Conotelus Erichson 1843
Creators: name: Kirejtshuk, Alexander G.
name: Kovalev, Alexey V.
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2022
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Insecta
Coleoptera
Nitidulidae
Conotelus

description: 1. Conotelus Erichson, 1843: 249 —Nearctic and Neotropical regions.
Diagnosis. Body subcylindrical and very narrow with convex both upper and below surface. Labrum transverse and without trace of median suture. Abdominal segments telescopically conjoined and following segment more or less retracted into previous one; articulation between ventrites and laterosternites forming arc in cross-section (but not forming sharp fold). Male anal sclerite very long and with proximal parts of its ventral edges closed.
Comparison. The new tribe has clear differences from other genera of Cillaeinae defined in the above diagnosis. The most prominent features of the conotelins are in the structure of their abdomen, type of intersegmental junction and peculiar male anal sclerite, which are very different from those not only in all other cillaeines, about also in all other nitidulids. The body of the genus Conotelus is rather convex from below and more or less convex from above (up to at most only slightly subflattened), but, in contrast to other convex nitidulids, the conotelin abdomen has not any sharp compressed fold along ventrite and laterosternite. Murray (1864: 256) put Conotelus with Ctilodes Murray, 1864 and Carpophilus Stephens, 1829 (including Urophorus Murray, 1864, Anophorus Kirejtshuk, 1990a, Nitops Murray, 1864, Ecnomorphus Motschulsky, 1858, etc.) in the group “ Anguste-fimbriata ”, considering that Conotelus is intermediate between the genera “ Late-fimbriata ” (mostly Cillaeini s. str.) and “ Anguste-fimbriata ” (mostly Carpophilinae). Indeed, the carpophiline abdomen has the somewhat convex upper sclerotized surface, however, the sides of its “ventrites” turn on the upper surface without visible laterosternites (this peculiarity in the structure of the carpophiline abdomen also represents a rather modified condition and, therefore, the similarity of abdomens of the Conotelini trib. nov. and Carpophilinae are certainly convergent). It is difficult to say if the carpophiline laterosternites are completely reduced or the initial suture between the ventrites and laterosternites are completely fused (become not traced). And as a result, it is impossible to be sure in a strict homology of the upper sclerotized sides externally from abdominal pleurites of the Conotelini trib. nov. and Carpophilinae.
The labrum of Conotelus looks like transverse or slightly curved monolyte stripe without any trace of a median suture. The generalized condition of this structure represents two lobes and it has in many groups a trend to close these lobes and in these cases the labrum obtains monolyte outline with a more or less traced suture or remnants of it. In very rare cases among cillaeines the suture between labral lobes became not visible.
Many cillaeines have abdomen with long intersegmental membrane between segments and this circumstance conditions a comparatively great variability in length of abdomen of many species (but not so great as in staphylinids with telescopically folding abdominal segments). Nevertheless, the sclerotized base of abdominal segments of most cillaeines are located at most closely to apex of previous segment, while the abdominal segments of species of Conotelus are frequently joined telescopically (at least in museum specimens). Among nitidulids somewhat similar condition can be observed in the last abdominal segment of carpophilines. Finally, the ultimate abdominal segment in the new tribe is extremely long and the male anal sclerite of Conotelus, in conrast to all other nitidulids, is also abnormally long and its ventral lobes are strongly enlarged and forming a long tube for movement of aedeagus.
description: Published as part of Kirejtshuk, Alexander G. & Kovalev, Alexey V., 2022, Monograph on the Cillaeinae (Coleoptera: Nitidulidae) from the Australian Region with comments on the taxonomy of the subfamily, pp. 1-133 in Zootaxa 5103 (1) on page 12, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5103.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/6245709