Episcaphula (Cosmoscaphula) tamburinea Heller 1920
Creators: name: Skelley, Paul E.
name: Leschen, Richard A. B.
name: Liu, Zhenhua
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2021
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Insecta
Coleoptera
Erotylidae
Episcaphula
Episcaphula tamburinea

description: Episcaphula (Cosmoscaphula) tamburinea Heller, 1920
Episcaphula (Cosmoscaphula) tamburinea Heller 1920: 105–106. Chûjô & Chûjô 1988: 161.
Episcaphula (Cosmoscaphula) clatrata Heller 1920: 106, new synonymy. Chûjô & Chûjô 1988: 161.
Episcaphula rufolineata Wilson 1921: 35, new synonymy.
Episcaphula (Episcaphula) rufolineata Wilson 1921: 35. Chûjô & Chûjô 1988: 165 (subgenus combination).
Comments. Heller (1920) published a large work on the Erotylidae of the Indo-Australian region with an emphasis on the Philippines. The Australian taxa described in this work have been overlooked by previous Australian workers. Some need clarification and nomenclatural corrections.
The subgenus Cosmoscaphula Heller (1920: 105–106) is recognized as an Episcaphula Crotch, 1876 with an enlarged lobe or callus between the eye and antennal base. Heller (1920) placed two species in the subgenus: E. (C.) tamburinea Heller, 1920 and E. (C.) clatrata Heller, 1920, stating that E. clatrata may be a “var.?” of E. tamburinea. Both species were from Tamborine Mountain, near Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. The following year, Wilson (1921) described Episcaphula rufolineata, also from Tamborine Mountain, noting the same lobe in front of the eyes, sexual dimorphism, and variation in color pattern.
While Heller (1920) only discussed one specimen for E. clatrata (SDEI, Figs. 3–4), he mentioned two depositories for E. tamburinea. Since his types are generally deposited in SDEI, the male specimen (SDEI, Figs. 1–2) with the following label data is here designated as the lectotype for Episcaphula (Cosmoscaphula) tamburinea Heller, 1920: “[white paper, hand-written] S. Queensland / Mt. Tambourine ” // “[red paper, typed] Syntypus ” // “[white paper, hand-written] Coll. Hacker ” // “[white paper, hand-written] Episcaphula / (Cosmoscaphula) / tambourinea n. / [typed] Det. K M Heller 1918” // “[lavender paper, black border, hand-written] tam- / bourinea / Hell.” // “[white paper, typed] SDEI Coleoptera / # 302836” // “[red paper, typed] LECTOTYPE ♂ / Episcaphula / (Cosmoscaphula) / tamburinea Heller / des. Skelley, / Leschen, Liu 2020”. Paralectotypes may exist but were not studied.
Wilson (1921) discussed multiple specimens of E. rufolineata from multiple localities, but stated “Type in author’s collection”, explicitly indicating that only a single specimen was used to describe the species. The Museums Victoria website hosts an image of this holotype (Figs. 5–7; Hoath 2020a, MVMA).
Examination of these images clearly show Heller’s types represent a male and female with extremes of the color pattern variation as discussed by Wilson (1921). Males of the species have a notched clypeal margin, dilated protarsomeres, a slightly more elongated pronotum, and more strongly curved tibiae.
Because they are from the same locality and share all morphological characters, it is clear they are conspecific and are here synonymized. With Heller considering E. clatrata as a possible variety of E. tambruinea and since evidence is lacking to invoke prevailing use rules to maintain E. rufolineata (ICZN 1999: Article 23.9.1), we use the name E. tamburinea for this species.
description: Published as part of Skelley, Paul E., Leschen, Richard A. B. & Liu, Zhenhua, 2021, Nomenclatural notes for some Australian Erotylinae (Coleoptera: Erotylidae), pp. 69-76 in Zootaxa 4966 (1) on pages 71-72, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4966.1.7, http://zenodo.org/record/4729469