taxonID	type	description	language	source
03D587E0FFA04401D3EBFBEBFD16F939.taxon	description	While describing Nephelotus, Pascoe (1866) did not take into account Anhammus but considered both genera in the key to the Malayan Lamiinae (Pascoe, 1866). Nephelotus was keyed differently due to the “ elytra not toothed at the shoulders ”, while the original description expressly stated the opposite (“ Elytra sub-angustata, humeris in dentem productis ”). Gahan (1906) considered Nephelotus as a subgenus of Anhammus without providing any differential characters. Ritsema (1914) and Aurivillius (1922) considered these as separate genera, without stating any reasons. Finally, Breuning (1943) keyed both genera differently, due to the scape with closed (Anhammus) or open cicatrix (Nephelotus). Actually, the cicatrix is open in both genera. Anhammus and Nephelotus are closely related taxa, as supported by the facts that Breuning (1982) described a Nephelotus species as member of Anhammus, by comparison of Mimonephelotes to Anhammus (Breuning, 1970) and then, he renamed it as Mimanhammus (Breuning, 1971). The main differences are related to the body size (29 – 44 mm in Anhammus vs. 19 – 27 mm in Nephelotus) and the different elytral pattern (numerous small points of yellowish pubescence forming two more or less conspicuous spots in Anhammus versus an irregular ochreous pattern and a large pre-median whitish spot in Nephelotus). The pronotal spines, long and acute in Anhammus, tend to disappear in Nephelotus but they are still present in some Philippine species, though always shorter than those of Anhammus. These differences suggest that Nephelotus should be considered as a subgenus of Anhammus, as Gahan (1906) supposed; nonetheless, we prefer to conserve the current taxonomy waiting for further analyses.	en	Vitali, Francesco, Chemin, Gerard (2022): Taxonomic notes about the genus Nephelotus Pascoe, 1866 (Coleoptera, Cerambycidae, Lamiinae). Zootaxa 5141 (1): 79-86, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5141.1.7
03D587E0FFA04407D3EBF8FFFD6DFD62.taxon	description	(Figs 1 – 8) Breuning (1944 a, b) separated Paranhammus from Nephelotus on the basis of the following characters: 1) Scape with closed (Paranhammus) or open cicatrix (Nephelotus) 2) Antennomere III as long as IV (Paranhammus) or longer than IV (Nephelotus) 3) Mesosternum armed with a rounded tubercle (Paranhammus) or unarmed (Nephelotus) 4) Pronotal base with three (Paranhammus) or two (Nephelotus) transverse furrows Actually, both genera have an open cicatrix, antennomere III about as long as IV, unarmed mesosternum and pronotal base with two large furrows. Only a specimen of Mindanao shows a supplementary incomplete superficial transverse impression between these furrows. Thus, all stated differential characters are untrue. Monohammus marcipor and Nephelotus conspersus show the same body structure and analogous pattern, differing little in antennal colour (dark brown in marcipor and reddish testaceous in conspersus) and, maybe, the glabrous spot on the pronotal disc (rhomboidal in marcipor and transverse in conspersus). Both characters can be considered specific or even subspecific. The taxa are also biogeographically related since conspersus and marcipor seem to coexist in Palawan (Philippines). There is no substantial reason to consider them as belonging to different genera; consequently, the following taxonomic changes are proposed.	en	Vitali, Francesco, Chemin, Gerard (2022): Taxonomic notes about the genus Nephelotus Pascoe, 1866 (Coleoptera, Cerambycidae, Lamiinae). Zootaxa 5141 (1): 79-86, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5141.1.7
03D587E0FFA64407D3EBFCDCFAACF945.taxon	description	(Figs 9 – 15) Breuning (1970) did not compare Mimonephelotes to Nephelotus but to Anhammus, stating that it differs from it in the shorter lateral pronotal spine and in the presence of a short carina on each elytral base. This carina is, in reality, a double series of tubercles located on a bulge similar in all to that of N. conspersus or N. marcipor. Thus, the provided characters are just typical of the genus Nephelotus. However, this taxon from Luzon clearly differs from N. marcipor. The body size is more robust and larger (19 - 27 mm vs 19 - 23 mm), the basal granulation of elytra forms distinct rows separated by smooth areas, the humeral tubercle is longer and finally, the pronotal disc is densely punctate (rather than smooth) at sides. Moreover, it differs from the Luzon population of N. marcipor in the pronotal tubercles twice as long as wide. These characters support the validity of N. enganensis as a true species. Breuning (1971) introduced Mimanhammus as substitute name for Mimonephelotes, claiming that this name was preoccupied. Actually, the name in question was Mimonephelotus Breuning, 1940, which differs by one letter (Mimonephelot-e-s vs. Mimonephelot-u-s); thus, Mimanhammus is an unnecessary replacement name. Finally, Breuning (1982) described this species for a second time as Anhammus luzonicus, based again on a female from Luzon. In conclusion, the following taxonomic changes are proposed:	en	Vitali, Francesco, Chemin, Gerard (2022): Taxonomic notes about the genus Nephelotus Pascoe, 1866 (Coleoptera, Cerambycidae, Lamiinae). Zootaxa 5141 (1): 79-86, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5141.1.7
03D587E0FFA64407D3EBF8F6FBA6F871.taxon	description	(Fig. 15) Description: Body length 23 mm. Extremely similar to the female but body slightly narrower; elytra more tapered apically; protibiae more arcuate at apex; antennae 2.7 times as long as body and antennomere V slightly surpassing the elytral apex (in female, antennae 1.6 times as long as body and antennomere VI hardy reaching the elytral apex).	en	Vitali, Francesco, Chemin, Gerard (2022): Taxonomic notes about the genus Nephelotus Pascoe, 1866 (Coleoptera, Cerambycidae, Lamiinae). Zootaxa 5141 (1): 79-86, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5141.1.7
03D587E0FFA44405D3EBFF66FBE0FE0D.taxon	description	The type of N. marcipor (Luzon) is a taxon with a very short lateral tubercle (about as long as wide), not dissimilar from that of N. conspersus. Specimens from Panay and Mindanao show tubercles two or three times as long as wide; nonetheless, the holotype of Mimanhammus mindanaonis perfectly corresponds to the population from Luzon. Whether this type was destroyed and later substituted or two different forms inhabit these southern islands could be clarified by the paratype preserved in Berlin. Currently, it is not available for study.	en	Vitali, Francesco, Chemin, Gerard (2022): Taxonomic notes about the genus Nephelotus Pascoe, 1866 (Coleoptera, Cerambycidae, Lamiinae). Zootaxa 5141 (1): 79-86, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5141.1.7
