Atheta keeni Casey 1910
Creators: name: Gusarov, Vladimir I.
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2003
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Insecta
Coleoptera
Staphylinidae
Atheta
Atheta keeni

description: Atheta keeni Casey, 1910a
(Fig. 97 in Klimaszewski & Winchester 2002; Figs. 41–46 in this paper)
Atheta (Lamiota) keeni Casey, 1910a: 17.
Atheta (s. str.) innocens Casey, 1910a: 39, syn. nov.
Atheta (Lamiota) achromata Casey, 1911a: 82, syn. nov.
Atheta (Lamiota) profecta Casey, 1911a: 83, syn. nov.
Atheta (Liogluta) keeni: Fenyes, 1920: 209 (as valid species).
Atheta (s. str.) innocens: Fenyes, 1920: 214 (as valid species).
Atheta (Liogluta) achromata: Fenyes, 1920: 209 (as valid species).
Atheta (Liogluta) profecta: Fenyes, 1920: 209 (as valid species).
Atheta (Liogluta) keeni: Bernhauer & Scheerpeltz, 1926: 657 (as valid species).
Atheta (s. str.) innocens: Bernhauer & Scheerpeltz, 1926: 644 (as valid species).
Atheta (Liogluta) achromata: Bernhauer & Scheerpeltz, 1926: 656 (as valid species).
Atheta (Liogluta) profecta: Bernhauer & Scheerpeltz, 1926: 658 (as valid species).
Atheta (Liogluta) keeni: Moore & Legner, 1975: 364 (as valid species).
Atheta (s. str.) innocens: Moore & Legner, 1975: 363 (as valid species).
Atheta (Liogluta) achromata: Moore & Legner, 1975: 353 (as valid species).
Atheta (Liogluta) profecta: Moore & Legner, 1975: 370 (as valid species).
Lamiota keeni: Seevers, 1978: 263 (as valid species).
Xenota innocens: Seevers, 1978: 270 (as valid species).
Lamiota achromata: Seevers, 1978: 263 (as valid species).
Lamiota profecta: Seevers, 1978: 263 (as valid species).
Atheta (Liogluta) vasta: Klimaszewski & Winchester, 2002: 39 (nec Lohse & Smetana, 1985: 297) (as valid species).
Type material. Lectotype of Atheta keeni (here designated): ♂, “Metlakatla, B.[ritish] Col.[umbia] Keen”, “ Lamiota keeni Csy. ”, “TYPE USNM 39480” (red label), “CASEY bequest 1925” (NMNH). Paralectotypes: 5♂♂, 5♀♀, “Metlakatla, B.[ritish] Col.[umbia] Keen”, “ keeni PARATYPE USNM 39480” (red label), “CASEY bequest 1925” (NMNH).
Lectotype of Atheta innocens (here designated): ♀, “ Lane Co., Or.[egon]”, “ Atheta innocens Csy. ”, “TYPE USNM 39270” (red label), “CASEY bequest 1925” (NMNH).
Lectotype of Atheta achromata (here designated): ♂ (without head and prothorax), “Metlakatla, B.[ritish] Col.[umbia] Keen”, “ achromata Csy. ”, “TYPE USNM 39481” (red label), “CASEY bequest 1925” (NMNH).
Lectotype of Atheta profecta (here designated): ♂, “Metlakatla, B.[ritish] Col.[umbia] Keen”, “ profecta Csy. ”, “TYPE USNM 39482” (red label), “CASEY bequest 1925” (NMNH).
Paralectotype (see discussion) of Homalota vasta Mäklin in Mannerheim, 1853: ♀, “Sitka”, “Holmberg”, “ Homalota vasta m. Sitkha”, “Typus” (green label), “Mus. Zool. H:fors. Spec. Typ. No. 2250. Homalota vasta Mäklin ”, “ Homalota vasta Mäkl. Holotypus / Liogluta vasta. Holotypus Lohse fix. 1985” (MZHF).
Additional material. UNITED STATES: Alaska: ♀, Valdez, 61º09.05'N 146º21.80'W, 20 m, in forest litter, Alnus, ferns, Verathrum, 12.vii.1998 (V.I.Gusarov) (SPSU).
Diagnosis. See Klimaszewski and Winchester (2002; as Atheta vasta).
Discussion. The lectotype of At. innocens agrees with the types of At. keeni in external characters and the shape of the spermatheca. The lectotype of At. profecta has no head and prothorax but agrees with the types of At. keeni in the shape of the aedeagus and abdominal tergum 8. The lectotype of At. profecta is poorly pigmented, but otherwise it agrees completely with At. keeni in external characters, including male secondary features, and in the shape of the aedeagus.
The type series of Homalota vasta Mäklin in Mannerheim, 1853 (examined) includes two specimens (Lohse & Smetana 1985). One of them is a female conspecific with Atheta keeni and the other is a female belonging to the genus Liogluta and illustrated by Lohse and Smetana (1985). This second female bears the following labels: “Sitka”, “Holmberg”, “Mus. Zool. H:fors. Spec. Typ. No. 2251. Homalota vasta Mäklin ”. From the description and illustrations in Lohse and Smetana (1985) it is clear that they meant to designate the second specimen (a female of Liogluta) as the lectotype of Homalota vasta. Unfortunately, when they cited the labels of the lectotype, they listed the labels of the first specimen (a female of Atheta keeni). Moreover, it is the first specimen that had been labeled as the lectotype. The latter circumstance is especially misleading and originally I was going to accept what the lectotype label said, and consider Atheta keeni and Homalota vasta to be synonymous. While identifying some athetines from British Columbia for Jan Klimaszewski (Klimaszewski & Winchester 2002) I labeled the specimens of Atheta keeni as At. vasta. However, Lohse and Smetana are very explicit in that they meant the specimen of Liogluta, illustrated and redescribed by them, to be the lectotype of Homalota vasta. Therefore I accept their intent to designate the Liogluta specimen as the lectotype, disregard their misplaced lectotype label and consider At. keeni to be a valid species, different from Liogluta vasta. In the type series of Homalota vasta I labeled the specimen of Liogluta as lectotype and the specimen of At. keeni as paralectotype.
Atheta keeni is the type species of the subgenus Lamiota Casey, 1910a (by original designation). Subgeneric assignment of At. keeni and the status of the name Lamiota requires further study. Atheta keeni has the pronotal pubescence of the type I and cannot be placed in the genus Liogluta Thomson, 1858.
Distribution. Atheta keeni is known from Alaska, British Columbia and Oregon.
description: Published as part of Gusarov, Vladimir I., 2003, Revision of some types of North American aleocharines (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae: Aleocharinae), with synonymic notes, pp. 1-134 in Zootaxa 353 (1) on pages 37-39, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.353.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/5019783