Table Of ContentBULLETIN DE L'INSTITUT ROYAL DES SCIENCES NATURELLES DE BELGIQUE ENTOMOLOGIE, 80: 109-126,2010
BULLETIN VAN HET KONINKLJJK BELGISCH INSTJTUUT VOOR NATUURWETENSCHAPPEN ENTOMOLOGLE, 80: 109-126,2010
Catalogue of the types of the Cerambycoidea of the National Museum of
Natural History of Luxembourg
by Francesco VITALI
Abstract foreign entomologists, besides several acquisitions,
are its original nucleus; nevertheless, the greater part
A list oft he types preserved in theN ational Museum ofNatural History of this collection - and of the whole tropical material
of Luxembourg (MNHNL) is provided. Lectotypes of Hastertia
as well - is represented by the specimens collected by
bougainvillei LAMEERE, 1912; Clinopleurus lansbergei LAMEERE,
Edouard-Pierre Luja (1875-1953). This Luxembourgian
1912; 0/igoenop/us luzonicus SCHWARZER, 1926;Jonthodes nodico/lis
HINTZ, 1919; Calanthemis aurescens HINTZ, 1911; Chlorophorus explorer collected a lot of natural samples in Zambezi
manillae var. aurivilliusi ScHWARZER, 1926; Xylotrechus jordani (Mozambique), Belgian Congo (Democratic Republic
HINTZ, 1911; Pachydissus congolensis HINTZ, 1911; lsosaphanus
of the Congo), and Brazil between 1898 and 1924
fen-anti HINTZ, 1913; Metopotylus costa/us HINTZ, 1911; Xystrocera
(LuJA, 1918; 1951; 1953). He was a great friend of
metallica var. a tripes HINTZ, 1911; Xystrocera latipes HINTZ, 1911;
Xystrocera lujae HINTZ, 1911; Velleda congo/ens is HINTZ, 1911; Victor Ferrant (1856-1942), employee, curator and later
Ade1pas albomaculatus HINTZ, 1913; Aderpas uniformis HINTZ, director of the MNHNL from 1894 to 1942, and also
1913; Cyclocerusferranti HINTZ, 1911; Eumimetes griseus HINTZ, he worked for Belgian companies. This explains why
1911; Protonarthron dubium HINTZ, 1911; Eudtyoctenes corticarius
a lot of his material (including types) is also preserved
HINTZ, 1911 and Glenea congolensis HINTZ, 1911 are designated in
in the Royal Institute of Natural Sciences, Brussels
the MNHNL. Lectotypes of Frea fascia/a HINTZ, 1912; Oxyhammus
konduensis HINTZ, 1913; Sternotomiella viridis HINTZ, 1913; (IRSNB), the Royal Museum ofCentralAfrica, Tervuren
Pinacosternodes macula/us HINTZ, 1913 and Pinacosternodes (MRACT) and the Museum fur Naturkunde, Berlin
uniform is HINTZ, 1913 are designated in the Royal Institute ofNatural
(MFNB). However, Luja's material represents 55% of
Sciences of Brussels. HINTZ is recognised as the senior author of
the tropical Cerambycids of the MNHNL.
Hospes scutellaris and Jonthodes nodicollis. Jonthodes nodico/lis
HINTZ, 1919 is transferred to the genus Hybunca SCHMIDT, 1922, as Another great contribution to this collection (~41 %)
follows: Hybunca nodicollis (HINTZ, 1919) n. comb. The following comes from the acquisitions of the Museum; the majority
synonymies are established: Hospes nodicollis BuRGEON, 1931 nee of them are constituted by those that Ferrant did from
HINTZ, 1919 n. syn. and Hybunca nodicollis BuRGEON, 1931 nee
1910 to 1931 and the rest by the collection Kuntgen.
HINTZ, 1919 n. syn.
Most specimens are supposed to have been purchased
Key-words: Cerambycoidea, Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle as identified from the catalogue Winkler, but Luja
de Luxembourg, types, holotypes, lectotypes and Hintz are among the probable sellers as well. On
the other band, the collection Kuntgen (mostly Luja's
duplicates) constitutes less than 15% of the tropical
Introduction
collection ofCerambycids. The kind oflabels present in
such collection suggests that the insects were given by
The collection of the tropical Cerambycoidea, with
Luja during or after his Brazilian mission (1921-1924).
over 3200 specimens representing nearly 900 identified
A relatively small but important contribution ( 4.3%)
species and subspecies, among which many types, is the
to the tropical collection was made by Pierre Hastert, a
highlight of the National Museum of Natural History of
good Ferrant's friend, while another part of the African
Luxembourg (MNHNL).
material came from Stanleyfalls (Boyoma Falls),
Presently, it includes at least 161 types, of which
directly donated by the Rev. R. P. H. Kohl or through
11 holotypes, 21 lectotypes, 20 paratypes and 61
the collection Hastert. Other important donations have
paralectotypes and 48 syntypes.
come from the French commandant Daniel Fouquet,
Private donations of some Luxembourgian and
who sent material from Vietnam, and from the German
II
110 F. VITALI
specialist E. Hintz, who donated (or likely exchanged) erroneously attributed some of Hintz's determinations
specimens coming from the German eastern Africa. to the remaining material of the Museum. In contrast,
The majority of this material was collected just in the some types based on Luja's material are well represented
typical localities and in the years of the description of in the Belgian Museums (DAMOISEAU & CooLs, 1987;
new species. Hence, it is about topotypes or sometimes CooLs, 1993). So, it seems that Hintz received only a
also paratypes. Finally, other important personalities of part of Luja 's material and directly from Luja, since he
Science related to Ferrant sent him material of their own mentioned as types a number of specimens inferior to
collections but no typical material. those actually present in the collections.
Concerning the study of this collection, FERRANT In some other cases, the labels on the bottom
( 1911) provided a detailed catalogue of all specialists of the box do not correspond to the pinned labels.
involved in the determination, according to the studied The new identifications sometimes are taxonomic
taxonomic group. Regarding the Cerambycids, he changes according to the taxonomy used at Ferrant's
quoted A. Lameere and P. Boppe, who were describing times, sometimes are different (right or erroneous)
new Prioninae, and E. Hintz, to whom Ferrant accredited identifications, and sometimes are misspellings. In all
the description of more than 20 new African species. cases, I attributed the new identification to Fenant, who
Actually, Hintz identified the majority of the organised the collection and wrote the labels, even if
Cerambycids and nearly all African species, while only a I have no proofs whether someone else suggested the
small part (6.5%) of the remaining materials, especially new name.
the American or Asian species, were identified by Some of these misunderstandings also concern the
B. Schwarzer between 1925 and 1931. types (both paratypes and holotypes) present in the
Nonetheless, the relationship among the different collection. Most of them were identified at Ferrant's time
Museums, Luja and Hintz still presents some obscure and can-y red labels of "type" or "cotype", preswnably
aspects. for holotypes and for paratypes, respectively. Actually,
Firstly, it is unclear who the owner of the material the checking up of the collection of the MNHNL and
sent to Hintz was. It seems that Hintz received such IRSNB has evidenced that a certain munber of presumed
material directly from Luja, since in his papers he never types were misidentified since such specimens have not
mentioned any Museums. This might be confirmed by been quoted as types, their sizes or localities being not
the fact that the material collected at Kondue has the mentioned in the original descriptions.
same identical labels, though it is preserved in different Possibly, Ferrant and other curators enoneously
Museums (MNHNL, IRSNB or MRACT). This makes identified as types a number of specimens greater than
think that it is about material labelled by Luja and later ones that Hintz had really observed, not having verified
entrusted to different Museums. Nonetheless, theiRSNB the original descriptions; nonetheless, some facts
preserved some Hintz's types coming from Kondue but suggest a quite different interpretation. Such presumed
having locality labels hand-written by Hintz, suggesting types have overall a big nwnber of Hintz's autographed
that Hintz did not receive either labelled or even prepared labels; moreover, according to the labels of origin, Hintz
material as well. described most of the types, when they already belonged
Moreover, Hintz dedicated four new species to to the MNHNL. Nonetheless, he always mentioned
Ferrant (GuiNET, 2002) and FERRANT himself (1911) Luja as owner of the types, though he also dedicated
quoted that Hintz was describing some new species some species to Fenant. On the other hand, Luja was
for the MNHNL. Correspondingly, the labels of origin in the embanassing situation to be Luxembourgian and
that Ferrant got under each specimen often refer a a good Fenant's friend but also employee for Belgian
date of arrival to the MNHNL anterior to that of the companies in Belgian colonies. Accordingly, Hintz did
descriptions. Nonetheless, the detennination labels not mention the real owner of the types, leaving Luja
hand-written by Hintz have dates from 1914 to 1917, the duty to entrust them to the musewns. Later, since
or none. These last labels, which are also the largest 1913 Hintz no longer indicated the exact number of the
majority, include also types that HINTZ (1911, 1912, types, making virtually impossible their recognition.
1913, 1919) simply mentioned as "collection Luja". This hypothesis can explain why the number of
Even the species dedicated to Ferrant were mentioned the types of each species is singularly similar in both
as of"Coll. Luja". MNHNL and IRSNB. Naturally, no proofs support these
Thirdly, some detenninations are actually erroneous. supposed events, which nevertheless, if they have really
Since it is about similar but not identical species, occuned, show a great example of friendship between
sometimes also Hintz's new species, it seems that Ferrant ancient men of Science, which overpasses times and
Type catalogue of the Cerambycoidea in the Natural History Museum of Luxembourg 111
nationalities. List of the types
However, the number and the identity of the types is
sometimes doubtful, since Hintz did not always indicate Family Disteniidae THOMSON, 1860
their exact number or since the total amount of the Subfamily Disteniinae THOMSON, 1860
specimens labelled as type in both MNHNL and IRSNB Tribe Disteniini THOMSON, 1860
sometimes exceed the number of mentioned types.
Moreover, some other syntypes are apparently present Saphanodes lujae HINTZ, 1913 HOLOTYPE (Fig. 1)
in the collection Kuntgen or in other Museums. Since Congo beige, Kondue, E. Luja [lgt.], E. Luja don. 1907,
Hintz always indicated Luja as owner of the types, this Saphanodes lujae m[ihi ], det. E. Hintz, Type, lc3'.
problem might be solved through the examination of
the epistolary documents between the Luxembourgian
explorer and such museums; nonetheless, I could trace Family Cerambycidae LATREILLE, 1802
them in no museum. Subfamily Prioninae LATREILLE, 1802
The ICZN recommends the fixation of lectotypes; Tribe Macrotomini THOMSON, 1860
so, in order to accomplish this task, I tried to identify
the specimen that Hintz himself selected as holotype. Hastertia bougainvillei LAMEERE, 1912 LECTOTYPE
I observed that only one syntype has often a pink label and PARALECTOTYPE (Fig. 2)
of "type", not belonging to the usual labels of the [Papua,], Bougainville, P. Hastert don. 1913, Hastertia
MNHNL and IRSNB, which Hintz presumably added Bougainvillei det. A. Lameere, Type, lc3'1 ~; ditto, acq.
to the specimen. Therefore, in order to avoid disputes, 1927, Hastertia Bougainvillei Lameere, 1c3'1 ~.
I adopted the method to select as lectotype the type
having that pinned pink label and as paralectotypes all REMARKS: LAMEERE (1912) described this species on a
remaining syntypes. In the rare cases, when all syntypes male and two females from Bougainville (coil. Hastert)
were deprived of such labels, I selected as lectotype the and two females from Kieta (MFNB). The second
male or the better-conserved specimen; nevertheless, in female of Hastert's collection is apparently lost. The
those cases where further specimens having a pink label only existing male type, belonging to the MNHNL, is
were supposed to exist, I renounced to the designation here formally designated as lectotype, while the female,
of the lectotype. as well the ones preserved in Berlin, is designated as
Other cerambycids appear to be the types of some paralectotype. The other two specimens are topotypes.
species that SCHWARZER described in 1926. Actually,
no proof of this fact is present in the collection; Clinopleurus lansbergei LAMEERE, 1912 LECTOTYPE
nonetheless, these specimens show an extraordinary and PARALECTOTYPES (Fig. 3)
series of coincidences with such types: they arrived at the [Papua,], Bougainville, P. Hastert don. 1913,
Museum in 1925 coming from the same exact localities Clinopleurus Lansbergei det. A. Lameere, Type,
and corresponding to the original descriptions in all 2c3' c3'2 ~ ~; without locality [probably, Bougainville ],
features. On the other side, ScHWARZER did not indicate acq. 1926, Clinopleurus Lansbergei Lameere, lc3'.
the collection where the types were preserved but surely,
he identified several specimens of the MNHNL at the REMARKs: LAMEERE (1912) described this species on an
same time he wrote the descriptions. Moreover, such undetennined number of specimens from Bougainville
types are not preserved in MFNB (WILLERS, in !itt.) and preserved in the collection Hastert and in the IRSNB.
no further ancient specimen of such species has been Four syntypes of the collection Haste1t are currently
known until recent times (HUDEPOHL, 1992). Hence, it present in the MNHNL, while only another syntype is
seems reasonable to identify these specimens as types. preserved in the IRSNB (DAMOJSEAut & CooLs, 1987).
Finally, a small nwnber of specimens carry the I designate as lectotype the male specimen measuring
label of type and a specific (or even generic!) epithet 80 mm (up the apex of the mandibles) missing the
that are not present in the bibliography. These species ante1ior right leg, the left mesotarsus and the right
were actually never described; hence, they must be metatarsus. All remaining syntypes are designated as
considered as nomina nuda or nomina museala, even paralectotypes.
if Hintz identified them as new species. Some nomina MARAZZI & MARAzzi (2006) transfened this species
nuda by K. M. Heller, without indication of type and to the genus Xixuthrus THOMSON, 1864.
moreover, coming from purchased material, are present
in the MNHNL as well.
''
112 F. VITALI
Tribe Meroscelisini TnoMsoN, 1860 them have the pink label of type. Hence, I designate as
lectotype a male specimen missing the posterior left leg
Closterus promissiramis GILMOUR, 1962 and the last left antennomere. The other two specimens
= Closterus ferrandi LAMEERE in litteris are designated as paralectotypes.
Madagascar, acquistion 1922, Closterus Ferrandi In all likelihood, the species was described as
Holotypus [in !itt.], det. A. Lameere 1921, 10'. Jonthodes since it has an elytral pattern analogue to
that of J. formosa; nevertheless, it clearly belongs to the
Subfamily Cerambycinae LATREILLE, 1802 genus Hybunca, which ScHMIDT described only in 1922.
Tribe Anag1yptini LACORDAIRE, 1869 Actually, it shows the same pattern of H. chrysogramma
baromabana Schmidt, 1922 from Cameroon but it has
Oligoenoplus luzonicus ScHWARZER, 1926 LECTOTYPE an unusual smooth pronotum.
and PARALECTOTYPE (Fig. 4-5) Both ScHMIDT (1922) and BURGEON (1931) ignored
Hintz's species, which the latter author described again
[Philippines,], Luzon, Mt. Banahao, acq. 1925, Ceresium
on isotopotypical specimens, even using the same
raripilum [d et. V. Ferrant?], Newtn. 1d '; [Philippines,],
specific epithet.
Luzon, Imugan, acq. 1925, Oligoenoplus luzonicus [det.
V. Ferrant?], 1 Sj?.
Hospes scutellaris HINTZ, 1919 SYNTYPE
REMARKS: Both specimens of the MNHNL had no label
of either type or determination; nonetheless, they show = Hospes scutellaris BURGEON, 1931 nee HINTZ, 1919
n. syn.
a striking similarity with the types mentioned in the
= Hospes nigripes HINTZ in litteris
introduction ( cfr. ScHWARZER, 1926), which leads to
Congo beige, Kondue, E. Luja [lgt.], E. Luja don. 1907,
recognise them as the types of Oligoenoplus luzonicus.
Hospes scutellaris m[ihi] det. E. Hintz, Type, 1 Sj?; ditto,
According to the usual conventions, the male is fixed
1c)'2Sj?Sj?; ditto, Hospes nigripes m[ihi] det. E. Hintz,
as lectotype (holotype) and the female as para lectotype
Type, 2()' c3' 1 Sj?.
(allotype).
Though HDDEPOHL (1992) inserted this species
REMARKS: Besides the specimens preserved in the
among the Clytini, it actually belongs to the Anaglyptini
(AURrVILLTUS, 1912). MNHNL, three other paratypes are present in the
IRSNB (DAMOISEAU & CooLs, 1987). None of them has
the pink label of type, and no other specimen is present
Tribe Callichromatini BLANCHARD, 1845 in the MFNB (WILLERS, in !itt.). Actually, the description
only quotes a length of 13 mm, but the number of the
Hybunca nodicollis (HINTZ, 1919) n. comb. types is unknown. All presumed types of both MNHNL
and IRSNB reach such size; however, all are females.
LECTOTYPE and PARALECTOTYPES (Fig. 6) Hence, they must be considered as syntypes.
= Jonthodes nodicollis HINTZ, 1916 nomen nudum In all likelihood, Hospes nigripes should indicate
= Jonthodes nodicollis HINTZ, 1919 orig. comb. specimens characterised by black, rather than violet
= Hybunca nodicollis BURGEON, 1931 nee HINTZ, 1919 femoral club. The species is actually nomen nudum;
n. syn. however, it does not seem specifically different from
Congo beige, Kondue, E. Luja [lgt.], E. Luja don. 1907, scutellaris.
Jonthodes nodicollis m[ihi] det. E. Hintz, 3d' 0'2 Sj? Sj?; Both ScHMIDT (1922) and BURGEON (1931) ignored
ditto, coil. A. Klmtgen, Jonthodes nodicollis Hintz [det. Hintz's species, which the latter author described again
A. Kuntgen], 2d'd'. on isotopotypical specimens, even using the same
name.
REMARKs: HINTZ (1916) mentioned Jonthodes nodicollis
from Mawambi (Democratic Republic of the Congo)
three years before its description. The species was really Rhopalizus euporidus JoRDAN, 1894
described only in 1919, apparently on an undetermined = Rhopalizus brevicornis HINTZ in litteris
number ofs pecimens, 19 mm long, comingfromKondue. Congo beige, Kondue, E. Luja [lgt.], E. Luja don. 1907,
Both specimens of the IRSNB overpass 20 mm, while Rhopalizus brevicornis m[ihi] det. E. Hintz, Type, 1 Sj?.
three specimens preserved in the MNHNL have the
characters of the original description, though none of
Type catalogue of the Cerambycoidea in the Natural History Museum of Luxembourg 113
Tribe Cerambycini LATREILLE, 1802 both median legs. The other syntype is preserved in
the IRSNB (DAMOISEAU & CooLs, 1987) and must be
Pachydissus congolensis HINTZ, 1911 LECTOTYPE deemed as paralectotype.
and PARALECTOTYPE? FERRANT (1911) and HEUERTZ (1954) quoted this
= Pachydiscus (sic!) congolensis (HINTZ) FERRANT, 1911 species as "Xylotrechus aurescens", though this species
misspelling was never used in this combination. Probably, it is about
Congo beige, Kondue, E. Luja [lgt.], E. Luja don. 1907, a nomen in litteris that Ferrant received from Hintz in a
Pachydissus congolensis m[ihi] det. E. Hintz, Type, 1c3'; first step of his description.
ditto, 7c3'c3'3~~; ditto, coli. A. Kuntgen, Pachydissus
congo lens is Hintz [ det. A. Kuntgen ], 2c3' c3' 1~ .
Chlorophorus manillae var. aurivilliusi ScHWARZER,
Remarks. FERRANT (1911) and HEUERTZ (1954) mentio 1926 LECTOTYPE and PARALECTOTYPE (Fig. 7)
ned this species as Pachydiscus (sic!) congolensis. [Philippines,], Mindanao, Kolambugan, acq. 1925,
According to AoLBAUER (2002), P congolensis is a 1c3'1~.
younger synonym of Pachydissus regius Aurivillius,
1906 and both congolensis-types belong to the MFNB. REMARKS: As for Oligoenoplus luzonicus, both
Nonetheless, this attribution is surely erroneous. In specimens have either label of neither type nor
fact, FERRANT (1911) mentioned P congolensis among determination; nonetheless, they show a notable series
the species that Hintz had described for the MNHNL. of correspondences with the types. ScHWARZER (1926)
Moreover, all specimens from Kondue mentioned in did not indicate the collection where the types were
the original description belong to the collection Luja. preserved, the size or the number of specimens either;
Hence, the way in they could be preserved at the MFNB therefore, no element contrasts with the fact that such
is unexplainable. Finally, such presumed "types" have specimens belong to the typical series. According to
the label "Pachydissus congolensis m. E. Hintz det. the usual conventions, the male is fixed as lectotype
192" (AoLBAUER, 2002), which clearly implies a label (holotype) and the female as paralectotype (allotype).
pre-printed in 1920, while this species was described AVRIVILLIUS (1928) considered this variety as a species,
in 1911. Evidently, those specin1ens must be deemed as emending its specific epithet in aurivilli.
simple topotypes.
On the other side, a male specimen preserved in
the MNHNL has all features quoted in the original Xylotrechus jordani HINTZ, 1911 LECTOTYPE and
description and the label "m. det. Hintz", besides the PARALECTOTYPES
pink label. A female specimen having the features of Congo beige, Kondue, E. Luja [lgt.], E. Luja don.
the allotype has the red label of type; nonetheless, three 1907, Xylotrechus Jordani m[ihi] det. E. Hintz Type,
other "types" are preserved in the IRSNB (DAMOISEAU 5c3' c3'2 ~ ~; ditto, coil. A. Kuntgen, Xylotrechus Jordani
& CooLs, 1987), while only two types were mentioned Hintz [ det. A. Kuntgen] , 1 ~.
in the original description. In conclusion, while the
identification of the para lectotype remains doubtful, the REMARKS: HINTZ mentioned only six types and other
male specimen having the pink label of type (MNHNL) two syntypes are present in the IRSNB (DAMOISEAU &
must be considered as lectotype. CooLs, 1987). Hence, only four specimens belonging to
the MNHNL can be deemed as syntypes.
I selected the specimen carrying Hintz's detennination
Tribe Clytini MULSANT, 1839 label and the pink label of type as lectotype. This
specimen is a labelled female, 13 mm long, missing
Calanthemis aurescens HINTZ, 1911 LECTOTYPE
the right antenna except for the scape. Other three
= Xylotrechus aurescens (HINTZ) FERRANT, 1911
specimens, as well both preserved in the IRSNB, are
Congo beige, Kondue, E. Luja [lgt.], E. Luja don. 1907,
designated as paralectotypes. The remaining four
Calanthemis aurescens m[ihi] det. E. Hintz, Type, 1c3'.
specimens are topotypes.
REMARKS: HLNTZ mentioned two specimens as types; the
one preserved at the MNHNL has Hintz's autograph label Tribe Obriini MULSANT, 1839
and the pink label of type; therefore, it is deemed as the
lectotype. It is a labelled male 10.5 mm long, missing Nosoeme curvipes HINTZ, 1911 PARATYPES
114 F. VITALI
Congo beige, Kondue, E. Luja [lgt.], E. Luja don. Tribe Tillomorphini LACORDAIRE, 1869
1907, Nosoeme curvipes m[ihi] det. E. Hintz, 30'0'1 ~;
ditto, Nosoeme sp. det. Hintz, Nosoeme curvipes Hintz Centrotoclytus helleri ScHWARZER, 1926 HOLOTYPE
[det. V. Ferrant], 10'1~. (Fig. 10)
[Philippines,], Mindanao, Momungen, acq. 1925,
REMARKs: MARTINS (1977) synonymised this species Centrotoclytus Helleri, 10'.
with Hypomares brunneus (Thomson, 1858) comparing
the holotype (MFNB) and two cotypes belonging to the REMARKS: The specimen has no label of either type or
Deutsche Entomologische Institut, Eberswalde. The detennination; however, it shows an impressive series
holotype corresponds to the first specimen mentioned of correspondences with the type already noticed in the
in the original description; while apparently four of introduction. Though ScHWARZER ( 1926) did not indicate
the remaining six types (coll. Luja) are present in the the collection where the type was preserved, the present
MNHNL, as other ones mentioned in the same paper. specimen in the MNHNL is here formally recognised as
According to DAMOISEAU & CooLs (1987) other two the holotype of Centrotoclytus helleri.
syntypes are preserved in the IRSNB; hence, only
two specimens of MNHNL should be considered as
paratypes.
Tribe Xystrocerini BLANCHARD, 1845
Other two unidentified specimens, measuring less
than 16 rnm and hence not belonging to the typical
Antennoeme quadriplagiata HINTZ, 1911 PARATYPES
series, were identified as the same species in subsequent = Iquitosternum apicale HINTZ in litteris
times, possibly by Ferrant.
Congo beige, Kondue, E. Luja [lgt.], E. Luja don. 1907,
Antennoeme quadriplagiata m[ihi] det. E. Hintz, 4 ~ ~;
ditto, Iquitosternum apicale Hintz [in !itt.], 8m; ditto,
Tribe Plectogasterini QUENTIN & VILLIERS, 1969 coll. A. Kuntgen, Antennoeme quadriplagiata Jord.
(sic!) [det. A. Kuntgen], 40'0'8f.
Neoclosterus ferranti BoPPE, 1912 HOLOTYPE
(Fig. 8) REMARKs: Four specimens of MNHNL have the
Congo beige, Kondue, E. Luja [lgt.], E. Luja don. 1907, label "m[ihi] det. E. Hintz" corresponding in size
Neoclosterus Ferranti Boppe, P. Boppe vid[it], Type, (12-16 rnm) to the six specimens of the collection
Neoclosterus lujae Boppe var. det. Quentin & Villiers Luja that HINTZ quoted as types of A. quadriplagiata.
1969, 10'. Since the first specimen mentioned in the original
description (Mawambi am Ituri) does not belong to the
REMARKS: QUENTIN & VILLIERS (1969) considered this MNHNL but possibly to the MFNB, the remaining five
species as a simple variety of Neoclosterus lujae BOPPE, specimens coming from Kondue might be recognised as
1912. the paratypes of A. quadriplagiata.
According to DAMOISEAU & COOLS (1987) other two
syntypes are preserved in the IRSNB; nonetheless, one
Neoclosterus opacipennis BoPPE, 1912 HOLOTYPE specimen does not reach even 11 mm; hence only one
(Fig. 9) specimen preserved in the IRSNB can be considered as
Congo belge, Kondue, E. Luja [lgt.], E. Luja don. 1907, paratype. In contrast, the four specimens of the MNHNL
Neoclosterus opacipennis BoPPE, P. Boppe vid[it], Type, should be considered as paratypes.
1 ~- It is remarkable that HINTZ firstly identified the males
of this species as "Iquitosternum apicale" two taxa that
REMARKs: According to QUENTIN & VILLIERS (1969) he never described. Curiously, this species is indicated as
all Boppe's species were described as belonging "quadriplagiata Jord." in the box labels of the Museum
to Plectogaster; actually, they were described as and that of the collection Ktmtgen.
Neoclosterus (BoPPE, 1912).
I I
Type catalogue of the Cerambycoidea in the Natural History Museum of Luxembourg 115
lsosaphanus ferranti HINTZ, 1913 LECTOTYPE (Fig. Xystrocera latipes HINTZ, 1911 LECTOTYPE and
11) PARALECTOTYPES
= Jsophanus (sic!) Ferranti (HINTZ) FERRANT, 1911 Congo beige, Kondue, E. Luja [lgt.], E. Luja don. 1907,
misspelling Xystrocera latipes m[ihi] det. E. Hintz, Type, 8~ ~;
= Jsoseptanus (sic!) ferranti (HINTZ) HEUERTZ, 1954 ditto, E. Luja [lgt.], E. Luja don. 1907, Xystrocera
misspelling latipes HINTZ, 1 ~; ditto, coli. A. Kuntgen, Xystrocera
Congo beige, Kondue, E. Luja [lgt.], E. Luja don. latipes HINTZ [det. A. Ktmtgen], 2~~-
1907, Jsosaphanus Ferranti m[ihi] det. E. Hintz, Type,
lsoseptanus (sic!) ferranti HINTZ [det. V. Ferrant], 10'; REMARKs: One of the seven specimens that HINTZ
ditto, 20'0'. mentioned as X trivittata was later identified by HINTZ
himself as var. latera/is. HINTZ described this species
REMARKs: HINTZ (1913) described lsosaphanus as on eight specimens (50'0'3~~) measuring 14-20 mm;
related to Saphanodes HINTZ, 1913 and Metopotylus nonetheless, all eight specimens present in the MNHNL
QUEDENFELDT, 1882. Actually, the former genus belongs are females. Moreover, according to DAMOISEAU &
to the Disteniidae and the latter to the Cerambycinae CooLs (1987), seven other syntypes ( 40' 0'2 ~ ~ + 1
Xystrocerini. The examination of this genus suggests destructed 0') are present in the IRSNB. Actually, only
instead a closer relation with Oemodana GAHAN, 1904, both females correspond to the description, while the
from which it can be distinguished in the smooth (rather other ones belong to the typical form. Moreover, no
than granulate) scape and the long pubescent (rather specimen belonging to this fonn is a male, corresponding
than calve) pronotum. to the fact that HINTZ quoted "antennis brevibus" and
This species was described on a pair, but only the furnished only chromatic characters (green or blue) in
male belongs to the MNHNL, while the other type is order to separate the sexes.
preserved in the IRSNB (DAMOISEAU & CooLs, 1987). Only six of the eight females present in the MNHNL
Hence, the male, moreover having the determination can be considered as syntypes. Among them, the
label, is designated as lectotype, that is preserved specimen having the pink label of type (MNHNL)
in the IRSNB (unfortunately strongly damaged) as should be designated as lectotype. It is a pinned female,
paralectotype. The remaining males are topotypes. 20 mm long, missing both hind claws; the remaining
FERRANT ( 1911) mentioned this species as "lsophanus five females, as well both specimens in the IRSNB, are
Ferranti" before its description and inserted it in the considered paralectotypes.
collection among the Callichromatini, adding a label BREUNING (1957) considered this species as a fmm
"lsoseptanus ferranti". Still HEUERTZ (1954) and of X frontalis Thomson, 1858, while MARTINS (1980) of
DAMOISEAU & CooLs (1987) quoted this species using X fulvipes Thomson, 1858.
such misspellings.
Xystrocera lujae HINTZ, 1911 LECTOTYPE and
Metopotylus costatus HINTZ, 1911 LECTOTYPE (Fig. PARALECTOTYPES
12) Congo beige, Kondue, E. Luja [lgt.], E. Luja don. 1907,
Congo beige, Kondue, E. Luja [lgt.], E. Luja don. 1911, Xystrocera Lzijae m[ihi] det. E. Hintz, Type, 50' 0'2 ~ ~;
Metopotylus costatus m[ihi] det. E. Hintz, Type, 10'. ditto, coll. A. Kuntgen, Xystrocera Lujae Hintz [det.
A. Kuntgen], 40' 0' 1 ~; Congo beige, lturi, 1 ~.
REMARKS: HINTZ mentioned two specimens as types. The
one preserved at the MNHNL has Hintz's autograph REMARKS: The holotype and six specimens, which HINTZ
label as the other one present in the IRSNB (DAMOISEAU mentioned as cotypes, are currently perfectly preserved
& CooLs, 1987), which also have the pink label of type. in the MNHNL. DAMOISEAU & CooLs (1987) quoted
This latter type misses head, antennae, and all legs other four syntypes preserved in the IRSNB. Since
except for both mesofemora; hence, it is too poorly HINTZ described Xystrocera lujae on the basis of eleven
preserved to be a valid lectotype. Consequently, the specimens, all specimens cwTently exist.
specimen preserved in the MNHNL is designated as The lectotype, having the pink label of type, is
lectotype. It is a labelled male 13 mm long, missing the designated in the MNHNL: it is a pinned male, 25
left mesotarsus and the left hind leg. mm, long, missing the right median leg. The remaining
LEPESME & BREUNING (1956a) transferred this species syntypes in both MNHNL and IRSNB are designated
to the new genus Millotsaphanidius. as paralectotypes, while the other specimens belonging
,,
116 F. VITALI
to the collection Kuntgen must be considered as Velleda congolensis HINTZ, 1911 LECTOTYPE and
topotypes. PARALECTOTYPES
= Veleda (sic!) congolensis (HINTZ) FERRANT, 1911
misspelling
Xystrocera metallica var. atripes HINTZ, 1911 Congo beige, Kondue, E. Luja [lgt.], E. Luja don.
LECTOTYPE 1907, Veileda congo lens is m[ihi] det. E. Hintz, Type,
Congo beige, Kondue, E. Luja [lgt.], E. Luja don. 1907, 2(30'4~~; ditto, coli. A. Kuntgen, Velleda congolensis
Xystrocera metallica v. a tripes m[ihi] det. E. Hintz, Type, HINTZ [ det. A. Kuntgen], 1c 3' 1 ~.
1(31 ~; ditto, Xystrocera metallica QUEo., 3(3(31 ~.
REMARKS: Six of the seven specimens on which HINTZ
REMARKS: BREUNING (1957) considered this form as a described this species seem to be present in the MNHNL;
variety of Xystrocera asperata Thomson, 1858. nonetheless, DAMOISEAU & CooLs (1987) quoted other
HINTZ quoted two females in the original description, two syntypes preserved in the IRSNB. Actually, another
though the specimens just having the label of type and specimen preserved in the IRSNB (ex coil. Hintz) might
the characters ofthis form (black legs) are actually a pair. be a syntype as well.
Another syntype is present in the IRSNB (DAMOISEAU & Though HINTZ selected no holotype, the specimen
CooLs, 1987). Both syntypes have no pink label of type, carrying the pink label of type (MNHNL) is designated
but the one preserved in the IRSNB is damaged, missing as lectotype. Such specimen is a labelled female, 8 mm
one leg and most part of the right antenna; therefore, the long, missing of the right protarsus.
female of the MNHNL is designated as lectotype and The remaining five specimens of the MNHNL
the one of the IRSNB as paralectotype. It is a pinned and the one of the IRSNB should be considered as
specimen, 28 mm long, missing the right protarsus. paralectotypes.
HINTZ described this species as a representative of
Phrissomini, but BREUNTNG (1954) transferred it to the
Subfamily Lamiinae LATREILLE, 1825 Acanthocinini, instituting the new genus Falsovelleda.
Tribe Acanthocinini BLANCHARD, 1845
Eoporis (Eoporimimus) bifasciana ScHWARZER, 1925 Tribe Acmocerini THOMSON, 1864
SYNTYPE
Formosa, Fuhosho, H. Sauter [1gt.], acq. 1924, Acmocera albofasciata HINTZ, 1911 PARATYPES
Eoporimimus bifascianus ScHWR. Type! [handwritten Congo beige, Kondue, E. Luja [lgt.], E. Luja don. 1907,
by. B. Schwarzer], Eoporimimus bifascianus ScHw. det. Acmocera albofasciata m[ihi] det. E. Hintz, Type [=
S. Breuning [1950], 1(3. para type], 6c3' c3'; ditto, coil. A. Kuntgen, Acmocera
albofasciata HINTZ, 7 c3' c3'.
REMARKS: ScHWARZER (1925) described this species from
an undetermined number of specimens, 9-12 mm long, REMARKS: HINTZ mentioned as types a pair coming from
having the following labels: "Fuhosho, 7.VII; 7.VIII; Ituri, which must be considered as holotype and allotype.
7.IX; Sokutso, 7.XII.1912". Aftetwards, he mentioned "a number of specimens"
He described this species as belonging to of the Luja collection, feebly different in the pattern
Eoporimimus, a new subgenus of Eoporis PASCOE, 1824 but belonging to the same species, which must be
that he himself instituted in the same paper; nonetheless, considered as paratypes. Eleven specimens are present
the specimen preserved in the MNHNL has a handwritten in the IRSNB (CooLs, 1993), while only six specimens
label indicating "Eoporimimus bifascianus Type". of the MNHNL have the label of type. However, the
The MNHNL purchased this specimen in 1924 and seven specimens of the collection Kuntgen, deriving
Schwarzer never published such combination. The only from collection Luja in subsequent years, must be
explanation is that originally, Schwarzer had intention considered as paratypes as well.
to describe this new species as belonging to a new genus BREUNING & TE:occm (1979) considered this species
but later, he changed idea, declassing Eoporimimus to as a subspecies of Acmocera conjux Thomson, 1858.
subgenus level. In all likelihood, the present specimen
is one of the first, or even the first specimen of this
species, that Schwarzer observed.
I I
Type catalogue of the Cerambycoidea in the Natural History Museum of Luxembourg 117
Tribe Aderpasini BREUNING & TtoccHI, 1977 Ade1pas uniformis HINTZ, 1913 LECTOTYPE and
PARALECTOTYPES
Ade1pas congolensis HINTZ, 1913 HOLOTYPE (Fig. Congo belge, Kondue, E. Luja [lgt.], E. Luja don. 1907,
13) Aderpas uniformis m[ihi] det. E. Hintz, Type, 1c 3'2 ~ ~.
Congo beige, Kondue, E. Luja [lgt.], E. Luja don. 1904,
Aderpas congolensis m[ihi] det. E. Hintz, Type, 1c3'; REMARKs: HINTZ described this species from an
Congo beige, Sankuru, 1901, E. Luja [lgt.], E. Luja don. undete1mined number of specimens from Kondue
1904, 1~. measuring between 8 and 11 mm.
I select as lectotype the specimen canying the
REMARKs: According to CooLs (1993), a syntype is pink label of type and belonging to the MNHNL. It
present in the IRSNB; nonetheless, HINTZ did not is a labelled female, 10 mm long, missing the right
mention the number of the types and provided only antenna except for scape and pedicle, the last five left
one size (11 mm). Hence, it is uncertain whether such antennomeres, the left hind legs, and the right hind claw.
specimen is really a type. It is only 10 mm long; hence, The remaining two specimens carrying the red labels of
it cannot be considered as a type. types put by Ferrant, and both syntypes preserved at the
In contrast, the specimen preserved in the MNHNL IRSNB (CooLs, 1993), both without pink label of type,
reaches such size, has Hintz's autograph label and are designated as paralectotypes.
the pink label of type; therefore, it is deemed as the Aderpas uniformis was considered as a species
holotype. (BREUNING, 1938), as a morph of A. subfasciatus JoRDAN,
This species was considered as a synonym of 1894 (BREUNING & TE:occHI, 1977) and finally as a morph
A. brunneus (THOMSON, 1858) (BREUNING, 1938), as a of A. lineolatus subfasciatus (TE:occHI, 2001).
valid species (BREUNING & TEoccHI, 1977) and finally as
a subspecies of A. quadricostatus HINTZ, 1913 (TE:occHJ
et alii, 2004). However, it does not result that none of Tribe Ancylonotini LACORDAIRE, 1869
such authors ever checked the holotype.
Cyclocerus ferranti HINTZ, 1911 LECTOTYPE and
PARALECTOTYPES
Aderpas albomaculatus HINTZ, 1913 LECTOTYPE and Congo beige, Kondue, E. Luja [lgt.], E. Luja [lgt.],
PARALECTOTYPES E. Luja don. 1907, Cyclocerus Ferranti m[ihi] det.
Congo beige, Kondue, E. Luja [lgt.], E. Luja don. E. Hintz, Type, 2c3' c3' 1~ , ditto, 1c 3'.
1907, Aderpas albomaculatus m[ihi] det. E. Hintz,
Type, 3c3' c3'4 ~ ~; ditto, coll. A. Kuntgen, Aderpas REMARKS: HINTZ described this species on two pairs
albomaculatus, cotype, [det. A. Kuntgen], 2c3'c3'4~~· measuring 15-18 mm: Four specimens seem to be
ctmently well preserved in the MNHNL; while two other
REMARKs: HINTZ described this species from an syntypes are claimed by the IRSNB (CooLs, 1993).
undetermined number of specimens from Kondue The specimen having the pink label of type
measuring between 7 and 12 mm. BREUNING (1938) (MNHNL) must be considered as lectotype. It is a
synonymised this species with Aderpas griseus pinned male, 18 mm long, missing the half of the last
(THOMSON, 1858). right antennomere. The female has also the pink label of
I select as lectotype the specimen having the pink type; hence, it is a paralectotype. Though figured in the
label of type (MNHNL). It is a labelled female, 11 1run original description, the male preserved in the IRSNB
long, missing the left antenna except for the scape, the has no pink label of type; hence, it must be considered as
last two right antennomeres, and the right metatarsus. paralectotype. In contrast, a female of the IRSNB comes
The other six specimens, having the red labels of type from Kassai; consequently, it cannot be considered as a
put by Ferrant, the specimens of the collection Kuntgen syntype, while another male preserved in the MNHNL
and the five syntypes preserved in the IRSNB (CooLs, must be deemed as paralectotype.
1993), all without a pink label of type, are designated as AURlVILLfUS ( 1921) synonymised Cyclocerus ferranti
paralectotypes. with Latisternum macropus Jordan, 1903. Possibly,
HINTZ did not notice that this species had already been
described since he identified it as a representative of the
Acanthoderini. Actually, this genus is a very unusual
representative of the Ancylonotini.
tl
118 F. VITALI
Paroeax schoutedeni BREUNING, 1935 The only specimen with Hintz's autograph label
= Idactus sellatus HrNTZ in litteris preserved in the MNHNL has no pink label of type as
Congo beige, Kondue, E. Luja [lgt.], E. Luja don. 1907, all syntypes preserved in the IRSNB (CooLs, 1993).
Idactus sellatus m[ihi] det. E. Hintz, Type [in !itt.], Another specimen with the same locality label is
16'1 ~· present in the MNHNL, but it does not seem that Hintz
examined it too, as well the nine remaining topotypical
REMARKs: HrNTZ identified this species as being new specimens. However, none of the examined syntypes
but he did not describe it. The species was in fact new come from Gabon, though two specimens labelled
but it was later described by BREUNrNG from a different as such are present in the IRSNB. Consequently, the
locality of Congo. identification of the true types, besides the lectotypes,
remains doubtful.
Phloeus brevis JORDAN, 1903
= Oeax latus HrNTZ in litteris Dichostates quadrisignatus HrNTZ, 1912 SYNTYPES
Congo beige, Kondue, E. Luja [lgt.], E. Luja don. 1907, Congo beige, Kondue, E. Luja [lgt.], 1914, Dichostathes
Oeax latus m[ihi] det. E. Hintz, Type [in !itt.], 1 ~. quadrisignatus m[ihi] det. Hintz, type, 2d' d'2 ~ ~.
REMARKs: HrNTZ identified this species as being new REMARKS: HrNTZ described this species from an
but he did not describe it. Actually, JORDAN had already undetermined number of specimens coming from
described this species as belonging to a different genus. Kondue and measming 10 -12 mm.
Four syntypes are preserved in the MNHNL and
other two in the IRSNB (CooLs, 1993). Nevertheless,
Tribe Ceroplesini THOMSON, 1860 none of the specimens preserved in the MNHNL has
the pink label of type, as well the one preserved in the
Pycnopsis brachypteroides HrNTz, 1910 PARATYPES IRSNB.
D[eutsche] O[st], Afr[ika], [= Tanzania], Lukuledi,
Pycnopsis brachypteroides m[ihi] det. E. Hintz [1910],
Cotype, E. Hintz don. 1912, 16'1 ~; D[eutsche] Ost Crossotofrea lineata HrNTZ, 1913 SYNTYPES
Afrika[= Tanzania], Lindi, [19]03, E. Hintz don. 1912, Congo beige, Kondue, E. Luja [lgt.], E. Luja don. 1907,
Pycnopsis brachypteroides det. E. Hintz 1916, 1d ' 1 ~. Crossotofrea lineata m[ihi] det. E. Hintz, Type, 2 ~ ~.
REMARKS: HrNTz (1910) described bracypteroides as REMARKS: HrNTZ described this species on an undeter
a tme species, while AuruvrLLTUS ( 1921) considered it mined number of specimens from Kondue measuring
as a simple variety of P. brachyptera Thomson, 1860. between 11 and 12trun. Two syntypes are present in the
Finally, BREUNrNG (193 7) considered it as no variety MNHNL and two other in the IRSNB (CooLs, 1993),
either. but none of the specimens preserved in both MNHNL
Two paratypes are present in the MNHNL. and IRSNB has the pink label of type.
According to BREUNING (1942) this species belongs
to Frea sg. Crossotofrea.
Tribe Crossotini THOMSON, 1864
Dichostates fiavomaculatus HrNTZ, 1912 SYNTYPE? Crossotofrea trilineata HrNTZ, 1913 SYNTYPES
Congo beige, Kondue, 1904, E. Luja [lgt.], E. Luja don. Congo beige, Kondue, E. Luja [lgt.], E. Luja don. 1907,
1907, Dichostates flavomaculatus m[ihi] det. E. Hintz, (Frea) trilineata m[ihi] det. E. Hintz, type, 3d' d'2 ~ ~;
Type, 1d'; ditto, Dichostathes fiavopictus Qued. [det. ditto, E. Luja [lgt. ], E. Luja don. 1907, Frea tuberculata
V. Ferrant], 1 ~; Congo beige, Kondue, E. Luja [Jgt.], Aur. det. E. Hintz, 1 ~.
E. Luja don. 1907, 2d'd'l ~; ditto, coli. A. Kuntgen,
5d'd'1 ~· REMARKS: HrNTZ described Crossotofrea trilineata on an
tmdetennined number of specimens from Kondue and
REMARKs: HrNTZ described this species on only four Bipindi (Cameroon). BREUNrNG (1942) synonymised it
specimens coming from Kondue and Gabon, 12-14 mm with Frea (Crossotofrea) unifasciata (THOMSON, 1858).
long. Presently, five syntypes and a topotype, which Hintz
