Riegeriana apicalis Walker 1873
Creators: name: Stehlík, Jaroslav L.
name: Kment, Petr
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2014
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Insecta
Hemiptera
Largidae
Riegeriana
Riegeriana apicalis

description: Riegeriana apicalis (Walker, 1873)
(Figs 1–14)
Physopelta apicalis Walker, 1873: 21 (original description). Syntypes: 4 specimens (a–d), ‘Hindostan’ [= India or northern India] (BMNH).
Physopelta apicalis: Lethierry & Severin (1894): 241 (catalogue); Distant (1903): 98 (redescription, distribution); Hussey (1929): 29 (catalogue), Zamal & Chopra (1990): 5, 7, 10 (redescription, description and figures of pygophore and paramere, distribution).
Iphita fasciata Stehlík & Jindra, 2008: 616 –617 (original description, differential diagnosis, figure, distribution), syn. nov. Holotype: ♀, India, Maharashtra, Western Ghats Mts., Amboli env., 50 km W Belgaum, 21.–23.v.2006, O. Šafránek lgt. (PPUA).
‘Physopelta’ apicalis: Stehlík (2013): 565 (type material, excluded from Physopelta).
Type material examined. Lectotype: ♂ (BMNH), ‘Type [p, white circular label, damaged] // averse: E. Ind. [hw] / reverse: 58 / 60 [hw, light-blue circular label, unreadable] // 11. Physopelta apicalis. [p, white label] // ♂ [p, white label] // LECTOTYPUS / PHYSOPELTA APICALIS / Walker, 1873 / = Riegeriana apicalis (Walk.) / des. STEHLÍK & KMENT 2013 [p, red label]’. Specimen pinned through right clavus; left antennomeres 2–4, left fore, apical portion of left mesotibia, left meso- and metatarsus, right mesotarsus, and apical portion of right clavus missing; one tarsus and some fragments glued to identification label.
Paralectotypes: 1 ♀ (BMNH), ‘averse: E. Ind. [hw] / reverse: 58 / 60 [hw, light-blue circular label] // Physopelta / apicalis / Waker’s Catal. [p, white label] // Physopelta / apicalis [hw, white label] // ♀ [p, white label] / / PARALECTOTYPUS / PHYSOPELTA APICALIS / Walker, 1873 / = Riegeriana apicalis (Walk.) / des. STEHLÍK & KMENT 2013 [p, red label]’. Specimen pinned through scutellum; both antennomeres 4, left hind leg from mid of femur, and right metatarsomeres 2 and 3 missing.—1 ♀ (BMNH), ‘averse: E. Ind. [hw] / reverse: 58 / 60 [hw, light-blue circular label] // Physopelta / apicalis / Waker’s Catal. [p, white label] // ♀ [p, white label] // PARALECTOTYPUS / PHYSOPELTA APICALIS / Walker, 1873 / = Riegeriana apicalis (Walk.) / des. STEHLÍK & KMENT 2013 [p, red label]’. Specimen pinned through scutellum venter up; both antennomeres 4 and left metatarsomere 3 missing.
Additional material examined. 1 ♂, INDIA: Maharashtra: Bhor Ghat [a mountain passage located between Karjat and Khandala in Western Ghat Mts.], Dixon lgt. (BMNH: Distant coll.).
Measurements (in mm). Males (n = 2). Lectotype first / non-type specimen second. Body length 18.58 / 19.28; head: width (including eyes) 2.38 / 2.48, interocular width: 1.46 / 1.51; lengths of antennomeres: 1–5.89 / 5.62, 2–5.08 / 5.02, 3–3.40 / 3.40, 4–2.81 / 2.54; pronotum: length 4.02 / 4.48, width 5.67 / 6.37; scutellum: length 2.81 / 2.75, width 2.75 / 3.02; corium: length 9.83 / 9.45, width 3.19 / 3.35.
Females (n = 3; for antennomere 4: n = 1). Body length 16.18 (15.82–16.47); head: width (including eyes) 2.34 (2.32–2.38), interocular width 1.49 (1.46–1.51); lengths of antennomeres: 1–3.24 (3.02–3.40), 2–3.33 (3.13–3.46), 3–2.30 (2.16–2.49), 4–2.43; pronotum: length 3.00 (2.97–3.05), width 5.53 (5.24–5.51); scutellum: length 2.50 (2.48–2.54), width 2.70 (2.59–2.81); corium: length 8.70 (8.42–9.07), width 2.90 (2.86–2.97).
Distribution. India (Maharashtra: Mumbai and Western Ghats Mts.) (Distant 1903, Zamal & Chopra 1990, Stehlík & Jindra 2008). The records from East India (this paper) should be confirmed by additional material.
Discussion. Walker (1873) described Physopelta apicalis based on four syntypes, and the type locality was given as ‘Hindostan’. In the collection of BMNH we found four specimens of P. apicalis, neither of them being labeled as from Hindostan. However, based on the labels and acquisition numbers it was possible to identify one male and two females as Walker’s syntypes, while the fourth male originates from Distant’s collection and does not belong to the type series (see Distant 1903). The whereabout of the fourth syntype is unknown. To avoid any later confusion concerning the identity of the species, the male syntype is designated here as the lectotype.
Stehlík & Jindra (2008) described Iphita fasciata based on combination of characters unique within the genus Iphita, not expecting that such a distinctive species had already been described in a different genus. However, during the present revision of Physopelta, Stehlík (2013) discovered that Physopelta apicalis is not congeneric with the rest of Physopelta species. Here we can further confirm that Riegeriana apicalis (Walker, 1873) is a senior synonym of I. fasciata Stehlík & Jindra, 2008, syn. nov.
description: Published as part of Stehlík, Jaroslav L. & Kment, Petr, 2014, Riegeriana, a new genus for Physopelta apicalis, and checklist of the genus Iphita (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Largidae) with description of one new species, pp. 167-183 in Zootaxa 3860 (2) on pages 169-172, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3860.2.4, http://zenodo.org/record/251064