| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Vitali
Member Rosalia
Estonia
991 Posts |
 Posted - 08/09/2020 : 22:11:01
|
352.12 KB
A tiny creature, only 3 mm long.
With lower ocular lobes remarkably higher than the cheeks (~2.5 times) and such an M shaped dark band of elytra I arrive at Exocentrus asmarensis, which is most probably wrong, but I cannot get further with Breuning. |
|
|
Jérôme Sudre
Member Rosenbergia
France
1771 Posts |
Posted - 11/09/2020 : 19:04:40
|
Bonsoir
Me semble plutôt être undulatofasciatus ? Regardez de votre côté ! |
 |
|
|
Vitali
Member Rosalia
Estonia
991 Posts |
Posted - 12/09/2020 : 20:51:04
|
Thank you for the hint. You are right, I have overlooked that the puncture is aligned in the mid part of elytra and the species belongs to subgenus Camptomyne. But I have difficulties with this species. I use Breuning’s revision and he regarded E. undulatofasciatus to be a synonym of E. subfasciatus (page 254). In the description of E. subfasciatus he writes “Elytra decorated with several very wavy white transverse bands, leaving free a narrow very wavy transverse postmedian band”. I would not call the white area in the first half of elytra a “wavy transverse band”. Breuning gives the size 4-5 mm for E. subfasciatus, my beetle is 3 mm.
Besides, Titan database gives a synonym for E. subfasciatus:
Exocentrus subfasciatus = Exocentrus (Pseudocentrus) grisescens Jordan, 1894
and states that Breuning gives only Exocentrus (Exocentrus) grisescens in page 241 in his revision of 1958. However, there is also Exocentrus (Camptomyme) subfasciatus in page 253 in the same work. This fact is not mentioned in Titan. I am not a professional entomologist, and all this looks like a complete mess to me, considering also that the same species seems to be mentioned in three different sub-genera.
However, indeed, if I use a key provided by Breuning, I arrive at E. subfasciatus.
|
Edited by - Vitali on 12/09/2020 22:08:37 |
|
|
|
Xaurus
Member Rosenbergia
Germany
1907 Posts |
Posted - 13/09/2020 : 01:17:52
|
please forget Breuning's revison and sugenus arrangement of Exocentrus, its completely useless, there is the same situation in asia too, f.e.
Exocentrus subglaber Fisher, 1925 (s. s.tr.)
= bicoloripennis Breuning, 1957 (sg. Centenexocentrus)
= rufolateralis Rondon & Breuning, 1970 (sg. Camptomyne)
synonyms in 3 different subgenera 
|
|
|
|
Jérôme Sudre
Member Rosenbergia
France
1771 Posts |
Posted - 13/09/2020 : 10:02:55
|
To be a disaster is a disaster but for me it is E (Camptomyme ) undulatofasciatus .
Breuning and Teocchi rehabilitated undulatofasciatus in 1975 (Bull IFAN t.37 Ser A, n° 3 p. 644-645) and therefore this undulatofasciatus, which was made synonymous in 1958, is valid because it was rehabilitated.
E grisescens of which I also have some ex is different by already the more or less long length of the third article of the antennas: "equal or longer" (subjective character because debatable in some of these subgenera). and by other small characters.
Grisescens as the following synonymous: ortmansi , obliquevittatus , subfasciatus and hallei Lepesme (Breuning 1958 and Breuning and Teocchi 1973 and 1975). Personally I could see the type of hallei in the Lepesme collection and in my opinion it is a good species what Mourglia and Teocchi considered in 1994 (Accad Naz. Lincei Anno CCCXCI p. 418) taken up again in 2008 by Teocchi et all (Cah Magellanes, N° 79 p 16-17)
The subgenera in the genus Exocentrus are questionable for some species because sometimes one wonders why they have been included in one subgenus more than another? Unless there are very characteristic subgenera: Dentexocentrus, Similexocentrus .
I hope I have answered your questions?
|
Edited by - Jérôme Sudre on 13/09/2020 10:15:26 |
|
|
|
Vitali
Member Rosalia
Estonia
991 Posts |
Posted - 13/09/2020 : 10:33:24
|
Yes, Jérôme. It seems to be clear now. Thank you for your help.
THen, I'll keep this specimen as Exocentrus (Camptomyne) undulatofasciatus Lepesme & Breuning, 1953. |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
Uganda, Exocentrus sp
