THE IDENTITY AND TAXONOMIC STATUS OF SITARIS LATIVENTRIS SCHAUFUSS , 1861 AND SITARIS MELANURUS KÜSTER , 1849 , TWO ENIGMATIC IBERIAN TAXA ( COLEOPTERA , MELOIDAE )

J. L. Ruiz, M. A. Bologna & M. García-París. 2013. The identity and taxonomic status of Sitaris lativentris Schaufuss, 1861 and Sitaris melanurus Küster, 1849, two enigmatic Iberian taxa (Coleoptera, Meloidae). Graellsia, 69(2): 169-178. Extensive morphological variability in Nemognatinae has often led to proliferation of species descriptions. Most species of Nemognathinae are seldom encountered in nature and some species remain only known by the specimens used for the original descriptions. Two examples of this problem are represented by Sitaris lativentris Schaufuss, 1861 and Sitaris melanurus Küster, 1849, both described from Spain. The rediscovery of specimens morphologically assignable to S. lativentris in southern Spain, and a careful reading of the original description of S. melanurus, allow us to shed light on the taxonomic status of these enigmatic taxa. Sitaris lativentris has been considered a synonym of Sitaris solieri Pecchioli, 1840 until now; however, neither the lectotype of S. lativentris (here designated), nor the newly found specimens morphologically assignable to S. lativentris, correspond to S. solieri, except in coloration. Alternatively, comparisons between S. lativentris and S. muralis did not render any differences, except in the pattern of elytral coloration and coloration of the pilosity, both variable in other species of Nemognathinae. Therefore S. lativentris is hereby synonymised with S. muralis (new synonymy). The identity of Sitaris melanurus has been overlooked by most researchers, probably because the type specimens seem to be lost. However, the original description provides sufficient information to discard the inclusion of the taxon in Sitaris. Morphological characters presented in the description correspond to traits that, among western European sitarine beetles, are only present in Stenoria apicalis (Latreille, 1804). Küster’s (1849) description corresponds to one of the most frequent color variants of this species. As a consequence we include the name S. melanurus as a new synonym of S. apicalis.

Sitaris lativentris Schaufuss, 1861 and Sitaris melanurus Küster, 1849, both described from Spain, represent a good example.Descriptions of both taxa are quite precise and permit an accurate identification, but no other specimens were found again after the descriptions.The nomenclatural history of these names is diverse, while S. melanurus was used in recent catalogues (Bologna, 2008;García-París et al., 2010), the name S. lativentris was placed in the synonym list of Sitaris solieri Pecchioli, 1840 without any justification (Escherich, 1897;Bologna, 1991).
The collection of new specimens morphologically assignable to S. lativentris in southern Spain, the availability of series of Iberian specimens of S. muralis and S. solieri for comparison (Appendix I), the examination of type material of most Sitaris taxa (Bologna, in prep.), and a careful reading of the original description of S. melanurus, allow us to shed light on the taxonomic status of these enigmatic taxa.

The taxonomic status of Sitaris lativentris Schaufuss, 1861
Sitaris lativentris was described from southern Spain (Type locality: "Hisp.mer.";Schaufuss, 1861: 49), based on an undetermined number of specimens (more than one).Escherich (1897) included the name in the synonym list of S. solieri without discussion -probably influenced by the colouration pattern of the specimens described (Schaufuss, 1861) and by the comments of Schaufuss (1870: 47)-, where it has remained since then (Mader, 1927;Bologna, 1991Bologna, , 2008;;García-París et al., 2010).Borchmann (1917: 144) disagreed and treated S. lativentris as an independent taxon, indicating "Andalusien" as its geographic range, as Beauregard (1890) had already pointed out.The original description of S. lativentris does not include any information about the tarsal claws structure.Presence or absence of a row of teeth in the ventral margin of the upper blade of tarsal claws, allows a readly assignation of specimens to the species complexes related to either S. solieri (with a row of teeth) or to S. muralis (without teeth) (Bologna, 1991).
Recent field surveys in southern Spain led to discovery of a few specimens that correspond precisely to the description of S. lativentris.These specimens are two males (Fig. 1) collected in  (Province of Granada, Spain, 12-IX-2005, J.L. Ruiz leg.), which were found in strict microsympatry with three specimens of typical S. muralis (Appendix I).Both series of Sitaris were found together inside the village of Sorvilán, resting on one of the ancient walls of the church at mid-day.Subsequent visits to the locality during the same dates of 2006, 2007 and 2008 yielded more specimens of typical S. muralis, but none morphologically similar to S. lativentris or S. solieri (Appendix I).
We had the opportunity of examining a female syntype of S. lativentris (Fig. 2) held at the collection of the Magyar Természettudományi Múzeum (HNHM, Budapest), and to compare it with specimens of S. solieri, S. muralis and with the atypical specimens from Sorvilán.This specimen is pinned with the following labels: (a) "Hispania mer., Staudinger" (white, handwritten, rectangular); (b) "Holotypus 1861, Sitaris lativentris, L.W. Schaufuss (white with red contour line, rectangular, handwritten, with "Holotypus" red printed).However, Schaufuss (1861) did not designate a holotype for S. lativentris, and based on the original description the type series included more than one specimen.Consequently the "Holotypus" label was added posteriorly.In order to avoid further taxonomic problems and in accordance with article 74.7.3 of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN, 1999), we designate here the specimen above indicated (Fig. 2) as lectotype of S. lativentris (present designation).We add to this specimen the following label: "Lectotypus / Sitaris lativentris Schaufuss, 1861 / Ruiz, Bologna & Gª-París des.2013" (red printed label).
The specimens from Sorvilán are identical in all aspects to the lectotype of S. lativentris, including color pattern, pilosity coloration and shape, antennae morphology and length, and structure of tarsal claws.A brief description follows: total length: 10.8-11.9mm; head and thorax black, shiny; legs with tibiae and tarsi orange-yellow, except the apical tarsal segment, yellowish brown, femora dark brown with distal portions lighter, metafemora with a narrow longitudinal yellowish broad line in their ventral margin; upper blade of tarsal claws ventrally smooth or only with one or few faint teeth; antennae with first segment black, shiny, the second dark reddish brown, all other segments (III-XI) dark brown, almost black, not shiny; labrum   yellowish, darker in the central area; elytra orangeyellow along the basal two thirds, dark brown along the distal third (the narrowed area of the elytra), the contact between the brown and yellow colour areas is difuse, obliquely placed; wings functional with an amber hue, darker on the sides; abdomen orange-yellow, except a light brown central area in the last sternite; dorsal and ventral pilosity golden yellow, including all the body and appendages, except the apical third of the elytra.Male genitalia identical to that of specimens of S. muralis from the same locality, including some variability at the phallobasis and distal portion of aedeagus, broader and lighter in the specimens described (Fig. 3).
Neither the type of S. lativentris nor the Sorvilán specimens are similar to S. solieri, except in coloration (resembling pale specimens of the latter).Determinant differences between S. lativentris and S. solieri include: upper blade of tarsal claws ventrally smooth or only with one or few faint teeth at the basis in S. lativentris, strongly dentate along the complete ventral surface in S. solieri; male genitalia with the apex of parameri evenly pointed in dorsal view in S. lativentris (Fig. 3), with a lateral narrowing in S. solieri.Because these traits are precisely diagnostic characters for the S. solieri speciesgroup, S. lativentris cannot be considered a synonym of S. solieri.
Comparisons between type material of S. lativentris and Sorvilán specimens with S. muralis, did not render any significant differences, except in the pattern of elytral coloration (similar to pale specimens of S. solieri) and coloration of pilosity.Since those coloration characters are variable in other species of Sitaris it is reasonable to assume they may be variable in S. muralis as well.Consequently S. lativentris and the Sorvilán specimens correspond to a paler phenotype of S. muralis with the elytral black colouration slightly reduced anteriorly when compared to typical specimens and with yellow golden vestiture all over the body except on the apical third of the elytra.

Sitaris (Sitaris) muralis
During the present study two syntypes of S. splendidus (male and female) preserved at HNHM were examined, confirming the synonymy of this species with S. muralis.Type labels are as follows: (a) "Hispania mer., Andalusia, Staudinger" (white, rectangular, handwritten); (b) "Holotypus/Paratypus 1861, Sitaris splendidus L.W. Schaufuss" (white with red contour line, rectangular, handwritten, with "Holotypus" and "Paratypus" red printed; added by the Hungarian Museum).The specimens described as S. splendidus represent a phenotype in which the extension of the elytral dark colouration is intermediate between typical S. muralis and those described as S. lativentris.García-París et al. (2010: 193, fig. 11) show a photograph of the syntype of S. splendidus labelled as "Holotypus", stating erroneously that it could be the holotype by monotypy.Schaufuss (1861) included more than one specimen in the type series and did not designate a holotype.With the taxonomic purpose of fixing the identity of S. splendidus and in accordance with article 74.7.3 of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN, 1999), we designate here the specimen above mentioned and figured by García-París et al. (2010: 193, fig. 11) as lectotype of S. splendidus (present designation).We add to this specimen the following label: "Lectotypus / Sitaris splendidus Schaufuss, 1861/ Ruiz, Bologna & Gª-París des. 2013" (red printed label).
However, the original description is quite detailed and provides sufficient basis to discard the inclusion of the taxon in Sitaris.As a matter of fact, statements presented in the description like "Brustschild wie der Kopf rostgelb, glänzend (…), der Grund rostgelb, mit einem schwarzen punktformigen Fleckchen auf der Mitte der Basin", "Beine lang, schwach, rostgelb" (sic), and many others, correspond to traits that, among western European sitarine beetles, are only present in Stenoria apicalis (Latreille, 1804) (Pardo Alcaide, 1958;Bologna, 1991).Therefore it is likely that Küster (1849a) was describing one of the most frequent color variants of this species (pronotum yellow-reddish with a basal central dark spot; Bologna, 1991).The geographic range of S. apicalis (see Bologna, 1991Bologna, , 2008;;Ruiz, 2001)