Beraba sexnotata Botero & Santos-Silva & Bezark 2026, comb. nov.
Fuente:
Zenodo
Salvato in:
| Autori principali: | , , |
|---|---|
| Natura: | Recurso digital |
| Pubblicazione: |
Zenodo
2026
|
| Soggetti: | |
| Accesso online: | |
| Tags: |
Aggiungi Tag
Nessun Tag, puoi essere il primo ad aggiungerne!!
|
| _version_ | 1866902167970906112 |
|---|---|
| author | Botero, Juan Pablo Santos-Silva, Antonio Bezark, Larry G. |
| author_facet | Botero, Juan Pablo Santos-Silva, Antonio Bezark, Larry G. |
| contents | <p><i>Beraba sexnotata</i> (Boheman, 1859) comb. nov.</p><p>Figs 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63</p><p><i>Eburia sexnotata</i> Boheman, 1859: 151.</p><p><i>Beraba moema</i> Martins, 1997: 69. Syn. nov.</p><p><b>Remarks.</b></p><p>Boheman (1859) described <i>Eburia sexnotata</i> based on syntypes from “ California, Insula Puna ” (Figs 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61). According to Aurivillius (1893) (translated): “ <i>Eburia sexnotata</i> Boh. does not come from California, but from Puna Island, which is located off the coast of Ecuador in the Gulf of Guayaquil. ” Tippmann (1951) stated (translated): “ Aurivillius did not correctly interpret Boheman’s indication of the locality, assuming that the species was found both in California and on Puna Island, which, however, cannot be the case, as this species of <i>Eburia</i> has not been recorded from California. ” However, this information is completely incorrect, since, as seen above, Aurivillius (1893) never stated that the species occurred in both locations. Martins (1997) reported on <i>E. sexnotata</i> (translated): “ I examined a pair from that locality (MZSP) [Gulf of Guayaquil] that matches the original description perfectly, and I believe my identification is correct. ” However, the specimens from the MZSP collection are not <i>Beraba sexnotata</i> (see below).</p><p>Martins (1997) described <i>Beraba moema</i> (Figs 62–63) based on males and females from Ecuador. Two male and one female paratypes are from Guayaquil in the province of Guayas, a city located approximately 50 km north of Puná Island. A comparison of paratypes of this species, deposited in the MZSP, with the syntypes of <i>Eburia sexnotata</i> revealed no differences. Therefore, we synonymize <i>Beraba moema</i> under <i>Eburia sexnotata</i>, which is transferred to <i>Beraba</i> Martins, 1997.</p><p>Currently, considering the synonymy, <i>Beraba sexnotata</i> is known only from Ecuador (Monné 2024; Tavakilian and Chevillotte 2025).</p><p>According to Martins (1999) (translated): “ <i>Beraba</i> was established by Martins (1997 b) to include species that were originally described in <i>Eburia</i>, solely because they lacked a sulcus on antennomere III. However, several features distinguish <i>Beraba</i> from <i>Eburia</i>. The species of <i>Beraba</i>, although lacking a sulcus on antennomere III, exhibit a generally shiny appearance, smaller dimensions, absence of a sulcus on the sides of the coronal suture, antennomere III longer than IV, absence of a latero-anterior tubercle on the sides of the prothorax, and the apex of the meso- and metafemora bearing only a single inner spine, among other features. ” However, at least some of these features are extremely variable in the species currently included in <i>Eburia sensu auctorum</i>. For now, we have chosen to consider <i>Beraba</i> as distinct from <i>Coeleburia</i> until a comprehensive revision of the species that are being included in this genus is carried out.</p><p><b>Material examined.</b></p><p>ECUADOR, <i>El Oro</i>: 1 km N Machala, 50 m, male paratype, female paratype, 19. II. 1981, H. Howden leg. (MZSP). <i>Manabí</i>: 1.5 km E Pto. Cayo, 20 m, female paratype, 28. II. 1981, H. Howden leg. (MZSP).</p> |
| format | Recurso digital |
| id | zenodo_https___doi_org_10_5281_zenodo_18866928 |
| institution | Zenodo |
| language | |
| publishDate | 2026 |
| publisher | Zenodo |
| record_format | zenodo |
| spellingShingle | Beraba sexnotata Botero & Santos-Silva & Bezark 2026, comb. nov. Botero, Juan Pablo Santos-Silva, Antonio Bezark, Larry G. Biodiversity Taxonomy Animalia Arthropoda Insecta Coleoptera Cerambycidae Beraba Beraba sexnotata <p><i>Beraba sexnotata</i> (Boheman, 1859) comb. nov.</p><p>Figs 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63</p><p><i>Eburia sexnotata</i> Boheman, 1859: 151.</p><p><i>Beraba moema</i> Martins, 1997: 69. Syn. nov.</p><p><b>Remarks.</b></p><p>Boheman (1859) described <i>Eburia sexnotata</i> based on syntypes from “ California, Insula Puna ” (Figs 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61). According to Aurivillius (1893) (translated): “ <i>Eburia sexnotata</i> Boh. does not come from California, but from Puna Island, which is located off the coast of Ecuador in the Gulf of Guayaquil. ” Tippmann (1951) stated (translated): “ Aurivillius did not correctly interpret Boheman’s indication of the locality, assuming that the species was found both in California and on Puna Island, which, however, cannot be the case, as this species of <i>Eburia</i> has not been recorded from California. ” However, this information is completely incorrect, since, as seen above, Aurivillius (1893) never stated that the species occurred in both locations. Martins (1997) reported on <i>E. sexnotata</i> (translated): “ I examined a pair from that locality (MZSP) [Gulf of Guayaquil] that matches the original description perfectly, and I believe my identification is correct. ” However, the specimens from the MZSP collection are not <i>Beraba sexnotata</i> (see below).</p><p>Martins (1997) described <i>Beraba moema</i> (Figs 62–63) based on males and females from Ecuador. Two male and one female paratypes are from Guayaquil in the province of Guayas, a city located approximately 50 km north of Puná Island. A comparison of paratypes of this species, deposited in the MZSP, with the syntypes of <i>Eburia sexnotata</i> revealed no differences. Therefore, we synonymize <i>Beraba moema</i> under <i>Eburia sexnotata</i>, which is transferred to <i>Beraba</i> Martins, 1997.</p><p>Currently, considering the synonymy, <i>Beraba sexnotata</i> is known only from Ecuador (Monné 2024; Tavakilian and Chevillotte 2025).</p><p>According to Martins (1999) (translated): “ <i>Beraba</i> was established by Martins (1997 b) to include species that were originally described in <i>Eburia</i>, solely because they lacked a sulcus on antennomere III. However, several features distinguish <i>Beraba</i> from <i>Eburia</i>. The species of <i>Beraba</i>, although lacking a sulcus on antennomere III, exhibit a generally shiny appearance, smaller dimensions, absence of a sulcus on the sides of the coronal suture, antennomere III longer than IV, absence of a latero-anterior tubercle on the sides of the prothorax, and the apex of the meso- and metafemora bearing only a single inner spine, among other features. ” However, at least some of these features are extremely variable in the species currently included in <i>Eburia sensu auctorum</i>. For now, we have chosen to consider <i>Beraba</i> as distinct from <i>Coeleburia</i> until a comprehensive revision of the species that are being included in this genus is carried out.</p><p><b>Material examined.</b></p><p>ECUADOR, <i>El Oro</i>: 1 km N Machala, 50 m, male paratype, female paratype, 19. II. 1981, H. Howden leg. (MZSP). <i>Manabí</i>: 1.5 km E Pto. Cayo, 20 m, female paratype, 28. II. 1981, H. Howden leg. (MZSP).</p> |
| title | Beraba sexnotata Botero & Santos-Silva & Bezark 2026, comb. nov. |
| topic | Biodiversity Taxonomy Animalia Arthropoda Insecta Coleoptera Cerambycidae Beraba Beraba sexnotata |
| url | https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18866928 |