Cephaloconnus Franz
Creators: name: Jałoszyński, Paweł
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2017
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Insecta
Coleoptera
Scydmaenidae
Cephaloconnus

description: 1. Morphological structures and taxonomic status of Cephaloconnus Franz
The general body shape of Euconnus (Cephaloconnus) hypertrophicus (Fig. 1) resembles that of many species of Euconnus (Napochus); especially in the antennae with 4-segmented and sharply demarcated club and the pronotum broadest behind middle and strongly narrowing anteriorly, with obtuse-angled but well-marked posterior and anterior corners and the anterior margin much shorter than posterior margin. The pronotum, however, is not broadest at base, as in the type species of Napochus, but between middle and posterior third. However, the shape of pronotum is variable within Napochus; species assigned to this subgenus and with the pronota broadest between base and middle are known (e.g., Jałoszyński 2015a, 2017c).
Other characters shared by Cephaloconnus and Napochus are: a short head with the vertex not bulging posterodorsally (Figs 9 ¯10); the frontoclypeal groove faint or absent (Fig. 10); the hypomeral ridges (Fig. 11; hr) nearly complete and typically strongly convergent posteriorly; the thick bristles on tempora and sides of prothorax (in some cases reduced in Napochus, but present in its type species and in E. hypertrophicus); an even number of antebasal pronotal pits (Fig. 9; abp) (one or two pairs of small pits, variable within Napochus), typically accompanied by short and indistinct sublateral carinae (Fig. 9; slc) (variable within Napochus, but present in its type species and in E. hypertrophicus); the basisternal part of prosternum (Fig. 11; bst) strikingly short, much shorter than the coxal part; a relatively narrow metaventral intercoxal process (Fig. 12; mtvp) (its width and shape is variable within Napochus); and the general shape of the aedeagus (Figs 27 ¯28), except for a distinctly emarginate apex of the median lobe in E. hypertrophicus, whereas the aedeagal apex in most species of Napochus is not emarginate (but the shape of the aedeagus, and especially its apical portion, shows a high degree of variability within Napochus, e.g., see figs 35̄ 54 in Jałoszyński (2015a)).
A striking character of Cephaloconnus, seen in E. hypertrophicus (Figs 1, 9 ̄10, 13̄14), is the modified head. The vertex is more convex than in most species of Napochus, the frons is bulging anterodorsally, and these regions are separated by a transverse groove and a rounded ridge (Fig. 10). This modification is restricted to males and small pits at each side of the transverse groove suggest a presence of large cephalic glands (the pits are here interpreted as glandular openings; Fig. 14; gop).
Conclusions. The only major morphological difference between the type species of Cephaloconnus and Napochus is the presumably glandular modification of the head in males of the former; females of Cephaloconnus do not differ from those of Napochus, except for having slightly larger heads in relation to the pronotum. Neonapochus Machulka, 1929, defined solely on the basis of one apomorphy, the modified antennal club in males, was previously placed as a junior synonym of Napochus (Jałoszyński 2016b); the same solution seems reasonable in the case of Cephaloconnus, which also shows an apomorphy restricted to one sex, and additionally a variable one, as Franz (1962) placed in Cephaloconnus species with the head bearing an impression, tooth or a tubercle. Such characters can be used to define species groups within Napochus, but not subgenera. Consequently, Cephaloconnus is placed as a junior synonym of Napochus.
description: Published as part of Jałoszyński, Paweł, 2017, Taxonomy of ' Euconnus complex'. Part XIII. Status of Afrotropical subgenera of Euconnus: Cephaloconnus, Cerviconnus, Ursoconnus and Nodoconnus (Coleoptera, Staphylinidae, Scydmaeninae), pp. 531-544 in Zootaxa 4294 (5) on pages 533-534, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4294.5.3, http://zenodo.org/record/839194