Maechidiini Telnov 2020
Creators: name: Telnov, Dmitry
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2020
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Insecta
Coleoptera
Scarabaeidae

description: Key to the Maechidiini from the Indo-Australian transition zone and Bali
This key is generally adapted for males and is mainly based on male features, including genital organs
.
1. Punctures of elytral disc ordinary: circular, variably ovoid or hexagonal, annular or not but not elongate linear or sinusoid incision-shaped..................................................................................... 31
– Punctures of elytral disc at least in part conspicuous: elongate linear or sinusoid, incision-shaped (cf. Figs 288, 290–291, 296, 303, 314, 317–320, 323, 328, 331, 339–340, 343, 348, 351, 353, 355, etc.) .................................................................................................................................................... 2
2. Lateral margins of pronotum in dorsal view distinctly rounded (more or less distinctly constricted anteriad and posteriad), without or with prebasal emargination or constriction ............................... 6
– Lateral margins of pronotum in dorsal view slightly sinuous, somewhat widened from anterolateral angles towards base or nearly straight in basal half, not distinctly constricted both anteriad and posteriad (Figs 218, 226, 241) ........................................................................................................... 3
3. Dorsal punctures of forebody comparatively large, distinctly annular; aedeagus not as in Figs 646– 648 ..................................................................................................................................................... 4
– Dorsal punctures of forebody comparatively less large, not annular ................................................ 5
4. Lateral margin of pronotum with about 20 flat crenulae; elytron without tracks of longitudinal carinae; intervening spaces of elytra not transversely wrinkled; aedeagus unknown ............................................................................................. M. parallelicollis Moser, 1920
– Lateral margin of pronotum with about 19–20 flat crenulae; elytron with vague tracks of longitudinal carinae; intervening spaces of elytra transversely wrinkled; aedeagus as in Figs 646– 648 ............................................................................................................ M. humeralis Heller, 1914
– Lateral margin of pronotum with about 24–25 crenulae; elytron with vague tracks of three longitudinal carinae; intervening spaces of elytra transversely wrinkled; aedeagus as in Narakusumo & Balke (2019: fig. 1e–f) ................................................ M. acutus (Narakusumo & Balke, 2019) comb. nov.
5. Anterolateral angles of labroclypeus broadly obtuse, not or slightly produced anteriad (Fig. 135); elytral setae very inconspicuous, strongly appressed; elytra without metallic shine; aedeagus as in Figs 646–648 .................................................................................... M. lineatopunctatus Frey, 1969
– Anterolateral angles of labroclypeus subacute, strongly produced anteriad (Fig. 120); some elytral setae are longer and stouter than others, suberect, arranged in longidutinal rows; elytra with vague metallic shine; aedeagus not studied................................................................ M. gressitti Frey, 1969
6. Lateral margins of pronotum crenulate (rarely crenulate-denticulate); male labroclypeus broadly emarginate to subtruncate on anterior margin ................................................................................... 7
– Lateral margins of pronotum distinctly denticulate (Fig. 199); anterior margin of male labroclypeus deeply U-shaped emarginate on anterior margin, its anterolateral angles strongly protruding anteriad (Fig. 99) .......................................................................................................... M. alesbezdeki sp. nov.
7. At least male metatibia distinctly thickened distally, not long and slender; all tarsi with short to moderately long tarsomeres; aedeagus not as in Figs 652–654 ......................................................... 8
– Male metatibia slender and hardly widened distally (Fig. 55); all tarsomeres slender and lengthened (Fig. 55); aedeagus as in Figs 652–654 ............................................................... M. longipes sp. nov.
8. Setae on lateral margins of pronotum and elytra shorter than length of compound eye (in older specimens setae often become broken and look shorter); aedeagus not as in Figs 614–616 or 703–705 ........................................................................................................................................... 10
– Setae on lateral margins of pronotum and elytra in fresh specimens as long or longer than length of compound eye; aedeagus as in Figs 614–616 or 703–705 ................................................................ 9
9. Hypomeron separated from prosternum by low straight carina; aedeagus as in Figs 614–616 .......... ............................................................................................................................ M. esau Heller, 1914
– Hypomeron almost fused to prosternum, carina at place of fusion not indicated or inconspicuous; aedeagus as in Figs 703–705 ..................................................................... M. rugicollis Moser, 1920
10. Lateral margin of pronotum distinctly emarginate or strongly constricted prebasally.................... 11
– Lateral margin of pronotum not or hardly emarginate prebasally, evenly rounded all along or slightly constricted prebasally ..................................................................................................................... 16
11. Lateral margin of pronotum moderately strongly emarginate or constricted, upper angle of constriction not produced posteriad, either obtuse or completely rounded; aedeagus not as in Figs 601–603 ... 12
– Lateral margin of pronotum very deeply emarginate prebasally, upper angle of emargination produced posteriad and acute (Fig. 206); lateral margin of pronotum in emargination area almost smooth, markedly less strongly crenulate than anterior part of it; aedeagus as in Figs 601– 603 .......................................................................................................................... M. brocki sp. nov.
12. Underside /lateral margins of male basal metatarsomere with ordinary short or long setae, which are not arranged brush-like .................................................................................................................... 14
– Ventrolateral margins of male basal metatarsomere with a brush of long (sub)erect setae (cf. Figs 436–437) .................................................................................................................................. 13
13. Abdominal ventrites medially with golden (sub)erect setae (Fig. 435); aedeagus as in Figs 730– 732 ................................................................................................................. M. tarsalis Arrow, 1941
– Abdominal ventrites without golden (sub)erect setae; aedeagus as in Figs 620–622 ........................ ...................................................................................................................... M. hirtipes Arrow, 1941
14. Lateral margin of pronotum markedly emarginate prebasally; intervening spaces of elytra densely microreticulate, opaque; basal protarsomere without tooth; aedeagus not as in Figs 745–747 ...... 15
– Lateral margin of pronotum rather constricted prebasally, not markedly emarginate; intervening spaces of elytra smooth or microscopically wrinkled, glossy; basal protarsomere in both sexes with central tooth (Fig. 447); aedeagus as in Figs 745–747 ....................................... M. yamdena sp. nov.
15. Underside of male basal metatarsomere with brush of long erect setae; aedeagus as in Figs 724– 725 .......................................................................................................... M. subcostatus Heller, 1895
– Underside of male basal metatarsomere with a long setae which are not brush-like arranged and rather suberect; aedeagus as in Figs 709–711 ......................................................... M. similis sp. nov.
16. Lateral margin of pronotum with 20 or more delicate crenulae; lateral margin of male labroclypeus variably strongly sinuous; aedeagus not as in Figs 706–708 .......................................................... 18
– Lateral margin of pronotum with 13–16 rough crenulae; lateral margin of male labroclypeus strongly sinuous (Figs 117, 171)..................................................................17 [two possibly conspecific taxa]
17. Intervening spaces on pronotal dorsum completely flat; pronotal disc without impressions; dorsal punctures of pronotum comparatively stronger ovoid (Figs 171, 250); each elytron with vague tracks of three longitudinal carinae (including sutural one); aedeagus as in Figs 706– 708 ...................................................................................................... M. seriegranosus Heller, 1914
– Intervening spaces on pronotal dorsum in part slightly globose, not completely flat; pronotal disc with vague circular impression on either side of hardly longitudinally impressed midline; dorsal punctures of pronotum rather circular to irregularly hexagonal, distinctly ovoid along lateral sides only (Figs 38, 117); each elytron with vague tracks of four longitudinal carinae (including sutural one); aedeagus unknown.......................................................................... M. fraterculus Moser, 1920
18. Intervening spaces of elytra opaque, microreticulate ...................................................................... 19
– Intervening spaces of elytra glossy, smooth or wrinkled, not microreticulate ................................ 23
19. Male and female labroclypeus emarginate or subtruncate (not truncate) on anterior margin, bent up to with regard to axis of frons in lateral view; head dorsally flattened or convex on frons, impressed dorsally at anterolateral angles of labroclypeus; pronotal punctures annular or not; crenulae lateral pronotal margin separated by delicate shallow or broad and distinct spaces ................................. 20
– Female labroclypeus gradually constricted anteriad on lateral margins, its anterior margin truncate (Fig. 156), not or hardly bent up with regard to axis of frons in lateral view; head dorsally flattened, hardly impressed dorsally at anterolateral angles of labroclypeus; pronotal punctures not annular; crenulae of lateral pronotal margin separated by delicate shallow spaces; male is unknown .................................................................................................... M. papuanus Moser, 1926
20. Parameres long and slender, constricted towards apices ................................................................. 21
– Parameres short and broad, widened apically (Figs 679–680) ............... M. nepenthephilus sp. nov.
21. Parameres narrowly separated at base (Figs 655–657, 748–750); crenulae of lateral pronotal margin separated by distinct moderately deep and broad intervening spaces ............................................. 22
– Parameres moderately broadly separated at base (Figs 736–738); crenulae of lateral pronotal margin narrowly separated in anterior half, nearly merged ....................................... M. vicinus Heller, 1914
22. Lateral margin of pronotum evenly broadly rounded (Fig. 229) ........... M. luniceps Fairmaire, 1883
– Lateral margin of pronotum somewhat constricted towards base in basal third (Fig. 242) ................ .................................................................................................................. M. paupianus Heller, 1910
23. Elytral incision-shaped punctures distinctly sinuous....................................................................... 27
– Elytral incision-shaped punctures more or less straight .................................................................. 24
24. Dorsal forebody with greenish metallic lustre; dorsal punctures of pronotum regularly circular to ovoid ................................................................................................................................................ 25
– Forebody without metallic lustre; dorsal punctures of pronotum, especially lateral and laterobasal ones, irregularly ovoid, double annular and large (Figs 95, 264); aedeagus as in Figs 742– 744 ..................................................................................................... M. woodlarkianus Heller, 1914
25. Intervening spaces of elytra smooth or in part delicately wrinkled; elytral longitudinal carinae vague and inconspicuous; aedeagus is unknown ....................................................................................... 26
– Intervening spaces of elytra irregularly roughly wrinkled; elytral longitudinal carinae rather broad and elevated; aedeagus as in Figs 670–672 .............................................. M. milneanus Heller, 1914
26. Male labroclypeus narrowed anteriad, truncate on anterior margin (female unknown); anterolateral angles of labroclypeus obtuse, not marked (Fig. 187); aedeagus as in Figs 733– 735 ........................................................................................................................ M. trivialis sp. nov.
– Female labroclypeus not markedly narrowed anteriad, subtruncate on anterior margin (male unknown); anterolateral angles of labroclypeus obtuse but marked (Fig. 97) .................................... ................................................................................................................. M. aenescens Heller, 1910
27. Total body length less than 8 mm; body brown to castaneous brown ............................................. 29
– Total body length about 9–10 mm; body black to dark brown........................................................ 28
28. Dorsal punctures of pronotum oblong-ovoid, horseshoe-shaped, moderately dense; regular transverse row of punctures present along anterior and basal margin of pronotum; male labroclypeus broadly V-shape emarginate on anterior margin (Fig. 130); aedeagus unknown .... M. jobiensis Moser, 1920
– Dorsal punctures of pronotum circular to ovoid, horseshoe-shaped along lateral margins only, sparse; no row of punctures along either anterior and basal margins of pronotum, male labroclypeus shallowly emarginate on anterior margin (Fig. 101); aedeagus unknown........ M. aroae Heller, 1914
29. Lateral margin of pronotum stronger rounded, constricted anteriad and posteriad; posterolateral angle of pronotum obtuse ................................................................................................................ 30
– Lateral margin of pronotum less rounded, stronger constricted anteriad than posteriad; posterolateral angle of pronotum nearly right-angled ............................... M. moluccanus Moser, 1920 comb. rest.
30. Aedeagus as in Figs 649–651 ...................................................................... M. lobaticeps Frey, 1969
– Aedeagus as in Figs 700–702 ................................................................................. M. riedeli sp. nov.
31. With conspicuous dense brush-like cluster of setae at least along lateral margins of pronotum or on its postero-lateral angles (cf. Figs 122, 221, 238, 246, 261, 358).................................................... 32
– Dorsal pubescence ordinary or scale-like, not brush-like clustered ............................................... 36
32. Pronotum slightly narrower than combined width of elytra............................................................ 33
– Pronotum distinctly narrower than combined width of elytra...... M. helleri (Frey, 1969) comb. nov.
33. Lateral margin of pronotum flattened and laterally expanded in anterior half, strongly emarginate postmedially (Figs 246, 261) ..............................................................................34 [M. ursus group]
– Lateral margin of pronotum not expanded laterally in anterior half, postmedian emargination short, inconspicuous (Fig. 221) ................................................................................. M. kazantsevi sp. nov.
34. Elytra without longitudinal rows of glossy glabrous humps ........................................................... 35
– Longitudinal carinae of elytra formed by large irregular glossy glabrous humps (Figs 74, 337– 338) ............................................................................................ M. perlatus (Frey, 1969) comb. nov.
35. Metatibia widened, flattened and glabrous on inner margin (Fig. 444); sutural carina of elytron present; lateral postmedian emargination of pronotum deep (Fig. 261) ................. M. ursus sp. nov.
– Metatibia slender, not flattened and glabrous on inner margin; sutural carina of elytron absent; lateral postmedian emargination of pronotum moderately strong (Fig. 238)................................................. .............................................................................................. M. opatroides Arrow, 1941 comb. rest.
36. Dorsal sculpture of pronotum and elytra of strongly irregularly arranged punctures forming conspicuous fingerprint-like pattern (Figs 297, 347).......................................37 [M. sturnus group]
– Punctures of pronotum and elytra not fingerprint-like arranged, not like in Figs 297, 347 ............ 38
37. Middle of posterior margin of male abdominal sternites 2–3 each with a paired bunch of three long setae on each side (Fig. 433); aedeagus as in Figs 721–723 ........................ M. sturnus Arrow, 1941
– Male abdominal sternites medially with somewhat stronger appressed curved setae but without paired bunches of long setae; aedeagus as in Figs 592–594 .............................. M. caperatus sp. nov.
38. Male 3 rd visible abdominal sternite with obtuse ventral median triangular hump (Figs 429– 432) .......................................................................................................................39 [M. dani group]
– Male 3 rd visible abdominal sternite not humped, evenly rounded or flattened ventrally ................ 40
39. Male labroclypeus comparatively shallower emarginate on anterior margin (Fig. 121); ventral hump of visible abdominal ventrite 3 acute in ventral view (Figs 431–432); aedeagus as in Figs 617– 619 ...................................................................................................................... M. hamatus sp. nov.
– Male labroclypeus comparatively deeper emarginate on anterior margin (Fig. 114); ventral hump of visible abdominal ventrite 3 rather obtuse in ventral view (Figs 429–430); aedeagus as in Figs 604– 606 ............................................................................................................................. M. dani sp. nov.
40. Punctures of elytra circular to ovoid, arranged in more or less regular paired longitudinal rows (cf. Figs 327, 345) .................................................................................................................................. 41
– Punctures of elytra circular, ovoid or of different shape, if arranged in longitudinal rows then those not paired ......................................................................................................................................... 46
41. Lateral margin of pronotum distinctly emarginate prebasally (Fig. 255 and Narakusumo & Balke 2019: fig. 5a).................................................................................................................................... 42
– Lateral margin of pronotum evenly broadly rounded, not or indistinctly emarginate prebasally ... 43
42. Generally larger species, total body length over 9 mm; male metatibia slender, inner margin straight; aedeagus as in Figs 715–717 ................................................................................... M. sougb sp. nov.
– Generally smaller species, total body length under 7 mm; male metatibia thickened and somewhat curved on inner margin (cf. Narakusumo & Balke 2019: fig. 5e); aedeagus as in Narakusumo & Balke (2019: fig. 5f–g)................................... M. obiensis (Narakusumo & Balke, 2019) comb. nov.
43. Generally larger species, total body length over 6 mm; labroclypeus deeply emarginate anteriorly; aedeagus not as in Figs 676–678 ..................................................................................................... 44
– Generally smaller species, total body length under 5 mm; labroclypeus shallowly emarginate anteriorly; aedeagus as in Figs 676–678 ......................................................... M. nanus Arrow, 1941
44. Male metatibia straight, not curved ................................................................................................. 45
– Male metatibia strongly curved (cf. Narakusumo & Balke 2019: fig. 2e); aedeagus as in Narakusumo & Balke (2019: fig. 2f–g).............................. M. arcuatus (Narakusumo & Balke, 2019) comb. nov.
45. Crenulae of lateral margin of pronotum flat, nearly merged, intervening spaces indistinct (Fig. 244); aedeagus as in Figs 688–690 ........................................................................... M. pedarioides Arrow
– Crenulae of lateral margin of pronotum strong, intervening spaces rather deep and broad (cf. Narakusumo & Balke 2019: fig. 3a–b); aedeagus as in Narakusumo & Balke (2019: fig. 3e–f)........ ....................................................................... M. cakalele (Narakusumo & Balke, 2019) comb. nov.
46. Male basal metatarsomere ordinary, not conspicuously widened and flattened ............................. 50
– Male basal metatarsomere conspicuously widened and flattened (cf. Fig. 446) ............................. 47
47. Dorsal setae of forebody long, surpassing length of corresponding punctures; aedeagus not as in Figs 640–642 ................................................................................................................................... 48
– Dorsal setae of forebody inconspicuous, short, hardly surpassing length of corresponding punctures (Fig. 315); aedeagus as in Figs 640–642 .............................................................. M. legalovi sp. nov.
48. Dorsal setae at least on forebody long, pointed or hardly widened apically; male and female labroclypeus subtruncate on anterior margin................................................................................... 49
– Dorsal setae slightly clavate (widened apically), comparatively shorter (Figs 58, 144, 231); male labroclypeus comparatively deeper emarginate on anterior margin (Fig. 144); aedeagus as in Figs 661–663 ........................................................................................................... M. maleo sp. nov.
49. Aedeagus as in Figs 712–714 .................................................................................. M. skalei sp. nov.
– Aedeagus as in Figs 691–693 ............................................................ M. peregrinus Lansberge, 1886
50. Parameres entirely glabrous............................................................................................................. 51
– Parameres on apical margin with delicate cilia-like setae (Figs 595–596) .......... M. ciliatus sp. nov.
51. Lateral margins of pronotum in dorsal view distinctly rounded (more or less distinctly constricted anteriad and posteriad)..................................................................................................................... 52
– Lateral margins of pronotum in dorsal view nearly straight, not distinctly constricted anteriad and posteriad (Fig. 230); aedeagus as in Figs 658–660 .................................................. M. mailu sp. nov.
52. Hypomeron separated from prosternum by flange-like carina; preapical hump of elytron not Г- shaped........................................................................................................................................... 53
– Hypomeron separated from prosternum by moderately high carina; preapical hump of elytron Г- shaped.......................................................................................................... M. simplex Frey, 1969
53. Dorsal setae at least in part distinctly clavate (distinctly widened apically) ...................................... ..................................................................................................................... 66 [M. pauxillus group]
– Dorsal setae ordinary or slightly widened apically.......................................................................... 54
54. Species from New Guinea or Sulawesi ........................................................................................... 55
– Species from Lesser Sunda Islands (Bali); aedeagus as in Figs 643–645 ........ M. leucopsar sp. nov.
55. Male labroclypeus subtruncate, truncate or shallowly emarginate on anterior margin .................. 56
– Male labroclypeus distinctly emarginate on anterior margin .......................................................... 58
56. Species from Sulawesi; aedeagus as in Figs 589–591 or 726–729 ................................................. 57
– Species from New Guinea; aedeagus as in Figs 673–675 ............................ M. muticus Arrow, 1941
57. Aedeagus as in Figs 589–591; lateral margin of each elytron with a row of short setae; elytron on disc with track of single longitudinal carina.................................................... M. boessnecki sp. nov.
– Aedeagus as in Figs 726–729; lateral margin of each elytron with a row of long setae; elytron on disc with tracks of two longitudinal carinae ............................................................... M. suwawa sp. nov.
58. Dorsal setae of forebody inconspicuous, appressed to suberect; setae short, generally not or slightly surpassing length of corresponding punctures (some setae can be longer than corresponding punctures, but most of them are shorter) ......................................................................................... 62
– Dorsal setae of forebody suberect to erect, distinctly longer than length of corresponding punctures.......................................................................................................................................... 59
59. Lateral margin of elytron with a row of short setae......................................................................... 60
– Lateral margin of elytron with a row of extraordinarily long setae (Fig. 24) ........... M. awu sp. nov.
60. Pronotum dorsally with shallow circular impression on either side of median part; punctures of pronotum comparatively larger and more circular ......................................................................... 61
– Pronotum dorsally without impressions; punctures of pronotum comparatively smaller and stronger ovoid (Fig. 287); aedeagus as in Figs 570–572 ...................................................... M. aiyura sp. nov.
61. Aedeagus as in Figs 582–585; dorsal punctures of pronotum smaller and generally ovoid (Fig. 203) ......................................................................................................... M. babyrousa sp. nov.
– Aedeagus as in Figs 607–610; dorsal punctures of pronotum larger and generally circular (Fig. 211)............................................................................................................... M. deltouri sp. nov.
62. Species from New Guinea; aedeagus not as in Figs 629–631 ........................................................ 63
– Species from Sulawesi; aedeagus as in Figs 629–631 ............................................. M. konjo sp. nov.
63. Anterolateral angles of labroclypeus either acute or right-angled................................................... 64
– Anterolateral angles of labroclypeus strongly obtuse...................................................................... 65
64. Aedeagus as in Figs 667–669; male upper metatibial terminal spur half the length of male basal metatarsomere, not surpassing distal margin of metatibia in dorsal view (Fig. 59) ................................................................................................ M. miklouhomaclayi sp. nov.
– Aedeagus as in Figs 576–578; male upper metatibial terminal spur longer than half the length of male basal metatarsomere, surpassing distal margin of metatibia in dorsal view ............................... .............................................................................................................. M. angusticeps Arrow, 1941
65. Elytral longitudinal carinae glabrous, glossy, stronger elevated; sutural carina present; intervening spaces on pygidium opaque, microreticulate; aedeagus unknown ...................................................... ............................................................................................... M. interruptocarinulatus Heller, 1914
– Elytra without elevated tracks of longitudinal carinae; sutural carina not indicated; intervening spaces on pygidium glossy; aedeagus unknown................................ M. seriepunctatus Moser, 1920
66. Elytron with elevated glossy and glabrous longitudinal carina(e) (these carinae are more or less widely interrupted, in some specimens strongly reduced to few humps per carina and can be limited to sutural carina only) ...................................................................................................................... 67
– Longitudinal carina(e) of elytron when present not elevated nor glossy or glabrous...................... 70
67. Dorsal setae on lateral parts of pronotum scale-like but not extraordinarily enlarged and not arranged in two lateral longitudinal stripes; aedeagus not as in Figs 586–588 .............................................. 68
– Dorsal setae on lateral parts of pronotum scale-like and extraordinarily enlarged, as in Figs 26, 204, arranged in two lateral longitudinal rows; aedeagus as in Figs 586–588 ............. M. bintang sp. nov.
68. Lateral margin of pronotum nearly straight to gradually slightly widened towards postmedium, with shallow prebasal emargination; elytron with less than four longitudinal carinae including sutural one.................................................................................................................................................... 69
– Lateral margin of pronotum sinuous – somewhat emarginate in anterior and posterior half, obtuse angulate medially (Fig. 216); elytron with four in part interrupted elevated longitudinal carinae including sutural one................................................... M. heterosquamosus Heller, 1910 comb. rest.
69. Aedeagus as in Figs 611–613; male pygidium as in Fig. 543 ...................... M. dendrolagus sp. nov.
– Aedeagus as in Figs 632–639; male and female pygidium as in Figs 481–482 ... M. lapsus sp. nov.
– Aedeagus as in Figs 718–720; male and female pygidium as in Figs 519-521 .................................. ................................................................................................ M. speciosus (Frey, 1969) comb. nov.
70. Anterolateral angles of labroclypeus acute in dorsal view .............................................................. 71
– Anterolateral angles of labroclypeus obtuse in dorsal view (Figs 169–170); aedeagus as in Figs 697– 699 .................................................................................................. M. popei (Frey, 1969) comb. nov.
71. Species from New Guinea ............................................................................................................... 72
– Species from Central Moluccas (Seram); aedeagus as in Prokofiev (2018: fig. 5) ............................. .......................................................................................... M. agnellus (Prokofiev, 2018) comb. nov.
72. Aedeagus as in Figs 598–600; male and female pygidium as in Figs 465–466 .................................. ........................................................................................................................... M. crypticus sp. nov.
– Aedeagus as in Figs 664–666; male pygidium as in Fig. 492 ............................ M. merdeka sp. nov.
– Aedeagus as in Figs 682–684; male and female pygidium as in Figs 499 –5000................................ .................................................................................................................... M. owenstanleyi sp. nov.
– Aedeagus as in Figs 685–687; male and female pygidium as in Figs 505–506 .................................. ................................................................................................ M. pauxillus Heller, 1910 comb. rest.
– Aedeagus as in Figs 739–741; male and female pygidium as in Figs 531–532.... M. weigeli sp. nov.
description: Published as part of Telnov, Dmitry, 2020, A revision of the Maechidiini Burmeister, 1855 (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae) from the Indo-Australian transition zone, and the first record of the tribe west of Wallace's Line, pp. 1-210 in European Journal of Taxonomy 721 on pages 130-137, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2020.721.1127, http://zenodo.org/record/4122118