NEW ACTS and COMMENTS 37

NEW NOMENCLATURAL and T AXONOMIC ACTS, and COMMENTS

General comments The Editors While editing the present volume, we faced a number of contradictory concepts affecting the classification of cerambycids. In absence of modem revisions and phylogenies it was often impossible to evaluate alternatives and apply objective criteria. Therefore, a number of decisions had to follow the principle of the "more recent use". The following cases are specified: Anaglyptini Lacordaire, 1868 is listed as valid, while the tribe is also considered synonymous with the Clytini Mulsant, 1839. Lamiini Latreille, 1802 and Monochamini Gistel, 1848 are used as separate tribes, although they were merged in Ohbayashi & Niisato, 2007, and in recent American publications. Dorcadionini Swainson & Shuckard, 1840 are usually included in Lamiini from which they seem to be separated mainly by adaptive characters. But they are listed, mainly for convenience, as aseparate tribe in the Catalogue. Xystrocerini Blanchard, 1845, Methiini J. Thomson, 1860 and Oemini Lacordaire, 1868 were synonymized because of variability of characters supposed to distinguish them, but they are still in use as valid (Monne & Bezark, 2009). Leptoxenus Bates, 1877 is here placed in Xytrocerini, while it is also considered as a member of Methini (see Ohbayashi & Niisato, 2007). The systematics of Phytoeciini is unsatisfactory and the use of many generic or sub-generic taxa is inconsistent among workers. Conizonia Fairmaire, 1864 and Coptosia Fairmaire, 1864 are listed as distinct genera in the present Catalogue, following Sama, 2005a. The latter includes Pseudocoptosia Pic, 1900 and Pseudomusaria Pic, 1900. The subgenera in Callidium Fabricus, 1775 are listed as valid, although they are considered also as synonyms. The subgenera in Cerambyx Linnaeus, 1758 and Saperda Fabricius, 1775 are listed as synonyms, although they are considered also as valid. The subgenera in Exocentrus Dejean, 1835 are numerous, poorly defined and their use produces confusions. As they proved to be inapplicable for our needs, all taxa listed in the present Catalogue are placed under Exocentrus s. str. Glaphyra Newman, 1840 is currently considered as a valid genus, or as a subgenus of Molorchus Fabricius, 1792. It is listed as a valid genus in the present Catalogue. Phymatodellus Reitter, 1913 is listed as a valid subgenus of Phymatodes Mulsant, 1839, as in Ohbayashi & Niishito 2007, although it may be a synonym of Poecilium Fairmaire, 1868. Poecilium Fairmaire, 1864 is listed as a valid genus, while it may be considered as a subgenus of Phymatodes Mulsant, 1839, or even merged with Phymatodes. Clytus rhamni Germar, 1817 is a weil known, widely distributed species. Some of its synonyms were used to denote subspecies (Gonzales & al., 2007). The species is not considered polytypic in the present Catalogue. Monochamus galloprovincialis (Olivier, 1795) is a widely distributed species of economic importance. It may be polytypic. Thus, some ofthe names listed in its synonymy may represent subspecies.

The authors ofthe family-group names are given as in Bousquet & al. (2009), with the exception ofRemphanini, Cleomenini and Tillomorphini credited in the Catalogue to Lacordaire, 1868.

In addition, Apodasyini Lacordaire, 1872, CIeomenini Pascoe, 1869, Nathriini Arnett, 1962, Purpuricenini J. Thomson, 186 I, and Tetropini Portevin, 1927 are used in the present Catalogue as valid tribes, while they are invalid in Monne & Bezark (2009) and in some other American publications.

The numerous varieties described by M. Pic, and based exclusively on color pattern, pose a recurrent problem. In many cases it is not clear if they are infrasubspecific as defined by the ICZN, and the use of the respective names is inconsistent among workers. 38 NEW ACTS and COMMENTS

Pakistan, as far as the beetle fauna is eoneemed, is one of the poorly known areas included in the Catalogue. Hashmi & Tashfeen (1992) published a eatalogue of Pakistani beetles, based on identifieations provided by the former Commonwelth Intitute of Entomology. Vaueher speeimens from Pakistan were eompared with material housed in the eolleetions of the Natural History Museum in London. Consequently, the published data laek reliability and many taxa are obviously misidentified. In addition, some names are misspelled while others are nomina nuda. About 10% ofthe data were found likely eorreet and were taken over.

The work of Johannes Eusebius Voet (1776-1805) "Catalogus systematicus Coleopterorum" does not apply eonsistently binominal nomenclature (see also Sherbom, 1902, Alonso-Zarazaga & Lyal, 1999). Thus, new names of taxa published in that work are not available (ICZN, Art. 11.4) and should not be used for taxonomie purposes.

Cerambycidae: Prioninae A. Drumont, G. Sama & Z. Komiya Type species designations Mesoprionus Jakovlev, 1887 is based on three speeies Prionus asiaticus Faldermann, 1837, Prionus besikanus Fairmaire, 1855, and Prionus henkei Sehaufuss, 1879 (eurrently in synonymy with P. asiaticus Faldermann). The type speeies of Mesoprionus was not designated by Jakovlev. Aeeording to ICZN, Reeommendation 69A, Prionus asiaticus Faldermann, 1837 is hereby designated as the type speeies ofthe genus Mesoprionus Jakovlev. Özdikmen (2008a) ineorreetly gave Prionus angustatus Jakovlev, 1887 as type speeies, a speeies originally not included in the genus. Polylobarthron Semenov, 1900 was established for two speeies, Polyarthron margelanicum Thery, 1896 and P. unianis Pie, 1898. A type speeies was not designated. As P. unianis is eurrently held as a junior synonym of P. margelanicum, Polyarthron margelanicum Thery, 1896 is hereby designated as the type speeies of the genus Polylobarthron Semenov.

New synonyms Aegolipton yunnanense Feng & Chen, 2007, syn. nov. of Aegolipton marginale (Fabrieius, 1775), based on the deseription and illustration of the holotype of A. yunnanense. The deseription of A. yunnanense is based on females with eharaeters that fall within the range of variation of the widely distributed A. marginale. Surprisingly, A. yunnanense was originally eompared to A. lackerbecki Z. Komiya, 2005 from Sumatra and Java, but not to A. marginale known from Yunnan. Megopis (Nepiodes) lineata Hüdepohl, 1994 syn. nov. of Nepiodes sulcipennis (A. White, 1853), based on study of the type material and in agreement with the opinion of Karl-Emst Hüdepohl hirnself (personal eommunieation from November 2000). Sarmydus trichodes Feng & Chen, 2006, syn. nov. of Sarmydusfujishiroi Drumont, 2006, based on deseriptions, examination of type series of S. fujishiroi, and illustration of the holotype of S. trichodes. The deseription of S. fujishiroi was published in April 2006 with the type material eoming from Vietnam and China (Guangxi, Siehuan and Yunnan Provinees), while S. trichodes was published in July 2006, and is based on a speeimen from Yunnan. Mesoprionus batelkai (Släma, 1996), syn. nov. of Mesoprionus besikanus (Fairmaire, 1855), based on examination of the type material of P. batelkai, of several topotypieal speeimens from Crete, and of many specimens from several eountries in whieh M. besikanus oeeurs (Bulgaria, Greeee, Maeedonia and Turkey). The eharaeters used for separation of M. batelkai and repeated in Lorene (1999) represent elinal variation of P. besikanus. Mesoprionus schaufussi (Jakovlev, 1887), syn. nov. of Mesoprionus lefebvrei (Marseul, 1856), based on the deseription and, for M lefebvrei, on study of the type material. Mesoprionus schaufussi was ineorreetly plaeed in synonymy with Prionus coriarius Linnaeus, 1758 from whieh it differs by the 12-segmented antennae present in both sexes.

Reconfirmed synonymy Nepiodes lacertosus (Paseoe, 1867) is a synonym of Nepiodes costipennis (A. White, 1853), based on re­ examination ofthe respective holotypes.