Polydrusus (Conocetus) Germann, 2018, subgen. nov.
Creators: name: Christoph Germann
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2018
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Insecta
Coleoptera
Curculionidae
Polydrusus

description: Key to the species of Polydrusus (Conocetus) and P. (Denticonocetus) subgen. nov.
1. All femora toothed (Fig. 1A–B) ..................... P. (Denticonocetus subgen. nov.) kahri Kirsch, 1865
– Femorae untoothed ...................................................................................................... (Conocetus) 2
2. Elytra oval, shoulders not pronounced (brachypterous; Fig. 1C–D); scutellum with densely standing scales; eyes big and convex ........................................................................ P. festae (F. Solari, 1925)
– Elytra long oval or parallel sided (males) or parallel at least at basal half, then widened towards apex (females), shoulders pronounced (hind wings present; not verified in P. longus); scutellum with inconspicuous vestiture; eyes of various shape ................................................................................ 3
3. Elytra 3 times as long as width of both elytra .................. P. (incertae sedis) longus (Stierlin, 1884)
– Elytra less than 3 times as long as width of both elytra.................................................................... 4
4. Legs with either whitish hairs or hairs with green lustre, no scales ................................................. 5
– Legs with hairs plus oval or lanceolate scales.................................................................................. 6
5. Legs reddish-brown with very long, raised, white hairs with a pearl-like lustre. Eyes less bulged, long oval drop-shaped as in P. angustus (Figs 2E–F, 3C–D)............... P. rhodiacus (Schilsky, 1912)
– Legs bright reddish-brown to yellowish, with shorter hairs with green lustre. Eyes oval, clearly bulged (Fig. 3A–B) ................................................................................................ P. crinipes sp. nov.
6. Head very robust (especially in females); eyes remarkably small, placed laterally, oval and bulging; temples mostly longer than diameter of an eye. Frons and epifrons bulged, therefore head and rostrum appear swollen (Figs 1E–F, 5C) ................................................. P. stierlini (Schilsky, 1910)
– Head different ................................................................................................................................... 7
7. Bigger and long-oval, elongate species with apex of elytra elongately pointed (Fig. 3C–F); scales oval, dense, standing, with blue-greenish sheen; femora robust; body colour dark-brown to blackish; eyes either conspicuously long-oval (Fig. 5D) or circular and bulging ........................................... 8
– Smaller species with parallel sided elytra, apex of elytra not elongately pointed; scales brighter golden-greenish or other (coppery, brownish, or whitish to pearl-like); body colour brighter; eyes oval but not long-oval....................................................................................................................... 9
8. Eyes conspicuously long-oval drop shaped and less bulged (Figs 3C–D, 5D) ................................... .................................................................................................................. P. angustus (Lucas, 1854)
– Eyes circular and bulged (Fig. 3E–F) ...................................................... P. calabricus (Faust, 1890)
9. Hairs on head, pronotum and elytra whitish, conspicuous, long and semi-raised (at least 45° angle). Body colour mostly well visible through rather scarce, often spotty standing, oval to lanceolate whitish scales with a greenish pearl-like lustre; scales on sides of pronotum mostly denser standing....... 10
– Hairs less conspicuous, shorter and more adjacent; scales on elytra and pronotum different......... 11
10. Eyes big (Fig. 5A), protruding (note: males have bigger eyes than females); body mostly dark brown; scales generally narrower, lanceolate-oval, sparsely standing (often spotty), with whitish to pearl-like lustre (only exceptionally slightly greenish); penis more robust, tip longer, truncated (Fig. 6A–D)................................................................. P. grandiceps (Desbrochers des Loges, 1875)
– Eyes small (Fig. 5B), less protruding (note: males have bigger eyes than females); body colour brighter brown; scales generally more rounded-oval, denser and more regular standing with greenish pearl lustre; penis more gracile, tip shorter, slightly rounded (Fig. 6E–H) ......................................... .................................................................................................................... P. transjordanus sp. nov.
11. Scales on upper side of body vivid green, circular, dense and regularly standing, hairs in-between short and adjacent (Fig. 4A–B)................................................................. P. bardus Gyllenhal, 1834
– Scales on elytra generally circular, but with lanceolate ones intermixed, therefore appearing spotty or cloudy (except males of P. baudii, see below), hairs in-between longer. Colour varying from greenish to brownish, more lanceolate scales around disc of pronotum (thus disc appearing bare)............. 12
12. Males............................................................................................................................................... 13
– Females (the females of the two following species are very similar, and thus difficult to distinguish) ..................................................................................................................................... 14
13. Males more robust, broad, laterally and dorsally bulged. Elytra broader. Vestiture cloudy, with lanceolate scales intermixed (Fig. 4C–D). Penis robust (Fig. 8C), internal sac with long and slender sclerite (Fig 9M); males only known from Turkey, possible parthenogenetic reproduction elsewhere (= geographical parthenogenesis).................................................... P. marcidus Kiesenwetter, 1864
– Males more gracile and of about the same size as females; narrower, weakly rounded laterally and hardly bulged dorsally. Elytra long-oval, parallel along middle, pointed towards apex. Vestiture with regular-standing circular scales (Fig. 4E–F). Penis gracile (Fig. 8D), internal sac with short and stout sclerite (Fig. 9N). Known from Cyprus only.................................................. P. baudii (Faust, 1889)
14. Elytral hairs brighter, mostly whitish (Fig. 4D) .............................. P. marcidus Kiesenwetter, 1864
– Elytral hairs mostly (but not always) darker (Fig. 4F). Known from Cyprus only ............................. ........................................................................................................................ P. baudii (Faust, 1889)
description: Published as part of Christoph Germann, 2018, A review of Conocetus Desbrochers des Loges, 1875, subgenus of Polydrusus Germar, 1817 (Coleoptera, Curculionidae, Entiminae), pp. 1-39 in European Journal of Taxonomy 392 on pages 35-36, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2018.392, http://zenodo.org/record/1137833