Skip to main content
NCBI home page
ZooKeys logoLink to ZooKeys
. 2020 Nov 5;986:55–80. doi: 10.3897/zookeys.986.57158

The species of Timarcha Samouelle, 1819 described by Linnaeus (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae)

José Miguel Vela 1,✉, Miguel Ángel Alonso-Zarazaga 2, Mauro Daccordi 3
PMCID: PMC7661484  PMID: 33223880

Abstract

Linnaeus described five species presently included in the genus Timarcha: Chrysomela goettingensis, Tenebrio caeruleus, Tenebrio laevigatus, Tenebrio latipes, and Tenebrio rugosus. After a study of the relevant material, the identity of these species has been established. The following synonyms are proposed or confirmed: Timarcha goettingensis (Linnaeus, 1758) = T. latipes (Linnaeus, 1767), syn. nov.; Timarcha caerulea (Linnaeus, 1758), comb. nov. = T. balearica Gory, 1833, syn. nov. = T. balearica Pérez Arcas, 1865, syn. nov.; Timarcha rugosa (Linnaeus, 1767) = T. scabra (Olivier, 1807), syn. conf. = T. generosa Erichson, 1841, syn. conf.; Timarcha laevigata (Linnaeus, 1767) = T. tenebricosa (Fabricius, 1775), syn. conf.. The type of Tenebrio caeruleus is a Chrysomelidae currently belonging to genus Timarcha and therefore can no longer be considered a Tenebrionidae (Helops caeruleus) nor the type species of genus Helops. For the sake of nomenclatural stability, an application to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature to change the relative precedence of Timarcha caerulea and retain usage of T. balearica will be made. An application to change the relative precedence of Timarcha laevigata has been submitted, which would lead to the conservation of usage of T. tenebricosa as valid. Lectotypes are designated for Chrysomela goettingensis, Tenebrio latipes, Tenebrio caeruleus, Timarcha balearica Gory, T. balearica Pérez Arcas, Tenebrio rugosus, Chrysomela scabra, Timarcha generosa, Tenebrio laevigatus, and Chrysomela tenebricosa. For each of the valid species the diagnosis, distribution, and host-plant data are reported.

Keywords: Chrysomelinae , Europe, leaf beetles, nomenclature, North Africa, synonyms, taxonomy, Tenebrionidae

Introduction

The taxonomy of the genus Timarcha Samouelle, 1819 (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae) is among the most challenging of all Palaearctic chrysomelids because: i) the types were rarely consulted by authors, and ii) there exists a high variability in traits as size, sculpture and form of the pronotum (Petitpierre 1970; Tiberghien 1971; Gómez-Zurita 2008; Kippenberg 2010). Therefore, a revisionary work on this genus is required (Daccordi et al. 2020).

As a starting point for the revision of the genus Timarcha, we have studied the species authored by Carl Linnaeus. He described five species presently belonging to this genus. They are Chrysomela goettingensis Linnaeus, 1758, Tenebrio caeruleus Linnaeus, 1758, Tenebrio laevigatus Linnaeus, 1767, Tenebrio latipes Linnaeus, 1767, and Tenebrio rugosus Linnaeus, 1767. One of us (MAAZ) studied and photographed the types of T. latipes and T. laevigatus in the collection of the Linnean Society of London. As well, consultation of photographs of Linnean types on the website of the Linnean Collections (http://linnean-online.org/) of the Linnean Society of London, together with a study of type specimens of other nominal species in other museums, led us to reconsider the availability and nomenclatural status of the five species of Timarcha described by Linnaeus.

Material and methods

Measurements of body length were made using the ocular grid of a Lomo MBS-10 binocular microscope at 10× magnification. Body size was considered the total length of the specimen from the anterior region of head to the apex of elytron. Photographs of type specimens of Tenebrio laevigatus and T. latipes were taken with a Canon EOS 7D camera attached to a MP-E 65 mm f/2.8 1–5× macro lens. Photographs of type specimens of Chrysomela goettingensis, Tenebrio caeruleus, and T. rugosus were kindly provided by Linnean collections staff (The Linnean Society of London) and of Timarcha balearica Gory, 1833 by Antoine Mantilleri (MNHN). Types, and their parts, of Timarcha balearica Pérez-Arcas, 1865, T. scabra (Olivier, 1807), and T. generosa Erichson, 1841 were photographed with an Olympus Stylus TG-3 digital compact camera. Photographs of other specimens or their parts were done with a Canon EOS 550D attached to a bellows with a Schneider Componon-S 50mm f/2.8 objective. Combine ZM was used for resolving the stack of photos.

The methodology to name the vestiture under of the tarsi I–III, to dissect the sclerites of endophallus, and to inflate the endophallus is explained by Daccordi et al. (2020).

In the treatment of type material from the collection of Carl Linnaeus, we have followed Recommendation 73F (International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature 1999) and have designated “a lectotype rather than assume a holotype”. The designation of lectotypes in this paper has been made by the three authors jointly, unless otherwise indicated in the labels of the types.

Host plants are given using their valid names. If a name, now a synonym, was originally mentioned, this follows the valid name between round brackets. Plant nomenclature follows APG IV (2016) for families and The Plant List (http://www.theplantlist.org) for genera and species names.

The material examined is housed in the following collections (curators mentioned between round brackets):

LSUK The Linnean Collections of the Linnean Society, London (Isabelle Charmantier, Suzanne Ryder)

MNCNMuseo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales, Madrid (Mercedes París)

MNHN Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris (Antoine Mantilleri)

ZMHB Museum für Naturkunde der Humboldt-Universität, Berlin (Johannes Frisch, Bernd Jäger)

ZMUK Zoologisches Museum, Universität Kiel, Kiel (Michael Kuhlmann).

The label data for all type specimens is cited as follows: a double slash (//) divides the texts on different labels, a single slash (/) divides the text in different rows. Type localities are cited with their original spellings. Comments and notes are cited in square brackets: [p] preceding data are printed, [h] preceding data are handwritten, [w] white label, [r] red label.

The webpage of the Linnean Collections (http://linnean-online.org/), of the Linnean Society of London, has been a critical source of information.

Results

Timarcha goettingensis

(Linnaeus, 1758)

BEC2FA89-45DE-5AEC-8EFC-BCB7BDC112F2

Figures 1–4 , 5–7

Figures 1–4.

Figures 1–4.

Open in a new tab

Timarcha goettingensis1 lectotypus of Chrysomela goettingensis in dorsal (a) and side (b) view, and label (c) (photos provided by The Linnean Society, with permission to reproduce 2 lectotypus of Tenebrio latipes in dorsal (a) and side (b) view, lateral side of pronotum (c), underside of third metatarsomere (d), and label (e) (photos by Alonso Zarazaga and Ren Li, with permission to reproduce from The Linnean Society) 3 male habitus from Germany, Frankenhausen (a) and Germany, Erfurt (b) 4 pronota of males from France, Lozère (a), Germany, Bad Frankenhausen (b) and Germany, Erfurt (c).

Figures 5–7.

Figures 5–7.

Open in a new tab

Timarcha goettingensis5 aedeagi of Germany, Erfurt in dorsal (a) and side view (b) and Germany, Bad Frankenhausen in dorsal (c) and side (d) view 6 sclerite of the endophallus from Germany, Bad Frankenhausen, in dorsolateral view (taken from Daccordi et al. 2020) 7 everted endophallus from Germany, Frankenhausen in dorsal (a) and side (b) view (taken from Daccordi et al. 2020). Scale bars: 1 mm (5), 0.5 mm (6).

  • Chrysomela goettingensis Linnaeus 1758: 368 (original description).

  • Tenebrio latipes Linnaeus 1767: 678 (original description), syn. nov.

Type localities.

Chrysomela goettingensis: “Germania”. Tenebrio latipes: “Africa” [type locality wrong].

Type material.

Chrysomela goettingensis: not examined. The images of the lectotype (♂, presently designated, Fig. 1), labelled “goettingensis [w, h, Linnaeus’ handwriting] // 4 [w, p]” (LSUK, code LINN 5537), are available at http://linnean-online.org/22922/.

Tenebrio latipes: Lectotype (♀, presently designated, Fig. 2): “LSL INS 6579 [p] // latipes [h, Linnaeus’ handwriting] // 30” (LSUK, code LINN 6579). Examined by one of us (MAAZ), images are also available at http://linnean-online.org/23904/.

Comments.

In the Linnean collections there are two different species under Chrysomela goettingensis. One of them, specimen LINN 5537 labelled “goettingensis” [w, h, Linnaeus’ handwriting] (http://linnean-online.org/22922/), is the lectotype of Chrysomela goettingensis Linnaeus, 1758: 368 (presently in Timarcha, Fig. 1). The other species have the codes LINN 5536 (labelled “goettingensis” [w, h, Linnaeus’ handwriting]) (http://linnean-online.org/22921/), LINN 5538 (no labelled) (http://linnean-online.org/22923/), LINN 5539 (no labelled) (http://linnean-online.org/22924/), and are to be considered syntypes of Chrysomela goettingensis Linnaeus, 1760: 160, although this species is currently known as Chrysolina sturmi (Westhoff 1882: 268) (see Waterhouse 1864: 18; Weise 1916: 96; Bieńkowski 2001: 162). An additional specimen, LINN 5540 (http://linnean-online.org/22925/), is also the latter species but cannot be a syntype because it comes from Fenwick Skrimshire, who was born after the publication of Linnaeus’s work.

Authors such as Weise (1916: 207), Winkler (1930: 1298), Bechynĕ (1945a: 103, 1947a: 59, 1948: 50), Jolivet (1967a: 225); Warchałowski (2010: 629), and Gómez-Zurita and Kippenberg (2010: 440 (pars)) have identified as “Timarcha latipes (Linnaeus)” specimens belonging to T. punctella Marseul, 1871 species group (Daccordi and Vela unpubl. data). However, the original description of Tenebrio latipes Linnaeus, 1767 clearly says that it is half the size of T. laevigata. In fact, the lectotype of T. latipes measures 8.4 mm (Fig. 2), obviously much smaller than T. punctella or species similar to it from North Africa. The type locality “Africa” given by Linnaeus (1867) for T. latipes is incorrect.

Diagnosis.

Males: 7.4–12.6 mm (lectotype of T. goettingensis: 8.7 mm; Fig. 1); females: 8.4–14.5 mm (lectotype of T. latipes is an unextended specimen measuring 8.4 mm; Fig. 2). Black or black with bluish luster (Fig. 3). Highly variable species in brightness, puncturation, form of the pronotum and elytra, and size. Sides of the pronotum regularly, slightly curved or almost straight, with the widest point in the basal third or at base, never cordiform, completely margined or with lateral margins obliterated at different extent (Fig. 4). Puncturation on the pronotum and elytra dense, regular, heavily or weakly marked, usually stronger on the elytra, not or conspicuously vermiculated (Figs 3, 4). Mesoventrite variable with apophysis a bit prominent, slightly forked, or more or less emarginated or almost straight, never clearly bituberculated. Vestiture of the female tarsi: (1, 1, 1/3–3/4; 1, 1, 1/3–3/4; 1, 4/5–1, 1/2–3/4). The aedeagus is slender and progressively narrowed towards the apex in dorsal view and regularly curved in side view (Fig. 5). Sclerites of the internal sac of the aedeagus (Fig. 6) with a paired phanera in romboid form, which is an important diagnostic character to separate this from other closely related species. The inflated endophallus of an approximate locotype (coming near Göttinga in central Germany) (Fig. 7) is shown. A number of species and subspecies, whose taxonomical rank has yet to be studied, have been described in association with this species (Winkelman and Debreuil 2008; Warchałowski 2010; Gómez-Zurita and Kippenberg 2010).

Distribution.

Most of Europe, from northern Spain to European Russia, and reaching Great Britain and Sweden (Gómez-Zurita and Kippenberg 2010)

Host plants.

Scabiosa atropurpurea L. (= S. maritima L.) (Caprifoliaceae); Plantago lanceolata L., P. coronopus L. (Plantaginaceae), Cruciata laevipes Opiz, Galium aparine L., G. arenarium Loisel., G. mollugo L., G. odoratum (L.) Scop. (= Asperula odorata L.), G. saxatile L., G. uliginosum L., G. verum L., Rubia peregrina L. (Rubiaceae) (Jolivet and Petitpierre 1973; Winkelman and Debreuil 2008; Tiberghien 2016).

Timarcha balearica

Gory, 1833

42AE1909-04C7-5EE1-9E36-67415479466E

Figures 8–14

Figures 8–14.

Figures 8–14.

Open in a new tab

Timarcha balearica8 lectotypus of Tenebrio caeruleus in dorsal (a) and side (b) view, and label (c) (photos provided by The Linnean Society, with permission to reproduce) 9 lectotypus of Timarcha balearica Gory in dorsal (a), ventral (b) and side (c) view, and label (d) (photos provided by Antoine Mantilleri (MNHN), with permission to reproduce) 10 lectotypus of Timarcha balearica Pérez Arcas, habitus (a), pronotum (b) and labels (c) 11 male habitus from Spain, Baleares, Palma de Mallorca 12 aedeagus from Spain, Baleares, Palma de Mallorca, in dorsal (a) and side (b) view 13 sclerite of the endophallus from Spain, Palma de Mallorca, in side view (taken from Daccordi et al. 2020) 14 Everted endophallus from Spain, Baleares, Menorca, Mahón, in dorsal (a) and side (b) view. Scale bars: 1 mm (12), 0.5 mm (13).

  • Tenebrio caeruleus Linnaeus 1758: 418 (original description), syn. nov. Application for reversal of precedence will be submitted to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (see comments below).

  • Tenebrio caeruleus Linnaeus 1767: 677 (repeated description).

  • Timarcha caerulea (Linnaeus 1758), nov. comb.

  • Timarcha balearica Gory 1833: pl. 49 (original description).

  • Timarcha balearica Gory 1844: 300 (text description).

  • Timarcha balearica Pérez Arcas 1865: 180 (original description). Synonymized with T. balearica Gory by Fairmaire and Allard (1873: 152). Synonymy confirmed.

  • Timarcha balearica var. violaceus Pic 1919: 20 (unavailable infrasubspecific name).

  • Timarcha balearica var. martini Pic 1919: 20 (unavailable infrasubspecific name).

  • Timarcha balearica ab. viridipennis Bechynĕ 1946: 30 (unavailable infrasubspecific name).

  • Timarcha balearica ab. coerulescens Bechynĕ 1946: 30 (unavailable infrasubspecific name).

  • Timarcha balearica ab. longicornis Bechynĕ 1946: 30 (unavailable infrasubspecific name).

  • Timarcha balearica ab. nigriventris Bechynĕ 1946: 30 (unavailable infrasubspecific name).

  • Timarcha balearica ab. olivacea Bechynĕ 1946: 30 (unavailable infrasubspecific name).

  • Timarcha balearica ab. semicoerulea Bechynĕ 1946: 30 (unavailable infrasubspecific name).

  • Timarcha balearica ab. discolor Bechynĕ 1946: 30 (unavailable infrasubspecific name).

  • Timarcha balearica ab. tricolor Bechynĕ 1946: 30 (unavailable infrasubspecific name).

Type localities.

Tenebrio caeruleus: “Hispania”. Timarcha balearica G.: “Les Iles Baléares”. Timarcha balearica P. A.: “Mahón (Menorca), Alcudia de Mallorca”.

Type material.

Tenebrio caeruleus: not examined. The images of the lectotype (♂, presently designated, Fig. 8), labelled “coerule / us 19’ [w, h, Linnaeus’s handwriting]” (LSUK, code LINN 6569), are available at http://linnean-online.org/23894/.

Timarcha balearica G.: Lectotype (♂, presently designated, Fig. 9): “Baleares [h. by Blanchard] // Ex-Musaeo / GUÉR.-MÉNEV. [p, w] // lectotypus [p] / Timarcha / balearica Gory [h] / Daccordi et Vela des. 2017 [p, r]”. Paralectotypes: 2 ♂♂: same label text as lectotype, but paralectotypus instead of lectotypus (MNHN, Col. Oberthür).

Timarcha balearica P.-A.: Lectotype (♂, presently designated, Fig. 10): “T. / Balearica / Perez / Menorca [h. by Pérez Arcas,w] // MNCN / Cat. Tipos N° / 2496 [p, r] // MNCN_Ent / 101190 [p, grey] // Timarcha balearica / Pérez Arcas, 1865 / SINTIPO / J. Bezdek, 2013 [p, r] // lectotypus [p] / Timarcha / balearica P. Arcas [h] / Daccordi et Vela des. 2017 [p, r]” (MNCN).

Comments.

Timarcha balearica was described for the first time as figure 8 in planche 49 (Gory 1833). Later, Gory (1844: 300) published a text description (see Bousquet 2016 for exact publication dates).

Linnaeus (1758: 418) described Tenebrio caeruleus (Fig. 8; here considered a synonym of Timarcha balearica), with these words: “T. apterus caerulescens, thorace suborbiculato, coleoptris obtusis. Habitat in Hispania”. Some years later, Linnaeus (1764: 98) made an extended description expanding the locality to “Europa australiore” and provided more characters: “Corpus magnitudine, colore, statura & facie T. mortisagi, sed. Antennae caeruleae, apice nigrae, nec totae nigrae. Thorax brevior, postice parum rotundatus, nec postice truncates. Elytra marginibus lateralibus atro-caerulescentibus, apice obtuso nec acuminato. Femora atro-caerulescentia, nitida, nec nigra opaca”. Later, Linnaeus (1767: 677) turned back repeating exactly the description of 1758, but not that of 1764.

Fabricius (1775: 257) proposed the combination Helops caeruleus (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae) for a beetle from “Europa australi”, making a reference to the Linnaean descriptions of 1758 and 1764, but adding “elytris striatis” and “antennae pedesque nigrae” to the description of Linnaeus (1758: 418); these characters are clearly not found in the type of Tenebrio caeruleus Linnaeus, 1758, where the elytra are smooth and legs are bluish. To date, the type species of the genus Helops (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae) is Tenebrio caeruleus Linnaeus, 1758 (Nabozhenko et al. 2008; International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature 2009), but this statement should be changed as most probably Helops caeruleus was described by Fabricius, not by Linnaeus (in Tenebrio). Interestingly, Illiger (1802: 410) rightly stated that Tenebrio caeruleus should be considered as belonging to genus Chrysomela (genus Timarcha was not described until 1819 by Samouelle). However, since 1802 no one has mentioned Tenebrio caeruleus as a Chrysomelidae.

For the sake of stability (Art. 23.2, International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature 1999), it would be convenient to apply the reversal of precedence and declare Timarcha balearica Gory, 1833 a nomen protectum. The requirements of Art. 23.9.1.2 are met by quoting the following references: Jolivet (1967b, 1995), Petitpierre (1970, 1973, 1985, 2011), Jolivet and Petitpierre (1973, 1981), Petitpierre et al. (1993), Chevin (1994), Petitpierre and Juan (1994), Santiago-Blay and Fain (1994), Steinhausen (1994), Jolivet and Hawkeswood (1995), Jolivet (1998), Teunissen (2002), Warchałowski (2003, 2010), Gómez-Zurita (2004, 2008), Gómez-Zurita et al. (2000, 2004), Gómez-Zurita and Galián (2005), Davison and Blaxter (2005), Jolivet and Poinar (2007), Gómez-Zurita and Kippenberg (2010), Mravinac et al. (2011), Jolivet et al. (2014), Petitpierre and Anichtchenko (2018), Petitpierre (2019), Daccordi et al. (2020). However, the name Tenebrio caeruleus Linnaeus, 1758 does not meet the requirements of Art. 23.9.1.1, because, until the present, it has been used in its misinterpreted concept of a Tenebrionidae of genus Helops. Therefore, an application is to be submitted to the International Commission of Zoological Nomenclature in order to maintain usage of T. balearica as a valid species, under Art. 23.9.3. Nomenclatural stability would be negatively affected by using Tenebrio caerulea Linnaeus (presently combined in Timarcha) as a valid name owing to its current ambiguity.

Diagnosis.

Males: 12.0–14.5 mm (lectotype of Tenebrio caeruleus: 12.2 mm, Fig. 8; lectotype of T. balearica Gory: 12.7 mm, Fig. 9; lectotype of T. balearica P. Arcas: 12.0 mm, Fig. 10); females: 14.9–17.3 mm. Coloration variable from black, greenish, bluish, or copper-violet, or a combination; 11 color variations have been described (Pic 1919; Bechynĕ 1946; Compte 1956). Lateral sides of the pronotum curved, narrower at base; margin conspicuous on all four sides except in lateral sides near the base, where it is obliterated. Pronotum and elytra smooth, puncturation absent (Fig. 11). Mesoventrite divergently bituberculated. Vestiture tarsal formulae: ♂♂ (0, 0, 0; 0, 0, 0; 1/3, 0, 0), ♀♀ (1/4, 0, 0; 1/4–1/3, 0, 0; 3/4, 0, 0), very distinctive in females. Aedeagus very characteristic in its truncate apex in dorsal view; in side view it is curved in its second half (Fig. 12). Sclerite of internal sac of aedeagus with a much reduced phanera and a looped flagellum (Fig. 13; see also Petitpierre 1970: fig. 8 and Petitpierre 2019: fig. 19). The inflated endophallus is as illustrated (Fig. 14; see also Petitpierre and Anichtchenko 2018: fig. 11).

Distribution.

Balearic Islands: Mallorca and Menorca (Tenenbaum 1915; Jolivet 1953; Compte 1956).

Host plants.

Rubia peregrina L. (= R. angustifolia L.), Galium spp., Asperula spp. (Rubiaceae) (Jolivet 1953; Jolivet and Petitpierre 1973; Jolivet and Poinar 2004), Plantago lanceolata L. (Plantaginaceae) (Petitpierre 1985).

Timarcha rugosa

(Linnaeus, 1767)

0FEF0D49-2B1F-567B-8BB4-E08CAD14F238

Figures 15–17 , 18–22

Figures 15–17.

Figures 15–17.

Open in a new tab

Timarcha rugosa15 lectotypus of Tenebrio rugosus in dorsal (a) and side (b) view, and label in upper (c) and lower view (d) (photos provided by The Linnean Society, with permission to reproduce) 16 lectotypus of Timarcha scabra in dorsal (a), and ventral (b) view, pronotum (c) and label (d) 17 Lectotypus of Timarcha generosa in dorsal view (a), pronotum (b) and label (c).

Figures 18–22.

Figures 18–22.

Open in a new tab

Timarcha rugosa18 male habitus from Algery, Mandoura (a), Morocco, Debdou (b) and Morocco, Aguelmame Sidi Ali (c) 19 pronota of males from Algery, Mandoura (a), Morocco, Debdou (b) and Morocco, Aguelmam Sidi Ali (c) 20 aedeagi from Morocco, Oujda in dorsal (a) and side (b) view, Morocco, Aguelmame Sidi Ali in dorsal (c) and side (d) view and Morocco, Annual in dorsal (e) and side (f) view 21 sclerite of the endophallus from Algery, Batna in dorsal view (taken from Daccordi et al. 2020) 22 Everted endophallus from Morocco, Ain Benimathar, in dorsal (a) and side view (b). Scale bars: 1 mm (20), 0.5 mm (21).

Type localities.

Tenebrio rugosus: “Africa” [other localities mentioned in the original description as “Hispania” and “Gallia” are erroneous and should not be taken into consideration following Recommendation 76A.2 of the Code (International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature 1999)]. Chrysomela scabra: “côte de Barbarie”. Timarcha generosa: “Bona”.

Type material.

Tenebrio rugosus: not examined. The photographs of the lectotype (♀, presently designated, Fig. 15), labelled “rugosus / chalybeata [reversal, w, h, Linnaeus’ handwriting] // 27 [w, p]” (LSUK, code LINN 6576), are available at http://linnean-online.org/23901/.

Chrysomela scabra: Lectotype (♀, presently designated, Fig. 16): “COLLECTION / OLIVIER / TYPE [round green label, p] // lectotypus [p] / Timarcha / scabra Olivier [h] / Daccordi et Vela des. 2017 [p, r] // Timarcha [p] / rugosa L. [h] / Daccordi et Vela det. 2017 [p, w]” (MNHN).

Timarcha generosa: Lectotype (♂, presently designated, Fig. 17): “generosa / Er. / chalconota Dej. / Bona Wagner [h, w] // v. generosa Er. [h, bluish label] // 19114 [p, w] // Type [p, r] // syntype / Timarcha generosa / Erichson, 1841 / labelled by MFNB 2016 [p, r] // lectotypus [p] / Timarcha / generosa Erichson [h] / Daccordi et Vela des. 2017 [p, r]” (ZMHB). Paralectotype: 1 ♂ “Hist.-Coll. (Coleoptera) / Nr. 19114 / Timarcha generosa Erichs. / Bona, Wagner / Zool. Mus. Berlin [p, w] // 19114 [p, w] // Type [p, r] // syntype / Timarcha generosa / Erichson, 1841 / labelled by MFNB 2016 [p, r] // paralectotypus [p] / Timarcha / generosa Erichs. [h] / Daccordi et Vela des. 2017 [p, r]” (ZMHB). Paralectotype: 1 ♀ “Hist.-Coll. (Coleoptera) / Nr. 19114 / Timarcha generosa Erichs. / Bona, Wagner / Zool. Mus. Berlin [p, w] // 19114 [p, w] // Type [p, r] // syntype / Timarcha generosa / Erichson, 1841 / labelled by MFNB 2016 [p, r] // paralectotypus [p] / Timarcha / generosa Erichs. [h] / Daccordi et Vela des. 2017 [p, r]” (ZMHB). All the specimens carry a label: “TIMARCHA [p] / rugosa L. [h] / Daccordi et Vela det. 2017 [p, w].

Comments.

Fairmaire (1884: 89) and Fairmaire and Allard (1873: 161), respectively, considered Chrysomela scabra and Timarcha generosa as junior synonyms of T. rugosa, and we can confirm these decisions. However, since Bechynĕ (1947a: 56) to present, T. generosa and T. scabra were regarded as separate species (Gómez-Zurita and Kippenberg 2010: 439, 441; Warchałowski 2010: 625). The lectotype of T. generosa designated herein has blackish legs, but it is interesting that the two paralectotypes have reddish legs, showing this color variation which is not uncommon in several Timarcha species.

Diagnosis.

Males: 11.8–19.0 mm (lectotype of T. generosa: 15.8 mm, Fig. 17); females: 13.7–21.2 mm (lectotype of Tenebrio rugosus is an extended specimen measuring 23.5 mm, Fig. 15; lectotype of Timarcha scabra is an unextended specimen measuring 15.6 mm, Fig. 16). Species variable in size, form of pronotum, and elytral sculpture. Black, shining or matte, sometimes with bronze tan. Legs black or femora and tibiae reddish, also antennomeres I–V can be reddish at base in populations of northern Algeria. Pronotum cordiform or subcordiform, with maximum width at distal 1/3, reborded even at posterior angles, without or with weak punctures which are not very dense (Fig. 19). Elytra not or weakly punctured, always conspicuously vermiculate, giving a rugose aspect (Fig. 18). Mesoventrite straight or weakly emarginate, not or weakly prominent. In ventral view, meso- and metatarsomere III slightly emarginated at apex in males; in females, this emargination is well marked, which is a differential feature relative to other species. Vestiture tarsal formulae: ♂♂ (0,0,0; 0–1/3,0,0; 0–4/5 (very finely),0,0), ♀♀ (1, 1, 1; 1, 1, 1; 1, 1, 1). Aedeagus somewhat variable, generally broad (Fig. 20c, e) but sometimes narrower (Fig. 20a) in dorsal view, and also more or less curved in side view (Fig. 20b, d, f). Sclerites of internal sac of aedeagus, in dorsoventral view, with wide or fine, slightly curved, and paired phanera, and a straight flagellum (Figs 21, 22). The inflated endophallus is shown in Figure 22.

Distribution.

Tunisia, Algeria, and Morocco. Spain and France, as in the original description of T. rugosus, are wrong.

Host plants.

Plantago albicans L. (Plantaginaceae), Asperula sp. (Rubiaceae) (Jolivet 1966).

Timarcha tenebricosa

(Fabricius, 1775)

F8AD6D54-2F7B-5600-87AD-098E94D7520D

Figures 23–24 , 25–29

Figures 23, 24.

Figures 23, 24.

Open in a new tab

Timarcha tenebricosa23 lectotypus of Tenebrio laevigatus in dorsal (a) and side view (b), pronotum (c) and metatarsus in lower view (d) (photos by Alonso Zarazaga and Ren Li, with permission to reproduce from The Linnean Society) 24 typi of Chrysomela tenebricosa Fabricius, lectotypus male in dorsal (a) and ventral (b) view, and pronotum (c), paralectotypus female in dorsal (d) and ventral (e) view, and pronotum (f) (photographed by Michael Kuhlmann, Zoologischen Museum Kiel, reproduced with permission).

Figures 25–29.

Figures 25–29.

Open in a new tab

Timarcha tenebricosa25 male habitus from France, Poitiers 26 pronota of males of males of Crimea (a), Austria, Vienna (b), France, Paimport (c) and France, Poitiers (d) 27 aedeagi from France, Alps Maritimes, Caussols in dorsal (a) and side (b) view, France, Normandie, Bréal in dorsal (c) and side (d) view, Crimea in dorsal (e) and side (f) view 28 sclerite of the endophallus from England, Launceston in dorsolateral view (taken from Daccordi et al. 2020) 29 Everted endophallus from France, Paimport in dorsal (a) and side view (b). Scale bars: 1 mm (27), 0.5 mm (28).

Type localities.

Tenebrio laevigatus: “Africa” [wrong type locality]. Chrysomela tenebricosa: “Europa australiori”.

Type material.

Tenebrio laevigatus: Lectotype (♀, designated herein, Fig. 23): “laevigatus [h, probably by Linnaeus] // 29 [p]” (LSUK, code LINN 6578). Examined by one of us (MAAZ), images are also available at http://linnean-online.org/23903/.

Chrysomela tenebricosa: not examined. Syntypes (1 ♂, 1♀, Fig. 24) (ZMUK) were examined from photographs. Minelli and Vittorelli (1976) designated in litteris (1974) the male as the “lectoholotypus”, the female as the “lectoallotypus”. Here we formally designate the male as lectotype (Fig. 24a–c), and the female as paralectotype (Fig. 24d–f).

Comments.

The lectotype of T. laevigata (L.), a female (Fig. 23), has the pronotum and elytra finely and regularly punctured, the mesoventrite protruding and slightly bituberculated, and the metatarsus setose with the vestiture formula (1, 1/2, 1/3) (Fig. 23d); this perfectly fits specimens of the well-known European T. tenebricosa. On the other hand, females of Timarcha laevigata auct. nec Linnaeus, 1767 from North Africa, i.e. T. turbida Erichson, 1841: 189, or even T. punctella Marseul, 1871: 387, are different in that they have a pronotum with finer punctures, the mesoventrite very scarcely protruding and slightly emarginated but not bituberculate, and the female metatarsus with a large glabrous strip underside and a vestiture formula (1, 1, ½–¾) (T. turbida) or (1,1,1) (T. punctella).

As the name Timarcha laevigata, in the sense here fixed as a synonym of T. tenebricosa, has at least one usage since 1899 (in Apfelbeck 1907: 500, 502, 506), one of the two conditions required by International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (1999, Art. 23.9.1.1) for reversal of precedence is not accomplished. Besides, the name T. laevigata, although wrongly applied to a North African species, has been profusely used until now (see e.g. Gómez-Zurita and Kippenberg 2010; Warchałowski 2010). An application has been submitted to the International Commission of Zoological Nomenclature (Vela et al. 2018) to maintain usage of T. tenebricosa as a valid species. The type species of Timarcha Samouelle is Chrysomela tenebricosaFabricius 1775, by subsequent designation by Chevrolat (1843: 655 in Löbl and Smetana 2011: 50).

Diagnosis.

Males: 14.6–17.2 mm; females: 16.1–18.2 mm (lectotype of Tenebrio laevigata = 17.5 mm; Fig. 23). Black or with bluish luster. Surface microreticulate, with a dull aspect (Fig. 25). Pronotum subcordiform, or cordiform, usually widest at the anterior 1/3, completely rebordered by a fine furrow, sides regularly curved. However, there is a much variation in the form of pronotum (Fig. 26), and the lateral sides near the base may be straight (Fig. 26a, d), sinuate (Fig. 26b), or both straight and sinuate (e.g. left side straight, right side sinuate; Fig. 26c). Puncturation on pronotum (Fig. 26) and elytra dense, regular, moderately marked, on a smooth surface never vermiculate. Mesoventrite with apophysis somewhat protruding, more or less emarginate, sometimes slightly bituberculate. Vestiture tarsal formulae: ♂♂ (0,0,0; 0,0,0; 1/3–1/2,0,0), ♀♀ (1/2,0,0; 1/2–3/4,0–1/2,0–1/2; 3/4–1,1/3–1/2,1/3–1/2). Aedeagus variable but always with paddle-shaped at the apex in dorsal view and strongly curved with sinuate apex in lateral view (Fig. 27). Sclerites of the internal sac of aedeagus with a long, curved flagellum that is somewhat widened before the apex in dorso-lateral view (Fig. 28); the phanera consist in two paired wings elongated and curved. The inflated endophallus is shown in Figure 29 (see also Petitpierre and Anichtchenko 2018: fig. 3). Thirteen subspecies have been described (Bechynĕ 1945b, 1948; Müller 1952), whose taxonomic status is very doubtful (Minelli and Vitorelli 1976; Warchałowski 2010).

Distribution.

Most of Europe, from northern Spain to Great Britain and Ireland, eastwards to Georgia, Azerbaijan, and Asiatic Turkey; not recorded in Scandinavia (Gómez-Zurita and Kippenberg 2010).

Host plants.

On Rubiaceae: Asperula cynanchica L., Cruciata laevipes Opiz, Galium aparine L., G. mollugo L., G. parisiense (L.), G. verum L., Rubia peregrina L. (Jolivet and Petitpierre 1973; Winkelman and Debreuil 2008).

Discussion

The difficult task of studying the types of old species has been greatly facilitated with the quick access to high-quality images. As a result, it is now easier for taxonomists to verify the status of old synonyms or interpretations which were based upon very short, generalized descriptions. The high-quality images of the types in the Linnaean collections have proven extremely useful for the zoological community. In addition, most museums and their curators are willing to help with search for and loan of types, which can facilitate taxonomic work. Incorrect species concepts, not based on the examination of name-bearing types, have sometimes been maintained despite the identity of extant type material, which has been carefully cared for and maintained for many years for the benefit of science.

In the case of genus Timarcha, whose revision is very necessary, the slow and sometimes difficult work of consulting types has become absolutely necessary, as various authors have made different interpretations for a long time. Although historical misinterpretations of T. laevigata and T. latipes have ascribed these to different North African species or even to both sexes of the same species, these two species are actually two very different European species. Also, T. caerulea is revealing, as it was considered a Tenebrionidae, when in actuality the type is clearly a male of the genus Timarcha, identical to T. balearica (Chrysomelidae).

The main synonyms presented here can be summarized as follows:

Timarcha goettingensis (Linnaeus, 1758)

= T. latipes (Linnaeus, 1767), syn. nov.

Timarcha balearica Gory, 1833 (to be proposed to ICZN as a nomen protectum)

= Timarcha caerulea (Linnaeus, 1758), syn. nov., comb. nov. (to be proposed to ICZN as a nomen oblitum)

Timarcha rugosa (Linnaeus, 1767)

= T. scabra (Olivier, 1807), syn. conf.

= T. generosa Erichson, 1841, syn. conf.

Timarcha tenebricosa (Fabricius, 1775) (proposed to ICZN as a nomen protectum)

= T. laevigata (Linnaeus, 1767), syn. conf. (proposed to ICZN as a nomen oblitum)

Supplementary Material

XML Treatment for Timarcha goettingensis
zookeys.986.57158-treatment1.xml (34KB, xml)
XML Treatment for Timarcha balearica
zookeys.986.57158-treatment2.xml (71.7KB, xml)
XML Treatment for Timarcha rugosa
zookeys.986.57158-treatment3.xml (30KB, xml)
XML Treatment for Timarcha tenebricosa
zookeys.986.57158-treatment4.xml (69.7KB, xml)

Acknowledgements

We thank Ren Li (Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China) for the photographs of the types of T. laevigata and T. latipes. We also thank the following persons. Elaine Charwat and Mike Fitton, as former Deputy Librarian and Curator of Entomology, respectively, and Isabelle Charmantier and Suzanne Ryder, as present Head of Collections and Curator of Entomology, respectively (Linnean Collections, The Linnean Society of London), helped with the searching of Linnean types. Andrea Deneau (Digital Assets Manager in the Linnean Collections) facilitated photographs and permission to publish the Linnean types. Michael Kuhlmann (Zoologisches Museum Kiel) and Antoine Mantilleri (Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris) kindly sent us to photographs of types of Timarcha tenebricosa and T. balearica, respectively. Mercedes París (Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales, Madrid) and Johannes Frisch and Bernd Jäger (Museum für Naturkunde der Humboldt-Universität, Berlin) were very helpful locating the types under their care. Patrice Bouchard (Canadian National Collection of Insects, Ottawa) made important suggestions in the text and revised and improved the English. The cooperation of Maurizio Bollino (Museo di Storia Naturale del Salento, Calimera, Lecce) was very important for the endophallus eversions. We are grateful to Lyubomir Penev for his support in the publication of our paper.

Citation

Vela JM, Alonso-Zarazaga MA, Daccordi M (2020) The species of Timarcha Samouelle, 1819 described by Linnaeus (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae). ZooKeys 986: 55–80. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.986.57158

References

  1. Apfelbeck V. (1907) Koleopterologische Ergebnisse der mit Subvention der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien im Frühjahr 1905 ausgeführten Forschungsreise nach Montenegro und Albanien. Sitzungsberichte der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, Mathematisch-naturwissenschaftliche Classe (Abt. 1) 116(1): 493–506.
  2. APG IV (2016) An update of the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group classification for the orders and families of flowering plants: APG IV. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 181: 1–20. 10.1111/boj.12385 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bechynĕ J. (1945a) De sectionis Timarchae latipes Linn. speciebus (Col. Phytoph. Chrysomelidae). Časopis Československé Společnosti Entomologické 42: 101–103. [Google Scholar]
  4. Bechynĕ J. (1945b) De specibus generis Timarcha Latr. sectionis T. tenebricosa F. (Col. Phytoph. Chrysomelidae). Entomologicke Listy 8: 5–10. [Google Scholar]
  5. Bechynĕ J. (1946) Descriptions d’une espèce et des varieties nouvelles du genre Timarcha Latr. Časopis Československé Společnosti Entomologické 43: 27–30. [Google Scholar]
  6. Bechynĕ J. (1947a) Notulae ad cognitionem generis Timarcha Latr. VIII (Col. Phytoph. Chrysomelidae). Acta Entomologica Musei Nationalis Pragae 25: 55–61. [Google Scholar]
  7. Bechynĕ J. (1947b) Notulae ad cognitionem specierum generis Timarcha Latr. XL (Col. Phytophaga, Chrysomelidae). Časopis Československé Společnosti Entomologické 44(1–2): 3–9. [Google Scholar]
  8. Bechynĕ J. (1948) Contribution à la connaissance du genre Timarcha Latr. 12: études phylogénétiques et zoogéographiques (Col. Phytophaga, Chrysomelidae). Sborník Národního Musea v Praze 4B(2): 1–62.
  9. Bieńkowski A. (2001) A study on the genus Chrysolina Motschulsky, 1860, with a checklist of all the described subgenera, species, subspecies, and synonyms (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae: Chrysomelinae). Genus 12(2): 105–235. [Google Scholar]
  10. Berkenhout J. (1769) Outlines of the Natural History of Great Britain and Ireland (Vol. I). Elmsly, London, 233 pp https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/25813764 [Google Scholar]
  11. Berkenhout J. (1795) Synopsis of the Natural History of Great Britain and Ireland (Vol. I). Third edition. Fort. Cadell, London, 334 pp. [Google Scholar]
  12. Bousquet Y. (2016) Litteratura Coleopterologica (1758–1900): a Guide to Selected Books Related to the Taxonomy of Coleoptera with Publication Dates and Notes. ZooKeys 583: 1–776. 10.3897/zookeys.583.7084 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  13. Brunetti EA. (1880) Tenacity of life in Timarcha laevigata. Entomologist’s Monthly Magazine 16: 1–235. [Google Scholar]
  14. Chevin H. (1994) Food selection and life-cycle of the Old World Timarcha Latreille, 1829 (Col. Chrysomelinae). In: Jolivet PH, Cox ML, Petitpierre E. (Eds) Novel Aspects of the Biology of Chrysomelidae.Kluwer Academic Publishers, the Netherlands, 533–539. 10.1007/978-94-011-1781-4_40 [DOI]
  15. Compte A. (1956) Aportaciones al conocimiento de la Timarcha balearica Gory. Bolletí de la Societat d’Història Natural de les Balears 2: 37–40. [Google Scholar]
  16. Cuní-Martorell M. (1885) Excursión entomológica a varias localidades de la provincia de Gerona (Cataluña). Anales de la Sociedad Española de Historia Natural 14: 51–73. [Google Scholar]
  17. Cuní-Martorell M. (1888) Insectos observados en los alrededores de Barcelona. Anales de la Sociedad Española de Historia Natural 17: 133–191. [Google Scholar]
  18. Cuní-Martorell M, Martorell-Peña M. (1876) Catálogo Metódico y Razonado de los Coleópteros Observados en Cataluña. Gorchs, Barcelona, 360 pp. [Google Scholar]
  19. Daccordi M, Bollino M, Vela JM. (2020) Some techniques for the study of useful characters in the taxonomy of the genus Timarcha Samouelle, 1819 (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae). European Journal of Taxonomy 630: 1–14. 10.5852/ejt.2020.630 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  20. Davison A, Blaxter M. (2005) Ancient origin of glycosyl hydrolase family 9 cellulase genes. Molecular Biology and Evolution 22(5): 1273–1284. 10.1093/molbev/msi107 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Dufour L. (1843) Excursion entomologique dans les montagnes de la Vallée d’Ossau. Bulletin de la Société des Sciences, Lettres et Arts de Pau 3: 5–118. [Google Scholar]
  22. Duftschmidt CE. (1825) Fauna Austriae, oder Beschreibung der österreichischen Insecten, für angehende Freunde der Entomologie. Dritter Theil. Verlag der k.k. priv. Akademischen Kunst- Musik- und Buchhandlung, Linz, 289 pp 10.5962/bhl.title.65994 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  23. Erichson WF. (1841) Über die Insekten von Algier mit besonderer Berücksichtigung ihrer geographischen Verbreitung. In: Wagner M. (Ed.) Reise in die Regentsschaft Algier in den Jahren 1836, 1837 und 1838 nebst einem naturhistorischen Anhang und einem Kupferatlas.Dritter Band. L. Voss, Leipzig, 140–194. 10.5962/bhl.title.49771 [DOI]
  24. Fabricius JC. (1775) Systema entomologiae sistens insectorum classes, ordines, genera, species, adiectis synonymis, locis, descriptionibus, observationibus. Libraria Kortii, Flensburgi et Lipsiae, 832 pp https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/25551417 [Google Scholar]
  25. Fabricius JC. (1781) Species Insectorum, Exhibentes Eorum Differentias Specificas, Synonyma Auctorum, Loca Natalia, Metamorphosin, Adiectis Observationibus, Descriptionibus. Tom I. Carolus Ernest Bohnii, Hamburgi et Kilonii, 552 pp https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/25550325 [Google Scholar]
  26. Fabricius JC. (1801) Systema Eleutheratorum Secundum Ordines, Genera, Species, Adiectis Synonymis, Locis, Observationibus, Descriptionibus. Tomus I. Bibliopolii Academici Novi, Kiliae, 506 pp. [Google Scholar]
  27. Fairmaire L. (1884) Liste complémentaire des espéces du genre Timarcha. Anales de la Real Sociedad Española de Historia Natural 13: 75–112. [Google Scholar]
  28. Fairmaire L, Allard L. (1873) Révision du genre Timarcha. Annales de la Société Entomologique de France 5(3): 143–202. [Google Scholar]
  29. Gmelin JF. (1790) Caroli a Linné. Systema Naturae per Regna Tria Naturae, Secundum Classes, Ordines, Genera, Species, cum Characteribus Differentiis, Synonymis, Locis. Editio decimal tertia, aucta, reformata. Tom I. Pars IV. Classis V. Insecta Georg Enanuel Beer, Lipsiae, 1517–2224. https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/25751252
  30. Gomez-Zurita J. (2004) Molecular systematics and time-scale for the evolution of Timarcha, a leaf-beetle genus with a disjunct Holarctic distribution. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 32(2): 647–665. 10.1016/j.ympev.2004.02.009 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Gómez-Zurita J. (2008) Species and speciation in Timarcha. In: Jolivet P, Santiago-Blay J, Schmitt M. (Eds) Research on Chrysomelidae 1.Brill Academic Publishers, Leiden, 17–39.
  32. Gómez-Zurita J, Galián J. (2005) Current knowledge on genes and genomes of phytophagous beetles (Coleoptera: Chrysomeloidea, Curculionoidea): a review. European Journal of Entomology 102(4): 577–597. 10.14411/eje.2005.082 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  33. Gómez-Zurita J, Juan C, Petitpierre E. (2000) The evolutionary history of the genus Timarcha (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae) inferred from mitochondrial COII gene and partial 16S rDNA sequences. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 14(2): 304–317. 10.1006/mpev.1999.0712 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Gómez-Zurita J, Pons J, Petitpierre E. (2004) The evolutionary origin of a novel karyotype in Timarcha (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae) and general trends of chromosome evolution in the genus. Journal of Zoological Systematics and Evolutionary Research 42(4): 332–341. 10.1111/j.1439-0469.2004.00267.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  35. Gómez-Zurita J, Kippenberg H. (2010) Chrysomelinae, tribe Timarchini. In: Löbl I, Smetana A. (Eds) Catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera: Chrysomeloidea (Vol.6). Apollo Books, Stenstrup, 437–443.
  36. Gory HL. (1833) Timarcha balearica In: Guérin-Meneville FE (Ed.) Iconographie du règne animal de G. Cuvier, ou representation d’après la nature de l’une des espèces les plus remarquables et souvent non encore figurées, de chaque genre d’animaux. Avec un texte descriptif mis au courant de la science. Ouvrage pouvant servir d’atlas à tous les traités de zoologie. Tome III. J.B. Baillière, Paris, pl. 49. https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/27812877
  37. Gory HL. (1844) Timarcha balearica. In: Guérin-Meneville FE (Ed.) Iconographie du règne animal de G. Cuvier, ou représentation d’après nature de l’une des espèces les plus remarquables et souvent non encore figurées, de chaque genre d’animaux. Avec un texte descriptif mis au courant de la science. Ouvrage pouvant servir d’atlas à tous les traités de zoologie. Insectes.Tome III. J.B. Baillière, Paris & London, 300 pp https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/27812877 [Google Scholar]
  38. Herbst JFW. (1794) Catalogue critique des insectes du Cabinet de M. Herbst. In: Fuessly JG. (Ed.) Archiv Insektengeschichte.Steiner, Zürich, 65–175. [52 pl.]
  39. Herrich-Schäffer GAW. (1838) Die Fortsetzung von Panzer Faunae insectorum Germaniae initia. Heft 156. Manz, Regensburg, 24 pp. [+ pls.] [Google Scholar]
  40. Heyden von LFJD, Reitter E, Weise J. (1883) Catalogus Coleopterorum Europae et Caucasi. Ed. Tertia. Nicolai, Berolini, 228 pp https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/9332844 [Google Scholar]
  41. International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (1999) International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. Fourth Edition. The International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature, London, 306 pp. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (2009) Opinion 2237 (Case 3422) Helops Fabricius, 1775 (Insecta, Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae): usage conserved by designation of Tenebrio caeruleus Linnaeus, 1758 as the type species. The Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature 66(4): 369–370. 10.21805/bzn.v66i4.a16 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  43. Illiger K. (1802) Zusätze, Berichtigungen und Bemerkungen zu Fabricii Systema Eleutheratorum. Tomus I. Magazin für Insektenkunde 1(3–4): 306–425. [Google Scholar]
  44. Jeanne C. (1967) Révision des espèces françaises du genre Timarcha Latr. (ColeopteraChrysomelidae). Actes de la Société Linnéenne de Bourdeaux, Sèrie A [1965] 102(7): 1–25.
  45. Jolivet P. (1953) Les Chrysomeloidea des îlles Baléares. Mémories de l’Institut Royal des Sciences Naturelles de Belgique 2(50): 1–88. [Google Scholar]
  46. Jolivet P. (1966) Notes systématiques et écologiques sur les chrysomélides marocains (Col.) (1re note: Chrysomelinae). Bulletin de la Société des Sciences naturelles et physiques du Maroc 46(1–2): 121–126. [Google Scholar]
  47. Jolivet P. (1967a) Notes écologiques sur les Timarcha tuniso-lybiens (Col. Chrysomelidae). Bulletin de la Societé entomologique de France 72: 224–239. [Google Scholar]
  48. Jolivet P. (1967b) Nouvelles observations ecologiques sur les Timarcha Latr. (Col.: Chrysomelidae). Bulletin Mensuel de la Société Linnéenne de Lyon 36: 13–18. 10.3406/linly.1967.5878 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  49. Jolivet P. (1995) A status report on the species of Timarcha (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Insecta Mundi 9(1–2): 153–154. [Google Scholar]
  50. Jolivet P. (1998) Interrelationship Between Insects and Plants. CRC Press, Boca Raton, 309 pp 10.1201/9781498719360 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  51. Jolivet P, Hawkeswood TJ. (1995) Host-plants of Chrysomelidae of the World. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, 281 pp. [Google Scholar]
  52. Jolivet P, Petitpierre E. (1973) Plantes-hôtes connues de Timarcha Latreille (Col. Chrys.). Quelques considérations sur les raisons possibles du trophisme sélectif. Bulletin de la Societé Entomologique de France 78(1–2): 9–25. [Google Scholar]
  53. Jolivet P, Petitpierre E. (1981) Biology of Chrysomelidae (Coleoptera). Butlletí de la Institució Catalana d’Història Natural 47 (Secció de Zoologia 4): 105–138.
  54. Jolivet P, Poinar G. (2007) Parasites, commensals and phoretics of Timarcha (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Genus 18(4): 589–596. [Google Scholar]
  55. Jolivet P, Poinar G, Verma KK. (2014) Timarcha Latreille: a strange beetle and a living fossil. Terrestrial Arthropod Reviews 7(1): 3–20. 10.1163/18749836-06041071 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  56. Kippenberg H. (1994) Familie Chrysomelidae (ohne Alticinae). In: Lohse GA, Lucht WH. (Eds) Die Käfer Mitteleuropas, Band 14.Supplementband mit Katalogteil. Goecke und Evers, Krefeld, 17–92. [142.]
  57. Kippenberg H. (2010) New acts and comments. Chrysomelidae: Chrysomelinae. General comments. In: Löbl I, Smetana A. (Eds) Catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera: Chrysomeloidea (Vol.6). Apollo Books, Stenstrup, 67–73.
  58. Kirby W, Spence W. (1826) An Introduction to Entomology: or Elements of the Natural History of Insects: with Plates. Volume 3. Longman, Rees, Orme, Brown, and Green, London, v + [3] + 732 pp. [pls 6–20.] https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/24527935
  59. Küster HC. (1847) Die Käfer Europas, Nach der Natur beschrieben. Mit Beiträgen mehrerer Entomologen, 9 Heft. Bauer & Raspe, Nürnberg, [2] + 100 sheets + 3 pls. https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/49085041
  60. Latreille PA. (1804) Histoire naturelle, générale et particulière des crustacés et des insects. Ouvrage faisant suite à l’histoire générale et particulière, compose par Leclerc de Buffon, et rédigée par C. S. Sonnini, member de plusieurs societies savants. Tome onzième. F. Dufart, Paris, 422 pp https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/24880545 [Google Scholar]
  61. Latreille PA. (1829) Suite et fin des insectes. In: Cuvier G (Ed.) Le Règne Animal Distribué D’après son Organisation, Pour Servir de Base à L’histoire Naturelle des Animaux et D’introduction à L’anatomie Comparée. Nouvelle édition, revue et augmentée. Tome V. Déterville, Paris, 556 pp. [Google Scholar]
  62. Linnaeus C. (1758) Systema Naturae per Regna Tria Naturae, Secundum Clases, Ordines, Genera, Species, cum Characteribus, Differentiis, Synonymies, Locis. Tomus I. Editio decima, reformata. Impensis Direct, Laurentii Salvii, Holmiae, 824 pp https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/726886 [Google Scholar]
  63. Linnaeus C. (1764) Museum S:ae R:ae M:tis Ludovicae Ulricae Reginae Svecorum, Gothorum, Vandalorumque, &c. In quo animalia rariora, exotica, imprimis. Insecta & Conchilia describuntur & determinantur. Prodromi instar. Salvius, Holmiae, 720 pp https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/51334755 [Google Scholar]
  64. Linnaeus C. (1767) Systema Naturae per regna tria naturae, secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, cum characteribus diferentiis, synonymis, locis. Editio duodecima, reformata. Tomus I, Pars II. Laurentii Salvii, Holmiae, [2] + 533–1327 + [37] pp. https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/57766250
  65. Little W. (1838) Localities of Scottish Coleoptera. Magazine of Zoology and Botany 2: 232–237. [Google Scholar]
  66. Löbl I, Smetana A. (2011) Errata for volume 6. In: Löbl I, Smetana A. (Eds) Catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera (Vol.7). Apollo Books, Stenstrup, 35–63 [authorship of Timarcha, p. 50] 10.1163/9789004260931_010 [DOI]
  67. Lopatin IG, Aleksandrovich OR, Konstantinov AS. (2004) Check list of leaf-beetles (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae) of the Eastern Europe and Northern Asia. Wydawnictwo Mantis, Olsztyn, 343 pp. [Google Scholar]
  68. Marseul SA. (1883) Monographie des chrysomélides de l’Ancien-Monde. L’Abeille, Journal d’Entomologie 21: 1–108. [Google Scholar]
  69. Mravinac B, Meštrović N, Cavrak VV, Plohl M. (2011) TCAGG, an alternative telomeric sequence in insects. Chromosoma 120(4): 367–376. 10.1007/s00412-011-0317-x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  70. Minelli A, Vittorelli S. (1976) Il rassenkreis Timarcha tenebricosa (F.) (Col. Chrysomelidae). Bollettino del Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di Verona 3: 1–33. [Google Scholar]
  71. Mohr KH. (1966) Familie Chrysomelidae. In: Freude H, Harde KW, Lohse GA. (Eds) Die Käfer Mitteleuropas.Band 9. Cerambycidae, Chrysomelidae. Goecke & Evers, Krefeld, 95–280.
  72. Müller G. (1952) I coleotteri della Venezia Giulia. Catalogo ragionato con tabelle dichotomiche per la classificazione delle specie della regione adriatica orientale, del Veneto e della pianura padana. Volume II: ColeopteraPhytophaga (Cerambycidae, Chrysomelidae, Bruchidae). Centro Sperimentale Agrario e Forestale, Trieste, 685 + [1] pp.
  73. Nabozhenko M, Bouchard P, Löbl I. (2008) Case 3422 Helops Fabricius, 1775 (Insecta, Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae): proposed conservation of usage by designation of Tenebrio caeruleus Linnaeus, 1758 as the type species. The Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature 65(1): 27–30. 10.21805/bzn.v65i1.a7 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  74. Olivier GA. (1791) Encyclopédie méthodique. Histoire naturelle. Insectes. Tome cinquième. Panckoucke, Paris, 793 pp https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/7520012 [Google Scholar]
  75. Olivier GA. (1807) Entomologie, ou histoire naturelle des insectes, avec leurs caractères génériques et spécifiques, leur description, leur synonymie et leur figure enluminée. Coléoptères. Tome cinquième. Desray, Paris, 612 pp https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/33604275 [Google Scholar]
  76. Panzer GWF. (1797) Faunae Insectorum Germanicae initiae oder Deutschlands Insekten. Heft 44. Felssecker, Norimbergae, 24 pp [24 pls.] https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/14927212 [Google Scholar]
  77. Pérez-Arcas L. (1865) Insectos nuevos o poco conocidos de la fauna española. Primera parte. Revista de los Progresos de las Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales 15: 166–186. [Google Scholar]
  78. Petitpierre E. (1970) Variaciones morfológicas y de la genitalia en las Timarcha Lat. (Col. Chrysomelidae). Publicaciones del Instituto de Biología Aplicada 48: 5–16. [Google Scholar]
  79. Petitpierre E. (1973) Estudios sistemáticos, citogenéticos y evolutivos sobre el género Timarcha (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae). PhD thesis, Universidad de Barcelona, Barcelona, 23 pp. [Google Scholar]
  80. Petitpierre E. (1985) Notas faunisticas y ecológicas sobre Chrysomelidae (Coleoptera) de Mallorca y Catalunya. Bolletí de la Societat d’Història Natural de les Balears 29: 31–36. [Google Scholar]
  81. Petitpierre E. (2011) Cytogenetics, cytotaxonomy and chromosomal evolution of Chrysomelinae revisited (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae). ZooKeys 157: 67–79. 10.3897/zookeys.157.1339 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  82. Petitpierre E. (2019) ColeopteraChrysomelidae II. Fauna Ibérica (Vol. 46). CSIC, Madrid, 596 pp. [Google Scholar]
  83. Petitpierre E, Anichtchenko A. (2018) Endophallus structure: a promising tool for cryptic species identification in Timarcha Samouelle, 1819 (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae: Chrysomelinae). Zootaxa 4446(3): 361–383. 10.11646/zootaxa.4446.3.4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  84. Petitpierre E, Juan C. (1994) Genome size, chromosomes, and egg-chorion ultrastructure in the evolution of Chrysomelinae. In: Jolivet P, Cox ML, Petitpierre E. (Eds) Novel Aspects of the Biology of Chrysomelidae.Kluwer Acad. Publ., Dordrecht, 213–225. 10.1007/978-94-011-1781-4_14 [DOI]
  85. Petitpierre E, Segarra C, Juan C. (1993) Genome size and chromosomal evolution in leaf beetles (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae). Hereditas 119: 1–6. 10.1111/j.1601-5223.1993.00001.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  86. Pic M. (1919) Notes diverses, descriptions et diagnoses (suite). L’Échange, Revue linnéenne 35(395): 17–20. [Google Scholar]
  87. Reitter E. (1913) Fauna Germanica. Die Käfer des Deutschen Reiches. Nach der analytischen Methode bearbeitet. IV. Band [1912]. K.G. Lutz’ Verlag, Stuttgart, 236 pp. [pls 129–152.] [Google Scholar]
  88. Rossi P. (1790) Fauna Etrusca sistens insecta quae in provinciis Florentina et Pisana praesertim collegit. Tomus primus. Typis Thomae Masi & Sociorum, Liburni, 272 pp [10 pls.] https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/15596977 [Google Scholar]
  89. Samouelle G. (1819) The Entomologist’s Useful Compendium; or an introduction to the knowledge of British insects, comprising the best means of obtaining and preserving them, and a description of the apparatus generally used; together with the genera of Linné, and the modern method of arranging the classes Crustacea, Myriapoda, spiders, mites and insects, from their affinities and structure, according to the views of Dr. Leach. Also an explanation of the terms used in entomology; a calendar of the times of appearance and usual situations of near 3,000 species of British insects; with instructions for collecting and fitting up objects for the microscope. Illustrated with twelve plates. Thomas Boys, London, 496 pp [12 pls.] https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/5878579 [Google Scholar]
  90. Santiago-Blay J, Fain A. (1994) Phoretic and ectoparasitic mites (Acari) of the Chrysomelidae. In: Jolivet P, Cox ML, Petitpierre E. (Eds) Novel Aspects of the Biology of Chrysomelidae.Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 407–417. 10.1007/978-94-011-1781-4_34 [DOI]
  91. Schoenherr CJ. (1808) Synonymia Insectorum, oder: Versuch einer Synonymie aller bisher bekannten Insecten; nach Fabricii Systema eleutheratorum & c. geordnet. Erster Band. Carl Friedr. Marquard, Stockholm, 424 pp https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/42218536 [Google Scholar]
  92. Shuckard WW, Spry W. (1861) The British Coleoptera Delineated, Consisting of Figures of All the Genera of British Beetles. Henry G. Bohn, London, xxx pp. [83 + 86 pl. + 8 suppl. pls.] https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/39306862
  93. Steiner E. (1864) Erster Nachtrag zu dem von Herrn Julius Müller in der Sitzung vom 10. December 1862 vorgelegten Verzeichnisse der bis jetzt in Mähren und Oesterreichisch-Schlesien aufgefundenen Coleopteren. Verhandlungen des Naturforschenden Vereines in Brünn 3: 203–208. [Google Scholar]
  94. Steinhausen WR. (1994) Larvae of Palaearctic Timarcha Latreille. In: Jolivet P, Cox ML, Petitpierre E. (Eds) Novel Aspects of the Biology of Chrysomelidae.Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 119–125. 10.1007/978-94-011-1781-4 [DOI]
  95. Stephens JF. (1829) A Systematic Catalogue of British insects: being an attempt to arrange all the hitherto discovered indigenous insects in accordance with their natural affinities, containing also the references to every English writer on entomology and to the principal foreign authors, with all the published British genera to the present time. Part I. Baldwin & Cradock, London, 416 pp https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/9484543 [Google Scholar]
  96. Stephens JF. (1831) Illustrations of British Entomology; or, a synopsis of indigenous insects: containing their generic and specific distinctions; with an account of their metamorphoses, times of appearance, localities, food, and economy, as far as practicable. Mandibulata. Volume IV. London, Baldwin & Cradock, 366 pp https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/9188710 [Google Scholar]
  97. Stephens JF. (1839) A Manual of British Coleoptera, or Beetles; containing a brief description of all the species of beetles hitherto ascertained to inhabit Great Britain and Ireland; together with a notice of their chief localities, times and places of appearances, etc. Longman, Orme, Brown, Green and Longmans, London, 443 pp [12 pls.] https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/39160555 [Google Scholar]
  98. Tenenbaum S. (1915) Faüna koleopterologiczna Wysp Balearskich (Faune coléoptérologique des îles Baléares). Księgarni Gebethnera i Wolffa, Warszawa, 150 pp. [Google Scholar]
  99. Teunissen APJA. (2002) Coleópteros de la Península ibérica de la colección A. Teunissen (Holanda): IV. Familia Chrysomelidae (Coleoptera). Boletín de la Sociedad Entomológica Aragonesa 30: 193–196. [Google Scholar]
  100. Tiberghien G. (1971) Études systématiques sur les Chrysomélides du genre Timarcha (Col.). La variabilité des caractères externes et leur interprétation en systématique (1° partie). Bulletin de la Société entomologique de France 76: 185–192. [Google Scholar]
  101. Tiberghien G. (2014) Chrysomelidae, Tribu Timarchini. In: Tronquet M. (Ed.) Catalogue des Coléoptères de France.Association Roussillonnaise d’Entomologie, Perpignan, 600–601.
  102. Tiberghien G. (2016) Observations biologiques sur les Chrysomelinae: nouvelle contribution pour les Timarcha (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae). Le Coléoptériste 19(1): 39–45. [Google Scholar]
  103. Vela JM, Alonso-Zarazaga MA, Daccordi M. (2018) Case 3760 – Chrysomela tenebricosa Fabricius, 1775 (currently Timarcha tenebricosa; Insecta, Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae): proposed precedence of the specific name over Tenebrio laevigatus Linnaeus, 1767. Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature 75: 146–151. 10.21805/bzn.v75.a031 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  104. Warchałowski A. (2003) Chrysomelidae. The Leaf-beetles of Europe and the Mediterranean Area. Natura optima dux Foundation, Warszawa, 600 pp. [56 pls] [Google Scholar]
  105. Warchałowski A. (2010) The Palaearctic Chrysomelidae. Identification Keys. Natura Optima Dux Foundation, Warszawa, 2 vols, 1211 pp. [Google Scholar]
  106. Waterhouse GR. (1864) Notes on Chrysomelidae in the Linnaean and Banksian collections. Transactions of the Entomological Society of London (3rd series) 1(1): 18–28.
  107. Weise J. (1882) Chrysomelidae Lieferung 2. Naturgeschichte der Insecten Deutschlands. Erste Abteilung Coleoptera. Sechster Band. Verlags, Berlin, 193–368.
  108. Weise J. (1916) ChrysomelidaeChrysomelinae, pars 69. In: Schenkling S (Ed.) Coleopterorum Catalogus. W. Junk, Berlin, 255 pp. [Google Scholar]
  109. Winkelman J, Debreuil M. (2008) Les Chrysomelinae de France (Col. Chrysomelidae). Association des Coléoptéristes Amateurs du Sud de la Fran ce, Supplément Rutilans, Villelongue-dels-Monts, 188 pp. [Google Scholar]
  110. Winkler A. (1930) Catalogus Coleopterorum Regiones Palaearcticae. Albert Winkler, Wien, 1265–1392.

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

XML Treatment for Timarcha goettingensis
zookeys.986.57158-treatment1.xml (34KB, xml)
XML Treatment for Timarcha balearica
zookeys.986.57158-treatment2.xml (71.7KB, xml)
XML Treatment for Timarcha rugosa
zookeys.986.57158-treatment3.xml (30KB, xml)
XML Treatment for Timarcha tenebricosa
zookeys.986.57158-treatment4.xml (69.7KB, xml)

Articles from ZooKeys are provided here courtesy of Pensoft Publishers

RESOURCES