Scopaeus complex Sharp, 1874

Scopaeus complex Sharp View in CoL

(Figs 12–19, 30–41, 56, 59)

Scopaeus complex Sharp, 1874: 61 View in CoL , 62.

Scopaeus (subgen. Scopaeus) complex View in CoL ; Smetana (2004: 616).

Type specimens examined: Lectotype ♂, Japan, leg. Lewis ( NHML); labelled “Type” (printed, red edged, round label), “ Japan. / G Lewis.” (printed), “ Scopaeus / complex / type D.S.” (handwritten), “Sharp Coll. / 1905-313.” (printed), “NHMUK015009822” (printed QR-code label), “ Lectotype / Scopaeus complex / Sharp, 1874 / des. J. Frisch, 2025”; here designated . Paralectotype ♂, same labels (scanned copies) as lectotype, but “ Paralectotype / Scopaeus complex / Sharp, 1874 / des. J. Frisch, 2025” .

Sharp (1874: 61, 62) did not communicate the number of specimens from which he described Scopaeus complex . Thus, to stabilize the name S. complex Sharp, 1874 according to ICZN 1999, Article 74.1, two male syntypes from the NHML collection, where Sharp′s collection of Staphylinidae including most types is stored ( Smetana & Herman 2001: 143, Horn et al. 1990: 363), are here designated as lectotype and paralectotype. Their syntype status is evidenced by the locality label according to which they were collected in Japan by Lewis as stated by Sharp (1874: 1), and by the handwritten identification label, which is signed with Sharp′s initials “D. S.”, bears the remark “type”, and corresponds quite well with the example of Sharp′s handwriting in Horn et al. (1990: 513). They also bear the subsequent, round type-label of the NHML Coleoptera collection. Furthermore, their characters clearly match Sharp′s description. For instance, Sharp (1974: 62) described the distinctive sternite VII of these male syntypes very precisely. Both specimens were originally mounted on the same card, but I mounted them on separate cards to avoid confusion, and labeled them with lectotype and paralectotype labels. The specimen I selected as the lectotype is given the original labels, while I attached scanned copies of all original labels to the paralectotype. Vladimir Gusarov, Oslo, had already attached lectotype and paralectotype labels in 1993, but they are invalid as he never published a lectotype designation.

Two females from the Sharp collection at NHML which were collected by Lewis in Japan and identified by Sharp as “? S. complex var.” are not syntypes, because Sharp (1874: 61, 62) did not mention a variation, and one of these specimens was collected in 1881 after the original description of 1874 .

New records: China: Guangdong: Danxia Shan NP ( 25°02′4′′N, 113°45′0′′E), 100 m, 23.IV.2013, leg. Hájek & Růžička ( NMPC) GoogleMaps . Guizhou: Guilin, Yoashan , 24.–25.IX.1980, leg. Hammond ( NHML) . Hongkong: Ping Shan Chai , 8.–21.V.2016, leg. Barthelemy ( PACH) ; Tai Po Kau , 10.VIII.1983, leg. Dudgeon ( NHMW) ; Wang Tong ( Lantau Island ), 1.–8.VI.2016, leg. Aston ( PACH) . Jiangsu: Suzhou, Dongshanzhen , 24.VI.1998, leg. Li ( SNUS) . Zhejiang: Anji , Longwangshan NR, 250 m, 26.IV.2006, leg. Yuanxin ( SNUS) ; Lin′an, West Tianmu Mts , 11.VIII.2004, leg. Chen & Zhu, 15.–28.VIII.2003, leg. Hu & Tang ( SNUS) ; Ningbo, Tiantong , 9.VII.1998, leg. Li ( SNUS) ; Yuyao ( Siming Mts ), 31.VII.2004, leg. Zhujingwen ( SNUS) . Japan: Chiba: Yotsukaidô-Shi, Nariyama , 18.III.1996, leg. Maruyama ( MFNB, YSCT) . Kanagawa: leg. Sauter ( NHMW) ; Yokosuka , 27.IX.1987, leg. Tao ( YSCT) ; Yokohama , leg. Lewis ( NHML) ; Hiratsuka, Tsuchiya , 1.IV.1990, leg. Watanabe ( TWCF) . Kyôto: 4.VII.1881, leg. Lewis ( NHML) ; 7.–20.VIII.1980, leg. Besuchet ( MHNG, MFNB) . Fukuoka: Nishi-Ku ( Nokonoshima Island ), 16.VI.1998, leg. Fujimoto ( YSCT) ; Amagi-Shi, Tenjinmori , XI.1992, leg. Nomura ( YSCT) . Okayama: leg. Sauter ( NHMW) . Saga: Imari , 26.VII.1977, 30.X.1979, leg. Ohishi ( MFNB, YSCT) ; Mt Mifune ( Mt Mifuneyama ?), 15.III.1980, leg. Nomura ( YSCT) . Shimane: Dougo ( Oki Island ), 10.XI.2004, leg. Watanabe ( TWCF) . Tochigi: Fujioka, Watarase-yusuichi , 25.IX.2002, leg. Watanabe ( TWCF) . South Korea: Jeju-do: Bukjeju-gun, Jocheoneup, Seonheul-ri , SJ Park, 22.V.2006, leg. Kim ( CNUIC, MFNB) . Taiwan: Akau ( HNHM) . Kaohsiung: Liuqui [Liukuei], 4.VIII.1978, leg. Niizato ( NHMC, MFNB) . Vietnam: Hà Nam: Ph ꞿ Lý, Tuong Linh , 24.–28.V.1966, leg. Topál ( HNHM, MFNB) . Ninh Binh: Cuc Phuong , 3.–10.V.1966, leg. Topál ( HNHM, MHNG) .

Redescription: Male: Abdominal sternite VII (Figs 12, 14, 16, 18) with black, lateral combs of posterior emargination relatively short, occupying about 0.3 of maximum sternite length, slightly, convexly curved laterad at distal end; corona of black setae surrounding posterior emargination well developed.

Abdominal sternite VIII (Figs 13, 15, 17, 19) with medially divided field of black macrosetae long, occupying posterior two-thirds of sternite length.

Aedeagus with truncate end of apical lobes, without apical tooth, in lateral view with subacute end ( Figs 30 View FIGURES 27–32 , 33, 36, 39 View FIGURES 33–41 ), in ventral and dorsal view with comparatively broad, truncate apices and subacute apicolateral angles ( Figs 31, 32 View FIGURES 27–32 , 34, 35, 37, 38, 40, 41 View FIGURES 33–41 ); subapical teeth pointing proximad, not or barely bent laterad ( Figs 31 View FIGURES 27–32 , 34, 37, 40 View FIGURES 33–41 ); membranous lobes more or less projecting ventrally ( Figs 30 View FIGURES 27–32 , 33, 36, 39 View FIGURES 33–41 ); ventroproximal ends of apical lobes shortly, feebly convex and ending in obtuse angle ( Figs 30 View FIGURES 27–32 , 33, 36, 39 View FIGURES 33–41 ). Ventral lobe clearly protruding ventrally, in lateral view ending in short, narrow, obtuse tip (( Figs 30 View FIGURES 27–32 , 33, 36, 39 View FIGURES 33–41 ), in ventral view in middle gradually somewhat extended distad and with narrow, median incision ( Figs 31 View FIGURES 27–32 , 34, 37, 40 View FIGURES 33–41 ). Length of aedeagus: 0.6–0.63 mm.

Female: Bursa in lateral view with dorsally widened, subtruncate proximal end, in ventral view narrow and parallel with slightly dilated distal end ( Fig. 59 View FIGURES 54–61 ).

Distribution: Scopaeus complex is distributed in the very east of the Palaearctic and the adjacant northeastern Oriental region (Fig. 62) and recorded from central (Honshu) and southern (Kyūshū) Japan across South Korea, southwestern China, and Taiwan as far south as the north of Vietnam. Interestingly, no Japanese localities of S. complex seem to have been published to date. Sharp (1874: 61, 62) did not mention the type locality in Japan. Catalogs of the Staphylinidae of Japan ( Adachi 1957: 14; Shibata 1977: 58; Shibata et al. 2013: 159) also contain no distribution data. Bernhauer′s (1922a: 230) record of S. velutinus for Taiwan (Anping), which was cited by Shibata (1973: 52), Smetana (2004: 619), and Schülke & Smetana (2015: 997), refers to S. complex (see remarks under S. velutinus below), because Bernhauer, following Fauvel′s (1904: 53) synonymization, identified the species of the S. decipiens group as S. velutinus . Scopaeus complex was only recently published for South Korea ( Jeon & Ahn 2025: 327; cf. Ahn et al. 2017: 322). The species is here for the first time recorded for Mainland China (cf. Li et al. 2019: 388) and Vietnam.

Remark: Scopaeus complex is also redescribed by Jeon & Ahn (2025: 327) in the framework of a recent contribution on Korean Scopaeus .