INFORMATION TO USERS This was produced from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction. 1.The sign or “target” for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is “Missing Page(s)”. If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure you of complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark it is an indication that the Him inspector noticed either blurred copy because of movement during exposure, or duplicate copy. Unless we meant to delete copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed, you will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photo­ graphed the photographer has followed a definite method in “sectioning” the material. It is customary to begin filming at the upper left hand comer of a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again—beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. For any illustrations that cannot be reproduced satisfactorily by xerography, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and tipped into your xerographic copy. Requests can be made to our Dissertations Customer Services Department. 5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases we have filmed the best available copy. University Micrdrilms International 300 N. ZEEB ROAD. ANN ARBOR. Ml 48106 18 BEDFORD ROW, LONDON WC1R 4EJ, ENGLAND 8100281 W h eeler , Q u e n t in D u a n e COMPARATIVE MORPHOLOGY, CLADISTICS, AND A REVISED CLASSIFICATION OF THE GENERA OF LYMEXYLIDAE (COLEOPTERA), INCLUDING DESCRIPTIONS OF TWO NEW GENERA The Ohio State University PH.D. 1980 University Microfilms International300 N. Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106 PLEASE NOTE: In all cases this material has been filmed in the best possible way from the available copy. Problems encountered with this document have been identified here with a check mark . 1. Glossy photographs 2. Colored illustrations 3. Photographs with dark background 4. Illustrations are poor copy ________ 5. °rint shows through as there is text on both sides of page 6. Indistinct, broken or small print on several pages _ throughout 7. Tightly bound copy with print lost in spine 8. Computer printout pages with indistinct print 9. Page(s) _____ lacking when material received, and not available from school or author ________ 10. Page(s) ________seem to be missing in numbering only as text follows ________ 11. Poor carbon copy ________ 12. Not original copy, several pages with blurred type 13. Appendix pages are poor copy ________ 14. Original copy with light type ________ 15. Curling and wrinkled pages ________ 16. Other University M icrofilms international 200 \ Z = = = =0. A\'N A330S Vli -S '06 '312: 761-1700 COMPARATIVE MORPHOLOGY, CLADISTICS, AND A REVISED CLASSIFICATION OF THE GENERA OF LYMEXYLIDAE (COLEOPTERA), INCLUDING DESCRIPTIONS OF TWO NEW GENERA DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Quentin D. Wheeler, B .S ., M.S. ***** The Ohio State University 1980 Reading Committee: Approved By: Dr. David J. Horn Dr. Donald E. Johnston Dr. Gordon R. Stairs A dviser Dr. Charles A. Triplehorn Department of Entomology To my w ife Kim, who understands i i . ACKNOWLEDGMENTS A number of people have participated in the successful completion of this project. In all fairness, however, my thanks need be extended to include those who added both materially or philosophically to this study directly and those who gave me encouragement and support during my previous investigations in insect systematics. I will make an effort to thank each person who has substantially contributed to my personal progress and that of my study of Lymexylidae. I apologize to any which are inadvertantly omitted. Dr. Charles A. Triplehom, my academic adviser for this study and my undergraduate and M.S. studies in entomology, was among the first scientists to inspire my interest in the study of insects. He has proven to be a constant source of sound advice, and an oasis of un­ wavering support during my years at The Ohio State University. Dr. Ginter Ekis served as co-adviser during initial work on this project. I am grateful for his support and help, and particularly" for making me aware of many resources - espcially people - around the country and around the world, and for his participation in various discussions on systematics. A group of colleagues, and friends, which I collectively refer to as the "Ball School" have been of inestimable influence and encourage­ ment through personal interactions and their outstanding contributions iiiv. to the literature on beetle taxonomy and theoretical systematics. This elite group of scientists includes George E. Ball (University of Alberta, Edmonton), Terry L. Erwin (National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington), David H. Kavanaugh (California Academy of Sciences, San Francisco), and Donald R. Whitehead (USDA, Systematic Entomology Laboratory, Smithsonian Institution, Washington). Lee H. Herman, Jr. (American Museum of Natural History, New York) gave advice and shared his ideas and methods, providing me with suggestions which were both constructive and inspiring during visits to the American Museum. Some particularly helpful colleagues include Stewart B. Peck (Carleton University, Ottawa), J. Milton Campbell (Biosystematics Research Institute, Ottawa), Edward C. Becker (B.R.I., Ottawa), Alfred F. Newton, Jr. and Margaret Thayer (Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University, Cambridge), John F. Lawrence (CSIRO, Division of Entomology, Canberra City and formerly of the M.C.Z.), Vicki Funk (O.S.U., Department of Botany), John LaDuke (O.S.U., Botany), and Larry Watrous (O.S.U., Department of Entomology). Ronald B. Madge (British Museum of Natural History, London), very generously shared his insights into lymexylid systematics, including unpublished results of personal research, in an exemplary scientific s p i r i t . John Nagy prepared most of the habitus drawings of lymexylid beetles in this paper. I commend John on his talent, eye for detail, and careful work; and admire the quality of these drawings, his first efforts in illustrations of insects. Glen Berkey (Ohio Agriculatural Research § Development Center, Wooster) prepared excellent reductions for many plates, and David Stutes is responsible for operation of the scanning electron microscope and the sem micrographs which are included in this study. Support for this study of the Lymexylidae was gathered from several sources. I enjoyed full-tim e support for my research during the year 1980 while I was a Presidential Fellow of The Ohio State University. Larry Watrous (O.S.U., Entomology) and I were awarded a grant from the Ohio Biological Survey which funded the construction and field testing of a modification of the flight-intercept trap for beetles. We were granted permission to test our traps at Cedar Bog and the Wahkeena Nature Preserve by the Ohio Historical Society. I was awarded funds for field study of lymexylids in Costa Rica by the Graduate School of The Ohio State University through a Graduate Student Alumni Award. The Environmental Sciences Program of the Smithsonian Institu­ tion supported studies in Panama in 1978 (funds were awarded to Dr. Terry L. Erwin for studies on carabid beetles of Barro Colorado Island) The Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute permitted use of the B.C.I. f a c i l i t y . The Department of Entomology of The Ohio State University has generously supported my research activities for several years. In v. addition to space for office and laboratory work it has acquired equipment and supplies, accepted page charges for several publications, and paid for travel associated with field work, museum and library studies, and participation in professional society meetings. The latter support came, in part, from the Osborn Fund, the Knull Fund, and the Department's budget: Thanks. Taxonomic research is heavily dependent upon museum curators opening their hearts and cabinets. I have been able to borrow and study specimens from most parts of the world, and am indeed grateful to each individual and institution which made these loans possible. These persons and collections are listed in Table 1, along with acronyms which I use in the text in reference to these depositories. VITA January 3 1954 Born- M ary sv ille, Ohio 1972 High School Diploma, Marysville Senior High School, Marysville, Ohio 1973 Laboratory Assistant, Insect Pathology Laboratory, Department of Entomology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1973 Insect Taxonomist, WHO c/o Insect Pathology Lab., Dept. Entomology, The Ohio State University, Columbus 1974 Field Entomologist, Vector-borne Disease Unit Dept. Health, State of Ohio, Columbus 1975 ' Insect Taxonomist, USDA Forest Service, N.E. Rsch. Lab., Delaware, Ohio 1976 B.S. in Entomology, The Ohio State University, Columbus 1976-1977 Teaching Associate, Dept. Entomology, The Ohio State University, Columbus 1975-1976 Curatorial Assistant, The Ohio State University, Collection of Insects and Spiders, Columbus 1976-1977 Assistant Extension Entomologist, Ohio Cooperative Extension Service, The Ohio State University, Columbus 1976,1978 1979 Research Associate, Dept. Entomology, The Ohio State University, Columbus 1977 M.S. in Entomology, The Ohio State University, Colum­ bus (Thesis: Revision of the genus Anisotoma of North and Central America) 1978 Research Assistant, Smithsonian Institution, Environ­ mental Sciences Program funds awarded to Dr.