DOI: 10.15468/fu7qnd
title: A Monographic Revision of the Genus Hoplopyga Thomson, 1880 (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Cetoniinae: Gymnetini)

description: This dataset contains the digitized treatments in Plazi based on the original journal article Shaughney, Jennifer Marie, Ratcliffe, Brett C. (2015): A Monographic Revision of the Genus Hoplopyga Thomson, 1880 (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Cetoniinae: Gymnetini). The Coleopterists Bulletin 69 (4): 579-638, DOI: 10.1649/0010-065x-69.4.579, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1649/0010-065x-69.4.579ABSTRACTA comprehensive revision of the genus Hoplopyga Thomson, 1880 is presented. Eighteen species are redescribed, and two new species are described. A key for identification, distribution maps, and images of the 20 species are provided. Hoplopyga ruteri Antoine is removed from the genus and placed in junior synonymy with Macrocranius similis Schürhoff. Lectotypes are designated for Hoplopyga brasiliensis (Gory and Percheron), Hoplopyga corumbana Schürhoff, and Hoplopyga multipunctata (Gory and Percheron). The following new synonymies are established: Hoplopyga lucidiventris (Thomson) is Hoplopyga foeda (Schaum); Hoplopyga spurca (Janson) is Hoplopyga liturata (Olivier); Hoplopyga monacha (Gory and Percheron) and Hoplopyga rubida (Gory and Percheron) are Hoplopyga singularis (Gory and Percheron). Hoplopyga pseudomiliaris Shaughney and Ratcliffe from Guatemala and Hoplopyga riparia Shaughney and Ratcliffe from Peru and Brazil are described as new species.Key Words: taxonomy, nomenclature, scarab beetles, fruit beetles, NeotropicsThe Cetoniinae (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) is an attractive subfamily of scarab beetles known as the fruit beetles or flower chafers. Notable among the 12 cetoniine tribes recognized by Krikken (1984) are the Gymnetini, distinguished by having a scutellum that is partially or entirely obscured by the extended basomedian lobe of the pronotum. The Gymnetini are abundant in the New World and vary widely in color, sculpturing, and pattern throughout their range from the central United States to Argentina (Ratcliffe and Deloya 1992). The most recent checklists include 24 genera (Krikken 1984), 25 genera (Hardy 1975), or 27 genera (Krajcik 1998) in the New World Gymnetini, but taxonomic resolution is complicated by the extreme intraspecific diversity and lack of consistent, shared character states among both genera and species. Revisions of the New World Gymnetini genera have been largely completed by Ratcliffe and Deloya (1992) and Ratcliffe (2013, 2014, 2015), but further revisionary work must be done in the genus Gymnetis MacLeay (sensu lato) to define species limits. The biology of most species remains unknown, and this valuable information may never be discovered if habitats are eradicated before life histories are fully understood.Thomson (1880) created the genus Hoplopyga along with six other gymnetine genera after purchasing a large collection of cetoniine specimens. In the same work, he named Gymnetis marginesignata Gory and Percheron as the type species and moved six additional species into the genus. He distinguished Hoplopyga as having the elytral apices prolonged into spines and a mesometasternal process that is short, flat, and with a rounded apex. However, these characters are manifested in varying degrees by Hoplopyga species as well as by species in other gymnetine genera. Thomson also noted that males of this genus possess protibiae that are “unarmed” or without teeth. This is another inconsistent character, because the males of most Hoplopyga species possess bidentate or tridentate protibiae with teeth that become worn down over time. Schoch (1895b) addressed Thomson’ s vague generic description and provided a key to the genus (which he misspelled as Holopyga), as well as descriptions for six species. Schoch (1895a) transferred two species from Gymnetis to Hoplopyga and described Holopyga [sic] multiguttata, a species that was later synonymized with Hoplopyga multipunctata (Gory and Percheron, 1833). There is currently no key available for identification of Hoplopyga species, and there has been no comprehensive revision of this genus. Schoch (1896), Schenkling (1921), Blackwelder (1944), and Krajcik (1998) provided checklists of Hoplopyga species, but these checklists contain incorrect nomenclature and are incomplete, since several new species were recently described by Antoine (1998, 2008) and Ratcliffe (2012). The most recent checklist contained 23 species in the genus (Schoolmeesters 2014).