Lypoglossa Fenyes 1918
Creators: name: Gusarov, Vladimir I.
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2004
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Insecta
Coleoptera
Staphylinidae
Lypoglossa

description: Lypoglossa Fenyes, 1918
(Figs. 1–17, 25–70, 72–78)
Lypoglossa Fenyes, 1918: 23 (type species: Dasyglossa fenyesi Bernhauer, 1907, by original designation).
Lypoglossa: Fenyes, 1920: 239 (as valid genus).
Lypoglossa: Bernhauer & Scheerpeltz, 1926: 597 (as valid genus in subtribe Athetina Casey, 1910).
Megacrotona Scheerpeltz, 1968: 159 (unavailable name; as subgenus of Atheta Thomson, 1858; type species: Oxypoda lateralis Mannerheim, 1830, by original designation).
Megacrotona Benick & Lohse, 1974: 103 (available name; as valid genus in tribe Callicerini Lohse, 1969).
Lypoglossa: Moore & Legner, 1975: 448 (as valid genus).
Lypoglossa: Seevers, 1978: 134 (as valid genus in tribe Athetini).
Lypoglossa: Lohse & Smetana, 1985: 294 (as valid genus).
Megacrotona: Lohse & Smetana, 1985: 294 (as synonym of Lypoglossa).
Lypoglossa: Lohse, 1989: 207 (as valid genus in tribe Athetini).
Megacrotona: Lohse, 1989: 207 (as synonym of Lypoglossa).
Lypoglossa: Hoebeke, 1992: 382 (as valid genus).
Megacrotona: Hoebeke, 1992: 382 (as synonym of Lypoglossa).
Lypoglossa: Ashe in Newton, Thayer, Ashe & Chandler, 2000: 371 (as valid genus in tribe Athetini; unassigned to subtribe).
(Other references for Palaearctic Lypoglossa are omitted)
Diagnosis. Lypoglossa is distinguished from other athetine genera by the combination of the following characters: body parallel­sided; sensilla a of epipharynx long (Fig. 2); antennal article 2 as long as article 3 (Figs. 12–13); ligula with broad base, split in two lobes (Fig. 6); labial palpus with setae,, and present (Fig. 6); pronotum transverse, 1.2–1.4 times as wide as long, with microsetae directed anteriorly along midline, and laterally and posteriorly in lateral portions of the disc (Type I, Benick & Lohse 1974) (Fig. 16); pronotal macrosetae short and thin; pronotal hypomera invisible in lateral view; medial macroseta of mesotibia thin, much shorter than tibial width; mesothoracic process narrow (Fig. 17); posterior margin of elytra near posterolateral angle straight or slightly concave; tarsal formula 4­5­5; metatarsal segment 1 much longer than segment 2; single empodial seta shorter than claws (Fig. 15); abdominal terga 3–5 with weak transverse basal impression; medial lamellae of internal sac present (Figs. 49–50); copulatory piece with pointed apex (Fig. 49) and without sclerotized suspensoria; spermatheca S­shaped, with large umbilicus (Figs. 32, 78).
Description. Length 3.2–4.6 mm, pronotal width 0.81–1.09 mm. Body parallelsided; uniformly brown to dark brown with lighter appendages or with reddish brown pronotum and elytra.
Head transverse; eye length to temple length ratio 0.9–1.5; infraorbital carina complete. Antennal article 2 as long as article 3, article 4 elongate, 5 elongate to subquadrate, 6–10 elongate to transverse, apical article without coeloconic sensilla, as long as articles 9 and 10 combined (Figs. 12–13). Labrum (Fig. 1) transverse, with slightly emarginate anterior margin. Epipharynx (Fig. 2) with long sensilla a, with three pairs of small marginal setae, medial field with 29 pores, lateral rows with 3 pores each, anterolateral groups with 4–5 pores each, transverse row with six pores, posterolateral groups with 4–5 pores each; two medial proximal pores on each side and one lateral proximal pore. Mandibles (Figs. 3–5) broad, right mandible with a blunt medial tooth; velvety patch of dorsal molar area visible at 400X. Maxilla (Figs. 8–11) with galea projecting slightly beyond apex of lacinia; apical lobe of galea covered with numerous fine and short setae; internal margin of galea with long subapical setae (Fig. 9); distal comb of lacinia is divided into a group of 6 closely placed spines and two isolated spines (Figs. 10–11), middle portion produced medially and covered with numerous fine setae (Figs. 10–11), ventral surface of lacinia with a marginal group of 5 strong setae (Fig. 10), dorsal surface of lacinia with numerous weak setae (Fig. 11). Labium as in Figs. 6–7, 14; ligula with broad base, almost entirely split into two slightly divergent lobes (Fig. 6); medial area of prementum with 2 pores and 19 pseudopores, lateral areas each with two asetose pores, single setose pore and 8–11 pseudopores (Fig. 6). Hypopharyngeal lobes as in Fig. 7. Labial palpus with setae,, and present (Fig. 6). Mentum (Fig. 14) with concave anterior margin.
Pronotum (Fig. 16) transverse, 1.2–1.4 times as wide as long, with microsetae directed anteriorly along midline, in lateral portions of the disc microsetae directed laterally and posteriorly (Type I, Benick & Lohse 1974); macrosetae short; hypomera invisible in lateral view. Meso­ and metasternum as in Fig. 17, mesosternal process narrow, extending about 2/3 length of mesocoxal cavities, metasternal process short, mesosternum and mesosternal process not carinate medially; relative lengths of mesosternal process: isthmus: metasternal process in ratio of about 9:4:1; mesocoxal cavities margined posteriorly; mesocoxae contiguous. Medial macroseta of mesotibia thin, much shorter than tibial width. Tarsal segmentation 4­5­5, metatarsal segment 1 much longer than segment 2 (Fig. 15). One empodial seta, shorter than claws (Fig. 15). Posterior margin of elytra near posterolateral angle straight or slightly concave. Wings fully developed.
Abdominal terga 3–5 with weak basal impression. Tergum 7 as long as tergum 6. Terga 3–5 matte due to dense punctation, punctation on terga 6–7 sparser. Tergum 7 with wide white palisade fringe. Posterior margin of tergum 8 in both sexes slightly convex, without modifications (Figs. 51, 53). Posterior margin of sternum 8 in both sexes strongly convex (Figs. 52, 54), in male protruding posteriorly beyond the apex of tergum 8 (Figs. 51–52).
Copulatory piece of the aedeagus with pointed apical process (Fig. 49); medial lamellae present (Figs. 49–50). Sclerite of paramere (Sklerit of Brundin (1940), velar sac sclerite of Seevers (1978)) triangular (Figs. 31, 69). Spermatheca S­shaped, with large umbilicus (Figs. 32, 70, 78).
Type species. Dasyglossa fenyesi Bernhauer, 1907, by original designation.
Discussion. When Scheerpeltz (1968) proposed the name Megacrotona he fixed the type species of this subgenus (Oxypoda lateralis Mannerheim, 1830) but did not mention any character of Megacrotona. Therefore, Scheerpeltz did not satisfy the requirements of Article 13.1 of the Code (ICZN 1999) and had not made the name Megacrotona available. As far as I know, the earliest work where any characters of Megacrotona were mentioned is the paper by Benick and Lohse (1974). Since Benick and Lohse were the first authors to make the name Megacrotona available the name should be attributed to them and not Scheerpeltz.
description: Published as part of Gusarov, Vladimir I., 2004, A revision of the genus Lypoglossa Fenyes, 1918 (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae: Aleocharinae), pp. 1-36 in Zootaxa 747 on pages 2-4, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.158194