Cephennodes (s. str.) triangulifer, Jałoszyński, 2025

Cephennodes (s. str.) triangulifer sp. nov.

( Figs 1–11 View FIGURES 1–5 View FIGURES 6–11 )

Type material. Holotype: CHINA (YUNNAN Prov.): ♂, two labels: “CHINA [22] - Yunnan, / SE Pingbian, primary / forest, 22º54’31’’N, / 103º41’44’’E, 2100 m / 27.VIII.2014, V.Assing” [white, printed]; “ CEPHENNODES (s. str.) / triangulifer m. / P. Jałoszyński, 2025 / HOLOTYPUS ” [red, printed] ( MNHW) GoogleMaps . Paratypes (15 exx.): 2 ♀♀, same data as for holotype GoogleMaps ; 4 ♂♂, 2 ♀♀, “CHINA: Yunnan, SE Pingbian, / 22º54’31’’N, 103º41’44’’E, 2100 m / primary subtropical broad-leaved / forest, litter sifted / 28.VIII.2014, / leg. M. Schülke [ CH14-22 a]” [white, printed] GoogleMaps ; 3 ♂♂, 4 ♀♀, “CHINA: Yunnan, SE Pingbian, / 22º54’31’’N, 103º41’44’’E, 2100 m / primary subtropical broad-leaved / forest, litter sifted / 27.VIII.2014, / leg. M. Schülke [ CH14-22 ]” [white, printed]; each paratype with yellow “ PARATYPUS ” label ( MNB, cPJ) GoogleMaps .

Diagnosis. Body very large, BL> 1.9 mm; antennae gradually thickening; punctures on frontovertexal region of head and on pronotum fine but still more distinct than those on elytra; pronotal lateral carinae single; subhumeral lines short, as long as 0.35 × EL. Male: antennomere 3 ( Figs 3 View FIGURES 1–5 , 7 View FIGURES 6–11 ) with mesal subtriangular projection only slightly longer than length of antennomere, with pointed apex and anterior margin indistinctly sinuate; frontal region of head ( Fig. 2 View FIGURES 1–5 ) anterior to supraantennal tubercles with pair of small, shallow and diffuse lateral impressions; aedeagus ( Figs 4–5 View FIGURES 1–5 , 8–11 View FIGURES 6–11 ) in ventral view with apex of capsular region subtriangular and blunt, distal plate elongate, subtriangular and strongly curved dorsad.

Description. Body of male ( Figs 1 View FIGURES 1–5 , 6 View FIGURES 6–11 ) strongly convex, oval, with weakly marked constriction between pronotum and elytra, dark brown with slightly lighter tarsi, covered with light brown setae. BL 2.01–2.13 mm.

Head ( Figs 2 View FIGURES 1–5 , 7 View FIGURES 6–11 ) broadest across small but strongly convex and coarsely faceted eyes, HL 0.29–0.35 mm, HW 0.50–0.53 mm; frontovertexal region weakly convex at middle, anterior region of frons with pair of small and shallow lateral impressions; supraantennal tubercles weakly elevated; anterior margin of clypeus slightly thickened. Punctures on frontovertexal area fine but sharply marked and separated by spaces 2–3 × as wide as their diameters, clypeus with sparser punctures at middle, frontovertexal region with barely discernible median longitudinal line composed of minute punctures; setae on frons and vertex sparse, long and suberect. Antennae ( Figs 1, 3 View FIGURES 1–5 ) long and moderately slender, gradually thickened, AnL 1.05–1.13 mm, antennomere 1 and 2 each about as long as broad, 3 modified, with large mesal triangular projection slightly longer than length of antennomere, 4–6 each about as long as broad, 7 indistinctly elongate, 8 and 9 each weakly transverse, 10 about as long as broad, 11 about as long as 9 and 10 combined, twice as long as broad.

Pronotum in strictly dorsal view transversely subrectangular (in Figs 1 View FIGURES 1–5 and 6 View FIGURES 6–11 pronotum is slightly tilted downwards anteriorly), strongly convex at middle and flattened near anterior and hind corners, broadest near middle; PL 0.63–0.68 mm, PW 0.90–1.00 mm.Anterior margin in strictly dorsal view nearly straight; lateral margins strongly rounded and distinctly microserrate, posterior corners nearly right-angled; posterior margin shallowly bisinuate; lateral marginal carinae simple (i.e., not doubled); lateral antebasal pits shallow but distinct, each located much closer to posterior than to lateral pronotal margin. Punctures on median region of pronotal disc fine but distinct, with sharp margins, separated by spaces subequal to diameters of punctures; punctures becoming smaller towards all pronotal margins, except for those in anterior corners, which are much denser and coarse. Setae on pronotal disc long and moderately dense, suberect.

Elytra about as wide as pronotum, together oval, broadest near anterior third; EL 1.08–1.25 mm, EW 0.95–1.00 mm, EI 1.10–1.25; subhumeral lines developed as sharp borders between elevated humerus and lower mesal region, as long as 0.35 × EL and distinctly divergent posterad; basal elytral fovea on each elytron located slightly closer to subhumeral line than to lateral margin of mesoscutellum; elytral apices unmodified, separately rounded. Punctures on elytra fine, unremarkable; setae distinctly longer than those on pronotum, dense and erect.

Hind wings functional.

Metaventrite with diffuse lateral impressions as long as 1/3 of its length.

Legs long and slender, unmodified.

Aedeagus ( Figs 4–5 View FIGURES 1–5 , 8–11 View FIGURES 6–11 ) of simonis form, AeL 0.33 mm; capsular region of median lobe in ventral view approximately drop-shaped, stout, with subtriangular and blunt apex shifted to left side; dorsal apical projection (= distal plate) in ventral view slender, elongate and tapering distad, in lateral view hook-shaped, curved dorsad at a nearly right angle; parameres long and slender, not reaching apex of aedeagus, each with one apical and two subapical long setae.

Female. Externally similar to male, except for antennomere 3 and frontal region of head unmodified, and relatively slightly shorter antennae; wingless; BL 1.93–2.10 mm; HL 0.30–0.35 mm, HW 0.50–0.55 mm, AnL 1.03–1.05 mm; PL 0.58–0.70 mm, PW 0.95–1.03 mm; EL 1.00– 1.13 mm, EW 0.93–1.03 mm, EI 1.08–1.13.

Distribution. S China: Yunnan.

Etymology. The adjective triangulifer refers to the modification of the antennomere 3 in males.

Remarks. Species of the C. bos group are difficult to identify, their aedeagi are poorly differentiated, so external structures are important to diagnose them, especially head modifications in males. Males of Cephennodes triangulifer differ from all remaining Chinese species of this complex ( C. aschnae is excluded from the discussion) in the following combination of characters: the frontal region of head with shallow and indistinct lateral impressions without elevated anterior margins and lacking a median impunctate area; and the apex of projection on antennomere 3 not abruptly narrowed to needle-sharp point. The remaining (i.e., non-Chinese) species included in this group, the Vietnamese C. bos , C. bubalus , and C. buceros , have the subtriangular projection of the antennomere 3 much longer than the length of this antennomere, and its mesal margin strongly sinuate, clearly differing in shape from the short projection of C. triangulifer . Among the Chinese species, C. pseudobos and C. impressibos also have the projections and antennomeres 3 of a different shape, and only C. brachyspinosus , as its name implies, has the spinelike projection similarly short as that of C. triangulifer . The aedeagi of these two species are highly similar, but they differ in the shape of the distal plate in ventral view: it is narrowing distad in C. triangulifer , but parallel-sided in C. brachyspinosus . A clear external feature to distinguish these two species is the frontal area of the head in males: in C. triangulifer the very faint and barely discernible median longitudinal group of densely set minute punctures is surrounded by large punctures distributed all over the frontovertexal region, whereas in C. brachyspinosus this median line is surrounded by a large oval impunctate area. Cephennodes brachyspinosus also has a more strongly punctate pronotum.

Within the studied sample of specimens identified as C. triangulifer , variability in the shape of the median lobe and distal projections was found, illustrated in Figs 4–5 View FIGURES 1–5 , 8–11 View FIGURES 6–11 . All specimens come from the same collecting spot, and externally they do not differ in any features, also the variability in the body pigmentation (dark brown shown in Fig. 1 View FIGURES 1–5 and slightly lighter, as in Fig. 6 View FIGURES 6–11 ) is continuous. The impressions on the frontal region are difficult to study, and if the head is observed in posterodorsal view, as illustrated in Fig. 7 View FIGURES 6–11 , it is possible to overlook these small structures.