Eurynodes coelestis ( Kerremans, 1897 )

Eurynodes coelestis ( Kerremans, 1897) View in CoL

( Figure 2 View FIGURE 2 )

Brachys coelestis Kerremans, 1897: 134 View in CoL .

Cylindromorphoides ( Eurynodes) coelestis Théry, 1936: 471 ; Obenberger 1937: 1277; Blackwelder, 1944b: 335.

Eurynodes coelestis Cobos, 1979: 428 View in CoL ; Bellamy 2003: 94; 2008: 2463; Migliore et al., 2020: 19.

Holotype (by monotypy): Eurynodes coelestis ( 1 ♀, MNHN, see Migliore et al., 2020): Caraça Minas Geraez; Brésil; E. Gounelle 1.2.1885 [p] // Brachys ; coelestis; n. sp. [h]; Kerremans det. [p] // coelestis; Kerr.; Type [h] // MUSÉUM PARIS; Coll. Gounelle; 1915 [p] // HOLOTYPE [p] // HOLOTYPE; Eurynodes ; coelestis ( Kerremans, 1897) [p] // MNHN; EC9092.

Additional material: ( 1 ♀, SMTD: Figs. 2A–E View FIGURE 2 ; original labeling: Fig. 2F View FIGURE 2 ) .

Type locality: “Minas Geraez: Caraça” [Serra do Caraça (Belo Horizonte), Minas Gerais state, Brazil].

In the description of Eurynodes cristatus ( Théry, 1934) an additional specimen ( Fig. 2 View FIGURE 2 ) with different morphological characteristics is mentioned and interpreted by Théry as the possible male of E. cristatus or as a simple variation of it ( Théry, 1934). This specimen was not included within the type series of E. cristatus but was found in the collection of SMTD as well. Contrary to the interpretation of Théry, it was found to be a female after dissecting its ovipositor ( Fig. 2F View FIGURE 2 ). Morphological characteristics like the flattened posthumeral carina ( Figs. 2B, 2D View FIGURE 2 ), slender habitus and the shiny blue color indicate that it belongs to Eurynodes coelestis ( Kerremans, 1897) . A comparison with photographs of the holotype of E. coelestis , figured in Migliore et al. (2020), confirms this assessment.

Diagnosis

Significant morphological differences between E. cristatus and E. coelestis were already noted by Théry (1934, 1936) and Migliore et al. (2020). Females of both species can be separated by the strongly curved posthumeral elytral carina in E. cristatus ( Figs. 1B, 1D View FIGURE 1 ) in comparison to the flat carina on the elytra of E. coelestis ( Figs. 2B, 2D View FIGURE 2 ). The sternites of E. cristatus are somewhat wider than those of E. coelestis ( Figs. 1C View FIGURE 1 , 2C View FIGURE 2 ). The form of the ovipositor and size of the two styli are different ( Figs. 1E View FIGURE 1 , 2E View FIGURE 2 ). Males of both species are currently unknown.