Dietomorpha Reymond 1938
Creators: name: Chigray, Svetlana N.
name: Nabozhenko, Maxim V.
name: Chigray, Ivan A.
name: Abakumov, Evgeny V.
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2022
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Insecta
Coleoptera
Tenebrionidae
Dietomorpha

description: Genus Dietomorpha Reymond, 1938
Figs 3, 17, 23C, 26C
Dietomorpha Reymond, 1938: 143.
Dietomorpha – Kühnelt 1957: 86, fig. 4.
Kawiria – Kaszab 1957: 295–296 (erroneous interpretation of Dietomorpha pardalis).
Type species
Dietomorpha pardalis Reymond, 1938, by monotypy.
Species included
Dietomorpha pardalis Reymond, 1938, Dietomorpha gonzalesi S. Chigray & Nabozhenko sp. nov.
Diagnosis
Body robust (Fig. 3), completely covered with lanceolate longitudinally striated, creamy scales (each scale with median longitudinal ridge at middle) (Fig. 9D, F), with spotted (Fig. 2A) or striped (Fig. 3C, E–G) pattern of dark scales on elytra and dark spots on pronotum. Body under scales black or darkbrown. Body length 9–14 mm. Epistoma and frons covered with sparse, erected yellowish setae. Eyes large, circular, convex in dorsal view; surface behind eyes concealed by anterior margin of pronotum.
Pronotum slightly transverse (1.4–1.7× as wide as long); lateral margins and partly prothoracic hypomera basally with bare and smooth black spot. Disc of pronotum (Fig. 52) convex, with two triangular deep impressions at base. Pronotum covered with sparse, erect, conical tubercles becoming larger along lateral margins, each tubercle with spine at apex. Prosternum without transverse triangular depression along anterior margin, longitudinal length 2.2× as short as longitudinal length of one procoxa. Prosternal process elongated and narrow (length 3 × width), raised or not raised between procoxae, strongly (D. pardalis) (Fig. 3B) or weakly (D. gonzalesi S. Chigray & Nabozhenko sp. nov.) (Fig. 3D) protruding, not touching with mesoventrite.
Elytra oval or widely oval, with one (D. gonzalesi S. Chigray & Nabozhenko sp. nov.) or double in middle (D. pardalis) humeral rib; with strong, acute spinose tubercles (with spine in base of each tubercle) (Fig. 9E–F) on dark spots (D. pardalis) or with five longitudinal rows of spinose tubercles (D. gonzalesi S. Chigray & Nabozhenko sp. nov.). Scutellar shield completely or partly concealed by base of pronotum; surface around scutellar shield with triangular depression. Transverse length of metacoxae subequal to intercoxal process of abdominal ventrite 1.
Trochanters with elongate, sparse setae. Meso- and metafemora curved outward. Protibiae with projecting process at apex of outer margin, armed with tuft of spines (Fig. 26B). Lateral margins of protibiae with long, fine setae and short spines. Protibial terminal spurs elongated, extending to base of protarsomere 4; mesotibial terminal spurs extending to apex of mesotarsomere 2; metatibial terminal spurs extending to midlength of metatarsomere 1. Outer and inner protibial terminal spurs subequal in length, inner meso- and metatibial terminal spurs longer than outer ones, spurs flattened from sides. All tarsi flattened from sides, covered with long setae dorsally and short setae ventrally. Tarsal claws elongated, thin, weakly curved outward.
Male genitalia (Fig. 17A–H)
Inner sternite VIII (Fig. 17H) weakly sclerotized on margins, densely covered with long, dense setae; anterior margin deeply emarginated in middle; gland is absent (or at least, was not observed).
Rods of spiculum gastrale (Fig. 17G) widely spaced, thickened, arcuately connected at apex, with wide membrane along this connection and near derivatives of inner sternite IX; these derivatives elongated, ladle-shaped, evenly sclerotized in middle and slightly more sclerotized terminally; apical margin of derivatives covered with short dense setae.
Tegmen of aedeagus thickened, obtuse (Fig. 17A–C). Basal piece of tegmen much shorter and wider than apical piece, with tubercle-shaped apex (Fig. 17A–B). Apical piece strongly curved, narrowly rounded at apex, covered with short setae in apical half; ventral apophyses not expressed, dorsal apophyses moderately long, triangular. Median lobe (Fig. 17D, F) widened in basal ⅔ and narrowed in apical third, with weakly separated apex, strongly curved; basal part with additional four sclerotized armatures; baculi not merged at apex.
Female genitalia
Spiculum ventrale (Fig. 17I) very short and strongly widened, sternite VIII with long acutely angulate curved apophyses.
Ovipositor (Fig. 17G–L) short, weakly sclerotized. Coxite with four distinct not merged lobes. Baculi of coxite lobe I short, shorter than paraproct baculi; lobe II small, sclerotized; lobe III larger, conical, sclerotized; lobe IV membranous (only at apex slightly sclerotized), conical, with dense pubescence of long setae. Paraproct V-shaped on each side ventrally, baculi sharply widened in base and narrow in apical third. Vulva with narrow sclerotization in the middle of ventral side. Apical margin of proctiger with deep V-shape emargination, baculi of proctiger strongly widened.
Female genital ducts (Fig. 23C) Vagina moderately widened, sacciform, narrower before oviduct and after spermatheca, apical part of vagina not elastically curved. Spermatheca very short, single-tube. Accessory gland long, with two tubelike constrictions, short in base and long in middle. Basal part between two constrictions not sacciform.
Distribution
Iran and Pakistan (Balochistan region), Afghanistan (Registan Desert).
Notes
Koch (1964) synonymized Dietomorpha pardalis and Kawiria szekessyi Kaszab, 1957 (junior synonym). Koch also noted that Reymond (1938) should be considered as the author of the genus Dietomorpha and the species Dietomorpha pardalis, because he presented figures for this species. Kaszab (1957) noted that Reymond (1938) did not give a description or a differential diagnosis of the genus, and the author of Dietomorpha pardalis should therefore be Kühnelt (1957), who distinctly described, compared and figured this taxon. Later Kwieton (1982) cited Koch’s work but incorrectly established the following synonymy: Kawiria pardalis Reymond, 1938, comb. n. = Kawiria szekessyi and Dietomorpha Reymond, 1938 = Kawiria Schuster, 1957. Medvedev (2005) was not aware of these works and re-established the synonymy previously proposed by Koch, and he also recognised the author of the binomen Dietomorpha pardalis Kühnelt, 1957.
description: Published as part of Chigray, Svetlana N., Nabozhenko, Maxim V., Chigray, Ivan A. & Abakumov, Evgeny V., 2022, A revision of the Palaearctic Pimeliini (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae): a comparative analysis and systematic position of Eastern European and Asian taxa with dorso-lateral eyes, pp. 1-71 in European Journal of Taxonomy 809 on pages 25-26, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2022.809.1719, http://zenodo.org/record/6419425