Cyrtolabulus flavorufus Selis, 2024

Cyrtolabulus flavorufus Selis, 2024

( Figs 24 View FIGURE 24 , 63K View FIGURE 63 )

Cyrtolabulus flavorufus Selis, 2024: 66 , 67, 70, 84 (key), figs 3, 12 (distribution), 13F, ♀ —“ MADAGASKAR / Prov. Mahajanga / Katsepy ” (NHMW).

Type material examined. HOLOTYPE: ♀ labelled “ MADAGASKAR / Prov. Mahajanga / Katsepy / 30. 5.–3. 6. 1995 MADL // Cyrtolabulus / sollicitus (G.S.) ♀ / J.Gusenleitner,det.1995 // Cyrtolabulus flavorufus / HOLOTYPUS ♀ / Det. Marco Selis [red label] // NHMW ” ( NHMW).

Description of male (hitherto unknown). Habitus in Fig. 24B View FIGURE 24 . Differing from the female as follows: clypeus with slightly narrower apical margin and with denser silvery pubescence, flagellum subclavate with F7–F9 expanded, F11 subconical but laterolaterally compressed in ventral half, robust and with pointed apex not reaching basal margin of F9 ( Fig. 24C View FIGURE 24 ), mid-femur with a basal semicircular excision followed by a sharp subtriangular lobe covered in dense silvery pubescence ( Fig. 24D View FIGURE 24 ).

Variability. The examined specimens show some variability in pattern, with the background color ranging from black with dark red markings to entirely bright orangish-red, and the yellow markings described for the holotype (Selis 2024) varying in extension.

Distribution. Madagascar: Antsiranana *, Mahajanga, Toliara * (Selis 2024) ( Fig. 63K View FIGURE 63 ).

Notes. Three specimens ( Fig. 24E View FIGURE 24 ) from the northernmost point of Madagascar ( CASENT2118484 , CASENT2118495 , CASENT2118536 ) show some differences from the other examined specimens, such as the generally smaller and sparser punctures, much thinner F11 of male ( Fig. 24F View FIGURE 24 ), mid femur of male not modified ( Fig. 24G View FIGURE 24 ), and less developed apical spine of the ventral lobes of aedeagus. Given the evident differences in F11 and mid femur of the male, it could be a distinct and undescribed species, but given the availability of only three specimens, of which only one is male, no taxonomic action is being undertaken now, also considering the very subtle differences in the genitalia.