Content uploaded by Hüseyin Özdikmen
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Hüseyin Özdikmen on Jun 28, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
_____________Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 3, No. 2, June 2008__________ 621
THE GENUS TETROPS STEPHENS, 1829
WITH A NEW SUBSPECIES, TETROPS PRAEUSTUS
ANATOLICUS SSP. N. FROM TURKEY
(COLEOPTERA: CERAMBYCIDAE: LAMIINAE)
Hüseyin Özdikmen* and Semra Turgut*
* Gazi Üniversitesi, Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi, Biyoloji Bölümü, 06500 Ankara / Türkiye. E-
mails: ozdikmen@gazi.edu.tr and semraturgut@mynet.com
[Özdikmen, H. & Turgut, S. 2008. The genus Tetrops Stephens, 1829 with a new
subspecies, Tetrops praeustus anatolicus ssp. n. from Turkey (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae:
Lamiinae). Munis Entomology & Zoology 3 (2): 621-635]
ABSTRACT: All taxa of the genus Tetrops in the whole world are evaluated. A new
subspecies, Tetrops praeustus anatolicus ssp. n. is described from S Turkey. Distinguishing
characters, photo of adult are also given in the text. It is compared with related taxa. On the
other side, a replacement name, T. hauseri kostini nom. nov. proposed for the homonym
species group name T. hauseri nigra Kostin, 1973 or T. hauseri niger Kostin, 1973 (not T.
nigra Kraatz, 1859). The genus is also discussed in detail.
KEY WORDS: new subspecies, replacement name, Tetrops, Lamiinae, Cerambycidae.
Subfamily LAMIINAE Latreille, 1825
Tribe TETRAOPINI Thomson, 1860
= Tetropini Thomson, 1860
= Astathini Thomson, 1864
The tribe includes currently 14 genera as Astathes Newman, 1842;
Bacchisa Pascoe, 1866; Chreomisis Breuning, 1956; Eustathes Newman,
1842; Hecphora Thomson, 1857; Hispasthathes Breuning, 1956;
Mecasoma Chemsak & Linsley, 1974; Ochrocesis Pascoe, 1867;
Parastathes Breuning, 1956; Paratragon Teocchi, 2002; Phaea Newman,
1840; Tetraopes Dalman in Schoenherr, 1817; Tetrops Kirby, 1826 and
Tropimetopa J. Thomson, 1864. This genus was placed in Tetropini by
some authors. Since Tetropini were separated by Planet (1924) and
supported by Namkhaidorzh (1976) and Danilevsky & Miroshnikov
(1985) according to Danilevsky (2007b).
Genus TETROPS Stephens, 1829
= Polyopsia Mulsant, 1839
= Oberopa Haldeman, 1873
Type species: Leptura praeusta Linnaeus, 1758
The generic name Tetraopes was introduced by Dalman in Schönherr,
1817 without a type species and Thomson (1864) subsequently designated
Lamia tornator Fabricius, 1775 as a type species of Tetraopes Dalman in
Schönherr, 1817. Later, the genus name Tetrops was used by Kirby, 1826
_____________Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 3, No. 2, June 2008__________
622
with the type species Lamia tornator Fabricius, 1775 that is a junior
synonym of Cerambyx tetrophthalmus Förster, 1771. At present,
Tetraopes Dalman in Schönherr, 1817 is still used as a valid generic name
in Cerambycidae (Lamiinae: Tetraopini). Vives (2000) also stated that
“Kirby (1826, In: Kirby and Spence, Introd. Entomol., 3: 498) uses a
genre Tetrops in combination with the specific name tornator and in the
following volume of the same work (1826, In: Kirby and Spence, Introd.
Entomol., 4: 619) introduces the genre Tetraopes in replacement of his
previous Tetrops. It is a question of a later use of the genre of Schönherr
because his Tetrops is a mistake or a deliberate proposition of a new
name”. So Tetrops Kirby, 1826 is a junior objective synonym of Tetraopes
Dalman in Schönherr, 1817. On the other hand, the genus name Tetrops
was used by Stephens, 1829 and also Stephens, 1831 with the type species
Leptura praeusta Linnaeus, 1758. Vives & Zarazaga in Vives (2000) used
Tetrops Stephens, 1829 as valid genus name and mentioned in their
appendix that the authors will request the commission for the
suppression of Tetrops Kirby, 1826. Apparently, Tetrops Stephens, 1829
has at least two synonyms as Polyopsia Mulsant, 1839 and Oberopa
Haldeman, 1873. However, the name Tetrops Stephens, 1829 must be
conservated as a valid name. Also according to Vives (2000), the name
Tetrops is masculine in gender not feminine.
This chiefly Palaearctic genus is represented by 9 species in the whole
world. In Turkey, it is represented by only 2 species as T. praeustus
(Linnaeus, 1758) and T. warnckei Holzschuh, 1977. All taxa of this genus
are presented as follows:
eleagni Plavilstshikov, 1954
Other names. plavilstshikovi Kostin, 1973
According to Danilevsky (2007b), T. plavilstshikovi Kostin, 1973 is a
synonym of T. eleagni Plavilstshikov, 1954. He stated that "the statement
of Kostin (1973), that in Ily valley two Tetrops species: "T.
plavilstshikovi" (=elaeagni) and T. formosa songarica live together is
wrong. According to his materials in Zoological Museum (S.-
Petersburg), he identified less pubescent T. elaeagni from Ily valley as T.
formosa songarica. T. elaeagni was recorded for Russia by G.V.
Lindemann (1971: Pallasovka distr. Vishnevka and Elton). I’ve got two
specimens from Dzhanybek, which is situated exactly on Russia–
Kazakhstan border. The species is also known from Amu-Darja River
Valley in Turkmenia (see Kostin, 1973: 207)”.
DISTRIBUTION: S European Russia, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan,
Turkmenia
CHOROTYPE: Central Asiatic
_____________Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 3, No. 2, June 2008__________ 623
formosus Baeckmann, 1903
ssp. formosus Baeckmann, 1903
ssp. bivittulatus Jankowski, 1934
ssp. songaricus Kostin, 1973
Other names. bivuttulata Plavilstshikov, 1954
This species has at least 3 subspecies in the world. The nominative
subspecies occurs in Central Asia (Kirgizia) and China. The other
subspecies, T. formosus bivittulatus Jankowski, 1934 and T. formosus
songaricus Kostin, 1973 occur only in Kazakhstan. Danilevsky (2007b)
stated that“Tetrops formosa was described from Issyk-Kul (Kirgizia). It
has red elytra and totally red antennae and pronotum. I treat as
nominative my two specimens from near Merke (Kazakhstan at the
border with Kirgizia). Tetrops formosa bivittulata Jankowski, 1934,
described from Zailijsky Alatau (Alma-Ata) as a variation differs from
the nominative subspecies by dark general colour and specially by usual
presence of elongated elytral black spots. It was regarded as a
subspecies distributed in Zailijsky Alatau by Kostin (1973: 206) under
the name “T. formosa bivittulata Plav.” Wrong attribution of the name
to Plavilstshikov was repeated by Lobanov et al. (1981: 790-791) in the
wrong synonymization: “Tetrops formosa formosa Baeckm., 1903 = T.
formosa bivittulata Plav., 1954 (sensu Kostin, 1973)”. T. f. bivittulata has
usually black elongated spot on each elytron and black two basal
antennal joints, but sometimes elytra and antennae are totally red. T. f.
songarica (Dzhungarsky Alatau near Lepsinsk – Chernaia Rechka) is
similarly red as the nominative subspecies, but pronotum is always
partly black, sometimes elytra are with dark spots. O. Mehl reared a
series of Tetrops formosa ssp. n. from Malus twigs collected (1991)near
Arslan-Bob in Fergansky Ridge (Kirgizia). Specimens are darker than T.
f. formosa, but in general lighter than T. f. bivittulata, though black
elytral stripes are often present, as well as only two basal antennal
joints are black. Another new subspecies of T. formosa must be
distributed in Kirgizia near At-Bashi, according to my single specimen,
which is coloured similar to T. f. songarica, but pronotum with very
dense recumbent pubescens among erect setae. The species attribution of
T. hauseri nigra (unknown to me) from Tekes River valley near
Narynkol in Kazakhstan is doubtful. It can be a form of T. formosa. T. f.
songarica is distributed only in Dzhungarsky Alatau and absent in Ily
River valley”.
DISTRIBUTION: Kirgizia, Kazakhstan, China
CHOROTYPE: Central Asiatic
gilvipes Faldermann, 1837
Other names. nigra Kraatz, 1859; muehlfeldi Mulsant, 1863
_____________Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 3, No. 2, June 2008__________
624
The European Tetrops Stephens, 1829 was revised by Holzschuh (1981).
According to him, T. gilvipes must be regarded as a subspecies of T.
praeustus, from which it differs only by the punctuation, dark coloration
of elytra and entirely light legs. Sama (2002) gave T. nigra Kraatz, 1859
as a synonym of T. praeustus. According to Danilevsky (2007a), we
include west Europe in the area of Tetrops gilvipes following P. Berger
(1985), though the distribution of this species in Europe rests unclear. C.
Pesarini and A. Sabbadini (1994) regard that Tetrops gilvipes (described
from Transcaucasie) absent in West Europe, and black Tetrops with pale
legs from West Europe can be a separate species T. nigra or a dark form
of T. praeustus. Danilevsky (2007b) also stated that ”Tetrops praeustus
and T. gilvipes can be definitly distinguished only with larvae
(Danilevsky, Miroshnikov, 1985). A taxon with "gilvipes-like larvae" is
very common in West Europe, but its adults are very similar to T.
praeustus (Svacha, Die Larven der Kafer Mitteleuropas, Band 6)! So
possibly a yellow form of T. gilvipes was described from Europe as T.
praeustus. In that case black beetles from Caucasus are T. praeustus ssp.
gilvipes. And a taxon with "praeustus-like" larvae (sensu Danilevsky
and Miroshnikov, 1985) needs another name. Any way the stable black
colour of Caucasian (and Turkmenian) T. gilvipes makes impossible its
synonymysation with T. praeustus, proposed by Sama (1988) and
accepted by Bense (1995). But if T. praeustus has "praeustus-like
larvae", then European taxon with "gilvipes-like" larvae (usually yellow,
but sometimes black) can be named T. gilvipes ssp. nigra Kraatz, 1859”.
So we think that possibly there are two different species in Europe. Since,
they have two separate larvae as "praeustus-like larvae" and "gilvipes-like
larvae". These are T. praeustus and T. gilvipes not T. nigra. Because both
gilvipes and T. nigra were described from Caucasus and Western Europe
based on the specimens with black colored elytra. In this case, T. nigra is
merely the named populations of T. gilvipes in mainly Western Europe.
Anyway, Sama (2002) also mentioned that “specimens with brown or
black elytra, at various times referred to T. nigra, T. gilvipes or even T.
starkii, have often been reared from the same locality and the same trees
(probably Padus)”. However, we think that Sama believed wrongly that
T. nigra in Europe is a transitional form between T. praeustus and T.
gilvipes. Moreover, the observation in copula of black and light
specimens of Sturani (1981) as mentioned by Sama (2002), is not more
important than finding two different larvae in Europe. The observation of
Sturani (1981) does not prove that these are the same taxon and it can be
explained by various ways. For example, it may be an explanation for this
case, density of the populations of these taxa in observation areas or on
plants etc. Even as we known an unusual event that the copulation can
occur between two different species among animal taxa. Furthermore,
according to Starzyk & Lessaer (1978), the male genitalia of T. gilvipes
and T. praeustus are clearly different from each other (fig. 3). Finally, for
_____________Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 3, No. 2, June 2008__________ 625
us, T. gilvipes and T. praeustus are separate species and T. nigra is a
synonym of T. gilvipes not T. praeustus now.
DISTRIBUTION: Europe (?France, ?Italy, ?Romania, ?Hungary,
?Czechia, ?Slovakia, Crimea, S European Russia), Caucasus (Georgia,
Armenia, Azerbaijan), Central Asia (Turkmenia), Iran
CHOROTYPE: Turano-European
hauseri Reitter, 1897
ssp. hauseri Reitter, 1897
ssp. kostini nom. nov.
Other names. bicoloricornis Plavilstshikov, 1954
This species has 2 subspecies in the world. The nominative subspecies
occurs in Kirgizia and Uzbekistan. The other subspecies, T. hauseri
kostini nom. nov. occurs in Kazakhstan and China. Danilevsky (2007b)
stated that “T. hauseri hauseri up to now seems to be known only from
Sary-Chelek. According to a series of Tetrops hauseri hauseri, collected
by me in Sary-Chelek (2004), it can be with only two basal antennal
joints black (that is why Tetrops formosa m. bicoloricornis Plav., 1959
was decribed from Saery-Chelek) and with rather red elytra (with only
small black elonagated spots). So the colour patterns of T. hauseri and T.
formosa can be same. Both species can be easily distinguished by the
character of pronotal punctation, which is very fine in T. hauseri. The
species attribution of T. hauseri nigra (unknown to me) from Tekes
River valley near Narynkol in Kazakhstan is doubtful. It can be a form
of T. formosa”.
In addition to this, T. hauseri nigra Kostin, 1973 or T. hauseri niger
Kostin, 1973 is a homonym name of T. nigra Kraatz, 1859. Also
Danilevsky (2007b) mentioned this status. It must be replaced under the
articles 57-60 of the zoological code (ICZN, 1999). So we propose the
replacement name kostini nom. nov. for the homonym name T. hauseri
nigra Kostin, 1973. The replacement name is dedicated to I. A. Kostin
who is current author name of the taxon. It is masculine in sex.
DISTRIBUTION: Kirgizia, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, China
CHOROTYPE: Central Asiatic
mongolicus Murzin, 1977
Danilevsky (2007c) stated that “one male of Tetrops mongolicus from
Russia is preserved in the collection of Moscow Pedagogical State
Iniversity: Buriatija, Selenga river valley, 5km NE Dzhida, 4-9.6.2001,
A. Anishchenko leg”.
_____________Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 3, No. 2, June 2008__________
626
DISTRIBUTION: Mongolia, Russia (East Siberia)
CHOROTYPE: Siberian
praeustus Linnaeus, 1758
ssp. praeustus Linnaeus, 1758
ssp. algiricus Chobaut, 1893
ssp. anatolicus ssp. n.
Other names. iocustus Voet, 1778; pilosa Geoffroy, 1785; ustulata
Hagenbach, 1822; praecesta Dufour, 1843; inapicalis Pic, 1891;
angorensis Pic, 1918.
This species is represented by three subspecies (including new
subspecies) in the world. The subspecies, T. praeustus algiricus
Chaubaut, 1893 occurs only in North Africa (Algeria). New subspecies, T.
praeustus anatolicus ssp. n. occurs only in South Turkey.
In Turkey, it is represented by two subspecies as T. praeustus praeustus
(Linnaeus, 1758) and T. praeustus anatolicus ssp. n.
Records from Turkey:
For nominative subspecies: Sakarya prov.: Sapanca, Niğde prov.:
Çamardı, Antalya prov.: Toros Mountains (Bodemeyer, 1900); Asia
Minor: Ankara prov. as T. praeustus v. angorensis (Winkler, 1924-1932);
İstanbul prov.: Polonez village (Demelt, 1963); Çorum prov.: İskilip as
Tetrops praeustus angorensis (Breuning et Villiers, 1967); Ankara prov.:
Kızılcahamam (Gfeller, 1972); Sinop prov.: Dranaz Mt. (Sama, 1982);
Turkey (Danilevsky & Miroshnikov, 1985; Lodos, 1998; Sama, 2002);
Çorum prov.: İskilip (Öymen, 1987); Bilecik prov. (Adlbauer, 1988);
European Turkey (Althoff & Danilevsky, 1997); Samsun prov., İçel prov.
(Özdikmen et al., 2005); Ankara prov.: between Sereflikoçhisar-Evren
(Özdikmen, 2006).
For the new subspecies, T. praeustus anatolicus: Antalya prov.: Alanya-
Taşkent and between Karapınar and Sarımut, Konya prov.: near Beyreli,
Hadim, Bozkır, Sorkun, Beyşehir-Akseki road and Dere, Osmaniye prov.:
Zorkun.
However, the old İçel record of Özdikmen et al., 2005 belongs to the new
subspecies, T. praeustus anatolicus and probably the old Antalya record
of Bodemeyer (1900) should be the new subspecies.
DISTRIBUTION: Europe (Portugal, Spain, France, Corsica, Italy, Sicily,
Sardinia, Malta, Albania, Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia,
Macedonia, Greece, Crete, Bulgaria, European Turkey, Romania,
Hungary, Austria, Switzerland, Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark,
_____________Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 3, No. 2, June 2008__________ 627
Germany, Luxembourg, Great Britain, Ireland, Czechia, Slovakia,
Norway, Poland, Sweden, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Belorussia,
Ukraine, Crimea, Moldavia, European Russia, European Kazakhstan),
Siberia, Mongolia, Caucasus, Transcaucasia, Turkey, Syria, Iran, North
Africa (Algeria), North America (Canada)
CHOROTYPE: Palearctic
Tetrops praeustus anatolicus ssp. n.
Material examined: Holotype male: Konya province: Hadim, Küçüklü
village env., 13.05.2007, 1300 m, N 36 45 E 32 27 and Paratypes: Antalya
province: Alanya-Taşkent, exit of Karapınar village, 16.05.2006, 1100 m,
N 36 36 E 32 24, 1 specimen; Konya province: near Beyreli, 16.05.2006,
1096 m, N 36 46 E 32 26, 8 specimens; Antalya province: between
Karapınar and Sarımut, 13.05.2007, 1100 m, N 36 36 E 32 24, 1
specimen; Konya province: Hadim, Küçüklü village env., 13.05.2007,
1300 m, N 36 45 E 32 27, 47 specimens; Konya province: Bozkır, Üçpınar
village, 15.05.2007, 1471 m, N 37 08 E 32 15, 10 specimens; Konya
province: Sorkun, 15.05.2007, 1281 m, N 37 09 E 32 08, 14 specimens;
Konya province: Beyşehir-Akseki road, S of Beyşehir, 11.06.2007, 1410 m,
N 37 28 E 31 37, 1 specimen; Konya province: Dere, 13.06.2007, 1252 m,
N 37 10 E 32 09, 4 specimens; Osmaniye province: Zorkun, Fenk plateau,
04.06.2007, 1049 m, N 36 59 E 36 20, 6 specimens.
Differential diagnosis: Mainly, the new subspecies T. praeustus
anatolicus is a color form of T. praeustus praeustus like T. praeustus
algiricus. This new taxon resembles T. praeustus praeustus and T.
praeustus algiricus in terms of colour of elytra and colour of legs
respectively.
The new subspecies, T. praeustus anatolicus can be easily distinguished
from Tetrops praeustus praeustus (Linnaeus, 1758), which is widely
distributed in Palaearctic region by following feature: Fore legs are not
light entirely. They are black or dark at least in basal half (sometimes
nearly complete) of femora (fig. 1b). Elytral punctuation of the new
subspecies is more or less stronger than the nominative subspecies (fig.
2b).
Also the new subspecies, T. praeustus anatolicus can be easily
distinguished from Tetrops praeustus algiricus Chobaut, 1893, which is
only distributed in North Africa (Algeria) by following feature: Elytra
have a dark spot apically (fig. 1a).
The new subspecies probably distributes only in Southern Anatolian
region (especially from Western Taurus Mountains to Amanos
Mountains) of Turkey.
_____________Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 3, No. 2, June 2008__________
628
Sama (2002) stated that ”the true T. praeustus has fore legs entirely light
and middle and hind legs entirely dark, sometimes except apices of
middle femora. Specimens from southern Turkey (Çakıllı pass, North of
Antalya, Çamlıyayla and Yayladağı, east of Hatay) differ from those of
Europe by having distinctly darker, nearly black middle and hind legs
and a stronger punctation of pronotum and elytra”. If the Sama’s
specimens also belong to this new taxon, so the new subspecies possibly
occurs only from Antalya province to Hatay province in Mediterranean
region of Turkey.
Even the old İçel record of Özdikmen et al., 2005 is belonging to the new
subspecies, T. praeustus anatolicus and probably the old Antalya record
of Bodemeyer (1900) must belong to the new subspecies.
On the other side, the variety T. praeustus var. angorensis was described
by Pic, 1918 based on the specimens with totally black legs and black
elytral apex from Turkey. The variety name angorensis was very likely
dedicated to Ankara province by Pic. M. L. Danilevsky (personal
communication in 30.12.2007) mentioned that “in Europe specimens
with totally black legs are not often, but they exist. I have several
specimens from Krasnodar region of Russia, where they are mixed with
normal”. In this case, Pic’s variety angorensis is not a subspecies
absolutely. As seen above, we examined many specimens of the new
subspecies. And we see that above mentioned characters of the new
subspecies are stable and invariable. So we decided that the examined
specimens are belonging to a new taxon not var. angorensis Pic, 1918.
The var. angorensis is a form of T. praeustus praeustus.
Variations: The new subspecies is characterized by black or dark spot on
femora of fore legs chiefly. This variable spot always exist in all examined
specimens. The femoral dark spots of the specimens from Amanos
Mountains are smaller than the specimens from Western Taurus
Mountains. In addition to this, while middle and hind tibiae and tarsi are
entirely black in the specimens from Western Taurus Mountains, are not
completely in the specimens from Amanos Mountains. These last
specimens have distinctly dark, nearly black middle and hind legs, as it
was mentioned by Sama (2002). For this reason, Sama’s specimens
mentioned in 2002 from S Turkey are also belonging to the new
subspecies very likely.
Etymology: The new name “anatolicus” derived from the word “Anadolu”
(meaning Anatolia in English).
_____________Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 3, No. 2, June 2008__________ 629
A short key for related taxa
1. Elytra dark colored mostly and legs light colored
entirely……………….………gilvipes Faldermann, 1837 (=nigra Kraatz, 1859)
- Elytra light colored at least a great part and but legs not light colored
entirely ……..…………………………………………………………….………………………2
2. Fore legs light colored entirely….…praeustus praeustus Linnaeus, 1758
- Fore legs not light colored entirely..………………………………………….………3
3. Elytra with an apical dark spot….……………..praeustus anatolicus ssp. n.
- Elytra without an apical dark spot…...praeustus algiricus Chobaut, 1893
rosarum Tsherepanov, 1975
Danilevsky (2007d) stated that “Tetrops rosarum was recorded for
Mongolia by Tsherepanov (1985) and O. Krivolutzkaia (in:
Tsherepanov, 1996) without special comments. Most probably the
records were based on Tetrops mongolicus Murzin, 1977”.
DISTRIBUTION: Russia (Far East Russia), ?Mongolia
CHOROTYPE: Siberian
starkii Chevrolat, 1859
Other names: pseudopraeusta Müller, 1927; vicina Pic, 1928; ? mesmini
Pic, 1928.
Holzschuh (1981) mentioned that the variety vicina Pic, 1928 belongs to
T. starkii and the variety mesmini Pic, 1928 should be T. starkii.
DISTRIBUTION: Europe (Spain, France, Italy, Slovenia, Croatia & Bosnia
Herzegovina, Serbia, Moldova, Greece, Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary,
Austria, Germany, Great Britain, Czechia, Slowakia, Poland, Netherland,
Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Latvia, Lithuania, Belorussiya, Ukraine,
?Crimea, European Russia), Caucasus (Georgia)
CHOROTYPE: European
warnckei Holzschuh, 1977
This species is endemic to Turkey.
Records from Turkey: Antalya prov.: Taurus, Akseki as the type locality
(Holzschuh, 1977).
DISTRIBUTION: S Turkey
CHOROTYPE: S Anatolian
_____________Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 3, No. 2, June 2008__________
630
* This study was supported by a TUBITAK Project (105T329).
LITERATURE CITED
Adlbauer, K. 1988. Neues zur Taxonomie und Faunistik der Bockkäferfauna der Türkei
(Coleoptera, Cerambycidae). Entomofauna, 9 (12): 257-297.
Althoff, J. & Danilevsky, M. L. 1997. A Check-List of Longicorn Beetles (Coleoptera,
Cerambycoidea) of Europe. Slovensko Entomološko Društvo Štefana Michielija. Ljubljana,
64 pp.
Bodemeyer, H. E. V. 1900. Quer durch Klein Asien, in den Bulghar Dagh; Eine
Naturvissenschafliche studien-Reise. Coleopterologisches, 196 pp.
Breuning, S. & Villiers, A. 1967. Cérambycides de Turquie (2. note). L’ Entomologiste,
23 (3): 59-63.
Danilevsky, M. L. 2007a. A check-list of Longicorn Beetles (Coleoptera, Cerambycoidea)
of Europe. Last updated 01.11.2007. Available from:
http://www.cerambycidae.narod.ru/europe.htm.
Danilevsky, M. L. 2007b. Systematic list of Longicorn Beetles (Cerambycoidea) of the
territory of the former USSR. Last updated 20.12.2007. Available from:
http://www.cerambycidae.narod.ru/ussr.htm
Danilevsky, M. L. 2007c. Systematic list of Mongolian Cerambycoidea. Last updated
01.11.2007. Available from: http://www.cerambycidae.narod.ru/mongolia.htm
Danilevsky, M. L. 2007d. A check list of the longicorn beetles (Cerambycoidae) of Russia,
Ukraine, Moldova, Transcaucasia, Central Asia, Kazakhstan and Mongolia. Last updated
20.12.2007. Available from: http://www.cerambycidae.narod.ru/russia.htm
Danilevsky, M. L. & Miroshnikov A. I. 1985. Timber-Beetles of Caucasus (Coleoptera,
Cerambycidae). The Key. Krasnodar, 419 pp.
Demelt, C. V. 1963. Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Cerambycidenfauna Kleinasiens und 13.
Beitrag zur Biologie palaearkt. Cerambyciden, sowie Beschreibung einer neuen Oberea-Art.
Entomologische Blatter, 59 (3) : 132-151.
Gfeller, W. 1972. Cerambycidae (Coleoptera) der Türkei-Persienexpedition 1970 der
Herren Dr. H. c. W. Wittmer und U. v. Botmer. Mitteilungen der Entomologischen
Geselschaft Basel, 22 (1): 1-8.
Holzschuh, C. 1977. Neue bockkäfer aus Anatolien und Iran (Coleoptera, Cerambycidae).
Koleopterologische Rundschau, 53: 127-136.
Holzschuh, C. 1981. Beitrag zur Kenntnis der europaeischen Tetrops-Arten
(Cerambycidae, Coleoptera). Koleopterologische Rundschau, 55: 77-89.
International Comission of Zoological Nomenclature. 1999. International Code of
Zoological Nomenclature. Fourth Edition. The International Trust for Zoological
Nomenclature, London.
Kostin, I. A. 1973. The Dendrophagus Beetles of Kazakhstan (Buprestidae, Cerambycidae,
Ipidae). Alma-Ata: 288pp.
Lodos, N. 1998. Entomology of Turkey VI (General, Aplied and Faunistic). Ege Ü. Ziraat
Fak. Yayınları No: 529, E. Ü. Faculty of Agriculture Press, İzmir, 300 pp.
_____________Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 3, No. 2, June 2008__________ 631
Öymen, T. 1987. The Forest Cerambycidae of Turkey. İ. Ü. Forest Faculty, İstanbul, 146 pp.
Özdikmen, H. 2006. Contribution to the knowledge of Turkish longicorn beetles fauna
(Coleoptera: Cerambycidae). Munis Entomology & Zoology, 1 (1): 71-90.
Özdikmen, H., Özdemir, Y. & Turgut, S. 2005. Longhorned Beetles Collection of the
Nazife Tuatay Plant Protection Museum, Ankara, Turkey (Coleoptera, Cerambycidae). J.
Ent. Res. Soc., 7 (2): 1-33.
Sama, G. 1982. Contributo allo studio dei coleotteri Cerambycidae di Grecia e Asia Minore.
Fragmenta Entomologica, Roma, 16 (2): 205-227.
Sama, G. 2002. Atlas of the Cerambycidae of Europe and the Mediterranean Area. Vol.1.
Nakladatelstvi Kabourek. Zlin: 173 pp.
Starzyk, J. R. & Lessaer, M. 1978. Studies on the distribution, morphology and biology of
Tetrops starki Chevr. (Col. Cerambycidae). Z. angew. Ent. 86: 35–46.
Vives, E. 2000. Coleoptera, Cerambycidae. Fauna Iberica, Vol. 12. Museo Nacional de
Ciencias naturales. CSIC. Madrid: 715pp.
Winkler, A. 1924-1932. Catalogus Coleopterorum regionis palaearcticae. Verlag von Albert
Winkler, 1135-1226.
_____________Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 3, No. 2, June 2008__________
632
(a)
(b)
Figure 1. (a) Dorsal view and (b) Ventral view of holotype of T. praeustus anatolicus ssp. n.
_____________Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 3, No. 2, June 2008__________ 633
(a) (b)
(c)
Figure 2. (a) Lateral view and (b) Elytral punctuation and pubescence of holotype of T.
praeustus anatolicus ssp. n. (c) Elytral pubescence of T. praeustus (from Starzyk & Lessaer,
1978)
c
(A) (B)
Figure 3. a: aedeagus (top view), b: aedeagus (side view), c: paramerae (top view),
Paramerae (top view) (A) T. gilvipes (B) T. praeustus (from Starzyk & Lessaer, 1978)
_____________Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 3, No. 2, June 2008__________
634
(a)
(b)
(c)
Map 1. (a) The provinces of Turkey (b) Distributional patterns of T. praeustus (Linnaeus,
1758) in Turkey (c) Distributional patterns of T. warnckei Holzschuh, 1977 in Turkey.
_____________Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 3, No. 2, June 2008__________ 635
Map 2. Objective distributional patterns ( ) in S Turkey of T. praeustus anatolicus ssp. n.
(the map from Google Earth).
