| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Gyula
Member Rosenbergia
Hungary
1055 Posts |
 Posted - 29/12/2011 : 10:35:15
|
bonjour,
Thailand, Chiang Mai, 32 mm,
Paraleproleda crucifera?
merci. |
|
|
Francesco
Forum Admin
Luxembourg
9431 Posts |
Posted - 29/12/2011 : 12:18:50
|
No; it is a male of Paraleprodera lecta Gahan, 1888.
P. crucifera (India and Ceylon) has no pre-apical black spot on the elytra. |
 |
|
|
Francesco
Forum Admin
Luxembourg
9431 Posts |
Posted - 02/05/2012 : 18:24:32
|
A small update: the name of this species is actually Paraleprodera triangularis (Thomson, 1865).
P. lecta is a synonym of this species. |
|
|
|
Vitali
Member Rosalia
Estonia
991 Posts |
Posted - 25/08/2014 : 09:58:16
|
Using the last free days with pleasure I was labeling some older material and faced a few minor problems which urged me to return to this old subject.
I have a specimen from famous "Cameron highlands" in Malaysia, which corresponds exactly to Paraleprodera triangularis (Thomson,1865), but I cannot find any indication of finding this species in Malaysia. A labeling mistake?
The book "Cerambycid-beetles of Laos" represents a photo of Paraleprodera crucifera with a "pre-apical black spot on the elytra". Is this another mistake?
It seems to be very common, as practically all photos in the Internet show Paraleprodera triangularis named P. crucifera. The only one which I found to correspond to Francesco's description is here. This is a specimen without a pre-apical spot. Are there any keys published for Paraleprodera? |
|
|
|
Francesco
Forum Admin
Luxembourg
9431 Posts |
Posted - 25/08/2014 : 16:00:00
|
Dear Vitali, this specimen does not correspond to "Francesco's description" but to the original one.
Fabricius (1793) described Lamia crucifera basing on a male of collection Olivier from uncertain locality.
Olivier represented it in 1808 (and not in 1795 as Titan Base claims).
Since the collection is currently unknown, this drawing is possibly the type.
Cerambix cruciferus Fabricius in Olivier, 1808
According to Breuning (1944), this species is endemic from southeast India (Pondichéry) and Ceylon.
I do not know on which basis Thai sellers have started selling Paraleprodera triangularis with this name... in my opinion, for the same reason that they keep selling Celosterna luteopubens as C. pollinosa.
Unfortunately, the copy-paste system of the Web (besides the diffuse ignorance) keep propagating these mistakes... 
Are you sure your Malayan beetles belong to the same species? |
|
|
|
Vitali
Member Rosalia
Estonia
991 Posts |
Posted - 25/08/2014 : 21:55:35
|
451.46 KB
Thank you for an exhaustive reply.
The beetle from Malaysia is up, but I bought it from a re-seller, not from a local collector, so I cannot be completely sure in labelling.
|
|
|
|
Francesco
Forum Admin
Luxembourg
9431 Posts |
Posted - 25/08/2014 : 22:23:18
|
| It is evidently the same species... but it is not strange, since it may descend to the Malayan peninsula through the Titiwangsa Mts. |
|
|
|
nasa
Member Rosalia
China
960 Posts |
Posted - 24/02/2016 : 17:46:59
|
Is Paraleprodera javanica Breuning, 1943 a junior synonym of Paraleprodera triangularis (Thomson, 1865)?
Here, there is the holotype of Paraleprodera javanica Breuning, 1943 |
|
|
|
Francesco
Forum Admin
Luxembourg
9431 Posts |
Posted - 24/02/2016 : 18:23:27
|
I do not think: please observe the lateral white spot of elytra absent in P. javanica.
Moreover, P. javanica differs from P. triangularis in the eyes longer than cheeks (as long as cheeks in P. tringularis). |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
Thailand: Paraleprodera triangularis ♂
