| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Gyula |
Posted - 27/02/2016 : 20:26:35
282.59 KB
Malaysia, N. Borneo, Sabah Crocker range |
| 10 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| horshehden |
Posted - 05/03/2016 : 06:29:01
So than it might be HT; I do not remember it precisely and I'm stil not at home.
However, there are quite many "fake" labels in Paris...
I remember a case of one species (I cannot name it since its going to be published), which was supposedly described according to a single specimen. But this specimen is in another well known European museum with original handwritten "type" label. However, the Paris specimen shows red label "Holotype" (I do not remember it precisely again). |
| dryobius |
Posted - 04/03/2016 : 22:25:35
It can't be a lectotype, since it was apparently described from one specimen.
|
| horshehden |
Posted - 04/03/2016 : 16:29:00
It should be Lectotype. |
| dryobius |
Posted - 04/03/2016 : 14:41:32
Tomas... Is your photo of the holotype? |
| horshehden |
Posted - 03/03/2016 : 19:34:43
Well, the true E. borneensis is here:
283.62 KB
But I do not know what is its variability.
One of my specimens from Trus Madi has black hairs on elytra (and rather sparse), while all specimens from W Malaysia (they often come together with E. femorata, a species described in the same paper with E. histrionica) have light and more dense hairs.
Since E.histrionica is very similar to E. borneensis, while E. subbifasciata and E. misolensis are quite distinct, I would rather expect Sulawesi was an error.
As concerns E. trusmadiana, it also lives in W Malaysia (or very close still undescribed species) and should belong to different genera (see also Parastrangalis jucunda). |
| dryobius |
Posted - 03/03/2016 : 15:19:00
For the moment, I strongly disagree. I believe this is E. borneensis. I have seen about 100 of them. Sometimes the middle fascia is reduced to almost the width of a hair. The apical tranverse fascia can be a straight line or somewhat curved.
E. histrionica was described from Sulawesi (maybe an error, because there are very few Lepturinae from that island!!). E. histrionica was recorded from W. Malaysia (Vives, 2001) based on a specimen in Hudepohl's Collection, however, I don't know if it was examined by anyone besides Hudepohl. E. histrionica was recorded from Sarawak (Borneo) by Abang & Vives (2003) based on two records over 100 years old and I don't believe that Vives examined them, and surely Dr. Abang is not an expert on Lepturinae, and likely these were identified before E. borneensis was described.
To summarize my opinion, E. borneensis is a common species with markings that are sometimes variable. E. histrionica does not occur in Borneo or W. Malaysia, unless the type locality of E. histrionica is a mistake. I also have a specimen or two of E. borneensis from Sumatra. E. collaris (from Philippines) is very close to E. borneensis. E. trusmadianus from Borneo is somewhat similar to E. borneensis but has distinct pubescence at the apex of the elytra and appears to be very rare in Sabah.
Perhaps there are multiple species that all look very similar. But I don't see any external morphology to support that theory. |
| horshehden |
Posted - 03/03/2016 : 05:06:57
It is most probably not E. borneensis, since this species should have strait transverse fascia and apex should be completely light, right?
I cannot confirm that it is E. histrionica, may be not.
In my opinion, there are several undescribed species of this kind in the area (careful genitalia inspection is needed). |
| dryobius |
Posted - 03/03/2016 : 00:27:42
Elacomia borneenis (Pic)
like here...
320.92 KB |
| Xavier |
Posted - 28/02/2016 : 10:33:24
Elacomia sp.; may be Elacomia histrionica (Pascoe, 1869) ? |
| Sergi |
Posted - 28/02/2016 : 10:31:08
Maybe Elacomia sp. |
