identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
03F98799FFC6FFA7FF585C1541FA82D2.text	03F98799FFC6FFA7FF585C1541FA82D2.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ropalopus Mulsant 1839	<div><p>SUBGENUS ROPALOPUS MULSANT, 1839</p> <p>Type species: Callidium insubricum Germar, 1824; designated by Thomson (1864).</p> <p>Synonyms</p> <p>Calliopedia Binder, 1915: 186; type species: Rhopalopus reitteri Binder, 1915 (= Callidium ungaricum Herbst, 1784).</p> <p>Euryoptera Horn, 1860: 571; type species: Euryoptera sanguinicollis Horn, 1860.</p> <p>Rhopalopus L. Redtenbacher, 1845: 110 (unjustified emendation).</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03F98799FFC6FFA7FF585C1541FA82D2	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.		Plazi	Karpiński, Lech;Szczepański, Wojciech T.;Kruszelnicki, Lech	Karpiński, Lech, Szczepański, Wojciech T., Kruszelnicki, Lech (2020): Revision of the Ropalopus ungaricus / insubricus group (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Callidiini) from the western Palaearctic region. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 189: 1176-1216, DOI: 10.1093/zoolinnean/zlz154
03F98799FFC6FFA7FF435D0D406D8286.text	03F98799FFC6FFA7FF435D0D406D8286.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ropalopus Mulsant 1839	<div><p>GENUS ROPALOPUS MULSANT, 1839</p> <p>Ropalopus Mulsant, 1839, Hist. Nat. Coléop. France, Longic.: 39.</p> <p>Type species: Callidium insubricum Germar, 1824; designated by Thomson (1864: 264).</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03F98799FFC6FFA7FF435D0D406D8286	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.		Plazi	Karpiński, Lech;Szczepański, Wojciech T.;Kruszelnicki, Lech	Karpiński, Lech, Szczepański, Wojciech T., Kruszelnicki, Lech (2020): Revision of the Ropalopus ungaricus / insubricus group (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Callidiini) from the western Palaearctic region. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 189: 1176-1216, DOI: 10.1093/zoolinnean/zlz154
03F98799FFC6FFA5FCC35DCB41F28307.text	03F98799FFC6FFA5FCC35DCB41F28307.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ropalopus UNGARICUS UNGARICUS (HERBST 1784	<div><p>ROPALOPUS UNGARICUS (HERBST, 1784)</p> <p>Distribution: Europe (including European Russia and westernmost Turkey) and North Africa (Algeria, probably also Morocco and Tunisia) (Fig. 20).</p> <p>This is a highly variable taxon that to date has been considered a separate species apart from R. insubricus (with its three subspecies), R. siculus and the newly described R. boreki sensu e.g. Danilevsky (2019a). Consequently, there was a difficult taxonomic situation, and many issues with both problematic specimens that show intermediate characters (and also probably some hybrids) and with determining the distribution of particular species in Europe, especially in countries such as Italy, France, Hungary and Greece. Other issues concern some described varieties, e.g. annulus and vogti, that were transferred between the taxa R. ungaricus and R. insubricus (Sama, 2002).</p> <p>Therefore, all European populations are reduced to subspecific level under this species. The following subspecies are proposed herein, with the specified distribution.</p></div> 	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03F98799FFC6FFA5FCC35DCB41F28307	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.		Plazi	Karpiński, Lech;Szczepański, Wojciech T.;Kruszelnicki, Lech	Karpiński, Lech, Szczepański, Wojciech T., Kruszelnicki, Lech (2020): Revision of the Ropalopus ungaricus / insubricus group (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Callidiini) from the western Palaearctic region. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 189: 1176-1216, DOI: 10.1093/zoolinnean/zlz154
03F98799FFC3FFA3FF165DB3430F81CA.text	03F98799FFC3FFA3FF165DB3430F81CA.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ropalopus UNGARICUS UNGARICUS (HERBST 1784	<div><p>ROPALOPUS UNGARICUS UNGARICUS (HERBST, 1784)</p> <p>(FIGS 1A, J, 2A–D, 3F, G, 4A–D, 5E–G, 6A, B, P, Q, 7A, O, P, 8A, N, O, 9A, B, 10A, B, K, L, 11A–E, 12A–E, 13A–E, 14A, 16A, 17A–F; SUPPORTING INFORMATION, FIGS S1A, B, P, Q, S 2A, B, P, Q, S 3A, J, S 4A, 5A–C, P, Q, S 6A–C)</p> <p>Callidium ungaricum Herbst in Fuesslins, 1784, Arch. Insectengesch. 5: 96.</p> <p>Type material examined: Lectotype (herein designated) male with four labels: (1)? SYNTYPE, Callidium ungaricum Herbst, 1784 labelled by Museum für Naturkunde Berlin 2019 (red); (2) hungaricum Hbt × Banat.; (3) Hist.-Coll. (Coleoptera), Nr. 22087, Callidium hungaricum Fabr. Hungaria, Zool. Mus. Berlin; and (4) L E C T O T Y P E, Callidium ungaricum Herbst in Fuesslins, 1784, des., 2019 (red).</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03F98799FFC3FFA3FF165DB3430F81CA	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.		Plazi	Karpiński, Lech;Szczepański, Wojciech T.;Kruszelnicki, Lech	Karpiński, Lech, Szczepański, Wojciech T., Kruszelnicki, Lech (2020): Revision of the Ropalopus ungaricus / insubricus group (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Callidiini) from the western Palaearctic region. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 189: 1176-1216, DOI: 10.1093/zoolinnean/zlz154
03F98799FFCDFFACFF0D5F29466386E4.text	03F98799FFCDFFACFF0D5F29466386E4.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ropalopus UNGARICUS GALLICUS VARTANIS 2018	<div><p>ROPALOPUS UNGARICUS GALLICUS VARTANIS, 2018</p> <p>(FIGS 1B, C, K, 2E–G, 3H, 4E–G, 5H, 6C–E, R, 7B–D, Q, 8B, C, P, 9C, 10C, 11F–I, 12F–I, 13F–I, 14B, 16B, C; SUPPORTING INFORMATION, FIGS S1C–E, R, S 2C– E, R, S 3B, K, S 4B, S 5D, E, R, S 6D–F)</p> <p>Distribution: South-eastern France (Fig. 20). This taxon was described from Aiguines, and several new localities in south-eastern France are herein added (Table 1). Most of these were incorrectly assigned to R. u. insubricus.</p> <p>Diagnosis: Ropalopus u. gallicus is characterized by its relatively short elytra, the pronotum with its lustrous area predominantly slightly punctate and wrinkled (Fig. 2E), and the antennae, which are usually much shorter than the body in males. Moreover, the pubescence of the ventral side of the body is characteristic owing to the abundant long, whitish hairs (Fig. 16B), which is the best trait for distinguishing it from both of the closest taxa, R. u. ungaricus and R. u. insubricus (Fig. 16A and D, respectively). There are also clear differences in the shape of the lateral lobes (Fig. 12G), which are by far the shortest and widest in the discussed group. In contrast, the prosternal process (Fig. 9C) does not seem to differ from R. u. ungaricus (Fig. 9B). Body length: 17.0–20.0 mm.</p> <p>Remarks: Despite its original classification as a subspecies of R. insubricus sensu e.g. Sama (2002) and Vartanis (2018), this taxon is evidently more closely related to R. u. ungaricus, but the elytra at the base are less frequently and less markedly wrinkled. The type locality of this taxon lies at medium elevation of ~ 1000 m a.s.l.; thus, although it overlaps, in part, with the range of elevations inhabited by R. u. ungaricus, it can be regarded as a transitional elevation between the latter and R. u. insubricus. The imagines were collected in the first days of July. This subspecies is indisputably associated ecologically with maple (Acer sp.) (Vartanis, 2018).</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03F98799FFCDFFACFF0D5F29466386E4	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.		Plazi	Karpiński, Lech;Szczepański, Wojciech T.;Kruszelnicki, Lech	Karpiński, Lech, Szczepański, Wojciech T., Kruszelnicki, Lech (2020): Revision of the Ropalopus ungaricus / insubricus group (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Callidiini) from the western Palaearctic region. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 189: 1176-1216, DOI: 10.1093/zoolinnean/zlz154
03F98799FFCDFFAAFCD059E4431D85F9.text	03F98799FFCDFFAAFCD059E4431D85F9.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ropalopus UNGARICUS OSSAE 2020	<div><p>ROPALOPUS UNGARICUS OSSAE subsp. nov.</p> <p>(FIGS 1G, N, 2O, 3A, M, N, 4N, O, 5M, N, 6K, L, V, W, 7J, K, V, W, 8I, J, S, T, 9F, 10H, O, 11S, T, 12S, T, 13P, Q, 15C, 16H–J, 18E–K, SUPPORTING INFORMATION, FIGS S1K, L, V, W, S 2K, L, V, W, S 3F, N, S 4F, S 5K, L, V, W, S 6K, L)</p> <p>LSID: urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act: FDF45041-7065- 4AEC-AA24-94D207C1599C</p> <p>Type material examined: Fourteen ♂♂ and four ♀♀.</p> <p>Holotype: Male (Figs 15C 1, 16H), Greece, Thessaly, Stomio (Larissa), Mount Ossa, 1 July 2003, ~ 600 m a.s.l., on Acer sp., C. Cocquempot leg. (from CCC, deposited in ZMB).</p> <p>Paratypes: Greece, Thessaly, Stomio (Larissa), Mount Ossa: nine ♂♂ and two ♀♀, 1 July 2003, ~ 600 m a.s.l., on Acer sp., C. Cocquempot leg.; two ♂♂, 25 June–14 July 2011, no collector data; two ♀♀, 15 June–1 July 2013, F. Fiedler leg.; one ♂, 11 July 2014, J. Steinhofer leg.; Spilia environs (Larissa), Mount Ossa: one ♂ and one ♀, 5 March 2016 and 30 April 2016 ex larva (12–16 May 2014, Acer sp.), J. Steinhofer leg.; one ♂, 17 April 2016 ex larva (9 July 2014, Acer sp.), J. Steinhofer leg. (deposited in CAW, CCC, CJS and CLKR).</p> <p>Additional material studied, based on photographs: Central Greece, Thessaly: four ♂♂ and three ♀♀, Mount Ossa; one ♀, Kalabaka.</p> <p>Description: Body length: males 14.1–23.0 mm (HT 22 mm), females 17.3–24.3 mm. Body width at elytral base: males 4.4–7.0 mm, females 5.3–7.7 mm. Body width behind middle: males 5.3–7.9 mm, females 6.6–8.9 mm. Integument of whole body from dark brown to black; legs and antennae usually lighter; head and prothorax dark brown; elytra constantly dark with greenish brown metallic lustre. Pubescence of whole body made by sparse, short, brown and black hairs, more pronounced on basal part of elytra and sides of pronotum but completely lacking in its central part; on ventral side (Fig. 16H–J) rather constant, fine, dense and barely noticeable on abdomen and thorax, with slightly denser whitish hairs around mesosternal process and on prothorax. Head relatively small, strongly punctured; forehead strongly marked with longitudinal furrow of variable depth between antennal tubercles (Supporting Information, Fig. S1K, L); clypeus and labrum relatively wide and well pronounced; mandibles strong, wide and obtusely toothed (Fig. 1G); eyes large, surrounding antennal tubercles (Supporting Information, Fig. S2K). Antennae thick and robust, long, clearly exceeding elytral length by almost two last joints in males, and reaching two-thirds of elytral length in females; with denser and more pronounced erect setae on inner side. Antennomere 1 densely pubescent with thick recumbent setae; antennomere 2 triangular, about as long as wide at the widest point, with thicker longer and more erect setae (Supporting Information, Fig. S3F); antennomere 3 slightly longer than antennomeres 5–7; antennomere 4 about as long as antennomeres 8 and 9; apical joint ~5.0 times longer than wide in males and ~2.5 times in females; antennomeres 3–8 (sometimes to 9) with pronounced long tooth on inner side. Pronotum evenly tapered towards anterior and posterior margin, in males usually clearly transverse, ~1.6 times (HT 1.55) wider than long, elliptical in shape (Fig. 15C 2), sometimes narrower and more rounded on sides (Fig. 15C 5); in females smaller, narrower than elytra, ~1.6 times wider than long; in both sexes usually entirely punctate, but sometimes with glabrous smooth area near base; punctation variable, punctured or rugose, usually uniformly dense, sometimes more sparse in central part; always dense and fine at sides, forming there more-or-less visible, usually asymmetrical and narrow strips with sparse but clearly visible relatively long hairs (Fig. 3A); pubescence in remaining part of pronotum scant and short, barely perceptible, mainly along upper and lower edges. Prosternum finely and densely punctate, with sparse, short whitish pubescence and row of short, thick, dense erect hairs along upper edge. Prosternal process (Figs 9F, 10H) relatively narrow and rounded at apex. Elytra long, in males ~2.2 times (HT 2.23) longer than wide at base and ~1.9 times (HT 1.88) behind middle; in females ~2.3 and 1.9, respectively; almost parallel sided in anterior third, then clearly expanding towards end; elytral sculpture mainly made by indistinct points with creased and convex surface between them (Fig. 19G, K, L), with gradual change in the depth and density of points towards the end (Fig. 19O); scutellum of variable shape, usually irregularly dotted. Mid and hind femora wide in males, narrower in females; posterior tibiae nearly straight, with distinct erect setae at inner margin.</p> <p>Male terminalia: Median lobe (Fig. 13P, Q) relatively slender, lanceolate, slightly narrowed before apex. Lateral lobes of tegmen short and robust, adjoining at ends, with external margin convex and relatively short hairs on top (Fig. 12S, T); margin of phallobase roof clearly concave at middle (Fig. 11S, T).</p> <p>Differential diagnosis: Ropalopus u. ossae can be distinguished from R. u. boreki by its different elytral sculpture, which is additionally more uniform on its whole surface, by its pronotum, which is evenly tapered towards the anterior and posterior margins, and, in males, by constantly longer antennae and clearly different parameres, which are definitely shorter and more robust. The new subspecies is evidently more related to R. u. siculus, from which it is separated by longer antennae, the overall stronger structure of the body and its bigger size, and by the clearly shorter, sparser and less pronounced pubescence on the ventral side of the body (Fig. 16H and 16F, respectively). Moreover, there are differences in the margin of the phallobase roof, which is clearly concave in the middle, and in the lateral lobes with relatively short hairs that are additionally always remarkably twisted together on the top in the newly described subspecies (Fig. 12S–T and P–R, respectively). The prosternal process (Fig. 9F) is closest to R. u. siculus (Fig. 9E). Generally, specimens of R. u. ossae have a darker elytra colour, which is constant in this taxon; therefore, they seem to be blackish even in daylight, whereas specimens of R. u siculus are normally green to brownish.</p> <p>Remarks: The specimens of R. u. ossae were found at elevations between 500 and 1100 m a.s.l. They were collected on Mount Ossa (mostly on the eastern slopes) from the second half of June to mid-July. There is no doubt that the larvae of this taxon develop in the wood of maples (Acer spp.). Some unpublished records relating to other tree species, such as Platanus sp., have not been confirmed and are not supported herein. It is worth noting that there are independent ecological observations indicating a difference in behaviour between R. u. ossae and R. u. siculus; the taxon from Greece is frequently attracted to wine/ sugar traps, unlike the Sicilian subspecies. There is also a series of peculiar specimens from the southern part of continental Italy (Fig. 18L–Q; Sláma, 2018) that exhibit intermediate characters between these two taxa (see Discussion for more details).</p> <p>Etymology: The specific epithet is a toponym referring to Mount Ossa (Greek: Όσσα) in the Larissa regional unit, Thessaly, Greece, which is the type locality of this new subspecies.</p></div> 	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03F98799FFCDFFAAFCD059E4431D85F9	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.		Plazi	Karpiński, Lech;Szczepański, Wojciech T.;Kruszelnicki, Lech	Karpiński, Lech, Szczepański, Wojciech T., Kruszelnicki, Lech (2020): Revision of the Ropalopus ungaricus / insubricus group (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Callidiini) from the western Palaearctic region. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 189: 1176-1216, DOI: 10.1093/zoolinnean/zlz154
03F98799FFCBFFAAFF505AE347178119.text	03F98799FFCBFFAAFF505AE347178119.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ropalopus lederi (GANGLBAUER 1882) LEDERI (GANGLBAUER 1882	<div><p>ROPALOPUS LEDERI (GANGLBAUER, 1882)</p> <p>(FIGS 1I, 3D, E, 5C, D, 6N, O, 7M, N, 8M, 9H, 10J, 11W, X, 12W, X, 13T, U, 15E, 16M, 17G; SUPPORTING INFORMATION, FIGS S1N, O, S 2N, O, S 3H, I, S 4H, S 5N, O, S 6O)</p> <p>Rhopalopus lederi Ganglbauer, 1882, Verh. zool.-bot. Ges. 31[1881]: 747.</p> <p>Type material examined: Lectotype (herein designated) male, with five labels: (1) TYPUS (red); (2) Novorossiysk 18 IV 78; (3) Rhopalopus Lederi Gangl.; (4) Lederi Cauc. Gglb.; and (5) L E C T O T Y P E, Rhopalopus Lederi Ganglbauer, 1882, des., 2019.</p> <p>Synonyms</p> <p>Rhopalopus nigripes Pic, 1926.</p> <p>Distribution: The Caucasus and Crimea. It is present in southern Russia (Krasnodar Krai, Adygea), Georgia, Azerbaijan, Armenia and southern Crimea (Fig. 20). Although it has been reported from Turkey by Löbl &amp; Smetana (2010), which was repeated by Danilevsky (2019a), its occurrence there was revised by Sama (1996). The record from Merzifon (south-western Samsun) after Adlbauer (1992) refers to Ropalopus sculpturatus (Pic, 1931). Therefore, R. lederi is to date not known to occur in Turkey. The reference from Palestine by Plavilstshikov (1940) is certainly a mistake and must refer either also to R. sculpturatus or is an incorrect citing of a record of Ropalopus ledereri (Fairmaire, 1866). A mention by Plavilstshikov (1940) from northern Iran is particularly interesting, because it might refer to R. nataliyae and, if so, this or those specimen(s) should have been taken into consideration when describing the species.</p> <p>Diagnosis: Ropalopus lederi is generally distinctive owing to its long and pronounced body pubescence (especially, hairs on the pronotum and basal part of the elytra; Figs 3D, E, 5C, D), relatively slender antennae and tarsi (Fig. 8M), pronotum that is rounded in males, and elytra with only slight metallic lustre. It can be distinguished easily from its closest relative, R. nataliyae, by the second antennal joint, which is almost spherical in R. lederi (Supporting Information, Fig. S3H) and clearly longer than wide in R. nataliyae (Supporting Information, Fig. S3G). The ventral side of the body (Fig. 16M) has a clearly visible yellowish pubescence, especially on the prothorax and mesothorax. According to Plavilstshikov (1940), the elytra are usually brown or dark brown, metallic, with a green, brown or purple lustre, and the legs are black or black–brown (f. typica), or red–brown to rusty (ab. separatus Pic). Body length: 9.0–23.0 mm.</p> <p>Remarks: According to Plavilstshikov (1940), R. lederi inhabits deciduous and mixed forests, groves and orchards. Imagines are active from June to August. Although this author stated that the host plant remains unknown, a single pupa of this species was found in a maple trunk lying on the ground, most probably Trautvetter’s maple Acer heldreichii Boiss. &amp; Heldr. subsp. trautvetteri (Medw.) E.Murray, in June by Miroshnikov (Lobanov, 2003). Moreover, Miroshnikov (2010) noted the low elevation above sea level of his newly discovered locations (Gelendzhik environs, Pshadsky Pass, 150 m a.s.l.; Seversky District, Ubinskaya village, ~ 200 m a.s.l.), contrasting with the findings of this species in the western Caucasus, where it is mainly known from highland regions. Owing to the significant discrepancy in the elevations of inhabited habitats and the certain incompatibility concerning morphology between the specimens that were studied and some of them illustrated and available on the Internet (such as antenna thickness and shape of pronotum), the existence in this region of two forms isolated by elevation (analogous to R. u. ungaricus and R. u. insubricus) cannot be excluded.</p> <p>A l e c t o t y p e f r o m t h e f o r m e r c o l l e c t i o n o f L. Ganglbauer housed in NHMW is herein designated (Fig. 17G) to fix the name to a single specimen.</p></div> 	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03F98799FFCBFFAAFF505AE347178119	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.		Plazi	Karpiński, Lech;Szczepański, Wojciech T.;Kruszelnicki, Lech	Karpiński, Lech, Szczepański, Wojciech T., Kruszelnicki, Lech (2020): Revision of the Ropalopus ungaricus / insubricus group (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Callidiini) from the western Palaearctic region. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 189: 1176-1216, DOI: 10.1093/zoolinnean/zlz154
03F98799FFCBFFA8FCC55E8B47D2878F.text	03F98799FFCBFFA8FCC55E8B47D2878F.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ropalopus HANAE SAMA & REJZEK 2002	<div><p>ROPALOPUS HANAE SAMA &amp; REJZEK, 2002</p> <p>(FIGS 15F 1, 18C, D)</p> <p>Distribution: Turkey (Fig. 20). The species was described from the Buğlan Geçidi Pass located ~ 40 km north-west of Muş (eastern Turkey), but later it was also recorded several times from Mount Yaraligoz in the environs of Kastamonu (northern Turkey) (N. and C. Auvray, 2019, personal communication). Given that the second locality is located&gt; 700 km to the northwest, the species is probably more widely distributed in most of north-eastern Turkey.</p> <p>Diagnosis: Ropalopus hanae is mainly characterized by its elongate body and parallel-sided elytra with only a slight green metallic lustre, a nearly flat head, lacking a longitudinal furrow between the eyes, entirely and densely microgranulate punctured, strongly transverse pronotum and slender antennae of the same length as the body (Sama &amp; Rejzek, 2002). According to the original description, R. hanae differs from the closest related taxa, R. lederi and R. u. siculus, by its head lacking a longitudinal furrow between the antennal elevations and by the extremely fine punctures in the apical half of the elytra. Additionally, it can be distinguished easily from R. u. siculus by evidently more slender antennae and the entirely punctured pronotum. Body length of the male holotype (Fig. 15F 1): 24.0 mm.</p> <p>Remarks: The area of the type locality of R. hanae is situated at an elevation of 1640 m a.s.l. The specimen was collected between 22 and 23 June and captured on a branch of a living shrubby Quercus species. However, it is considered by the authors to develop in Acer spp., like the rest of the species in this group. Some maple trees were observed in the type locality (Sama &amp; Rejzek, 2002). There are also records of a further 15 specimens (Fig. 18C, D) belonging to this species that were collected over several years in an Acer – Quercus forest on the slopes of Mount Yaraligozin (Kastamonu environs) in the second half of July (N. and C. Auvray, 2019, personal communication). This plot is located at an elevation of ~ 1400 m a.s.l. According to the collectors, all specimens were attracted to traps that were hung solely on oaks, and this tree species was dominant in the habitat. Although this might suggest a possible association with Quercus, larval development of R. hanae in Acer cannot be excluded on this basis.</p> <p>ROPALOPUS NATALIYAE DANILEVSKY &amp; SKRYLNIK, 2014</p> <p>(FIGS 1H, O, 3B, C, O, 5A, B, O, 6M, X, 7L, X, 8K, L, U, 9G, 10I, 11U, V, 12U, V, 13R, S, 15D, 16L, O, 17J; SUPPORTING INFORMATION, FIGS S1M, X, S 2M, X, S 3G, O, S 4G, S 5M, X, S 6M, N)</p> <p>Distribution: Northern Iran (Fig. 20). The species was described from the environs of Khoshyeylāq in Golestan Province (north-east Iran), but it is now also known from the environs of Marzanabad in Mazandaran Province (northern Iran).</p> <p>The original description of R. nataliyae was based on a single female. Additional abundant material has since been collected, including several males hitherto unknown to science; therefore, the species can be redescribed herein in more detail.</p> <p>Material examined: Sixteen ♂♂ and eleven ♀♀, north-east Iran, Golestan Province, 3 km south-west of Khoshyeylāq, 24 May 2018, Lech Kruszelnicki leg.; one male: N Iran, Mazandaran Province, 28 km east of Marzanabad, 18 May 2018, Lech Kruszelnicki leg.</p> <p>Redescription: Body length: 9.6–21.0 mm. Body width at elytral base: 3.1–6.0 mm. Body width behind middle: 3.3–7.5 mm. Body black; legs and antennae usually brown–black, sometimes slightly reddish. Pubescence of whole body yellowish, most pronounced on basal part of elytra and sides of pronotum but completely lacking in its central part, rather sparse on elytra, denser and erected on head, especially in the front part. Ventral side of body (Fig. 16L, O) with clearly visible, sparse, thin and long pubescence, denser on prosternum and mesosternum. Head between antennal tubercles with visible furrow, sometimes nearly flat; apical palpal joints elongated, triangular. Antennae relatively slender (slightly thinner in females) and short; in males usually slightly exceeding elytra, in females reaching to about apical elytral quarter. Antennomere 1 about equal in length to antennomere 4; antennomere 2 clearly longer than wide (ratio&gt; 1:1.3; Supporting Information, Fig. S3G); antennomere 5 a little longer than antennomere 4; antennomeres 5–11 in males almost equal in length; antennomeres 3–9 in males with distinct apical internal spines (antennomeres 3–10 in females); outer angles of joints distinct but not protruding in spines; apical antennal joint about five times longer than wide in males and about two times in females. Prothorax variable in shape, in males usually more rounded (Fig. 3B, C) sometimes a little transverse, ~1.3 times wider than long; in females usually more transverse (Fig. 3O) ~1.5 times wider. Pronotum almost flat, usually entirely punctate but sometimes with glabrous smooth area near base; punctation variable, usually uniformly dense, sometimes sparser, rarely changing into transverse wrinkles, always dense and small at sides. Elytra black, with only slight brown–green metallic lustre, long, ~2.3 times longer than basal width in males and ~2.6 times in females; shape of elytra rather variable, generally almost parallel sided in males and parallel sided in anterior third, then clearly expanding towards end in females; elytral punctation regular and dense, in anterior part with sculpture more pronounced, much finer in posterior part; scutellum transverse, glabrous and semicircular, usually irregularly dotted. Mid and hind legs clearly longer in males; femora relatively wide in males, much narrower in females; posterior tibiae nearly straight, with distinct erect setae at inner margin. Prosternal process (Figs 9G, 10I) sharp at apex, relatively short, variable in width.</p> <p>Male genitalia: Median lobe (Fig. 13R, S) rather variable in shape, relatively slender, lanceolate, slightly narrowed before apex. Lateral lobes of tegmen of variable length, ~2–3 times shorter than length measured from tegmental ring to base of lateral lobes (Fig. 11U, V), slender, almost parallel sided; apex rounded, with long hairs concentrated on top and shorter ones on sides; margin of phallobase roof clearly concave at middle (Fig. 12U, V). The male habitus is shown in Fig. 15D 1–4.</p> <p>Differential diagnosis: Ropalopus nataliyae differs from all other species in this group by its second antennal joint, which is clearly longer than wide. Antennae are distinctly more slender in comparison to R. ungaricus subspp. and R. hanae. Imagines are relatively small, with only slight metallic lustre of elytra.</p> <p>Remarks: The area of the type locality of R. nataliyae is situated at an elevation of ~ 2000 m a.s.l. Imagines were collected there along a canyon with scattered maples in the second half of May and at the beginning of June. There is no doubt that this species develops in the wood of maples, because numerous larval galleries and larvae themselves have been found on trunks and branches under the bark, and several imagines were later reared from this material. A few different Acer species are distributed in this region of Iran, and R. nataliyae is ecologically associated, at least, with Acer monspessulanum L.</p> <p>PHYLOGENY</p> <p>Morphological phylogenetic analysis: The genera of Callidiini exhibit a wide range of intraspecific morphological variation, thus it is difficult to distinguish good and constant characters for particular taxa. For the morphology-based phylogenetic analysis, we are able to score a total of 34 ordered or unordered characters (Table 2; Supporting Information, Table S1). The maximum parsimony analysis based on morphological characters results in five equally long most parsimonious trees of a length of 105 steps. The strict consensus tree (Fig. 21) reveals the monophyly of the Ropalopus ungaricus / insubricus group, with R. nataliyae, R. lederi and R. hanae in an earlybranching position. It also indicates R. clavipes in the position of a sister group to the clade of all remaining Ropalopus taxa considered. Strong monophyly of the clade comprising subspecies of R. ungaricus is underlined. In this group, the earlybranching position of R. u. siculus and R. u. ossae is emphasized. However, these clades, in addition to clades comprising R. u. boreki and R. u. insubricus, receive only weak support. Ropalopus u. insubricus is sister to R. u. ungaricus and R. u. gallicus. The resemblance of the two last-mentioned taxa is strongly supported morphologically, which might indicate close sister relationships between them.</p> <p>The majority consensus tree (Fig. 22) confirms the above-mentioned results, but R. nataliyae is revealed as a sister taxon to the clade consisting of the remaining species of the Ropalopus ungaricus / insubricus group.</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03F98799FFCBFFA8FCC55E8B47D2878F	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.		Plazi	Karpiński, Lech;Szczepański, Wojciech T.;Kruszelnicki, Lech	Karpiński, Lech, Szczepański, Wojciech T., Kruszelnicki, Lech (2020): Revision of the Ropalopus ungaricus / insubricus group (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Callidiini) from the western Palaearctic region. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 189: 1176-1216, DOI: 10.1093/zoolinnean/zlz154
03F98799FFC8FFA9FDBF5BC4473D827B.text	03F98799FFC8FFA9FDBF5BC4473D827B.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ropalopus UNGARICUS UNGARICUS (HERBST 1784	<div>KEY TO SUBSPECIES OF ROPALOPUS UNGARICUS 1. Pronotum in males with distinct, shining large rhomboid unpunctured or at most finely punctate area (Fig. 19B); in females, almost completely unpunctured (Fig. 19C)............................................................... 2 – Pronotum in both sexes uniformly densely punctate or rugose, often with small unpunctured area near base at middle (Fig. 19E, F)............................................................................................................................ 4 2. Basal half of elytra at least slightly irregularly wrinkled,; pronotum evenly tapered towards anterior and posterior margin; stains with deeper punctation on each sides of pronotum in males almost merged at anterior and posterior margin, rather uniform (Fig. 2B); antennae in males shorter, as long as or at most slightly longer than elytra.............................................................................................................................. 3 – Basal half of elytra without wrinkles, regularly punctured; pronotum unevenly tapered towards anterior and posterior margins, wide and raised at base then cordate; stains with deeper punctation on each sides of pronotum in males narrow and irregular, never about to merge into each other (Fig. 2K); antennae in males clearly longer than elytra. Distributed in Europe from northern Italy through the Balkans to westernmost Turkey, and through Ukraine to southern part of European Russia, not higher than 600 m a.s.l........................................................................................................................................... R. u. insubricus 3. Ventral side of body with sparse and short pubescence (Fig. 16A); antennae in males as long as or slightly longer than elytra; lustrous area on pronotum at most with fine, barely noticeable punctation. Distributed in Europe from eastern France to westernmost Ukraine and eastern Romania, and from south-western Poland to central Italy and Montenegro, excluding southeastern France, not lower than 600 m a.s.l........ R. u. ungaricus – Ventral side of body with abundant and long white pubescence (Fig. 16B); antennae in males usually much shorter than elytra; lustrous area on pronotum usually slightly punctate and wrinkled. Distributed in southeastern France.................................................................................................................... R. u. gallicus 4. Elytral sculpture more uniform on whole surface, with gradual change in depth and density of points towards end (similarly shiny) (Fig. 19O), mainly made by indistinct points with creased and convex surface between them (Fig. 19G, K, L), greenish brown; pronotum evenly tapered towards anterior and posterior margins............................................................................................................................................................ 5 – Elytral sculpture clearly separated around middle, with deeper and larger points on basal half (metallic) and much thinner and denser on second half (matt) (Fig. 19P); sculpture on first half mainly composed of clearly separated points (vermiculate in some places) with wide, flat surface between them (Fig. 19H, M, N), blackish green; pronotum unevenly tapered towards anterior and posterior margins, wide and raised at base then cordate; antennae in males as long as elytra; lateral lobes of tegmen long and slender, parallel sided with external margin concave and relatively long hairs on top (Fig. 12O). Distributed in southern Greece (Peloponnese)...................................................................................................................... R. u. boreki 5. Ventral side of body with dense, erect, yellowish pubescence especially on prosternum (Fig. 16F); antennae in males slightly longer than elytra; lateral lobes of tegmen short and robust, adjoining at ends, with external margin convex; margin of phallobase roof almost straight, with small depression at middle and relatively long hairs on top (Fig. 12P–R). Distributed in Sicily.................................................. R. u. siculus – Ventral side of body with sparse and short pubescence (Fig. 16H); antennae in males clearly longer than elytra; lateral lobes of tegmen short and robust, adjoining at ends, with external margin convex; margin of phallobase roof clearly concave at middle, and relatively short hairs on top (Fig. 12S, T). Distributed in central Greece (Thessaly)................................................................................................................. R. u. ossae</div> 	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03F98799FFC8FFA9FDBF5BC4473D827B	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.		Plazi	Karpiński, Lech;Szczepański, Wojciech T.;Kruszelnicki, Lech	Karpiński, Lech, Szczepański, Wojciech T., Kruszelnicki, Lech (2020): Revision of the Ropalopus ungaricus / insubricus group (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Callidiini) from the western Palaearctic region. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 189: 1176-1216, DOI: 10.1093/zoolinnean/zlz154
