, Thank you very much for your clarification!! |
| Xavier |
Posted - 26/01/2015 : 18:51:45
true ! |
| Francesco |
Posted - 26/01/2015 : 18:48:58
quote:
Originally posted by Sergi
So, all Grammographus are Demonax??
Naturally, for the simple reason that the type-species (Grammographus lineatus Chevrolat, 1863) was synonymised with Demonax.
All entomologists agree on this point for more than one century, as the same Titan base shows (here).
Then, if Mr. Tavakilian, on his own initiative, autonomously decides to conserve Grammophorus as a good genus, he must publish a paper supporting this statement.
Otherwise, the officially recognized name remains Demonax notabilis. |
| Sergi |
Posted - 25/01/2015 : 19:12:08
Very complicated these species.... All presents the same look!! |
| Xavier |
Posted - 25/01/2015 : 19:05:21
Have a look here also ... |
| Sergi |
Posted - 25/01/2015 : 17:40:07
So, all Grammographus are Demonax?? |
| Francesco |
Posted - 25/01/2015 : 17:03:52
Naturally, Grammographus is a well-known synonym of Demonax, as already explained here. |
| Sergi |
Posted - 25/01/2015 : 16:59:39
In Base Titan Demonax notabilis is synonym of Grammographus notabilis. |
| Xavier |
Posted - 25/01/2015 : 16:54:56
I still don't understand how to separe Demonax nigromaculatus Gahan, 1906 / Demonax oblongomaculatus Gahan, 1906 / Grammographus notabilis cuneatus (Fairmaire, 1888) etc |
