|
Remarks
[#1]
[#2]
Only Rhagium inquisitor rugipenne was recorded for Mongolia by Namhaidorzh (1972).
[#3]
[#4]
[#5]
[#6]
[#7]
[#8]
[#9]
[#10]
[#11]
[#12]
[#13]
[#14]
[#15]
[#16]
The dark elytral pattern in Chlorophorus obliteratus looks like reduced black patterns of typical Chlorophorus diadema. That is why such specimens were described, as Chlorophorus diadema kaszabi. The original description of Chlorophorus diadema kaszabi totally fits to some of my specimens of Chlorophorus obliteratus. So it looks possible that Chlorophorus obliteratus is a subspecies or just a colour form of Chlorophorus diadema. I am sure same taxon was recorded for Mongolia as Chlorophorus faldermanni (by Heyrovský, 1968 for Kobd aimak, Khara-Us-Nur and independently by Namkhaidorzh, 1976 for South Gobi-aimak, 20km S Bulgan). Chlorophorus diadema diadema was also recorded for Mongolia (Namkhaidorzh, 1974 1976). It is also represented by two specimens in my collection (South-Gobi aimak and Baian-Khongor aimak). Mongolian Chlorophorus diadema diadema is very close by all characters to Chlorophorus diadema diadema from Far East Russia.
[#17]
The taxon, described as "E. darigangense" by Namkhaidorzh (1976: 210) is a Mongolian form of E. chinganicum and was recorded by Heyrovský (1973a) as E. chinganicum rubrosuturale. D. chinganicum rubrosuturale (described as a species from Inshan Mts - far southwards from the territory of Mongolian Republic) was regarded by Breuning (1962) as morpha of D. chinganicum, which can be also found near Kharbin. In fact all infraspecific taxa of E. chinganicum (including E. ch. melancholicum) were described from China. The differences of Mongolian E. chinganicum (under the name "darigangense") from type specimens of D. chinganicum chinganicum and D. chinganicum melancholicum were described by Namkhaidorzh (1976:211), who reliably supposed his "E. darigangense" as a geographical form of E. chinganicum. So, Mongolian E. chinganicum represents a new subspecies. E. darigangense and E. chinganicum are not close. The photographs of males and females of both taxa are represented in http://www.zin.ru/Animalia/Coleoptera/rus/atlasdan/.
[#18]
[#19]
[#20]
I regard Pterolophia mandshurica = burakowskii on the base of original description accompanied by a picture. P. burakowskii was described from East-Gobi Aimak. I've got a female of Mongolian P. mandshurica from Bulgan Aimak. It was originally recorded for Mongolia by Namkhaidorzh (1974: 173 - Sukhe-Bator Aimak, East Aimak, East-Gobi Aimak) as P. rigida. Later (Namkhaidorzh, 1976: 213) the identifications of corresponding specimens were changed to P. burakowskii. According to Cherepanov (1983): Pteroplophia mandshurica = selengensis (described from Mongolian part of Selenga River Valley). Holotype and a paratype of P. selengensis are preserved in Zoological Museum (St. Petersburg). In general they are a little paler than specimens from Far East Russia, but no other differences.
[#21]
The subspecies was recorded for "Lappland" by Breuning (1952), so can be distributed in North of the European part of Russia, as well as in Norway, Sweden and Finland; for Sakhalin Is. by Matsushita et Tamanuki (1935) - afer Gressitt (1951); and for Mongolia by Heyrovský (1973b), as well as for "Nordeuropa".
[#22]
[#23]
All taxa of i group "quinquevittatum-maurum" belong to one species. Now I am ready to recognize 4 subspecies, though in reality the number of subspecies must be more. Sometimes the areas of different subspecies nearly contact one another (and specimens from different populations are preserved with identic labels). Sometimes populations of different subspecies are intermixed or the area of one subspecies is interrupted by the area of another. Very often morphologically identic specimens can be observed in different subspecies. E. quinquevittatum was described (as Neodorcadion) from "Governement Minusinsk" on the base of specimens with elytral carinae and white stripes. The specimens with the most developed elytral carinae are distributed in Central Tuva in Kyzyl environs. So, traditionally this form was regarded as typical E. quinquevittatum, and I believed that Tuva could be included in "Governement Minusinsk" sensu Hammerström (1893), while Minusinsk is situated about 300 km northwards Kyzyl, and occurrence here of any form of E. quinquevittatum looks rather doubteful (but E. quinquevittatum was recorded for south part of Krasnoiarsk Region - West Sajans by Plavilstshikov, 1958). More over, inside Tuva Republic all known populations of the species northwards Kyzyl are characterized by reduction of elytral carinae and elytral white stripes (which are often totally absent). This form was described as Neodorcadion leucogrammum Suvorov. Recently (2003) I've received a big series of E. quinquevittatum with the label: "Krasnoiarsk Region, Verchneusinsk, Us River Valley, 5.7.2002, A.Brinev leg." All specimens (about 50) are very similar and have elytral carinae and white dorsal elytral stripes. This form is fitting well to the original description and very possibly was the base for it. Still the level of development of elytral carinae and white stripes in that population (which must be accepted as typical) is never so strong as in specimens from Central Tuva, but can often be observed in different populations of E. leucogrammum sensu Plavilstshikov (1958). So now I see the necessity to accept: E. quinquevittatum = E. leucogrammum. Neodorcadion leucogrammum Suvorov was described from "nörlichen Abhängen des Gebirgsrückens Tanny-Ola Anfang VIII.903 gesammelt." on the base of 3 males and 1 female with hardly developed elytral carinae and white stripes. The syntype female preserved in the collection of Zoological Institute, St.-Petersburg belongs to another form - described as Neodorcadion grumi ab. leucotaenium. A male from same collection with two hand labels by Suvorov: "Neodorcadion leucogrammum typ.m." and "Namiur River to the north from Kobdo, 18.VII.1903, Gr.-Gr. leg." does not to type series, because was collected much before the expedition reached Tuva territory, out of type locality - it is striated form of E. quinquevittatum maurum. In my materials typical population is represented by specimens from Chal-Kezhig in Elegest River Valley (north slope of Tannu-Ola Ridge), where striated specimens are mixed with glabrous. My specimens from Bai-Haak represent a transitional population to E. quinquevittatum sajanicum. "E. leucogrammum", sensu Tsherepanov (1983: "Ulug-Khem depression eastwards Chadan") is another species - E. tuvense Plavilstshikov. E. quinquevittatum sajanicum (= E. quinquevittatum sensu Plavilstshikov, 1958, partim) was descriped (as Neodorcadion sajanicum Hammerstrom) from Kemchik River Valley (Central Tuva). I do not know the type, but according to Plavilstshikov (1958), it is similar to the type of E. quinquevittatum. The type locality is rather close to the east border of the subspecies distributed from about Chadan to Kyzyl and then southards to Mongolian border (Erzin). I collected a lot of very typical E. quinquevittatum sajanicum near Ishtii-Hem (about 40km southwards the type locality - Kemchik River). A population of E. quinquevittatum sajanicum from near Erzin, as well as the population of E. quinquevittatum quinquevittatum from north Tannu-Ola (mentioned above) consists of striated and glabrous specimens (glabrous, smooth males are much more numerous than glabrous females). According to J.Mikhailov (personal communication, 2003), glabrous males often copulate with striated females; besides all transitional forms were observed (the population is represented in my materials with the specimens collected by B.Korotiaev). Southwards (in about 20km), near Tere-Khol Lake the population of E. quinquevittatum sajanicum includes only striated specimens. E. quinquevittatum katharinae was described from north Mongolia (most probably from Ubsu-Nur Lake Valley) after one male (holotype in ZIN, St.Petersburg). The subspecies is characterized by usually wide body with very strong elytral carinae and with the widest white elytral stripes known in the species. It is distributed around Ubsu-Nur Lake and in sands (Altan-Els) along Tesiyn-Gol (north of Ubsunur and Dzabkhan aimaks). The population of E. quinquevittatum katharinae from Altan-Els Sands consists of striated and smooth glabrous specimens with many transitional forms (similar to the populations of E. quinquevittatum quinquevittatum from Chal-Kezhig, north slope of Tannu-Ola, and to the population of E. quinquevittatum sajanicum from near Erzin, south Tuva). The description of Neodorcadion maurum Jakovlev was based on three syntypes: 2 males "trouvés en 1879 par Mr G.Potanin en Mongolie" and 1 female "venant de l'Alai" - the last locality is not exact. According to Namhaidorzh (1972) the type series was collected near Ulangom. The same population was partly used for the description of E. grumi: syntype male and sytype female in my collection with the label in Russian: ["Namiur River between Kobdo River and Ulangom, 18.7.1903, Grum-Grzhimailo"]. Another part of E. grumi syntypes was collected in north Tannu-Ola. One syntype male in my collection with the label in Russian: ["north slope of Tannu-Ola Ridge, 3-5.8.1903, Grum-Grzhimailo"]. I've got very similar specimens from Torgalyk River. I do not see the difference between specimens from Tuva and Mongolia. If the diference exists, the synonymy maurum = grumi could be canceled, after respective lectotype designation. Now the area of the taxon is very large. Tuva: planes northwards Tannu-Ola, hills southwards Tannu-Ola from Mugur-Aksy to Samagaltai. Mongolia: from the west part of Greate Lakes Valley - Ureg-Nug Lake eastwards along Tesiyn-Gol to Dzabkhan aimak and southwards up to Kobdo. The are of the taxon described by Plavilstshikov (1958) is totally wrong: there is nothing similar to the taxon in Transbaicalie or in Selenga and Orkhon Rivers Valleis. E. quinquevittatum maurum is characterized by smooth, often shining elytra without humeri granules, without epical elytral white stripe, abdomen with less dense pubescence. Specimens with elytral carinae and white elytral stripes are well known as rare female form (ab. leucotaenium), but very rare males also can be striated. In some areas the transitional forms between E. quinquevittatum maurum and E. quinquevittatum quinqievittatum (Chal-Kezhig) or E. quinquevittatum maurum and E. quinquevittatum sajanicum (Erzin) or E. quinquevittatum katatharinae (from Barun-Turun to Delgerekh) are known, but in some areas - not (Khadyn Lake, Bai-Khaak). The proposed nomenclature must be regarded as preliminal as it is not quite natural. In fact the typical population of E. quinquevittatum quinquevittatum in Us-River Valley is totally isolated from any other populations of the species and is rather peculiar. So, all other populations with poor developed white elytral stripes must have another names. That also concerns the population of E. quinquevittatum sajanicum from Khemtchik-River Valley to Shagonar and futher eastwards to about Kyzyl. Similar populations southwards Kyzyl have much stronger elytral sculpture and white elytral strokes, so they represent another subspecies and need a new name. Also new names must be proposed for strongly variable populations from near Erzin and for very stable population from Tere-Khol Lake. With such point of view E. quinquevittatum leucogrammum is distributed only along north slope of Tannu-Ola, while similat populations northwards and eastwards Kyzyl need new names. So, at least 5 new subspecies names must be introduced for Tuva only. Several localities known to me (ZIN - collection of Zoological Museum, St.-Petersburg; MD - my collection):
[#24]
Neodorcadion morosum was described as a species from "Nord-Ouest de la Mongolie" on a single male ("21 mm"). The holotype (20 mm) with the label in Russian: ["N-W Mongolia, 8.7.1894, Clemenz"] is preserved in Zoological Institute (St.-Petersburg). The name was faithfully declared as a synonym of E. dorcas (glabrous form) by Plavilstshikov (1958). It is agree with my materials as I've got E. dorcas ab. morosum from Aldarkhan, that is about same population as from Shurgyngol River Valley. My series from Ereen Lake (north part of Gobi-Altai aimak) consists mostly of ab. morosum, but includes one female of typical form. E. dorcas scabrosum was described from sands near Khukh-Mort (north of Gobi-Altai aimak - type locality), that is less than 100 km eastwards population of nominative subspecies. Another locality represented in the type series is sandy desert in Khungui River Valley (Dzabkhan aimak), that is about 120 km northwards from the type locality. Two paratypes from near Khuh-Mort are preserved in Zoological Institute (St.-Petersburg). Male is glabrous, but female with white stripes. I've got a glabrous pair from near type locality. The taxon really differs from the nominative subspecies by much more rough elytral sculpture. L.Heyrovský had no adequate imagination of the species. I've got a series of E. maurum from one locality (Ubsunur aimak, 32 km NW Ulangom, 1200 m, 27.6-7.7.1968, Exp. Dr.Z.Kaszab) with two different identifications by L.Heyrovský: "E. dorcas m. morosum" and "E. grumi". The very peculiar rough elytral sculpture of E. dorcas makes the identification of the species very easy. A single females, described as E. dorcas fortecostatum Heyrovský, 1975, from near Ulangom (Ubsunur aimak) belongs to corresponding form of E. maurum. The separation of E. dorcas annulatum, as it was mentioned by Namkhaidorzh (1972), could hardly be accepted. The type series consists of glabrous forms of two different species: E. egregium from Kobd aimak and E. dorcas from Gobi-Altai aimak (Dzabkhan River Valley northwards Dzhargalan - that is rather close to known typical population). Unfortunately, where is holotype from, is not clear from the original description. But if the holotype is from Gobi-Altai aimak and its antenna really with white rings, than it must just an aberration of E. dorcas dorcas. Plavilstshikov (1958) described too wide area for E. dorcas. The species sure absent near Ulan-Bator and in Selenga River Valley. I believe, that its are is limited by the region to south-west from Khingai Ridge (Gobi-Altai and Dzabkhan aimaks). It must be absent both in Russia and in China.
[#25]
[#26]
Namhkaidorzh (1972) proposed a new synonymy: E. heros = E. zichyi. E. heros (Jakovlev, 1899) was described (as Neodorcadion) on one female ("24mm") from "montibus Alashanicis meridionalibus...". The holotype (24.5 mm) is preserved in Zoolological Institute (St.-Petersburg) with the label in Russian ["S Alashan, VI and beginning of VII.1873, Przhevalsky"; besides one conspecific male is also preserved with the label in Russian ["China"]. E. heros is very close to E. zichyi, but differs from all specimens of E. zichyi by rather flat male elytra, less rough pronotal sculpture and red femora (that is impossible in E. zichyi). Besides the area of E. zichyi is delimited from Alashan Desert by the area of another vicariant species. So I prefer now to regard both as different species.
[#27]
E. mongolicum was described (as Neodorcadion) on series of specimens "trouvées en 1893 dans la Mongolie par M.Clemenz". Jakovlev mentioned the size of one male (17 mm) and one female (20 mm), but in the text he used several males for description. Now in Zoologica Institute (St.-Petersburg) three similar males (14.5-16.5 mm) are equiped with original Jakovlev's red type labels, but all without any geographical label. A female (19.5 mm) undoubtedly belongs to syntype series, though has only one original label in Russian ["V.Jakovlev's coll."]. Besides, there are a very similar pair of males (17.5 mm and 20 mm) without Jakovlev's labels, but with the geographical labels in Russian ["N-W Mongolia, 20.VI-7.VII.1894, Clemenz" and "N-W Mongolia, 9.VII-10.VIII.1894, Clemenz"]. Any way all these specimens look like members of one population. The syntype series does not allow to identify exactly its geographical origine, as very similar specimens (collection of Zoological Museum, St.-Petersburg) are known from very wide area (from Dzabkhan River Valley in the north part of Gobi-Altai aimak, to Ushugin-Obo Mt. in the east part of Uver-Khangai aimak. Besides, I've got similar specimens from near Beger in the east part of Gobi-Altai aimak. The syntypes of E. intermedium do not possess any character, which could distinguish E. intermedium as a species from E. mongolicum. In general elytral and thoracic punctuation and design are same. The locality of E. intermedium is situated at the south part of E. mongolicum area. So, E. intermedium = E. mongolicum. E. kaszabi was described from two localities: Bogd environs in Bain-Khongor aimak and Khovd environs in Uver-Khangai aimak. Both localities are inside the area of E. intermedium. The original description is equipped with photographs of a male and a female, besides I've studied a syntype female in Heyrovský collection in Prague National Museum. The specimens used by Heyrovský for his description are nearly identical to syntypes of E. mongolicum. So, E. intermedium = E. mongolicum = E. kaszabi. Heyrovský did not compare his new species with any other species, but mentioned: "Dem E. ornatum Fald. nahestehend.", which was totally out of the reality. All localities, mentined above, are situtated westwards from 103°E. So, I accept the area of the monimative form as the western half of the species area. Neodorcadion kozlovi was described from "Zentral Mongolei; Chutzen-Shanda Brunnen 16.VII.1909 (Expedition P.K. Kozlov, coll. P.P. Semenov-Tian-Shansky)." on series of males (16-20 mm) and a female (22 mm). Now a series with original Suvorov's type labels preserved in Zoological Museum (St.-Petersburg) consists of two specimens: male (15.5 mm) with label in Russian ["Cent. Mongolia, Tzosto River, 28.VI-2.VII.1909, Kozlov's exp."] and a female (22.5 mm) with Russian label ["Cent. Mongolia, Khutzen-Shanda well, 16.VII.1909, Kozlov's exp."]. Namkhaidorzh (1972) had in his disposal 10 syntypes. According to I.Kerzhner (2003, personal communication), the well Chutzen-Shanda is situated in the north part of South-Gobi aimak near Mandal-Obo (44°08'N, 104°05'E). One more male is preserved in the museum from the type locality ("Omnogov aimak, Mandal-Obo, 26.7.1967, B.Namkhaidorzh leg"). Nearby I've collected a series of specimens in 2002 from near Mandal-Gobi (45°10'N, 105°30'E) to Manlai (44°03'N, 107°02'E) and to Mandah (44°24'N, 108°13'E - more than 100 ex.); I've also got several specimens from near Sain-Shand (44°47'N, 110°07'E). Both syntypes and a male from Mandal-Obo are very similar to my series collected in 2002 becouse of usual (by not constant!) conjugation of internal dorsal elytral stripes with sutural stripe forming wide central white elytral trianguilar area, which are always absent in specimens of E. intermedium from westwards of 103°E. So, I regard all these populations as E. intermedium ssp. kozlovi. Still certain specimens of E. intermedium kozlovi are indistinguished from the nominative form. Plavilstshikov (1958) used in the key only one character for separation of his E. mongolicum from his E. kozlovi: the wide fusion between humeral elytral stripe and external dorsal stripe at elytral base. According to the original description only one syntype male (the biggest) had a connection between humeral elytral stripe and external dorsal stripe at elytral base. This character is really absent in all known to me E. intermedium intermedium, but present in about 80% of E. intermedium kozlovi. The description of Neodorcadion princeps was based on a single male ("18 mm") without exact geographical data. The holotype (18 mm) without geographical label, preserved in Zoological Museum (St.-Petersburg), has an original label by Ménetriés hand "D. ornatum var." mentioned in the original description and totally corresponds to the it. The holotype is characterized by totally fused humeral and external dorsal elytral stripes forming rather wide joined humeral stripe, sutural stripe is also wide. In fact such elytral design is simply a very rare abberation known in many different taxa (E. argali rugipenne, E. intermedium intermedium, E. intermedium kozlovi, E. oryx). Among more than hundred E. intermedium kozlovi, collected by me in East-Gobi aimak about 6 males and 2 female have similar elytral design. The holotype of N. princeps most probably is the corresponding aberration of E. ornatum (as it was reflected in the oryginal label by Ménetriés) because of: black legs, black antennae, absence of internal dorsal elytral stripe (so, not E. intermedium or E. oryx), moderately rough elytral sculture near humeri similar to E. argali rugipenne (so not E. intermedium, or E. zichyi, or E. heros - besides much smaller than E. heros or E. zichyi), rather rough elytral sculpure near middle - just same as in syntype female of E. ornatum (so, not E. argali rugipenne). Besides, the syntype female of E. ornatum has very special strongly developed white pubescence of pronotum which is unknown to me in any specimen of related species, but just same as in holotype of N. princeps. So, E. ornatum = E. princeps. Namkhaidorzh (1972) mentioned a single male of E. princeps from near Altan-Shire (East-Gobi aimak) as the first record of the species for Mongolia. That was rather natural as the locality is situated inside the population of E. intermedium kozlovi. So, E. intermedium kozlovi = E. princeps, sensu Namkhaidorzh, 1972 (not Jakovlev, 1899). I can suppose now several local subspecies inside the very big area of E. intermedium, but now all infraspecific names belong to the nominative form and to E. intermedium kozlovi. E. argali, E. novitzkyi, E. intermedium, E. oryx and E. heros constitute a system of vicariant species.
[#28]
Namkhaidorzh (1972) mentioned that the taxon was not known to him. But in 1976 he reported it inder the name "E. argali", though exactly from the type locality of E. argali rugipenne. The abundance of the specimens just on the border with China makes me sure that E. argali rugipenne is also distributed in North China. E. quadricarinatum described from near Ulan-Bator is a synonym of E. argali, as it was faithfully supposed by Namkhaidorzh.
[#29]
[#30]
[#31]
[#32]
[#33]
[#34]
[#35]
[#36]
[#37]
[#38]
[#39]
[#40]
[#41]
[#42]
As far as I know, no exact distributional data on E. oryx were published up to now (2003). Three localities from East-Gobi aimak (near Tenger-Nur Lake, near Shokhoi-Nur Lake and near Sulan-Khere) published by Namkhaidorzh (1976) [wrongly attributed by him to South Gobi aimak], concern another species, close to E. intermedium (I've studied two males from near Tenger-Nur, preserved in Zoological Institute, St.-Petersburg, and identified by Namkhaidorzh as E. oryx). So, E. oryx has small area near south-east part of Khangai mountains. It must be in vicariant relations with neihbour populations of E. argali and E. intermedium. E. oryx easily differs from E. intermedium by smooth elytra and from E. argali by wide sutural white stripe.
[#43]
Glabrous (without white hair stripes) form of E. ornatum was described as Dorcadion exaratum Ménetriés, 1854 "de Pekin". It is wrong locality data, but most probably the type locality is situated in China. The geographical relations between glabrous and pubescent form in China are not clear (I do not know both from one locality). According to Plavilstshikov (1958) "glabrous form does not have own area, but usually does not occur together with pubescent form". According to Namkhaidorzh (1972), all E. ornatum from Mongolien Republic have glabrous elytra (so, the type locality of E. ornatum is situated somewhere in North China), so, at least here E. ornatum is represented by a distinct subspecies. Untill the type locality and status of E. exaratum are not clear, I prefer to use for Mongolian subspecies the name E. ornatum hircus Jakovlev, 1906. One male from Mongolia (with well developed elytral white stripes, though with totally fused internal dorsal stripe and sutural stripe) preserved in Zoological Institute (St.-Petersburg): East-Gobi Aimak, 10 km NW Erdene, 13.7.1975, Gurieva leg. is identified by Namkhaidorzh (hand label) as E. ornatum - in fact iy is normal E. i. kozlovi. Neodorcadion hircus was described from East Mongolia (Kerulen River Valley). The name was originally declared as a synonym of E. ornatum by Plavilstshikov (1958), as well as Neodorcadion novitzkyi var. inalbatum Suvorov, 1909 also from Kerulen River. In Mongolia E. ornatum hircus is known from Central-Gobi aimak and East-Gobi aimak to Khentei aimak and East aimak. It must be distributed in China from Mongolian border to Khangai Ridge. E. kaznakovi (Suvorov, 1912) was described (as Neodorcadion) from "Alashan, Oasis Dyn-juan-ing, 20.VI.1908" on series of males (15-19 mm). A syntype male (15.1 mm) is preserved in Zoological Institute (St.-Petersburg) with the label in Russian: [Alashan, Dyn-iuan-in, 26.6.1908, Kozlov's exp." Another male, preserved in the Museum's collection with the label in Russian ["Alashan Desert, South Gobi, end of IX.1901, Kozlov"] and identified by Namkhaidorzh as E. kaznakovi, is very similar to the syntype but a little longer (17.0mm) with a short basal stroke of internal elytral dorsal stripe and so very similar to the picture of E. ornatum male in its original description. Still E. kaznakovi and E. ornatum looks as different species, because of totally different pronotal and elytral sculpture.
[#44]
[#45]
The differences between European and Far East populations are evident, so the name Asias halodendri halodendri can not be used for east populations, as Cerambyx halodendri Pallas, 1776 was described "... ad Irtin" (= Irtysh), and the specimens from Kazakhstan are not close to Far East populations. As it was declared by Kostin (1974), populations from East Kazakhstan differs from West Kazakhstan populations at the subspecies level. I preliminary accept that Asias halodendri ephippium (Steven et Dalman, 1817), described from South Russia (Terek River), is distributed from North Caucasus to the south part of European Russia (northwards to about Saratov) and in Ural Region of Kazakhstan. In Semipalatinsk region Asias halodendri halodendri is distributed. For far east Maritime subspecies, which penetrates far in East Siberia, the name Asias halodendri pirus (Arakawa, 1932) can be used. It was introduced for Korean population as Purpuricenus pyrus. Rather peculiar specimens from Tuva populations were described as Anoplistes minutus Hammarström, 1893 - same in Mongolia.
[#46]
A. kozlovi was collected in same locality as Asias halodendri minutus, thouh about 1 month later and according to D.Obydov on another host plant.
MH © September 10, 2004
|
