identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
F76FA6655062FF92F192FAD1FE7BF894.text	F76FA6655062FF92F192FAD1FE7BF894.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Aulacocheilus (Aulacocheilus) leai (Mader 1934) Skelley & Leschen & Liu 2021	<div><p>Aulacocheilus (Aulacocheilus) leai (Mader, 1934), new combination</p> <p>Episcaphula tetrastica Lea 1921: 362.</p> <p>Episcaphula leai Mader 1934: 40, new name for Episcaphula tetrastica Lea, 1921; not Episcaphula tetrastica Gorham (1883: 253–254).</p> <p>Episcaphula (Episcaphula) leai Mader. Chûjô &amp; Chûjô 1988: 164 (subgenus placement).</p> <p>Aulacochilus [sic] tetrastica (Lea). Lawrence 1988: 53 (combination).</p> <p>Comments. Two species, Episcaphula tetrastica Gorham, 1883 and Episcaphula tetrastica Lea, 1921, are primary homonyms. Recognizing the homonym, Mader (1934) proposed a new name, Episcaphula leai, for E. tetrastica Lea, 1921. The name E. leai Mader, 1934 was the name used in the catalog of Chûjô &amp; Chûjô (1988: 164).</p> <p>Unaware of Mader (1934), Lawrence (1988) studied the type of E. tetrasticus Lea, 1921, recognized it was as a member of Aulacocheilus and transferred it to that genus becoming Aulacocheilus tetrastica (Lea, 1921). A dorsal photograph of the type of E. tetrastica Lea, 1921 (SAM) is available at Atlas of Living Australia (2020). We agree with Lawrence (1988) that it belongs in the genus Aulacocheilus, but the species name provided earlier by Mader (1934) must be used.</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/F76FA6655062FF92F192FAD1FE7BF894	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	Skelley, Paul E.;Leschen, Richard A. B.;Liu, Zhenhua	Skelley, Paul E., Leschen, Richard A. B., Liu, Zhenhua (2021): Nomenclatural notes for some Australian Erotylinae (Coleoptera: Erotylidae). Zootaxa 4966 (1): 69-76, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4966.1.7
F76FA6655062FF92F192FDA0FE6AFB41.text	F76FA6655062FF92F192FDA0FE6AFB41.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Aulacocheilus Dejean 1836	<div><p>Aulacocheilus Dejean, 1836</p> <p>Aulacocheilus Dejean 1836: 429. Type species: Erotylus quadripustulatus Fabricius (1801: 6), by monotypy.</p> <p>Aulacochilus [sic] of Aulacocheilus Dejean 1836: 429.</p> <p>Comments. There has been much confusion over the spelling of this genus (Aulacochilus vs. Aulacocheilus) and more recently over its authorship (Chevrolat vs. Dejean vs. Lacordaire), date of valid publication (1837 vs. 1842) (Bousquet &amp; Bouchard 2013: 6; Skelley 2020: 3), and type species.</p> <p>Aulacocheilus “ Lacordaire 1842: 245–246 ” [with the subsequently cited type species: Erotylus (Aulacocheilus) javanus Guérin-Méneville (1841: 155–156)] was first emended to “ Aulacochilus ” by Redtenbacher (1858: 374), which eventually became the spelling in prevailing use (Chûjô &amp; Chûjô 1989: 75–76). An immediately notable problem is that Guérin-Méneville’s use has priority over Lacordaire’s. In their catalog, Chûjô &amp; Chûjô (1989: 76) referenced Dejean’s (1837) catalog (a reprinting of previous versions, see Bousquet &amp; Bouchard 2013) by stating “ Aulacochilus (Chevrolat) Dejean, Cat. Col. ed. 3, 1837, p. 453 (nom. nud.!)”.</p> <p>However, there is an earlier use of the name by Dejean (1836: 429). Bousquet &amp; Bouchard (2013: 98) recognized that E. quadripustulatus Fabricius (1801) was an available species at the time it was listed under Aulacocheilus Dejean, 1836. Thus, the name and original spelling of Aulacocheilus Dejean, 1836 with a type species by monotypy is available by indication (ICZN 1999: Article 12.2.5) and has priority over other spellings, attributions, and type designations.</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/F76FA6655062FF92F192FDA0FE6AFB41	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	Skelley, Paul E.;Leschen, Richard A. B.;Liu, Zhenhua	Skelley, Paul E., Leschen, Richard A. B., Liu, Zhenhua (2021): Nomenclatural notes for some Australian Erotylinae (Coleoptera: Erotylidae). Zootaxa 4966 (1): 69-76, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4966.1.7
F76FA6655061FF91F192FABDFD01FA41.text	F76FA6655061FF91F192FABDFD01FA41.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Episcaphula (Cosmoscaphula) Heller 1920	<div><p>Episcaphula (Cosmoscaphula) Heller, 1920</p> <p>Episcaphula (Cosmoscaphula) Heller 1920: 105. Type species: Episcaphula (Cosmoscaphula) tamburinea Heller (1920: 105), by subsequent designation (Chûjô &amp; Chûjô 1988: 161).</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/F76FA6655061FF91F192FABDFD01FA41	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	Skelley, Paul E.;Leschen, Richard A. B.;Liu, Zhenhua	Skelley, Paul E., Leschen, Richard A. B., Liu, Zhenhua (2021): Nomenclatural notes for some Australian Erotylinae (Coleoptera: Erotylidae). Zootaxa 4966 (1): 69-76, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4966.1.7
F76FA6655061FF91F192FDBEFE20FB5D.text	F76FA6655061FF91F192FDBEFE20FB5D.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Spondotriplax australiae (Lea 1922)	<div><p>Spondotriplax australiae (Lea, 1922)</p> <p>Tritoma australiae Lea 1922: 295–296.</p> <p>Hedista tricolor Weise 1927: 34. Lawrence 1988: 53 (synonymy).</p> <p>Hedista australiae (Lea). Lawrence 1988: 53 (generic combination).</p> <p>Spondotriplax australiae (Lea). Chûjô &amp; Chûjô 1990: 54 (generic combination).</p> <p>Comments. Hedista Weise, 1927 was described and compared with Aulacocheilus by Weise (1927). It was placed near Aulacocheilus in the Encaustini in all subsequent catalogs. Lawrence (1988) studied the holotypes of both Tritoma australiae Lea, 1922 (Tritomini) and Hedista tricolor Weise, 1927 (Encaustini) and synonymized the two as Hedista australiae (Lea, 1922). Apparently unaware of this, Chûjô &amp; Chûjô (1989: 89) retained Hedista tricolor in the Encaustini and, the following year, moved T. australiae into Spondotriplax Crotch, 1876 (Tritomini) (Chûjô &amp; Chûjô 1990: 54).</p> <p>The combination of Lawrence’s (1988) species synonymy and Chûjô &amp; Chûjô’s (1990) transfer of T. australiae into Spondotriplax, resulted in the unrecognized synonymy of Hedista Weise, 1927 with Spondotriplax Crotch, 1876. We confirmed that Hedista has all of the diagnostic characters that place it solidly in Spondotriplax. Until there is a revision of Spondotriplax, we agree with the placement of T. australiae in Spondotriplax and officially make the generic synonymy.</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/F76FA6655061FF91F192FDBEFE20FB5D	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	Skelley, Paul E.;Leschen, Richard A. B.;Liu, Zhenhua	Skelley, Paul E., Leschen, Richard A. B., Liu, Zhenhua (2021): Nomenclatural notes for some Australian Erotylinae (Coleoptera: Erotylidae). Zootaxa 4966 (1): 69-76, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4966.1.7
F76FA6655061FF91F192FF5DFF2CFE11.text	F76FA6655061FF91F192FF5DFF2CFE11.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Spondotriplax Crotch 1876	<div><p>Spondotriplax Crotch, 1876</p> <p>Spondotriplax Crotch 1876: 469. Type species: Spondotriplax endomychoides Crotch (1876: 470), by original designation. Hedista Weise 1927: 33, new synonymy. Type species: Hedista tricolor Weise (1927: 34), by monotypy.</p> <p>Comments. Spondotriplax is characterized as a genus of Tritomini with ovoid body shape, finely facetted eyes, elongately pentagonal mentum, and an antennal club of 5 antennomeres with the terminal antennomeres broadened.</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/F76FA6655061FF91F192FF5DFF2CFE11	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	Skelley, Paul E.;Leschen, Richard A. B.;Liu, Zhenhua	Skelley, Paul E., Leschen, Richard A. B., Liu, Zhenhua (2021): Nomenclatural notes for some Australian Erotylinae (Coleoptera: Erotylidae). Zootaxa 4966 (1): 69-76, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4966.1.7
F76FA6655061FF90F192F98EFDCAF803.text	F76FA6655061FF90F192F98EFDCAF803.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Episcaphula (Cosmoscaphula) tamburinea Heller 1920	<div><p>Episcaphula (Cosmoscaphula) tamburinea Heller, 1920</p> <p>Episcaphula (Cosmoscaphula) tamburinea Heller 1920: 105–106. Chûjô &amp; Chûjô 1988: 161.</p> <p>Episcaphula (Cosmoscaphula) clatrata Heller 1920: 106, new synonymy. Chûjô &amp; Chûjô 1988: 161.</p> <p>Episcaphula rufolineata Wilson 1921: 35, new synonymy.</p> <p>Episcaphula (Episcaphula) rufolineata Wilson 1921: 35. Chûjô &amp; Chûjô 1988: 165 (subgenus combination).</p> <p>Comments. Heller (1920) published a large work on the Erotylidae of the Indo-Australian region with an emphasis on the Philippines. The Australian taxa described in this work have been overlooked by previous Australian workers. Some need clarification and nomenclatural corrections.</p> <p>The subgenus Cosmoscaphula Heller (1920: 105–106) is recognized as an Episcaphula Crotch, 1876 with an enlarged lobe or callus between the eye and antennal base. Heller (1920) placed two species in the subgenus: E. (C.) tamburinea Heller, 1920 and E. (C.) clatrata Heller, 1920, stating that E. clatrata may be a “var.?” of E. tamburinea. Both species were from Tamborine Mountain, near Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. The following year, Wilson (1921) described Episcaphula rufolineata, also from Tamborine Mountain, noting the same lobe in front of the eyes, sexual dimorphism, and variation in color pattern.</p> <p>While Heller (1920) only discussed one specimen for E. clatrata (SDEI, Figs. 3–4), he mentioned two depositories for E. tamburinea. Since his types are generally deposited in SDEI, the male specimen (SDEI, Figs. 1–2) with the following label data is here designated as the lectotype for Episcaphula (Cosmoscaphula) tamburinea Heller, 1920: “[white paper, hand-written] S. Queensland / Mt. Tambourine ” // “[red paper, typed] Syntypus ” // “[white paper, hand-written] Coll. Hacker ” // “[white paper, hand-written] Episcaphula / (Cosmoscaphula) / tambourinea n. / [typed] Det. K M Heller 1918” // “[lavender paper, black border, hand-written] tam- / bourinea / Hell.” // “[white paper, typed] SDEI Coleoptera / # 302836” // “[red paper, typed] LECTOTYPE ♂ / Episcaphula / (Cosmoscaphula) / tamburinea Heller / des. Skelley, / Leschen, Liu 2020”. Paralectotypes may exist but were not studied.</p> <p>Wilson (1921) discussed multiple specimens of E. rufolineata from multiple localities, but stated “Type in author’s collection”, explicitly indicating that only a single specimen was used to describe the species. The Museums Victoria website hosts an image of this holotype (Figs. 5–7; Hoath 2020a, MVMA).</p> <p>Examination of these images clearly show Heller’s types represent a male and female with extremes of the color pattern variation as discussed by Wilson (1921). Males of the species have a notched clypeal margin, dilated protarsomeres, a slightly more elongated pronotum, and more strongly curved tibiae.</p> <p>Because they are from the same locality and share all morphological characters, it is clear they are conspecific and are here synonymized. With Heller considering E. clatrata as a possible variety of E. tambruinea and since evidence is lacking to invoke prevailing use rules to maintain E. rufolineata (ICZN 1999: Article 23.9.1), we use the name E. tamburinea for this species.</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/F76FA6655061FF90F192F98EFDCAF803	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	Skelley, Paul E.;Leschen, Richard A. B.;Liu, Zhenhua	Skelley, Paul E., Leschen, Richard A. B., Liu, Zhenhua (2021): Nomenclatural notes for some Australian Erotylinae (Coleoptera: Erotylidae). Zootaxa 4966 (1): 69-76, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4966.1.7
F76FA6655067FF97F192F902FDFFF86A.text	F76FA6655067FF97F192F902FDFFF86A.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Hoplepiscapha laticollis (Carter 1908) Skelley & Leschen & Liu 2021	<div><p>Hoplepiscapha laticollis (Carter, 1908), new combination</p> <p>Hymaea laticollis Carter 1908: 410.</p> <p>Comments. The genus Hoplepiscapha Lea, 1922 is characterized as a Dacnini genus near Thallis Erichson (1842) with elongate antennomeres. The holotype of Hoplepiscapha longicornis Lea (1922: fig. 337), and holotype of Hymaea laticollis Carter (1908) (Figs. 8–10; Hoath 2020b) are clearly congeneric. The transfer of H. laticollis into Hoplepiscapha is here validated.</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/F76FA6655067FF97F192F902FDFFF86A	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	Skelley, Paul E.;Leschen, Richard A. B.;Liu, Zhenhua	Skelley, Paul E., Leschen, Richard A. B., Liu, Zhenhua (2021): Nomenclatural notes for some Australian Erotylinae (Coleoptera: Erotylidae). Zootaxa 4966 (1): 69-76, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4966.1.7
F76FA6655066FF96F192FF15FE4BFE53.text	F76FA6655066FF96F192FF15FE4BFE53.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Neothallis bizonata (Macleay 1887) Skelley & Leschen & Liu 2021	<div><p>Neothallis bizonata (Macleay, 1887), new combination</p> <p>Thallis bizonata Macleay 1887: 328. Chûjô &amp; Chûjô 1988: 151.</p> <p>Comments. Neothallis Fauvel (1891) is a genus of Dacnini unique from other genera in having a concave mesoventrite with a broad prosternal rest allowing the prosternal process to nearly touch the metaventrite, and sublateral pronotal sulci (Delkeskamp 1961). Thallis bizonata (Figs. 11–13) clearly shows both of these characters and the transfer is here validated.</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/F76FA6655066FF96F192FF15FE4BFE53	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	Skelley, Paul E.;Leschen, Richard A. B.;Liu, Zhenhua	Skelley, Paul E., Leschen, Richard A. B., Liu, Zhenhua (2021): Nomenclatural notes for some Australian Erotylinae (Coleoptera: Erotylidae). Zootaxa 4966 (1): 69-76, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4966.1.7
