Russian Entomol. J. 15(1):53–61 © RUSSIAN ENTOMOLOGICAL JOURNAL, 2006 A revision of the Chrysolina (perforata) species group (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) Ðåâèçèÿ ãðóïïû âèäîâ Chrysolina (perforata) (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) A.O. Bienkowski À.Î. Áåíüêîâñêèé Zelenograd, 1121-107, Moscow, 124460, Russia. Зеленоград, 1121-107, Москва, 124460, Россия. KEY WORDS: Chrysomelidae, Chrysolina perforata, Chrysolina purpurata, systematics, key. КЛЮЧЕВЫЕ СЛОВА: Chrysomelidae, Chrysolina perforata, Chrysolina purpurata, систематика, определительная таблица. ABSTRACT. 2 species, namelyC hrysolina perfora- hypericia Bechyne, 1950 of the genusC hrysolina Mots- ta (Gebler, 1830) with 4 subspecies and Ch. purpurata chulsky, 1860. The following characters permit us to (Faldermann, 1833) are included in theC hrysolina (per- distinguish this species group from the other members forata) species group herewith. Lectotype ofC hrysome- of the subgenus. la variolosa Motschulsky, 1854 is designated. Neotype Diagnosis of the Chrysolina (perforata) of Chrysomela perforata Gebler, 1830 is established. The species group following new synonymy is established: Chrysomela perforata simillima Mohr, 1966 = Chrysolina perforata Body entirely metallic dorsally and ventrally, anten- changaiensis L.Medvedev, 1980 syn.n. = Ch. perforata nae and legs metallic or rufous. pallidipes L.Medvedev, 1980 syn.n., and Chrysomela Last maxillary palpomere oval, not broader than the purpurata Faldermann, 1833 = Chrysomela campestris next to last, similar in both sexes. Antenna inserted Weise, 1912 syn.n. Ch. perforata turczaninoffi (Harold, more close to clypeus than to eye. 1875) (= Chrysomela variolosa Motschulsky, 1854) is a Pronotum with convex lateral calli at entire length, separate subspecies, but not a synonym of Ch. perfora- which separated from disk by narrow, deep impression ta perforata. Chrysolina perforata var. camptolbensis- filled with large coalescent punctures in basal 1/3–1/2, estris L.Medvedev, 1980 is an inavailable name. and by wide, more shallow impression covered with large, partly coalescent punctures anteriorly. Propleura РЕЗЮМЕ. К группе видов Chrysolina (perforata) convex. Lateral impression more or less distinct, cov- отнесены 2 вида: Chrysolina perforata (Gebler, 1830)с ered by transverse wrinkles, but without sharp outer 4 подвидами и Ch. purpurata (Faldermann, 1833).О бо- border. значены лектотип Chrysomela variolosa Motschulsky, Elytron with 11 regular puncture rows, including 1854 и неотип Chrysomela perforata Gebler, 1830.П ред- abbreviated scutellar row and marginal row. The last is ложена новая синонимия: Chrysomela perforata placed at the bottom of furrow along epipleuron. Rows simillima Mohr, 1966 = Chrysolina perforata 2–3, 4–5, 6–7, and 8–9 slightly arranged in pairs. changaiensis L.Medvedev, 1980 syn.n. = Ch. perforata Tarsi: male: segments 1–3 with entire sole, broader pallidipes L.Medvedev, 1980 syn.n.; Chrysomela than in female; female: segment 1 of all tarsi with broad purpurata Faldermann, 1833 =C hrysomela campestris glabrous stripe beneath, 2 — with narrow glabrous Weise, 1912 syn.n. Ch. perforata turczaninoffi (Harold, stripe beneath. 1875) = Chrysomela variolosa Motschulsky, 1854 рас- Pygidium with distinct groove at entire length. Last сматривается как отдельный подвид, а не синоним abdominal sternite evenly convex in both sexes. Ch. perforata perforata. Chrysolina perforata var. Chrysolina (perforata) species group includes eight camptolbensisestris L.Medvedev, 1980 является не- nominal taxa, but only Ch. perforata (with subspecies пригодным названием. simillima, changaiensis, and pallidipes) and Ch. pur- purata (Faldermann, 1833) are considered to be valid Introduction names recently [Medvedev, 1982; Medvedev & Dubesh- ko, 1992]. Mohr [1966] believedC h. campestris (Weise, The taxa close toC hrysolina perforata (Gebler, 1830) 1912) to be the third valid species of the group in present a natural group within the subgenus Allo- question. 54 A.O. Bienkowski Material 37250 Chrysomela perforata Gebler Sibirien, Gebler Zool. Mus. Berlin”. DESCRIPTION. Colour of dorsum variable: 1) above I have examined the type specimens from the fol- green; elytra with weak golden reflection, with suture, punc- lowing collections (names of curators in brackets): tures, and scutellum violet; 2) above green, elytra reddish- MNHUB — Museum fur Naturkunde der Humboldt- golden, punctures violet with aureole green; 3) above green, Universitat, Berlin, Germany (Dr. J. Frisch), with pronotal lateral calli and scutellum violet, elytra with DEI — Deutsches Entomologisches Institut, Eberswal- golden reflection and with punctures violet. Antennomeres de, Germany (Dr. L. Zerche), 1–4 rufous (1 darkened dorsally), 5–11 gradually darkened. Legs entirely blue or with femora green. Ventral side green. LMC — Collection of Dr. L.N. Medvedev, Moscow, Elytron with regular rows of large punctures. Rows paired. Russia. Intervals flat. Hind wings absent. In #, hind tarsomere 1 MTD — Museum fur Tierkunde Dresden, Dresden, broader than 3. Germany (Dr. R. Krause), Aedeagus rounded and broadened at apex, without lateral ZMMU — Zoological Museum of Moscow State Uni- emarginations (or with only very slallow emarginations), versity, Moscow, Russia (Dr. N.B. Nikitsky, Mr. A.A. ventrally with distinct subapical denticles, lateral borders of Gusakov), apical orifice not elevated (see from lateral side); flagellum ZSM — Zoologische Staatssammlung Munchen, broad. Munchen, Germany (Dr. M. Baehr), Length: 5.2–6.5 mm (#), 6.0–8.0 mm ($). and additional materials from: Deutsches Entomolo- DISTRIBUTION. Altai, Sayans, N. Mongolia. REMARKS. Gebler [1830] described Chrysomela perfo- gisches Institut; Entomological Department, Biologi- rata on the base of three specimens from the environs of cal Faculty, Moscow State University (Dr. V.Yu. Sav- Irtysh river and Ridersk (=Leninogorsk). The type speci- itsky); Moscow Pedagogical State University (Dr. K.V. mens from Dr. Gebler collection were deposited in Museum Makarov); Museum fur Naturkunde der Humboldt- National d’Histoire Naturelle (Paris), ZIN, and ZMMU [Horn Universitat; Museum fur Tierkunde Dresden; Naturhis- & Kahle, 1935–1937]. Unfortunately, I have not found the torisches Museum Wien, Austria (Dr. H. Schoenmann); type of Ch. perforata there. In Zoological Museum of Uni- Zoological Institute of Russian Academy of Sciences, versity of Helsinki (collection by Dr. Mannerheim) I found St.-Petersburg (Dr. G.S. Medvedev, Mrs. A.K. Chistia- two specimens (# and $) labelled as “perforata Gebler”, and kova); Zoological Museum Amsterdam, Niederlands obtained by Dr. Mannerheim from Gebler. However, these (Dr. B. Brugge); Zoological Museum of Moscow State specimens do not correspond to the original description because they have developed hind wings [Gebler, 1830 men- University; Zoological Museum of University of Hels- tioned “Aptera” in the original description]. inki, Finland (Dr. H. Silfverberg); Zoologische Staatssa- In MNHUB I found a series (1 #, 5 $$) labelled “perfo- mmlung Munchen, Germany; and author’s collection. rata Gebl. Sibir. Gebl.”. Some of them, namely 1# and 2 $$, have normal hind wings and, therefore, can not be conspecific Subgenus Allohypericia Bechyne, 1950: 159 with perforata (I identified these specimens as purpurata). Chrysolina (perforata) species group Others (3 $$) are conspecific with perforata. However, the information on the labels does not permit us to consider the Chrysolina perforata (Gebler, 1830: 216) respective specimens as the types. In MTD (collection by Dr. Fischer von Waldheim) I found two specimens: $ with Chrysolina perforata perforata (Gebler, 1830: 216) label “perforata Gebl.” and # with label “perforata Gebl. Figs 1–5, 31. Barn.” These specimens correspond to the original descrip- Chrysomela perforata Gebler, 1830: 216 (“ad fl. Irtysch et tion and the recent interpretation of this species [Medvedev, prope Riddersk” — type probably lost, “Barnaul” — neotype in 1982; Medvedev & Dubeshko, 1992]. The fixation of the MTD, examined). interpretation of the name perforata is necessary for the Chrysomela perforata: Marseul, 1886: 68, 1887: 86. revision of the group in question. Therefore, I designate a Chrysomela (Pezocrosita) perforata perforata: Mohr, 1966: 98. neotype. It is a #, without hind wings, above green, elytra Chrysolina perforata perforata: L. Medvedev, 1980: 318. Chrysolina (Allohypericia) perforata perforata: L. Medvedev, with weak golden reflection, pronotal calli and impressions, 1982: 80; L. Medvedev & Dubeshko, 1992: 100, 102 [partim]. elytral suture, epipleuron, and punctures violet, elytral rows MATERIAL. TYPES. Chrysomela perforata, neotype #, paired, consist of large punctures, with intervals flat (lateral designated here, with labels: “40.”, “ perforata Gebl. Barn.”, “ex intervals slightly convex). coll. Fischer von Waldheim” [yellow], “Neotype Chrysomela Some specimens from Irkutsk being at my disposal are perforata Gebler, 1830. Bienkowski design. 2004” [red], “Chryso- intermediate between this subspecies and perforata turczan- lina perforata perforata (Gebl.) Bienkowski det. 2004”. inoffi. They have aedeagus with preapical lateral emargin- Additional specimens. MONGOLIA: 1 #, 1 $, Khubsungul ations, and lateral borders of apical orifice (viewed from Aimak: Khubsugul lake, V. Dorogostaiskiy leg.; 2 ##, 1 $, Ubsu lateral side) elevated, but elytral punctures finer than in Nur Aimak: 35km WNW from Somon Tes, Altan els desert, 1400m, exp. Z. Kaszab leg., 23.6.1968; 1 #, Dzabkhan Aimak: perforata turczaninoffi, and elytral intervals flat. 15km NW from Somon Songino, 1840m, exp. Z. Kaszab leg., 13.7.1968; 1 #, Uncertain locality: “Mongolia bor. Reitter”; Chrysolina perforata turczaninoffi (Harold, 1875: 176) RUSSIA: 4 ##, 2 $$, Irkutsk Area: “Quell. d. Irkut Reitter”; 1 Figs 6–14, 31. #, 3 $$, Krasnoyarsk Prov.: Minusinsk, L. A. Molchanov leg., 8.1902; 4 ##, 4 $$, the same place and collector, 1899; 1 #, Chrysomela variolosa Motschulsky, 1854: 40 (“Kiachta”, Tuva: 4 km E. Erzin, Benediktov leg., 23.8.1994; 3 ##, 7 $$, lectotype and paralectotypes in ZMMU, examined; paralecto- Upsa-Nur: Tes-Khem river and Kholu river valley, D. Berman types in MNHUB, examined). leg., 5–6.1962; Uncertain localities: 1 $, “37250”, “perforata Chrysomela turczaninoffi Harold, 1875: 176 nom. nov. pro Gebl. Sibir. Gebl.” [yellow]; 2 $$, “Hist.-Coll. (Coleoptera) Nr. variolosa Motschulsky, 1854: 40 nec Petagna, 1819: 19. A revision of the Chrysolina (perforata) species group 55 1 2 3 4 5 Figs 1–5. Chrysolina perforata perforata, # (neotype, Barnaul): 1–3 — aedeagus, apical part (1 — dorsal view, 2 — lateral view, 3 — ventral view); 4 — fore-tarsus; 5 — hind-tarsus. Ðèñ. 1–5. Chrysolina perforata perforata, ñàìåö (íåîòèï, Áàðíàóë): 1–3 — ýäåàãóñ, âåð øèííàÿ ÷àñòü (1 — ñâåð õó, 2 — ñáîêó, 3 — ñíè çó); 4 — ïåðåäí ÿÿ ëàïêà; 5 — çàäíÿÿ ëàïêà. Chrysomela purpurata: Marseul, 1886: 68, 1887: 87. $$, Selenga river valley; 6 ##, 8 $$, Sayans: Turan; 1 #, 1 $, Chrysomela variolosa: Weise, 1887: 174. Irkutsk Area: “Menetr.”, “Irkutsk”, “Coll. Mannerh.”, “ Purpurata Chrysomela (Pezocrosita) campestris: Mohr, 1966: 96. Falderm. variolosa Mann.”; 1 $, Irkutsk. Chrysolina perforata simillima: L. Medvedev, 1980: 318. DESCRIPTION. Colour of dorsal side variable: 1) green Chrysolina (Allohypericia) perforata simillima: L. Medvedev, (clypeus sometimes violet, elytra sometimes blue), aureole of 1982: 80. elytral punctures, elytral suture, pronotal lateral calli (partly MATERIAL. TYPES. Chrysomela variolosa, lectotype #, or entirely) violet, 2) entirely bluish-violet, 3) head green, designated here, with labels: “ variolosa Mannh.” [handwritten pronotum green with lateral calli violet, elytra violet, 4) violet- by Motschulsky], “Lectotype Chrysomela variolosa Motschul- purple, with labrum and clypeus blue, aureole of elytral punc- sky, 1854. Bienkowski design. 2004” [red]. Paralectotypes: # tures and elytral suture golden, 5) violet-purple, with head and with labels: “ variolosa Manner”, my “Paralectotype” label similar to that under lectotype; # with labels: “Kiachta” [pink], pronotum partly blue, elytral intervals blue, 6) violet-purple my “Paralectotype” label similar to that under lectotype; $ with with head and lateral sides of elytra greenish-blue. Antennae labels: “b. Kiachta”, my “Paralectotype” label similar to that dark brown with antennomeres 1–3 or 1–4 rufous entirely or under lectotype (all in ZMMU); $ with labels: “37249”, only below (1 mostly darkened dorsally). Legs violet, or violet “variolosa Mannerh. Sibir. Menetr.” [yellow], “Syntypus Chry- with diffuse blue pattern, or femora and tibiae violet, tarsi dark somela variolosa Motschulsky, 1854 labelled by MNHUB brown. Ventral side violet, blue, or green. Elytron with regular 2003” [red] (MNHUB); 2 $$ with labels: “Hist. Coll. (Co- or slightly irregular rows of large, very dense punctures. Punc- leoptera) Nr. 37249 Chrysomela variolosa Mannerh. Sibirien. tures larger than in other related taxa. Rows paired or equidis- Menetries. Zool. Mus. Berlin”, “Syntypus Chrysomela variolosa tant. Intervals convex, at least, in lateral 1/2. Some of the Motschulsky, 1854 labelled by MNHUB 2003” [red] (MN- HUB); # with labels: “Kiachta” [yellow], “Hist. Coll. (Co- punctures of one row joined by impression. Because of that, leoptera) Nr. 37249 Chrysomela variolosa Mannerh. Sibirien. elytral surface looks like wrinkled. Hind wings absent. In #, Menetries. Zool. Mus. Berlin”, “Syntypus Chrysomela variolosa hind tarsomere 1 broader than 3. Motschulsky, 1854 labelled by MNHUB 2003” [red] (MN- Aedeagus narrowed at sides of apical orifice and slightly HUB); # with labels: “Hist. Coll. (Coleoptera) Nr. 37249 emarginate laterally, ventrally with obtuse or indistinct sub- Chrysomela variolosa Mannerh. Sibirien. Menetries. Zool. Mus. apical denticles, lateral borders of apical orifice more elevated Berlin”, “Syntypus Chrysomela variolosa Motschulsky, 1854 (see from lateral side); flagellum narrow. labelled by MNHUB 2003” [red] (MNHUB). Length: 6.2–7.2 mm (#), 6.8–7.9 mm ($). Additional specimens. CHINA: 1 #, 2 $$, Dzungaria: Karlyk-Tag, V-VI.1908; MONGOLIA: 1 $, Selenginsky aimak: DISTRIBUTION. Sayans, Transbaikalia, Dzungaria, N. Shamar, 29.VI.1971; 1 #, the same place, 29.VI.1977; 1 $, the Mongolia. same place, Yu.M.Zaitsev leg., 30.6.1978; 1 #, 1 $, Dzabkhan REMARKS. The name “variolosa” was firstly used for Aimak: Ulassiatai, O.Bamberg leg., 28.5.1908. Uncertain local- this taxon by Mannerheim in Dejean [1837], but without ities: 2 ##, 2 $$, Mongolia; 1 #, “Nordl. Mongolei, Changai, description, as nomen nudum. Motschulsky [1854] pre- Leder”; 1 #, Borloo-Gol, left bank, 8.VIII.1985; 1 #, 1 $, S. sented the description of “ Chrysomela variolosa Manner- Mongolia: Kudava, O.Bamberg leg.; 1 #, 1 $, Mongolia: Gorji, heim” based on more than 30 specimens collected, in part, O.Bamberg leg., 10.7.1908; 1 #, 1 $, N. Mongolia: Simowaja, in the environs of Kyakhta. I found a series of four type O.Bamberg leg., 3.6.1908; RUSSIA: 1 #, Transbaikalia: Dauria, specimens of Ch. variolosa in Motschulsky collection F. Sahlberg leg.; 1 #, 1 $, Dauria; 1 #, Chikoi river; 1 #, Troitskosavsk (=Kyakhta), F.Lukjanovich leg.; 17.5.1928; 1 #, (ZMMU). Five more type specimens of Ch. variolosa 2 $$, the same place, 6–8.8.1910; 1 #, 1 $, Kyakhta; 1 #, 1 were found in MNHUB. The name turczaninoffi Harold is a $, the same place, Goetzelmann leg.; 1 #, 1 $, Kyakhta Distr.: valid one for this taxon because of variolosa Motschulsky 5km NE Kiran Vill., 50°21’43"N, 106°46’11"E, I.V.Melnik leg., is a junior primary homonym of Chrysomela variolosa 25-30.VI.1999; 2 $$, Selenga river valley, 5–6.1908; 5 ##, 3 Petagna, 1819. 56 A.O. Bienkowski 6 8 7 13 9 10 12 11 14 Figs 6–14. Ch. perforata turczaninoffi: 6–9 — # (Mongolia: Khangai): 6–8 — aedeagus, apical part (6 — dorsal view, 7 — lateral view, 8 — ventral view); 9 — hind-tarsus; 10–12 — # (Transbaikalia), aedeagus, apical part (10 — dorsal view, 11 — lateral view, 12 — ventral view); 13–14 – # (Chrysomela variolosa, lectotype), aedeagus, apical part (13 — dorsal view, 14 — lateral view). Ðèñ. 6–14. Ch. perforata turczaninoffi: 6–9 — ñàìåö ( Ìîíãîëèÿ: Õàíãàé): 6-8 — ýäåàãóñ, âåð øèííàÿ ÷àñòü (6 — ñâåð õó, 7 — ñáîêó, 8 — ñíèçó), 9 — çàäíÿÿ ëàïêà; 10–12 — ñàìåö (Çàáàéêàëüå), ýäåàãóñ, âåðøèííàÿ ÷àñòü (10 — ñâåðõó, 11 — ñáîêó, 12 — ñíè çó); 13–14 — ñàìåö ( Chrysomela variolosa, ëåêòîòèï), ýäåàãóñ, âåð øèííàÿ ÷àñòü (13 — ñâåð õó, 14 — ñ áîêó). Chrysolina perforata simillima (Mohr, 1966: 96) lina perforata changaiensis L.Medv. Bienkowski det. 2004” Figs 15–27, 31. (LMC); $ with labels [in Russian]: “Mongolia, 10km SW Khukh- Mor’ta, Gobi Altai aimak, Arnoldi leg. 21.VIII.968", “PARATY- Chrysomela (Pezocrosita) perforata simillima Mohr, 1966: PUS” [red], “ Chrysolina perforata changaiensis Medv. 96 (“Sibiria”, holotype in Narodni Muzeum, Prague). L.N.Medvedev det. 1992”, “Mongolia” (ZSM). Chrysolina perforata changaiensis L.Medvedev, 1980: 318 Chrysolina perforata pallidipes, paratypes, 2 ## with (Mongolia: Khangai, holotype and paratypes in LMC ex- labels [in Russian]: “Mongolia, 15km S. Ulangom, Ubsu Nur amined, paratype in ZSM, examined), syn. nov. aimak, Arnoldi leg., 30.VIII.968”, “PARATYPUS” [red], “ Chryso- Chrysolina (Allohypericia ) perforata changaiensis : L. lina perforata pallidipes Medv. L.N. Medvedev det. 1992”, Medvedev, 1982: 80, syn.n. “Mongolia” (ZSM); # with labels [in Russian]: “Ubsu Nur Chrysolina perforata pallidipes L.Medvedev, 1980: 318 aimak, 45–55km WNW Ulangom, 17.VII.76, L.N. Medvedev, (Mongolia: Ubsu Nur Aimak, paratypes in ZSM and LMC, N. Voronova. 1900-2050m”, “Paratypus” [red], “ Chrysolina examined), syn.n. perforata pallidipes L. Medv. L. Medvedev det.” (LMC); # with Chrysolina (Allohypericia ) perforata pallidipes : L. labels: “Mongolia, 20km W from south shore of Doro Nur Medvedev, 1982: 80; L. Medvedev, Dubeshko, 1992: 100. lake, Kobdo aimak, Arnoldi, 22.VIII.968” [in Russian, “Kobdo MATERIAL. TYPES. Chrysolina perforata changaiensis, aimak” — is incorrect, really “Baian Ulegei aimak”), “Paratypus” holotype, # with labels: “r. Ider, 30km below Toson-Tsengel, [red], “Chrysolina perforata pallidipes L.Medv. Bienkowski det. 22.VII-71. under Thymus” [in Russian], “Holotypus Chrysolina 2004” (LMC); 2 ## with labels: “Mongolia, Ubsu Nur aimak, perforata changaiensis L. Medv.” [red], “ Chrysolina perforata 15km SSE Tarialan, Kerzhner, 5.VIII.970” [in Russian], “Paraty- changaiensis L. Medv. L. Medvedev det.” (LMC). Paratypes: $ pus” [red], “Chrysolina perforata pallidipes L.Medv. Bienkowski with labels: “MPR Dzabzansk.[sic!] a. 30km E. Toson-Tsengel, r. det. 2004” (LMC). Ider, thyme thicket, Medvedev 12.7.1971” [in Russian], “Paraty- Additional specimens. MONGOLIA: 3 ##, 1 $, Bajan- pus” [red], “Crysolina perforata changaiensis L.Medv. Bien- Khongor Aimak: Bajan-Khongor, 6–17.6.1962; 1 #, Dzabkhan kowski det. 2004” (LMC); # with labels: “170km W Aldark- Aimak: 30km E. from Santamargac-Somon, Cholbo-See 1900m, hana, under worm-wood, 15.VII-71” [in Russian], “ Chrysolina 48°38’N 95°46’E, Mongolish-Deutsche Biolog. Exped. leg., perforata Gebl. L.Medvedev det. 96”, “Paratypus” [red], “Cryso- 15.8.1964; 2 ##, 2 $$, N.-W. from Uliassutai: Ulan-Erig, A revision of the Chrysolina (perforata) species group 57 Yurganova leg., 1.VI.1911; 1 $, Gobi Altai aimak: 10km S.-W. from Khukh-Mor’ta, Arnoldi leg. 21.VIII.1968; 2 ##, 1 $, Ubsu- Nur Aimak: Ulangom, Charchira, Dorn leg., 16.7.1977; 2 ##, 1 $, Choeondloen gol river: 32km N.-W. from Ulangom, 1200m, exp. Z. Kaszab leg., 7.7.1968; 2 ##, 1 $, 20km S. from Ulangom, 1380m, exp. Z. Kaszab leg., 8.7.1968; 1 #, 1 $, Ubsu-Nur Aimak: between Oeroeg nur lake and Ulangom, 12km ESE from Ulaan davaa pass, 1450m, exp. Z. Kaszab leg.: 28.6.1968. Uncertain locality: NW MONGOLIA: 1 #, Burgasutai river, Sevko & Sizova leg.: 7.VI.1923; RUSIIA: 3 ##, Krasnoyarsk Prov.: Minusinsk; 1 #, 1 $, the same place, Csiki leg.; 1 #, the same place, A. Jacobson leg., 1 $., 3.6.1897; 2 ##, Tuva: Khandagaity, B.Korotyaev leg., 28.7.1972; 1 $, 20km S. from Erzin, R. Zlotin leg.: 23.VII.1961; 1 #, 30km N.-W. from Erzin, R. Zlotin leg.: 11.VII.1961; 1 #, 2 $$, Kuraiskiy Ridge above Kurai Vill., 1800m, 27.6.1993; 1 $, Tannu-Ola ridge: N. slope, Grum-Grzhimailo leg., 3-5.VIII.1909. Uncertain locality: 1 #, “Tomsk gub.: Chagan-uzunu-Taldur, Redikortsev leg., 15 16 6.VIII.1912”. Intermediate specimens between subspecies perforata Figs 15–16. Ch. perforata simillima, # (Ch. perforata perforata and perforata simillima. changaiensis, holotype, Mongolia: Ider river), aedeagus, apical MONGOLIA: 2 ##, Bajan-Ulegej Aimak: 27km S. from part (15 — dorsal view, 16 — lateral view). Somon Tsagannur, 2690m, exp. Z. Kaszab leg., 3.7.1968; 3 ##, Ðèñ. 15–16. Ch. perforata simillima, ñàìåö (Ch. perforata 1 $, Ubsu-Nur Aimak: 6km S.-W. from Somon Baruunturuun, changaiensis, ãîëîòèï, Ìîíãîëèÿ: ð. Èäýð), ýäåàãóñ, âåðøèííàÿ 1350m, exp. Z. Kaszab leg., 24.6.1968; RUSSIA: 1 #, 1 $, Tuva: ÷àñòü (15 — ñâåð õó, 16 — ñáîêó). Mugur-Aksy Vill.: Talaity lake, B.A.Korotyaev leg., 29.VII.1971; 1 #, 1 $, Teeli Vill., steppe, B.A.Korotyaev leg., 27.6.1971; 1 #, Length: 5.1–6.6 mm (#), 6.1–6.8 mm ($). the same place, Khemchik river valley, B.A.Korotyaev leg., DISTRIBUTION. Tuva, NW Mongolia, finding in C 26.VI.1971; 1 #, 29.6.1971. Mongolia (Baian Khongor aimak) should be confirmed. DESCRIPTION. Colour of dorsum very variable: 1) head REMARKS. According to the original description [Mohr, green, pronotum green with anterior margin, posterior margin, 1966], subspecies perforata simillima differs from the nomi- and lateral calli, violet; elytra blue, with suture and aureole of notypical subspecies only in the aedeagus structure: “Seiten elytral punctures violet; 2) body above green, with only suture des Aedoeagus fast parallel oder kaum wahrnehmbar gerundet, and elytral punctures violet; 3) head blue with area around unterseits sind die Seiten vor der Spitze deutlich verbreitert”. I frontal suture violet; pronotum violet with bluish-green spots; compared the original description and aedeagus figure opfe rfo- scutellum violet, elytra green with suture, punctures, and rata simillima with the type specimens of perforata chan- epipleura violet; 4) dorsum entiely black with weak violet gaiensis and found them to be similar. Therefore, I believCe h. reflection; 5) head green, pronotum green with base, lateral perforata changaiensis to be a new junior synonym of Ch. impressions, and sometimes lateral calli violet, elytra golden- perforata simillima. On the other hand, I examined the type green with scutellum, suture, punctures violet, epipleura violet specimens of both, perforata changaiensis and perforata pal- or green, 6) head green with clypeus violet, pronotum green, lidipes. They are similar externally, have identical aedeagus scutellum and elytral suture violet, elytra golden-purple with structure, and slightly differ only in the colour of legs: mostly aureole of punctures green. 7) above bluish-green, with frons, rufous with violet reflection in pallidipes and dark metallic middle part of vertex, longitudinal stripes on pronotum interi- (violet or blue) in changaiensis. However, in one examined orly to lateral impressions, and elytral punctures violet; pronotal paratype of pallidipes (20km W from Duro-Nur lake) legs are lateral calli and elytral suture golden; 8) head bluish-green (or pale brown with violet reflection. Distribution of these two violet with vertex bluish-green, or green with clypeus violet), forms (with rufous and metallic legs) also permits me to think pronotum blue (or green) medially, violet laterally, or entirely them to be the same subspecies. Therefore, I consider Ch. iridescent violetish-bluish-green, elytra green with suture, punc- perforata changaiensis = Ch. perforata pallidipes. tures, scutellum, and lateral margin violet, epipleura green or Besides that, I think that Medvedev [1980, 1982] used violet; 9) head violet with vertex bluish-green, pronotum vio- the name “perforata simillima” for perforata turczaninoffi. In let, elytra greenish-blue with suture golden, punctures golden- Naturhistorisches Museum Wien, I found a series of speci- violet, epipleura violet. mens from Baian Khongor. They have legs and antennae Antennomeres 1–4 rufous (1 darkened dorsally), follow- entirely rufous and aedeagus structure typical of the subspe- ing antennomeres gradually darkened, or antennae dark brown cies Ch. perforata pallidipes. These specimens were, proba- with antennomeres 1 and 2 rufous below, or antennae entire- bly, incorrectly labelled, because the last location is about ly rufous. Legs entirely blue, or femora green, tibiae and tarsi 700km distant from the before known area to the southeast. dark brown, or femora and tibiae violet, tarsi brown, or Medvedev [1980] described “var. camptolbensisestris, femora and tibiae pale brown with violet reflection, or legs nov.” as intermediate form between subspecies perforata entirely rufous. Ventral side entirely metallic, gree, bluish- pallidipes (because of rufous legs) and nominotypical sub- green, or violet, or with last abdominal sternite rufous with species (because of aedeagus without lateral emarginations violet reflection. Elytron with regular rows of fine or large before apex) from the environs of Tolbo Nur lake (Mongolia, punctures. Rows more or less paired. Intervals flat. Hind Baian Ulegei aimak). However, the namec amptolbensisestris wings absent. In #, hind tarsomere 1 broader than 3. should be regarded as infrasubspecific and inavailable accord- Aedeagus with deep or shallow lateral emarginations be- ing to ICZN [1999] Art. 45.6.3. I included this name as fore apex, ventrally with distinct subapical denticles, lateral perforata camptolbensisestris (subspecific rank) in the check- borders of apical orifice less elevated or not elevated (see list [Bienkowski, 2001], but this name did not become an from lateral side); flagellum narrow. available [ICZN, 1999, Art. 16A]. 58 A.O. Bienkowski 19 18 17 20 21 23 25 24 22 26 27 Figs 17–27. Chrysolina perforata simillima: 17–21 — # (Mongolia: Ulangom): 17-19 — aedeagus, apical part (17 — dorsal view, 18 — lateral view, 19 — ventral view); 20 — fore-tarsus, 21 — hind-tarsus; 22–25 — # (Mongolia: Cholbo-See): 22 — hind-tarsus, 23–25 — aedeagus, apical part (23 — dorsal view, 24 — lateral view, 25 — ventral view); 26–27 — # (Ch. perforata pallidipes, paratype, Mongolia: 45–55km WNW Ulangom), aedeagus, apical part (26 — dorsal view, 27 — lateral view). Ðèñ. 17–27. Chrysolina perforata simillima: 17–21 — ñàìåö ( Ìîíãîëèÿ: Óëàíãîì): 17–19 — ýäåàãóñ, âåð øèííàÿ ÷àñòü (17 — ñâåðõó, 18 — ñáîêó, 19 — ñíèçó); 20 — ïåðåäíÿÿ ëàïêà, 21 — çàäíÿÿ ëàïêà; 22–25 — ñàìåö ( Ìîíãîëèÿ: îç. Õîëáî): 22 — çàäíÿÿ ëàïêà, 23–25 — ýäåàãóñ, âåðøèííàÿ ÷àñòü (23 — ñâåðõó, 24 — ñáîêó, 25 — ñíèçó); 26–27 – ñàìåö (Ch. perforata pallidipes, ïàðàòèï, Ìîíãîëèÿ: 45–55êì ÇÑÇ Óëàíãîì), ýäåàãóñ, âåð øèííàÿ ÷àñòü (26 — ñâåð õó, 27 — ñ áîêó). Medvedev [1980] found the specimens with the intermedi- MATERIAL. TYPES: Chrysomela purpurata, neotype, # ate characters betweenp erforata simillima (=changaiensis) and with labels: “Irkutsk 25.VII.1951”, “ Chrysomela perforata perforata pallidipes from Mongolia (Khan-Khukhei). I found Gebl. L. Medvedev det.”, “ purpurata Fald. Mohr det. 1966”, the specimens with intermediate aedeagus characters between “Holotypsu Novotypus” [sic !] [red] (DEI). Additional specimens: KAZAKHSTAN: 1 $, Dzhezkazgan Ch. perforata perforata and perforata simillima in the series Area: Uly-Tau Mts., N.G.Skopin leg., 27–28.5.1970; 1 #, E. from Tuva (Mugur-Aksy, Teeli) and Mongolia (Ulan-Erig). Kazakhstan: Saur ridge, O.L.Kryzhanovsky leg., 30.8.1946; 1 Chrysolina purpurata (Faldermann, 1833: 70) $, Tarbagatai ridge; 1 #, Zaisan city, O.L.Kryzhanovsky leg., 15.8.1946; 1 $, Karaganda Area: Karkaralinsk, Matthiessen Figs 28–30, 32. leg.; 3 ##, the same place, N.G.Skopin leg., 20.6.1969; 3 ##, Chrysomela purpurata Faldermann, 1833: 70 (“Irkutsk”, 4 $$, Karkaraly, E.Smirnov leg., 8–9.8.1937; 2 ##, 82km N. neotype in DEI, examined). from Karkaralinsk, E.Ptushenko leg., 22.8.1937; 3 ##, 1 $, Chrysomela perforata: Marseul, 1886: 68, 1887: 86; Weise, Kokchetav Area: Kokchetav, Burygin leg., 1907; 1 #, 1 $, 1887: 174. Borovoe, B.Rodendorf leg., 16.6.1928; 1 $, 26.6.1928; 1 #, Chrysomela campestris Weise, 1912: 84 nom. nov. pro 1.VIII.1928; 1 $, NKazakhstan: Imantau, 4.I X.1962; 2 $$, the perforata: Marseul, 1886: 68, 1887: 86, nec Gebler, 1830: 216. same place, V.Kirillov leg.; 1 $, Pavlodar Area: Bayanaul, Chrysomela (Pezocrosita) purpurata: Mohr, 1966: 98; Lo- E.Ptushenko leg.: 28.8.1937; 1 $, 31.8.1937; 1 $, Semipalat- patin, 1970: 184, 187. insk Area: Semipalatinsk, A.Solotarew leg.; 1 #, the same Chrysolina (Pezocrosita) purpurata: Lopatin, 1977: 155. place; 1 #, Semipalatinsk Area: Kolkhoznoe, D.Panfilov leg., Chrysolina perforata (= campestris): L. Medvedev, 1980: 317. 16.7.1958; 2 $$, Mukur river, D.Panfilov leg., 4.7.1958; 1 #, Chrysolina (Allohypericia) purpurata: Medvedev, 1982: Zhangiztobe, D.Panfilov leg.: 20.VI.1958; 1 #, 22.VI.1958; 1 79; Medvedev, Dubeshko, 1992: 99. #, Kainar, D.Panfilov leg.: 16.VI.1958; 1 #, 4 $$, Tselinograd A revision of the Chrysolina (perforata) species group 59 Area: Kuraly lake, N.Petrovsky leg., 29.6.1900; 1 #, 1 $, S. of Bestobe: Sileti river, V.Kuznetsov leg., 17.6.1963; 1 #, 30 km from Kulanutpes, Keleinikova leg., 2.7.1958. 1 $, Turgai Area: Turgai river. MONGOLIA: 1 $ without exact locality data. SIBERIA: 1 #, Altai: “Altai. Schaufs. coll. L.v.Heyden”; 1 #, 1 $, Altai Staudinger; 1 $, “Gebler”, “Kolyvan.”, “Coll. Mannerh.”, “Perforata Gebler. Var.A. Mannerh.”; 2 ##, 1 #, Altai: Kolyvan’; Krasnoyarsk; 3 ##, 1 $, Omsk: I.Telishev leg., 18.7.1938; 1 #, 6.VII.1937; 2 ##, Tomsk; 1 $ , Transbaikalia: “Fixation Euparal” [associated with spermatheca slide], “Dau- ria” [old label], “Daourie — S.E. du lac Baikal — Siberie Russie” [written by Bourdonne], “ campestris m.” [written by Weise], “perforata Gebl.”, “purpurata Mars. 195”, “Zool. Mus. Berlin”, “Lectotype” [red], “ Chrysolina campestris Wse. L.N. Medvedev det. 1988”, “Chrysomorpha ( Allohypericia) campestris (Weise, 1912) — Daourie Russie — Lectotype $ — Nouvelle 28 Combinaison — J.C. Bourdonne, 2001” (MNHUB). 1 #, 2 $$, Yakutia: upper reaches of Indigirka river, Vas’kovsky leg., 27.VII–7.VIII.1942; Uncertain localities: $ with # aedeagus (!) on the same pin, “Sibir. Staud.”, old red square, “Typus” [red 30 recent label], “campestris * 1912 Weise” [recent label] (MN- HUB); 1 $, “Sibirien. coll. Stierlin”; 1 $, “Sibir. coll. Kraatz”; 1 #, “Sibirien. Coll. O. Leonhard”; 1 $, “Amur. Coll. Kraatz”; 1 $, Siberia; 2 $$, 1 #, 2 $$, W. Siberia; “Hist.-Coll. (Coleoptera) Nr. 37250 Chrysomela perforata Gebler Sibir- ien, Gebler Zool. Mus. Berlin”; 1 #, “Gebler”, “Sibiria occid.”, “Coll. Mannerh.”, “ Perforata Gebler”. DESCRIPTION. Colour of dorsal side variable: 1) vio- let with blue reflection, with pronotal lateral calli, elytral 29 suture and aureole of elytral punctures violet, 2) bluish- green, with pronotum entirely or only at lateral calli, elytral suture and punctures violet, 3) green, with pronotal lateral Figs 28–30 – Chrysolina purpurata, # (Krasnoyarsk), calli, elytral suture and punctures violet, 4) head bluish- aedeagus: 28 — apical part, dorsal view, 29 — the same, ventral green, pronotum and elytra violet with greenish reflection, view, 30 — lateral view. elytral punctures golden; 5) dorsum black with metallic Ðèñ. 28–30 – Chrysolina purpurata, ñàìåö (Êðàñíîÿðñê), reflection at pronotal lateral calli and lateral sides of elytra; ýäåàãóñ: 28 — âåð øèííàÿ ÷àñòü, ñâåðõó, 29 — òî æå, ñíèçó, 6) head blue with vertex violet, pronotum violetish purple, 30 — ñáîêó. elytra greenish-blue with violet suture and aureole of punc- tures; 7) head purplish-violet, pronotum green with lateral calli purplish-violet, elytra bluish-green with suture and have not developed hind wings. I considered them to be aureole of punctures violet; 8) entirely purplish-violet, head conspecific with Ch. perforata turczaninoffi. The labels of and pronotum partly bluish, elytral suture and aureole of these specimens do not include enough information to rec- punctures golden. ognize them to be the types of purpurata. On the other Antennae dark brown with antennomeres 1 and 2 rufous hand, Mohr [1966] designated a neotype of Ch. purpurata. below and apically. Legs violet. Underside entirely violet, or He selected a # with developed hind wings, collected in partly blue, or bluish-green. Elytron with regular rows of Irkutsk. The last interpretation of Ch. purpurata is pres- moderately large or fine (in specimens from Yakutia, see ently accepted [Medvedev, 1982; Medvedev & Dubeshko, Remarks) punctures. Rows slightly paired. Intervals flat or 1992]. weakly convex. Hind wings develop, at least, reaching elytral Weise [1912] proposed the new name campestris for apex. In #, hind tarsomere 1 not broader (or slightly broader) the specimens which has been determined by Marseul [1886] than 3. as perforata. According to ICZN [1999] Art. 12.2.1 the Aedeagus with shallow lateral emarginations before apex name campestris is available. I agree with Weise [1912] in or without emarginations; flagellum narrow. the interpretation of perforata sensu Marseul. The type Length: 5.8–6.5 mm (#), 6.8–7.7 mm ($). specimens of campestris are those identified by Marseul DISTRIBUTION. N. and E. Kazakhstan, Altai, Sayans, [1886] as perforata. Therefore, the specimens, labelled as Transbaikalia, Yakutia, Mongolia (?). types of Ch. campestris in Dr. Weise collection (MN- REMARKS. Faldermann [1833] described Chrysomela HUB), are really not types. However, they are conspecific purpurata from the environs of Irkutsk. The original de- with Ch. purpurata. scription is rather detailed, but, unfortunately, does not Specimens from Yakutia (upper reaches of Indigirka include the characters to distinguish Ch. purpurata and Ch. river) being at my disposal have elytral rows forming by perforata. Dr. Faldermann’s collection was deposited in fine, dense punctures, which are as large as those in prono- ZMMU and Zoological Institute of Russian Academy of tal impressions; elytral intervals very densely, minutely Sciences (St.-Petersburg) [Horn & Kahle, 1935–1937], but I punctate. Other characters (including aedeagus structure) was not succeeded in the finding of the type specimens of are typical of Ch. purpurata. Medvedev & Ammosov Ch. purpurata there. In Zoological Museum of University [1978] noted on the variation of Ch. perforata from upper of Helsinki (Mannerheim’s collection) I found two speci- reaches of Indigirka river which has numerous punctures mens (# and $) from Irkutsk labelled as “ purpurata” and in elytral rows. Probably, they are concerned with the received by Mannerheim from Menetries. These specimens same form. 60 A.O. Bienkowski KEY TO SPECIES AND SUBSPECIES OF CHRYSOLINA (PERFORATA) SPECIES GROUP 1(2)Hind wings develop, at least, reaching elytral apex. In male, hind tarsomere 1 not broader than 3......... Ch. purpurata 2(1) Hind wings absent. In male, hind tarsomere 1 broader than 3 3(4)Dorsum mostly violet or violetish-purple, more rarely green. Legs dark metallic. Elytron with rows of large, foveiform, very dense punctures which larger than in other subspecies; intervals convex, at least, in lateral 1/2. Elytral surface looks like wrinkled. Aedeagus narrowed at sides of apical orifice, ventrally with obtuse or indistinct subapical denticles, distinctly “humped” at level of apical orifice (see from lateral side).................. Ch. perforata turczaninoffi 4(3)Elytron with rows of fine or large punctures; intervals flat, elytral surface smooth. Dorsum mostly green or bluish-green, with elytral suture and punctures violet. 5(6)Aedeagus rounded and broadened at apex, without dis- tinct lateral emarginations, ventrally with distinct subap- ical denticles, not “humped” at level of apical orifice (see from lateral side). Legs dark metallic.............................. ..................................................Ch. perforata perforata 6(5)Aedeagus with distinct, mostly deep lateral emarginations before apex, ventrally with distinct subapical denticles, less Fig. 31. Chrysolina perforata, distribution: 1 — Ch. perfo- “humped” or not “humped” at level of apical orifice (see rata perforata; 2 — Ch. perforata simillima; 3 — Ch. perforata from lateral side). Legs dark metallic or rufous................ turczaninoffi; 4 — specimens with intermediate characters between the respective subspecies. ...................................................Ch. perforata simillima Ðèñ. 31. Ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèå Chrysolina perforata: 1 — Ch. perforata perforata; 2 — Ch. perforata simillima; 3 — Ch. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. I would like to thank all the perforata turczaninoffi; 4 — ýêçåìïëÿðû ñ ïðîìåæóòî÷íûìè curators mentioned above for the loan of the specimens, Dr. ïðèçíàêàìè ìåæäó ñîîòâåðñòâóþùèìè ïîäâèäàìè. L.N. Medvedev for placing the material to my disposal. This Fig. 32. Chrysolina purpurata, distribution. Ðèñ. 32. Ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèå Chrysolina purpurata. A revision of the Chrysolina (perforata) species group 61 work forms a part of my re-examination of all Chrysolina from Middle Asia and Kazakhstan // Entomol. Obozr. materials in Deutsches Entomologisches Institut and Muse- Vol.49. No.1. P.183–196 [in Russian]. um fur Tierkunde Dresden which secured the financial back- Lopatin I.K. 1977. Chrysomelid-beetles (Chrysomelidae) of ing of the DFG grants 436 RUS 17/98/02 and 436 RUS 17/94/ Central Asia and Kazakhstan. Leningrad: Nauka Publ. 270 pp. [in Russian]. 03, respectively. Marseul S. 1886. Monographie des Chrysomelides. III. — Chrysomelidae. 6. Chrysomela // L’Abeille. Vol.24. (Ser.4. References Vol.6). P.1–72. Marseul S. 1887. Monographie des Chrysomelides. III. — Chrysomelidae. 6. Chrysomela // L’Abeille. Vol.24 (Ser.4. Bechyne J. 1950. 7e contribution a la connaissance du genre Vol.6). P.73–190. Chrysolina Motsch. (Col. Phytophaga Chrysomelidae) // Medvedev L.N. 1980. New leaf-beetles (Coleoptera, Chry- Ent. Arbeit. Mus. G.Frey Bd.1. S.47–185. somelidae) from Mongolia // Entomol. Obozr. Vol.59. Bienkowski A.O. 2001. A study on the genus Chrysolina No.2. P.311–321 [in Russian]. Motschulsky, 1860, with a checklist of all the described Medvedev L.N. 1982. Leaf-beetles of Mongolia: a key for subgenera, species, subspecies, and synonyms (Coleoptera: determination. Moscow: Nauka Publ. 304 pp. [in Rus- Chrysomelidae: Chrysomelinae) // Genus. Vol.12. No.2. sian]. P.105–235. Medvedev, L.N. & Ammosov Yu.N. 1978. Fauna of leaf-beetles Dejean P.F. 1837. Catalogue des Coleopteres de la collection de (Coleopera, Chrysomelidae) and its main zoogeographic M. le Comte Dejean. 3 ed., revue, corrigee et augmentee. features // In: Ekologo-faunisticheskie issledovanija naseko- Paris. XIV+503 pp. mykh Yakutii. Yakutsk. P.113–128 [in Russian]. Faldermann F. 1833. Species novae Coleopterorum Mongoliae Medvedev L.N. & Dubeshko L.N. 1992. Key to Chrysomelid- et Sibiriae incolarum // Bull. Soc. Imper. Naturalist. Mosc. beetles of Siberia. Irkutsk: Irkutsk Univ. Publ. 224 pp. [in Vol.6. P.46–72. Russian]. Gebler F. 1830. Bemerkungen uber die Insecten Sibiriens, Mohr K.-H. 1966. Bestimmungstabelle der Untergattung Pe- vorzuglich des Altai. Ledebour Reise Vol.2 No.3. 228 pp. zocrosita Jacobson 1902 (Allophypericia Bechyne 1950) Harold E. 1875. Correspondenz // Ent. Zeitung, Stettin. Bd.36. (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae) // Reichenbachia. Bd.8. S.89– No.4–6. P.176. 104. Horn W. & Kahle I. 1935–1937. Uber entomologische Motschulsky V. 1854. Etudes Entomologi ques. Vol.3. 69 pp. Sammlungen, Entomologen & Entomo-Museologie // En- Petagna L. 1819. Memoria su di alcuni insetti del regno di tomologische Beihefte aus Berlin-Dahlem. Bd.2–4. 540 pp. Napoli. // Atti Acc. Sci. Nap. Vol.1. P.19–40. International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. 1999. 4 ed. Weise J. 1887. Neue sibirische Chrysomeliden und Coccinel- The International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature Publ. liden nebst Bemerkungen uber fruher beschriebene Arten Russian translation. 2000: St.-Petersburg. 221pp. // Arch. f. Naturgesch . Bd.53. Hf.1. S.164–214. Lopatin I.K. 1970. Review of species of the genus Chrysomela, Weise J. 1912. Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Chrysomeliden // subgenus Pezocrosita Jcbs. (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae) Arch. f. Naturgesch. Bd.78A. Hf.2. S.76–98.