identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
03C187D0FFBBFFE9FD3D3815EA16FC56.text	03C187D0FFBBFFE9FD3D3815EA16FC56.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Eleodes (Promus) compositus Casey 1891	<div><p>Eleodes (Promus) compositus Casey 1891, revised status</p> <p>(Fig. 1)</p> <p>The well-known coleopterist Thomas L. Casey described 15 species of Eleodes, of which four are currently considered valid. Eleodes compositus was described in 1891 and subsequently synonymized by Blaisdell (1909) with Eleodes hispilabris (Say), albeit without reexamining the type or any specimens that could be ascribed to this newly designated infrasubspecific forma composita (Blaisdell 1909). Blaisdell assessed that the aberrant form of the pronotum which Casey described “is no proof that it is specifically distinct. Analogous aberrations are observed in dentipes in particular, and hispilabris is fully as variable as that species” (Blaisdell 1909). Indeed, the pronotum of E. compositus (Fig. 1) is subquadrate, evenly arcuate laterally, and only slightly constricted posteriorly unlike the pronotum of E. hispilabris, which is distinctly constricted posteriorly, widest anterior of midline, and with very prominent anterior projections. The name E. compositus has since been listed as a synonym of E. hispilabris in several publications and its status has not been reconsidered in the literature (Papp 1961; Tanner 1961).</p> <p>As part of an ongoing effort to reassess every type specimen within the genus Eleodes, the type of Eleodes compositus, residing at the USNM, was examined. In doing so, it became apparent that this specimen did not represent E. hispilabris, nor was it even a member of the subgenus Eleodes where E. hispilabris is placed. In fact, this specimen belongs to the subgenus Promus as clearly evidenced by the holotype male having the combined characters of spined profemora and the first two segments of the protarsi with pads of tomentose setae, a combination found in no other subgenus. The heavily sulcate elytral striae clearly distinguish this species from all other described Promus species. The holotype, with the locality given as “ Texas ”, remains as the only known specimen of this enigmatic species. Eleodes compositus Casey is hereby returned to valid, species-level standing and placed in the subgenus Promus.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03C187D0FFBBFFE9FD3D3815EA16FC56	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	Johnston, M. Andrew	Johnston, M. Andrew (2015): A Checklist and New Species ofEleodesEschscholtz (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) Pertaining to the SubgenusPromusLeconte, with a Key to United States Species. The Coleopterists Bulletin 69 (1): 11-19, DOI: 10.1649/0010-065X-69.1.11, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1649/0010-065x-69.1.11
03C187D0FFBDFFECFF3038EDEF26FBE6.text	03C187D0FFBDFFECFF3038EDEF26FBE6.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Eleodes (Promus) madrensis Johnston 2015	<div><p>Eleodes (Promus) madrensis Johnston, new species</p> <p>(Fig. 3)</p> <p>Diagnosis. This species can be readily distinguished from other members of Eleodes, subgenus Promus, by the presence of tomentose pads interrupting the plantar surface on the first and second protarsal segments in males, the shape of the pronotum being widest anterior to midline, attenuate posteriorly, and by having a strongly declivous prosternum with a small recurved process at the tip. It most closely resembles E. knullorum and Eleodes subnitens, as discussed above.</p> <p>Description. Male. Length 18–23 mm; width 7–9 mm (n = 21). Body elongate oval, widest near middle of abdomen, glabrous. Head: Antennae clavate, moderately long, extending beyond pronotum by approximately 3 segments, segments 3–7 longer than wide, segments 8–11 at least as wide as long. Mentum transversely hexagonal; anterior margin blunt, half as wide as posterior margin; lateral angles lined with long, dark setae. Maxillae heavily punctate, clothed with scattered golden setae; stipes bearing long, dark setae; palpifer rounded, produced ventrally, with long, dark setae; terminal palp segment triangular, distal margin as wide as segment is long; galea and lacinia covered with dense, yellow setae anteriorly. Ligula with 2 dense brushes of yellow setae dorsally. Mandibles heavily punctate laterally; punctures obsolete anteriorly. Head subparallel, narrowing anteriorly before antennal insertion and posteriorly behind temples, moderately punctured evenly throughout; labrum transverse, deeply sinuate anteromesally, densely covered with large punctures, clothed with yellow setae densest along anterior margin; clypeus completely fused, frontoclypeal suture entirely visible; postgenae clothed with sparse, yellow setae and punctate, punctures becoming confused mesally and forming transverse stria that do not extend to submentum; eyes elongate, slightly constricted by epistomal canthus, ventral lobe positioned slightly anterior to dorsal. Thorax: Pronotum quadrate, rounded laterally, slightly wider than long; widest slightly anterior to midline; anterior angles acute, distinct, projecting antero-laterally; lateral margin inflexed immediately after anterior angles, then laterally inflated, becoming wider than elytral base, posterior half sinuate; posterior margin slightly narrower than elytral base; posterior margin slightly and evenly rounded; disc evenly convex, with small, scattered, moderately dense punctures. Prosternum narrow between coxae, about half the width of coxal opening, with a shallow median furrow; strongly declivous immediately anterior of coxae, with a short, rounded, recurved process strongly appressed to anterior margin of mesosternum; clothed with scattered, short, golden setae. Scutellum moderately large, about twice as wide as long; adorned with several large, shallow punctures. Elytra glabrous, fused medially; moderately densely punctate; punctures arranged in linear striae; striae very inconspicuously and slightly depressed; elytral intervals bare and impunctate. Epipleura moderately wide, same width as pseudepipleura, traceable to posterior margin of thorax, epipleura and pseudepipleura contiguous and indiscernible thereafter; pseudepipleura ending near midline of 5 th visible sternite. Hind wings absent. Legs: Relatively long. Profemora clavate, moderately punctate throughout; each puncture bearing a single golden brown seta; armed with a single, acute tooth on anterior face; tooth positioned about 1/4 the femoral length from apex, angled anterio-laterally. Protibia with similar punctation and setation as femora; ending with 2 apical spurs of similar length, each about 2/3 as long as first protarsal segment. Protarsi 5-segmented; segments 1–4 of similar length, segment 5 as long as the 3 preceding segments; segments 1 and 2 with yellow tomentose setal pads interrupting plantar surface; segments 3–4 with golden setae lining the apico-lateral margins of plantar groove; segment 5 with plantar groove fully lined with yellow-brown spicules. Mesothoracic legs similar to prothoracic legs, but lacking the femoral tooth and tomentose pads on tarsal segments 1–2; segments 1–4 with golden setae lining the apico-lateral margins of plantar groove. Metothoracic legs elongate; femora reaching the posterior margin of 4th visible sternite, not toothed; tarsi 4-segmented, each segment with yellow-brown spicules lining lateral margins of plantar surface.</p> <p>Abdomen: With 5 visible sternites; sternites 1–3 connate, bearing scattered, small punctures; sternites 4–5 hinged laterally with intersegmental membrane conspicuous, moderately densely punctured. Intercoxal process transverse, rectangular; 1.5 times as wide as mesocoxal diameter. Terminalia: Adeagus simple; basal piece cylindrical, parallel-sided, rounded anteriorly; fused parameres approximately 3/4 as long as basal piece, triangular; dorsal base of parameres deeply bisinuate, with sharply acute anteriorly oriented lateral points; lateral margins of parameres evenly convergent; distal end of parameres rounded, laterally compressed. Clavae 1/2 the length of parameres; longitudinally curved, concave in distal half; distal margin rounded, flattened, vertically oriented.</p> <p>Female. Length 23–26 mm; width 8–10 mm (n = 37). Similar to male, body generally larger, abdomen slightly expanded. Profemora unarmed but bluntly sinuate distally. Protarsal segments 1–2 without tomentose pad; all tarsal segments with golden brown setae along antero-lateral margins of plantar groove. Terminalia: Coxites trapezoidal, elongate, twice as long as wide, dorsally concave; mesally appressed, produced apical angle acutely produced, triangular; lateral and distal margins clothed with long, yellow setae. Gonostyles as wide as long, rounded, crowned with long, yellow setae.</p> <p>Variation. The morphology of this species is fairly consistent, though the tarsi are sometimes abraded, likely due to specimen age, which can obscure the male setal pads.</p> <p>Distribution. Northern Sonora, Mexico; southwestern New Mexico, southeastern to central Arizona, United States.</p> <p>Etymology. The specific epithet madrensis is derived from the Madrean archipelago, where this species is found.</p> <p>Remarks. Specimens of Eleodes madrensis are frequently found in natural history collections, but tend to be interspersed with material identified as E. subnitens and E. knullorum. See Diagnosis and Key for means to separate these taxa. K. W. Brown was the first tenebrionid worker to diagnose the difference between E. madrensis and E. subnitens, indicated in his collection by the determination label of ‘ Promus possibly new species.’ The type specimen has therefore been selected from his original series of specimens from Ramsey Canyon.</p> <p>Type Material. Holotype (male) first label “ARIZ., Cochise Co.,/ Huachuca Mts., Miller / Canyon. 5-VIII-1971 /ex. R.L. Dunn ” second label “Purchased 1971 from/ Russell D. Dunn ” third label green disc indicating specimens formerly of K. W. Brown Collection, deposited in CASC.</p> <p>Paratypes. 57 marked with blue paratype labels, 9 with same information as holotype, 5 males, 4 females, 1 with additional label “ Eleodes (Promus) /Poss. N. SP./det KWB, ‘82” ADSC; “ Ramsey Canon / Huachuca Mts / Ariz. WH Mann ” “WM Mann 1954/ Collection ” 1 male, 2 females, USNM; “ Madera Cn / Pima Co. / Arizona ” “ Dr Lenczy / X.1982 ” 2 males, USNM; “ Palmerlee /9.18.07</p> <p>Ariz. ” “ Coll. By / HAKaeber” “WM Mann 1954/ Collection” 1 male 1 female, USNM; “ Huachu. Mtns /7.11.02 Ariz.” “Miller Can./HAKaeber” 1 female, USNM; “ Palmerly / Cochise Co. /Ariz.” “Brooklyn/ Museum/Colln. 1929” 1 male, USNM; “ Portal, AZ/ 7.20.44/ W.W. Jones ” “branchus” 1 female, USNM; “ Arivaca / Pima Co. / Arizona ” 1 female, USNM; “ ARIZONA: Santa Cruz Co. / Madera Canyon / 24-VIII-1980 night/ T.P. &amp; T.A. Friedlander,/and P.W. Kovarik ” 1 female, TAMU; “ USA:AZ, Pima Co. / <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=-110.846634&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=31.763233" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long -110.846634/lat 31.763233)">Sta Rita Mtns</a> N31°45.794′ / W110°50.798′ 4336ft / 26-VII-2013 W.B.Warner ” 1 female WBWC; “ USA:AZ, Yavapai Co. 12km /SW Prescott, headlamping/34.4576° -112.5199° 5700ft / 23- VIII-2014 M.A. Johnston ” 1 male, 2 females, MAJC; “ MEXICO, Sonora /16.5 air km ENE of/ <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=-108.976944&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=29.844444" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long -108.976944/lat 29.844444)">Bacadehuachi</a> / 29.844444, -108.976944 / 2-VIII- 2012 1680m /leg. T.R.Van Devender ” “sycamore- Cupressus /arizonica /riparian forest/on slope” 2 females, ASUHIC; “ USA:AZ Cochise County / <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=-110.314&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=31.446" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long -110.314/lat 31.446)">Ramsey Canyon Nature Preserve</a> /ex: side of cabin at night/ N31.446° W110.314° / Jul 1 2012 EK Moody” 1 male, ASUHIC; “ Mexico, Sonora / Mt. Huachinera / Rancho Madrono /vi-25-81 2200m / McCleve &amp; Jump” 3 males 4 females, OSUC; “NM: Hidalgo Co,/ Animas Mts. /Indian Cr/vi-6-80 1828m /Scott McCleve” 1 female, OSUC; “AZ: Graham Co. / Gila Mts. / Bonita Creek /vi-13-79 1164m /Scott McCleve” 1 female, OSUC; “nr. Portal, Cochise /Co., AZ/8-25-70/ S. McCleve ” 1 female, OSUC; “Chiricahua M.,/29.VIII.60 Ar.” “SW res/sta.” “Collr. C.A./Triplehorn” 1 female, OSUC; “AZ, Cochise Co. / Huachuca Mtns. /Copper Cn 1882m /vi-10-78/Scott McCleve” 1 male, OSUC; “ Huachu. Mts / Ariz ” “ Miller Can /HA. Wenzel” “ H.W. Wenzel /Collection” 1 male, 1 female, OSUC; “ Huachuca mts.,/ Ariz. 18-VIII-71/Ramsey Canyon” “D.J. &amp; J.N./Knull Collrs.” 1 female, OSUC; “ Madera Can. / Santa Rita Mts. / Ariz. 17-VI-70” “W.E. &amp; C.A./Triplehorn/Collectors” 1 female, OSUC; “AZ:STA CRUZ Co. / Santa Rita Mts. / Madera Cn/v-31-79 1499m /Scott McCleve” 1 female, OSUC; “AZ- Cochise Co. / Cochise Stronghold / DBrzoska 12-VIII-1982 ” 1 male 1 female, OSUC; “ Sta. Catalina Mts.,ARIZ. / Molino Basin 4400’/ 16-VI 1970 ” “W.E.&amp;C.A./Triplehorn/Collectors” 1 male, OSUC; AZ: Cochise Co. /Huachuca MtsCop-/per Cn vi-6-77/Scott McCleve” 1 female, OSUC; “ Arizona, Madera / Cn. Santa Rita Mts. / Santa Cruz Co. / 6200 ft. 1-2.VIII.52” “ H.B. Leech / J.W. Green /Collectors” 1 female, CASC; “ 6000 ft Mt. / Washington ” “ Nogales Ariz / J.A. Kusche / July 1919 -17” “Van Dyke/Collection” 1 male 1 female, CASC; “ Santa Rita Mts. / Ariz. 5 to 8000ft. /June, F.H. Snow” “Blaisdell/Collection” 1 female, CASC; “ 31°25′30″ N 111°11′30″ W/ USA, Arizona, Sta Cruz Co/Sycamore Cyn, 26:III:2000/Cols. K.Will, W.Moore,/ K.Ober ” 1 female, RLAC; “ Ariz., Maricopa / Co. Red Mountain / VI-22-2000 / K.Will col.” 1 female, RLAC; “ Arizona, Gila Co. / Tonto Natural Bridge / VI-12:14-88 at night/ R.L. Aalbu col.” 1 female, RLAC; “ USA:AZ. Gila Co. / Pinal Mtn. Rec. / Area (Pine-Oak)/ VII-28-1991 ” 1 female, RLAC.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03C187D0FFBDFFECFF3038EDEF26FBE6	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	Johnston, M. Andrew	Johnston, M. Andrew (2015): A Checklist and New Species ofEleodesEschscholtz (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) Pertaining to the SubgenusPromusLeconte, with a Key to United States Species. The Coleopterists Bulletin 69 (1): 11-19, DOI: 10.1649/0010-065X-69.1.11, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1649/0010-065x-69.1.11
03C187D0FFBBFFE8FF5B39E3E84AFDD9.text	03C187D0FFBBFFE8FF5B39E3E84AFDD9.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Eleodes (Steneleodes) hepburni Champion 1892	<div><p>Eleodes (Steneleodes) hepburni Champion, 1892, new placement</p> <p>Eleodes compressitarsis Blaisdell, 1935</p> <p>Eleodes beameri Blaisdell, 1937</p> <p>Eleodes bryanti Blaisdell, 1937</p> <p>Eleodes palmerleensis Blaisdell, 1937</p> <p>Eleodes hepburni is the valid name for a group of synonymized species names with a tangled nomenclatural legacy. Blaisdell (1937) described the subgenus Holeleodes Blaisdell as containing three then newly described species from Arizona, therein named E. beameri Blaisdell (the type species), E. bryanti Blaisdell, and E. palmerleensis Blaisdell. These three purported species were later found to be conspecific with each other and were thus synonymized, remaining assigned to the subgenus Holeleodes (Triplehorn and Doyen 1972). Triplehorn (2010) further synonymized these three species names with two priority-carrying names, i.e., E. compressitarsis Blaisdell and E. hepburni, which had both been placed by Papp (1961) in the subgenus Ardeleodes Blaisdell.</p> <p>In his act of assigning synonymy, Triplehorn (2010) erroneously placed E. hepburni in the subgenus Promus. However, throughout his discussion, Triplehorn referenced the similarity of this assemblage to Eleodes longicollis LeConte, 1851, which has consistently been placed in the subgenus Steneleodes. It is thus apparent that Triplehorn (2010) intended to place E. hepburni in Steneleodes and not Promus. This interpretation is further and unambiguously supported by the presence of heavily sclerotized female genitalia characteristic of the subgenus Steneleodes and phylogenetic placement based on molecular data (A. D. Smith and M. A. Johnston, unpublished data). Eleodes hepburni is hereby placed in the subgenus Steneleodes.</p> <p>Although Triplehorn (2010) did not make any mention of the subgenus Holeleodes, it is in accordance with current species-level synonymies that this subgenus follows the placement of E. hepburni and thereby becomes a junior subjective synonym of Steneleodes.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03C187D0FFBBFFE8FF5B39E3E84AFDD9	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	Johnston, M. Andrew	Johnston, M. Andrew (2015): A Checklist and New Species ofEleodesEschscholtz (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) Pertaining to the SubgenusPromusLeconte, with a Key to United States Species. The Coleopterists Bulletin 69 (1): 11-19, DOI: 10.1649/0010-065X-69.1.11, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1649/0010-065x-69.1.11
03C187D0FFB1FFE2FF553833EFE5FC2B.text	03C187D0FFB1FFE2FF553833EFE5FC2B.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Eleodes Eschscholtz 1829	<div><p>KEY TO THE SPECIES OF ELEODES SUBGENUS PROMUS OF THE UNITED STATES</p> <p>The subgenus Promus is represented in the United States by eight species. Eleodes knullorum is highly variable (Triplehorn 1971) and thus keys to two distinct forms, which occur sympatrically in southwestern Texas (Fig. 4). The definitional boundaries of E. knullorum may need revision when examined in the context of the group’ s entire geographic range, which includes northern Mexico.</p> <p>1. Elytral disc strongly flattened, lateral margin distinctly carinate (Fig. 5A–B)................................................................... E. opacus (Say)</p> <p>1′. Elytral disc laterally rounded.......................2</p> <p>2. Body strongly fusiform, males without profemoral spines, anterior angles of pronotum rounded (Fig. 5E–F)........................................................................ E. fusiformis LeConte</p> <p>2′. Body not strongly fusiform, males with single profemoral spine, anterior pronotal angles often acute.................................................3</p> <p>3. Elytra clothed with minute yellow setae originating from small, evenly spaced punctures....................... E. spiculiferous Triplehorn</p> <p>3′. Elytra glabrous, without setae, punctation variable.........................................................4</p> <p>4. Elytra with deeply impressed, sulcate striae, intervals convex (Fig. 1)..................................................................... E. compositus Casey</p> <p>4′. Elytra without sulcate striae........................5</p> <p>5. Elytra with&gt;25 conspicuous, neatly arranged, longitudinal striae comprised of small punctures, anterior pronotal angles rounded (Fig. 5C–D).................................. E. striolatus LeConte</p> <p>5′. Elytra without neatly arranged striae, or with few, large punctures, anterior pronotal angles acute............................................. 6</p> <p>6. Elytra with conspicuous strial punctures, often quite large (Fig. 5G–H)........... E. goryi Solier</p> <p>6′. Elytra with small, inconspicuous punctures (Figs. 2–4).................................................... 7</p> <p>7. Pronotum constricted behind anterior angles, evenly arcuate in posterior half, prosternal process large, forming triangular wedge (Fig. 2)................................. E. subnitens LeConte</p> <p>7′. Pronotum with lateral margins evenly arcuate anteriorly, sinuate posteriorly, prosternum variable, not forming a large triangular wedge (Figs. 3–4)....................................................... 8</p> <p>8. Prosternum flat, horizontal, extending beyond procoxae. Male profemoral tooth blunt, dentate (Fig. 4A–B)............................................................... E. knullorum Triplehorn (form 1)</p> <p>8′. Prosternum declivous behind procoxae. Males with strong profemoral spines....................... 9</p> <p>9. Southwestern Texas. Abdomen not attenuate posteriorly, female gonostyle reniform, inserted on anterior dorsal surface of coxite (Fig. 4C–D)................. E. knullorum Triplehorn (form 2)</p> <p>9′. Arizona, southwestern New Mexico. Abdomen attenuate posteriorly, female gonostyle truncate mesally, inserted on posterior face of coxite (Fig. 3)....................................................... E. madrensis Johnston, new species</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03C187D0FFB1FFE2FF553833EFE5FC2B	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	Johnston, M. Andrew	Johnston, M. Andrew (2015): A Checklist and New Species ofEleodesEschscholtz (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) Pertaining to the SubgenusPromusLeconte, with a Key to United States Species. The Coleopterists Bulletin 69 (1): 11-19, DOI: 10.1649/0010-065X-69.1.11, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1649/0010-065x-69.1.11
