Parapenthus Kаtаev & Wrаse 2018, gen. n.
Creators: name: Kаtаev, Boris M.
name: Wrаse, Dаvid W.
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2018
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Insecta
Coleoptera
Carabidae
Parapenthus

description: Parapenthus gen. n.
Type species Ditomus solitarius Peyron, 1858
Diagnosis. Most similar in combination of characters to Penthus differing as follows: dorsum with violet metallic tinge; labrum rather deeply emarginate anteriorly; pronotum not bordered along apical and basal margins, its apical angles markedly protruding anteriad, very narrowly rounded at apex, basal angles almost rectangular, with sharp apex; and protibia with about 10–12 lateral spines situated in apical half of outer edge (versus 6–8 spines in Penthus).
The new genus differs from Penthophonus in having the following distinctive features: head relatively larger; paraglossae narrow, separated from ligular sclerite by wide notch; apical angles of pronotum markedly protruding anteriad, very narrowly rounded at apex; three penultimate abdominal sternites, in addition to short general pubescence, also with several long setae along hind margin; metatrochanter large, more than a half as long as metafemur, slightly acute at apex; and protibia with about 10–12 lateral spines situated in apical half of outer edge (versus 3–4 spines in Penthophonus), with outer angle not dentiform and without additional short spur on inner apical angle.
Description. Body (Fig. 1) robust, dorsum with violet metallic tinge, rather densely and roughly punctate, covered with erect setae.
Labrum (Fig. 3) rather deeply emarginate anteriorly. Аpical margin of clypeus shallowly emarginate. Tempora setose. Genae wide. One very long supraorbital seta on each side. Lateral margin of frons above insertion of antennae simple, not widened. Mentum (Fig. 4) with wide and very short median tooth. Epilobes noticeably widened apically. Ligular sclerite very slightly narrowed before truncate apex, with two long ventro-apical setae and a few very short setae on dorsal side. Paraglossae glabrous, narrow, longer than ligular sclerite and separated from it by wide notch. Terminal maxillary and labial palpomeres more or less cylindrical, usually narrowed apically. Basal labial palpomere carinate. Penultimate labial palpomere markedly longer than apical one.
Pronotum cordate, with two or several setigerous pores at sides before middle. Аpical angles markedly protruding anteriad, very narrowly rounded at apex. Basal angles almost rectangular. Аpical and basal margins not bordered, basal pronotal edge glabrous, not ciliate.
Elytra not serrate at sides, basal border complete, not bent and not raised near scutellum.
Hindwings fully developed, folded at apex (obviously the species is capable of flight; one of the examined specimens was covered with Lepidopteran scales and might have been collected at light).
Prosternum with rather long setae medially. Metepisternum markedly longer than wide. Three penultimate abdominal sternites, in addition to short general pubescence, also with several long setae along hind margin (similar to those of Penthus, Pachycarus, Chilotomus, and Bronislavia, but such setae absent in Penthophonus). Аnal (last visible) abdominal sternite in female with distal margin medially somewhat enlarged and plate-like.
Protibia (Fig. 2) with outer angle not dentiform, without additional short spur on inner apical angle, with about 10–12 lateral spines situated in apical half of outer edge and with two ventroapical spines. Аpical spur of protibia slender. Profemur not denticulate along inner margin. Metafemur with many setigerous punctures along posterior margin. Metacoxa with a posteromedial setigerous pore and with numerous additional long setae. Metatrochanter large, more than a half as long as metafemur, slightly acute at apex. Tarsi setose dorsally. Metatarsomere 1 short, slightly longer than 2, noticeably shorter than 2+3. Protarsus and mesotarsus of male not dilated.
Etymology. The genus name is a combination of the Greek para, meaning near, and the name of the carabid genus Penthus.
Composition and distribution. The genus includes only one species, P. solitarius, distributed in the Middle East (Turkey, Syria, Israel and Egypt).
Remarks. This new genus is erected for the single species P. solitarius, which was originally described within Ditomus Bonelli, 1810, but later was treated as a member of the genus Penthus Chaudoir, 1843 (Piochard de la Brûlerie 1873, Reitter 1900, Tschitschérine 1901, Jakobson 1907, Stichel 1923, Csiki 1932). Based on the available descriptions of this species, without examination of the specimens, Sciaky (1987) included it in Penthophonus Reitter, 1900 (a taxon very close to the genus Ophonus Dejean, 1921), and this treatment was tacitly accepted in the subsequent literature (Lorenz 1998, 2005; Wrase 2003; Wrase & Kataev 2017). Re-examination of the specimens of P. solitarius revealed that this species is distinguished from the members of Penthophonus in many sufficient characters (see diagnosis above) and actually most similar and apparently most related to Penthus. The most important characters in common for Parapenthus solitarius and Penthus, and absent in Penthophonus are: paraglossae narrow, separated from ligular sclerite by wide notch; abdominal sternites with transverse row of long setae along posterior margin; protibia without additional short spur on inner apical angle, with more than one ventroapical and more than four outer preapical spines; metafemur with many setigerous punctures along posterior margin; and metatrochanter long, about half as long as metafemur, acute at apex. Parapenthus solitarius warrants separate generic status due to the peculiar combination of the sufficient characters distinguishing it from the single representative of the genus Penthus — P. tenebrioides (Waltl, 1838) (see diagnosis above).
description: Published as part of Kаtаev, Boris M. & Wrаse, Dаvid W., 2018, Notes on Ditomina, with description of two new genera and a new species (Coleoptera, Carabidae) from the Middle East and India, pp. 350-368 in Zootaxa 4459 (2) on pages 352-353, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4459.2.8, http://zenodo.org/record/1458709