identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
C853F73124130C5DFF34FEF4B03AFF6F.text	C853F73124130C5DFF34FEF4B03AFF6F.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Archiconnus Franz	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Archiconnus Franz</p>
            <p> Archiconnus Franz, 1980: 189 . Type species:  Archiconnus huallaganus Franz, 1980 (monotypy). </p>
            <p>Revised diagnosis. Male and female: head short, with vertex not expanded dorso-caudad; thick and long bristles absent on head but present on sides of prothorax; fronto-clypeal groove absent; maxillary palpomere III strongly thickened and stout; mandible without mesal sub-median tooth; antennae with club composed of antennomeres IX– XI; pronotum with rounded sides and weakly arcuate anterior and posterior margins; base of pronotum with shallow and indistinctly demarcated pair of sub-median ante-basal pits, without lateral and sub-lateral carinae; basisternal part of prosternum much shorter than procoxal cavities; prosternum without intercoxal process or carina; prothoracic hypomeral ridges incomplete; mesoventral intercoxal process long, narrow and strongly expanding ventrally (keel-shaped); mesoventrite with asetose lateral impressions behind anterior ridge, without setose impressions; mesothorax without lateral foveae; mesocoxal projection with posterior lobe; metacoxae narrowly separated by subtrapezoidal metaventral intercoxal process; each elytron with single rudimentary and asetose basal fovea. Male: parameres slender, not fused with median lobe, with apical setae; internal armature of aedeagus asymmetrical.</p>
            <p>Redescription. Body of male (Fig. 1) strongly convex, elongate but moderately slender, with moderately long appendages, BL below 1 mm; cuticle glossy, brown, moderately densely setose.</p>
            <p>Head (Figs. 1–2, 4–5) only slightly elongate, rounded, with large eyes; occipital constriction (Figs. 4–5; occ) in the narrowest place much wider than half HW; tempora (Fig. 4; tm) long and convergent caudad, without bristles; vertex (Fig. 4; vt) broader than long, rounded, convex, not projecting dorso-caudad; frons (Fig. 4; fr) transverse and subtriangular; fronto-clypeal groove absent; antennal insertions broadly separated.</p>
            <p>Labrum transverse with rounded anterior margin. Mandibles (Figs. 4–5; md) symmetrical, each with broad basal part, without noticeable prostheca, and with slender and curved distal part, without mesal tooth. Each maxilla (Fig. 5) with subtriangular basistipes (Fig. 5; bst), elongate galea (Fig. 5; gal) and lacinia (Fig. 5; lac) and long maxillary palp (Fig. 5; mxp) composed of relatively long palpomere I, strongly elongate, pedunculate palpomere II, broad and stout palpomere III broadest near middle, and small, subconical and pointed palpomere IV.</p>
            <p>Labium (Fig. 5) with large and transverse submentum (Fig. 5; smn) sharply demarcated from gular plate (Fig. 5; gp) and laterally fused with postcardinal parts of hypostomae (Fig. 52; h), subtrapezoidal mentum (Fig. 5; mn); and short prementum bearing narrowly separated at bases small 3-segmented labial palps (Fig. 5; lp). Hypostomal ridges (Fig. 5; hr) long and connecting between base of submentum and gular plate.</p>
            <p>Gular plate (Fig. 5; gp) large and strongly narrowing anterad; gular sutures (Fig. 5; gs) superficial; posterior tentorial pits (Fig. 5; ptp) distinct, located at base of submentum.</p>
            <p>Antennae (Figs. 1–2) with distinct club composed of antennomeres IX–XI.</p>
            <p>Pronotum (Figs. 1–2) in dorsal view oval with strongly rounded lateral margins, indistinct anterior and posterior corners; without marginal carinae or edges and without sub-lateral carinae; base of pronotum with shallow and indistinctly demarcated pair of sub-median ante-basal pits; sides of pronotum with dense, thick and long bristles.</p>
            <p>Prosternum (Fig. 6) with short basisternal part (Fig. 6; bs) indistinctly demarcated from procoxal cavities (Fig. 6; pcc); median part of sternum without intercoxal carina or process; procoxal sockets (Fig. 6; pcs) closed by lateral lobes of sternum; hypomera (Fig. 6; hy) elongate; hypomeral ridge (Fig. 6; hyr) visible only in posterior half of hypomeron; pronotosternal sutures (Fig. 6; nss) entire.</p>
            <p>Mesoscutellum very small, heart-shaped, broader than long, barely visible between bases of elytra; mesoscutoscutellar suture indiscernible in slide preparation.</p>
            <p>Mesoventrite (Fig. 7) with narrow anterior ridge (Fig. 7; ar) and median projection of anterior ridge (Fig. 7; par); mesoventral intercoxal process (Fig. 7; msvp) narrow and keel-shaped; mesanepisternum with long prepectus (Fig. 7; pre) and posterior part not visible in ventral view; mesepimeron not visible in ventral view; sides of mesothorax without foveae; mesoventrite with indistinctly delimited subtriangular lateral asetose impressions (Fig. 7; ai); mesocoxal projections (Fig. 7; mcp) strongly projecting, with mesocoxal sockets (Fig. 7; mscs) located on their mesal surface and with distinct asetose posterior lobes (Fig. 7; pl).</p>
            <p>Metaventrite (Fig. 7; vIII) strongly transverse, anteriorly fused with mesoventrite, posteriorly moderately deeply bisinuate and with narrow median subtrapezoidal metaventral intercoxal process (Fig. 7; mtvp) bearing median notch. Metanepisterna and metepimera not visible in ventral view, narrow.</p>
            <p>Metafurca (Fig. 7) with very short and broad stem and divergent lateral furcal arms (Fig. 7; lmfa).</p>
            <p>Elytra (Figs. 1–2) oval, each with single rudimentary and asetose basal fovea located in shallow basal impression; humeral calli well-marked and developed as longitudinal protuberances; elytral apices unmodified, separately rounded.</p>
            <p>Legs (Figs. 1–2, 7) moderately long and slender; procoxae subglobose, mesocoxae slightly elongate, metacoxae transverse, stout; all trochanters short; all femora weakly clavate; tibiae short and slightly expanded near middle; tarsi short and stout.</p>
            <p>Abdominal sternites (Fig. 7) unmodified, suture between VII and VIII barely marked.</p>
            <p>Aedeagus (Figs. 8–9) strongly elongate, thin-walled, with internal armature composed of moderately darkly sclerotized tubular structure, and with free (i.e., not fused with median lobe) and slender parameres bearing apical setae.</p>
            <p> Distribution and composition.  Archiconnus is represented by a single species known from the northern part of Peru. </p>
            <p> Remarks. Two species of  Archiconnus were described by Franz (1980, 1994), but the other one, known from Mexico, is in the present paper placed in a separate genus. </p>
            <p> Archiconnus was described as a genus similar to  Euconnus (Napochus) , with a diagnostic set of characters including contiguous hind coxae, pronotum with rounded sides, strongly enlarged maxillary palpomere III, round head with bristles similar to those on pronotum, large and anteriorly located eyes, narrow occipital constriction, antennal club composed of three antennomeres, pronotum without lateral carinae near hind angles, with a pair of approximate ante-basal foveae, elytra with a single basal fovea, and aedeagal parameres free (i.e., not fused with the median lobe). However, one of these characters is in fact not present in  Archiconnus : there are no stiff and thick bristles on the head, which is covered with setae as thin as those on elytra, in contrast to pronotal bristles. </p>
            <p> Archiconnus is highly similar to  Euconnus s. str. , from which it differs in lacking the fronto-clypeal groove (present in  Euconnus s. str. ); mandibles without subapical mesal tooth (with tooth in  Euconnus s. str. ); absent sublateral pronotal carinae (present in  Euconnus s. str. ); internal parts of prothoracic hypomera demarcated laterally by an incomplete hypomeral ridge (complete in  Euconnus s. str. ) and strongly expanding mesally over sides of prosternum and therefore concealing a large part of procoxal sockets (largely visible in  Euconnus s. str. ); lateral impressions of mesoventrite asetose (setose in  Euconnus s. str. ); absent ventral and dorsal foveae on mesoventrite (present in  Euconnus s. str. ); presence of distinct posterior lobe of mesocoxal projection (absent in  Euconnus s. str. ); nearly contiguous metacoxae (moderately broadly separated in  Euconnus s. str. ); and each elytron with a single rudimentary fovea barely discernible even in transparent mounts (two deep foveae in  Euconnus s. str. ). The number of these differences justifies the placement of  Archiconnus as at least a separate subgenus within  Euconnus , but since the character states within the enormously large  Euconnus and its many subgenera are still very poorly studied, for the time being this taxon should be treated as a genus. </p>
            <p> The indistinctly demarcated basisternal part of prosternum, lack of prosternal intercoxal carina, procoxal sockets largely concealed under the internal part of hypomeron, which is laterally demarcated by an incomplete hypomeral ridge, and a single rudimentary elytral basal fovea make  Archiconnus similar to previously revised  Euconnomorphus (Jałoszyński 2012) . However,  Euconnomorphus clearly differs from  Archiconnus in a slender, strongly elongate maxillary palpomere III (strongly broadened and stout in  Archiconnus ); subconically expanded vertex (not expanded in  Archiconnus ); two pairs of deep foveae on sides of the mesoventrite (absent in  Archiconnus ); and in absence of posterior lobes of mesocoxal projections (present in  Archiconnus ). Previously revised  Venezolanoconnus (Jałoszyński 2012) is highly similar to  Archiconnus in the general body form, the shape of vertex (not subconical), the eyes large in males and rudimentary in females, lack of bristles on sides of the head, the maxillary palpomere III strongly broadened and stout, mandibles without subapical mesal tooth, absent frontoclypeal groove, pronotal base without sub-lateral carinae and with a rudimentary pair of ante-basal pits (only in some species, in others entirely absent), sides of pronotum with dense and long bristles, lack of the prosternal intercoxal carina, presence of asetose impressions of mesoventrite and a similar shape and width of the metaventral intercoxal process.  Venezolanoconnus differs from  Archiconnus in hypostomal ridges not connected posteromesally (connected in  Archiconnus ), antennae gradually thickened distally (with distinct club in  Archiconnus ), prothoracic hypomera with the internal part demarcated laterally by complete hypomeral ridges (incomplete in  Archiconnus ), absent posterior lobes of mesocoxal projections (present in  Archiconnus ) and extremely broad, hyaline parameres laterally embracing median lobe (slender parameres in  Archiconnus ). </p>
            <p> Archiconnus is also similar to  Parapseudoconnus , from which it differs in the hypostomal ridges connected in middle behind the submentum (short, not connected ridges in  Parapseudoconnus ), absent prosternal intercoxal carina (present in  Parapseudoconnus ), incomplete prothoracic hypomeral ridges (complete or nearly complete in  Parapseudoconnus ), postero-lateral (postcoxal) parts of prosternum separated from internal parts of prothoracic hypomera (fused in  Parapseudoconnus ), absent ventro-lateral foveae of the mesoventrite (present in  Parapseudoconnus ), and the aedeagus with parameres (parameres absent in  Parapseudoconnus ). </p>
            <p> Archiconnus mexicanus Franz is here separated from  A. aberrans and placed in its own genus,  Mexiconnus . The differences between these taxa are numerous and commented on in Remarks under the latter genus. </p>
            <p> Archiconnus huallaganus Franz (Figs. 1–9) </p>
            <p> Archiconnus huallaganus Franz, 1980: 189 , Fig. 173. </p>
            <p> Material studied. Holotype: 3: three labels (Fig. 3): "Umg. Tarapoto / Peru, lg. Franz" with "SA137 [or "/37']" on the reverse side [white, printed; reverse handwritten], "  Euconnus [sic!] / (  Archiconnus ) / huallague [sic!] m. / det. H. Franz" [white, handwritten and printed], " Typus " [red, handwritten] (NHMW). Paratype: Ƥ: same data as for holotype (NHMW). </p>
            <p> Diagnosis. This is the only known species of re-defined  Archiconnus and can be identified on the basis of the generic characters and the aedeagus. </p>
            <p>Redescription. Body of male (Fig. 1) strongly convex, elongate and relatively slender, with moderately long appendages, BL 0.81 mm; glossy, uniformly brown with slightly lighter legs and palps; vestiture slightly lighter than cuticle.</p>
            <p>Head (Fig. 1) roundly rhomboidal and slightly elongate, broadest at eyes, HL 0.18 mm, HW 0.15 mm; occipital constriction broader than half HW; tempora slightly shorter than eyes, rounded and gradually convergent caudad; vertex nearly as long as broad, convex, only slightly (not conically) projected dorso-caudad; frons modified, with pair of large lateral median tubercles located antero-mesally to distinct supraantennal tubercles; eyes large and strongly convex, moderately coarsely faceted, nearly circular with shallow posterior emargination. Punctures on head dorsum fine and sparse, inconspicuous; setae long, moderately dense, erect, those on vertex mostly directed caudad, thick bristles absent. Antennae (Fig. 1) slender, with indistinctly demarcated club composed of antennomeres IX–XI, AnL 0.30 mm; antennomeres I–II elongate, III–VII each about as broad as long or only slightly transverse; VIII strongly transverse; IX and X each strongly transverse; XI 1.7x as long as broad, slightly asymmetrical, with subconical, blunt apex.</p>
            <p>Pronotum (Fig. 1) in dorsal view elongate oval, with broadly rounded and indistinct front and hind angles, broadest near posterior fourth, PL 0.24 mm, PW 0.21 mm; anterior, posterior and lateral margins rounded; base of pronotum with shallow and indistinctly demarcated pair of sub-median ante-basal pits. Punctures on pronotal disc fine and inconspicuous; setae long, moderately dense and strongly erect, sides of pronotum with dense thick and long bristles.</p>
            <p>Elytra (Fig. 1) oval and more convex than pronotum, broadest distinctly behind middle, EL 0.40 mm, EW 0.30 mm, EI 1.33; humeral calli distinct, developed as short longitudinal protuberances; basal impressions indistinct, basal pits barely discernible; elytral apices separately rounded. Punctures on elytral disc as fine as those on pronotum; setae much shorter than pronotal bristles, moderately sparse and suberect. Hind wings well-developed, about twice as long as elytra.</p>
            <p>Legs (Fig. 1) moderately long and slender, without modifications.</p>
            <p>Aedeagus (Figs. 8–9) elongate, AeL 0.13 mm, median lobe subtriangular, strongly narrowing from base to apex; distal part with truncate apex, in lateral view strongly curved dorsally; internal armature composed of tubular structures located in basal part of median lobe; parameres slender, each with two long and thick apical setae. Female (Figs. 2, 4–7). Similar to male but clearly differing in non-modified frons and rudimentary eyes (Fig. 4), each composed of a single ommatidium. BL 0.79 mm; HL 0.16 mm, HW 0.14 mm, AnL 0.28 mm; PL 0.23 mm, PW 0.20 mm; EL 0.40 mm, EW 0.30 mm, EI 1.33.</p>
            <p>Distribution. Northern Peru, San Martin Province.</p>
            <p> Remarks. Franz (1980) included in the type series of  A. huallaganus a holotype male and two paratype females (one labeled as allotype). The allotype female, however, clearly differs from the other paratype and the holotype in the body shape and proportions of body parts and it certainly belongs to a different species. Details of the ventral side of this specimen were not studied and it may belong to  Archiconnus or  Euconnus . In the original description Franz (1980) gives further collecting data for the holotype as a road to Yurimagua, 80 km from Tarapoto, bog or swamp forest ("Sumpfwald"), and collecting data for the paratype female as 40 km from Tarapoto, montane forest, 0 1.10.1968 (it is unclear whether the collecting date refers only to the paratype or both holotype and paratype). </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/C853F73124130C5DFF34FEF4B03AFF6F	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	Jałoszyński, Paweł	Jałoszyński, Paweł (2013): Taxonomy of ' Euconnus complex'. Part II. Revision of Archiconnus Franz, Parapseudoconnus Franz and Mexiconnus gen. nov. (Coleoptera, Staphylinidae, Scydmaeninae). Zootaxa 3666 (4): 523-543, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3666.4.7
C853F73124160C53FF34FEA5B513FD1C.text	C853F73124160C53FF34FEA5B513FD1C.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Mexiconnus	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Mexiconnus gen. nov.</p>
            <p> Type species:  Archiconnus mexicanus Franz, 1994: 376 (here designated). </p>
            <p>Diagnosis. Male: head short, with vertex not expanded dorso-caudad; thick and long bristles absent on head but present on sides of prothorax; fronto-clypeal groove absent; maxillary palpomere III strongly thickened and stout; mandible with mesal sub-median tooth; antennae with club composed of antennomeres IX–XI; pronotum with rounded sides and weakly arcuate anterior and posterior margins; base of pronotum with deep and distinct transverse ante-basal groove slightly deepened at each end and not reaching lateral pronotal margins, without lateral and sub-lateral carinae; basisternal part of prosternum much shorter than procoxal cavities; prosternum with fine intercoxal carina; prothoracic hypomeral ridges complete; mesoventral intercoxal process long, narrow and strongly expanding ventrally (keel-shaped); mesoventrite with asetose lateral impressions behind anterior ridge, without setose impressions; mesothorax with a pair of deep ventro-lateral foveae; mesocoxal projection with very short, barely discernible posterior lobe; metacoxae narrowly separated by subtrapezoidal metaventral intercoxal process; each elytron with two rudimentary and asetose basal foveae; parameres not fused with median lobe, with broad basal and slender distal parts, without apical setae; internal armature of aedeagus asymmetrical. Females and their diagnostic characters unknown.</p>
            <p>Description. Body of male (Fig. 10) moderately strongly convex, slender, with moderately long appendages, BL below 1 mm; cuticle glossy, brown, moderately setose.</p>
            <p>Head (Figs. 10, 12) short and approximately rhomboidal, with large eyes; occipital constriction (Fig. 12; occ) in the narrowest place much broader than half HW; tempora long and strongly convergent caudad, without bristles; vertex rounded and convex, broader than long, not expanded dorso-caudad; frons transverse and subtriangular; fronto-clypeal groove absent; antennal insertions broadly separated.</p>
            <p>Labrum transverse with rounded sides and nearly straight anterior margin. Mandibles (Fig. 12; md) symmetrical, each with broad basal part, without noticeable prostheca, and with slender and curved distal part with one small subapical mesal tooth. Each maxilla (Fig. 12) with subtriangular basistipes (Fig. 12; bst), elongate galea (Fig. 12; gal) and lacinia (Fig. 12; lac) and moderately long maxillary palp (Fig. 12; mxp) composed of relatively long palpomere I, strongly elongate, pedunculate palpomere II, moderately elongate, very broad palpomere III broadest near middle, and small, subconical palpomere IV.</p>
            <p>Labium (Fig. 12) with approximately hexagonal, elongate submentum (Fig. 12; smn) indistinctly delimited from gular plate (Fig. 12; gp) and laterally demarcated from hypostomae by long and recurved lateral sutures of submentum (Fig. 12; lss); subrectangular mentum (Fig. 12; mn); and short prementum with small 3-segmented labial palps (Fig. 12; lp) narrowly separated at bases. Hypostomal ridges (Fig. 12; hr) short, not reaching lateral margins of submentum.</p>
            <p>Gular plate (Fig. 12; gp) indistinctly demarcated, strongly narrowing anterad; gular sutures (Fig. 12; gs) superficial; posterior tentorial pits (Fig. 12; ptp) distinct and located at base of submentum.</p>
            <p>Antennae (Fig. 10) with club composed of antennomeres IX–XI.</p>
            <p>Pronotum (Fig. 10) in dorsal view oval, with indistinct front angles and well-marked hind angles; sides strongly rounded; base of pronotum with deep transverse ante-basal groove slightly deepened at each end and not reaching lateral pronotal margins, without lateral carinae or edges and without sub-lateral carinae; sides of pronotum with long and thick bristles.</p>
            <p>Prosternum (Fig. 13) with basisternal part (Fig. 13; bs) relatively short and indistinctly demarcated from procoxal cavities (Fig. 13; pcc); median part of sternum with fine prosternal intercoxal carina (Fig. 13; pc); procoxal sockets (Fig. 13; pcs) closed by lateral lobes of sternum; hypomera (Fig. 12; hy) elongate, each with elongate internal (adcoxal) part demarcated laterally by complete hypomeral ridge (Fig. 13; hyr); pronotosternal sutures (Fig. 13; nss) entire.</p>
            <p>Mesoscutellum very small, subtriangular and elongate, barely visible between bases of elytra; mesoscutoscutellar suture fine but discernible.</p>
            <p>Mesoventrite (Fig. 14) with narrow anterior ridge (Fig. 14; ar) with small median projection (Fig. 14; par); mesoventral intercoxal process (Fig. 14; msvp) narrow and keel-shaped; mesoventrite behind anterior ridge with sharply delimited lateral asetose impressions (Fig. 14; ai); prepectus (Fig. 14; pre) long, posterior portion of mesanepisternum only partly visible in ventral view; mesepimeron not visible in ventral view; mesothorax with deep ventro-lateral fovea at each side (Fig. 14; vlf); mesocoxal projections (Fig. 14; mcp) with mesocoxal sockets (Fig. 14; mscs) located on their meso-ventral surface, without posterior lobes.</p>
            <p>Metaventrite (Fig. 14; vIII) strongly transverse, anteriorly fused with mesoventrite, posteriorly moderately deeply bisinuate and with narrow median subtrapezoidal metaventral intercoxal process (Fig. 14; mtvp) bearing median notch. Metanepisterna and metepimera narrow, only posterior parts of episterna visible in ventral view.</p>
            <p>Metafurca (Fig. 14) with very short and broad stem and divergent lateral furcal arms (Fig. 14; lmfa).</p>
            <p>Elytra (Fig. 10) oval, each with two rudimentary and asetose basal foveae barely discernible even in transparent mounts; humeral calli well-marked and developed as longitudinal protuberances; elytral apices unmodified, separately rounded.</p>
            <p>Legs (Figs. 10, 13–16) long and slender; procoxae subglobose, mesocoxae slightly elongate, metacoxae transverse, stout; all trochanters short; all femora weakly clavate; tibiae short and slightly expanded near middle; tarsi short and stout, protarsi (Figs. 15–16) strongly broadened at base and narrowing distally, with long and dense setae on ventral surface, especially tarsomere I with dense cushion of long setae.</p>
            <p>Abdominal sternites (Fig. 14) only partly preserved in holotype; sternites III and IV unmodified.</p>
            <p>Aedeagus (Figs. 17–18) strongly elongate, thin-walled, with internal armature composed of moderately darkly sclerotized and tubular structure forming an open loop, and with free (i.e., not fused with median lobe) parameres without apical setae; basal part of parameres very broad and embracing laterally median lobe, distal parts slender and narrowing to pointed apices.</p>
            <p> Distribution and composition.  Mexiconnus is represented by a single species known from the southernmost part of Mexico. </p>
            <p> Remarks.  Mexiconnus differs from  Archiconnus in several important characters that justify its separate placement. The submentum in  Mexiconnus is demarcated from post-cardinal parts of hypostomae by complete lateral sutures and hypostomal ridges are short and posteriorly reaching only to half length of submentum, while in  Archiconnus lateral sutures of submentum are absent and the hypostomal ridges are not only long, but connected in middle between the base of submentum and the gular plate. In  Mexiconnus the prosternal intercoxal carina is present and the internal parts of prothoracic hypomera are laterally demarcated by complete hypomeral ridges, while in  Archiconnus the prosternal carina is absent and the hypomeral ridges are incomplete. In  Mexiconnus the mesoventrite has deep ventro-lateral foveae, entirely missing in  Archiconnus .  Mexiconnus has two rudimentary and barely discernible in transparent mounts basal elytral foveae, while only a single, also rudimentary fovea can be seen in  Archiconnus . Also the aedeagi, described by Franz (1994) as similar, differ significantly in the shape of parameres. In  Mexiconnus the parameres are massive and their broad basal parts embrace the median lobe laterally, while distal parts are slender and gradually narrowing towards pointed apices devoid of setae. In  Archiconnus the parameres are slender also in their basal halves, each with rounded apex bearing two very long and thick setae. Strongly broadened protarsi in the only known male of  Mexiconnus mexicanus may constitute another difference between these two genera, as in  Archiconnus male and females do not differ in the shape of protarsomeres. </p>
            <p> Mexiconnus clearly differs from other members of the hitherto revised genera of the '  Euconnus complex'. From  Euconnus s. str. (Jałoszyński 2012) it differs in more slender body, with elytra not so much broader than the pronotum, the lack of fronto-clypeal groove (present in  Euconnus s. str. ), presence of lateral sutures of submentum (absent in  Euconnus s. str. ), short hypostomal ridges (long in  Euconnus s. str. ), pronotum in dorsal view strongly rounded (bell-shaped in  Euconnus s. str. ), presence of prosternal intercoxal carina (absent in  Euconnus s. str. ), lack of sub-lateral pronotal carinae (present in  Euconnus s. str. ), asetose impressions of the mesoventrite (setose in  Euconnus s. str. ), nearly contiguous metacoxae (moderately broadly separated in  Euconnus s. str. ), rudimentary basal elytral foveae (deep in  Euconnus s. str. ), and the broad parameres devoid of apical setae (slender and with setae in  Euconnus s. str. ). </p>
            <p> Mexiconnus differs from  Euconnomorphus (Jałoszyński 2012) in the vertex not expanded dorso-caudad (strongly subconical in  Euconnomorphus ), short and stout maxillary palpomere III (strongly elongate in  Euconnomorphus ), antennae with distinct club (gradually thickened distally in  Euconnomorphus ), presence of lateral sutures of submentum (absent in  Euconnomorphus ), short hypostomal ridges (long in  Euconnomorphus ), pronotum in dorsal view strongly rounded (bell-shaped in  Euconnus s. str. ), presence of prosternal intercoxal carina (absent in  Euconnomorphus ), complete prothoracic hypomeral ridges (incomplete in  Euconnomorphus ), welldemarcated asetose impressions of the mesoventrite (not demarcated in  Euconnomorphus ), and two (and not one) rudiments of basal elytral foveae. </p>
            <p> Mexiconnus differs from  Venezolanoconnus in much more slender body, antennal club composed of three antennomeres (antennae gradually thickening distally in  Venezolanoconnus ), presence of lateral sutures of submentum (absent in  Venezolanoconnus ), short hypostomal ridges (long in  Venezolanoconnus ), pronotum in dorsal view strongly rounded (in  Venezolanoconnus strongly rounded in anterior half and weakly in posterior half)), presence of prosternal intercoxal carina (absent in  Venezolanoconnus ), two (and not one) rudiments of basal elytral foveae, and strongly elongate distal halves of parameres (broad and short in  Venezolanoconnus ). </p>
            <p> Mexiconnus differs from  Parapseudoconnus in the presence of lateral sutures of submentum (absent in  Parapseudoconnus ), postero-lateral (postcoxal) parts of prosternum separated from internal parts of prothoracic hypomera (fused in  Parapseudoconnus ), two rudiments of basal elytral foveae (one deep and setose fovea in  Parapseudoconnus ), and presence of parameres (absent in  Parapseudoconnus ). </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/C853F73124160C53FF34FEA5B513FD1C	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	Jałoszyński, Paweł	Jałoszyński, Paweł (2013): Taxonomy of ' Euconnus complex'. Part II. Revision of Archiconnus Franz, Parapseudoconnus Franz and Mexiconnus gen. nov. (Coleoptera, Staphylinidae, Scydmaeninae). Zootaxa 3666 (4): 523-543, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3666.4.7
C853F73124180C50FF34FD4CB5B5FE6C.text	C853F73124180C50FF34FD4CB5B5FE6C.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Mexiconnus mexicanus (Franz) Franz	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Mexiconnus mexicanus (Franz) comb. nov.</p>
            <p>(Figs. 10–18)</p>
            <p> Archiconnus mexicanus Franz, 1994: 376 , fig. 72. </p>
            <p> Material studied. Holotype: 3: three labels (Fig. 11): "Umg. San-Cristobal / Chiapas, Mexico " with "Mx 16" on the reverse side [white, printed; reverse handwritten], "  Archiconnus /  mexicanus m. / det. H. Franz" [white, handwritten and printed], " Holotypus " [red, handwritten] (NHMW). A white printed label was added during the present study: "  MEXICONNUS /  mexicanus / (Franz, 1994) / det. P. JAŁOSZYŃSKI, '13". </p>
            <p> Diagnosis. This is the only known species of  Mexiconnus and can be identified on the basis of the generic characters and the aedeagus. </p>
            <p>Description. Body of male (Fig. 10) slightly flattened, elongate and slender, with long appendages, BL 0.93 mm; glossy, uniformly moderately dark brown with slightly lighter appendages; vestiture slightly lighter than cuticle.</p>
            <p>Head (Figs. 10, 12) short and rhomboidal in shape, broadest at eyes, HL 0.18 mm, HW 0.20 mm; occipital constriction slightly broader than half HW; tempora slightly longer than eyes, strongly convergent caudad and only weakly rounded; vertex strongly transverse, convex, not expanded dorso-caudad; frons confluent with vertex, slightly convex, subtrapezoidal and steeply but not abruptly lowering towards strongly transverse clypeus; supraantennal tubercles feebly marked; eyes large and strongly convex, kidney-shaped and transverse in relation to the long axis of the head, finely faceted. Punctures on head dorsum fine and sparse, inconspicuous; setae long, moderately dense, suberect to erect, those on vertex and tempora directed caudad, thick bristles absent. Antennae (Fig. 10) long and slender, with moderately distinctly delimited club composed of antennomeres IX–XI, AnL 0.50 mm; antennomeres I–IX elongate; X distinctly transverse; XI only 1.2x as long as broad, symmetrical, with broadly rounded apex.</p>
            <p>Pronotum (Fig. 10) in dorsal view elongate oval, broadest in anterior fourth, PL 0.25 mm, PW 0.23 mm; anterior margin slightly arcuate; front angles indistinct; lateral margins strongly rounded and strongly convergent towards well-marked, obtuse and blunt hind angles; posterior margin slightly arcuate; base of pronotum with deep and distinct transverse ante-basal groove slightly deepened at each end and not reaching lateral pronotal margins. Punctures on pronotal disc fine and inconspicuous; setae moderately long and dense, suberect, sides of pronotum with thick and long bristles.</p>
            <p>Elytra (Fig. 10) oval and only slightly more convex than pronotum, broadest near middle, EL 0.50 mm, EW 0.35 mm, EI 1.43; humeral calli distinct, each developed as short longitudinal protuberance; basal elytral impressions distinct; basal pits indiscernible in a dry-mounted specimen; elytral apices separately rounded. Punctures on median circumsutural part of elytral disc more distinct and denser than those on pronotum but only superficial and with diffused margins, punctures on remaining surface of elytra fine and inconspicuous; setae short, moderately sparse and suberect. Hind wings well-developed, about twice as long as elytra.</p>
            <p>Legs (Figs. 10, 15–16) long and slender; protarsi strongly broadened at base and with dense cushion of long setae on ventral surface, especially on tarsomere I.</p>
            <p>Aedeagus (Figs. 17–18) elongate, AeL 0.14 mm, median lobe oval, strongly narrowing from base to subapical region where the distal third of aedeagus is rapidly narrowing and forming slender apical projection; internal armature composed of tubular structures forming an open loop; parameres with broad basal and slender distal parts, each with pointed apex and without setae.</p>
            <p>Female. Unknown.</p>
            <p>Distribution. Southern Mexico, Chiapas State.</p>
            <p>Remarks. In the original description Franz (1994) gives further collecting data: Los Alcanfores (misspelled as "Alcanfones"; a place located west of San Cristóbal de Las Casas), old oak forest, 17.06.1992.</p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/C853F73124180C50FF34FD4CB5B5FE6C	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	Jałoszyński, Paweł	Jałoszyński, Paweł (2013): Taxonomy of ' Euconnus complex'. Part II. Revision of Archiconnus Franz, Parapseudoconnus Franz and Mexiconnus gen. nov. (Coleoptera, Staphylinidae, Scydmaeninae). Zootaxa 3666 (4): 523-543, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3666.4.7
C853F731241A0C57FF34F81AB059F9B5.text	C853F731241A0C57FF34F81AB059F9B5.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Parapseudoconnus Franz	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Parapseudoconnus Franz</p>
            <p> Parapseudoconnus Franz, 1980 sensu Newton &amp; Franz, 1998: 148 . Type species:  Pseudoconnus aberrans Franz, 1980 (monotypy).  Pseudoconnus is unavailable and the subgeneric name  Parapseudoconnus has priority for the name of the genus (problem clarified by Newton &amp; Franz, 1998). </p>
            <p> Parapseudoconnus Franz, 1980: 218 (as subgenus of  Pseudoconnus Franz, 1980 ). Type species:  Pseudoconnus aberrans Franz, 1980 (monotypy). </p>
            <p>Revised diagnosis. Male and female: head short, with vertex not expanded dorso-caudad; thick and long bristles absent on head but present on sides of prothorax; fronto-clypeal groove absent; maxillary palpomere III strongly thickened and stout; mandible without mesal sub-median tooth; antennae with club composed of antennomeres IX– XI; pronotum with rounded sides and weakly arcuate anterior and posterior margins, base of pronotum with one pair of external lateral pits and short longitudinal sub-lateral carina; basisternal part of prosternum much shorter than procoxal cavities; prosternum with fine intercoxal carina; prothoracic hypomeral ridges complete or nearly complete; postero-lateral (postcoxal) parts of prosternum fused with internal parts of prothoracic hypomera; mesoventral intercoxal process long, narrow and strongly expanding ventrally (keel-shaped); mesoventrite with asetose lateral impressions behind anterior ridge, without setose impressions; mesothorax with ventro-lateral foveae; metacoxae narrowly separated by subtrapezoidal or subtriangular metaventral intercoxal process; each elytron with single deep and setose basal fovea. Male: aedeagus without parameres, with asymmetrical internal armature.</p>
            <p>Redescription. Body of male (Figs. 19, 21) strongly convex, elongate but moderately slender, with moderately long appendages, BL below 1 mm; cuticle glossy, brown, moderately densely setose.</p>
            <p>Head (Figs. 19–21, 26–27, 32) short, approximately rhomboidal or rounded, with large eyes; occipital constriction (Figs. 27, 32; occ) in the narrowest place much wider than half HW; tempora (Fig. 26; tm) long and convergent caudad, without bristles; vertex (Fig. 26; vt) broader than long, rounded, convex, not projecting dorsocaudad; frons (Fig. 26; fr) transverse and subtriangular; fronto-clypeal groove absent; antennal insertions broadly separated.</p>
            <p>Labrum (Fig. 26; lb) transverse with rounded anterior margin. Mandibles (Figs. 26–27, 32; md) symmetrical, each with broad basal part, without noticeable prostheca, and with slender and curved distal part, without mesal tooth. Each maxilla (Figs. 27, 32) with subtriangular basistipes (Figs. 27, 32; bst), elongate galea (Figs. 27, 32; gal) and lacinia (Figs. 27, 32; lac) and long maxillary palp (Figs. 27, 32; mxp) composed of relatively long palpomere I, strongly elongate, pedunculate palpomere II, broad and stout palpomere III broadest between middle and basal third, and small, subconical and pointed palpomere IV.</p>
            <p>Labium (Figs. 27, 32) with large and transverse submentum (Figs. 27, 32; smn) not demarcated from gular plate (Figs. 27, 32; gp) and laterally fused with postcardinal parts of hypostomae (Figs. 27, 32; h), subtrapezoidal mentum (Figs. 27, 32; mn); and short prementum with small 3-segmented labial palps narrowly separated at bases (Figs. 27, 32; lp). Hypostomal ridges (Figs. 27, 32; hr) posteriorly reaching to half length of submentum.</p>
            <p>Gular plate (Figs. 27, 32; gp) large and strongly narrowing anterad; gular sutures (Figs. 27, 32; gs) superficial; posterior tentorial pits (Figs. 27, 32; ptp) distinct, located at base of submentum.</p>
            <p>Antennae (Figs. 19–21, 26) with distinct club composed of antennomeres IX–XI.</p>
            <p>Pronotum (Figs. 19–21) in dorsal view approximately oval with strongly rounded lateral margins, moderately distinct anterior and distinct posterior corners; without marginal carinae or edges but with short sub-lateral carinae visible near posterior pronotal corners; base of pronotum with one pair of shallow and small external lateral pits; sides of pronotum with dense, thick and long bristles.</p>
            <p>Prosternum (Figs. 28, 33) with short basisternal part (Figs. 28, 33; bs) distinctly demarcated from procoxal cavities (Figs. 28, 33; pcc); median part of sternum with fine intercoxal carina; procoxal sockets (Figs. 28, 33; pcs) closed by lateral lobes of sternum which are fused with internal parts of prothoracic hypomera; hypomera (Figs. 28, 33; hy) elongate; hypomeral ridge (Figs. 28, 33; hyr) complete or nearly complete; pronotosternal sutures (Figs. 28, 33; nss) entire.</p>
            <p>Mesoscutellum very small, subtriangular, barely visible between bases of elytra; mesoscuto-scutellar suture indiscernible in slide preparation.</p>
            <p>Mesoventrite (Figs. 29, 34) with narrow anterior ridge (Figs. 29, 34; ar) and median projection of anterior ridge (Figs. 29, 34; par); mesoventral intercoxal process (Figs. 29, 34; msvp) narrow and keel-shaped; mesanepisternum with long prepectus (Figs. 29, 34; pre) and posterior part in ventral view visible only near to ventro-lateral fovea; mesepimeron not visible in ventral view; sides of mesothorax with deep ventro-lateral foveae (Figs. 29, 34; vlf); mesoventrite with variously distinctly delimited lateral asetose impressions (Figs. 29, 34; ai), without setose impressions; mesocoxal projections (Figs. 29, 34; mcp) with mesocoxal sockets (Figs. 29, 34; mscs) located on their mesal or meso-ventral surface and with or without posterior lobes (Fig. 29; pl).</p>
            <p>Metaventrite (Figs. 29, 34; vIII) strongly transverse, anteriorly fused with mesoventrite, posteriorly moderately deeply bisinuate and with narrow median subtrapezoidal metaventral intercoxal process (Figs. 29, 34; mtvp) bearing median notch. Metanepisterna and metepimera narrow, only posterior parts of episterna partly visible in ventral view.</p>
            <p>Metafurca (Fig. 34) with very short and broad stem and divergent lateral furcal arms (Fig. 34; lmfa).</p>
            <p>Elytra (Figs. 19–21) oval, each with single deep and setose basal fovea located in shallow basal impression; humeral calli well-marked and developed as longitudinal protuberances; elytral apices unmodified, separately rounded.</p>
            <p>Legs (Figs. 19–21, 28-29, 33–34) moderately long and slender; procoxae subglobose, mesocoxae slightly elongate, metacoxae transverse, stout; all trochanters short; all femora weakly clavate; tibiae short and slightly expanded near middle or nearly parallel-sided; tarsi short and stout.</p>
            <p>Abdominal sternites (Fig. 29) unmodified, suture between VII and VIII barely marked.</p>
            <p>Aedeagus (Figs. 30–31, 35–36) elongate, thin-walled, with asymmetrical internal armature composed of moderately darkly sclerotized set of complicated sclerites; parameres absent.</p>
            <p> Distribution and composition. One species of  Parapseudoconnus is known to occur in the north-western part of Brazil and three others in the northern part of Peru. </p>
            <p> Remarks.  Parapseudoconnus differs from  Euconnus s. str. in distinct antennal club composed of three antennomeres (antennae gradually thickening distally in  Euconnus s. str. ), lack of fronto-clypeal groove (present in  Euconnus s. str. ), short hypostomal ridges (long in  Euconnus s. str. ), presence of prosternal intercoxal carina (absent in  Euconnus s. str. ), postero-lateral (postcoxal) parts of prosternum fused with internal parts of prothoracic hypomera (separated in  Euconnus s. str. ), asetose impressions of mesoventrite (setose in  Euconnus s. str. ), nearly contiguous metacoxae (moderately broadly separated in  Euconnus s. str. ), and the aedeagus without parameres (with parameres in  Euconnus s. str. ). </p>
            <p> Parapseudoconnus differs from  Euconnomorphus in distinct antennal club composed of three antennomeres (antennae gradually thickening distally in  Euconnomorphus ), short hypostomal ridges (long in  Euconnomorphus ), short head with the vertex not expanded dorso-caudad (long head with the vertex subconical in  Euconnomorphus ), presence of prosternal intercoxal carina (absent in  Euconnomorphus ), postero-lateral (postcoxal) parts of prosternum fused with internal parts of prothoracic hypomera (separated in  Euconnomorphus ), deep and setose basal elytral fovea (rudimentary and asetose in  Euconnomorphus ), and the aedeagus without parameres (with parameres in  Euconnomorphus ). </p>
            <p> Parapseudoconnus differs from  Venezolanoconnus in distinct antennal club composed of three antennomeres (antennae gradually thickening distally in  Venezolanoconnus ), short hypostomal ridges (long in  Venezolanoconnus ), presence of prosternal intercoxal carina (absent in  Venezolanoconnus ), postero-lateral (postcoxal) parts of prosternum fused with internal parts of prothoracic hypomera (separated in  Venezolanoconnus ), deep and setose basal elytral fovea (rudimentary and asetose in  Venezolanoconnus ), and the aedeagus without parameres (with parameres in  Venezolanoconnus ). </p>
            <p> Differences between  Parapseudoconnus ,  Archiconnus and  Mexiconnus were described in remarks under the two latter genera. </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/C853F731241A0C57FF34F81AB059F9B5	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	Jałoszyński, Paweł	Jałoszyński, Paweł (2013): Taxonomy of ' Euconnus complex'. Part II. Revision of Archiconnus Franz, Parapseudoconnus Franz and Mexiconnus gen. nov. (Coleoptera, Staphylinidae, Scydmaeninae). Zootaxa 3666 (4): 523-543, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3666.4.7
C853F731241C0C4AFF34F9E4B3B9FF4C.text	C853F731241C0C4AFF34F9E4B3B9FF4C.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Parapseudoconnus	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Subgenus  Parapseudoconnus s. str.</p>
            <p> The two subgenera were separated by Franz (1980) solely on the basis of differences in genital structures. However, all males of  Parapseudoconnus in the Franz Coll. have the aedeagi distorted or damaged to some extent (probably also illustrations in Franz's papers show such distorted or incomplete preparations), and only the internal armature seems intact. In the present study some other characters were found to be different between the type species of  Parapseudoconnus s. str. and the subgenus  Neuraphomimus .  Parapseudoconnus s. str. can be identified on the basis of the prothoracic hypomeral ridges obliterated in their anterior parts; indistinctly marked anterior margins of mesocoxal cavities; mesocoxal sockets located on meso-ventral surface of mesocoxal projections and therefore largely visible in ventral view; presence of small but distinct posterior lobes of mesocoxal projections; and the internal armature of the aedeagus without long and slender flagellum projecting distally beyond the median lobe. </p>
            <p> Parapseudoconnus (Parapseudoconnus) aberrans Franz (Figs. 19–20, 22, 26–31) </p>
            <p> Pseudoconnus (Parapseudoconnus) aberrans Franz, 1980: 218 , Fig. 206. </p>
            <p> Material studied. Holotype: 3: four labels (Fig. 22): "Umg. Manau / Amazongebiet / Brasil,lg.L.Beck" with "45" on the reverse side [white, printed; reverse handwritten], " Parapseudocon- / nus  aberrans / m. / det. H. Franz" [white, handwritten and printed], "3" [white, printed], " Typus " [red, handwritten] (NHMW). Paratypes (6 exx.: 2 33, 4 ƤƤ): same data as for the holotype, one female laballed "Allotypus" [red, handwritten] (NHMW). </p>
            <p>Diagnosis. Vertex in males and females with distinct postero-median impression; aedeagus with three elongate and curved sclerites.</p>
            <p>Redescription. Body of male (Fig. 19) strongly convex and moderately elongate, with moderately long appendages, BL 0.84–0.86 mm (mean 0.85 mm); glossy, uniformly light brown with slightly lighter appendages; vestiture slightly lighter than cuticle.</p>
            <p>Head (Fig. 19) approximately pentagonal and not elongate, broadest at eyes, HL 0.16–0.18 mm (mean 0.17 mm), HW 0.18–0.20 mm (mean 0.19 mm); occipital constriction much broader than half HW; tempora slightly shorter than eyes, rounded and gradually convergent caudad; vertex not projected dorso-caudad; broader than long, convex except for shallow postero-median impression; frons subtriangular and confluent with vertex; supraantennal tubercles weakly developed; eyes large and strongly convex, moderately coarsely faceted, kidneyshaped with deep posterior emargination, nearly transverse in relation to the long axis of head. Punctures on head dorsum fine and sparse, inconspicuous; setae long, sparse, suberect to erect, those on vertex mostly directed caudad, thick bristles absent. Antennae (Fig. 19) slender, with distinctly delimited club composed of antennomeres IX–XI, AnL 0.30 mm; antennomeres I–II elongate, III–VII each about as broad as long; VIII–X each strongly transverse; XI 1.4x as long as broad, slightly asymmetrical, with subconical, blunt apex.</p>
            <p>Pronotum (Fig. 19) in dorsal view sub-oval, broadest between middle and posterior third; PL 0.23 mm, PW 0.23–0.25 mm (mean 0.24 mm); anterior margin weakly arcuate; front angles rounded and indistinct; sides broadly rounded; hind angles well-marked and obtuse; posterior margin weakly arcuate; base of pronotum with shallow and small but distinct pair of external lateral pits, each adjacent to short longitudinal sub-lateral carina. Punctures on pronotal disc fine and inconspicuous; setae long, moderately dense and suberect, sides of pronotum with dense thick and long bristles, especially in posterior half.</p>
            <p>Elytra (Fig. 19) oval and only slightly more convex than pronotum, broadest slightly anterior to middle, EL 0.45–0.46 mm (mean 0.45 mm), EW 0.38 mm, EI 1.20–1.23 (mean 1.21); humeral calli distinct, developed as short longitudinal protuberances; basal impressions short but distinct, basal pits well-visible; elytral apices separately rounded. Punctures on elytral disc nearly as fine as those on pronotum; setae short and sparse, suberect. Hind wings well-developed, about twice as long as elytra.</p>
            <p>Legs (Fig. 19) moderately long and slender, without modifications.</p>
            <p>Aedeagus (Figs. 30–31) elongate, AeL 0.13 mm, thin-walled, in two studied and previously dissected males slightly distorted during previous preparations, oval in shape, with internal armature composed of three elongate and curved sclerites.</p>
            <p>Female (Figs. 20, 26–29). Similar to male but clearly differing in rudimentary eyes, each composed of a single ommatidium. BL 0.86–0.88 mm (mean 0.87 mm); HL 0.18 mm, HW 0.19 mm, AnL 0.28 mm; PL 0.24 mm, PW 0.24–0.25 mm (mean 0.25 mm); EL 0.45–0.46 mm (mean 0.45 mm), EW 0.38–0.39 mm (mean 0.38 mm), EI 1.16– 1.23 (mean 1.18).</p>
            <p>Distribution. North-western Brazil, Amazonas State.</p>
            <p> Remarks. Two specimens must be excluded from the type series of  Parapseudoconnus aberrans due to misidentifications: one female belongs to the same genus but clearly differs in the general body shape and certainly is not conspecific with the holotype male; another specimen has not only a different body shape but also a distinct transverse groove on the pronotal base and belongs either to  Euconnus or  Protoconnus Franz. Both females were collected in a different site than  P. aberrans , as evident from the numbers handwritten on the reverse side of locality labels (45 for  P. aberrans and 32 and 38 for the two misidentified females). In the original description Franz (1980) indeed gave further collecting data that confirm this suspicion: the holotype and six paratypes were collected on the road to Pacaás Novas, 9.5 km from Guayara-Mirim, while two remaining specimens come from Reserve Ducke and Lago Janauaca near Manaus. </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/C853F731241C0C4AFF34F9E4B3B9FF4C	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	Jałoszyński, Paweł	Jałoszyński, Paweł (2013): Taxonomy of ' Euconnus complex'. Part II. Revision of Archiconnus Franz, Parapseudoconnus Franz and Mexiconnus gen. nov. (Coleoptera, Staphylinidae, Scydmaeninae). Zootaxa 3666 (4): 523-543, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3666.4.7
C853F73124000C4BFF34FF0CB26FF9A1.text	C853F73124000C4BFF34FF0CB26FF9A1.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Neuraphomimus Franz	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Subgenus  Neuraphomimus Franz</p>
            <p> Neuraphomimus Franz : 1986: 44 (replacement name for  Pseudoconnus Franz, 1980 ).  Pseudoconnus Franz, 1980: 216 (preoccupied, nec Leleup, 1971). Type species:  Pseudoconnus simulator Franz, 1980 (original designation). </p>
            <p> Vetusteconnus Franz, 1993: 101 (unnecessary replacement name for  Pseudoconnus Franz ). </p>
            <p> Revised diagnosis. A subgenus of  Parapseudoconnus showing the following differences in relation to  Parapseudoconnus s. str. : prothoracic hypomeral ridges complete; anterior margins of mesocoxal cavities distinctly demarcated by carina; mesocoxal sockets located on mesal surface of mesocoxal projections and therefore not visible in ventral view; posterior lobes of mesocoxal projections absent; and the internal armature of the aedeagus with long and slender flagellum projecting distally beyond the median lobe. </p>
            <p>Redescription. Body of male (Fig. 45) strongly convex, elongate and relatively slender, with long appendages, vestiture distinct but unremarkable.</p>
            <p> Head (Fig. 42) as in  Parapseudoconnus s. str. , without important differences. </p>
            <p> Prothorax (Fig. 33) differs from that of  Parapseudoconnus s. str. in ventral structures: internal parts of hypomera demarcated laterally by complete hypomeral ridges (Fig. 33; hyr), and pronotosternal sutures (Fig. 33; nss) strongly curved laterally, so that the basisternal part of prosternum is expanded laterally. </p>
            <p> Mesoventrite (Fig. 33) as in  Parapseudoconnus s. str. , except for indistinctly demarcated asetose impressions (Fig. 34; ai), presence of distinct carinae demarcating antrerior margins of mesocoxal cavities (Fig. 34; mscc), and mesocoxal projections (Fig. 34; mcp), which conceal mesocoxal sockets (Fig. 34; mscs) located on their mesal margins; posterior lobes of mesocoxal projections absent. </p>
            <p> Metaventrite (Fig. 34) as in  Parapseudoconnus s. str. , except for broader metaventral intercoxal process (Fig. 34: mtvp). </p>
            <p> Elytra (Fig. 45) as in  Parapseudoconnus s. str.</p>
            <p>Legs (Figs. 21, 33–34) long; femora clavate, tibiae slender, tarsi moderately elongate.</p>
            <p>Abdominal sternites in the only studied specimen not preserved.</p>
            <p>Aedeagus (Figs. 35–36) partly damaged or distorted in studied specimens, so the shape of its distal part is not possible to describe, with thin walls and complex, asymmetrical internal armature composed of a system of irregular sclerites, with long flagellum projecting distally beyond median lobe.</p>
            <p>Distribution and composition. Three species are known to occur in the northern part of Peru.</p>
            <p> Remarks. Specimens of  Parapseudoconnus belonging to  Neuraphomimus are poorly preserved in NHMW and only the male of  P. simulator is nearly intact, while the type specimens of the remaining two species are partly or nearly completely damaged. The aedeagi, partly damaged or distorted during previous studies, are fragile and they were remounted only to ensure their safety and visibility in the mounting medium (previously the aedeagi were mounted in such a way that they were barely visible), as described in the Materials and Methods section. No attempts were made to obtain preparations with the aedeagi in a perfectly dorsal or ventral position, which would have required additional manipulations and might have caused further damage. Therefore, the aedeagi are here illustrated as they are embedded, not necessarily in dorsal or lateral aspects. In order to identify new specimens their aedeagi must be studied in various positions to carefully examine the shape of internal armature and compare it with that showed in Figs. 35–36 and in Franz (1980; Fig. 205). </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/C853F73124000C4BFF34FF0CB26FF9A1	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	Jałoszyński, Paweł	Jałoszyński, Paweł (2013): Taxonomy of ' Euconnus complex'. Part II. Revision of Archiconnus Franz, Parapseudoconnus Franz and Mexiconnus gen. nov. (Coleoptera, Staphylinidae, Scydmaeninae). Zootaxa 3666 (4): 523-543, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3666.4.7
C853F73124000C49FF34F916B44BFB63.text	C853F73124000C49FF34F916B44BFB63.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Parapseudoconnus (Neuraphomimus) simulator Franz	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Parapseudoconnus (Neuraphomimus) simulator Franz</p>
            <p>(Figs. 21, 23, 32–35)</p>
            <p> Pseudoconnus (s. str.)  simulator Franz, 1980: 217 , Fig. 203. </p>
            <p> Material studied. Holotype: 3: three labels (Fig. 23): "Umg. Tarapoto / Peru, lg. Franz" with "SA137 [or /37]" on the reverse side [white, printed; reverse handwritten], "  Pseudoconnus /  simulator / 3 m. / det. H. Franz" [white, handwritten and printed], " Typus " [red, handwritten] (NHMW). </p>
            <p>Diagnosis. Aedeagus with internal armature as in Fig. 35.</p>
            <p>Redescription. Body of male (Fig. 21) moderately strongly convex and elongate, with moderately long appendages, BL 0.75 mm; glossy, uniformly light brown with slightly lighter appendages; vestiture slightly lighter than cuticle.</p>
            <p>Head (Figs. 21, 32) approximately rhomboidal and slightly transverse, broadest at eyes, HL 0.15 mm, HW 0.18 mm; occipital constriction slightly broader than half HW; tempora slightly shorter than eyes, only slightly rounded and strongly convergent caudad; vertex distinctly broader than long, convex, only slightly (not conically) projected dorso-caudad, without postero-median impression; frons subtriangular, confluent with vertex; supraantennal tubercles weakly developed; eyes large and strongly convex, moderately coarsely faceted, kidney-shaped with deep posterior emargination, nearly transverse in relation to the long axis of head. Punctures on head dorsum fine and sparse, inconspicuous; setae moderately long, sparse, suberect to erect, those on vertex mostly directed caudad, thick bristles absent. Antennae (Fig. 21) slender, with distinctly delimited club composed of antennomeres IX–XI, AnL 0.30 mm; antennomeres I–II elongate, III–VIII about as broad as long or only slightly elongate; VIII–X distinctly transverse; XI 1.7x as long as broad, slightly asymmetrical, with subconical, blunt apex.</p>
            <p>Pronotum (Fig. 21) in dorsal view sub-oval, broadest between middle and posterior third; PL 0.20 mm, PW 0.20 mm; anterior margin strongly arcuate; front angles rounded and indistinct; sides broadly rounded; hind angles moderately distinct and obtuse; posterior margin weakly arcuate; base of pronotum with shallow and small but distinct pair of external lateral pits, each adjacent to barely marked longitudinal sub-lateral carina. Punctures on pronotal disc fine and inconspicuous; setae long, sparse and suberect to erect, sides of pronotum with dense thick and very long bristles.</p>
            <p>Elytra (Fig. 21) oval and only slightly more convex than pronotum, broadest distinctly anterior to middle, EL 0.40 mm, EW 0.33 mm, EI 1.23; humeral calli distinct, developed as short longitudinal protuberances; basal impressions short but distinct, basal pits well-visible; elytral apices separately rounded. Punctures on elytral disc nearly as fine as those on pronotum; setae short and sparse, only slightly suberect. Hind wings well-developed, about twice as long as elytra.</p>
            <p>Legs (Fig. 21) moderately long and slender, without modifications.</p>
            <p>Aedeagus elongate, AeL 0.11 mm, as in Fig. 35.</p>
            <p>Female. Unknown (see Remarks).</p>
            <p>Distribution. Northern Peru, San Martin Province.</p>
            <p> Remarks. The holotype male is accompanied in NHMW by a highly similar, but microphthalmous female labeled as  Pseudoconnus ?  simulator , and bearing the same collecting data. It is not possible to verify whether these specimens are conspecific or not without collecting a larger series composed of both sexes from the same spot. In the original description, Franz (1980) mentions that the type series is composed of a male holotype and female paratype, but in the Franz Coll. only this provisionally identified female is present, not labeled as paratype. In the original description Franz (1980) gives further collecting details: road Tarapoto-Yurimagua, 80 km from Tarapoto, between Pongo de Caimarachi and Shanussi, in litter of a bog or swamp forest ("Sumpfwald"), 0 1.10.1968. </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/C853F73124000C49FF34F916B44BFB63	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	Jałoszyński, Paweł	Jałoszyński, Paweł (2013): Taxonomy of ' Euconnus complex'. Part II. Revision of Archiconnus Franz, Parapseudoconnus Franz and Mexiconnus gen. nov. (Coleoptera, Staphylinidae, Scydmaeninae). Zootaxa 3666 (4): 523-543, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3666.4.7
C853F73124020C4EFF34FADFB414FB93.text	C853F73124020C4EFF34FADFB414FB93.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Parapseudoconnus (Neuraphomimus) fraudulentus Franz	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Parapseudoconnus (Neuraphomimus) fraudulentus Franz</p>
            <p>(Figs. 24, 36)</p>
            <p> Pseudoconnus (s. str.)  fraudulentus Franz, 1980: 217 , Fig. 204. </p>
            <p> Material studied. Remnants of the holotype preparation: 3: three labels (Fig. 24): "Umg. Tarapoto / Peru, lg. Franz" with "SA137 [or /37]" on the reverse side [white, printed; reverse handwritten], "  Pseudoconnus /  fraudulentus / 3 m. / det. H. Franz" [white, handwritten and printed], " Typus " [red, handwritten] (NHMW). </p>
            <p>Diagnosis. Aedeagus with internal armature as in Fig. 36.</p>
            <p>Redescription. The only known specimen (male holotype) is damaged (the mounting card bears a droplet of glue with small fragments of the basal abdominal sternite and hind coxae) except for the aedeagus (Fig. 36), which is distorted, but with apparently intact internal armature; AeL 0.10.</p>
            <p>Female. Unknown.</p>
            <p>Distribution. Northern Peru, San Martin Province.</p>
            <p> Remarks. In the original description Franz (1980) gives further collecting details: road Tarapoto-Yurimagua, 80 km from Tarapoto, between Pongo de Caimarachi and Shanussi, in litter of a bog or swamp forest ("Sumpfwald"), 0 1.10.1968. The damaged holotype, with only a partly distorted aedeagus left, makes it impossible to verify the generic and subgeneric status of  P. fraudulentus . However, the internal armature of the aedeagus seems to be preserved in a non-distorted state and it may be possible to identify new specimens, preferably by direct comparisons of their aedeagi to the holotype preparation, and not only by comparing with the Fig. 36. A possibility of a synonymy between  P. simulator and  P. fraudulentus cannot be excluded, as their aedeagi are highly similar and both holotypes were probably collected in the same spot. </p>
            <p> Parapseudoconnus (Neuraphomimus) monticola Franz (Fig. 25) </p>
            <p> Pseudoconnus (s. str.)  monticola Franz, 1980: 217 , Fig. 205. </p>
            <p> Material studied. Remnants of the holotype preparation: three labels (Fig. 25): "Umg. Tarapoto / Peru, lg. Franz" with "SA136 [or /36]" on the reverse side [white, printed; reverse handwritten], "  Pseudoconnus /  monticola / 3 m. / det. H. Franz" [white, handwritten and printed], " Typus " [red, handwritten] (NHMW). </p>
            <p>This species is known from a single holotype male only (but see also Remarks), and the specimen preserved in the Franz Coll. (NHMW) is damaged to the extent that makes it impossible to identify the species. Only the head, a part of prothorax and partly also fore legs are preserved. The original genital preparation in euparal or Canada balsam on a plastic mounting card has been in the past pinned in such a way that the card folded in half longitudinally and the mounting medium cracked and most of it has fallen off. A careful examination revealed that the remnants of the mounting medium do not contain the aedeagus or any other structures. Franz (1980, Fig. 205) illustrated the aedeagus of P. m o n t i c o l a and it may be possible to identify new specimens using this illustration. Only then a neotype can be designated.</p>
            <p> Remarks. Franz (1980) in the original description mentions that the type series of P. m o n t i c o l a is composed of the holotype male and a paratype female. The male in the Franz Coll. (NHMW) is accompanied by another partly damaged specimen (only abdomen and the ventral part of pterothorax with three legs survived), but identified by Franz as a female of  P. monticola with a question mark and not labeled as paratype. The identity (even to genus level) of these remnants is not possible. In the original description Franz (1980) gives further collecting details for  P. monticola : road Tarapoto-Yurimagua, mountains 40 km from Tarapoto, in a forest litter, 0 1.10.1968. </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/C853F73124020C4EFF34FADFB414FB93	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	Jałoszyński, Paweł	Jałoszyński, Paweł (2013): Taxonomy of ' Euconnus complex'. Part II. Revision of Archiconnus Franz, Parapseudoconnus Franz and Mexiconnus gen. nov. (Coleoptera, Staphylinidae, Scydmaeninae). Zootaxa 3666 (4): 523-543, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3666.4.7
