identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
8F6B0B50FF805E4CF9A3FD82D207FDFA.text	8F6B0B50FF805E4CF9A3FD82D207FDFA.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria mucronata Steven 1828	<div><p>Tentyria mucronata Steven, 1828 (Figs. 1, 36, 70, 106, 144, 154, 186, 222)</p> <p>Tentyria mucronata Steven, 1828: 90; Solier 1835: 320, Küster 1849: XVI.18, Mulsant 1854: 43, Kraatz 1865: 120, Reitter 1900: 169, Portevin 1934: 5, Dejean 1837: 204, Gebien 1910: 71, and 1937: 628, Español 1960: 404, Viñolas 1986: 101, Viñolas &amp; Cartagena 2005: 78 fig. 354d, Soldati 2007: 50.</p> <p>Tentyria glabra sensu Latreille 1804a: 271.</p> <p>Tentyria oblonga Solier, 1835: 321.</p> <p>Tentyria nitida Solier, 1835: 323.</p> <p>Tentyria elongata Waltl, 1835: 70 nom. preocc., homonym nov.</p> <p>Non Tentyria elongata Gebler, 1829: 119, 1833: 286 (= Anatolica angustata (Steven, 1828)).</p> <p>Types examined: The type of Tentyria mucronata Steven was not found between the types of Tentyria (MNHUB). We found a specimen bearing an old label written with “Gallia” and conserved in the Scĥnherr´s collection (NRMS) and seven syntypes: Tentyria nitida /in coll. Solier Coll. de Marseul (MNHN).</p> <p>One specimen labelled as syntype of Tentyria oblonga in coll. Solier Coll. of Marseul (MNHN), bearing five labels: Tentyria mucronata oblonga Sol, T, Espagne, col DU 64/Type Solier/MUSEUM PARIS, Coll. Solier, Coll. DE MARSEUL, 2842 90 / SYNTYPE / Tentyria oblonga Type Solier.</p> <p>Two syntypes of Tentyria elongata Waltl, carrying the label “ Hispania / Tentyria elongata Waltl ” (NHMW).</p> <p>Additional Material: Tentyria oblonga Sol, Korb. Elias, Cuya 66/MUSEUM PARIS, Coll. Solier, Coll. DE MARSEUL, 2842-90. France, Camargue: Camarful, Arlés, P. Bonat Leg. (1 ex CJF); Spain, Cataluña: Farola de Llobregat, Barcelona, F. Español det. and leg. (4 exx CJF); Barcelona, La Farola, coll. Max de Xarxas (MCNB); Rocallaura, coll. Max de Xarxas / subrugosa var. (MCNB); Premíà, Barcelona, coll. Max de Xarxas (1 ex MNCN); Vilaseca, Barcelona, coll. Max de Xarxas (1 ex MNCN); El Prat de Llobregat, Barcelona (5 exx CACT); Stang de Canet, Barcelona (2 exx CJF); Gavà, Barcelona (1♀ CJLB).</p> <p>Diagnosis: According to the original description “The body is black, slightly shiny, oblong, ovate and convex. Pronotum with the central lobe bi-mucronate. France meridional” (translated from Latin). Mulsant (1854) provided a very detailed description of this taxon.</p> <p>Body oval, elongate (Fig. 186). Head (Fig. 1) with eyes slightly convex and temples converging backwards, supraorbital fold thick; epistome with the anterior margin rounded, or very slightly angled, provide with a small tooth in the middle; gular groove slightly transverse and somewhat deep (Fig. 36). Pronotum (Fig. 70) with maximum width after the middle, sides rounded, somewhat narrower towards the base than at the apex; base strongly sinuate before the rear angles and with the median part prolonged backwards in a lobe, usually bi-mucronate or truncate, and often not bordered at the middle; punctures well marked, somewhat smaller than in the head; some specimens have on disc two pit-like impressions on both sides of the midline. Prosternal apophyses (Fig. 106) parallel-sided and somewhat longitudinally furrowed, with rounded or ogival end. Elytra oval, elongate, with maximum width before the middle and tapering regularly towards apex; base of elytra completely bordered, and medially curved around scutellum (Fig. 144); sculpture of elytra very variable, slightly striated, rugous, or smooth, but always with punctures somewhat finer than that of pronotum. Aedeagus (Fig. 154) about 3.7 mm long, parameres with sinuous sides, slightly longer than phallobase, and with truncate apex, neither spiniform, nor denticulate.</p> <p>Comments: Solier (1835) described T. oblonga from Barcelona and T. nitida from an uncertain locality, as a very close species to T. mucronata Steven, even considering that they could be varieties of this taxon. Kraatz (1865), and all the subsequent authors, include these species within the specific group of T. mucronata Steven, considering that the differential characters mentioned by Solier (1835) are the result of the specific variability. Indeed, within the same population we find individuals that differ in size, thickness of the body, development of the central lobe the pronotum, from just clearly bi-mucronate to not mucronate and / or truncated; the sculpture of the elytra, from smooth to clearly striated and / or rough, the punctures more or less marked on the surface of the body,..., differences more related to sexual dimorphism (such as more slender and elongated body in males) than a specific separation.</p> <p>On the other hand, in the NHMW can be found two syntypes of T. elongata Waltl (Fig. 222), a primary homonym of T. elongata Gebler (= Anatolica angustata (Steven, 1828)). These specimens are identical to those of T. mucronata Steven, a french-catalonian species. This concern has caused a great confusion in the taxonomy of the iberian Tentyria.</p> <p>Geographical distribution: Described from southern France and extended in the French and Catalan Mediterranean coasts, northern of the Ebro River (Español, 1960).</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FF805E4CF9A3FD82D207FDFA	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FF815E4CF9A3FDAED4F7F8FA.text	8F6B0B50FF815E4CF9A3FDAED4F7F8FA.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria schaumii Kraatz 1865	<div><p>Tentyria schaumii Kraatz, 1865 (Figs. 2, 37, 71, 107, 155, 187, 223)</p> <p>Tentyria schaumii Kraatz, 1865: 142; Reitter 1900: 170, Gebien 1910: 73, Fuente 1934: 29, Español 1954: 24 (fig. 25) 1958: 9 and 1960: 404, Viñolas 1986: 100, Pons &amp; Palmer 1996: 185, Viñolas &amp; Catagena 2005: 77(fig. 354c), L̂bl &amp; Smetana 2008: 206; Martínez 2018: 58, Iwan &amp; L̂bl 2020: 252.</p> <p>Types examined: Three syntypes (3♀♀) from Mallorca, Baleares (SDEI): Schaumii Kr. / Type Schaumi Kr., det. Schuster / Schaumii mi Balearen / Coll. Kraatz / Coll. DEI Eberswalde / Syntypus / SDEI Coleoptera # 300633; sp. nov., thor. bidentic. Malorca Schaumii Krtz. / Tent. Schaumii / Kraatz / Malorca / rugosa Géné. / Schaumi Kr. det. Schuster / Coll. Rottenberg / Coll. DEI Eberswalde / Syntypus / SDEI Coleoptera # 300634; Schaumii Malorca / Schaumi Kr. det. Schuster / Coll. Kraatz / Coll. DEI Eberswalde / Syntypus / SDEI Coleoptera # 300635.</p> <p>Additional material: Balearen, Reitter (2 exx, NRMS); dorsalis/ Baleares (HMNH); Balear Islands, Breit (1 ex, NRMS); Alcudia, 7.V.1969, O. Trottestam leg. (2 exx, NRMS); Port Bou, 29.V.1967, E. Leiler leg. (6 exx, NRMS); Palma, Coll d’en Rabassa 15.V.1960, A. Compte leg. (3 exx, NRMS); Mallorca, Cala Millor, 23.V.1978 / 20. V.1978, J. Ferrer leg. (CJF) / (1♁ CJLB); San Agustín, 25.V.1969, L. Samuelsson leg. (2 exx, NRMS); Can Picafort, Mallorca, 11.8.1996, J. de Ferrer leg. (6 exx CJdeF in CJLB); Palma de Mallorca (1♁ CJF). Cala´n Bosh, Menorca, 30.8.2010, J.C. Martínez leg. (1♀ CJLB).</p> <p>Diagnosis: Species well distinguishable by the body, dull black and robust, with graceful legs (Fig. 187); Head (Fig. 2) with the eyes fairly convex and the temples narrowed back; anterior edge of epistome rounded and not toothed; gular groove shallow in center and slightly transverse (Fig. 37); pronotum (Fig. 71) large and transverse, with fine and dense punctures, and the sides regularly curved from the base to the apex. Basal lobe slightly protruding backward, completely margined and slightly notched or bi-mucronate; prosternal apophysis lanceolate (Fig. 107). Elytra striated or rough-striated; wider than the pronotum, and well punctured; with the base completely margined and notched around the scutellum as in T. ophiusae (Fig. 143). Anal sternite truncate at the apex (Fig. 149). Aedeagus robust, about 3.7 mm long, with the parameres slightly longer than the phallobase, with barely sinuate sides and converging from the base, ending in a small truncated apical tooth (Fig. 155).</p> <p>Comments: Sabulicolous species, inhabitant particularly the coastline, active almost all the year (Moragues 1889; Español 1960; Pons &amp; Palmer 1996).</p> <p>Designation of the Lectotype of Tentyria schaumii Kraatz, 1865, present designation:</p> <p>Of the three syntypes located in the SDEI, we designate Lectotype the specimen with the following labels: Schaumii Kr. / Type Schaumi Kr., det. Schuster / Schaumii elegans mi Balearen / Coll. Kraatz / Coll. DEI Eberswalde / Syntypus / SDEI Coleoptera # 300633 (Fig. 223). The other two specimens are considered Paralectotypes.</p> <p>Geographical distribution: Eastern Balearic Islands, concretely from Mallorca, Menorca and Cabrera, and the neighbouring islets (Moragues 1889, Español 1954, 1958 and 1960, Palmer &amp; Vives 1993, Pons &amp; Palmer 1996).</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FF815E4CF9A3FDAED4F7F8FA	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FF815E4FF9A3F8AED0D7FC05.text	8F6B0B50FF815E4FF9A3F8AED0D7FC05.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria ophiusae Codina 1918	<div><p>Tentyria ophiusae Codina, 1918 (Figs. 3, 38, 72, 108, 143, 156, 188, 224)</p> <p>Tentyria mucronata ssp. ophiusae Codina, 1918: 265; Gebien 1937: 628, L̂bl &amp; Smetana 2008: 206, Martínez 2018: 58, Iwan &amp; L̂bl 2020: 251.</p> <p>Tentyria ophiusae Codina Español 1940: 9, 1951: 11, 1954: 23 and 1960: 404, Viñolas 1986: 102, Juan &amp; Petitpierre 1990, Pons &amp; Palmer 1996, Viñolas &amp; Cartagena 2005: 78 and 355 a, Viñolas et al. 2016: 131 and 2017: 74.</p> <p>Types examined: Syntype: Cotypus / Tentyria ophiusae nov. sp. Codina / Formentera, S. Franc. Javier, Malaquer leg. / Zool. Staatsslg. München / ophiusae Cod. (Fig. 224).</p> <p>Additional material: Formentera, La Sabina, 26.X.1948, X. Palau leg., F. Español det. (2♁ CJF and 1♁ CJLB); Ibiza, Figueroa, 16.IV.1962, F. Español leg. (MCNB); Formentera, Mitjorrn, 8.VIII,1962, Balcells leg. (MCNB); Ilot Caragolé, Freus, 1.VIII.1962, idem (MCNB); Espalmador, 10.VIII.1962, idem (MCNB); Espalmador, 4-1921 (MNCN).</p> <p>Diagnosis: Species well characterised by the following features: graceful and bright body, with very fine and hardly noticeable punctures (Fig. 188). Head with large and convex eyes (Fig. 3); gular groove consisting in a shallow central depression (Fig. 38). Sides of pronotum more narrowed in the base than in the apex; margin of the base entire and thick, and the middle lobe barely indented, rather truncated or even rounded (Fig. 72); prosternal apophysis with parallel sides and rounded end (Fig. 108); elytra smooth or with vestigial stria, very oblong but sharpened towards the extreme, and barely narrowed towards the humeri which are angled and fallen, broad base, curved around the scutellum but straight to the humeri (Fig. 143); anal sternite truncate at the apex (Fig. 149); aedeagus fusiform, about 3.25 mm in length, with the parameres almost as long as the phallobase (Fig. 156).</p> <p>Comments: T. ophiusae Codina was described as subspecies of T. mucronata Steven; however, according with Español (1940, 1951), it should be considered different species mainly by the configuration of the aedeagus.</p> <p>Geographical distribution: Endemism from the coastal sands of the Balearic Pitiusas (Ibiza and Formentera) (Español 1960; Pons &amp; Palmer 1996).</p> <p>Group of T. subcostata</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FF815E4FF9A3F8AED0D7FC05	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FF825E51F9A3FBD6D2B9FB0A.text	8F6B0B50FF825E51F9A3FBD6D2B9FB0A.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria subcostata Solier. In 1835	<div><p>Tentyria subcostata Solier, 1835 (Figs. 4, 39, 73, 109, 157, 189, 225, 226, 250)</p> <p>Tentyria subcostata Solier, 1835: 325; Bujalance et al. 2016: 348, Martínez 2018: 58.</p> <p>Tentyria sinuatocollis Rosenhauer, 1856: 185 (part).</p> <p>Tentyria emarginata Kraatz, 1865: 141 (Rambur in litt.), Reitter 1900: 169, Gebien 1910:69 and 1937: 628, Español 1960: 405, Bujalance et al. 2016: 349 (syn.), Martínez 2018: 58.</p> <p>Tentyria sinuaticollis ssp. emarginata Viñolas, 1986: 102, Viñolas 1991: 46, Viñolas &amp; Cartagena 2005: 79.</p> <p>Tentyria elongata sinuaticollis sensu Palmer 1998: 268.</p> <p>Tentyria elongata subcostata Solier sensu Iwan &amp; L̂bl 2020: 249.</p> <p>Types examined: Lectotype (Bujalance et al. 2016), carrying the following labels: subcostata / Tentyria subcostata Sol, T, alg, Du64 / MUSEUM PARIS, Coll. Solier, COLL. DE MARSEUL, 2842-90 / SYNTYPE / Tentyria subcostata Type Solier)” (Fig. 225). In the MNHN, besides the syntype above mentioned, there are other two syntypes (Fig. 247 a, b) that do not match the description of Solier (Bujalance et al. 2016).</p> <p>Six syntypes (4♀♀ and 2♁♁) of Tentyria emarginata Kraatz in the SDEI with the following labels: Tentyria sp. ? / emarginata Kraatz / emarginata Kr. det. Schuster / 220 / Coll. Schaum / Syntypus / SDEI Coleoptera # 300626 (♀); Tentyria emarginata Kr. det. Schuster / Andalusien Kraatz / Coll. Kraatz / Syntypus / SDEI Coleoptera # 300627 (♀); emarginata Ramb. Kraatz Andalus / emarginata Kr. det. Schuster / Coll. Schaum / Syntypus / SDEI Coleoptera # 300628 (♀); emarginata Kraatz var. / var. elytris transversim rugosis, Andalus Staud. / emarginata Kr. det. Schuster / Coll. Kraatz / Syntypus / SDEI Coleoptera # 300629 (♁); emarginata Kr. var. / var. thoracis lobo medio marginato / emarginata Kr. det. Schuster / Coll. Kraatz / Syntypus / SDEI Coleoptera # 300630 (♁); Tentyria emarginata / Andalusien Kraatz / emarginata Kr. det. Schuster / Syntypus / SDEI Coleoptera # 300631 (♀) (Fig. 226).</p> <p>Additional material: Four historic specimens of Tentyria emarginata Rambur in litt, in coll. Rambur, (MNHUB), all of them bearing the following labels: “ Tentyria emarginata Ramb.Andalus, Zool. Mus. Berlin, Hist.- Coll. (Coleoptera), Nr 45540”; one of them also bears two old handwritten labels: “ emarginata Rambur, Andalus Ramb ” and another with “Nr 45540”. One historic speciemen with three labels Tentyria curculionoides Hrbst. ?, Andalus, Laferté, Zool. Mus. Berlin, Hist.-Coll. (Coleoptera), Nr. 45576 / old handwritten label curculionoides Kr., Andalus, Laferté / old label with the number 45576. One historic specimen (1♀) with three labels handwritten by Rosenhauer: T. gaditana Rsh. Rosh., Hispania (big label with black margin) / T. gaditana Rsh. Rosh. (small label) / Hispania Rsh. (small label) (NMUHB).</p> <p>Morocco: Tentyria marocana? Solier, Restinga, Melilla, Morocco 1909, Arias leg. / MNCN (1♁, MNCN); Ras el Ma Cap, 14.X.1999, Gonz. Mtnez leg. (1 ex, CJGC). Spain: Cádiz: Chiclana 12.IX.2004, J.L. Bujalance leg. (1♀, CJLB); Rota 7.VIII.1987, J.L. Bujalance leg. (1 ex, CJLB); Tentyria emarginata Kr., P. Leo det., Tarifa 21.V.1977 (1 ex, CJdeF in CJLB); Tentyria emarginata Kr., P. Ardoin det., Tarifa, Paloma 2.III.1974, J. de Ferrer leg. (1 ex, CJdeF in CJLB); Tarifa 11.VI.1977, J. de Ferrer leg. (2 exx, CJdeF in CJLB); Tarifa (2 exx, CJF); Tarifa, M. Frene leg. (1 ex, CJF); Tarifa, Punta Paloma 16. VIII.2008 (1 ex) / 10.XI.2009 (4 exx), A. Castro Tovar leg. (CACT); T. sinuaticollis Rosh., A. Viñolas det., Barbate 5.X.1983, J. de Ferrer leg. (1♀, CJdeF in CJLB); Bolonia, next to Barbate, 15.VIII.2002, Juan Fernández leg. (1♁, CJF); Playa de Bolonia, Tarifa, 2.IV.2010, A. Castro Tovar leg. (4 exx, CACT). San Fernándo, Playa del Castillo, 20.IX.2005, P. Coello leg. (1♁, CACT). Camping Bahía de Plata, Zahara de los Atunes, 2.VIII.2006, A. Castro Tovar leg. (1♀ and 1♁, CACT). Tentyria elongata ssp. sinuatocollis, Soldati det. 2001, Trafalgar Cap, 1.IV.1983, J.L. Moreno leg. (1♁, CJF). Huelva: P. N. de Doñana, A. Cárdenas, J. Hidalgo &amp; J.L. Bujalance leg., 1999-2005 (many specimens, CJLB); Almonte 10.VI.2006, J.J. López-Pérez leg. (1 ex, CJJL); Aljaraque 18.IV.2007, F. López Martín (1♀, CJJL); isla de Saltes 25.III.2006, J.L. López-Pérez leg. (7 exx, CJJL); Tentyria sinuatocollis ssp. emarginata, A. Viñolas det., La Redondela, Lepe, 16.VIII.1981, J. de Ferrer leg., (1 ex., CJLB); Islantilla, 14.V.2006, J.L. Bujalance leg. (3♁♁, CJLB); Málaga: Tentyria sinuaticollis ssp. emarginata, A. Viñolas det., Sª de las Nieves, Ronda 8.VI.1983, J. de Ferrer leg. (1♁, CJLB). Portugal: Monte Gordo, 4.4.2010, A. Castro Tovar leg. (5♁♁ and 1♀, CACT); Tentyria elongata sinuaticollis Rosenh., Palmer det. 97, Faro 6.IV.1958, P. Ardoin leg. (1♀, MNHN); Lagoa, 14.VII.2006, J.L. Bujalance leg. (1♁ and 2♀♀, CJLB); Faro 21.VIII.1977, J. Ferrer leg. (1 ex., CJF); Albufeira 1.VI.1977, J. Ferrer leg. (1 ex, CJF); Monte Gordo, Algarve, 27.6.1977, J. Grico leg. (2♀♀, CJF); Ria de Alvor, Algarve 14.V.1982, A. Zuzarte leg. (10 exx, CJF); Portimao, Algarve 4.IV.1988, R. Rober leg. (1♁ and 1♀, CJF); Portogallo: Lagos, Novak 12.IX.11 / Tentyria lateritia Rtt. /530/ Tentyria emarginata Kraatz, J.L. Bujalance det. 2006 (1♀, NHMB); Lagos Lu., Novak 9-911 / lateritia /Sammlung Adr. Schuster / Winkler / Tentyria emarginata Kraatz, J.L. Bujalance det. 2006 (2♁, NHMB).</p> <p>Diagnosis: According to Solier’s original description: “Black, very faintly shiny. Head with well-marked punctures, rather widely spaced and almost posteriorly effaced, with a slightly transverse and deep hollow in the middle of the inferior part. Prothorax transverse, rather low-cut anteriorly, sub-lunate, with the dorsum very finely punctured, and prolonged in the middle of the base into a rather pronounced elongate lobe and forming two broad and obtuse teeth: marginal groove effaced in the middle of the base. Elytra rather convex, short, oval, scarcely punctured: each one provided with three very slightly pronounced ribs, occasionally other ones less marked are also observable among them. Abdomen, ventrally almost completely smooth” (translated from French).</p> <p>In addition, head (Fig. 4) with the supraorbital fold somewhat prominent; slightly or not convex eyes, epistome with the anterior margin truncate or sub-truncate, unusually toothed; gular groove consisting of a deep central depression, not well defined (Fig. 39); pronotum (Fig. 73) somewhat transverse, central lobe exceptionally very finely margined; male protibiae slender and sinuous in the inner margin (Fig. 141); prosternal apophysis longitudinally furrowed, subparallel-sided and converging in a straight line towards the apex which is truncate or blunt (Fig. 109). Elytra more elongated in males (Fig. 189). Aedeagus (Fig. 157) about 3.4 mm long, with parameres equal in length to the phallobase, non-sinuous sides, subparallel, and tapering at the apex into a blunt tooth.</p> <p>Comments: T. subcostata has been misunderstood and confounded with other taxa since its description (Bujalance et al. 2016). Solier (1835) only indicated “Barbarie” as typical locality, without specifying, despite the three syntypes located in the MNHN carry labels with locality indication, “alg” (Algeria? Algeciras?) and “alger”. However, only the lectotype (Bujalance et al. 2016) fits the initial description of Solier (1835); the remaining syntypes correspond to T. maura Erichson, 1841, described from Algeria (Fig. 247). The label carried by the lectotype it not clear, bur probably it indicates Algeciras (Dupont collection) and not Algeria.</p> <p>Kraatz (1865), by comparison with the above-mentioned types, considered typical specimens of T. subcostata Solier those from Algeria (with the base of the pronotum margined and without bidentate central lobe), despite that do not agree with the description of Solier (1835), arguing the specific variability of this character. For this reason, Kraatz (1865) considered that T. maura Erichson, 1841 and T. acuminipennis Lucas, 1855, both described from Algeria, are identical to the “typical Algerian specimens of T. subcostata ”, thus creating the respective synonyms. However, despite having confused with an Algerian species, Kraatz (1865) cited this species from Algeciras, rejected the identity of T. subcostata Solier and described T. emarginata Kraatz, whose diagnosis is similar to that of T. subcostata Solier (Bujalance et al., 2016). Kraatz (1865) considered that different morphotypes of T. sinuatocollis Rosenhauer,1856 belonged to different taxa. From these specimens with the base of the pronotum not margined, the posterior angles of the pronotum obtuse, and the elytra scarcely or not striated, Kraatz described T. emarginata (Rambur in litt.) of Andalucía, without indicating a specific locality.</p> <p>Reitter (1900) transcribed the errors of Kraatz; Palmer (1998), furthermore, considered this last species a subspecies of T. elongata Waltl, and added a new error when considering T. marocana Solier synonymy of T. subcostata Solier (Bujalance et al. 2016). Finally, Leo &amp; Fancello (2019) indicated, without argument, that the synonymy between T. subcostata and T. emarginata syn. that we established (Bujalance et al. 2016) was pending verification. The establishment of the synonymy was based on the comparative study of type material of T. subcostata Solier and is ratified in the present revision with the designation of Lectotype of T. emarginata Kraatz.</p> <p>Differential diagnosis: As consequence of the great confusion of this taxon, we believed necessary to differentiate it from other North African taxa with which it has been confused. The type of T. marocana Solier (Fig. 248), differs from T. subcostata Solier, mainly, by having larger average size, more marked and denser punctures, more convex eyes, even overflowing the lateral margin of the head, less truncated epistome, more transverse pronotum, with the posterior angles better indicated, the base clearly margined, without bidentate central lobe, elytra in wide oval, with subparallel sides, flat in the disc and striated rough. Tentyria maura Erichson (= Tentyria subcostata sensu Kraatz, 1865) (Fig. 247), differs from T. subcostata Solier, mainly, by having more convex eyes, more transverse pronotum, with the later angles more rounded and nothing marked, the base completely and clearly margined, sinuate on both sides and with the basal lobe slightly protruding back, wide, truncated, but never bidentate; oval elytra, wide and convex on the sides, depressed on both sides of the suture, very acuminate at the apex and generally with the lateral ribs raised and marked.</p> <p>Designation of the Lectotype of Tentyria emarginata Kraatz, 1865, present designation:</p> <p>To stabilize the taxonomy of the genus Tentyria, of the six syntypes located in the SDEI we designate Lectotype to the specimen carrying the original Kraatz labels and corresponds to the original description: Tentyria emarginata / Andalusien Kraatz / emarginata Kr. det. Schuster / Syntypus / SDEI Coleoptera # 300631 (♀) (Fig. 226). The other five specimens are considered as Paralectotypes.</p> <p>Geographic distribution: Ibero-Maghrebian species, described from the “Barbarie” (Solier, 1835) and recorded in the Moroccan Mediterranean coast (Bujalance et al. 2016). Faucheux (2009) cited this species in the Atlantic littoral: Tentyria elongata ssp. subcostatata, Labrique det. Due to the past confusion concerning this taxon, its actual distribution in North Africa is not yet sufficiently defined. In the Iberian Peninsula it is widely distributed along the south and southwest coast, from Algeciras to Lagos (southern Portugal).</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FF825E51F9A3FBD6D2B9FB0A	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FF9C5E53F9A3FAFED55BFE6A.text	8F6B0B50FF9C5E53F9A3FAFED55BFE6A.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria striatorugosa Bujalance & Ferrer & Cárdenas 2023	<div><p>Tentyria striatorugosa sp. nov. (Figs. 5, 40, 73, 110, 142, 158, 190, 251)</p> <p>Tentyria rugosostriata Rambur in litt. Dejean, 1837: 204.</p> <p>Tentyria elongata ssp. sinuatocollis sensu Koch 1944a: 226, L̂bl &amp; Smetana 2008: 206, Martínez 2018: 58.</p> <p>Tentyria elongata ssp. sinuat i collis sensu Español 1960: 405, Palmer 1998 (part).</p> <p>Tentyria sinuat i collis ssp. sinuat i collis sensu Viñolas 1986: 102 and 1991: 44, Viñolas &amp; Cartagena 2005: 79, Fig. 355c. Tentyria curculionoides (Herbst) sensu Steven 1828: 89.</p> <p>Types designated: Holotype (♁): Tentyria sinuaticollis Rosh., A. Viñolas det. 1984 / Playa de la Hacienda, 31- VII-1983 / San Roque (Cádiz) Hispania, J. de Ferrer leg. (excoll. CJdeF in MNCN). Paratypes: Cádiz: Tentyria sinuaticollis Rosh., A. Viñolas det. / San Roque (Cádiz) Hispania / VIII-1974 (1♁, excoll. CJdeF in CJLB); Tentyria sinuaticollis, A. Viñolas det. / Playa Torreguadiaro, 2.VIII.1982 - San Roque, Cádiz, R. Ramirez leg. (1♀, excoll. CJdeF in CJLB); Fide Schuster, J. Ferrer / Andalusien, Algeciras / Stockholm (12 exx, NRMS); Tentyria subcostata, San Roque, Sª Carbonera VI.1901, Escalera leg. (1 ex, MNCN). Granada: Punta Jolucar, Torrenueva 4.IV.2006, A. Castro Tovar leg. (CACT). Málaga: Tentyria corrugata Ros. / Marbella, Málaga VI.1981 (1 ex, CJF); Hispania, Málaga, Casares-costa 5.III.1994, Bastazo – Vela leg. (1♀, CB &amp; V); Fuengirola, Málaga / rugoso-striata / (1♁, NRMS); Estepona IV.1995, N. Gyllensvärd / (2♁♁, NRMS).</p> <p>Andalucía: Tentyria rugosostriata Ramb., Andalus Ramb., Zool. Mus. Berlin, Hist.-Coll. (Coleoptera), Nr. 45534 (6 exx, NMUHB), one of them also carries two old labels: one handwritten; Tentyria subrugosa / AndalusiaD.H. Müller / Hispania / (1♁, NRMS). Tentyria sinuatocollis Rosenh.</p> <p>Description: Holotype (Fig. 190): Body elongated and robust with shiny black tegument. Size: 14.3 mm long and 6.3 mm maximum width at the elytra.</p> <p>Head (Fig. 5): large and not convex, 2.8 mm maximum width at the eyes, which are large, slightly convex, and hardly protruding from the lateral outline, subparallel sides, supraorbital fold very little marked, fine but dense punctures, epistome almost straightly truncated on the anterior edge, gular groove (Fig. 40) consisting of a small depression restricted to the central area. Filiform antennae, not exceeding the base of the pronotum, 1 st antennomere robust, 2 nd small and somewhat longer than wide; 3 rd 3.2 times as long as wide, almost as long as the next two together, from 4 th (1.8 times longer than wide) to the 8 th longer than wide, but progressively decreasing in length, 9 th almost as long as wide, 10 th slightly transverse and 11 th conical at the apex and slightly longer than wide.</p> <p>Pronotum like that of T. subcostata (Fig. 73), very slightly convex and with very fine punctures (points smaller than those of the head), somewhat transverse, 1.3 times wider than long (4.4 mm wide, 3.4 mm long), with maximum width in the middle, curved sides, somewhat narrower towards the base, rear angles very obtuse and not indicated in dorsal view. Base prolonged backwards into an unmargined central lobe, slightly sinuate in the middle. Prosternal apophysis (Fig. 110) longitudinally furrowed, subparallel sides, tapering in the posterior third in straight line towards the apex, which ends in a blunt tip, slightly surpassing the procoxae. Propleurae and prosternum smooth and shiny, with fine but well-marked punctures; legs very slender, the protibiae 3.5 mm long, almost straight on the inner edge, but somewhat dorsoventrally curved near the apex, as long as mesotibiae, which are dorsoventrally somewhat sinuous, and both shorter than the metatibiae, also sinuous, of 5 mm long.</p> <p>Elytra elongate, ovoid, flattened around the median suture, 1.48 times longer than wide (9.3 mm long, 6.3 mm wide), maximum width before the middle, very acuminate towards the apex, about 2.8 times longer than the pronotum; striate-rugose, with the ribs little enhanced, broad and usually somewhat blurred by very shallow transverse wrinkles with a tuberous appearance, the punctures even finer than that of the pronotum, only visible at high magnification; the base narrow and curved in an arc, with the margin effaced before the scutum (Fig. 142). Abdominal sternites shining and finely punctured, except the first which has coarser dots in the anterior part, around the metacoxae, as the metasternum; anal sternite truncate at the apex.</p> <p>Aedeagus (Fig. 158) 4 mm long, with the phallobase barely longer than the parameres which have the sides slightly sinuous sides and with the maximum width in the middle, very acuminate at the apex which is finely denticulate.</p> <p>Paratypes: Size 12.2–16.3 mm length (13.5 mm average, 13.1 mm males and 14.3 mm females) and 5.1–7.3 mm maximum width of elytra (5.8 mm average, 5.5 mm males and 6.3 mm females).</p> <p>Pronotum transverse, 1.2–1.37 times wider than length (1.3 times average: 1.27 times males and 1.33 times females), maximum width at the middle (3.5–5-0 mm wide and 2.7–3.7 mm long).</p> <p>Elytra 2.63–3.04 times longer than the pronotum (average 2.8 times), shape in oval slightly elongated, 1.36– 1.64 times longer than wider (average 1.47 times).</p> <p>Aedeagus of 3.4–3.7 mm in length (3.61 mm average), with the phallobase 1.0–1.24 times (1.14 average) longer than the parameres.</p> <p>Females of average size evidently higher than males, prothorax more transverse. Protibiae somewhat thicker and straighter, elytra stubbier and somewhat depressed at the disc, and with ribs and wrinkles more raised.</p> <p>Variability of Paratypes: The variability of the paratypes mostly concerns the size and the width of pronotum and elytra; the latter vary from flat to slightly depressed at the suture; exceptionally the median lobe of the pronotum is very finely marginated, as the base of the elytra, which in some specimens is almost completely marginated.</p> <p>Differential diagnosis: T. striatorugosa sp. nov. differs to T. subcostata, in the larger average size, elytra strongly striate-rough, with the lateral grooves deeper, less narrowed towards the base and more acuminate towards the apex, flattened or depressed in the suture line, with the base cut in a more closed arch and with the margin almost always interrupted before the scutellum. The prosternal apophysis is narrower and more elongated, with the end not bent downwards in ventral view, but generally ending in a blunt or truncated point. The aedeagus somewhat longer in average and more acute at the apex. Stockier specimens.</p> <p>It differs from T. lateritia mostly in the shape of the pronotum, laterally rounded, not subpentagonal, the noticeable sexual dimorphism in the protibia, the stronger roughness in the elytra, and by the aedeagus, with the penis not thickened between the parameres nor strongly constrained before the apex.</p> <p>Finally, it differs of T. sinuatocollis mainly in the base of the pronotum, with rear angles obtuse, almost unnoticeable, and the basal margin erased in the middle; aedeagus less slender, and the prosternal apophysis not bent at the end.</p> <p>Comments: T. striatorugosa sp. nov. (= T. rugosostriata Rambur in litt., Fig. 251), has been confused since Koch (1944a) with T. sinuatocollis Rosenhauer. However, it is an unpublished taxon, clearly distinguishable from T. sinuatocollis Rosenhauer. The study of the Rambur’s material has made feasible the clarification of this taxon.</p> <p>Geographical distribution: This species is widespread along the Mediterranean coast of the provinces of Cádiz (Bay of Algeciras), Málaga and Granada.</p> <p>Etymology: the specific epithet “ striatorugosa ” refers to the Latin terms striatus -rugosa meaning “with furrows and wrinkles”, alluding to the striations and wrinkles on the surface of the elytra.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FF9C5E53F9A3FAFED55BFE6A	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FF9E5E52F9A3FDE6D308FAD2.text	8F6B0B50FF9E5E52F9A3FDE6D308FAD2.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria sinuatocollis subsp. sinuatocollis Rosenhauer 1856	<div><p>Tentyria sinuatocollis ssp. sinuatocollis Rosenhauer, 1856 (Figs. 6, 41, 74, 111, 142, 159, 191, 227, 249)</p> <p>Tentyria sinuatocollis Rosenhauer, 1856: 185–186 (only part of the syntypes).</p> <p>Tentyria elongata var. sinuatocollis sensu Kraatz 1865: 140, Reitter 1900: 168, Gebien 1910: 69.</p> <p>Tentyria elongata var. arenaria Kraatz, 1865:140 syn. nov. (Tentyria arenaria Rambur in litt.), Reitter 1900:168, Gebien 1910:69.</p> <p>Tentyria elongata var. rugosostriata Kraatz, 1865: 140 syn. nov., Reitter 1900: 168, Gebien 1910: 69.</p> <p>Tentyria elongata elongata sensu Koch 1944a: 225, Español 1960: 405, Viñolas 1986: 102, Viñolas 1991: 44, Palmer 1998: 263 (specimens south Almería), Viñolas &amp; Cartagena 2005: 79 (specimens south Almería), L̂bl &amp; Smetana 2008: 206, Martínez 2018: 58, Ivan &amp; L̂bl 2020: 249.</p> <p>Types examined: Syntype (♀), bearing the following labels: Tentyria sinuaticollis And., Rsh. 69, T / 357/ MUSÉUM PARIS, COLL. DE MARSEUL 1890 / MUSÉUM PARIS, COLL. SOLIER, 9641-34 / v. sinuaticollis -Rosh. / Tentyria sinuaticollis, Andalusia.</p> <p>Additional material: Six historic specimens of Tentyria arenaria in litt. in coll. Rambur, (NMUHB), having all of them the following labels: Tentyria arenaria Ramb., Andalus Ramb., Zool. Mus. Berlin, Hist.-Coll. (Coleoptera), Nr. 45531; one of them also has two old labels: one handwritten, arenaria Ramb., Andalus Rambur, and the other with the numbers 45531. Another specimen has one old and handwritten label: elongata Waltl.; Spain: Hispan, Tarnier, rugosa-striata (1♁, NRMS). Cádiz: Algeciras, J. Ardois leg., T. marocana (1♁, MNCN); Sevilla: Tentyria elongata var. sinuatocollis det.? (1 ex, MNCN). Málaga: 18.V.1946, Cobos leg., Tentyria elongata Walt. det. Español (1 ex, CJF); Fuengirola, J. Ardois leg., Tentyria maroccana (1♀, MNCN); Fuengirola, X.2005, A. Cárdenas leg. (2♁♁, CJLB); Fuengirola, 3-16/165, agree with one of two syntypes of T. subrugosa Sol. cum type comp. J. Ferrer det. (NRMS); Fuengirola, 5.1955, T. elongata (1♁, NRMS); Fuengirola, 7.XI.1962, S. Aberg leg. (Ex. Coll. Sverker Aberg en NRMS) (2♁♁ and 1♀) / Spanien /Fuengirola, 24.IV.1965, O. Lundblad leg. (1♁, NRMS); Fuengirola, J. Ardois leg. (1♀, NRMS); Fuengirola, Schramm leg., T. elongata v. rugosostriata Kr., det. Schuster (1♁, NRMS); (Torrox, 30.VIII.1986 and 13.VIII.1987, J.L. Bujalance leg. (1♁ and 1♀, CJLB); Torre del Mar, 30.VIII.1986, J.L. Bujalance leg. (1♁ and 1♀, CJLB); Playa del Campo de golf, 1.4.1977, M.A. Alonso Z. leg., Tentyria elongata Waltl, F. Español det. (1 ex, MNCN); Guadalmar, 1.IV.2010, A. Castro Tovar leg. (1♁, CACT); Guadalmar, playa de la Cizaña, 9.VII.2005, A. Castro Tovar leg. (1♁, CACT).</p> <p>Diagnosis: Elongated body (Fig. 191), 2.37 times longer than broad on average; size 14.4 mm long and 6.1 mm broad on average. Head (Fig. 6) subparallel sided, with the anterior edge of the epistome truncated; the gular groove (Fig. 41) consisting of a shallow depression. Pronotum (Fig. 74) with fine and sparse punctures, finer than in head; transverse, at least in males, 1.28 times broader than long on average; the maximum at the middle (4.23 mm broad and 3.29 length on average); posterior angles well noticeable, straight, or slightly obtuse; base completely margined and clearly tri-sinuate; prosternal apophysis (Fig. 111) elongated, longitudinally furrowed, subparallel-sided and sharply tapering towards the apex that which, usually, is protruding between the procoxae; the apex feebly down curved. Oval elytra, tapering in a straight line near the apex; base in open arc, the basal margin deleted, only visible it the humeri which are angulate and with unnoticeable punctures (Fig. 142); disc provided with punctures inconspicuous and more or less striated, but always with superficial striae and broad intervals, never costiform, with irregular transversal rugosities; on average, 2.74 times longer than pronotum, 1.49 times longer than broad; anal urosternite truncate at the end (Fig. 149); aedeagus (Fig. 159) large and slender, 3.7–4.2 mm long (3.95 mm on average), the parameres and the phallobase of same size. Females, generally, broader, with the protibia shorter and right in the inner side.</p> <p>Comments: T. sinuatocollis has been confounded since its description with other taxa. In fact, Rosenhauer (1856) described T. sinuatocollis from three different taxa, considering two of them as variable forms of the same taxon: T. sinuatocollis Rosenhauer (T. arenaria Rambur in litt. Fig. 249), T. emarginata Kraatz (T. emarginata Rambur in litt. Fig. 250) (= T. subcostata Solier) and T. striatorugosa sp. nov. (T. rugosostriata Rambur in litt. Fig. 251).</p> <p>Rosenhauer (1856) described this species characterized by having small head, with epistome short and truncated. Pronotum barely convex and not very transverse, with very fine punctures, curved sides, and slightly narrowed before base, which is broad, tri-sinuate, and finely margined, with the posterior angles slightly protruding and acute. Oval elytra, narrowed to the apex, slightly convex and depressed in the suture, sub-striate, and with transverse rugosities. Rosenhauer himself, remarked that some specimens show the elytra inconspicuously striate or rough, and the base of pronotum non entirely margined at middle.</p> <p>Kraatz (1865), erroneously consider Tentyria sinuatocollis Rosenhauer a variety non-distinguishable of T. elongata Waltl (= Tentyria mucronata Steven), species obviously ignored by Kraatz (1865), as it could be verified if the diagnoses of both authors are compared (Waltl 1835); being in turn Tentyria elongata sensu Kraatz (1865) a copy of the diagnosis of Tentyria sinuatocollis Rosenhauer (1856). Moreover, Kraatz (1865) located Tentyria elongata Waltl in the Southeast of Andalusia and stablished three geografic varieties only differentiated in the elytral sculpture.</p> <p>All following authors (Reitter (1900), Koch (1944a), Español (1960), Viñolas (1986), Viñolas (1991), Palmer (1998), Viñolas &amp; Cartagena (2005)) repeated the error of Kraatz (1865) considering T. elongata Waltl as a valid species distributed in the Southeast of the Iberian Peninsula, thus misinterpreting the true identity of Tentyria sinuatocollis Rosenhauer. Since Koch (1944a) to nowadays, this species has been identified with the variable specimens described by Rosenhauer, with the rough-striated elytra, the basal lobe of pronotum unmargined and the posterior angles obtuse (= T. striatorugosa sp. nov.). Finally, T. sinuatocollis has been wrongly transcribed “ sinuaticollis ” by Español (1960), Viñolas (1986 and 1991), Palmer (1998) and Viñolas &amp; Cartagena (2005).</p> <p>Designation of the Lectotype of Tentyria sinuatocollis Rosenhauer, 1856, present designation:</p> <p>To stabilize the taxonomy of the genus we designate Lectotype the unique specimen we have located from the Rosenhauer’s collection (Rsh. 69) via coll. Solier and labelled as type (T). Hereby we designate Lectotype of Tentyria sinuatocollis Rosenhauer, 1856 the specimen carrying the labels: Tentyria sinuaticollis And., Rsh. 69, T / 357 / MUSÉUM PARIS, COLL. DE MARSEUL 1890 / MUSÉUM PARIS, COLL. SOLIER, 9641-34 / v. sinuaticollis-Rosh. / Tentyria sinuaticollis, Andalusia (MNHN) (Fig. 227).</p> <p>Geographical distribution: Mediterranean littoral of the Iberian Peninsula, from the Southeast of the province of Cádiz to Almeria, more frequent in the province of Málaga; the record from “Sevilla” in MNCN without collector data is doubtful and need to be confirmed.</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FF9E5E52F9A3FDE6D308FAD2	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FF9F5E55F9A3FA46D4F4F93F.text	8F6B0B50FF9F5E55F9A3FA46D4F4F93F.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria sinuatocollis subsp. escalerai Bujalance & Ferrer & Cárdenas 2023	<div><p>Tentyria sinuatocollis escalerai ssp. nov. (Figs. 75, 192)</p> <p>Tentyria (Subtentyrina) elongata elongata sensu Koch 1944a:226 (part), Español 1960: 405 (part.), Palmer 1998: 263 (part), Grimm &amp; Aistleitner 2009: 70.</p> <p>Tentyria elongata Waltl sensu Viñolas 1986: 102 (part.), Martín-Cantarino &amp; Seva 1990, Viñolas &amp; Cartagena 2005: 79 (part).</p> <p>Types designated: Holotype (♁): Los Arenales del Sol, El Alted (Alicante), Hispania 20.VIII.1996, Nuria de Ferrer leg. / Tentyria elongata Waltl, J. de Ferrer det. (ex coll. CJdeF in MNCN). Paratypes: same label than the type (2♁♁ and 1♀, CJdeF in CJLB).</p> <p>Additional material: Alicante, Tentyria elongata var. Waltl /Pérez Arcas / Rico! (2 exx, MNCN). Murcia: Morata (Murcia) / var. prothorace lobo basali leviter sinuato / MNCN_Ent, Nº Cat. 70841 (1♁, Col. Escalera, MNCN); Morata (1 ex, Col. Escalera, MNCN). El Mar Menor, La Manga, 10.V.1980 (1♁ and 1♀, CJF, NRMS). Mazarrón XII.1924 and 1925 Escalera leg. / Tentyria elongata var. sinuaticollis / MNCN (1♁ and 6 exx, MNCN). Cap Palos /Sammlung,A. Thery (2♀♀, NMB). Cartagena, 28.III.1985, J. Ferrer leg. (1ex CJF). Calblanque (Murcia) 4.V.2002, J. C. Martínez leg. (1♁, CJF). Almería: San Juan de los Terreros (Almería) 19.V.1999, M. Gª. París leg. (10 exx, MNCN). Palomares (1♀, MNCN). Playa de Macenas, Mojácar (Almería) 1.IV.1999, M. Baena Ruíz leg. (1♁, CJLB). El Playazo, Valle de Rodalquilar, Níjar (Almería), 30S 0588539 4079456, 3.V.2006, A. Castro Tovar leg. (2♁♁, CACT). Monsul beach, San José, Almería, A. Castro Tovar leg. 14-XII-04 (1♁, CJLB; 1♁, CACT) / 14.VII.2004 (1♁, CACT) / 30.V.2010 (21 exx, CACT). Almería / Tentyria elongata var. arenaria Kr. (6 ex, MNCN box nº 26). Almería / Tentyria elongata var. sinuaticollis Rosh. (numerous specimens, col. Tenebrionidae, box nº 26 MNCN). Andalusia: Andalus, Mosel / Tentyria v. heydeni Hg. / Sammlung, H. Gebien (1♁, 1♀, NHMB).</p> <p>Description: Holotype (Fig. 192). Elongated body, 2.26 times longer than broad; black tegument, almost mate and micro- reticulate. Total length: 12.2 mm; maximum width in elytra: 5.4 mm.</p> <p>Head: maximum width 2.5 mm at the base of the eyes which are somewhat convex; supraorbital folds scarcely enhanced; epistome truncate in the anterior margin and with a tiny tooth in the middle; punctures fine and spaced; gular groove consists of a broad but badly delimited hollow in the centre; antennae filiform, not reaching the base of the pronotum; the 1 st antennomere robust, the 2 nd small and barely longer than broad, 3 rd about 3.3 times longer than broad and similar to the 4 th and 5 th together, from the 4 th (1.8 times longer than broad) to the 8 th longer than broad, but progressively decreasing in length; the 9 th almost as long as broad; the 10 th slightly transverse and the 11 th conical at the end and slightly longer than broad.</p> <p>Pronotum (Fig. 75) feebly convex, transverse, 1.36 times broader than long, with the maximal width closer to the apex than to the base (4.0 mm broad and 2.9 mm long), narrowing from here in a straight line towards the base and in closed curve towards the apex; sub-cordiform shape. Base of pronotum totally margined and sinuate before the posterior angles. Central lobe truncate, exceeding the posterior angles which are almost straight. Punctures very fine and sparse, less noticeable than in the head, almost imperceptible; prosternal apophysis, with parallel sides and narrowed towards the apex, rounded at the end, and slightly bent in ventral view, slightly surpassing the pro-coxae; propleurae and pro-sternum with the surface little bright, and rather punctured; protibiae long and sinuous on its inner edge, almost as long as mesotibiae and 1/3 shorter than the metatibiae.</p> <p>Elytra rather convex, elongated, oval in shape, flattened on the disk, 1.39 times longer than broad (7.5 mm length and 5.4 mm broad), with the maximal width on middle, equally narrowing towards the base and the apex, slightly rough-striated, and sparsely punctured; 2.6 times longer than pronotum; humeri well marked; the base cut in arc and with the basal margin erased, only indicated next to the humeri; Abdominal sternites not very bright and with fine but clearly noticeable punctures; the last sternite truncated at the apex.</p> <p>Aedeagus like in Fig. 158 but smaller in size, length 3.45 mm.</p> <p>Sexual dimorphism: Females showing shortest protibiae, with the inner edge straight.</p> <p>Paratypes: Size: 12.2–15.5 mm in length (13.7 mm on average) and 5–6.3 mm maximum width of elytra (5.73 mm on average).</p> <p>Pronotum rather transverse, 1.26–1.38 times wider than long (1.33 average), with the maximum width before the middle (3.9–4.6 mm wide, 2.9–3.5 mm long).</p> <p>Females with shorter protibiae and straight inner edge.</p> <p>Elytra 2.5-2.81 times longer than the pronotum (mean 2.65 times); rather ovate and elongated, of 1.39–1.56 times longer than wide (mean 1.47 times).</p> <p>Aedeagus: Length 3.4–3.9 mm (3.56 mm average); parameres and phallobase similar in length.</p> <p>Variability of Paratypes: variations are mainly observed in length, width, and roughness of elytra and in the basal lobe of the pronotum, which varies from noticeably truncated to slightly sinuate.</p> <p>Differential diagnosis: T. sinuatocollis escalerai differs from T. s. sinuatocollis in the pronotum, which is more transverse, with maximum width before the middle, cordiform, with the basal lobe more protruding, truncated and not clearly sinuate (Figs. 74, 75); the head is smaller and with the eyes slightly more convex; the elytra are somewhat depressed in the middle line; shorter, wider and oval shape, and with steeper slope towards the apex; usually, chubbier and smaller specimens, and with the antenna and the legs somewhat more graceful.</p> <p>Geographical distribution: This subspecies is present in the Mediterranean coast, from Gata’s cape (Almería) to Alicante.</p> <p>Etymology: Subspecies devoted in memoriam of the great entomologist Dr. Manuel Martínez de la Escalera.</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FF9F5E55F9A3FA46D4F4F93F	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FF985E54F9A3F8EBD0E7FAB7.text	8F6B0B50FF985E54F9A3F8EBD0E7FAB7.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria lateritia Reitter 1900	<div><p>Tentyria lateritia Reitter, 1900 (Figs. 7, 42, 76, 112, 160, 193, 228)</p> <p>Tentyria lateritia Reitter, 1900:169.</p> <p>Types examined: Only one syntype available carrying the following labels: Algarve, Maltzan / C. Vincent, 28/379 (28.3.1879) / nov. sp! / lateritia m. Syntypus (SDEI).</p> <p>Additional material: Portugal, Algarve, Sagres VII.1962, H. Coiffait leg. / Museum Paris, 1985, Coll. H. Coiffait / Tentyria elongata sinuaticollis Rosenh., Palmer det. 97 (1♀, MNHN); Cabo São Vicente Sagres, 25.3.91, Bastazo &amp; Vela leg. (1♁, CB &amp; V); Sagres 24.4.1978, A. Zuzarte leg. (4♀♀, CJF); Portugal, Algarve, Cap. St. Vicent, VII.1970, H. Coiffait / Muséum Paris, 1985, Coll. H. Coiffait / Tentyria emarginata Kr., F. Español det. (1♁ and 1♀, MNHN); Sagres 30.8.78, nº 912, Pilar leg. (1♁, CJF); Bordeira, Algarve, 25.IV.2005, I. Silva leg. (CJF). Portogallo: Lagos, Novak, 12.IX.11 / Tentyria lateritia Rtt. / 530 (1♀ NHMB); Lagos Lu. Novak 9-911 / lateritia / Sammlung Adr. Schuster (1♁ NHMB); Lagos Lu. Novak 9-911 / lateritia / Winkler / Sammlung Adr. Schuster (1♁ NHMB); Playa de Sagres 3.4.2010, A. Castro Tovar leg. (2♁♁ and 1♀ CACT).</p> <p>Diagnosis: Body stubby (Fig. 193), about 13.5 mm long on average, tegument finely punctured; head (Fig. 7) with small, flat, subparallel-sided eyes; epistome subrounded or truncate at its anterior border; gular groove poorly delimited, consisting of a shallow central depression (Fig. 42). Pronotum (Fig. 76) more finely punctured than head and elytra; strongly transverse, pseudo-pentagonal in shape, the basal lobe as in T. subcostata and usually not marginate; prosternal apophysis (Fig. 112) subparallel-sided and depressed medially. Male protibiae with straight inner edge, like female ones. Elytra generally wide and convex, becoming very stubby, smooth, or barely striated or wrinkled. Aedeagus (Fig. 160), with the middle lobe thick and strongly narrowed before the apex, the parameres no subparallel but progressively narrowed from the base to the apex, which is very sharp.</p> <p>Comments: T. lateritia Reitter is very close to T. subcostata Solier (= Tentyria emarginata Kraatz syn.). It was cited by Gebien (1910, 1937), and inexplicably overlooked by Koch (1944a); Español (1960), unknowing T. lateritia Reitter, considered that it was a synonymy of T. emarginata Kraatz. Viñolas (1986), Palmer (1998) and Viñolas &amp; Cartagena (2005) agreed with Español (1960). However, T. lateritia differs from T. subcostata in the pronotum, which is very transverse and pseudo-pentagonal; protibiae, without apparent sexual dimorphism; broad and very convex elytra, commonly stubby, and aedeagus, with the parameres progressively narrowed from the base to the apex, which is very sharp. Likewise, the median lobe (penis) is thickened between the parameres and strongly narrowed before the apex.</p> <p>Designation of the Lectotype of Tentyria lateritia Reitter, 1900, present designation:</p> <p>The unique syntype available (Fig. 228) is the specimen carrying the following labels: “ Syntypus / Algarve, Maltzan / C. Vincent, 28/3 79 / nov. sp! / lateritia m. Type”, preserved in Coll. Heyden (SDEI). Hereby, this specimen is designated Lectotype of Tentyria lateritia Reitter, 1900, to support the current taxonomic validity of this species.</p> <p>Geographic Distribution: Only known from the southern west of Portugal, in the surroundings of San Vicente Cap.</p> <p>Group of T. faroensis</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FF985E54F9A3F8EBD0E7FAB7	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FF995E57F9A3FA47D09BF8CA.text	8F6B0B50FF995E57F9A3FA47D09BF8CA.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria faroensis Bujalance & Ferrer & Cárdenas 2023	<div><p>Tentyria faroensis sp. nov. (Figs. 8, 43, 77, 113, 150, 161, 194)</p> <p>Types examined: Holotype (♁): Portugal, Praia da Galé, (Albufeira) 13.VII.2007, J.L. Bujalance leg. (MNCN). Paratypes: same label than the type (1♁ and 1♀, CJLB). Same locality than the Type, 14.VII.2008, J.L. Bujalance leg. (1♀, CJLB). Tavira, Faro, Portugal 5-1978, J. Ferrer leg. (1♁, CJF). Portugal (Faro), Praia de Bordeira 04.VI.2001, SOLDATI rec. (1♁ CJF). Vila Real Sº Antonio (Dunas “ Pitfall ”) 20- 24.5.1985, Col. Artur Serrano, nº 11427 (2♀♀, NRMS).</p> <p>Description: Holotype (Fig. 194), body somewhat elongated; 2.2 times long than wider. Black, dorsally not very shiny, brighter in ventral side. Size: 12 mm length and 5.4 mm maximum width in the elytra.</p> <p>Head (Fig. 8): 2.7 mm maximal width at the base of the eyes which are slightly convex; supraorbital folds barely raised and the temples slightly converging backwards; epistome rounded and provided with a central tiny tooth; fine and dense punctures; gular groove (Fig. 43) consisting in a hollow in the middle, not well delimited. Filiform antennae, reaching but not surpassing the base of the pronotum; the 1 st antennomere robust, the 2 nd small and barely longer than broad, the 3 rd about 3.25 times longer than broad and almost as long as the next two gathered, from the 4 th (1.75 times longer than broad) to the 8 th longer than broad, but progressively decreasing in length; the 9 th almost as long as broad; the 10 th slightly transverse and the 11 th conical at the end and slightly longer than broad.</p> <p>Pronotum (Fig. 77): feebly convex, transverse, 1.25 times broader than long, with the maximal width in the middle (4 mm broad and 3.2 mm long); sides curved equally closed at the base than at the apex, which are equal in with; sub-cordiform shape. The base of the pronotum is extended backwards in a central lobe, slightly bi-dentate, completely margined, and strongly sinuate before the posterior angles that are slightly obtuse and well noted. Fine and dense punctures, smaller than in the head; wide prosternal apophysis (Fig. 113), furrowed on the rear half, rounded towards the apex, and not surpassing the pro-coxae; pro-pleurae and pro-sternum with the surface smooth and somewhat bright, with small punctures, but well discernible; protibiae almost straight on its inner edge, as long as the mesotibiae, and both shorter than the metatibiae.</p> <p>Elytra: very convex, elongated, not flattened on the disk, with almost imperceptible wrinkles; 2.34 times longer than the pronotum and with finer and more disperse punctures. Ovate, moderately elongated, and almost equal narrowed in the base than in the apex; dorsally they slope in abrupt decline towards the apex that is very blunt and with the lower and upper flange of the epipleure separated, and this latter slightly bent upwards being parallel to the horizontal plane. Well-marked humeri with the base barely incised and the basal margin very fine and almost discontinuous before the scutellum. Abdominal sternites smooth, not very bright and with fine and dense punctures; the last urosternite rounded at the apex (Fig. 150).</p> <p>Aedeagus (Fig. 161) of 3.2 mm length, with the phallobase 1.46 times longer than the parameres which are very curved in lateral view.</p> <p>Paratypes: Size 12–14.5 mm length (13.68 mm average) and 5.2–6.5 mm maximum width of the elytra (6 mm average).</p> <p>Pronotum barely transverse, 1.25–1.37 times wider than long (1.3 times in average: 1.28 times in males and 1.35 in females), the maximum width in the middle (4–4.8 mm wide and 3.2–3.5 mm in length).</p> <p>Elytra: 2.34–2.62 times longer than the pronotum (average 2.53 times), ovate and moderately elongated shape, 1.38–1.54 times long than wider (average 1.43 times).</p> <p>Aedeagus: 3.2–3.5 mm length (1.33 mm average), phallobase 1.33–1.46 times longer than the parameres (1.40 times average).</p> <p>Females often more robust, with the pronotum somewhat more transverse and with the sides in a more closed curve; protibiae more robust and straight in the inner edge, but they hardly differ from the males; elytra somewhat longer in relation to the pronotum.</p> <p>Variability of the paratypes: The variability of the paratypes is fundamentally related to the median lobe of the base of pronotum with the teeth barely marked and scarcely backwards prolonged in two of the paratypes with more oriental distribution. Likewise, the elytra are narrow and slightly convex and with smoot and bright surface in the specimen coming from the Praia da Bordeira with a more western distribution.</p> <p>Differential diagnosis: Species showing an exclusive arrangement of features: different of the group of T. gaditana, because the base of pronotum is trisinuated, the apex of the elytra very blunt and not elongated beyond the last abdominal sternite and by the conformation of the aedeagus. Different of the groups of T. sinuatocollis and T. curculionoides mostly in the shape of the head, with the sides non-parallel and the epistome rounded; protibia of male without apparent sexual dimorphism; the last abdominal sternite rounded at the apex and not truncated and by the conformation of the aedeagus; finally, from the group of T. mucronata, by the shape of the head with the eyes slightly convex, the posterior angles of the pronotum very well marked, the protibiae of the male without apparent sexual dimorphism, the base of the elytra regularly curved from the humeri, the shape of elytra in a more regular oval, the last abdominal sternite not truncated at the apex, and by the conformation of the aedeagus.</p> <p>Geographical distribution: Species only recorded in the localities of Types, in the Faro district, southern and southwest coast of Portugal.</p> <p>Etymology: Faroensis, referring to Faro district (Portugal).</p> <p>Group of T. curculionoides</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FF995E57F9A3FA47D09BF8CA	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FF9A5E59F9A3F892D40CFD2E.text	8F6B0B50FF9A5E59F9A3F892D40CFD2E.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria curculionoides (Herbst 1799) sensu Steven 1828	<div><p>Tentyria curculionoides (Herbst, 1799) (Figs. 9, 44, 78, 114, 162, 195, 229)</p> <p>Pimelia curculionoides Herbst, 1799: 58–59, T. CXXI, Fig. 2; Scĥnherr (1806: 141).</p> <p>Tentyria curculionoides (Herbst) Schaum 1862: 69, Kraatz 1865: 143, Reitter 1900: 170 (specimens from Portugal), Fuente 1934: 29, L̂bl &amp; Smetana 2008: 207, Martínez 2018: 58, Ivan &amp; L̂bl 2020: 249.</p> <p>Tentyria curta Steven, 1828: 92 Schaum 1862: 69 syn.</p> <p>Tentyria curculionoides ssp. jordani Koch 1944a:229 syn. nov.</p> <p>Types examined: Nine syntypes of Tentyria curta Steven. Seven of them carrying the following labels: curta Stev. (old handwritten label) / 45572 (old label) / Hist.-Coll. (Coleoptera), Nr. 45572, Patria? Zool. Mus. Berlin (1♀, NMHUB); Tentyria curta Stev., Hist. -Coll. (Coleoptera), Nr. 45572, Patria? Zool. Mus. Berlin (4♀♀ and 2♁♁ NMHUB, one of the females correspomd to T. bassii Sol.). The remainder two syntypes carry the following labels: Tentyria curta Stev. var., Lusitan, Hist.-Coll. (Coleoptera), Nr. 45573, Zool. Mus. Berlin / var?, Lusit. (old handwritten square) / 45573 (old label) / (1♁ NMHUB). Tentyria curta Stev. var., Lusitan, Hist.-Coll. (Coleoptera), Nr. 45573, Zool. Mus. Berlin (1♁ NMHUB).</p> <p>Syntype of Tentyria curculionoides ssp. jordani Koch (♁): TYPUS Tentyria curculionoides ssp. jordani Koch 1944 / Portug. Praïa das Macas, Collares (Colares), K. Jordan / Tentyria andalusica Kr. (1♁ NHMB).</p> <p>Additional material: Pimelia curculionoides / Lusit / Schh (= Sch ̂nherr) / Rickmuseum Stockholm / Naturhistorika Riksmuseet Stockholm (1♀?, NRMS) Naturhistorika Riksmuseet Stockholm (1♀, NRMS); Portugal, Praia do Meco, Sesimbra, IV.1980, T. Branco leg. (CJF); Praia do Meco, Sesimbra 5.IV.2010, A. Castro Tovar leg. (4♁♁ and 1♀, CACT); Praia do Cresmina, Cascais 5.IV.2010, A. Castro Tovar leg. (1♀, CACT); Lagoa de Albufeira, Sesimbra, 17.IX.1982, A. Zuzarte leg. (2♁♁ CJLB), idem (7 exx, NRMS); Cabo Raso, Cascais (MNHN); MNCN_ Ent, Nº Cat. 70861 and 70862 (2 exx, MNCN).</p> <p>Diagnosis: Black, usually very bright, and finely punctured tegument (Fig. 195). Head (Fig. 9) with subparallel sides, stronger and denser punctures than in the rest of the body; temples not converging backward; small and barely convex eyes. Truncated, rarely rounded often trapezoidal epistome, exceptionally with a small, almost imperceptible, tooth in the middle. Supraorbital fold slightly prominent and separated from the eye in dorsal view. Long antennae, reaching the base of pronotum, the third antennomere approximately 3.5 times longer than wide. Gular groove usually consisting in a simple depression, often transverse (Fig. 44).</p> <p>Suborbicular, clearly transverse pronotum (Fig. 78), sides very curved and maximum width in the middle; obtuse posterior angles, hardly or not observable in dorsal view; the base usually finely margined; scarcely prolonged backwards. Prosternal apophysis rounded at the end and folded between the procoxae (Fig. 114). Male protibiae hardly longer than those of the female.</p> <p>Wide, ovate elytra, the maximum width in the middle; commonly very convex and stubby; finely punctured; elytra striated or striated-rough, commonly with broad, irregular, and poorly enhanced ribs, sometimes vestigial. Obtuse humeri, with the base margined and always curved and fitted to the base of the pronotum. The last urosternite is truncated (Fig. 149) in straight line or slightly sinuous.</p> <p>Robust aedeagus (Fig. 162), with the middle lobe thick and narrowing before the apex, parameres with the sides non-parallel, converging at the end, as long as the phallobase.</p> <p>Comments: Species historically confused with other taxa; described from Portugal (not from “ Spain ” as Viñolas &amp; Cartagena (2005) wrongly indicated) and unknown by Solier (1835).</p> <p>This taxon that was iconographed in the description of Herbst (1799), has been misinterpreted by several authors, due to confusion in the cataloguing of the Herbst and Steven types in the Berlin Museum. In the historical collections, the identification label was placed ahead of the series of specimens belonging to the same species, and not above or below each of them. Sometimes, to the first specimen was attached an identification of the record number corresponding in the collection’s book, remaining without label the rest of specimens. This procedure has led to numerous errors in labelling or relocation of the specimens after being removed for study. This type of error is reflected in the catalogue of records of the Berlin Museum where the syntypes of T. platyceps Steven, a species that inexplicably does not appear in the catalogue, were inscribed as Tentyria curculionoides Herbst no. 45574, after Tentyria curta Steven no. 45572/45573. These errors are confirmed by the labels on some specimens, which were described in detail by Steven (1828).</p> <p>Schaum stated that the typical series of P. curculionoides Herbst were in the Berlin Museum and are the same Portuguese species that Steven obtained in the MNHUB and described as T. curta (see Kraatz 1865, pp. 141).</p> <p>Steven (1828) confused T. curculionoides (Herbst) with an unpublished species from Cádiz, next to Algeciras (T. striatorugosa sp. nov.), with the pronotum bisinuate and prolonged in middle and striated-rough elytra seemed to the illustration of Pimelia curculionoides published by Herbst (1799).</p> <p>This error led Steven (1828) to describe Tentyria curta with specimens from the Berlin Museum, not realising that these specimens match the description, locality, and iconography of T. curculionoides Herbst (1799).</p> <p>Schaum (1862) established the synonymy between T. curculionoides (Herbst) and T. curta Steven, confirmed later by Kraatz (1865).</p> <p>Koch (1944a) confused T. curculionoides (Herbst) with T. heydeni Haag-Rutenberg, which in turn was unknown to himself (Español 1960). This error led Koch (1944a) to describe T. curculionoides ssp. jordani, from a specimen of the true T. curculionoides (Herbst). He also established another subspecies, T. curculionoides ssp. velox Chevrolat. However, as stated above, T. velox constitutes its own group, well separated from T. curculionoides. Español (1960) and Viñolas &amp; Cartagena (2005, Fig. 356b) carried over the errors of Koch (1944a) confusing T. curculionoides (Herbst) with specimens belonging to the T. velox group.</p> <p>Geographic distribution: Portugal: Only known from the coast of Lisbon and north-west of the district of Setubal, going inland following the fluvial courses.</p> <p>Designation of the Lectotype of Tentyria curta Steven, 1828, present designation:</p> <p>We consider necessary to designate Lectotype to give stability to the highly confused taxonomy of this species. We designate Lectotype of Tentyria curta Steven, 1828 the unique specimen that carries the historic label described by Steven (1828) “var. Lusit.” referring to its provenance (Fig. 229a). In addition, the specimen has other old label with the registration number “45573”, and a modern label “Hist.-Coll. (Coleoptera), Nr. 45573, Tentyria curta Stev. var. Lusitan., Zool. Mus. Berlin ”; seven of the other eight specimens are designated Paralectotypes (Fig. 229b).</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FF9A5E59F9A3F892D40CFD2E	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FF945E58F9A3FCDAD3C7FA7E.text	8F6B0B50FF945E58F9A3FCDAD3C7FA7E.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria stupefacta Bujalance & Ferrer & Cárdenas 2023	<div><p>Tentyria stupefacta sp. nov. (Figs. 10, 45, 79, 115, 163, 196)</p> <p>Tentyria andalusiaca Kraatz sensu Viñolas 1991: 44 fig. 1, Viñolas &amp; Cartagena 2005: 80 fig. 356a.</p> <p>Type material: Holotype (♁): Portugal, Troia (Setúbal) VIII, 1995, J.P. Valcárcel leg. (CJLB). Paratypes: similar labels than the type (1♁ and 2♀♀, CJLB and 1♁ and 2♀♀, CJPV). Tentyria curculionoides Herbst, Setubal / Col. del Sr. Pérez Arcas-reverso, Paz! / MNCN_Ent, Nº Cat.70859 / M.N.C.N., Madrid (1♀, MNCN). Tentyria curculionoides Herbst, Setubal / Col. del Sr. Pérez Arcas / MNCN_Ent, Nº Cat.70860 (1♁, MNCN). Portugal W, Comportes, Rio Sado, 29.III.1991, Bastazo and Vela leg. (1♀ and 3♁♁, CJLB and 1♀ and 3♁♁, CB &amp; V). Portugal, Sines, Sao Torpes, 28.III.1991, Bastazo &amp; Vela leg., (1♀, CJLB and 1♀ CB &amp; V). Alentejo, Costa Vicentina, Sines, Portugal 3.IV.2010, A. Castro Tovar leg. (1♁ and 1♀, CACT). Poço do Barbaroxo de Cima, Praia Monte Velho, Reserva Natural das Lagoas de S. Andre e Sancha, Sines, Port 4.IV.2010, A. Castro Tovar leg. (2♁♁, 2♀♀ and 2 exx, CACT). Alcácer do Sal, Setúbal, Portugal 13.5.1981, B. Lassalle leg. / Tentyria curculionoides (1 ex, CJF).</p> <p>Description: Holotype (Fig. 196), usually round body, with smooth, black, and shiny tegument. Size: 13.6 mm long and 6.3 mm maximum width in the elytra.</p> <p>Head (Fig. 10) with the maximum width (2.5 mm) in the eyes which are barely convex, with sub-parallel sides, the supraorbital fold slightly prominent and somewhat separated from the eye in dorsal view; epistome sub-truncated in the anterior margin, with fine and spaced punctures in the disk, somewhat denser on the anterior margin; gular groove (Fig. 45) consisting in a shallow central depression, poorly delimited; filiform antennae not surpassing the base of the pronotum. The 1 st antennomere robust, the 2 nd small and little longer than wide, the 3 rd 3.3 times as long as the next two together, from 4 th (1.7 times longer than wide) to 8 th, but progressively decreasing in length; 9 th almost long as wide, 10 th slightly transverse, and 11 th conical at the apex and slightly longer than wide.</p> <p>Slightly convex, moderately transverse pronotum (Fig. 79); 1.33 times wider than longer, with the maximum width in the middle (4.4 mm wide and 3.3 mm long), narrowing from here ahead and back, acquiring pseudo-pentagonal shape (like T. lateritia), with the apical and basal margins thick, the latter slightly sinuate before the posterior angles that are very obtuse. Base projecting backward, almost angular; very fine and thin punctures, lesser than in the head. Apophysis prosternal (Fig. 115) narrow and lanceolate, slightly surpassing the procoxae; propleurae and prosternum smooth and very bright, with very fine puncture; protibiae almost straight in the inner edge, almost as long as the mesotibiae and both shorter than the metatibiae.</p> <p>Elytra very convex, not parallel and somewhat depressed in the suture, oval shape, but somewhat elongated: 1.35 times longer than wide (8.5 mm long and 6.3 mm wide), with the maximum width in the middle and from here regularly constricted towards the base and the apex; approximately 2.58 times longer than the pronotum; striae rough, with fine and spaced punctures, with carinae lightly raised, broad and generally somewhat unclear by very superficial and transverse wrinkles of tuberous appearance; humeral angles very marked, the base totally margined and shaped in a closed arc around the base of the pronotum. Abdominal sternites bright and finely punctured, the last truncate at the apex.</p> <p>Aedeagus (Figure 163) 3.65 mm in length, with the phallobase 1.15 times longer than the parameres which show the sides non-parallel and slightly narrowed towards the base and the apex, and the middle lobe (penis) wide and abruptly narrowed near the apex.</p> <p>Paratypes: Size 11.2–16 mm total length (13.34 mm average; 13.13 mm males and 13.56 mm females) and 5.4–79 mm maximum width of elytra (6.19 mm average; 5.98 mm males and 6.43 mm females).</p> <p>Pronotum rather transverse; 1.27–1.58 times wide than long (1.38 times average: 1.36 times males and 1.40 females), with the maximum width in the middle (3.5–5.3 mm wide, 2.6–3.5 mm long).</p> <p>Elytra: 2.50–2.86 times longer than the pronotum (average 2.70 times), somewhat elongate and oval; 1.27-1.46 times longer than wide (mean 1.37 times).</p> <p>Aedeagus: 3.4–3,7 mm in length (3.61 mm average), with the phallobase 1.00–1.24 times (1.14 on average) longer than the parameres.</p> <p>The average size of females is somewhat bigger than males; pronotum slightly more transverse, elytra rather chubbier and protibiae somewhat thicker and shorter than those of males.</p> <p>Variability of the paratypes: Variability is mainly related to the size, width of pronotum and elytra (varying from depressed in the suture line to fully convex), and the shape of the epistome (truncated or sub-truncated).</p> <p>Differential diagnosis: The species morphologically and geographically closer to T. stupefacta are T. lateritia Reitter and T. curculionoides (Herbst). It differs from T. lateritia Reitter in the base of the pronotum, showing the basal margin thick and complete and the central lobe not bidentate, elytra with the ribs more evident; aedeagus with the phallobase slightly longer than the parameres, the latter with more sinuous edges not so sharp at the apex. It also differs in the median lobe (penis) which does not narrow so sharply before the apex.</p> <p>With respect to T. curculionoides (Herbst) it may be differentiated by the pseudo-pentagonal shape of the pronotum, which in T. curculionoides (Herbst) show curved sides and the base barely protruding backwards, and by the punctures, stronger and denser in the latter; the prosternal apophysis narrow and lanceolate in T. stupefacta, while it is wider, with parallel sides and the apex more rounded in T. curculionoides (Herbst); the base of elytra is narrower and curved than in T. curculionoides (Herbst). The aedeagus is less robust in T. stupefacta and with the phallobase, clearly longer than the parameres.</p> <p>Comments: Viñolas (1991), with specimens from Portugal, revalidated an Andalusian species, T. andalusiaca Kraatz, which Koch (1944a) synonymized with T. corrugata Rosenhauer, from the southeast of Andalusia. However, T. andalusiaca sensu Viñolas is an unpublished species, non-related to T. andalusiaca Kraatz (= T. corrugata Rosenhauer).</p> <p>Geographical distribution: Species recorded in the littoral and sublittoral areas of southern Portugal, from the mouth of the Mira River to the estuary of the Sado River, entering inland following the fluvial courses.</p> <p>Etymology: The specific epithet s tupefacta from “stupefactus” Lat. alludes to the great historical confusion of the Tentyria’s taxonomy in the Iberian Peninsula.</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FF945E58F9A3FCDAD3C7FA7E	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FF955E5BF9A3FA2AD5B1FA7E.text	8F6B0B50FF955E5BF9A3FA2AD5B1FA7E.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria heydeni Haag-Rutenberg 1870	<div><p>Tentyria heydeni Haag-Rutenberg, 1870 (Figs. 11, 46, 80, 116, 164, 197, 230)</p> <p>Tentyria heydeni Haag-Rutenberg, 1870: 130; Reitter 1900: 170, L̂bl &amp; Smetana 2008: 206, Martínez 2018: 58, Iwan &amp; L̂bl 2020: 250.</p> <p>Tentyria interrupta var. heydeni sensu Gebien 1910: 70.</p> <p>Tentyria curculionoides ssp. curculionoides sensu Koch 1944a: 229.</p> <p>Types examined: Seven syntypes from Aveiro, Portugal (Gaedike 1986: 385), (ZSM). We have examined two of them bearing the following labels: Aveiro, Heyd. / Heydeni Haag / Sammlung, Haag-Rutenberg / red label: Holotypus, Tentyria heydeni Haag, Staatssamml. München / blue label: Zool. Staatsslg. München / heydeni Haag. ((1♁, ZSM) (Fig: 230, a, b). Paratypus: (1♀, ZSM) carrying similar labels than the type (Fig. 230c).</p> <p>Adittional material: Portugal (Leiria) São Marthino do Porto, dunes, 1.XI.1991, C. Jeanne leg. / Tentyria curculionoides interrupta Latr., Soldati det. 1992 (2 ♁♁, CJF); Portugal, Nazaré, 12.VII.57, O. Lundblad leg. / Riksmuseum Stockholm (1♁ and 1♀, NHMS); Mallorca (wrong location), 20.III.1959, O. Lundblad leg. / Tentyria oblonga Sol. (aff. mucronata) det. Julio Ferrer 1987 / Tentyria heydeni Haag. Det. J.L. Bujalance (2 ♁♁, CJF? NRMS?). In the MNHN there are specimens caming from the following portuguese localities: São Marthino do Porto, São Pedro de Moel, Praia de Vagos prés de Aveiro, Praia do Pedrogão, Praia de Afife (Viana Castello).</p> <p>Diagnosis: According to the original description, Tentyria heydeni Haag-Rutenberg, is a species close to Tentyria curculionoides (Herbst), sharing the configuration of pronotum, but differing in the overall shape, slenderer (Fig. 197).</p> <p>The head (Fig. 11) is more strongly punctured than the rest of the body, with a rounded depression in the front, between the eyes; without epistomal tooth and with graceful antennae. Gular groove (Fig. 46) slightly marked, drawing a sunken “V” in the middle; ventral side of the head strongly punctured.</p> <p>The pronotum (Fig. 80) 1/3 broader than long, with sides more narrowed towards the base than in the apex, somewhat sinuous before the posterior angles that are rather drooping and well-marked; the base curved and slightly sinuate on the sides; with thick margin, the disc is slightly convex, bright, and finely punctured. Elytra oblong, ovoid and without wrinkles, barely depressed, base provided with a thin and shiny carina, sometimes erased before the scutellum; in some specimens there are vestiges of apical striae.</p> <p>In addition, the prosternal apophysis sub-parallel sided (Fig. 116), ending rounded and slightly depressed in the middle.</p> <p>Differential diagnosis: Tentyria heydeni Haag-Rutenberg, has been confused with Tentyria curculionoides (Herbst) and with Tentyria interrupta Latreille.</p> <p>It is distinguishable from T. c urculionoides by the more prominent supraorbital keel; the space between the eye and the keel is not or barely visible in dorsal view; the pronotum with the sides more convergent towards the base and usually somewhat sinuate before the posterior angles, which are better indicated; the base often sinuously curved before the posterior angles; more graceful protibiae in males; the elytra commonly in more elongated oval, smooth or with marks of grooves, never rough-striated; and at least, as punctured as the pronotum; frequently with the basal margin interrupted before the scutellum; and, finally, by the aedeagus (Fig. 164) with the penis non enlarged in the anterior middle, and the parameres with subparallel sides and longer than the phallobase.</p> <p>It differs from T. interrupta, by the most prominent and not sinuous supraorbital keel, the epistome less elongated, pronotum of sides narrower towards the base and generally somewhat sinuate before the posterior angles that are better marked; elytra wider than in T. interrupta which has the elytra proportionally more elongated, very finely punctured, with signs of striation and with more rounded humeri; and, finally, by the aedeagus, with the parameres longer and greater ratio parameres/phallobase in T. heydeni.</p> <p>Comments: The confusion about this taxon is reflected in literature: In the Gebien’s catalogue (1910) the species is cited as a variety of T. interrupta Latreille; Koch (1944a) did not mention this species and confused it with T. curculionoides (Herbst). This species was also unknown to Español (1956), who considered it a subspecies of T. interrupta Latreille, Español (1960), suggested that T. heydeni Haag-Rutenberg and T. interrupta Latreille must be included in the same group of species than T. curculionoides (sensu Koch). Finally, Viñolas &amp; Cartagena (2005), established the synonymy of Tentyria heydeni Haag-Rutenberg and T. interrupta Latreille.</p> <p>Geographical distribution: Species known in the portuguese coast, from Peniche to Afife.</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FF955E5BF9A3FA2AD5B1FA7E	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FF965E5AF9A3FA2AD5A2F8FF.text	8F6B0B50FF965E5AF9A3FA2AD5A2F8FF.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria espanoli Bujalance & Ferrer & Cárdenas 2023	<div><p>Tentyria espanoli sp. nov. (Figs. 12, 47, 81, 117, 165, 168)</p> <p>Tentyria interrupta ssp. heydeni sensu Español 1956:31.</p> <p>Tentyria curculionoides ssp. interrupta sensu Viñolas 1986:103 (part).</p> <p>Type material. Holotype (♁): Pontevedra, Cangas, Playa Siemens 22.VIII.1955, F. Español leg. / Tentyria heydeni F. Español det (CJF). Paratypes: carrying similar labels than the type (2 exx, CJF); La Lanzada (Pontevedra) 13.VIII.53, W. Steiner leg. / Tentyria curculionoides heydeni Haag, F. Español det. (1 ex MNCN); El Grove (Pontevedra) 5-6.VIII.53 / W. Steiner leg., T-53/ 2 exx / Tentyria curculionoides heydeni Haag, F. Español det. (1♀ and 1♁, MNCN); Vigo, L. Iglesias / MNCN _Ent, Nº Cat. 70853 (1♀, MNCN); Corrubedo (A Coruña) 27.III.1990, Jorge Iñiguez leg. (1♀ and 1♁, CJLB).</p> <p>Description: Holotype (Fig. 198): Quite robust body; black intense and bright tegument. Size: 16.2 mm long and 6.9 maximum width in the elytra.</p> <p>Head (Fig. 12) of 3 mm wide, sub-parallel sides, almost flat eyes; sub-truncated epistome; sinuous and well developed supraorbital folds, the space between the fold and the eye is not observable in dorsal view; dense, fine, but well-marked punctures; gular groove (Fig. 47) consisting in a shallow transverse depression, poorly delimited; filiform antennae, not surpassing the base of pronotum, 1 st antennomere robust, 2 nd small and somewhat longer than wide; 3 rd 3.3 times as long as the two next together, from 4 th (1.7 times longer than wide) to the 8 th also longer than wide, but decreasing progressively in length, 9 th almost as long as wide, 10 th slightly transverse and 11 th conical at the apex and slightly longer than wide.</p> <p>Pronotum: (Fig. 81) large, convex and somewhat transverse; 1.35 times wider than long, with the maximum width in the middle (5 mm wide and 3.7 mm long); sides regularly and slightly curved from the apex to the base which is prolonged backward describing a short and somewhat sinuous curve before the posterior angles; margin of pronotum thick in the central lobe but thinned towards the rear angles, which are obtuse and well noticeable; punctures very fine, clearly smaller than in head and in elytra; prosternal apophysis (Fig. 117) broad, with sides parallel and the apex subtruncated in ventral view, not surpassing the procoxae; prosternum and propleurae smooth, very bright and finely punctured; protibiae not very graceful and sinuous in the inner edge, almost as long as the mesotibiae and both shorter than the metatibiae.</p> <p>Elytra: convex, ovate, elongated, 1.5 times longer than wide (10.3 mm long and 6.9 mm wide), maximum width in the centre and similarly narrowed towards the base and the apex; superficially striated-rough; punctures bigger than in the pronotum and like those of head. The elytra 2.78 times longer and 1.38 times wider than the pronotum; well-indicated humeri; the base in open curve fitted to the base of the pronotum, with the margin irregular and interrupted next to the scutellum. Urosternites smooth, shiny, and finely punctured, the last one truncated it the apex.</p> <p>Aedeagus (Fig. 165) 4.4 mm in length, parameters narrow and elongated, 1.32 times longer than the phallobase.</p> <p>Paratypes: Length 14–16.2 mm (15.1 mm average; 15.9 mm males, 14.3 mm females); 6.1–6.9 mm maximum with of elytra (6.45 mm average 6.65 mm males, 6.25 mm females). Pronotum slightly transverse, 1.32–1.39 times wider than long (1.36 mm average in both sexes), and the maximum wide in the middle, 4.1–5.0 mm wide and 3.1–3.7 mm length. Elytra: 2.67–2.90 times longer than the pronotum (average 2.79 times), ovate and moderately elongate, 1.38-1.50 times longer than wide (average 1.46 times).</p> <p>Aedeagus: 4.4–4.5 mm length (4.45 mm average, parameres 1.12-1.32 (1.22 average) longer than the phallobase.</p> <p>Females of smaller and stubbier than the males.</p> <p>Variability of the paratypes: The variability of the paratypes concerns the size; the shape of the pronotum, from sub-circular to sub-cordiform; the sculpture of the elytra, always more or less sub-striated and distinctly rough.</p> <p>Differential diagnosis: T. espanoli sp. nov. is a species closely related, within its group, to T. heydeni Haag-Rutenberg and to T. interrupta Latreille; it differs from both in the larger average size, the colour of the integument, more intense and shinier black, and the size and shape of the aedeagus with the parameres clearly longer than the phallobase. Furthermore, it differs from T. heydeni Haag-Rutenberg by the pronotum, more convex and less cordiform, with less marked posterior angles, the elytra not so oval, proportionally longer and with a stronger sculpture.Also differentiated from T. interrupta Latreille by the epistome, truncated and less elongate; the pronotum, more convex, large, and transverse, with the posterior angles more evident; the male protibiae more robust and slightly sinuous on the inner edge; the elytral sculpture more marked and with larger punctures than those of the pronotum, and the humeral angles better indicated.</p> <p>Comments: Español (1956) confounded this species with T. heydeni Haag-Rutenberg, whose identity was unknown to him. Viñolas (1986) and Viñolas &amp; Cartagena (2005), considered it a synonym of T. interrupta Latreille, including it within the specific arrangement of T. curculionoides (Herbst), which was confused by these authors with an unpublished taxon so far (Tentyria velox ssp. serrana nov.).</p> <p>Geographical distribution: Species recorded in the western coast of Galicia (Rías Bajas).</p> <p>Etymology: Species named “ in memoriam ” of the great entomologist Dr. Francisco Español.</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FF965E5AF9A3FA2AD5A2F8FF	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FF975E5DF9A3F8A1D0E7F98D.text	8F6B0B50FF975E5DF9A3F8A1D0E7F98D.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria interrupta Latreille, J. L. Bujalance 1807	<div><p>Tentyria interrupta Latreille, 1807 (Figs. 13, 48, 82, 118, 166, 199)</p> <p>Tentyria interrupta Latreille, 1807: 55; Solier 1835: 331, Dejean 1837: 204, Mulsant 1854: 45, Kraatz 1865: 125, Reitter 1900: 172, Portevin 1934: 5, Español 1960: 409.</p> <p>Pimelia glabra Olivier 1795: 19 and 1808: f. 13 pl. 2 (nº59), Herbst 1799: 60 t. 121 f. 3, Latreille 1807: 155 syn.</p> <p>Tentyria gallica Solier, 1835: 333, Mulsant 1854: 45 syn.</p> <p>Types examined: It has not been possible to find specimens of Tentyria interrupta Latreille that could be the types, nor any reference to their whereabouts, nor were they even known by Solier (1835: 331), who described this taxon with specimens of Tentyria orbiculata Dejean in litt., coming from Bordeaux (M. Dupont and MNHN collections), without specifying author nor origin.</p> <p>Additional Material: France: two specimens in NMHUB, Rambur coll.; one of them bearing an old handwritten label “ orbiculata Gall. mer.”, as it is recorded in the catalogue of Dejean (1833 - 1837), and one recent label with erroneous identification. The other specimen only has a recent label “Coll. (Coleoptera) / Nr 45575 / Tentyria laevis … / Carthagena Dej. / Zool. Mus. Berlin”, with identification and locality erroneous; specimens from MNHN, labelled as “Gallia” from the Solier’s collection (coll. Marseul, MNHN); one specimen from the collection of Scĥnherr, labelled “Gallia/Muls.” (Mulsant ex coll. Chevrolat, NRMS); Tentyria interrupta, France /Allard (1ex, coll. MNCN); Tentyria interrupta, occidental France / col. Shramm (1 ex, MNCN); Tentyria interrupta, France: Dept. Charente Maritime, Île de Ré, VII.1967, P. Bonneau leg. (7 exx, CJF); Frankrike / coll. Signoret (2 exx, CJF); Pilat, 24-6-1981 / Nielsen leg. (2 exx, CJF); Ondres 8-12-1976 / R. Barrel leg. (1 ex, CJF). ¿ Spain: Lugo? Herdade do Reguengo 1400m / T. interrupta Latreille, J.L. Bujalance det. (4♀♀ and 2♁♁, CJF).</p> <p>Diagnosis: Black body; slightly bright elytra; elongated and punctured head, very prominent supraocular fold; truncated or sub-rounded epistome. Pronotum: slightly convex and transverse; somewhat punctured, and narrower towards the base; sub-orbicular or sub-cordiform, with the base slightly rounded and sometimes somewhat sinuous before the posterior angles. Commonly it is provided with two slightly marked depths on both sides of the dorsal midline. Elytra: elongated, ovate, with the sides almost likewise narrowed towards the base and apex, slightly striated and sub-rough, margin of the base irregular, practically erased or interrupted before the scutellum. Aedeagus narrow, sides sub-parallel and parameters barely longer than the phallobase. Fully description of this taxon can be found in Mulsant (1854).</p> <p>Comments: T. interrupta Latreille has been cited with different taxonomic rank, from several geographical areas of the Iberian Peninsula and by diverse authors. In the catalog of de la Fuente (1934) it is cited from Palencia, León (Paganetti), Zaragoza (Gorriz) and Barcelona (Cuní, Müller). These citations, according to Español (1956), must correspond to other taxa. Español (1956) cites it as T. interrupta ssp. heydeni (= T. espanoli sp. nov.) from northwestern Spain, and later the same author (Español 1960) cited it again as a separate species from T. heydeni. Viñolas (1986 and 1991) and Viñolas &amp; Cartagena (2005) cited it from Galicia and northern Portugal, as T. curculionoides ssp. interrupta considering T. heydeni a synonymy of this taxon. Later authors (L̂bl &amp; Smetana 2008, Grimm &amp; Aistleitner 2009, Martínez 2018, Iwan &amp; L̂bl 2020) cited T. interrupta as an independent species, from France, Spain, and Portugal. Despite all these citations, the presence of this taxon in the Iberian Peninsula needs to be confirmed due to confusion with other taxa. Furthermore, the specimens we have examined and identified as T. interrupta carry a single label “Herdade do Reguengo 1400m ” (without date or collector) which does not allow us to determine with accuracy the locality of provenance, although everything seems to indicate that it is a locality in Galicia or Portugal.</p> <p>Geographical distribution: Western and southwestern France (Mulsant 1854, Español 1960). The bibliographic references corresponding to the Iberian Peninsula need to be confirmed.</p> <p>Group of T. platyceps</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FF975E5DF9A3F8A1D0E7F98D	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FF905E5FF9A3F95ED00AFA93.text	8F6B0B50FF905E5FF9A3F95ED00AFA93.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria platyceps Steven. He 1828	<div><p>Tentyria platyceps Steven, 1828 (Figs. 14, 49, 83, 119, 167, 200, 231, 232, 233, 234)</p> <p>Tentyria platyceps Steven, 1828: 92; Schaum 1862: 70, Kraatz 1865: 116, 136, 139, Reitter 1900: 175, Fuente 1934: 31, Koch 1944a: 233, Español 1960: 410, López-Sánchez et al. 1985 (larval stades), Viñolas 1986: 105, Viñolas &amp; Cartagena 2005: 84 (fig.358d), L̂bl &amp; Smetana 2008: 208, Bujalance et al., 2016: 348, Martínez 2018: 58, Iwan &amp; L̂bl 2020: 251.</p> <p>Tentyria goudoti Solier, 1835: 360; Kraatz 1865: 116, 136, 139 syn., Reitter 1900: 175, Koch 1944a: 233, Español 1960: 410, Viñolas 1986: 105, Viñolas &amp; Cartagena 2005: 277, L̂bl &amp; Smetana 2008: 208, Bujalance et al. 2016: 348, Martínez 2018: 58, Iwan &amp; L̂bl 2020: 251.</p> <p>Tentyria modesta Rosenhauer, 1865: 188; Schaum 1862: 70 syn., Reitter 1900: 175, Koch 1944a: 233–234, Español 1960: 410, Viñolas 1986: 105, Viñolas &amp; Cartagena 2005: 277, L̂bl &amp; Smetana 2008: 208, Martínez 2018: 58, Iwan &amp; L̂bl 2020: 251.</p> <p>Tentyria platyceps var. modesta Kraatz 1865: 117, 136, Fuente 1934: 31.</p> <p>Tentyria calcarata Reitter, 1900: 170; Español 1960: 410–411 syn.? Viñolas 1986: 105, Viñolas &amp; Cartagena 2005: 277, L̂bl &amp; Smetana 2008: 208, Kaszab “ Holotype in litt. (MNHN)”, Bujalance et al. 2016: 348, Martínez 2018: 58, Iwan &amp; L̂bl 2020: 251.</p> <p>Types examined: Four of the five specimens of T. platyceps Steven, labelled and recorded (MNHUB) as syntypes of Pimelia curculionoides Herbst, carrying two labels: red label indicating “ SYNTYPUS Pimelia curculionoides Herbst 1799 labelled by NMHUB 2006” / white label “Hist.-Col. (Coleoptera), Nr. 45574, Tentyria curculionoides Herbst, Lusitan, Zool. Mus. Berlin ”. In addition, one of the specimens carries two old labels: small and rectangular label: “45574” / large square label, “ Orbiculata Akis F., curculioides Ht. *, Ten. Nomas Pall., Lusit”. These specimens are syntypes of Tentyria platyceps Steven instead of Tentyria curculionoides Herbst.</p> <p>Syntype of Tentyria goudoti Solier, labelled: goudot, Tanger / Muséum Paris, Tanger, Goudot / Tentyria goudoti Sol. / Type. (MNHN).</p> <p>Two syntypes? of Tentyria modesta Rosenhauer, label: T. platyceps v. modesta Rosh., Hispania / T. platyceps v. modesta Rosh. / Hispania Rosh. (NMHUB); Hispania Rosh. (NMHUB).</p> <p>Syntype of Tentyria calcarata Reitter, labelled: Malaga / Holotypus 1900, Tentyria calcarata Reitter det. Dr. Kaszab / T. calcarata m. Málaga / Muséum Paris / (The specimen carried a green label) (MNHN).</p> <p>Additional material: Portugal, Albufeira, 2.VI.1981, B. Lassalle leg. (2 exx, CJF) / 1.VI.1977 (1 ex, CJF); idem, Praia de Galé, 13.VII.2007, (1 ex, CJLB); Mértola, 2.VI.1981, B. Lassalle leg. (2 exx, CJF); Coruche, Alto Alentejo, A. Zuzarte leg. (2 exx, CJF); Beira, 7.V.1973, A. Zuzarte leg. (CJF); Beira, 7.V.2003. J. Israel leg. (CJF); Coruche, Ribatejo, 1.V.1978 A. Zuzarte leg. (1 ex, CJF); Bordeira, 10.IV.2003, J. Israel leg. (12 exx, CJF); Monforte, Herd. de Esquilas, 23.VI.1988, A. Zuzarte leg. (CJF); Monforte, St Alexo, 24: VII.1987, A. Zuzarte leg. (CJF); Odemira, Bajo Alentejo, 23 and 27.X.1982 / 25. V.1982, A. Zuzarte leg. (4 exx, CJF). Spain: Salamanca, Los Santos, 1000 m, VII.1976, B. Lassalle leg. (1 ex, CJF), Pico Cabeza Gorda, (NRMS); Madrid, Casa de Campo, XII.1971, J. Ferrer leg. (1 ex, CJF); idem Guadarrama, Canal Isabel II, (CJF); Toledo, V.1997, Z. Korsós leg, (HMNH); idem, Aranjuez, 1.V.1995, J. Iñiguez leg. (1 ex, CJLB); Cáceres, La Montaña, VIII.2000, A. Castro Luque (3 exx, CACL); Badajoz, Alto de la Bofrera 11.XII.2005, J. Saez leg. (1 ex, CACL); idem, Sª Tentudia, Galera de León, 17.II.2007, A. Linares leg. (4 exx, CACT); Ciudad Real, Torrecilla, 3.IV.1966 (4 exx, CJF); Alicante, Benidorm (1 ex, CJF); Granada 15 km W de Baza, 16.VI.1935, O. Lundblad leg., T. incerta pseudolaevis Koch (1 ex, NRMS); idem, Sierrra Nevada, 1700 m, 16. V.1935, idem (1 ex, NRMS); idem, Guadix, 19.IV.1989?, R. Pellersson? (1 ex, CJF); idem, Baza, Los Balcones, Baúl, 26.XII.2003, J.L. Sánchez leg. (3 exx, CJF); Almería, Puerto de la Ragua, Laroles-Bayacal, 19.IX.2008, A Castro Tovar leg. (CACT); Córdoba, arroyo Pinadillos, VII.1998, A. Castro Luque leg. (1 ex, CACL); idem, Jardines de Ronda del Marrubial, 26.IV.1996, M. Baena leg. (CJF); idem, Baena, Torre del Montecillo, Bujalance leg. (CJLB) 27.XII.1996 and 4.V.2011 Bujalance leg. (4 exx, CJLB); Jaén, Collado de los Jadines, Despeñaperros, 30.XII.2006, A. Castro Tovar leg. (2 exx, CACT); idem, Cerro Molina, Puente Tablas, 1.IX.2003, idem (2 exx, CACT); idem, Finca el Ardal, Linares, 7.II.2004, M. López leg. (CACT); Sevilla, Guadiamar River, Cárdenas et al. (2011) (many exx, CJLB and CUCO); Huelva, El Rocío, 9.IV.1989? R. Pellersson? (CJF); idem, Parque Nacional de Doñana, Bujalance et al. (2016) (11 exx, CJLB).</p> <p>Diagnosis: Unmistakable species among the Iberian Tentyria by having the following features: black body, sub-cylindrical (Fig. 200), about 13.2 mm in average length, not very bright and very finely punctured; large and broad head (Fig. 14), sub-triangular epistome, with a well-developed tooth in the middle; barely convex eyes; wide, deep, and very well defined gular groove (Fig. 49). Pronotum (Fig. 83) provided with a very fine puncture; usually slightly transverse, and sub-cordiform, sometimes subcircular or sub-elliptical and more transverse, with the base straight or sub-straight, not sinuous before the posterior angles and generally something narrower than the apex. Elongated and medially depressed prosternal apophysis (Fig. 119), surpassing the level of the procoxae. Elytra oval elongated, variable in length, subcylindrical, sometimes slightly striated and somewhat broader than the pronotum. Small aedeagus, fusiform parameres and barely longer than phallobase (Fig. 167).</p> <p>Comments: Species described from “Lusitania”, not from Andalusia as Viñolas &amp; Catagena (2005) mentioned. Steven (1828) described Tentyria platyceps with at least one specimen from “Lusitania” (MNHUB). Data on the Steven’s description agrees with the label that carries one of the syntypes listed as T. curculionoides Herbst in the Berlin Museum, before to be rectified and attributed to “ T. curculioides Ht. *” (Fig. 231). This confusion is the reason of that the type of T. platyceps Steven has remained hidden to date, not appearing in the recording book of the Museum.</p> <p>Accordingly, T. platyceps Steven was an unknown species to Solier (1835) and Rosenhauer (1856). Hence these authors described T. goudoti Solier (Fig. 232) and T. modesta Rosenhauer (Fig. 233), with identical characters those of T. platyceps Steven, as indicated Kraatz (1865) and Schaum (1862) respectively. This verifies that these last authors knew the true identity of T. platyceps Steven, by intuiting the confusion between T. curta Steven and T. curculionoides Herbst (Kraatz 1865). From Kraatz (1865), T. platyceps Steven has been a species correctly interpreted by almost all authors.</p> <p>Reitter (1900), described T. calcarata from Malaga, which was, dubiously, considered synonymy of T. platyceps Steven by Español (1960), since it was the unique species of Tentyria present in the mentioned locality whose description fits to that Reitter gave, even when this author does not include it in the group 3, close to T. platyceps Steven.</p> <p>Later, Kaszab designated in litt. “ Holotypus ” of T. calcarata Reitter a specimen from the MNHN labelled from Malaga (Fig. 234), and which corresponds to a variant specimen of the T. platyceps Steven (with the pronotum very transverse, and sub-elliptical), like the syntypes of Tentyria platyceps v. modesta Rosenhauer.</p> <p>Designation of the Lectotype Tentyria platyceps Steven, 1828, present designation:</p> <p>The specimen of the typical series that bears the following labels (two of them old): small rectangular label, “45574” / big square label, “ Orbiculata Akis F., curculioides Ht. *, Ten. Nomas Pall., Lusit” / red label, “ SYNTYPUS Pimelia curculionoides Herbst, 1799 labelled by NMHUB 2006” / white, “Hist.-Col. (Coleoptera), Nr. 45574, Tentyria curculionoides Herbst, Lusitan., Zool. Mus. Berlin ”, is designated Lectotype (Fig. 231). The remaining syntypes are designated “ Paralectotypes ”.</p> <p>Designation of the Lectotype of Tentyria goudoti Solier, 1835, present designation:</p> <p>The unique syntype of Tentyria goudoti Solier, bearing the lables: “goudot, Tanger / Muséum Paris, Tanger, Goudot / Tentyria goudoti Sol. / Type”, is designated Lectotype (Fig. 232).</p> <p>Designation of Lectotype and Paralectotype of Tentyria modesta Rosenhauer, 1856, present designation:</p> <p>To provide taxonomic stability, we consider necessary to designate Lectotype and Paralectotype of Tentyria modesta Rosenhauer to each of the two specimens examined in the MNHN, bearing the Rosenhauer’s labels and fitting to the description of this author, although they do not appear as syntypes. The specimen that bears the following labels: “ T. platyceps v. modesta Rosh. Hispania / T. platyceps v. modesta Rosh. / Hispania Rosh.”, is designated Lectotype (Fig. 233); the other that carrying the label: “Hispania Rosh.”, is designated Paralectotype.</p> <p>Geographical distribution: Widely distributed in central and southern Iberian Peninsula, especially in the inner areas. T. platyceps Steven, has been also cited in the north of Morocco (Tánger) as T. goudoti Solier (1835), Escalera (1914) and Kocher (1958). The record of Algeria (Reitter 1900) needs to be verified due to the historical confusion of this taxon discussed above.</p> <p>Group of T. bassii</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FF905E5FF9A3F95ED00AFA93	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FF925E5EF9A3FA58D5C2F8E6.text	8F6B0B50FF925E5EF9A3FA58D5C2F8E6.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria bassii Solier F. Espanol 1835	<div><p>Tentyria bassii Solier, 1835 (Figs. 15, 50, 84, 120, 168, 201, 235, 236)</p> <p>Tentyria bassii Solier, 1835: 356; Kraatz 1865: 134, Reitter 1900: 173, Fuente 1934: 31, L̂bl &amp; Smetana 2008: 206, Martínez 2018: 58, Iwan &amp; L̂bl 2020: 248.</p> <p>Tentyria bassii ssp. bassii Solier Koch 1944a: 230; Español 1960: 409, Viñolas 1986: 104, Viñolas &amp; Cartagena 2005: 83, 276 Fig. 358b.</p> <p>Tentyria bassii ssp. cantabrica Koch, 1944a: 230; Español 1956: 31 and 1960: 409, Viñolas 1986:104 syn., Viñolas &amp; Cartagena 2005: 83, 276, Iwan &amp; L̂bl 2020: 248.</p> <p>Tentyria bassi ssp. meridionalis Koch, 1944a: 231; Español 1960: 409, Viñolas 1986: 104 syn., Viñolas &amp; Cartagena 2005: 83, 276, Iwan &amp; L̂bl 2020: 248.</p> <p>Types examined: We have not found, in the Museum of Paris, the type of Tentyria bassii Solier Dupont’s collection, labelled “ Pimelia curculioides Herbst ” as described Solier (1835). Instead of that, we have examined four specimens which coming from the Dupont’s collection (Du64) and another one from the Deyrollei’s collection (Deyr. 77), as indicated in the round label carried in each specimen. This label also refers to the locality of Extremadura in three of specimens and to Spain in the other two. In addition, all of them bear the following rectangular label: “ Museum Paris, Coll. Solier, Coll. Marseul, 2842–90.</p> <p>Two syntypes of Tentyria bassii ssp. cantabrica Koch, labelled: Ponferrada (León), Paganetti leg. (1♁ and 1♀, NRMS) (Fig. 235).</p> <p>Typus of Tentyia bassii ssp. meridionalis Koch labelled: Portugal, Evora / Typus bassii ssp. meridionalis m., 1944 C. Koch / Sammlug Adr. Schuster / Schatzm. / corrugata (1♁ NHMB) (Fig. 236).</p> <p>Typus of Tentyia bassii ssp. gredosana Koch labelled: Piedraleves, Hi., S. de Gredos, 18.5.34, C. Koch / Typus, bassii ssp. gredosana m., 1944 C. Koch, / Sammlung H Gabien (1♀, NHMB).</p> <p>Additional material: Portugal: Ebora (Evora), (1 ex, MNCN); Serra de Gerês, Minho 25.IV.1974, T. Branco leg. (1 ex, CJF); São Cristóvão, Alto Alentejo, 9.IV.1982, A. Zuzarte leg. (10 exx, CJF); Montargil, Ribatejo, 18.IV.1979, A. Zuzarte leg. (8 exx, CJF); Antas, C. de Barros leg. / Bassii / Tentyria bassii det. A. Schuster (1 ex, NRMS); Trancoso (B. Alto, Portugal), 3.III.2003, nº 14447, col. Artur Serrano (2 exx, CJF); Covilha, Lamaçais, 23.IV.1978, nº 690, col. Canduso? Matas. (1ex, CJF); Peniche 25.IV.1982, nº 8245, col. Artur Serrano / Tentyria emarginata, A. Serrano det. (1 ex, CJF); Évora, Herdade de Vale Moura, Alto Alentejo, 27.V.1985, A. Zuzarte leg. (2 exx, CJF); Estremoz, Veiros, Vale das Quintas 11.IX.1972, (1 ex, CJF); Coruche, Alentejo, A. Zuzarte leg. (2 exx, CJF); Coruche, Ribatejo, Quinta Grande 15.IV.1976 (1 ex, CJF); Coruche, Ribatejo, 16.IV.1977, A. Zuzarte leg. (3 exx, CJF); Coruche, Fajarda, 31.III.1979 (2 exs, CJF); Beira Baixa, Belmonte-Inguias XII.1961, J. Matos leg. (2 exx, CJF); Belmonte, VII-1967 (1 ex, CJF); Monforte, St. Aleixo, Bacoreira, 24.VI.1988, A. Zuzarte leg. (2 exx, NRMS); Campo Maior, Herd. do Cabeça Gorda, Alto Alentejo, 8.IV.1986, A. Zuzarte leg. (1 ex, NRMS); Monforte, Herrera de Espuilas, 22.17.1988, A. Zuzarte leg. (CJF); Vilar Formoxa, Beira Alta, 7.VI1970, idem (CJF); Coruche, Alentejo, idem (CJF); Coruche, Monte Velho Ribatejo, 24.II.1976, A. Zuzarte leg. (2 exx, CJF); Strada de Pavía, Vimieiro, Alto Alentejo, 6.XI.1973, idem (CJF); Campo Maiva, Cabeza Gorda, Alto Alentejo, (IV.1976, idem (CJF); San André, Coruche, 3.V.1976, idem leg. (CJF). Spain: Hoyos (Cáceres) V.1957, Tentyria bassii Solier F. Español leg. and det. (CJF); Hoyos, 9.V.1957, F. Español leg. (CJF); Almaraz (Cáceres). 5.IV.1986, Dellacasa leg. (2 exx, CJF); Sª de Guadalupe (Cáceres), 4.III, MNCN_ Ent, Nº Cat. 70800 (2 exx, MNCN); Foncebadón (León), 5.V.1976 (1ex, CJF). Valencia de Alcántara, (Cáceres) VI.1965, J. Vives leg. (MCNB); Sierra de la Vera (Cáceres), VI.1959, A. Cobos leg, (MCNB).</p> <p>Diagnosis: Although T. bassii Solier shows great variability in some characters such as the shape of the pronotum, it is distinguishable from its congeners in the tegument, black and almost dull, and with very well marked and dense punctures, the head (Fig. 15) with large and convex eyes (usually more in males) and the temples converging back. This species also shows a well noticeable supraorbital keel, rounded epistome and provide with a tiny tooth, moderately deep and laterally well delimited gular groove (Fig. 50); transverse and slightly convex pronotum (Fig. 84), usually somewhat narrowed at the base, rear angles always marked and slightly obtuse, with the sides regularly rounded and the maximum width at the centre; prosternal apophysis (Fig. 120), broad (more in females), with parallel or subparallel sides, rounded at the end, reaching or surpassing posteriorly the procoxae; graceful legs, particularly in males, protibiae with the inner side sinuous (Fig. 141); elytra oval elongated in males (Fig. 201, 235a, 236), wider and stubbier in females (Fig. 235b); usually, striated and somewhat rough, with the upper and lower margins of each epipleura non-converging at the apex, the lower one protruding somewhat, but not becoming spiny. Aedeagus (Fig. 168) about 3.3 mm long on average, with the parameres similar in length to the phallobase, sinuous sides and tapering almost equally towards the base as at the apex.</p> <p>Comments: The type examined of Tentyria bassii ssp. gredosana Koch certainly corresponds to a female of Tentyria peiroleri ssp. castiliana Koch (= Tentyria castiliana Koch stat. nov.) as it will be explained ahead. The other two subspecies described by Koch (1944a), T. bassii ssp. cantabrica and T. bassii ssp. meridionalis are indistinguishable from the type, as pointed Viñolas (1986).</p> <p>Geographical distribution: Species described from Spain, abundant in the central area of the Iberian Western, known from the provinces of Caceres and León in Spain, and from the Évora district, Port Alegre, Santarem, Castelo Branco, Guarda, Leiria, Braga and Viana do Castelo, Portugal. It has been also cited from of Ávila, Salamanca, and Valladolid (Español 1960), and Zamora and Toledo (Viñolas1986, Viñolas &amp; Cartagena 2005).</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FF925E5EF9A3FA58D5C2F8E6	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FF935E61F9A3F892D0EFFAA9.text	8F6B0B50FF935E61F9A3F892D0EFFAA9.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria eulipoides Koch 1944	<div><p>Tentyria eulipoides Koch, 1944 (Figs. 16, 51, 84, 121, 141, 146, 169, 202, 237)</p> <p>Tentyria eulipoides Koch, 1944a: 229–230; Español 1960: 409, L̂bl &amp; Smetana 2008: 206; Martínez 2018: 58, Iwan &amp; L̂bl 2020: 249.</p> <p>Types examined: Holotype (♁) (Fig. 237): TYPUS, Tentyria eulipoides m., 1944 C. KOCH / Alcalá d. G. (de Guadaira) b. (bei) Sevilla 1931, leg. G. Frey (NHMB); Paratypes: TYPE / Gergel “Gelves” bei Sevilla / Sammlung A. dr. Schuster / gadit. (gaditana) / Gredosa (gredosana) / Tentyria eulipoides Koch, det. J.L. Bujalance, 2006 (1♁, NHMB); Syntypes (without type labels): Gergel bei Sevilla, gadit. / Samml. Adr. Schuster (2 exx, NHMB); Utrera, Melichar / subrugosa / Samml. Adr. Schuster (2 exx, NHMB); Granada: 5.62 / gaditana Rosenh. det. Reitter 1932 / Samml. A. Thery / (coll. Frey, NHMB); Hispania / Ronda / Melichar / subrugosa / Adr. Schuster Samml. (NHMB); Hispania / Melichar / subrugosa / Adr. Schuster Samml. (NHMB).</p> <p>Additional material: Almería: Almería / M.N.C.N., MADRID (1♀, MNCN). Córdoba: Laguna de Tíscar, 30.IV.1985, Bujalance leg. (1♁, CJLB); Tentyria, 6, Córdoba, Mora leg. (reverse) / Col. Mr. Pérez Arcas / M.N.C.N., MADRID (1♀, MNCN); Fuente la Lancha, 28.II.2007, A. Castro Tovar leg. (1♀, CACT). Jaén: La Parcela, Linares, 26-1-1996, M.A. López Vergara leg. (1♀ and 1♁, CJLB); surroundings of the urbanization La Garza, Linares, 2.II.2013, A. Castro Tovar leg. (1♁, CACT); idem 16-4-2013, (10 exx, CACT); idem, 18.V.2013, M.A. López Vergara leg. (2 exx). Sevilla: Alcalá de Guadaira (Sevilla), IV-1909, Exp. del Museo / T. eulipoides Koch ? / M.N.C.N., (2♁♁, in exhibition, MNCN); El Gandul, Alcalá de Guadaira, 2-3-2003, A. Linares leg. (1♁, CJLB); Puebla de Cazalla (Sevilla), IV-1909, Exp. del Museo / T. eulipoides Koch ? / M.N.C.N., (1♁, MNCN). Carmona, IV.1965, J. Vives leg. (MCNB); Alcalá de Guadaira, Rio Guadaira, 25.IV.2015, F. Caro Pintos leg. (1♀, CJF).</p> <p>Diagnosis: T. eulipoides Koch is a species very close T. bassii Solier, sharing the general body shape (Fig. 202), but differing in the greater average size; the punctures, finer and less dense; the head wider, and the eyes bigger and more convex (Fig. 16); less transverse and less well-defined gular groove (Fig. 51); the pronotum (Fig. 84) proportionally greater, with the base somewhat sinuous before le posterior angles; prosternal apophysis (Fig. 121) parallel-sided, with a central depression as a longitudinal groove, rounded apex, and slightly exceeding the procoxae; protibiae with clear sexual dimorphism (Fig. 141); male elytra generally more cylindrical oval and with barely indicated ribs or even smooth; female elytra wider and stubbier; the elytral apex spiny, formed by the convergence of the upper and lower margins of the epipleurae (Fig. 146). Aedeagus (Fig. 169) of larger median size and with the parameres narrower towards the apex.</p> <p>Geographical distribution: Species present in the Guadalquivir River basin, described from the province of Sevilla (Alcalá de Guadaira, Gergel “Gelves” and Utrera), Granada and Málaga (Ronda). Español (1960) and Viñolas &amp; Cartagena (2005) also cite this species in Córdoba and Ciudad Real. Also present in the province of Jaén. The record from Almeria, above mentioned, without collector’s label and that from Ciudad Real (Viñolas &amp; Cartagena, 2005) need of verification, because according with Ferrer &amp; Bujalance (2008), the authors confused this taxon.</p> <p>Group of T. peiroleri</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FF935E61F9A3F892D0EFFAA9	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FFAC5E60F9A3FA05D5D4FABE.text	8F6B0B50FFAC5E60F9A3FA05D5D4FABE.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria peiroleri subsp. peiroleri Solier 1835	<div><p>Tentyria peiroleri ssp. peiroleri Solier, 1835 (Figs. 17, 52, 85, 122, 151, 170, 203, 238)</p> <p>Tentyria peiroleri Solier, 1835: 357.</p> <p>Types examined: Syntype (♁?) (Fig. 238), bearing the following labels: “ Peirolerii / Type Solier / MUSEUM PARIS, Coll. Solier, COLL. DE MARSEUL, 2842-90 / TYPE” (MNHN).</p> <p>Additional material: Almeria: Hispania, Seidlitz leg. / Riksmuseum Stockholm (1♀, NHRMS); prolixa, Pto. Bacares / T. prolixa Rosenh. / T. prolixa / MNCN, MADRID (1♁, MNCN); S. de Bacares, rev. Yieru? / MNCN_Ent., Nº Cat. 70834 (1♀, MNCN); 16, Filabres / MNCN_Ent., Nº Cat. 70870 (1♁, MNCN). Granada: Llanos de Guadix, 30SVG92, 25.VI.1991, F.S. Piñero leg. (8♁♁ and 4♀♀, CFSP / 2♁♁ CJF); idem, 7.VI.1991 (1♁, CFSP); idem, 7.VI.1990 (1♁, CFSP); idem, 9.VI.1991 (2♀♀, CFSP); idem, 8.VII.1991, (1♀, CFSP); idem, 7.III.1990 (1♁and 1♀, CFSP / 1♁ and 1♀, CJF); idem, 7.XI.1990 (1♀, CFSP). Ladihonda, Guadix, 30SVG9730, 7.VI.1991, F.S. Piñero leg. (1♀, CFSP); idem, 25.VI.1991 (1♀, CFSP); idem, 7.VI.1991 (1♀, CFSP); idem 6.III.1992 (1♁, CFSP). Hernán Valle, Guadix, 30SVG9335, 7.III.1990, F.S. Piñero leg. (1♀, CFSP). Charches, Sª de Baza (SB9), 6.VI.1994, F.S. Piñero leg. (4♀♀, CFSP); idem, 20.VI.1994 (1♀, CFSP); idem, 26.III.1995 (1♀, CFSP). (21 exx in CFSP).</p> <p>Diagnosis: Oval elongated body, black and shiny tegument (Fig. 203); broad head (Fig. 17), slightly angled or sub-rounded epistome, somewhat sinuous on the sides and slightly dentate at the apex; gular groove (Fig. 52) slightly deep and frequently in the form of open “V”; convex and slightly transverse pronotum (Fig. 85), with the sides in curve somewhat closed towards the base, obtuse but not well-defined rear angles; almost straight basal margin, barely sinuate before the posterior angles; punctures fine but dense and noticeable, similar to those of the head; prosternal apophysis (Fig. 122) depressed in the middle, widened between the coxae and tapering towards the apex which is generally slightly bent upward (in ventral view), barely extends beyond the procoxae; elytra very finely punctured, short and ovate, particularly in females, with the sides sub-parallel, scarcely narrowed toward the base and the apex, sometimes with signs of striation; the base is straight and well margined; rounded humeri and with the last abdominal sternite slightly sinuate at the apex (Fig. 151). Aedeagus (Fig. 170) about 3.5 mm long on average, with the parameres just longer than the phallobase, with the sides parallel until the apex.</p> <p>Comments: The specific epithet “ peiroleri ” instead of “ peirolerii ” is a transcription error since it does not correspond to the handwritten text of label attached to the type. T. peiroleri Solier, 1835 was a misinterpreted species since its description, because the types of Solier were not examined and the locality was not certainly known (Solier 1835).</p> <p>The record from “Málaga” (Rosenhauer 1856) is a mistake as Kraatz (1865) mentioned; at the same time, this last author confounded this species with another undescribed species coming from “Castilla la Nueva” (T. castiliana Koch 1945 stat. nov.); Reitter (1900), included it among the unknown, as from “Hispania?”; Gebien (1937), misinterpreted it as a species from the Iberian Levante; Koch (1944a), following Gebien (1837) and Kraatz (1865), established two subspecies, one of the Spanish East (nominal form) and the subspecies T. peiroleri castiliana Koch, from the Peninsular Centre. Español (1960) accepted the conclusions of Koch (1944a); Viñolas (1986) and Viñolas &amp; Cartagena (2005), refused the validity of the subspecies proposed by Koch (1944a) and considered the whole of them (including T. aragonica Koch 1944) as synonymy, establishing a “variable species”, which would extend for much of the eastern half of the Iberian Peninsula, from Lleida to Seville. As it will be seen below, none of these taxa corresponds to the Solier type (1835), which, as this author believed, comes from southern Spain, and more specifically from the interior of the provinces of Granada and Almeria. T. peirolei Solier is a very variable species; the typical forms are in the Hoya de Guadix, being the specimens coming from the Sierra de Baza, somewhat bigger (especially the elytra) and with a more transverse pronotum, while those of Sª de los Filabres (Almería) are smaller and brighter.</p> <p>Designation of the Lectotype of Tentyria peiroleri Solier, 1835, present designation: The unique syntype fitting the Solier’s description (1835) is designated Lectotype (Fig. 238). It bears the following labels: handwritten label “Peirolerii” / label “ Type Solier ” / MUSEUM PARIS, Coll. Solier, COLL. DE MARSEUL, 2842-90 / red label “TYPE”.</p> <p>Geographic distribution: Andalusian species, typical of the interior of Betic chains, specifically from the “Hoya de Guadix”, extending eastward through the Sierra de Baza and the Sierra de Filabres.</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FFAC5E60F9A3FA05D5D4FABE	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FFAD5E62F9A3FA75D416FA29.text	8F6B0B50FFAD5E62F9A3FA75D416FA29.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria peiroleri subsp. incerta (sensu Vinolas & Cartagena 1835) Solier 1835	<div><p>Tentyria peiroleri ssp. incerta Solier, 1835 stat. nov. (Figs. 18, 86, 123, 152, 204, 239, 240)</p> <p>Tentyria incerta Solier, 1835: 359.</p> <p>Tentyria incerta ssp. pseudolaevis Koch, 1944a: 231 syn. nov. (Types from Almería).</p> <p>Tentyria levis Solier, 1835: 358 syn. nov.</p> <p>Types examined: Syntype (♁) (Fig. 239), bearing the following labels: T. incerta Sol., Barb ? (old rectangular label) / Incerta (Solier’s typical label from) / Tentyria incerta Sol., Barba. T., Du 64 (rounded label) / TYPE (red letter) / MUSEUM PARIS, COLL. DE MARSEUL, 2842-90 / TYPE (red label) / Tentyria incerta, Type Solier / label with the aedeagus (MNHN). In the MNHN there are other two specimens labelled as Types which really are not syntypes of Solier. Contrarily, there are two specimens of the misinterpreted Tentyria prolixa Rosenhauer. These two false syntypes bear the following labels: incerta Kr., Type / Kraatz, 866 (small, square label) / TYPE (red label) / MUSÉUM PARIS (Fig. 252); Tentyria incerta Sol., Andal. “Titf 86” (?) (rounded label) / MUSEUM PARIS, Coll. Solier, COLL. DE MARSEUL, 2842-90 / Tentyria incerta Solier, Type? /? SYNTYPE (red label).</p> <p>Tentyria incerta ssp. pseudolaevis Koch, 1944: Almería: Sierra Gádor, Prov. Almería, G. Frey, C. Koch, V. 1943 (two syntypes, NHMB); Umg. Almería, Hisp. m. V. 1943, G. Frey, C. Koc (two syntypes, NHMB); ALMERÍA, Roquetta (Roquetas), Hisp. m. V. 1943, leg. G. Frey, C. Koch (one syntype, NHMB). Málaga (one syntype, in NHMB): Tentyria incerta ssp. pseudolaevis, C. Koch, 1944, TYPUS / Málaga, J. Ardois / Winkler / laevis / Sammlung Adr. Schuster (NHMB).</p> <p>Tentyria levis Solier 1835: The type described by Solier (1835) has not been found in the MNHN, but we found a specimen labelled as type having the following tags: rounded label, “ Tentyria laevis Sol., Espan. T, Du 64” (Dupont 64) / rectangular label “ Laevis ” / “MUSEUM PARIS, Coll. Solier, COLL DE MARSEUL, 2842-90” / modern red label “TYPE”. However, this and other specimens determined as T. laevis Sol., cannot be considered syntypes since it does not match with the Solier’s description (1835). On the other hand, in the MNHUB we have located a possible syntype, or “type comparavit”, of T. laevis Solier, with the following labels (Fig. 254): Tentyria laevis Sol., Carthag. Dej. (old label) / 45575 (old label) / Hist.-Coll. (Coleoptera), Nr. 45575, Tentyria laevis..., Carthagena, Dej. Zool. Mus. Berlin.</p> <p>Additional Material: Almería: El Playazo, Valle de Rodalquilar, Níjar, 30S0588539 4079456, 3.V.2006, A. Castro Tovar leg. (2♁♁ and 1♀, CACT); Cabo de Gata, VII.2000, A. Castro Tovar leg. (1 ex, CACT); Coto de Vera, Pto. Rey, 24.IV.2011, J.C. Martínez leg. (2♁♁ and 2♀♀, CJF); idem, 23.IV.2011 (15 exx, CJLB); Cuevas de Almanzora, 12.II.2011, J.C. Martínez leg. (18 exx, CJLB); Mata Gorda, El Ejido, 23.IV.2011, J.C. Martínez leg. (17 exx, CJLB); El Palmar, Aguadulce, 27.XII.1955, F. Español leg. (1♁, CJF); Playa de Almerimar, V.1981, B. Lassalle leg. (3 exx, CJF); Tabernas, 1230m, 8.II.1987, Bastazo &amp; Vela leg. (2 exx, CB &amp;V); Níjar, 26.X.1991, Bastazo &amp; Vela leg. (7 exx, CB &amp;V); El Alquián, 9.I.2011, J.C. Martínez et al leg. (4♁♁ and 1♀, CJLB); Punta del Sabinar, Roquetas, 1989, M.A. Alonso Z. leg. (1♀, MNCN _ Ent Nº Cat. 70872); Salinas de Cabo de Gata, 14- 16.IV.2006, Pérez de Gregorio and M. Bravo leg. (MCNB).</p> <p>Diagnosis: The description of Tentyria incerta Solier fully fits the syntype preserved in Paris (MNHN). This species differs from T. peiroleri f.t. in the somewhat smaller average size, narrower head and usually more angled or subtriangular epistome (Fig. 18); less transverse but more convex pronotum (Fig. 86), at least in males, frequently sub-orbicular; narrower and elongated prosternal apophysis (Fig. 123), often more acute at the end and surpassing the procoxae; proportionally shorter and sub-cylindrical elytra (Fig. 204), the last urosternite usually not sinuous at the apex (Fig. 152). Aedeagus like that of T. peiroleri f.t., but of smaller average size.</p> <p>Comments: T. incerta Solier, described from “Barbarie” really is an Andalusian species, common in the coast of Almeria. It was unknown by Rosenhauer (1856) and misinterpreted by all authors after Kraatz (1865), who confused it with T. frigida Rambur in litt. (Fig. 253), identical to T. prolixa Rosenhauer, species unknown by Kraatz (1865). Proof of this is that in the MNHN there is a type of T. incerta designated by Kraatz (= T. prolixa Rosenhauer) (Fig. 252).</p> <p>Reitter (1900) recorded this species from “Hispania” and Koch (1944a), following the Kraatz’s (1865) criterium, cited it from Sierra Nevada, typical locality of T. prolixa Rosenhauer, and which this author confused with T. platyceps Steven (Koch 1944a). Hence, he did not detect the Kraatz’s error and described T. incerta ssp. pseudolaevis Koch with specimens from Almeria (Koch 1944a), true provenance of T. incerta Solier. Español (1960) followed Koch’s criterium, and finally, Viñolas (1986) established the synonymy between T. incerta sensu Kraatz (non T. incerta Solier) and T. incerta ssp. pseudolaevis Koch, and made the iconography of this taxon with a specimen identical to the specimens from Málaga of T. incerta ssp. pseudolaevis Koch (= T. kochi sp. nov.).</p> <p>T. incerta ssp. pseudolaevis Koch, is in fact a synonymy of T. incerta Solier (= T. peiroleri ssp. incerta Solier, stat. nov.) since the specimens from the typical localities (Almería) are like the Solier’s type. However, the specimens later cited by Koch (1944a) from Malaga (Sierra de Ronda) and Algeciras and labelled as “Tipus” (NHMB) belong to another hitherto unpublished taxon, T. kochi sp. nov., and cannot be considered Types of T. incerta ssp. pseudolaevis Koch, since Koch (1944a) did not include them in the typical series.</p> <p>On the other hand, Solier (1835) described T. levis with a specimen from “Carthagène” sent by “M. Widmann” which has not been found in the MNHN of Paris. Instead, as already indicated, there is a specimen labelled as “Type” from the Solier collection, which cannot be considered a syntype of T. levis Solier, since it does not agree with the Solier’s description (1835) because it shows a wide and deep gular groove. According to this characteristic and following the key of Solier (1835), it should be placed into the group of T. goudoti (= T. platyces) – T. grossa – T. orbicollis, and not in that of T. peiroleri – T. levis – T. incerta.</p> <p>In addition, it does not correspond to the species coming from Cartagena, supposed original locality. The syntype from Paris is a specimen corresponding to the unpublished T. kochi sp. nov. (= T. incerta ssp. pseudolaevis Koch, specimens from Malaga), typical of the Costa del Sol, but not of Cartagena. As consequence of this historical confusion, all the specimens in litt. of Rambur, tagged “ T. laevis Solier, Andalus Rambur ” (MNHUB) corresponds to the previously mentioned unpublished species. Rosenhauer (1856) dragged the erroneous record of Malaga; Kraatz (1865), considering authentic the syntypes of Paris and comparing them with material from Cartagena, realized that they are different, considering the locality of T. levis Sol. wrong. Hence, he described T. sublaevis Kraatz, 1865 with specimens from Cartagena, and cited Andalusia, specifically Malaga, as the true origin of Tentyria levis Solier, making a description of this taxon (Kraatz 1865) that does not agree with that of Solier (1835). Reitter (1900) followed the Kraatz’s criterion placing T. “ laevis ” in group 3 of his key, next to T. platyceps Stev., which corresponds to the Tentyria species with transverse gular groove, very deep and well developed. Koch (1944a) realized that the authors who preceded him (Reitter, Kraatz, Rosenhauer, Rambur,...) had confused T. levis Solier with an unpublished taxon, which he described as T. incerta ssp. pseudolaevis. However, Koch considering Tentyria sublaevis Kraatz synonymy of T. levis Solier, guided only by the typical locality that Solier cited, without considering that the specimens that inhabit Cartagena do not fit the description of Tentyria levis Solier. Therefore, T. sublaevis Kraatz should be considered a valid species to assign the specimens from Cartagena.</p> <p>In the MNHUB, there is a specimen labelled “ T. laevis Sol., Carthag. Dej. ” which exactly matches the description of T. levis Solier (1835), and therefore different from the specimens coming from Cartagena (T. sublaevis Kraatz). Probably, this is the lost type of Solier because it is very unlikely that there were two specimens from two different collectors with the same mistake in the label of locality. T. levis Solier was cited by Eschscholtz (1831) and later included in the Catalogue of the collection of Dejean (1833) “Laevis. Solier – Hisp. Orient.”, before Solier’s description (1835), which indicates that this taxon was transferred to Solier for study.</p> <p>On the other hand, comparing this specimen with others belonging to T. peiroleri and T. incerta Solier from Granada and Almería, respectively, they are practically indistinguishable. The same occurs when the descriptions of T. peioleri, T. levis and T. incerta are compared. This implies that Solier (1835) described three different species with variable specimens belonging to the same specific taxon. Hence, T. levis Solier must be considered a synonym of T. peiroleri ssp. incerta Solier, and the Carthagena provenance is a labeling mistake.</p> <p>Geographic distribution: Known from the Almería littoral and nearby mountains: Sª de Gádor and Sª de Alhamilla.</p> <p>Designation of Lectotype of Tentyria incerta Solier, 1835, present designation:</p> <p>Given the confusion about this taxon since its description and after detecting two false syntypes next to the type described by Solier (1835) we consider necessary to designate Lectotype to the specimen that carries the following labels: T. incerta Sol., Barb ? (old rectangular label) / Incerta (typical label of Solier) / Tentyria incerta Sol., Barba. T., Du 64 (rounded label) / TYPE (red letter) / MUSEUM PARIS, COLL. DE MARSEUL, (Fig. 239).</p> <p>Designation of Lectotype of Tentyria incerta ssp. pseudolaevis Koch, 1944, present designation:</p> <p>In the NHMB there is, at least, one specimen labelled “ Typus ” coming from Málaga (described above), which cannot be considered type, since Koch (1944a) explicitly indicated the typical series (4♁♁ and 4♀♀, Sierra Gádor), together with other specimens from other localities in the province of Almería. For this reason, we believe it necessary to designate one of the specimens bearing the following label Lectotype: Sierra Gádor, Prov. Almería, G. Frey, C. Koch, V. 1943 (Fig. 240a). The other specimens in the typical series are designated Paralectotypes (Fig. 240b).</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FFAD5E62F9A3FA75D416FA29	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FFAF5E65F9A3F9D8D1A1FA70.text	8F6B0B50FFAF5E65F9A3F9D8D1A1FA70.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria prolixa Rosenhauer 1856	<div><p>Tentyria prolixa Rosenhauer, 1856 stat. rest. (Figs. 19, 53, 87, 124, 171, 205, 252, 253)</p> <p>Tentyria prolixa Rosenhauer, 1856: 187.</p> <p>Tentyria incerta sensu Kraatz 1865: 136 (Tentyria frigida Rambur in litt.), Reitter 1900: 175, Koch 1944a: 231, Español 1960: 410.</p> <p>Tentyria angusticollis sensu Rosenhauer ?</p> <p>Types examined: The type of Tentyria prolixa Rosenhauer has not been located, nor documented by any author since its description, nor is it catalogued in any museum.</p> <p>Additional material: Historical material: frigida Rambur,Andalus Rambur / 45577 / Hist.-Coll. (Coleoptera), 45577, Tentyria frigida Ramb., Andalus. Ramb., Zool. Mus. Berlin (1♀?, NMHUB) (Fig. 253). Two false syntypes of Tentyria incerta Solier carrying the following labels: incerta Kr., Type / Kraatz, 866 (square, small label) / TYPE (red label) / MUSÉUM PARIS; Tentyria incerta Sol., Andal. “Titf? 86” (?) (rounded label) / MUSEUM PARIS, Coll. Solier, COLL. DE MARSEUL, 2842-90 / Tentyria incerta Solier, Type? /? SYNTYPE (red label). Tentyria incerta / Coté de Huéjar / Rab. r and L.Bl., juillet 1879 / Coll. Peyerimhoff (4 exx, MNHN). Tentyria prolixa var. Bearing the following labels: T. prolixa / Lanjarón, P. Arcas / MNCN, Madrid (1♁, MNCN).</p> <p>Granada: Sierra Nevada, 1500 m 14.VI.1935, O. Lundblad leg. (1 ex, CJF); Sierra Nevada, 2650 m, 13.V.1977, B. Gustafsson leg. (1 ex, CJF); idem, (old road), 1700 m, 8.VII.2004, J.L. Bujalance leg. (5♁♁, CJLB); idem, 2600 m, 8.VII.2004, Yeray Monasterio leg. (1 ex, CACT); idem (universitary shelter), 11.V.2005, A. Castro Tovar leg. (2♁♁ and 2♀♀, CACT); idem, 2300-2400 m, 4.VI.1997, Sánchez-Piñero leg. (9♁♁ and 4♀♀, CFSP / 3♁♁ and 2♀♀, CJF); Capileira, 30.VI.1973, Tentyria incerta Sol., P. Ardoin det., J. de Ferrer leg. (1♁, CJLB); Güejar Sierra, 30S-VG6605, 2600m, 25.VI.1996, nº 522 and 519, J. P. G. de la Vega leg. (1♁ and 1♀, CJJL); Aldeire, X.1955, J. Vives leg. (MCNB); Puerto de la Ragua, Almería, 28.IX.2009, Tentyria prolixa Rosenh. var. J.L. Bujalance det., A. Castro Tovar leg. (3♁♁, CACT); Idem, 1.V.2010, J.C. Martínez leg. (CJF).</p> <p>Diagnosis: Elongated body 13–16 mm length (Fig. 205). Smooth, black, shiny, and finely punctured tegument. Head (Fig. 19) with the maximum width in the eyes, which are convex and with the temples converging back; fine but dense punctures; elongated and almost rounded epistome, rarely triangular or pointed in the middle; narrow, deep, and well delimited laterally gular groove, but no in the middle (Fig. 53).</p> <p>Scarcely convex and slightly transverse pronotum (Fig. 87), fine and densely punctured, like the head, the sides are openly curved towards the apex and narrower towards the base, with a slightly sub-cordiform aspect, rear angles obtuse and hardly indicated, thickly bordered base, somewhat sinuate on the sides and slightly curved in the middle; well punctured prosternum and propleurae; the prosternal apophysis (Fig. 124) is commonly rounded at the apex and barely protruding between the procoxae. Graceful legs, male protibia long and sinuous in the inner edge. Oval narrowed elytra, convex and very elongated respect to the pronotum (Fig. 205), at least in males (at least three times the length of pronotum), smooth and very finely punctured, with the base generally cut in arc, adjusting to the base of the pronotum. Large and robust aedeagus, about 4 mm on average long (Fig. 171); the parameres slightly longer than the phallobase.</p> <p>Comments: T. prolixa Rosenhauer, described from Sierra Nevada (Granada), has been misinterpreted by all authors since its description because the material type was no available. Kraatz (1865) considered this species valid although it was unknown to him and confused it with T. incerta Solier, as it has been already above mentioned. Reitter (1900) cited this species from Andalusia, placing it next to T. gaditana Rosenhauer. Koch (1944a) maintained the confusion of Kraatz (1865), adding another error to when establishing the synonymy between T. prolixa Rosenhauer and T. platyceps Steven, despite recognizing the discrepancy in the description of both species. Español (1960), Viñolas (1986) and Viñolas &amp; Cartagena (2005) followed Koch’s criteria.</p> <p>In short, T. prolixa Rosenhauer is a valid species (= T. incerta sensu Kraatz Fig. 252) and not a synonym of T. platyceps Steven, coexisting species in Sierra Nevada.</p> <p>Geographic distribution: Only known from the provinces of Granada and Almeria: Sierra Nevada and adjacent areas.</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FFAF5E65F9A3F9D8D1A1FA70	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FFA85E64F9A3F9EBD590FA7C.text	8F6B0B50FFA85E64F9A3F9EBD590FA7C.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria sublaevis subsp. sublaevis Kraatz 1865	<div><p>Tentyria sublaevis ssp. sublaevis Kraatz, 1865 (Figs. 20, 54, 88, 125, 172, 206, 255)</p> <p>Tentyria sublaevis Kraatz, 1865: 144; Reitter 1900: 171, Fuente 1934: 30, Gebien 1937: 629.</p> <p>Tentyria laevis Solier sensu Koch 1944a: 229, Español 1960: 406, Viñolas 1986: 104, Viñolas &amp; Cartagena, 2005: 82, 276 (specimens from Murcia, Alicante and Albacete?), Grimm &amp; Aistleitner 2009:71 (part.).</p> <p>Tentyria levis Solier sensu L̂bl &amp; Smetana 2008: 206, Martínez 2018: 58.</p> <p>Types examined: Syntype: sublaevis Kr. / sublaevis mi. Andalus. Frend/ sublaevis Kr. Type det. Schuster / Syntypus / coll. DEI Müncheberg / SDEI Coleoptera # 300632.</p> <p>This specimen of T. sublaevis Kraatz (Fig. 255), catalogued syntype (Gaedike 1986) cannot been considered as such because Kraatz (1865) only mentioned three syntypes from “Carthagena (Handschuch u. A.)” which hitherto have not been found. However, this specimen, labelled as type, belonging to the Kraatz collection, fits his description (Kraatz 1865), and does not present substantial differences with respect to the specimens from Cartagena and neighbouring areas.</p> <p>Additional material: Historical material: One specimen bearing the following labels: handwritten label “ Carthagena ” / sublaevis Kraatz det. Schuster (1♁, NRMS); two specimens with one handwritten old label “ Hispania ” (1♁ and 1♀, NRMS).</p> <p>Alicante: Los Arenales del Sol - El Alted, 20.VIII.1996, nov. de Ferrer leg. (1♀, CJdeF in CJLB); Guardamar, 15.V.2000, A.C. Luque leg. (4♁♁ and 5♀♀, CACL); idem, VI.1997, idem (1♁, idem); Rojales, 15.VI.2001, idem (2 exx, idem); Laguna Bonmati, 13.6.1996, M.C. Cartagena leg. (1 ex, idem); Isla de Tabarca, 27.5.2001, A. C. Luque leg. (1 ex, idem); Benidorm, 5.V.1982, J. Ferrer leg. (2♁♁ and 1♀, CJF); Torrevieja, G. Schramm leg., (1♁, NRMS); La Encina – Albacete (Alicante, not Albacete), sublaevis, (1♁, NRMS). Murcia: VIII.1972, Mª Luisa Mariné leg. (1 ex, CJF); Sª Carrasco, 25.III.1957, Tentyria laevis, Español det., Palau leg. (2 exx, CJF); La Manga del Mar Menor, V.1980 (1 ex, CJF); Águilas, 13.IV.2008, J.C. Martínez leg. (ex, CJCM); idem, 30. X.2010, idem (3♁♁ and 1♀, idem); Albanilla, 9.VII.2006, idem (1♁ and 4♀♀, idem); Alcantarilla, 26.I.2002, idem (2♁♁ and 3♀♀, idem); Casas Nuevas, 6.IV.2011, idem (3♁♁ and 2♀♀, idem); Fortuna, 15.VII.2006, idem (1♁ and 2♀♀, idem); Garres, 2.III.2001, idem (1♀, idem); Jumilla, La Alquería, 20.III.2007, J. C. Martínez leg. (idem); idem, 24.VI.2002, idem (2♀♀, idem); Mazarrón, 17. X.2010, idem (3♁♁ and 5♀♀, idem); idem, 25.VI.2011, idem (4♀♀, idem).</p> <p>Diagnosis: Black body, slight bright, oblong, smooth tegument, slightly convex, weakly punctate (Fig. 206); small head (Fig. 20), somewhat convex eyes, slightly backward converging temples, sub-rounded epistome, with the sides sinuate, provided with a tooth hardly perceptible, gular groove (Fig. 54) consisting in a depression in the middle, and often two lateral notch poorly bounded; moderately convex and slightly transverse pronotum (Fig. 88), more in females, finely punctured, the sides curved and commonly narrowed towards the base, obtuse and not well noticeable rear angles, particularly in males; nearly straight base.</p> <p>The prosternal apophyses (Fig. 125) non-exceeding the procoxae and rounded at the end; graceful protibiae and with the inner margin sinuate in males; those of the females hardly different and relatively graceful compared with those the congeners; usually smooth elytra, exceptionally with marks of stria or roughness, variably oval elongated, barely narrowed towards the humeri that are rounded, the base straight and completely margined, almost imperceptible punctures, generally flattened or even somewhat depressed in the suture; smooth abdominal sternites, brighter like the ventral surface of the body, and with the imperceptible punctures, the last sternite truncated at the end; aedeagus (Fig. 172) with slightly fusiform parameres, almost as wide and barely longer than the phallobase.</p> <p>Comments: T. sublaevis Kraatz, described from Cartagena, is a valid species, and not a synonym of T. levis Solier (= T. peiroleri ssp. incerta Solier stat. nov.). Koch (1944a) established this synonymy supported on the identical provenance of the types of both species (see comments of T. peiroleri ssp. incerta Solier).</p> <p>Geographical distribution: species described from Cartagena, spread by the Levantine region, known in the coast as in the inland of the provinces of Alicante and Murcia. All existing records since Koch (1944a), referred to “ T. laevis ”, included in the distribution area above indicated, must refer to T. sublaevis. The remaining records should be disregarded until verified, due to the historical confusion with other taxa already argued.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FFA85E64F9A3F9EBD590FA7C	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FFA95E67F9A3FA23D30BF8AE.text	8F6B0B50FFA95E67F9A3FA23D30BF8AE.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria sublaevis subsp. cognata Bujalance & Ferrer & Cárdenas 2023	<div><p>Tentyria sublaevis cognata ssp. nov. (Figs. 21, 55, 89, 126, 147, 173, 207)</p> <p>Type material: Holotype (♁): Sra. de Baza, Granada, 20.VI.1980, B. Lassalle leg., (NHRS). Paratypes: same labels than the Type (3♀♀ CJF); Barranco del Espartal, Baza (Granada), 30SWG2854, 7.V.1990, F. S. Piñero leg. (1♁ CFSP); idem, 13.V.1990, idem (1♁ CFSP); idem, A5 21.VII.1991 (1♀ CFSP); idem, A3 21.IV.1991 (1♁ CFSP); idem, 17.III.1990 (1♁ CFSP); idem, A10 8.IV.1991 (1♁ CFSP); idem, 31.III.1990 (1♁ CFSP); idem, 31.V.1990 (1♀ CFSP); idem, A3 21.VII.1991 (1♀ CFSP); idem, 16.IX.1990 (1♀ CFSP); idem, A3 7.VII.1991 (1♀ CFSP); idem, A12 8.IV.1991 (1♀ CFSP); idem, C7 21.VII.1991 (1♀, CFSP); idem, 11.III.1990 (2♀♀ CFSP); idem, B12 24.VI.1991 (1♀ CFSP); idem, A5 24.VI.1991 (1♀ CFSP); idem, 1.VI.1990 (1♁ CFSP); idem, 26.IV.1992 (2♀♀ CFSP); P.N. Sierra de Huétor, Cerro de Orduña, Iznalloz, Granada, 1940 m, 2.X.2010, A. Castro Tovar leg. (3♁♁ and 3♀♀ CACT); Camino del cortijo de los Llanos, Galera, Cúllar, Granada, 6.IV.2005, A. Castro Tovar (1♁ CACT); Huéscar, Granada, Escalera leg., 1900 / peirolerii Sol. det. Schuster / gaditana / Tentyria peiroleri Sol. F. Español det. / Museum Paris, 1978, Coll. P. Ardoin (1 ex, MNHN); La Sagra, Granada, 2.VII.1976, J. de Ferrer leg. / Tentyria laevis Sol. det. P. Leo 1982, (1♀, CJLB); La Sagra, Granada, J. Ardois leg. (1♀ MNCN); La Sagra, 8.VI.1986, P. Bonneau leg. (♁♁? and ♀♀? CFSP); Puebla de D. Fadrique, 1900, Escalera leg. (1 ex, MNCN).</p> <p>Description: Holotype (fig. 207). Size 18.2 mm length and 7.8 mm of maximum width at elytra. Elongate, black, smooth, and shiny body, especially in the ventral side.</p> <p>Head (Fig. 21): maximum width (3.2 mm) at the eyes, which are slightly convex, with conspicuous and well developed supraorbital folds, slightly convergent and sinuated; convergent backwards temples; margin of epistome openly curved and showing a barely developed tooth; frontal punctures dense and conspicuous, but not confluent, the punctures are round and smaller in the epistome and genae; transverse gular groove (Fig. 55), clearly surpassing the base of mentum and conformed by central depression not very deep and feebly delimited at each side.</p> <p>Pronotum (Fig. 89): convex moderately transverse, 1.38 times as wide as long, the maximum of width at the middle (5.5 mm broad, 4 mm long), sides slightly more curved towards the base than towards the apex; sub-right base, posterior angles obtuse, inconspicuous dorsally. Punctures fine, but conspicuous, moderately dense but not as deep as in the head. Prosternal apophyses curved at the end, but not surpassing the level of procoxae, similar to the type form (Fig. 126). Prosternum and propleura are smooth and shiny, with fine but conspicuous punctures. Not very graceful and sub-right male protibiae, slightly sinuated inner margin.</p> <p>Convex and smooth elytra, with extremely fine punctures, 2.85 times longer than pronotum, oval elongated, about 1.45 times longer than wide; the maximum of width at middle; rounded humeri with the base entirely margined and straight; in dorsal view the elytra become feebly slope from middle to apex, which is acuminated because the prolongation of the upper margin of the epipleura, surpassing the anal sternite (Fig. 147); smooth and shiny urosternites, the punctures hardly visible.</p> <p>Broad and robust aedeagus (Fig. 173), 4.2 mm long, the parameres about 1.1 times longer than the phallobase.</p> <p>Paratypes: Size 14.3–18 mm length (16.1 mm average) and 5.7–8 mm of maximum width at elytra (6.66 mm average).</p> <p>Pronotum convex and somewhat transverse, 1.25–1.39 times wider than long (1.32 times in average: 1.30 times in males and 1.33 in females), with the maximum at the middle (4.2–5.5 mm wide, 3.2–3.9 mm length).</p> <p>Elytra 2.61–3.34 times longer than the pronotum (2.8 times in average), oval-elongated, 1.43–1.63 times longer than wide (average 1.50 times).</p> <p>Large Aedeagus 3.4–4.2 mm length (3.93 mm average); parameres 1.05–1.17 times (1.10 average) longer than the phallobase.</p> <p>Females often more robust, more transverse pronotum, with the sides more curved; protibiae somewhat shorter, robust, and straight in the inner side; elytra longer respect to the pronotum and more narrowed in the apex.</p> <p>Variability of the Paratypes: Variability mostly concerns the size, the shape of the epistome, with tooth present or absent, the intensity of the cephalic and pronotum punctures, the apex of elytra sometimes acuminated, sometimes conspicuously spiny.</p> <p>Differential diagnosis: T. sublaevis cognata ssp. nov. differs of T. sublaevis Kraatz f. t. in the following features: larger average size; broader head, not so convex eyes, cephalic and pronotal punctures somewhat more evident; more delimited and transverse gular groove (more superficial in T. sublaevis f.t.); usually not so transverse pronotum, at least in females, with openly curved sides, particularly on the anterior third, less rounded anterior angles; more robust male protibiae. More elongated elytra, with apex more elongated, spiniform or more acuminated by the extension of the upper margin with respect to the lower one of the epipleure; longer, more robust, and more acuminated aedeagus. These differences are more pronounced comparing with T. sublaevis Kraatz f. t. with coastal distribution.</p> <p>T. sublaevis cognata ssp. nov. differs from T. peiroleri Solier in the larger average size, shiner tegument, finer and feeble punctures; not triangular or sub-triangular epistome, less prominent epistomal tooth; more transverse and not so convex pronotum. Longer elytra, never sub-parallel or stubby, not even in the females; with apex more elongated, spiniform or more acuminated by the extension of the upper margin with respect to the lower one of the epipleure; larger aedeagus with the parameres curved, non-parallel and more apically acuminated.</p> <p>Geographic distribution: Intra-Betic depression, particularly, in the zone of Hoya de Baza and surroundings in the province of Granada.</p> <p>Etymology: The specific epithet “ cognata ”, refers to the narrow relationship of this species with other congeners, which has led to the taxonomic confusion.</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FFA95E67F9A3FA23D30BF8AE	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FFAB5E69F9A3FF52D08CFAED.text	8F6B0B50FFAB5E69F9A3FF52D08CFAED.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria kochi Bujalance & Ferrer & Cárdenas 2023	<div><p>Tentyria kochi sp. nov. (Figs. 22, 56, 90, 127, 174, 208, 256, 257)</p> <p>Tentyria laevis Solier sensu Rosenhauer 1856: 186, Reitter 1900: 175.</p> <p>Tentyria levis Solier sensu Kraatz 1865: 135.</p> <p>Tentyria peiroleri Solier sensu Rosenhauer 1856: 186 ?</p> <p>Tentyria incerta ssp. pseudolaevis Koch, 1944a: 231-233 (specimens from Málaga and Cádiz), Español 1960: 410.</p> <p>Tentyria incerta sensu Viñolas &amp; Cartagena 2005: 84 ?</p> <p>Tentyria (Tentyria) pseudolaevis ? sensu L̂bl &amp; Smetana 2008: 206, Martínez 2018: 58.</p> <p>Type material: Holotype (♁): Estepona (Málaga), Hispania, 6.III.1982, J de Ferrer leg. / Tentyria gaditana Rosh., A. Viñolas det. 1984 (MNCN). Paratypes: similar labels than the Type (2♁♁ and 1♀ CJLB); idem / Tentyria incerta ssp. pseudolaevis Koch., det. P. Leo 1983 (2♀♀ CJLB); idem, 24. V.1980, idem / idem (1♀ CJLB); Manilva (Málaga), 23.III.1975, idem / idem, P. Ardoin det. 1975 (1♀ CJLB); idem, Spain, III.1975, E. Taminiaux leg. / idem (1♁ CJLB); Málaga, J. Ardois leg. / TYPUS, Tentyria incerta ssp. pseudolaevis nov. C. KOCH / laevis / Winkler / Sammlung, Adr. Schuster (1♁, NHMB); Tentyria laevis Sol., Espn., T, Du 64 / Laevis / MUSEUM PARIS, coll. Solier, COLL DE MARSEUL, 2842-90 / TYPE (1♁ MNHN); Fuengirola, “Parque Sohail” (Málaga), 18.IX.2003, Alejandro Castro Tovar leg. (1♀ CJLB, 1 ex, CACT); Fuengirola (Málaga), 13.IV.2001, idem (1 ex CACT); idem, 15.XI.1962, S. Aberg leg. (1♁ and 1♀ NHRS); idem, 11.XI.1962, idem (1♀, idem). idem, Spanien, 3-16/165 (1 ex, NHRS); Nerja “Barranco Calailla” (Málaga), 26.III.1994, Bastazo &amp; Vela leg. (1♁ CB&amp;V); idem, J. Baraud leg. (1 ex, MNHN); Antequera (Málaga), 13.II.1994, idem (1 ♀, CB&amp;V); Marbella (Málaga), IV.1966, Palau leg. (2 exx, CJF); idem, IV.1966, A. Sundholm leg. (1♀ CJF); Otívar “Cerro chupa” (Granada), 20.V.1987, C. Besnard leg. (3 exx, CJF); Cerro salchicha 1400 m, 0471300 9074953, Haza del Lino, Sª de la Contraviesa (Granada), 7.I.2007, A. Castro Tovar leg. (1♁ and 1♀ CJLB); idem 1600 m, idem (Granada) 23.IV.2010, idem (2♁♁ and 1♀ CACT); Lanjarón (Granada), VI.2008, idem (1♀ CACT); idem, J. Baraud leg. (10 exx, MNHN); Trevélez, 1476 m (Granada), 15.IV.1994, nº 5021/249B y nº 5020/249A, Juan Pablo G. de la Vega leg. (1♁ and 1♀ CJJL); Sorvilán (Sierra Nevada), 800 m (7 exx, MNHN); Andalus / laevis / Naturhistorika Riksmuseet Stockholm (1 exs, NHRS); Andalusia / Dohrn / idem (1 ex, NHRS); Hispan / Tarnier? / idem (1 ex, NHRS); laevis Solier, Andalus Ramb. / 45542 / Hist.-Coll. (Coleoptera) Nr. 45542, Tentyria laevis Sol., Andalus., Rambur, Zool. Mus. Berlin (6 exx, MNHUB).</p> <p>Description: Holotype (Fig. 208): Elongated body; black and micro-granulated tegument, dorsally little bright. Size: 14.5 mm long and 5.5 mm maximum width in the elytra.</p> <p>Head (Fig. 22) with the sides non-parallel; maximum width (2.7 mm) at the eyes and at the genae that widen from the union with the eye towards the apex; large eyes (0.5 mm length) and convex; well-marked supraorbital folds; back converging temples; sub-triangular epistome, forward expanded and provide with a well-developed median tooth; fine and dense but not confluent punctures; very broad and deep gular groove (Fig. 56). Filiform antennae, about five mm length, surpassing the base of the pronotum, with the 1 st antennomere robust, the 2 nd small and barely longer than wide, the 3 rd 3.5 times longer than wide and similar in length than the 4 th and 5 th together, from 4 th (two times longer than wide) to 8 th longer than wide but progressively decreasing in length, 9 th almost as long as wide, 10 th slightly transverse and 11 th conical and slightly longer than wide; pubescence of the antenna slightly gilded and long, of approximately 0.1mm length from the 4 th antennomere, and somewhat shorter in the first three ones.</p> <p>Barely transverse pronotum (Fig. 90), 1.2 times wider than long, with the maximum width in the middle (4.1 mm wide and 3.4 mm long); very convex, sub-globous, with the sides in closed curve, somewhat more towards the base than at the apex, sub-straight base, obtuse and not marked rear angles; puncture very noticeable but somewhat finer than in head; prosternal apophysis (Fig. 127) of parallel sides, widely margined and with the extreme rounded and not surpassing the procoxae; propleurae and prosternum smooth and somewhat brighter, with small but well noticeable puncture; protibiae graceful and with the inner edge very slightly sinuate, almost the same size as the mesotibiae, and approximately 1/4 shorter than the metatibiae; graceful tarsus, as the tibias, and with the tarsomeres provided with thorny bristles of reddish- brown colour, very well developed as in the tibiae.</p> <p>Oval-elongated elytra, 1.6 times longer than wide, with the maximum width in the middle, almost equally narrowed in the base than in the apex; convex and with the surface very little rough and punctures very fine and spaced; 2.6 times longer than the pronotum; rounded humeri; straight and completely margined base. Urosternites smooth and with very fine punctures.</p> <p>Aedeagus of 3.3 mm length; parameres 1.13 times longer than the phalobase, which is ovate and wider than these (Fig. 174).</p> <p>Paratypes: Size of 13.2–17.1 mm length (15 mm average, 14.6 males and 15.4 females), 5.1–6.8 mm maximum width in elytra (6.1 mm average, 5.8 mm males and 6.3 mm females).</p> <p>Pronotum slightly transverse, 1.1–1.3 times wider than length (1.2 times average in males and females), with the maximum width in the middle (3.6–5.0 mm wide and 3.1–3.8 mm length).</p> <p>Elytra 2.4–2.9 times longer than the pronotum (average 2.6 times). A little ovate and elongated, 1.4–1.6 times longer than wide (average 1.5 times).</p> <p>Aedeagus 3.2–3.6 mm length, (3.4 mm average), with the parameres 1–1.1 times (1.06 average) longer than the phallobase.</p> <p>Females usually slightly larger, with protibiae somewhat more robust and straight on their inner edge; antennae shorter, non-exceeding the base of the pronotum.</p> <p>Variability of Paratypes: Differences have been mainly observed in size, in the shape of pronotum varying from subcircular to sub-quadrangular; the shape of the epistome, (which in two of them is more rounded and with the tooth reduced); and in the depth and width of the gular groove.</p> <p>Differential diagnosis: T. kochi sp. nov. is a species geographically and morphologically close to T. peiroleri Solier and T. prolixa Rosenhauer, sharing diverse characters, such as the general shape of the body, but clearly differing from these by the unmistakable conformation of the gular groove only resembling to that of T. platyceps Steven and T. grossa basalis Schaufuss; the punctures of the elytra, greater, denser and clearly appreciable on the dull surface, brilliant in the other species; by the shape of the head, wider in front of the eyes and the bigger epistomal tooth; and lastly, for its greater average size. In comparison, T. peiroleri f.t., shows most transverse and less convex pronotum, particularly in females, which have a commonly chubby appearance. In addition, it is different from T. peiroleri ssp. incerta Solier by the rounded ending of the prosternal apophysis, not prolonged beyond the procoxas. Likewise, T. kochi is also distinguishable from T. prolixa Rosenhauer of by the shape of the pronotum, more convex and subcircular; the elytra less ovate-elongated and the less graceful legs.</p> <p>Comments: T. kochi sp. nov. is an unpublished species that has been historically confused with T. levis Solier and T. incerta pseudolaevis Koch, which are in the MNHN and NHMB respectively (Figs. 256, 257) specimens catalogued and labelled as types of both taxa.</p> <p>Geographic distribution: Species spread in the Mediterranean littoral and nearby areas of the interior of the southeast of the Iberian Peninsula, from Granada to Cádiz, but especially in the province of Malaga.</p> <p>Etymology: Species devoted “in memoriam” of Dr. Carl Koch, for his important contribution to the knowledge of the Iberian Darkling beetles.</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FFAB5E69F9A3FF52D08CFAED	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FFA45E6BF9A3FAA5D0E0FF51.text	8F6B0B50FFA45E6BF9A3FAA5D0E0FF51.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria castrotovari Bujalance & Ferrer & Cárdenas 2023	<div><p>Tentyria castrotovari sp. nov. (Figs. 23, 57, 91, 128, 175, 209)</p> <p>Type material: Holotype (♁): Campos de Hernán Perea, Santiago de la Espada (Jaén) 27.IV.2002, A. Castro Tovar leg. (CACT). Paratypes: idem, Sª de Cazorla, Segura and las Villas, 3.VII.2010, idem (3 ♁♁ and 1♀ CACT); idem, 23.I.2010, idem (3♀♀ CACT); idem, 3.VII.2010, idem (8 exx, CACT); Rambla Seca, Sierra de Cazorla (Jaén) 5.V.2008, idem (3♁♁ CACT and 1♁ CJLB); Pinos Negros, Pico Banderillas, Sierra de Cazorla (Jaén) 27.IV.2002, idem (1♀ CJLB); La Pandera, Los Villares 19.VI.2010, idem (1♁ and 1♀ CACT); Cima de La Pandera, Valdepeñas, Jaén 11.VI.2011, idem (2 exx, CACT); idem, 27.V.2012, M.A. López leg. (3 exx, CACT).</p> <p>Description: Holotype (Fig. 209). Elongated body; black, smooth, and shiny tegument. Size 15.2 mm long, 6 mm maximum width at the elytra.</p> <p>Head (Fig. 23) with the maximum width (2.8 mm) in the eyes that are slightly convex; not very noticeable supraorbital folds; converging backwards temples; parallel genae, narrowing towards the epistome which that is sub-rounded or almost truncated, something projected forward and without median tooth; fine, clearly observable, and non-confluent punctures; transverse gular groove, consisting of a medium depression, not delimited at rear, and two deep and well-defined lateral notches (Fig. 57). Long and filiform antenae, reaching but not surpassing the base of pronotum, with the 1 st antennomere sturdy, the 2 nd small and barely longer than wide, the 3 rd 3.25 times longer than wide and similar in length than the 4 th and 5 th together, from 4 th (twice as long as wide) to 8 th longer than wide but decreasing progressively in length, 9 th almost equal in length that wide, 10 th slightly transverse and 11 th conical and slightly longer than wide.</p> <p>Convex and slightly transverse pronotum (Fig. 91), 1.28 times wider than long with the maximum width in the middle (4.5 mm wide, 3.5 mm long), sides in open curve from the basis to the apex, which is almost straight in dorsal view, barely wider than the base. This last one is slightly rounded and with the margin separated from the disc by a deep and well-defined groove and somewhat sinuate before the posterior angles which are obtuse and scarcely indicated. Small but very noticeable punctures somewhat dense, like those of the head. Prosternal apophysis (Fig. 128) with the end rounded in ventral view, not overcoming the procoxae in lateral view; smooth and somewhat brighter propleurae and prosternum, with small but well noticeable punctures; protibiae long and graceful, with the inner edge somewhat sinuous and curved close to the apex.</p> <p>Convex and smooth elytra and with fine punctures; 2.7 times longer than the pronotum, in elongated oval, 1.5 times longer than wide, with the maximum width in the middle, equally narrowed in the base than in the apex, this somewhat acuminate and commonly divergent, but not spiny and hardly prolonged beyond the last urosternite; rounded humeri with the base fully margined and slightly curved; urosternites smooth and with very fine punctures.</p> <p>Large aedeagus (Fig. 175), 4.3 mm in length, with the parameres 1.32 times longer than the phallobase and the sides slightly sinuous.</p> <p>Paratypes: Size of 13.3–17 mm length (15.4 mm average), 5.7–7.2 mm maximum width in elytra (6.2 mm average).</p> <p>Pronotum convex and slightly transverse, 1.22–1.35 times wider than long (1.28 times average: 1.26 times in males and 1.32 times in females), with the maximum width in the middle (4.3–5.2 mm wide and 3.3–4 mm length).</p> <p>Elytra 2.63–2.9 times longer than the pronotum (average 2.77 times), oval-elongated, 1.4–1.58 times longer than wide (average 1.48 times).</p> <p>Aedeagus large, 4–4.5 mm length, (4.25 mm average), with the parameres 1.1–1.37 times (1.25 average) longer than the phallobase.</p> <p>Females with rounder head, and more convex eyes; pronotum more transverse and, usually, with the sides closer curved; protibiae shorter and straight in the inner edge; and the elytra less narrow at the humeri. More robust appearance.</p> <p>Variability of paratypes: Some paratypes show the punctation of head and pronotum denser and more noticeable. Other specimens have the end of elytra more elongated and narrowed, but not spiniform.</p> <p>Differential diagnosis: Morphologically quite similar to T. prolixa Rosenhauer, but differs in the larger average size, more robust appearance; shorter and wider oval elytra, unnoticeable punctures and sharp and divergent end; the base of pronotum is less curved and sinuous before the posterior angles; less marked punctures; less graceful protibiae; larger aedeagus, with the parameres clearly longest than the phallobase.</p> <p>Respect to T. sublaevis Kraatz, is different in the shape of head, and in the lack of epistomial tooth; less transverse pronotum; the gular groove better marked; oval more regular elytra, non-spiniform in comparison with T. sublaevis ssp. cognata nov., and parameres of the aedeagus clearly longer than the phallobase.</p> <p>It is different of T. peiroleri Solier in the bigger average size; somewhat more smooth and shiny tegument; shape of the head and the absence of epistomal tooth, gular groove usually wider and deeper; less convex pronotum, less densely punctured and usually something more transverse, at least more than T. peiroleri ssp. incerta; prosternal apophysis not surpassing the procoxae; elytrae with the imperceptible punctures, in a more regular oval; sides nonsubparallel or plump, not even in the females; and particularly by the aedeagus, much larger and with the parameters clearly longer than the phallobase.</p> <p>Finally, it differs from T. kochi sp. nov. in the tegument somewhat smoother and brighter; the shape of the head, with the epistome never triangular and unarmed; more convex eyes; poorly defined in the middle throat groove and never so wide and deep; less convex pronotum, never sub-globose, brighter, and less densely punctured; elytra with imperceptible punctures; much larger aedeagus and with the parameters clearly longer than the phallobase.</p> <p>Geographic distribution: This species has only been collected in the type’s localities in Cazorla, Segura and the Villas Natural Park (Jaén).</p> <p>Etymology: Species named after the collector Mr. Alejandro Castro Tovar, entomologist from Jaen.</p> <p>Group of T. gaditana</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FFA45E6BF9A3FAA5D0E0FF51	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FFA65E6AF9A3FF1AD39FFC0E.text	8F6B0B50FFA65E6AF9A3FF1AD39FFC0E.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria gaditana ? Rosenhauer 1856	<div><p>Tentyria gaditana Rosenhauer, 1856 (Figs. 24, 58, 92, 129, 176, 210, 241, 258)</p> <p>Tentyria gaditana Rosenhauer, 1856: 186; Tentyria gaditana Rambur in litt. Dejean 1837: 204, Kraatz 1865: 143, Reitter 1900: 171 (specimens from Spain), Gebien 1910: 69, Fuente 1934: 30, Koch 1944a: 227, Español 1960: 407, Viñolas 1986: 103, Viñolas &amp; Cartagena 2005: 357 a, L̂bl &amp; Smetana 2008: 206, Ferrer &amp; Holston 2009: 32, Fig. 4 (Non Tentyria levis Solier), Bujalance et al. 2016: 354, Martínez 2018:5 8, Iwan &amp; L̂bl 2020: 249.</p> <p>Types examined: Three syntypes from MNHN, bearing the following labels: gaditana Rosh., Type, Espagne donné par Rosenhauer / 225 / MUSEUM PARIS, COLL. CHATANY 1914 / TYPE / prolixa Rosh. (Fig. 241); MUSEUM PARIS, COLL. CHATANY 1914 / TYPE / SYNTYPE; gaditana Rosh. / Type Ros. / Coll. Desbr. / MUSEUM PARIS, 1922, COLL. L. BEDEL / TYPE.</p> <p>Additional material: Historical material: Two specimens belonging to the Rambur’s Historical collection NMHUB, carrying the following labels: handwritten old label “ gaditana Ramb., andalus Ramb.” / 45541 / Hist.- Coll. (Coleoptera), Nr. 45541, Tentyria gaditana Ramb., Andalus, Rambur, Zool. Mus. Berlin. Three specimens without identification label: Andalusia, Staud. Leg. / Riksmuseum Stockholm (NHMS). One Paralectotype of Tenebrio caraboides Linné 1758 (UUZM), found in the old collection of the Swedish King Gustav IV Adolf, really belonging to Tentyria gaditana, was designated by Ferrer &amp; Holston (2009).</p> <p>Cádiz: Rota, Gres leg. Tentyria gaditana Ros. F. Español det. / var. JL. Bujalance det. (2 exx, CJF); Tarifa, 9.VIII.1978, B. Lassalle leg. (1 ex, CJF); idem, 16.VIII.2008, A. Castro Tovar leg. (2 exx, CACT); idem, 20.VI.1977, J. de Ferrer leg., Tentyria gaditana Rosenh. P. Leo det. (1♀, CJLB); idem, 23.8.1997, J.J.de la Rosa leg. (1♁, CACT); Olvera, J. Barroso leg. (1 ex, CJF). Puerto Real, 9.VII.1973, M. Tóth leg. (1 ex, HMNH); Véjer de la Frontera, Cádiz, 14.VI.1984, Podlussány leg. (1 ex, HMNH); San Roque, col. Juan de Ferrer (1 ex, CJCM); Zahara de los Atunes, 2.VIII.2006, J. A. Alejo leg. (1♀, CACT); Cádiz, 18.VIII.1972, G. Steen leg. (1 ex, CJF); Grazalema, VI.1903, Escalera leg., MNCN_ Ent. Nº Cat. 70801-70803, T. gaditana var., JL. Bujalance det. (2♀♀ and 1♁, MNCN); Pinar del Rey, San Roque, 16.VI.1972, J. de Ferrer leg. Tentyria gaditana Rosenh. F. Español leg. (1 ex, CJLB); San Roque, 6VIII.1975, idem, P. Leo det. (1 ex, CJLB); El Palmar, Conil, 29.VIII.2001, J.C. Martínez leg. (2♀♀ and 2♁♁, CJLB); Playa de Bolonia, Cádiz, 28.XI.1995, J.C. Martínez leg. (1♀, CJLB); Novo Santi Petri, Chiclana, Cádiz, 20.V.2007, T. gaditana, JL. Bujalance leg. (1♁, CJLB); Torre Gorda, Cádiz, 12.VII.2000, Depart. Zoología UCO leg., T. gaditana var., JL. Bujalance det. (4exx, CUCO) / 17.VII.2000 (2 exx, CUCO) / 14.IX.2000 (2 exx, CUCO).</p> <p>Diagnosis: Very variable species and, therefore, difficult to characterize. Body usually short, convex, dorsally not very shiny and with well-marked punctures (Fig. 210). Broad head; flat eyes, exceptionally somewhat convex; supraocular fold generally not very raised; the epistome rounded, and with a small tooth in the middle (Fig. 24). Gular groove (Fig. 58) usually narrow and unwell delimited, often only consisting in a central depression; convex, almost dull, densely punctured, transverse and proportionally large pronotum, with sides in regular curve from base to apex, finely margined base, sub-right or curving slightly protruding backward, sometimes slightly sinuate at posterior angles that are obtuse and not well indicated (Fig. 92); prosternal apophysis slightly furrowed longitudinally in the centre, parallel-sided and converging at the apex which is not pointed (Fig. 129); protibiae without apparent sexual dimorphism; convex and smooth elytra, brighter than the pronotum, broad shape and regular oval from base to apex, with fine but well-marked punctures, sometimes as thick as in the pronotum, usually right or sub-right base, and finely margined; aedeagus (Fig. 176) about 3.5 mm in length parameters of subparallel sides, almost equal or little shorter than the phallobase. Commonly, the specimens from inland and Mediterranean-influenced areas are smaller and stubbier, with the base of the pronotum right or sub-right, elytra showing feeble longitudinal grooves, and the aedeagus with the parameters similar in length as the phallobase; the morphotypes from the inner lands (Sierra de Grazalema) also show most coarsely punctures.</p> <p>Comments: T. gaditana Rosenhauer, is identical to T. gaditana Rambur in litt. Rosenhauer (1856), Dejean (1937) and Kraatz (1865). Rosenhauer (1856) described this species from Cádiz and kept the name that Rambur assigned in litt.; Reitter (1900) cited it as “ Tentyria gaditana Sol. ”, from Spain and Portugal without specifying locality. This indicates that, like Kraatz (1865), he did not examine Rosenhauer’s material. Koch (1944a), who did not know Rambur’s and Rosenhauer’s specimens, considered that T. gaditana sensu Kraatz (1865) and Reitter (1900) are identical to T. peiroleri sensu Koch (non T. peiroleri Solier), and that T. gaditana Rosenhauer is a species that should belong to the first group of Reitter (1900), next to other Tentyria species showing the base of the pronotum tri-sinuate. Español (1960) correctly interpreted the true identity of T. gaditana Rosenhauer, but dragged the Koch’s error (Koch 1944a) by considering T. gaditana Kraatz (= T. gaditana Rambur in litt.) and T. gaditana Reitter synonyms of T. peiroleri sensu Koch (non T. peiroleri Solier). Viñolas &amp; Cartagena (2005) rectified the error dragged by Español (1960). Lastly, Bujalance et al. (2016) showed a photograph of a syntype of T. gaditana found in the MNHN (Paris).</p> <p>In summary, T. gaditana Rosenhauer is a species known for long time, identical to Tentyria gaditana Rambur in litt. (Rosenhauer 1856) (Fig. 258). Nevertheless, it was misinterpreted by several authors who unknown the types of Rosenhauer and Rambur in litt. Only Kraatz (1865) examined the specimens of T. gaditana Rambur in litt.</p> <p>Designation of Lectotype of Tentyria gaditana Rosenhauer, 1856. Present designation:</p> <p>As already indicated the syntypes from Cádiz (Rosenhauer’s collection) have not been located or documented by any of the previous authors after description. We have got a specimen from NMHUB, labelled “ Tentyria gaditana Rosh., Hispania ”, which does not agree with the original description because it has the base of pronotum trisinuated and with the central lobe not margined, it is T. subcostata Solier (= T. emarginata Kraatz, = T. sinuatocollis Rosenhauer, part of the syntypes). For these reasons, we consider it necessary to designate a Lectotype to stabilize the taxonomy of this species.</p> <p>We designate Lectotype of Tentyria gaditana Rosenhauer, 1856, the syntype previously referenced, bearing the following labels (Fig. 241): Cadiz Rosh., Type, Espagne donné par Rosenhauer / 225 / MUSEUM PARIS, COLL. CHATANY 1914 / TYPE / prolixa Rosh.</p> <p>Geographical distribution: Species circumscribed to the province of Cádiz and neighbouring areas; it is very abundant in the coastal zone from the mouth of the Guadalquivir to Gibraltar, extending inland through the Sierra de Grazalema. The record from Portugal (Reitter 1900) does not correspond to this species; Viñolas (1986) also cites it from Malaga, and later Viñolas &amp; Cartagena (2005) repeat this record referring to Español (1960). Nevertheless, this last author only mentioned this species in Cádiz.</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FFA65E6AF9A3FF1AD39FFC0E	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FFA75E6DF9A3FBFAD0CAF996.text	8F6B0B50FFA75E6DF9A3FBFAD0CAF996.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria corrugata Rosenhauer, J. Ferrer 1856	<div><p>Tentyria corrugata Rosenhauer, 1856 (Figs. 25, 59, 93, 94, 130, 177, 211, 242, 243)</p> <p>Tentyria corrugata Rosenhauer, 1856: 189; Kraatz 1865: 143–144, Reitter 1900: 175 (specimens from Spain), Fuente 1934: 31, Koch 1944a: 228, Español 1960: 407, L̂bl &amp; Smetana 2008: 206, Martínez 2008: 58, Ivan &amp; L̂bl 2020: 249. Tentyria gaditana ssp. corrugata Rosenhauer Viñolas 1986: 104, Viñolas &amp; Cartagena 2005: 81, 357b. Tentyria andalusiaca Kraatz, 1865: 142, Koch 1944a: 227 syn. “ andalusica ”, Español 1960: 407, Viñolas 1986: 104, L̂bl &amp; Smetana 2008: 206, Martínez 2018: 58, Ivan &amp; L̂bl 2020: 249.</p> <p>Types examined: Two syntypes uncatalogued from the MNHN, carrying the following old labels: Tentyria corrugata Rosh. / Málaga / Ex. Musaeo Rosenhauer / LECTOTYPE, Tentyria corrugata Rosh., det. J. Ferrer &amp; J.L. Bujalance, ex. Coll. Oberthür via Allard MNHN (1♀ MNHN); Ex. Musaeo Rosenhauer / Paralectotype, Tentyria gaditana Rosh. (error! “ Tentyria corrugata Rosh. ”), ex. Coll. Oberthür vía Allard MNHN (1♁ MNHN). Two syntypes of Tentyria andalusiaca Kraatz syn. bearing the following labels: Andalus. Stauding / coll. Kraatz / SYNTYPUS / andalusiaca Kr., Type, det. Schuster / Coll. DEI, Münchenberg/ andalusiaca Kr. / andalusiaca Kr. / LECTOTYPUS Tentyria andalusiaca Kr., J.L. Bujalance det. 2005 (1♁, SDEI); another syntype with the first five labels identical / PARALECTOTYPUS. J.L. Bujalance det. (1♁, SDEI).</p> <p>Additional material: Historical material: Andalusia: Cádiz: Tarifa, V.1903, Escalera leg., Tentyria corrugata Rosenh., (2 exx, MNCN).</p> <p>Málaga: Málaga, 5.VII.1966, F. Español leg., Tentyria corrugata Rosh., F. Español det. (2 exx, CJF); Fuengirola, 16.I.1965, J. Ferrer leg., Tentyria corrugata Ros. (1♀ CJF and 1♁ CJLB); idem, río, 7.5.1977, idem, (1 ex, CJF); idem, 7.XI.1962, S. Aberg leg., Tentyria corrugata Rosh., J.L. Bujalance det. (1♀ NHMS); Estepona, IV.1955, Gyllensvärd leg., corrugata Rosenhauer, J. Ferrer det., CUM TYPO COMP. (1♁, NHMS).</p> <p>Diagnosis: Body (Fig. 211) convex, broad, and robust, integument dull black. Head (Fig. 25) with thin but dense punctures, with eyes very flat not overflowing lateral outline, supraorbital keel slightly raised; anterior edge of epistome rounded and with a minute tooth in the middle; gular groove (Fig. 59) consisting of a median depression, moderately deep and not delimited. Pronotum transverse (Figs. 93, 94), 1.3 to 1.4 times wider than long, finely but densely punctured, strongly rounded at sides, tapering evenly towards both ends, finely marginate, more strongly delimited at base, posterior angles obtuse and little or no marked in dorsal view, with base variable, from slightly curved to strongly curved and extended backwards. Prosternal apophysis with parallel sides and blunt tip (Fig. 130); the male protibiae is somewhat more graceful than those of females and with the inner edge slightly sinuous. Elytra ovate, with maximum width in the middle, tapering almost equally towards the base and apex, striated-rough, with wide intervals but, blurred by tuberous transverse wrinkles, with very fine and spaced punctures; the base is usually in arc; Aedeagus robust, with the parameters equal or slightly longer than the phallobase (Fig. 177).</p> <p>Comments: T. corrugata Rosenhauer is morphologically and geographically close to T. gaditana Rosenhauer, but different in the shape and sculpture of the elytra, the base usually in arc, more angulous humeri; the male protibiae more graceful; usually, more transverse pronotum. Smaller aedeagus, more robust and with the parameters equal or slightly longer than the phallobase. The general shape of the body is also more robust and larger average size.</p> <p>T. corrugata is a well characterised species and unmistakable into the distribution area but was described with a small number of specimens (Rosenhauer 1856) not well reflecting its variability. This fact together with the lack of knowledge of the types by all the authors since Rosenhauer (1856), induced Kraatz (1865) to describe T. andalusiaca Kraatz, with two exemplars from uncertain locality “ Andalucía ” and that correspond to variations of T. corrugata Rosenhauer, as it has been proved after comparing them with the locotipìcal specimens. Reitter (1900), indicated this species from Spain and Portugal. Koch (1944a) established the synonymy between T. andalusica Kraatz, and T. corrugata Rosenhauer, later confirmed by Español (1960). Viñolas (1986) considered T. corrugata Rosenhauer a subespecies of T. gaditana Rosenhauer; nevertheless, these taxa, although close, they have quite differentiable aedeagi. Lastly, Viñolas (1991) and Viñolas &amp; Cartagena (2005), misinterpreted the description of T. andalusiaca Kraatz, and non-having seen the Types, considered it a valid species, only known from southwestern Portugal “Cabo Sardão and Vila Nova Milfontes”. However, the study of the syntypes of Tentyria andalusiaca Kraatz allows confirming the synonymy with T. corrugata Rosenhauer, established by Koch (1944a), being T. andalusiaca sensu Viñolas, an unpublished species (= T. stupefacta sp. nov.), and different from T. andalusiaca Kraatz (= T. corrugata Rosenhauer).</p> <p>Designation of Lectotype of Tentyria corrugata Rosenhauer, 1856. Present designation:</p> <p>The labels carried by the two historical specimens, together with the description of Rosenhauer (1856) fully concordant, indicate that these are two syntypes. For that, we designate Lectotype (Fig. 242) the specimen bearing the following label: Tentyria corrugata Rosh. / Málaga / Ex. Musaeo Rosenhauer / LECTOTYPE, Tentyria corrugata Rosh., Det. J. Ferrer &amp; J.L. Bujalance, ex. Coll. Oberthür via Allard MNHN. Likewise, we designated Paralectotype the specimen bearing the following label: Ex. Musaeo Rosenhauer / Paralectotype, Tentyria gaditana Rosh. (error! “ Tentyria corrugata Rosh. ”), ex. Coll. Oberthür via Allard MNHN.</p> <p>Designation of Lectotype of Tentyria andalusiaca Kraatz, 1865 syn. Present designation:</p> <p>As a result of the confusion of this taxon with a hitherto unpublished species, Tentyria stupefacta sp. nov., we believe necessary to designate as Lectotype and Paralectotype the two specimens of the Type material (Kraatz 1865: 142). We designate Lectotype (Fig. 243) to the specimen that bears the following labels: Andalus. Stauding / coll. Kraatz / SYNTYPUS / andalusiaca Kr., Type, det. Schuster / Coll. DEI, Münchenberg / andalusiaca Kr., Light blue handwritten / andalusiaca Kr. / LECTOTYPUS Tentyria andalusiaca Kr., J.L. Bujalance des., 2005 (red label). Likewise, we designate Paralectotype to the other syntype that bears the label “ PARALECTOTYPUS. J.L. Bujalance des. 2005 “(red label), in addition to five other labels like the first five described for the Lectotype.</p> <p>Geographical distribution: species described from Malaga, only known from the coast of the provinces of Malaga to Tarifa (Cádiz).</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FFA75E6DF9A3FBFAD0CAF996	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FFA05E6CF9A3F902D558F83E.text	8F6B0B50FFA05E6CF9A3F902D558F83E.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria donanensis Bujalance, Cardenas, Ferrer & Gallardo 2016	<div><p>Tentyria donanensis Bujalance, Cárdenas, Ferrer &amp; Gallardo, 2016 (Figs. 26, 60, 95, 96, 131, 178, 212)</p> <p>Tentyria donanensis Bujalance, Cárdenas, Ferrer &amp; Gallardo, 2016: 351; Martínez 2018: 58, Iwan &amp; L̂bl 2020: 249.</p> <p>Tentyria (Subtentyrina) gaditana Rosenhauer Grimm &amp; Aistleitner 2009: 70</p> <p>Types examined: Doñana Nacional Park (Huelva): Holotype, 15.III.2000, La Mancha Grande, A.M. Cárdenas leg. (♁, CJLB); Paratypes: Cruz de Dominguez, 15.III.2000, 24.VII.2000, A.M. Cárdenas leg. (20♁♁ and 32♀♀, CUCO); Palacio Doñana, 24.VII.2000, idem (4 exx, CUCO); Laguna del Taraje, 24.III.2000, idem (1♁, CJLB); 25.IX.2001, idem (1♀, CJF); El Puntal, 25.IX.2001, idem (3 exx, CUCO); La Cancela, 23.05.2000, idem (7 exx, CUCO); Cerro de los Ánsares, 7.VIII.2000, idem (43 exx, CUCO); Corral de la Liebre, 15.III.2000, idem (1♁, CJLB); Corral de la Liebre, 15.III.2000, idem (1♁ and 1♀, CJLB); La Vera, 28.V.2005, J.L. Bujalance leg. (2♁♁, CJLB and CJF); Nave del Inglesillo, 15.III.2000, A.M. Cárdenas leg. (1♀, CJLB); Pinar de San Agustín, 30.VII.2001, idem (1♁, CJLB); 25.IX.2001, idem (1♁ and 1♀, CJLB); idem, 01.IV.2005, J.L. Bujalance leg. (2♀♀, CJLB); El Nido del Gato, 21.II.2001, A.M. Cárdenas leg. (1♀, CJLB); idem, 27.VII.2005, J.L. Bujalance leg. (1♀, CJLB); La Mogea, 26.IX.2001, A.M. Cárdenas leg. (1♁, CJLB); idem, 30.X.2001, idem (1♀, CJLB); Casa de Manecorro, 26.IX.2001, idem (1♀, CJLB); idem, 25.IX.2001, idem (15 exx, CJF); El Charco de la Boca, 26.IV.2001, idem (2♀♀, CJLB); idem, 23.V.2001, idem (2♀♀, CJLB); Arroyo de la Rocina, 15.IX.2001, idem (1♁, CJF); Caño Mayor, 2.IV.2005, M. Baena leg. (3 exx, CACT); idem, 28.VII.2005, J.L. Bujalance leg. (1♀, CJLB); Sanlucar, 30.IV.2001, idem (1♀, CJLB).</p> <p>Additional material: Huelva: Matalascañas, 5.IV.2010, A. Castro Tovar leg. (4 exx, CACT); Matalascañas, Huelva 5.IV.2010 (1 ex, CACT); P. N. de Doñana, Caño Mayor / 2.IV.2005, M. Baena leg. (1 ex, CACT); P. natural Marismas del Odiel, Isla de Saltés / 11.VIII.2007 / J.J. López Pérez leg. (1♁ and 1♀, CACT); Guadalquivir, Espagne, 20.III.66, Coll. P. BONNEAU (1♀, CJF); Hispania Mer., Huelva, 1.IV.1999 / El Abalario, Bastazo and Vela leg. (2♁ and 1♀, CB&amp;V); Huelva, Martinez! (1 ex, MNCN); Palma del Condado 22.VI.1981, B. Lassalle leg. (1 ex, CJF); Cartaya, 2.V.1996, J. Casas lg. (1 ex, CJGC); El Vigía, Playa, Palos de la Frontera, 1.IV.2006, JJ López-Pérez leg. (2♁, CJJLP); Moguer, Mazagón, playa, 10.IV.2006, JPG de la Vega leg. (2♁♁, CJJLP); Ayamonte, 8.IX.2006, JJ López-Pérez leg. (1♀, CJJLP); El Almendral, Isla Saltés, Huelva, 8.IV.2006, JJ López-Pérez leg. (1♁, CJJLP); Idem, 2.I.2007, JJ López-Pérez leg. (1♁ and 1♀, CJJLP); Idem, 12.III.2006, JJ López-Pérez leg. (2♀, CJJLP); Laguna de El Manto, Isla Saltés, Huelva, 18.III.2006, JJ López-Pérez leg. (1♁, CJJLP); La Cascajera, Isla Saltés, Huelva, 18.III.2006, JJ López-Pérez leg. (1♁ and 4♀♀, CJJLP); El Acebuchal, Isla Saltés, Huelva, 13.IV.2006, JJ López-Pérez leg. (2♁♁, CJJLP); Puerto Maltés, Punta Umbría, Huelva, 1.VI.2000, JJG. De la Vega leg. (1♀, CJJLP); Laguna 1ª de Palos, Palos de la Frontera, Huelva, 28.III.2007, JJ López-Pérez leg. (1♀, CJJLP).</p> <p>Diagnosis: Long body (Fig. 212), about 14.25 mm long on average, tegument smooth and shiny, mostly ventrally. Head short and rounded (Fig. 26), eyes very slightly convex, supraorbital folds parallel and slightly raised, epistome in continuous curve from the gena, showing a minute tooth in the middle; fine but clearly perceptible punctures; gular groove (Fig. 60) usually narrow and not well defined, often consisting only of a shallow central hollow. Pronotum (Figs. 95, 96) proportionately large and not very transverse, with sides in open curve and tapering equally towards both ends, the base finely bordered, in prolonged curve backwards and somewhat sinuate before the posterior angles which are very obtuse and hardly visible dorsally, especially in females; punctures fine and rather dense, more widely spaced on the disc; prosternal apophysis (Fig. 131) broad, parallel-sided, rounded at the end and not exceeding the procoxae. Elytra (Fig. 212) convex, moderately oval-elongated, with maximum width in the middle or frequently behind it, narrowed posteriorly in a straight line to the apex, which is very acute and surpasses the last abdominal sternite, by prolongation of the upper ridge of each epipleura which is more elongate than the lower; elytral ribs slightly indicated, punctures very fine and widely spaced; humeral angles very marked and the base notched in an arc. Aedeagus (Fig. 178) about 3.4 mm long on average, with the phallobase longer than the parameres, the latter tapering towards the apex in an almost straight, not sinuous, line.</p> <p>Comments: Geographically and morphologically this species is close to T. gaditana Rosenhauer from which it differs in the elytra which are ovate, elongated and sharpened at the apex, with signs of striae and finely punctured, more narrowed towards the base and the apex, of nonparallel sides; the humeri are more angulous, with the base narrower and cut in arc. The pronotum is as bright as the elytra, less densely but more finely punctured than in T. gaditana, less transverse, subcordiform, the base curved and clearly prolonged backwards, with the posterior angles very obtuse and barely or not indicated in the dorsal view; the aedeagus, with the phallobase clearly longer than the parameres, which are regularly narrowed from the base to the apex.</p> <p>In the northern limit of its distribution area (Marismas del Odiel), there is a population differentiable of the type form by the larger average size, a somewhat more robust body, the shinier tegument and a more intense black; pronotum slightly more transverse, with the base curve and less prolonged backwards, and the punctures denser and more marked; elytra without traces of streaks, with the base wider and slightly convergent almost in a straight line towards the scutellum; finally, by the aedeagus, slightly larger and more robust and with the phallobase proportionally somewhat shorter than in the typical form.</p> <p>Geographic distribution: Species described from Doñana National Park (Huelva) and extended on the littoral and sub littoral areas in the southwest of the Iberian Peninsula, from the mouth of Guadalquivir River to the Odiel marsh, being particularly abundant in the typical locality (Bujalance et al. 2016).</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FFA05E6CF9A3F902D558F83E	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FFA25E6EF9A3FF52D016FF51.text	8F6B0B50FFA25E6EF9A3FF52D016FF51.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria pseudogaditana Bujalance & Ferrer & Cárdenas 2023	<div><p>Tentyria pseudogaditana sp. nov. (Figs. 27, 61, 97, 132, 179, 213)</p> <p>Types examined: Holotype (♁): Islantilla pinar, Lepe (Huelva) 7.VII.2009, J.L. Bujalance leg. (MNCN). Paratypes: Islantilla, Lepe (Huelva) 13.VII.2009, J.L. Bujalance leg. (2♀♀ CJLB). La Antilla, Lepe, (Huelva) 15.VII.2009, J.L. Bujalance leg. (1♀ CJLB). Playa del Perdigón, Isla Cristina (Huelva) 24.XII.2000, CUCO, CORDOBA (3♁♁ and 1♀ CUCO). Isla de Bacuta, (eucaliptus) 29S-PB8022 (Huelva), 15.6.2006, J.J. López-Pérez leg. (1♁ nº1769 CJJL); idem, (arena playa) 29S-PB8022 (Huelva), 19.9.2006, idem (1♀ nº2052 CJJL,). Villa Réal, Dr. Martin / Algarve, Dr. Martin / MUSEUM PARIS, COLL. J. CHATANAY 1914/ MUSÉUM PARIS, COLL. CH. DEMAISON / Tentyria elongata sinuaticollis, Palmer det. 97 (1♀ MNHN). Huelva, Martínez! / M.N.C.N., MADRID / MNCN_Ent, Nº Cat. 70821 / Tentyria gaditana? Rosenhauer, 1856, J.L. Bujalance det. 2006 (1♀ MNCN).</p> <p>Description: Holotype (Fig. 213), broad body; black, smooth, and shiny tegument, particularly in ventral side. Size 14 mm length and 6.5 mm maximum width in elytra.</p> <p>Head (Fig. 27): short, with sub-parallel sides; 2.7 mm wide, basically like that of T. donanensis but with denser and thicker punctures; gular groove (Fig. 61) consisting of a deeper central hollow.</p> <p>Convex, dull and transverse pronotum (Fig. 97); 1.44 wider than long, maximum width in the middle (4.6 mm wide and 3.2 mm long); the sides in closed curve forward and backward; the base scarcely protruding backward; posterior angles of pronotum obtuse and slightly marked; dense punctures, somewhat smaller than that of the head; wide prosternal apophysis (Fig. 132), sides sub-parallel, rounded at the end; propleurae and prosternum smooth and bright, punctures small but well discernible; protibiae not graceful and lightly shorter than metatibiae, and both of them clearly shorter than mesotibiae.</p> <p>Smooth, ovate, and convex elytra, with punctures fine but evident, and moderately dense; 1.38 times longer than wide (9 mm long and 6.5 mm wide), and 2.81 times longer than the pronotum, sharpened at the apex and slightly narrowed towards the base that is slightly curved, with the humeral angles scarcely noticeable. Smooth, bright abdominal sternites and with fine and moderately dense punctation.</p> <p>Aedeagus (Fig. 179) 3.5 in length, with the phallobase; 1.15 times longer than the parameres which are strangled at the base and narrowed from here, in straight or slightly sinuous line, to the apex which is very sharp.</p> <p>Paratypes: Size 14–15.5 mm length (14.66 average, 14.25 mm males and 14.80 mm females) and 6.2–7.1 mm de maximum width of elytra (6.56 mm average, 6.50 mm males and 6.58 mm females).</p> <p>Pronotum transverse, 1.33–1.47 times wider than length (1.40 times average: 1.44 times males and 1.39 times females), maximum width at the middle (4.4–5 mm wide and 3.2–3.5 mm long).</p> <p>Elytra 2.57–2.88 times longer than the pronotum (average 2.77 times), shape in oval slightly elongated, 1.38– 1.51 times longer than wider (average 1.43 times).</p> <p>Aedeagus of 3.30–3.46 mm in length (3.38 mm average), with the phallobase 1.15–1.20 times (1.17 average) longer than the parameres.</p> <p>Females of average size somewhat higher than males. Pronotum slightly less transverse, elytra proportionally somewhat longer than in males.</p> <p>Variability of paratypes: Some specimens show the pronotum less transverse, the base lightly protruding backward and somewhat sinuate before the posterior angles. Other specimens show the elytra narrowed, less chubby.</p> <p>Differential diagnosis: Species close to T. donanensis and T. gaditana, being often difficult to differentiate without a study of the male genitalia. It differs to T. donanensis in the pronotum somewhat transverse, punctation denser and more noticeable. The base is broader, less protruding, and barely sinuate. Elytra, often more convex, chubby, and smooth, punctures more indicated, and base broader in opened arc. It differs from T. gaditana in the shape of elytra, sharpened at the apex, with the base cut in arc and the humeri more angulous; in the shape of the aedeagus which has the phallobase longer than the parameres, and in the parameres which are more curved.</p> <p>Geographical distribution: Species only known from the littoral of the southwestern Iberian Peninsula, from the Odiel’s marshes and to the Guadiana estuary.</p> <p>Etymology: In the specific epithet pseudogaditana, the greek prefix “ pseudo ” means false, imitation, because T. pseudogaditana is apparently similar and easily to confuse with the true T. gaditana.</p> <p>Group of T. velox</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FFA25E6EF9A3FF52D016FF51	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FFA35E6EF9A3FEE2D527F8D1.text	8F6B0B50FFA35E6EF9A3FEE2D527F8D1.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria velox subsp. velox Chevrolat 1865	<div><p>Tentyria velox ssp. velox Chevrolat, 1865 (Figs. 28, 62, 98, 133, 180, 214, 244)</p> <p>Tentyria velox Chevrolat, 1865: 390; Reitter 1900: 170, Fuente 1934: 30, L̂bl &amp; Smetana 2008: 34, 206, Martínez 2018: 58, Iwan &amp; L̂bl 2020: 252. Tentyria curculionoides ssp. velox Chevrolat sensu Koch 1944a: 229; Epañol, 1956: 30 and 1960: 408. Tentyria curculionoides ssp. curculionoides f.t. sensu Viñolas 1986: 102–103 (specimens from Valladolid, Palencia and Zamora), Viñolas &amp; Cartagena 2005: 276.</p> <p>Types examined: The type was not found in Paris (MNHN, Chevrolat collection). In the MNCN there is a series of specimens caught in Valladolid (Spain) by Chevrolat &amp; Bellier, donated to Mr. Pérez Arcas along with other insects of the same provenance (Pérez-Arcas 1865: 439). So that, we consider belonging to the typical series the specimens carrying the following labels: Valladolid, Bellier et Chevrolat 1864 (handwritten label) / MNCN_Ent, Nº Cat. 70855 (1♀, MNCN) (Fig.244); Tentyria velox? Chevr. Valladolid (handwritten label by Pérez Arcas) / Bellier! (back) / MNCN_Ent, Nº Cat. 70857 (1♁, MNCN); Tentyria velox, Valladolid (handwritten label by Pérez Arcas) / MNCN_Ent, Nº Cat. 70858 (1♁, MNCN); velox, Valladolid / MNCN_Ent, Nº Cat. 70856 / Tentyria velox, J.L. Bujalance det., 2011(1♁, MNCN); T. velox Chevr. / T. velox Valladolid / MNCN_Ent, Nº Cat. 70854 (1♁, MNCN); T. velox, Valladolid / Tentyria subrugosa Solier, 1835, J.L. Bujalance det. 2006 / M.N.C.N. MADRID / MNCN_Ent, Nº Cat. 70797 (1♀, MNCN).</p> <p>Additional material: Historical material: Valladolid Spanien / Peirolerii / curculionoides ssp. velox Chevr., DET. C. KOCH / Sammlung, Adr. Schuster / Coll. Kraatz / D.G.M (1♁, NHMB); Vallad / Locus typ. Valladolid, det. Julio Ferrer (1♁, NHMB); Tentyria velox / Rsh / Rsh (= Rosenhauer), det. J. Ferrer / Hispania / 446 (1♁, NHMB); velox. Ch: Spain. V. Jenel. / F. Bates. 81-19. / British Museum / velox / Sammlung, Adr. Schuster / curculionoides velox Chevr., det. J. FERRER (1♁, NHMB); Palencia, Paganetti / Moor. / Peirol. / Sammlung Adr. Schuster / curculionoides velox Chevr., det. Julio Ferrer (1♁ and 1♀, NHMB).</p> <p>Valladolid, Honquilana, VI.1987, Podlussány leg. (HMNH); Valladolid, Ataquines, 17.VII.1976, P. Bercedo leg. (1 ex, CJF).</p> <p>Diagnosis: Black, bright tegument. Head, slightly longer than wide, usually with maximum width at the back of the eyes (Fig. 28), convex temples, sometimes the genae, are also enlarged, raised and surrounded by a depression that separates them from the disc. Very prominent, curved and sinuous supraorbital folds, rarely straight; the epistome more or less projected ahead and rounded, usually densely punctured and without clearly visible tooth; usually straight, narrow and moderately deep gular groove (Fig. 62); transverse, slightly convex pronotum (Fig. 98), about 1.4 times wider than long, with the base thickly flanged, curved, and generally more or less sinuate at the level of the rear angles; prosternal apophysis (Fig. 133) with parallel sides and rounded at apex; elongated oval elytra (Fig. 214), 2.75–3 times longer than pronotum, usually smooth, sometimes with streaked or slightly rough marks, with the punctures usually somewhat thinner than those of the pronotum; aedeagus (Fig. 180) with the parameres clearly longer than the phallobase and with sides slightly sinuous, middle lobe (penis) narrowed before the apex. Smooth, very bright, and clearly punctured ventral tegument.</p> <p>Comments: T. velox Chevrolat, was misinterpreted by Koch (1944a) and Español (1956, 1960), who considered it a subspecies of T. curculionoides (Herbst), unknown taxon to both authors, as well as to Viñolas (1986) and Viñolas &amp; Cartagena (2005). These last authors (2005) proposed the synonymy between T. velox and T. curculionoides, whose types had been confused in the NMHUB. However, they are very different species, both in external morphology and the conformation of the aedeagus.</p> <p>Geographical distribution: Species described from the area around Valladolid and widespread by the North Plateau, in the provinces of Palencia (Koch 1944a) and Zamora (Español 1956, 1960).</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FFA35E6EF9A3FEE2D527F8D1	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FFBC5E71F9A3FF52D188F80F.text	8F6B0B50FFBC5E71F9A3FF52D188F80F.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria velox subsp. circumvoluta (Bujalance & Ferrer & Cárdenas 2023) Bujalance & Ferrer & Cárdenas 2023	<div><p>Tentyria velox ssp. circumvoluta nom. nov. and stat. nov. (Figs. 29, 63, 99, 134, 215, 245)</p> <p>Tentyria subrugosa Solier 1835: 352 nom. preocc., homonym nov.; Kraatz 1865: 132, Reitter 1900: 171, Fuente 1934: 30, Español 1960: 408, Viñolas &amp; Cartagena 2005: 82, 357d, L̂bl &amp; Smetana 2008: 206, Martínez 2018: 58, Iwan &amp; L̂bl 2020: 252.</p> <p>Non Tentyria subrugosa Besser 1832:13 (= Tentyria italica Solier 1835: 348 syn. nov.).</p> <p>Types examined: Tentyria subrugosa ?? Sol., Espag. Du64 (Dupont 64, circular label) / MUSEUM PARIS Coll. Solier, COLL. DE MARSEUL 2842-90 / Tentyria subrugosa Sol., det. J. Ferrer (1♀, MNHN) (Fig. 245).</p> <p>Five specimens from the NMHUB, one of them with the following labels: subrugosa Dj. S. Par; Sicil. (old handwritten label) / (modern label) Hist. Coll. (Coleoptera), Nr. 45571, Tentyria subrugosa Dej ?, Sicil. Parreyss, Zool. Mus. Berlin. The others four specimens carrying similar modern labels, and one of them, with smooth elytra, also bears one old handwritten label, similar to the first: Tentyr. subrugosa, Dej ?, Sicil. Parr., and another old label with the reference number “45571”.</p> <p>Aditional material: Ávila: La Serrada, ÁVILA, Spain, V-1960 / J. Vives leg. / Tentyria subrugosa Sol. (1 ♁, CJLB and 2 exx, CJF); Ávila, J. Sanz / T. subrugosa Sol. / MNCN_Ent, Nº Cat. 70795 / Tentyria subrugosa Sol., det. J.L. Bujalance (1♁, MNCN); Ávila, T. subrugosa Sol. / MNCN_Ent., Nº Cat. 70871, Tentyria subrugosa Sol., J.L. Bujalance det. (1♀, MNHN).</p> <p>Diagnosis: Body ovate, elongate (Fig. 215), integument black, not very shiny. Head (Fig. 29) elongate in front of the eyes, which are large and moderately convex, the head is also provided with dense punctures, especially in the front part; the supraorbital folds much enhanced, delimiting two large depressions inwards, at the level of the insertion of the antennae; epistome subtruncate or rounded, projecting forward and provided with a very small, hardly perceptible tooth; gular groove (Fig. 63) transverse, narrow, except in the middle, and moderately deep. Prothorax transverse, slightly convex, with fine but dense points, slightly arched at its anterior edge, sides rounded and somewhat narrower posteriorly; base bisinuate before the rear angles and prolonged in curve posteriorly, with a broad marginal groove and thickened rim (Fig. 99); prosternal apophysis (Fig. 134) parallel-sided, depressed in the middle, with the end slightly bent upwards, giving it a rounded appearance in ventral view. Elytra elongate oval, moderately convex, with inconspicuous punctures, provide with sinuous and irregular folds, as longitudinal as transversal, and some suborbicular tubercles, base slightly arched and with moderately thick and full rim. Females show less elongated oval elytra and the base of the pronotum less prolonged backwards, generally with a coarser appearance.</p> <p>T. velox ssp. circumvoluta differs from T. velox Chevrolat by its somewhat larger average size, the shape of the head, which is more elongated in front of the eyes, the base of the pronotum more sinuate and curved, and particularly by the surface of the elytra, provided with tuberous wrinkles remembering cerebral convolutions, and by the shape more ovate-elongated particularly in males.</p> <p>Comments: Solier(1835) described T. subrugosa Dejan in litt. (Dejean 1821, 1833) from Spain, using a non-valid name by primary homonymy with T. subrugosa Besser, 1832, which was described with specimens from Calabria (Italy), collected by Parreiss (Parreys), and labelled as T. subrugosa Dejean. Thus, we propose T. circumvoluta nom. nov., replacing T. subrugosa Solier nom. preocc., by the circumvolutions of the elytral sculpture.</p> <p>T. subrugosa Besser is an enigmatic species that has not been recorded since its description, partly due to the unawareness of the type material. Besser (1832) tried to accommodate it in the of Steven’s keys the specimens of “ T. subrugosa Dejean ” received from Parreys, including only those characters that he considers differentials with respect to other species like “ T. nomax, T. taurica and T. podolica ”, but that by themselves do not allow accurate identification. We have examined six specimens labelled “ Tentyria subrugosa Dej. Sicil. Parreys ” from NMHUB, but only two of them had old handwritten label (Fig. 259). These two specimens and another three belonging to the same taxa, are identical to T. italica Solier, 1835 (Fig. 260), which therefore becomes a synonym of T. subrugosa Besser, 1832; the sixth specimen corresponds to T. grossa Besser, 1832 (Fig. 261). Probably, the specimens deposited in the NMHUB are syntypes of T. subrugosa Besser and T. grossa Besser respectivamente (see previous comments referred to T. curculionoides Herbst and T. platyceps Steven).</p> <p>Geographical distribution: Described from Spain without specifying locality. Apparently, it is present in the northern sub-plateau, in the foothills of the Central System. Very common in the province of Ávila (La Serrada, Español 1960); Viñolas &amp; Cartagena (2005) also cited this species in Segovia; and Kraatz (1865) in Aranjuez and Madrid.</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FFBC5E71F9A3FF52D188F80F	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FFBD5E73F9A3FF52D004FD21.text	8F6B0B50FFBD5E73F9A3FF52D004FD21.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria velox subsp. serrana Bujalance & Ferrer & Cárdenas 2023	<div><p>Tentyria velox serrana ssp. nov. (Figs. 30, 64, 100, 135, 216)</p> <p>Tentyria curculionoides curculionoides sensu Viñolas &amp; Cartagena, 2005: 356 b.</p> <p>Type material: Holotype (♁): Sierra de Candelario-Calvitero 2400m (Salamanca), 21.VIII.1991, Bastazo &amp; Vela leg. (CB &amp; V). Paratypes: carrying similar labels than the holotype (2♀♀, CB &amp; V); Navas Frías, X.1958, J. Vives leg. (2 exx, MCNB). Ávila: Puerto Tremedal, 1500 m. 1.VIII.1981, B. Lasalle leg. (2♀♀ and 1♁, CJF, NRMS); idem, 1400m, B. Lasalle leg. (1♁, CJF, NRMS); idem, 1.V.1987, A. del Saz leg. (5♁♁ and 3♀♀, CJCM); Sierra de Gredos, Coiffait leg. 1959, Tentyria curculionoides Hbst. F. Español det. (MNHN); Pdor. Gredos, VII.1930, Dusmet leg. / MNCN_Ent, Nº Cat. 70852 (2♁♁, MNCN); Gredos ! / idem, Nº Cat. 70793 (1♀, MNCN); Navarredonda ! / idem, Nº Cat. 70794 (1♁, MNCN); Villarejo cf., Tentyria subrugosa Sol., / idem, Nº Cat. 70796 (1♁, MNCN); El Tiemblo, 10.V.1986, J. Ferrer leg. (3♀♀, CJF); Puerto del Pico (Ávila) VI.1909, / MNCN_Ent, Nº Cat. 70848 - 70850 (3 exx, MNCN); Puerto Mijares 1570m, 10.V.1986 / 8.VI.1986, A. del Saz leg. (11♀♀ and 4♁♁, CJCM). Cáceres: Puerto de Honduras, Jerte, 17.IV.2000, M. Baena leg. (2 exx, CACT); idem, 1430m, Hervas, 5.VI.2011, J. Navarro leg. (2 exx, CACT); Puerto de Tornavacas 1283m, 17.IV.1987, A. del Saz leg. (4♀♀, CJCM).</p> <p>Description: Holotype (♁) (Fig. 216): Elongated, robust body; black, smooth, and not very bright tegument. Size 14 mm long and 5.9 mm maximum width in the elytra.</p> <p>Head (Fig. 30) wider than long, with the maximum width (2.6 mm) in the genae that are thick and prominent; slightly convex eyes; temples converging towards back; very prominent supraocular fold, with two elongated depressions and converging backwards on both sides, above the insertion of the antennas; the surface of the disc is irregular and densely punctured, as well as the epistome, which is rounded and without tooth clearly perceptible; straight and narrow gular groove (Fig. 64), moderately deep on the sides; long and filiform antennas, non-exceeding the base of the pronotum, the 1 st antennomere sturdy, the 2 nd small and as length as wide, the 3 rd 2.6 times longer than wide and barely shorter than the 4 th and 5 th together, from 4 th to 8 th one and a half times longer than wide, the 9 th almost as long as wide, the 10 th slightly transverse and the 11 th conical at its end and slightly longer than wide.</p> <p>Transverse and somewhat convex pronotum (Fig. 100), 1.3 times wider than long, with well-marked and moderately dense punctures, quite similar to those that of the head; sides in regular curve, somewhat more narrowed towards the base than at the apex, the base thickly margined, clearly prolonged in curved backwards and bisinuate before the posterior angles that are obtuse; prosternal apophysis (Fig. 135) with parallel sides and rounded apex, depressed longitudinally in the centre and 1.7 times longer than wide; smooth and somewhat brighter propleurae and prosternum, punctures slightly dense and well-marked; densely punctured mesosternum; and metasternum thicker punctured in its anterior half; protibiae somewhat shorter than the metatibiae and with the inner edge slightly sinuous and curved.</p> <p>Elytra convex, in elongated oval, one and a half times longer than wide and almost three times longer than the pronotum, the maximum width in the middle, almost equally narrowed towards the base and apex, with well indicated punctures and barely finer than in the pronotum; well-marked humeri, protruding from the base that fits to the pronotum and is completely margined; urosternites smooth and provided with fine, but well-marked and moderately dense punctures.</p> <p>Aedeagus of 4 mm in length, with the parameres narrowed, drawing a slightly sinuous line, from the base to the apex and 1.3 times longer than the phallobase, similar to the type form, but higher average size.</p> <p>Paratypes: Size 13.3–16.2 mm length (14.7 mm in average) and 5.5–7 mm maximum wide of elytra (6.3 mm in average).</p> <p>Pronotum convex and barely transverse, 1.24–1.47 times wider than long (1.36 times in average: 1.32 times in males and 1.38 in females); the maximum wide in the middle (3.7–5.1 mm wide and 2.9–3.8 mm length).</p> <p>Elytra 2.57–3.09 times longer than the pronotum (2.81 in average), ovate and elongated, 1.32–1.54 times longer than wide (1.45 times in average).</p> <p>Aedeagus large, 3.5–4.4 mm in length (4.05 mm in average), parameres 1.10–1.34 times (1.21 in average) longer than the phallobase.</p> <p>Sexual dimorphism clearly observable only in the protibiae; which are slightly shorter, wider and with the internal border straight in the females. Likewise, females tend to have somewhat more transverse the pronotum and the base barely protruding backwards, slightly smaller average size, and commonly the elytra proportionally somewhat longer and wider.</p> <p>Variability of the paratypes: In addition to the morphometric variations already indicated, the variability refers to the greater or lesser brightness of the cuticle, the intensity of the punctures, the surface of the elytra showing signs of roughness or striation, and to the features of the head less accented.</p> <p>Differential diagnosis: T. velox serrana ssp. nov. differs from T. velox f.t. and T. velox ssp. circumvoluta, by the great size and more robust body; the tegument less bright and with more noticeable punctures; the shape of the head wider than long and with the epistome less projected forward; the pronotum less transverse in the middle; the elytra proportionally longer than in T. velox, and somewhat narrower towards the humeri, that are acuter. In addition, it differs from T. circumvoluta by the more graceful legs and the characteristic roughness of the elytra that this taxon shows.</p> <p>Geographic distribution: Species typical from the Central System Mountains, particularly from the western area; where the provinces of Cáceres, Ávila and Salamanca converge.</p> <p>Etymology: The specific epithet “ serrana” refers that it is a typical species of the “sierras”, Spanish term for mountains.</p> <p>Group of T. grossa</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FFBD5E73F9A3FF52D004FD21	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FFBE5E75F9A3FD2FD52DFE4E.text	8F6B0B50FFBE5E75F9A3FD2FD52DFE4E.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria grossa subsp. basalis Schaufuss L 1869	<div><p>Tentyria grossa ssp. basalis Schaufuss, 1869 (Figs. 31, 65, 101, 136, 145, 181, 217)</p> <p>Tentyria basalis Schaufuss, 1869: 21; Reitter 1900: 173, Gebien 1910: 68, Vilarrubia &amp; Español 1933: 306, Fuente 1934: 31.</p> <p>Tentyria grossa Besser sensu Koch 1941: 290, 1944b: 318, (specimens from Balearic Islands) Español 1954: 25, 1958: 9, 1960: 411, Viñolas 1986: 105, Viñolas &amp; Cartagena 2005: 84, 259b, Leo &amp; Lo Cascio 2021: 453.</p> <p>Tentyria grossa ssp. basalis Schaufuss L ̂bl &amp; Smetana 2008: 207, Martínez 2018: 58, Iwan &amp; L̂bl 2020: 250.</p> <p>Tentyria barbara Solier, 1835: 340, specimen from Mahón (Menorca)?</p> <p>Types examined: The specimen type was not found. Great part of the collection of L. W. Schaufuss is lost or dispersed in diverse European Museums (Horn &amp; Kahle 1935; Horn et al. 1990).</p> <p>Additional material. Historical material: Probably syntype of Tentyria grossa Besser in the historical collection NMHUB, catalogued and labelled as “ Tentyria subrugosa Dej. ?, Sicil. Parreyss, Nr. 45571” (Fig. 261), along with other five specimens from Tentyria subrugosa Besser (see comments in Tentyria velox ssp. circumvoluta).</p> <p>Mallorca: La Albufera, 10.V.1986, C. Coulianos leg. (2♀♀, CJF); Alcudia, local collectors (1♁, CJF). Menorca: Calan de Bos, 30.X.2010, J.C. Martínez leg. (1♁ and 1♀, CJLB).</p> <p>Diagnosis: Big size (length 14–20.5 mm, width 6.5–8 mm) (Fig. 217); black and slightly bright tegument.</p> <p>Large head (Fig. 31), provided with very dense punctures (mainly in the disc), widely extended in front of the eyes that are very convex, exceeding the lateral contour; epistome triangular, dentate at the apex, thickened forward, and slightly prominent, remaining lightly, but noticeably delimited by the disc and the genae, which are also prominent and raised; gular groove very broad, transverse and deep (Fig. 65); slightly transverse, densely punctured pronotum (Fig. 101), with points somewhat smaller than those of the disc of the head; curved and thick basal margin, slightly prolonged later and slightly sinuous before the rear angles which are obtuse; the prosternal apophysis (Fig. 136) more or less lanceolate and depressed towards the centre, resembling a spoon, with blunt end, prolonged beyond the procoxae; elytra oval, slightly narrowed towards the humeri, dorsally flattened, with the surface finely and variably punctured and, more or less smooth or with transverse wrinkles, sometimes with traces of stretchmark, the basal margin is progressively thickened to the humeri which are very prominent (Fig. 145); large and robust aedeagus (Fig. 181), about 5 mm in length, with the parameres somewhat longer than phallobase, narrowed and sinuous towards the apex that is truncated at the end, the medium lobe (penis) strongly narrowed before the apex.</p> <p>Comments: Schaufuss (1869) described T. basalis from the Balearic Islands (Mallorca and Menorca), without additional comments. Previously, Solier (1835) had described three varieties of T. barbara with specimens belonging to different species and localities, indicating “Smyrne” (Turkey) as a location of the variety that he named “ Mittrei ”, citing a specimen from Mahón (Menorca) in the Dupont’s collection, labelled as T. sicula. The Solier’s confusion (1835) is evident since the Balearic species differs from that of Turkey (= T. rotundata mittrei Sol.). However, T. basalis Schaufuss is very similar to other taxa described by Solier (1835), T. sardea from Sardinia, T. barbara from North Africa “Barbarie”, T. sicula from Italy, T. grandis from Sicily, T. tristis of Tunisia. Most authors include these species in the specific complex of T. grossa Besser, 1832 (non T. grossa Solier,1835 = T. rotundata (Brullé, 1832)), described from Calabria and very common in Sicily (Ragusa 1896).</p> <p>The disagreement among authors about the morphotypes or group of species close to T. grossa Besser is evident in the literature (Kraatz 1865, Baudi 1875, Heyden et al. 1883, Ragusa 1896, Reitter 1900, Gebien 1910, Peyerimhoff 1925).</p> <p>Gridelli (1930) suggested the need for a deep revision of this species or group of species due to their great variability, appealing to the need to study the Solier’s types (1835) to clarify the actual taxonomic status.</p> <p>Koch (1941) considered T. barbara Solier, T. castrogironai Escalera (= T. occidentalis Peyerimhoff), T. sardea Solier and T. basalis Schaufuss, morphotypes belonging to the complex of nearby species of T. grossa Besser. Nevertheless, he did not make a comparative study of the different geographical forms for supporting the hypothesis, nor referred to main features as the male genitalia.</p> <p>Español (1954, 1960), and later Viñolas &amp; Cartagena (2005), adopted the Gridelli’s (1930) criteria, and Koch (1941) established the synonymy T. basalis Schaufuss = T. grossa Besser.</p> <p>Ardoin (1973) described T. grossa ssp. sardiniensis after establishing the synonymy T. sardea Solier = T. latreillei Solier, without examining the type specimens and assuming that T. sardea Solier must come from “Barberie” and not from Sardinia as indicated Solier (1835).</p> <p>Gardini (1995) distinguished four subespecies of T. grossa Besser in the Italian fauna (including Sardinia and Sicily): T. grossa grossa Besser, T. grossa angustata Kraatz, T. grossa sommieri Baudi, and T. grossa sardiniensis Ardoin.</p> <p>Aliquò &amp; Leo (1999) indicated that T. grossa Besser shows diverse races in Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Balearics, Malta, Crete, Sardinian, Tyrrhenian coast from Italy, Ionian and Adriatic, Sicily and in numerous satellite islands, making it necessary an in-depth review.</p> <p>Ferrer (2008), in his contribution to the Catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera, considered T. grossa basalis Schaufuss valid subspecies.</p> <p>Aliquò &amp; Soldati (2014) considered the four subspecies differenced by Gardini (1995). Nevertheless, these authors did not mention the other species described by Solier (1835) in the Italian and North Africa faunas.</p> <p>Recently Leo &amp; Lo Cascio (2021), propose T. grossa ssp. basalis Schaufuss and T. grossa ssp. sardiniensis Ardoin, new synonymies of T. grossa Besser, in addition to four other taxa described by Solier (1835), whose types are unknown to date, as they have not been referenced by any author since their description.</p> <p>Beyond the difficulty of the T. grossa Besser complex, derived from the intraspecific variability recently highlighted by Leo &amp; Lo Cascio (2021), and the disparity of criteria of all the authors, the establishment of the synonymic and infraspecific classification of T. grossa Besser must firstly involve the location and study of the types described by Solier (Gridelli 1930), which appear in each of the taxonomic proposals of all the authors.</p> <p>Meanwhile, we consider that the synonymies of T. grossa ssp. basalis Schaufuss and T. grossa ssp. sardiniensis Ardoin, proposed by Leo &amp; Lo Cascio (2021), are not sufficiently justified since these authors do not take into account that the impossibility of distinguishing some specimens from the type form, cited as an argument, could be due to anthropic introductions throughout history, as they themselves propose to explain the presence of T. grossa Besser on the island of Crete.</p> <p>For all these reasons, and until more exhaustive studies are carried out, we maintain the differential identity of these island populations. A differential diagnosis is provided to distinguish the specimens considered typical of these taxa.</p> <p>Differential diagnosis: T. grossa ssp. basalis (Fig. 217) and T. grossa ssp. sardiniensis, share similar morphological pattern and, above all, identical aedeagus. However, T. grossa ssp. basalis differs from T. grossa ssp. sardiniensis in the epistome which is less gibbous, with the frontal edge straight and more triangular; gular groove well defined and with the edge crenulated, while in T. grossa ssp. sardiniensis is not delimited; thickest and densest punctures; sides of the pronotum in a closer curve from the base to the apex, the base is less prolonged backwards (especially in the females), and with the margin less thick, particularly in the central lobe; the elytra are less oval with the widest base; the prosternal apophyses is lanceolate and depressed towards the centre, spoon-shaped, regularly narrowed towards the posterior end which is blunt and not bent downward, whereas in T. grossa ssp. sardiniensis, shows subparallel sides, narrowed in a straight line later from the end of the procoxas, with the end truncated and slightly bent, the central depression marked by a line and a small and rounded pit on the edge of the posterior end.</p> <p>The differences of these taxa with T. grossa Besser from Calabria and Sicilia, are more evident, because this last species shows the head with slightly convex eyes and without overflowing the lateral contour; the epistome, less thickened and poorly delimited, with the less developed tooth; it also differs by the pronotum, less transverse and more orbicular, with more marked punctures, basal margin less thickened and usually not sinuate before the posterior angles that are very obtuse and hardly indicated; the prosternal process with parallel sides and smoothly converging towards the apex that is very blunt and somewhat bent downward, with a central depression, broad and subcircular in the last third. Likewise, compared with T. grossa ssp. sardiniensis and T. grossa ssp. basalis, the elytra are proportionally shorter, generally rough and with the basal margin finer and, in some specimens, somewhat crenulated.</p> <p>Geographical distribution: Balearic endemism, present in diverse localities of Mallorca and Menorca (Español, 1954, 1958, 1960, Viñolas 1986, Viñolas &amp; Cartagena 2005, Leo &amp; Lo Cascio 2021).</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FFBE5E75F9A3FD2FD52DFE4E	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FFB85E74F9A3FD82D261FE68.text	8F6B0B50FFB85E74F9A3FD82D261FE68.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria castiliana (, C. KOCH 1944) Koch. 1944	<div><p>Tentyria castiliana Koch, 1944 (Figs. 32, 66, 102, 137, 148, 182, 218, 246)</p> <p>Tentyria peiroleri castiliana Koch, 1944a: 226; Español 1960: 406.</p> <p>Tentyria peiroleri Solier sensu Kraatz 1865: 135, Viñolas 1986: 103, Viñolas &amp; Cartagena 2005: 276 (part.).</p> <p>Tentyria (Subtentyrina) castillana L̂bl &amp; Smetana 2008: 206, Martínez 2018: 58.</p> <p>Tentyria castillana Iwan &amp; L̂bl 2020: 248</p> <p>Tentyria bassii ssp. gredosana Koch, 1944a: 230 syn. nov.</p> <p>Types examined: Two syntypes of Tentyria peiroleri ssp. castiliana Koch, carrying the following labels: TYPUS, Tentyria peirolerii ssp. castiliana, C. KOCH, 1944 / ALCAZAR d. S. JUAN, Prov. Ciud. Real Hi. c. G. Frey, C. Koch, V.1943 (1♁, NHMB) (Fig. 246); TYPUS, peirolerii ssp. castiliana, C. KOCH, 1944 / Quero, Hi. c. 20.5.1934 C. Koch (1♀, NHMB).</p> <p>Type de Tentyria bassii ssp. gredosana Koch (Fig. 248), bearing the following labels: TYPUS, bassii ssp. gredosana C. KOCH, 1944 / Sammlung H Gebien / Piedralaves, Hi. S. de Gredos, 18.5.34, C. Koch (1♀, NHMB).</p> <p>Additional Material: Ávila: El Tiemblo, 10.V.1985 (1 ex, CJF); Navarredonda, Gredos, 15.V.1982, J. Plaza leg. (1♁ and 1♀, CJF); Puerto Casillas, 10-5-1987, A. del Saz leg (1♁, CJLB). Madrid: Colmenarejo, O. Ferrer leg., Tentyria peiroleri Sol., P. Ardoin det. (1 ex, CJF); Valdemoro, Madrid (1 ex, CJF); Batres, 29.V.2004, J. J. de la Rosa leg. (1♀, CACT); La Marañosa, S. Martín de la Vega, 25.VII.1984, J.L. Bujalance leg. (1♀, CJLB); Getafe, VII-1946, S.V. Peris leg. Tentyria peiroleri castiliana (2♁♁, MNCN); Getafe, J. Sanz leg. (1♀, MNCN); Madrid, J. Ferrer leg. (1♁, CJLB). Toledo: Quero, V-1908, Tentyria peiroleri, J. Sanz leg. (1♀, MNCN); Fuensalida, VII.1988, F.A. Montes leg. (3♀♀, CJF); Idem, 22.VIII.1955, F. Español det. and leg. (1 ex CJF); Laguna de la Peña Hueca, Villacañas, 21.V.2004, A. Castro Tovar leg. (1♁ and 4♀♀, CACT; 1♁ and 2♀♀, CJLB); Montalban, VI.1981, B. Lassalle leg. (1♀ and 1♁, CJF).</p> <p>Diagnosis: The typical form of T. castiliana Koch (Fig. 218) shows black, smooth, and very bright tegument; Head (Fig. 32) with the eyes usually not very convex, anteriorly sub-rounded epistome, narrow, shallow, and unwell delimited (in the middle) gular groove (Fig. 66); commonly pronotum quite transverse (Fig. 102), almost one and a half times wider than long, slightly convex, with fine but perceptible punctures, very curved sides and somewhat narrower towards the base.This is well margined bay a groove and slightly curved and prolonged backward, frequently slightly sinuous before the posterior angles, which are very obtuse and not noticeable; prosternal apophysis (Fig. 137) broad, subparallel-sided, rounded posteriorly, smooth and not, or barely, furrowed in the middle; usually little evident sexual dimorphism in the protibiae. Convex, elongated and regularly oval elytra in the males; stubby and more acuminate towards the apex in the females; generally smooth, sometimes with marks of striae finely punctured, with the apex of each elytra thorn shaped, by fusion of the superior and inferior margins of the end of the epipleura (Fig. 148), although sometimes it is only observable at high magnification; narrow and elongated aedeagus (Fig. 182), about 4 mm long, with subparallel sides, and the parameres barely longer than the phallobase.</p> <p>Comments: As already indicated (comments T. peiroleri Solier), T. castiliana Koch, is valid species, taxonomically and geographically separated from T. peiroleri Solier, which is an Andalusian species, not Valencian as Koch (1944a) suggested. The Levantine specimens were confused with the nominal form of T. peiroleri Solier by all the recent authors but really, they belong to a geographic variety of T. aragonica Koch, a species very close to T. castiliana Koch. Viñolas &amp; Cartagena (2005) synonymized these two taxa with T. peiroleri sensu Viñolas &amp; Cartagena (2005) so the geographic distribution they proposed cannot be assumed.</p> <p>On the other hand, after examining the type of T. bassii ssp. gredosana Koch, we did not find significant differences with the variant forms of T. castiliana Koch. These specimens are differentiated from the morphotype by the slenderer body; less bright tegument with denser and thicker punctures; slightly more convex eyes and the sculpture of the surface of the elytra often with traces of stretch marks.</p> <p>Geographical distribution: Species described from Alcázar de San Juan (Ciudad Real, Spain) and typical in centre of the Iberian Peninsula, reaching the Central System. It has been recorded in the provinces of Ciudad Real, Toledo, Madrid (Koch, 1944a, Español, 1960) and Ávila.</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FFB85E74F9A3FD82D261FE68	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FFB95E77F9A3FE1ED019FD12.text	8F6B0B50FFB95E77F9A3FE1ED019FD12.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria aragonica Koch. We 1944	<div><p>Tentyria aragonica Koch, 1944 (Figs. 33, 67, 103, 138, 183, 219)</p> <p>Tentyria aragonica Koch, 1944a: 231; Español 1960: 406, Ferrer (in L̂bl &amp; Smetana 2008), Martínez 2018: 58, Iwan &amp; L̂bl 2020: 248.</p> <p>Tentyria peiroleri Solier sensu Viñolas 1986: 103; Viñolas &amp; Cartagena 2005: 276 (part.).</p> <p>Types examined: The type of Tentyria aragonica (Teruel, Albarracín, Jaitner leg.) was not found among other types described by Koch and preserved in G. Frey coll. (NHMB).</p> <p>Additional material: Alicante: Ibi, 8.VII.1981, J.M. Vela leg. (1 ex, CJLB). Teruel: Frías, Albarracín, VII.1958, F. Español leg. / Tentyria peiroleri aragonica Koch, MZB / 85-6524, MZB (2♀♀ and 1♁, MCNB); idem / 85-6525, MZB (1♁, MCNB); Teruel, VIII.1941, Villalta leg. / 85-6527 (1♀, MCNB); Teruel, IV.1954, Picaud leg. / 85-6165 (1♀ and 1 ♁, MCNB); Teruel 935 m, B. Muñoz leg. / VIII.31 / MNCN _ Ent. NºCat. 70810-70811 (2 ♁♁, MNCN); idem / IV.31 / 70812, 70814 (2 ♁♁); idem / V.30 / 70813 (1♁); Ejulve, Teruel, VIII-58, Gracia leg. / 85-6526 (1♀, MCNB); Alcañiz, 12.VI.1957, Vives leg. / 85-6528 (1♀, MCNB); Teruel, Alcañiz, 20.IX.1993, C. Jeanne leg. (CFS); Javalambre, Teruel, Schraum leg. (MNHN). Valencia: Deh. Albufera (Valencia) Moróder leg. / Muséum Paris, 1678, Coll. P. Ardoin (1♁, MNHN); Requena, Tentyria peiroleri Sol. / ex. Deyrolle (1♀, MNCN); Valencia, Hispania / etiquetas coll. Reitter, det. J. Ferrer / Tentyria castiliana Koch, 1944 stat. nov., Bujalance &amp; Ferrer des. 2011 (1♀ and 1♁, NRMS); Valencia, Hispania (1♀, NRMS); Tentyria peiroleri Sol., Valencia, coll. Frey (NHMB); Valencia, Bétera, Peris Torres leg., Tentyria peiroleri Sol. det. F. Español (CJF). Zaragoza: Sabinar de Retuerta de Pina, Pina de Ebro, 25.V.1992, J. Blasco leg. (1 ♁, CJLB); Peñaflor, 4.VI.1952, S.V. Peris leg., T. peiroleri aragonica Koch, Español det. (1♀, MNCN); Vedado de Peñaflor, 18.II.2007, Murria leg. (2 ♀♀, CJLB); Zaragoza capital, Barrio de la Cartuja, III.1999, F. Murria Beltrán leg. (CJF); Montes de Torrero, III.1999, ídem (CJF); Bujaralaz, Monasterio de Rueda, 29.IV.2001, L. Soldati leg. (CLS); Bujaralaz, Laguna de Playa, 29.IV.2001, F. Soldati (CFS).</p> <p>Diagnosis (according to the morphotypes from Albarracín): Robust body (Fig. 219), about 11.5 to 15.5 mm long; smooth and very bright tegument. Strong and dense punctures in head and pronotum, those of the elytra something finer and more dispersed, but well noticeable. Head (Fig. 33) with convex eyes, back converging temples, raised supraorbital folds, curved, and forward prolonged epistome, wide and deep (in the middle) gular groove (Fig. 67), narrowed at the sides. Convex, discoidal, and transverse pronotum (Fig. 103), with very curved sides, equally narrowed forward and behind, very obtuse, barely marked rear angles, thick margined, and slightly backward prolonged, particularly in males. Parallel-sided prosternal apophysis (Fig. 138) narrower that of T. castiliana, with the rear end rounded and down bent (in ventral view); dimorphism sexual of protibia observable but not very noticeable. Very convex elytra, in males slightly wider than the pronotum, ovate, elongated and narrowed, almost equally towards the base than in the apex, rounded humeri. In general, shorter, and stubby in the females, sometimes with superficial traces of longitudinal stria; aedeagus (Fig. 183) about 3.7–4 mm in length, with the phallobase wider and shorter than the parameters, which are narrowed from the base to the apex, in sinuous line.</p> <p>Comments: T. aragonica Koch, was described as species close to the group of T. bassii Solier, however this last species shows a series of features that make it unmistakable: shape of head and convexity of eyes; gross and very dense punctures of the entire surface of the body; deeper gular groove, graceful legs, and noticeable sexual dimorphism of male protibiae, and shape of the aedeagus. Likewise, Koch (1944a) placed it close to the group of T. peiroleri sensu Koch (not T. peiroleri Solier). Español (1960), Viñolas (1986) and Viñolas &amp; Cartagena (2005) considered it specifically inseparable from T. peiroleri sensu Koch.</p> <p>As already was exposed, T. peiroleri Solier has been a misinterpreted species and not taxonomically related with T. aragonica Koch. We consider that this taxon is very close to T. castiliana Koch and that, like this one, it shows great variability that in many cases makes it difficult the correct identification. The typical form from Teruel of T. aragonica Koch differs from T. castiliana Koch, by the shape of the head, with somewhat more convex eyes, and projected forward epistome, separated from the gena by a more apparent sinuosity; usually less transverse pronotum, stronger and densely punctured and with the base more curved and sinuate before the posterior angles; the protibia of the males slightly more graceful and somewhat sinuate in the internal edge; apex of the elytra not spiniform, and aedeagus, with the parameters clearly longer than the phallobase.</p> <p>The variability of some specimens is related to size, smaller in specimens of the inland of the Levante region (these specimens were considered by Koch and later authors the typical nominal form of T. peiroleri Solier); less bright cuticle and the less manifest head features; usually smooth surface of the elytra, but also it may be clearly striated, striated-rough or simply rough, but always very superficially; and the punctures of the body surface, variable in thicknes and densely marked.</p> <p>Geographical distribution: Species described from Albarracín (Teruel), it is present in the centre and eastern of the Iberian Peninsula, typical of the Iberian System Mountains, extending to the north by the Ebro basin, and to the south through the inland of the Levantine zone. It has been recorded in the provinces of Zaragoza, Teruel, Valencia, and Alicante.</p> <p>Group of T. pazi</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FFB95E77F9A3FE1ED019FD12	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FFBA5E77F9A3FCDAD00CF8FD.text	8F6B0B50FFBA5E77F9A3FCDAD00CF8FD.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria pazi Espanol 1958	<div><p>Tentyria pazi Español, 1958 (Figs. 34, 68, 104, 139, 184, 220)</p> <p>Tentyria (Subtentyrina) pazi Español, 1958: 13; Español 1960: 406, Compte 1969: 117, Viñolas 1986: 104, Viñolas &amp; Cartagena 2005: 83 fig.358a, L̂bl &amp; Smetana 2008: 206, Martínez 2018: 58, Iwan &amp; L̂bl 2020: 251.</p> <p>Types examined: Three paratypes: Castellón de la Plana, Columbretes Islands, XII.1956, Paz leg. (ex coll. F. Español, CJF); Columbretes Islands, V.1957, F. Español leg. (MCNB).</p> <p>Additional material: Columbretes Islands, Grossa (Castellón), 13–17.IV.1994, Mª A. Marcos leg., Tentyria pazi Español, 1958, Mª C. Cartagena det. (1♁, CJLB); idem, S. Bordera leg. (1♀, CJLB).</p> <p>Diagnosis: Elongated, quite convex, and dull black body (Fig. 220). Rounded head (Fig. 34), almost as wide as long and narrowed behind the eyes which are big and feebly convex, epistome without tooth in the middle, conspicuous supra-orbital folds, strong and dense punctures, like those of the pronotum. Well noticeable gular groove (Fig. 68) but not very deep and erased on the sides. Moderately transverse pronotum (Fig. 104), narrower than the elytra, with rounded sides, the maximum width in the middle and more slightly narrowed towards the base than towards the anterior margin, the base is also rounded and thickly margined, slightly projecting backwards and barely sinuous to each side, obtuse and not well indicated rear angles; quite strong and dense punctures; prosternal apophysis (Fig. 139) parallel-sided and converging at the end which is bent down in ventral view, and slightly and longitudinally furrowed in the middle; graceful legs and with clear sexual dimorphism in the protibiae; ovate, striated-rough elytra with the base in line almost straight towards the scutellum completely margined; aedeagus (Fig. 184) with the parameres somewhat longer than the phallobase, of slightly sinuous contour and truncated at the apex.</p> <p>Comments: T. pazi Español shows a set of morphological features that make it unmistakable with the rest of its Iberian congeners (Español 1956). However, although morphologically is clearly identifiable, the comparative study of the male genitalia evidences the proximity with the T. mucronata group.</p> <p>Geographic distribution: Endemic species from the Columbretes islands (Castellón) (Español 1958, 1960, Compte 1969, Viñolas &amp; Cartagena 2005).</p> <p>Group of T. bifida</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FFBA5E77F9A3FCDAD00CF8FD	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FFBA5E76F9A3F889D45EFCDA.text	8F6B0B50FFBA5E76F9A3F889D45EFCDA.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria bifida Bujalance, Cardenas, Ferrer & Gallardo 2016	<div><p>Tentyria bifida Bujalance, Cárdenas, Ferrer &amp; Gallardo, 2016 (Figs. 35, 69, 105, 140, 153, 185, 221)</p> <p>Tentyria bifida Bujalance, Cárdenas, Ferrer &amp; Gallardo, 2016: 350; Martínez 2018: 58, Iwan &amp; L̂bl 2020: 248.</p> <p>Types examined: Holotype ♁: Caño Mayor, Doñana N. P. (Huelva); 28.VII.2005, J.L. Bujalance leg. (MNCN). Paratypes: same data as the Holotype (11♁♁ and 21♀♀, CJLB) (1♁ and 1♀, CACT) (1♀, CJF). Caño Mayor, Doñana N. P., 6.VII.2005, J.L. Bujalance leg. (5♁♁ and 3♀♀, CJLB) (2♁♁ and 1♀, CJF); El Charco de la Boca, Doñana N. P., 25.XI.2001, A. Cárdenas leg. (1♀, CUCO); 7.VIII.2001 (1 ex, CUCO); 30.VII.2001 (1♁ and 3♀♀, CUCO). La Casa de la Pichiricha, Doñana N. P., 25.VI.2001 (3♁♁ and 1♀, CUCO); 16.VII.2001 (1♀, CUCO); 30.VII.2001 (17♁♁ and 23♀♀, CUCO); 6.VII.2001 (1♀, CUCO); 7.VIII.2001 (3♁♁ and 3♀♀, CUCO); 25.IX.2001 (2 exx, CUCO). Matasgordas, Doñana N. P., 30.VII.2001 (5♁♁, 1♀, and 1 specimen, CUCO).</p> <p>Diagnosis: Body somewhat elongated (Fig. 221); smooth, black intense and bright tegument, particularly in the ventral side. Head (Fig. 35) shaped as in Tentyria platyceps Steven, subtriangular epistome slightly protruding forward, provided with a tooth at the middle; punctures quite fine but perceptible, not confluent and greater that in the pronotum; sub-right and transverse, well defined, broad and deep gular groove (Fig. 69), but not as deep than in T. platyceps; pronotum (Fig. 105) moderately transverse and convex, sided curved and narrowed towards the base, barely rounded and prolonged backward; posterior angles obtuse but discernible, punctures very fine and sparse; prosternal apophysis (Fig. 140) long and narrow, with the extreme bent upward in ventral view and surpassing backwards the level of procoxae. Protibiae not showing sexual dimorphism, with the margin right and progressively widened to the apex; elytra convex, smooth, punctures very fine, even more that in the pronotum, ovate and elongate, and almost as narrowed at the base as at the apex. Abdominal sternites smooth and bright, last urosternite with the apex bifid (Fig. 153). The aedeagus (Fig. 185) is small, with the parameres slightly strangled at the base and very curved in lateral view, conspicuously shorter and more curved than the phallobase.</p> <p>Geographic distribution: Endemism from Doñana National Park (Huelva) (Bujalance et al. 2016).</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FFBA5E76F9A3F889D45EFCDA	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
8F6B0B50FFBB5E7DF9A3FB36D4E5FCD1.text	8F6B0B50FFBB5E7DF9A3FB36D4E5FCD1.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Tentyria	<div><p>Key of the species of Tentyria from the Iberian Peninsula, Columbretes islands and Balearic archipelago:</p> <p>1 Base of pronotum protruding backwards forming a central lobe, bi-dentate or indented, seldom truncate (Figs.70–77)..... 2</p> <p>- Base of pronotum without these features (Figs. 78–105)...................................................... 3</p> <p>2 Pronotum configured according to Figs. 70–72; base of elytra entirely margined, excavated only in the middle, near the scutellum, just surrounding the basal lobe of pronotum (Figs. 143, 144); parameres of the aedeagus with the apex truncated or blunt (Figs. 154–156)................................................................................ 13</p> <p>- Pronotum configured according to Figs. 73–77; base of elytra backward curved, from the humeri (Fig. 142), which are somewhat angled, but always well noticeable; the margin thin or erased before the scutellum; parameres of the aedeagus with the apex sharp, mucronate or distinctly toothed (Figs. 157–161)....................................................... 4</p> <p>3 Species showing the apex of the anal sternite bifid (Fig. 153).................................................. 25</p> <p>- Species showing the anal sternite normally configured, rounded or truncate, but not bifid (Figs. 149–152)............... 5</p> <p>4 Head with parallel temples and epistome truncate and usually without perceptible tooth (Figs. 4–7); pronotum finely punctured, teeth of the central lobe very blunt (Figs. 73–76); base of elytra not completely margined; male protibiae commonly sinuous in the inner margin and longer than those of the female (Fig. 141); anal sternite truncated apically (Fig. 149); aedeagus with parameres elongated and of similar length as the phallobase (Figs. 157–160)..................................... 14</p> <p>- Head with the epistome rounded from the genae and provide with a small tooth somewhat perceptible (Fig. 8); pronotum with dense and strong punctures; base fully margined and with the central lobe commonly feebly excavated or bidentate (Fig. 77); base of elytra entirely margined; anal sternite rounded apically (Fig. 150); aedeagus with parameres curved and conspicuously shorter than the phallobase (Fig. 161).................................................................... 15</p> <p>5 Large head, broad and widely extended in front of eyes which are very convex, epistome triangular, thickened ahead, and with a noticeable tooth in the middle (Fig. 31); gular groove very wide, and transverse and deep (Fig. 65); pronotum with the basal margin curved, very thick and sinuous before the posterior angles (Fig. 101); prosternal apophysis protruding behind the procoxae (Fig. 136); elytra with the basal margin thick and raised, especially in the humeri which are very well marked (Fig. 145); robust and large specimens; aedeagus large and robust, about 5 mm in length (Fig. 181)....................... 22</p> <p>- Without the abovementioned features..................................................................... 6</p> <p>6 Head with very convex eyes, temples converging to the vertex, epistome somewhat rounded and provided with a small median tooth, more conspicuous in lateral view (Figs. 15, 16); gular groove commonly apparent and more or less deep (Figs. 50, 51); pronotum transverse, almost as wide as the elytra, particularly in males, with dense punctures (Fig. 84); apophysis prosternal commonly protruding backwards, between the procoxae (Figs. 120, 121); inner margin of protibiae in males feebly sinuous, and longer than in females (Fig.141); elytra densely punctured, usually more or less striated; humeri rounded, not angulous; aedeagus shaped as in Figs. 168, 169.................................................................... 18</p> <p>- Without the abovementioned features together.............................................................. 7</p> <p>7 Head with the sides subparallel or parallel, temples not converging to vertex, eyes flattened, epistome truncate or sub-truncate, exceptionally rounded, often trapezoidal (Figs. 9–13); gular groove superficial, generally feebly delimited (Figs. 44–48); pronotum with punctures fine and sparse, the base curved and more or less protruding backwards and strongly margined (Figs. 78–82); base of elytra curved, receiving the base of pronotum; apex of the anal urosternite truncated or slightly sinuate (Fig. 149); aedeagus according to Figs. 162–166................................................................. 16</p> <p>- Head with the epistome more or less rounded anteriorly, triangular or with the margin sinuate (Figs. 14–35); overall, without the abovementioned features together..................................................................... 8</p> <p>8 Head short, eyes flattened, exceptionally somewhat convex, the supraorbital fold slightly raised; epistome rounded from the genae, with a small tooth at middle (Figs. 24–27); gular groove commonly narrow and normally reduced to a central depression (Figs. 58–61); Pronotum with the base, usually, curved and more or less protruding backwards, finely margined, sometimes slightly sinuate before the posterior angles, which are obtuse and usually not well noticeable, proportionally large, sometimes nearly as broad as the elytra and with dense punctures, the sides regularly curved, but the curve more pronounced at base (Figs. 92–97); protibiae lack clear sexual dimorphism; aedeagus with the parameres shorter or almost equal than the phallobase (Figs. 176–179).......................................................................................... 20</p> <p>- Without the abovementioned features together.............................................................. 9</p> <p>9 Head proportionally large, eyes flattened; epistome triangular or subtriangular, and provided with a conspicuous tooth (Fig. 14); gular groove broad, very deep, well delimited at each side (Fig. 49); pronotum very variable with very fine punctures, usually not transverse; base almost straight, never sinuate before posterior angle and often narrower than the anterior margin (Fig. 83); prosternal apophyse elongated, surpassing the procoxae (Fig. 119); elytra narrow, with subparalel sides, slightly broader than pronotum, sometimes with vestigial striae and variable in length; aedeagus with the parameres widened in the middle, slightly longer than phallobase (Fig. 167)........................................................................ 17</p> <p>- Without the abovementioned features together............................................................. 10</p> <p>10 Head broad, epistome more or less protruding forwards, but never truncate or triangular, with dense punctures, without medial tooth or very inconspicuous, commonly with the maximum width after eyes, because of presenting very convex temples, sometimes become broader before eyes because of the genae are widened, two lateral cephalic depressions at each side, at the level of the antennal insertion, and sometimes with another depression on the disc, supraorbital folds very raised, curved and sinuate, rarely sub-straight (Figs. 28–30); gular groove straight, narrow and moderately deep (Figs. 62–64); pronotum scarcely convex, distinctly transverse, the base broadly margined, curved and often more or less sinuates before posterior angles (Figs. 98–100); elytra smooth or feebly rough, sometimes with vestigial striae; aedeagus with parameres conspicuously longer than phallobase and with slightly sinuate sides; penis narrowed before the apex (Fig. 180).............................. 21</p> <p>- Without the abovementioned features together............................................................. 11</p> <p>11 Elytra provided with striae and wrinkles in zigzag; shape oval-elongate from base to apex, which is normally rounded, not bifid, with the base in line almost straight towards the scutellum; Head as broad as long, narrowed behind the eyes, which are large and feebly convex, rounded epistome without tooth in the middle, the supra-orbital fold conspicuous (Fig. 34); pronotum convex and feebly transverse, base broadly margined, protruding in curved backwards, feebly sinuate before the posterior angles, which are obtuse, the punctures strong and dense, similar to those of the head (Fig. 104); aedeagus presenting the parameres slightly longer than the phallobase and slightly sinuate (Fig. 184); matte tegument................................. 24</p> <p>- Without the abovementioned features together............................................................. 12</p> <p>12 Pronotum transverse, slightly convex with the sides openly curved from base to the apex, base curved and barely protruding backwards, normally slightly sinuate before posterior angles, which are obtuse and not or barely indicated (Figs. 102, 103); gular groove narrow, shallow and poorly defined in the centre (Figs. 66, 67); male protibiae quite similar to those of female; aedeagus narrow and elongate, the parameres slightly longer or clearly longer than the phallobase (Figs. 182, 183); tegument smooth and shiny.................................................................................... 23</p> <p>- Pronotum moderately or slightly transverse, in the latter case very convex, with the base straight or slightly curved and somewhat protruding backward (Figs. 85–91); usually without the abovementioned features together.......................... 19</p> <p>13 GROUP OF Tentyria mucronata (Northeastern Iberian Peninsula and Balear archipelago):</p> <p>A Basal lobe of pronotum with the margin thinned or deleted in the middle, often bimucronate (Fig. 70); humeri rounded, the base of the elytra narrowed and very curved from the humerus (Fig. 144); aedeagus narrow, about 3.7 mm in length, with the parameres somewhat longer than the phallobase, the side subparallel and sinuate (Fig. 154); species from the northeastern coast of the Iberian Peninsula...................................................................... T. mucronata</p> <p>- Basal lobe of pronotum with the margin more or less thick, slightly bimucronate or truncate (Figs. 71, 72); base of the elytra wide, curved next to the scutellum and in straight line till the humeri which are angled and fallen down (Fig. 143); aedeagus proportionally wider, and with sides less parallel than in the previous species (Figs. 155, 156); species from the Balearic archipielago......................................................................................... B</p> <p>B Head with the eyes slightly convex, not clearly exceeding the lateral contour, epistome broad and rounded at its leading edge (Fig. 2); pronotum transverse, the sides regularly curved from the basis to the apex, with the basal lobe scarcely back protruding, very slightly bidentate (Fig. 71); Elytra striated or rough-striated and broader than the pronotum; body robust and tegument dull................................................................................ T. schaumi</p> <p>- Head with big and convex eyes, exceeding the lateral contour, epistome narrower and subtriangular (Fig. 3); pronotum less transverse, with narrower sides towards the base than towards the apex; base of pronotum narrower and margined, with the middle lobe barely indented, rather truncated or even rounded (Fig. 72); elytra barely broader than pronotum, smooth or weakly striate and very oblong in appearance; graceful and bright body, with very fine and hardly noticeable punctures.. T. ophiusae</p> <p>14 GROUP of Tentyria subcostata (littoral the meridional Iberian Peninsula):</p> <p>A Base of pronotum entirely margined, sinuate before the posterior angles, which are straight or sub-straight and well-marked (Figs. 74, 75).............................................................................. T. sinuatocollis</p> <p>a Pronotum barely transverse, at least in males, maximum width at the middle, punctures fine and sparse and the basis noticeaably trisinuated (Fig. 74); elytra ovate and elongate, widener in females....................... ssp. sinuatocollis</p> <p>- Pronotum transverse, subcordiform, maximum width before the middle, the punctures almost imperceptible, the base usually bisinuous and the medium lobe frequently truncate (Fig. 75); elytra shorter and broader, often somewhat deep at the suture line.................................................................................. ssp. escalerai nov.</p> <p>- Base of pronotum with the margin very fine and, commonly deleted at the medium lobe, posterior angles very obtuse, barely indicated in dorsal view (Figs. 73, 76)................................................................... B</p> <p>B Pronotum transverse and convex, maximum width at the middle, constricted forwards and backwards, resulting in a nearly pentagonal shape (Fig. 76); sexual dimorphism of protibiae not observable; elytra broad and convex, variably striated or with vestigial striae; aedeagus with parameres as long and broad as the phallobase, endophallus (penis) thick but sharply constricted before apex (Fig. 160).......................................................................... T. lateritia</p> <p>- Pronotum moderately convex, the sides regularly curved from the base to the apex (Fig. 73); protibiae in males long and sinuate in the inner side; overall, without the abovementioned features................................................ C</p> <p>C Elytra robust and conspicuously ribbed and rough, with fine or inconspicuous punctures; the punctures in the pronotum fine but well distinguishable; aedeagus of 3.5-4 mm length, with the parameres strongly acuminate at the apex (Fig. 158); usually large and robust specimens...................................................................... T. striatorugosa</p> <p>- Elytra smooth, or with vestigial ribs, finely but more conspicuously punctured than the previous species; the punctures in the pronotum less noticeable; aedeagus smaller, about 3–3.5 mm length, and with the parameres not so strongly acuminate (Fig. 157); smaller and more graceful specimens...................................................... T. subcostata</p> <p>15 GROUP OF Tentyria faroensis (Southern Portugal):......................................... T. faroensis sp. nov.</p> <p>16 GROUP OF Tentyria curculionoides (Atlantic, Western and Northwestern species):</p> <p>A Supraorbital folds generally feebly elevate and separate from the eye in dorsal view (Figs. 9, 10); pronotum with the posterior angles obtuse and usually inconspicuous in dorsal view, the base backwards prolonged continuing the curvature of the sides of the pronotum (Figs. 78, 79); elytra generally very convex and robust, rough-striated very finely punctured, provide with wide and slightly elevated ribs, crossed by transverse wrinkles; base of the elytra fully margined; sexual dimorphism of protibia unremarkable; aedeagus with regularly narrowed parameres from the base to the apex, of similar or shorter length than phallobase, the endophallus broad as in T. lateritia (Figs. 162, 163)............................................. B</p> <p>- Supraorbital fold well developed and next to the eyes, the space between them invisible in dorsal view (Figs. 11–13); pronotum with posterior angles obtuse and generally well indicated, the base openly curved, scarcely protruding backwards and often sinuated at the posterior angles (Figs. 80–82); elytra smooth or only with vestigial lines of striae, and punctures as the pronotum, frequently with the basal margin interrupted before the scutellum; sexual dimorphism of protibia is conspicuous; aedeagus more stylized with the parameres subparallels and similar in length or longer than the phallobase (Figs. 164–166)....... C</p> <p>B Pronotum transverse, subpentagonal, basal margin broad and slightly sinuate to the posterior angles (Fig. 79); prosternal apophysis narrow and lanceolate (Fig. 115); aedeagus with parameres nearly equal or shorter than the phallobase (Fig. 163)................................................................................... T. stupefacta sp. nov.</p> <p>- Pronotum more regularly curved than in the precedent species, not subpentagonal, basal margin with finer carena, forming a regular curve, not so protruding backwards (Fig. 78); prosternal apophyses broadened and rounded at the end, not lancelolate (Fig. 114); aedeagus more robust, with the parameres and the phallobase very similar in length (Fig. 162). T. curculionoides</p> <p>C Supraorbital fold noticeable, with straight margin (Fig. 11); pronotum with the sides in a more closed curve towards the base than at the apex, the sides and the base slightly sinuated before the posterior angles which are well indicated, base curved and protruding backwards (Fig. 80); elytra generally smooth or with vestigial striae, base of elytra entirely margined. aedeagus reaching about 3.8 mm length, with the parameres slightly longer than the phallobase (Fig. 164)............... T. heydeni</p> <p>- Supraorbital fold barely noticeable, with sinuous margin (Figs. 12, 13); pronotum regularly and openly curved at sides, from base to anterior angles, not sinuate before posterior angles, base not so protruding backwards (Figs. 81, 82); base of elytra with the margin interrupted or rough and fuzzy before the scutellum; elytra more oval-elongate, not so convex and barely wider than pronotum, often striated-rough.......................................................................... D</p> <p>D Head with epistome truncate (Fig. 12); pronotum convex, broad and transverse, with well indicated posterior angles (Fig. 81); males protibiae almost equal to those of the female; elytra frequently very rough-striated, punctation greater than those of the pronotum, with the humeri well indicated; aedeagus reaching about 4.3 mm lenght, the parameres conspicuously longer (1/3 times) than the phallobase (Fig. 165); usually large and robust specimens with shiny black tegument.... T. espanoli sp. nov.</p> <p>- Head with epistome in general sub-truncate and longer (Fig. 13); pronotum barely convex, with posterior angles not so conspicuous (Fig. 82); males with longer and slender protibiae; elytra slightly constricted in the base, superficially striate-rough and sometimes practically smooth, very fine punctures, similar or less than those of the pronotum, the humeri almost rounded, non-angled; aedeagus of smaller size and with the parameres nearly equal or slightly longer than the phallobase (Fig. 166); specimens more graceful and smaller, with matte tegument and black, but less intense..................... T. interrupta</p> <p>17 G ROUP OF Tentyria platyceps (species from the interior centro-meridional lands of Iberian Peninsula):....... T. platyceps</p> <p>18 GROUP OF Tentyria bassii (species from the interior of the Iberian Peninsula, distributed in the western half, especially in the southwestern quadrant): A Apex of elytra very acuminated or spiniform due to the convergence of the upper and lower margins of the epipleura (Fig. 146); broad and convex eyes (Fig. 16)............................................................... T. eulipoides</p> <p>- Apex of elytra not bifid neither spiny; the head is narrower than in the previous species, with smaller eyes (Fig. 15); females usually with very stubby elytra; tegument with more strong and denser punctures; smaller and more graceful specimens ….…............................................................................................. T. bassii</p> <p>19 GROUP OF Tentyria peiroleri (south-eastern Iberian Peninsula):</p> <p>A Head showing large eyes, with sharp and denticulate epistome (Fig. 22); gular groove wide and deep, well defined (Fig. 56), comparable to T. grossa ssp. basalis and T. platyceps; pronotum barely transverse, at least in males, very convex, sub-globous, base straight or slightly curved (Fig. 90), strong and dense, but not confluent punctures; prosternal apophysis with the end rounded and usually broadly margined (Fig. 127); parameres with the sides slightly narrowing from the base to the apex, and barely longer than the phallobase which is oval shaped (Fig. 174)................................... T. kochi sp. nov.</p> <p>- Gular groove narrowed, at least on the sides, variable in depth, but never like in the previous species (Figs. 52–55); in general, without the previous features combined.................................................................. B</p> <p>B Head with the epistome of sub-rounded to angled, but always with a more or less developed tooth (Figs. 17, 18); gular groove moderately deep and often openly “V” shaped (Fig. 52); pronotum convex, scarcely transverse or sub-globose (Figs. 85, 86), with fine but dense and well-marked punctures almost equal to that of the head; short and oval elytra, on average less than 2.75 times the length of the prothorax; often more chubby in females; sometimes with signs of stretch marks and finely punctuated; apex non spiniform; aedeagous of 2.9–3.6 mm long, with the parameres subparallel at the sides, slightly narrower than the phallobase, which is similar in length or somewhat smaller than the parameres (Fig. 170); specimens, usually, not exceeding 14 mm in length................................................................................. T. peiroleri</p> <p>a Head broad, epistome barely angulate or subrounded and slightly sinuate at the sides (Fig. 17); pronotum very slightly transverse, the sides regularly curved, somewhat closed towards the base, obtuse and very slightly indicated posterior angles, the basal margin almost straight and barely sinuate before the posterior angles (Fig. 85); prosternal apophyse broad and barely prolonged beyond the procoxas (Fig. 122); oval elytra, often very chubby in females; last abdominal sternite slightly sinuate at the apex (Fig. 151). Specimens with an average size of 14 mm in length............................... ssp. peiroleri</p> <p>- Narrower head, usually with angulate or subtriangular epistome, (Fig. 18); pronotum less transverse and more convex, frequently suborbicular (Fig. 86); prosternal apophyses narrower and elongated, often pointed and surpassing the level of the procoxas (Fig. 123); last abdominal sternite not or barely sinuate at the apex; elytra proportionally shorter and narrower, often sub-cylindrical; smaller specimens, average 13.3 mm............................................... ssp. incerta</p> <p>- Without the above characteristics combined............................................................... C</p> <p>C Head with the epistome somewhat projected forward, rounded or sub-truncated without perceptible tooth (Figs. 19, 23); the gular groove (Figs. 53, 57) always very well noticeable and occasionally broad and deep, although never comparable to that of T. kochi; pronotum slightly transverse in males, well punctured, with the sides in open curve and anterior angles well indicated, the base is straight or slightly curved and generally sinuated at the posterior angles (Figs. 87, 91); more transverse and convex in females; elytra almost equally narrowed at the basis than at the apex; aedeagus with the parameres usually exceeding 2 mm length, and always longer and narrower than the phallobase (Figs. 171, 175)..................................... D</p> <p>- Head with rounder epistome and, often provided of a tiny tooth at the apex (Figs. 20, 21); the gular groove consisting in a central depression or narrow and shallow line (Figs. 54, 55). Pronotum more transverse, with sides in closer curve and the anterior angles rounded (Figs. 88, 89), occasionally sub-circular in shape. Wide and oval elytra and clearly narrower towards the apex, which can be spiny; parameres with the maximum width in the middle, almost as broad as the phallobase and a little longer than this, usually not more than 2 mm in length (Figs. 172, 173)................................. T. sublaevis a Head small (Fig. 20); gular groove often consisting of a shallow central depression and two lateral notches (Fig. 54); pronotum transverse, usually with fine punctures (Fig. 88); oval elytra elongated towards the apex, that never is spiny, but often of subparallel sides; aedeagus about 3.4 mm long on average (Fig. 172); specimens graceful, about 13.7 mm long....... ssp. sublaevis</p> <p>- Big head (Fig. 21); narrow and scarcely deep gular groove (Fig. 55); pronotum variable and somewhat less transverse (Fig. 89); occasionally subcircular; punctures fine but evident and scarcely marked on the disc; oval and elongate elytra, and clearly narrower towards the apex, which is acuminate or even spiny by the prolongation of the upper margin of the epipleura, usually exceeding the last abdominal sternite (Fig. 147); aedeagus about 4 mm long on average (Fig. 173). Body broader and more robust, reaching 16 mm long............................................................... ssp. cognata nov.</p> <p>D Pronotum densely punctured, small, about 2.8–3.3 mm long and 3.5–4.5 mm width, with the basis curved and usually sinuate before the posterior angles (Fig. 87); oval and elongated elytra, nearly three times longer than pronotum; the parameres of 1.1 times longer, on average, than the phallobase (Fig. 171); graceful specimens, 14.5 mm medium lengt............ T. prolixa</p> <p>- Pronotum of greater size (3.3–4 mm long; 4.3–5.2 mm broad) and less densely punctured (Fig. 91); elytra oval, shorter and wider, on average 2.75 times longer than the pronotum, with the apex somewhat sharp but not spiniform; aedeagus of greater size, about 4.25 mm long, with the parameres 1.25 times longer, on average, than the phallobase (Fig. 175); specimens more robust and shinier,15.4 mm medium length............................................... T. castrotovari sp. nov.</p> <p>20 GROUP OF Tentyria gaditana (littoral or sub-littoral areas of the southern Iberian Peninsula: Málaga, Cádiz and Huelva):</p> <p>A Striated-rough elytra, intervals slightly elevated and with tuberous wrinkles; pronotum transverse, with maximum width before the middle, very curved sides and narrowing towards the base which is very extended backwards in some specimens (Figs. 93, 94); protibiae of males slightly sinuate on inner edge; aedeagus robust, with the phallobase equal or nearly as long as the parameres (Fig. 177)........................................................................ T. corrugata</p> <p>- Smooth or sub-striated elytra, but never ribbed; pronotum generally less transverse, with less curved sides and narrowed almost equally towards both ends (Figs. 92, 95–97); protibiae without perceptible sexual dimorfism; aedeagus generally with parameres shorter than phallobase (Figs. 176, 178–179)....................................................... B</p> <p>B Elytra with narrow and curved base, tapering posteriorly by prolongation of the upper margin of the epipleure beyond the last abdominal sternite, smooth or with signs of striae, frequently depressed in the suture and finely punctured; pronotum fine but densely punctured; aedeagus with the parameres clearly shorter than the phallobase and convergent towards the apex in a straight or sinuous line (Figs. 178, 179)................................................................... C</p> <p>- Elytra smooth, regularly oval from base to apex, not narrowed in the humeri nor acute at the apex, frequently shorter in relation to pronotum, more conspicuously punctured, the punctures sometimes as strong as in the pronotum; pronotum always matt, strong and densely punctured; aedeagus with more parallel sides, with the phallobase similar in length to the parameres (Fig. 176........................................................................................ T. gaditana</p> <p>C Pronotum not very convex, with the base protruding backwards, narrower than the apex, and often sinuous before of the posterior angles (Figs. 95, 96); elytra oval elongated often sub-striate; parameres of aedeagus with the sides not sinuous (Fig. 178)........................................................................................................................................................................................ T. donanensis</p> <p>- Pronotum more transverse and convex, matte; punctures thicker and denser, almost like in the head; base of the pronotum as wide as in the apex, not or barely sinuate front of the posterior angles, barely extended back (Fig. 97); elytra smooth, often stockier, and less constricted in humeri; aedeagus somewhat longer than in the previous species, with the parameters constricted at the base and converging in a straight or slightly sinuous line towards the apex (Fig. 179)...... T. pseudogaditana sp. nov.</p> <p>21 GROUP OF Tentyria velox (provinces of Castilla and Leon):............................................ T. velox</p> <p>a Elytra with tuberous wrinkles, with aspect of cerebral circumvolutions; pronotum transverse on males, finely punctured, with the base clearly sinuated before the posterior angles and curving backwards, at least in males (Fig. 99)....................................................................................... s sp. circumvoluta nom. and stat. nov.</p> <p>- Elytra smooth or only with vestigial striae or rugosities, never with tuberous wrinkles............................ b</p> <p>b Pronotum transverse, particularly on males, finely and sparsely punctured, base slightly protruding backwards (Fig. 98); elytra short, oval, finely punctured as pronotum or smaller; specimens in general of small size and tegument smooth and shiny........................................................................................ ssp. velox</p> <p>- Pronotum less transverse, at least on males, with dense and strong, but not confluent punctures; the base more curved backwards than in the previous species (Fig. 100); elytra long and oval shaped, often slightly prolongate beyond the last abdominal sternite, densely punctured, similar in size as the pronotum and the head. Body broad and robust; tegument less shiny or matte........................................................................... s sp. serrana nov.</p> <p>22 GROUP OF Tentyria grossa (Balearic Islands):............................................. T. grossa ssp. basalis</p> <p>23 GROUP OF Tentyria castiliana (Center-Oriental regions of the Iberian Peninsula):</p> <p>A Head with eyes barely convex, epistome rounded anteriorly and slightly sinuate at sides (Fig. 32); pronotum generally quite transverse, sides in narrower curve toward the base (Fig. 102); apex of each elytra thorn shaped, sometimes not very observable, by fusion of the inferior margin of the epipleura that ends fused to the superior margin (Fig. 148); sexual dimorphism in protibiae almost unperceivable; aedeagus stylized, long and subparallel, with similar or barely longer parameres than the phallobase (Fig. 182)......................................................................... T. castiliana</p> <p>- Head with more convex eyes and epistome extended ahead, well separated from the genae by a conspicuous sinuosity (Fig. 33); pronotum less transverse, stronger, and densely punctured, with the base more curved and sinuate before the posterior angles (Fig. 103); apex of elytra not spiniform; protibiae in male feebly sinuous in the inner margin and longer than in females; aedeagus with the parameres clearly longer than the phallobase (Fig. 183).............................. T. aragonica</p> <p>24 GROUP OF Tentyria pazi (Columbretes Islands):....................................................... T. pazi</p> <p>25 GROUP OF Tentyria bifida (Southwestern distribution, Doñana National Park):............................ T. bifida</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/8F6B0B50FFBB5E7DF9A3FB36D4E5FCD1	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Bujalance, José L.;Ferrer, Julio;Cárdenas, Ana M.	Bujalance, José L., Ferrer, Julio, Cárdenas, Ana M. (2023): A taxonomic revision of the genus Tentyria Latreille, 1802 in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 5320 (1): 1-88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5320.1.1
