Eupogonius infimus
Creators: name: Wappes, James E.
name: Santos-Silva, Antonio
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2020
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Insecta
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Eupogonius
Eupogonius infimus

description: Eupogonius infimus (Thomson, 1868)
Pyrracita infima Thomson 1868: 107; Lacordaire 1872: 623; Aurivillius 1922: 305 (cat.); Blackwelder 1946: 599 (checklist)
Pyrrhacita infima; Gemminger 1873: 3107 (cat.); Bates 1880: 116.
Pyrhacita infimis; Thomson 1878: 11 (type).
Eupogonius infimus; Breuning 1949: 23 (syn.); 1974: 11 (syn.); Chemsak et al. 1992: 120 (cat.); Maes et al. 1994: 38 (distr., hosts); Monné 1994: 30 (cat.); Monné and Giesbert 1994: 221 (checklist); Noguera and Chemsak 1996: 405 (checklist); Maes 1998: 916 (distr.); Martínez 2000: 98 (distr.); Monné 2002: 15 (cat. hosts); Turnbow et al. 2003: 26 (distr.); Monné 2005: 409 (cat.); Hovore 2006: 376 (distr.); Monné and Hovore 2006: 347 (checklist); Swift et al. 2010: 55 (distr.); Maes et al. 2010: 171 (distr.); Monné 2019: 579 (cat.). Eupogonius (Eupogonius) infimus; Breuning 1963: 504 (cat.).
According to Thomson (1868) (translated): “Black; prothorax [pronotum] coarsely punctate, with three flavous bands.” Without any explanation, Breuning (1949) transferred Pyrhacita infimis to Eupogonius, and synonymized Eupogonius subaeneus Bates, 1872 with it. Later, Breuning (1974), one more time without any explanation, synonymized E. marmoratus Fisher, 1925 with E. infimus. If the original description by Thomson (1868) is accurate, then the synonymies by Breuning (1949, 1974) are also incorrect. We are not sure if E. infimus sensu Breuning (1974) agrees with E. subaeneus and/or E. marmoratus, because according to him (translated): “Near of E. pauper Lec., but …, the pale-yellow pubescence on pronotum and basal half of the elytra less dense.” However, there is no pale-yellow pubescence on the pronotum of either E. subaeneus or E. marmoratus.
Unfortunately, the holotype of Pyrhacita infimis was not found in the MNHN collection (Gérard L. Tavakilian, personal communication). Thus, the identity of this species remains questionable, and even the generic assignment to Eupogonius by Breuning (1949) could be incorrect. Notwithstanding, as the holotype of E. subaeneus Bates, 1872, and E. marmoratus Fisher, 1925 have no longitudinal yellow pubescent bands on pronotum, both are revalidated. In these two species, there are somewhat distinct and narrow yellowish pubescent bands on the pronotum, but they are formed by a short longitudinal central band on anterior third, and an M-shaped band on posterior half (which may be indistinct).
For now, it is not possible to know what E. infimus, sensu all authors from Breuning (1949) to now, is because they may be E. infimus, E. marmoratus, E. subaeneus, a mixture of them or even a different species. Until the type is located, or other information comes forth providing clues to what is correct, it is best to keep these references under E. infimus.
description: Published as part of Wappes, James E. & Santos-Silva, Antonio, 2020, Nomenclatural notes on some currently known species of Eupogonius LeConte, 1852 (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Lamiinae) and description of seven new species, pp. 1-30 in Insecta Mundi 748 on pages 5-6, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.3693954