Melanesiandra striatifrons Santos-Silva &amp; Heffern &amp; Matsuda 2010
Creators: name: Santos-Silva, Antonio
name: Heffern, Daniel
name: Matsuda, Kiyoshi
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2010
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Insecta
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Melanesiandra
Melanesiandra striatifrons

description: <i>Melanesiandra striatifrons</i> (Fairmaire, 1879) (Fig. 22, 23, 82, 134, 135, 203, 214, 222, 265, 314, 344, 376-378) <i>Parandra striatifrons</i> Fairmaire, 1879: 289; 1881: 468; Schmeltz 1881: 10; Lameere 1902: 84; Dillon and Dillon 1952: 3; Webb 1994: 327 (note); Evenhuis and Ramsdale 2006: 11 (checklist). <i>Parandra</i> (<i>Parandra</i>) <i>striatifrons</i>; Lameere 1913: 6 (cat.); 1919: 17; Santos-Silva 2002: 32 (note). <i>Parandra vitiensis</i> Nonfried, 1894: 46; Lameere 1902: 84 (<i>syn</i>.); Dillon and Dillon 1952: 3 (revalidation); Evenhuis and Ramsdale 2006: 11 (checklist). <i>Birandra</i> (<i>Birandra</i>) <i>striatifrons</i>; Santos-Silva and Shute 2009: 32. <b>Description</b>. Integument shining, chestnut; parts of head, of mandibles, margins of pronotum, anterior margin of submentum, and margins of coxal cavities blackish; legs pale-brown. Male (Fig. 376). Head wide, proportionally very large in relation to body size; dorsal surface of gibbosities, with fine punctures, moderately abundant, not confluent; area between gibbosities and occiput with similar punctures, but sparser; area close to eyes (near apex of ocular carina) and area behind eyes with large distinct punctures, abundant, in part confluent; area between gibbosities and ocular carina smooth and depressed. Central region of clypeus strongly oblique. Central projection of labrum (Fig. 22), wide, truncate and with concavity at apex. Eyes (Fig. 82) barely emarginated. Mandibles of <i>major</i> males (Fig. 134) falciform, and sub-falciform in <i>minor</i> males, longer than head; inner margin in <i>major</i> males with two teeth, not together protracted, located before and after middle, apical tooth larger (in <i>minor</i> males, located approximately at middle of mandibles, and together protracted). Submentum depressed at area close to mentum, with large, deep, and moderately abundant punctures, in part confluent; margin close to mentum moderately elevated; pilosity sparse, restricted to sides. Antennae notably short (not reaching pronotal base); ventral sensorial area of antennae visible from side (Fig. 222), divided by carina (Fig. 314), elevated, visible from side; dorsal sensorial area of antennomere XI large. Maxillary palp as in Fig. 203. Pronotal disc strongly flat, curved laterally; anterior margin sinuous; anterior angles projected forward; lateral angle absent (sometimes indicated); posterior angle distinct; abundantly, coarsely punctate on latero-apical half; latero-basal half with fine punctures, abundant; center of disc very finely, sparsely punctate. Elytra finely, moderately abundantly punctate, sparser in circum-scutellar area; each elytron with two carinae barely marked. Metasternum with some coarse, shallow punctures at sides. Metafemur (Fig. 377) elongated. Metatarsus (without claws) (Fig. 265) shorter than metatibia (length equal to 0.85 times); metatarsomere V longer than I-III together. Female (Fig. 378). Central area of dorsal face of head with very fine, sparse punctation; area close to ocular carina and area behind eyes finely, moderately abundantly punctate. Central projection of labrum (Fig. 23) narrow, truncate or rounded. Mandibles as in Fig. 135. Lateral sides of pronotum finely and abundantly punctate. <b>Variability</b>. Integument dark-brown; submentum completely blackish; legs brown. Males: head not notably large in relation to body (<i>minor</i> males); dorsal face of head, on gibbosities, with punctures somewhat coarse, similar to those at the area behind eyes (mainly laterally); area behind eyes with punctures large and sparse; apex of labrum, frequently, strongly concave frontally, apex of labrum on plane significantly lower than the rest of the labrum, labrum convex near the central projection enhancing the appearance of the latter causing it to be more prominent; pilosity of submentum present throughout or completely absent; center of pronotal disc smooth; anterior margin of submentum, close to mentum, elevated only at sides; elytral punctures uniform. Metatarsus (without claws) approximately as long as metatibiae. Female: apex of labrum narrow and rounded; dorsal sensorial area of antennomere XI fused with ventral sensorial area. <b>Dimensions in mm (M / F)</b>. Total length (including mandibles), 15.8-21.7/17.2-21.2; prothorax: length, 3.1-4.5/3.6-4.2; anterior width, 4.1-5.8/4.4-5.4; posterior width, 3.3-4.3/4.1-4.9; humeral width, 4.0-5.6/ 4.9-6.0; elytral length, 8.8-12.1/10.3-13.3. <b>Geographical distribution</b> (Fig. 344). Fiji (Viti Levu; Vanau Levu, Ovalau). <b>Material examined</b>. (7 M, 11 F), as follows: FIJI. Ex Nonfried Collection, 2 F, [no date indicated] (IRSN); <i>Viti Levu</i>: M, F, [no date indicated] (AUMU); F, [no date indicated] (IRSN); F, ex. Nonfried Collection (type of <i>Parandra vitiensis</i>) [no date indicated] (IRSN); Nandarivatu Forest, M, X.17.1985, G. F. Bornemissza coll. (DHCO); M, F, X.17.1985, Bornemissza coll. (ZSMC); 2 F, 17.X.1985, [name of collector illegible] (ZKCO); M [identified by Dillon and Dillon (1952) as <i>P. vitiensis</i>], IX.9.1938, Y. Kondo coll. (BPBM); Naraiyawa (178 o 5’E, 17 o 56’S), 2 M, F, XI.20-23.1986, R. L. Brown coll. (MEMU; 1 M MZSP); Nausori (Colo-i-Suva Forestry Station; 200 m), M, I.28.1994, K. Ito coll. (KMCT); Belt Road (45 miles W Suva), F [identified by Dillon and Dillon (1952) as <i>P. striatifrons</i>], 25.VII.1938, E. C. Zimmerman coll. (BPBM). <i>Vanau Levu</i>: Kilaka (Bua; FJ-58D; 178 o 59’017”E, 16 o 48’412”S; 154m; Malaise), F, 28.VI-02.VII.2004, M. E. Irwin, E. Schlinger, M. Tokota coll. (USNM); M, [no date indicated] (USNM). <b>Types, type localities.</b> <i>Parandra striatifrons</i>: holotype M, from Fiji (Viti Levu), deposited at MNHN. <i>Parandra vitiensis</i>: holotype F, from Fiji, deposited at IRSN. <b>Comments</b>. The description and redescription of <i>Parandra striatifrons</i>, by Fairmaire (1879, 1881), indicates that he only knew the male of this species: “mandibulis validis, capite haud brevioribus, intus obtuse, apice sat acute bidentatis, capite prothorace haud angustiore...epistomate inter mandibulas vix producto, late sinuato, utrinque angulato” [English translation: mandibles robust, longer than head, interiorly obtuse, apex distinctly bidentate, head as long as prothorax…epistoma just projected between mandibles, widely sinuous, in both sides angulated]. That hypothesis is corroborated by the comparison made by Fairmaire (1881), between <i>P. austrocaledonica</i> and <i>P. striatifrons</i>: “les mandibules (<i>P. austrocaledonica</i>) sont bien plus larges”[English translation: the mandibles (<i>P. austrocaledonica</i>) are much broader]. It is very probable that Fairmaire (1879) possessed only one male when he described the species. In Fairmaire (1879, 1881) only a single measurement was supplied: “Long.: 20 millim.” and “Long. 20 mill. (mandib. Incl.)”. But Fairmaire (1881), when writing on other species for which he had more than one specimen, indicated the variation in some measurements, for example, in the redescription of <i>Opheltes cariosicollis</i> Fairmaire, 1877: “Long 26 à 40 mill”. There is no indication of the number of specimens that Fairmaire (1879) used to describe this species. Nonfried (1894) described <i>Parandra vitiensis</i>, apparently, based on a single specimen (“Long. 18 mm ”). It is possible to infer that, because in the same work, in the description of <i>Nemophas eupholoides</i>, he supplied the measurements of at least two specimens (“Long. 22-24 mm ”). It could be possible that Nonfried (1894) had more than one specimen with the same dimensions, however, we received all specimens of Parandrinae from the Oriental province, deposited at IRSN, among which, specimens from the Nonfried Collection and, again, among which, one specimen of <i>P. vitiensis</i> labeled as “Type”. It is very improbable that there are types in other collections. The calligraphy in the label of the specimen of <i>P. vitiensis</i> that has the “Type” label, belongs to IRSN, agrees very well with that illustrated by Horn and Kahle (1937: plate XXXIV, fig. 25) of a label handwritten by Nonfried. Damoiseau and Cools (1987) did not register any type for <i>Parandra vitiensis</i> in the Collection of IRSN, but as mentioned above, we believe that the specimen sent for study, is the holotype of that species. The description by Nonfried (1894) seems to adapt perfectly to a female (same sex of the specimen from IRSN labeled as “Type”), mainly by the form of the head (“Kopf schmal, vorne doppelt geschweift”). Although the description of the mandible (“Mandibeln lang”) can suggest that the specimen is a male, the mandible in that species is particularly longer than in the female, we believe that the term used by Nonfried (1894) is relative. Moreover, Nonfried (1894) stated that for the mandibles, the inner margin was toothed. This description agrees better with a female than to a male. It is possible that Nonfried (1894) described the position of teeth, if the specimen was a male. Lameere (1902) synonymized <i>P. vitiensis</i> under <i>P. striatifrons</i> and wrote that he had studied the Fairmaire “types” and Nonfried “types” from the Museum of Hamburg and found no difference between the two. Despite Lameere (1902) stating that he studied the “types” of <i>P. vitiensis</i>, that species, as discussed before, was probably described from a single female (holotype). As for <i>P. striatifrons</i>, Weidner (1976) did not register any “type” of that species in the Collection of Zoologisches Institut und Zoologisches Museum der Universität Hamburg. One of the authors (K. Matsuda) photographed one specimen in the MNHN that has a label of “Type”. That specimen is a male that agrees very well with the description and redescription of Fairmaire (1879, 1881). Cambefort (2006) also concluded that the types of Fairmaire were in the MNHN. Fairmaire (1881) and Lameere (1902) recorded the work in which was published the description of <i>Parandra striatifrons</i>, respectively: “Naturaliste, 1879, 289” and “Naturaliste, 1879, p. 289”. Dillon and Dillon (1952) recorded another work: “Soc. ent. France, Ann. VI, 1: 486, 1881”. In fact, <i>P. striatifrons</i> was described in the “Petites Nouvelles Entomologiques, no 211, 1879”, that was superseded by “Le Naturaliste – Journal des échanges et des nouvelles”, whose first number was published on IV.01.1879. Fairmaire (1881) published the redescription of that species. Dillon and Dillon (1952) revalidated <i>P. vitiensis</i>, and argued: “This species is easily distinguished from <i>P. striatifrons</i> in that it has the labrum dentate at each side angle of its anterior margin, not medially”. They also presented a key to separate the two species: “Epistoma unidentate; head across eyes not as wide as pronotum..................... <i>P. striatifrons</i> Epistoma bidentate; head across eyes as wide as pronotum.................................. <i>P. vitiensis</i> ” Curiously, Dillon and Dillon (1952) redescribed just the female of <i>P. striatifrons</i>, and in the list of material examined of that species, appear three females and not any males. Both the key presented by the authors and the redescription, and differences mentioned, serve only to separate males from females of <i>P. striatifrons</i>, and does not separate <i>P. striatifrons</i> from <i>P. vitiensis</i>. The redescription by Fairmaire (1881) contradicts the key above: “epistomate inter mandibula vix producto, late sinuato, utrinque angulato.” Apparently, Dillon and Dillon (1952) interpreted that the apex of labrum of <i>P. striatifrons</i> is unidentate, as opposed to <i>P. vitiensis</i> that would have the apex of labrum bidentate. This assumption is not confirmed by examination of the photograph of the holotype and, moreover, Dillon and Dillon (1952) had not taken into consideration the work of Fairmaire (1881) regarding the form of the head (“capite prothorace haud angustiore”), when they affirmed that the “head across eyes not as wide as pronotum.” The differences in the mandibles of the females of the “two species”, pointed out by those authors, are just intraspecific variations. When dealing with <i>P. vitiensis</i>, Dillon and Dillon (1952), probably, interpreted the work by Nonfried (1894), “vorne doppelt geschwift”, as if the apex of the labrum was bidentate. In fact, the work by Nonfried (1894) indicates that this author was speaking of the notches to the side of the apex of labrum (typical and more evident in females). Again, Dillon and Dillon (1952) failed to take into consideration the work by Nonfried (1894) regarding the form of the head (“Kopf schmal”), because they affirmed, as seen above in the key, that the head in this species is as wide as the pronotum. Moreover, the examination of the probable holotype female of <i>P. vitiensis</i>, the photograph of the probable holotype male of <i>P. striatifrons</i>, and the material examined [that includes the material used by Dillon and Dillon (1952)], shows that there are not any differences between these two species. In other words, the synonymy proposed by Lameere (1902) is correct: <i>P. vitiensi</i> s = <i>P. striatifrons</i>.
description: Published as part of <i>Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel &amp; Matsuda, Kiyoshi, 2010, Revision of Hawaiian, Australasian, Oriental, and Japanese Parandrinae (Coleoptera, Cerambycidae), pp. 1-120 in Insecta Mundi 2010 (130)</i> on pages 43-45, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5164485
description: {"references": ["Fairmaire, L. 1879. Diagnoses de coleopteres des iles Viti, Samoa, Tonga, etc. Petites Nouvelles Entomologiques 2 (211): 289 - 290.", "Fairmaire, L. 1881. Essai sur les Coleopteres des iles Viti (Fidgi). Annales de la Societe Entomologique de France (6) 1: 461 - 492.", "Schmeltz, J. D. E. 1881. Museum Godeffroy Hamburg. Catalog VIII. Zoologischen Anzeigers 4 (91): 1 - 18 (Beilage).", "Lameere, A. A. 1902. Revision des Prionides. Premier memoire. - Parandrines. Annales de la Societe Entomologique de Belgique 46 (3): 59 - 111.", "Dillon, L. S., and E. S. Dillon, 1952. Cerambycidae of the Fiji Islands. Bernice P. Bishop Museum Bulletin 206: 1 - 114.", "Webb, G. A. 1994. Parandra araucariae Gressitt (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Parandrinae): a new record for Norfolk Island. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum 37 (1): 325 - 328.", "Evenhuis, N. L., and A. S. Ramsdale. 2006. Checklist of the Coleoptera of Fiji. Bishop Museum Technical Report 35 (5): 1 - 59. Available at: http: // www. cerambycoidea. com / titles / eveniusramsdale 2006. pdf - accessed on 03.15. 2008.", "Lameere, A. A. 1913. Cerambycidae: Prioninae. Coleopterum Catalogus 22 (pars 52): 1 - 108.", "Santos-Silva, A. 2002. Notas e descriCOes em Parandrini (Coleoptera, Cerambycidae, Parandrinae). Iheringia (Serie Zoologia) 92 (2): 29 - 52, 56 fig.", "Nonfried, A. F. 1894. Beitrage zur Coleopterenfauna von Ostasien und Polynesien. Entomologisches Nachrichten 20: 45 - 48.", "Santos-Silva, A., and S. Shute. 2009. The identity of Parandra laevis Latreille, 1804 and nomenclatural changes in the Parandrinae (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae). Zookeys 25: 19 - 35, 9 fig.", "Weidner, H. 1976. Die Entomologischen Sammlungen des Zoologischen Instituts und Zoologischen Musuems der Universitat Hamburg, IX. Teil, Insecta VI, (Coleoptera). Mitteilungen aus dem Hamburgischen Zoologischen Museum und Institut 73: 87 - 264."]}