2018
DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2018.432
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Toward a comprehensive taxonomic revision of the “hirculus” group of American Onthophagus Latreille, 1802 (Coleoptera, Scarabaeidae, Scarabaeinae)

Abstract: The taxonomy of the American Onthophagus Latreille, 1802 included in the “hirculus” group is revised, and a study of their morphology allows for the delineation of five species-complexes. Herein, we provide a diagnosis of the “hirculus” group, an illustrated key to the complexes, along with a descriptive overview of their taxonomy and geographic distribution. Onthophagus hirculus Mannerheim, 1829 is considered to be a junior synonym of O. hircus Billberg, 1815, which is here demonstrated to be a valid species … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
26
0
12

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

3
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 505 publications
(38 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
26
0
12
Order By: Relevance
“…Prior to the work of Zunino & Halffter (1997) five groups of Onthophagus were recognized in the Americas, with more than 130 species. Other studies (Génier & Howden 1999;Kohlmann & Solís 2001;Génier 2017;Rossini et al 2018a) have increased the number of American groups to seven. It is interesting to note that although they all have the same geographic origin in what is today the Palearctic region, their distribution in the MTZ and in Central and South America follows completely different patterns: one species group is exclusive to the mountains (O. chevrolati) and mountain systems at the highest elevations; another is typical of the Mexican High Plateau (O. mexicanus); the ecological description of two others is less defined, with one typical of tropical forests (O. clypeatus); two other groups (O. gazellinus and O. dicranius) mainly found in cloud forest, and the last two (O. hircus and O. landolti) with a broad distribution (Génier & Howden 1999;Howden & Gill 1993;Kohlmann & Solís 2001;Génier 2017;Rossini et al 2018aRossini et al , 2018b.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Prior to the work of Zunino & Halffter (1997) five groups of Onthophagus were recognized in the Americas, with more than 130 species. Other studies (Génier & Howden 1999;Kohlmann & Solís 2001;Génier 2017;Rossini et al 2018a) have increased the number of American groups to seven. It is interesting to note that although they all have the same geographic origin in what is today the Palearctic region, their distribution in the MTZ and in Central and South America follows completely different patterns: one species group is exclusive to the mountains (O. chevrolati) and mountain systems at the highest elevations; another is typical of the Mexican High Plateau (O. mexicanus); the ecological description of two others is less defined, with one typical of tropical forests (O. clypeatus); two other groups (O. gazellinus and O. dicranius) mainly found in cloud forest, and the last two (O. hircus and O. landolti) with a broad distribution (Génier & Howden 1999;Howden & Gill 1993;Kohlmann & Solís 2001;Génier 2017;Rossini et al 2018aRossini et al , 2018b.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“… Onthophagus acuminatus : Gillet 1911a: 204 (complete list of species); Boucomont and Gillet 1927: 204 (catalog of species); Boucomont 1932: 307 (characters in key), 320 (distribution); Paulian 1936b: 506 (redescription); Blackwelder 1944: 211 (list of species from Latin America); Contreras 1951: 223 (cited for Colombia); Vulcano and Pereira 1967: 564 (characters in key); Howden and Young 1981: 98 (characters in key), 104 (redescription); Zunino and Halffter 1997: 161 (list of species); Kohlmann and Solís 2001: 167 (characters in key, redescription); Medina et al 2001: 139 (cited for Colombia); Ratcliffe 2002: 17 (cited for Panama); Morón 2003: 71 (cited for Mexico); Pulido-Herrera and Zunino 2007: 94 (catalog of species, distribution); Carvajal et al 2011: 322–323 (cited for Ecuador); Krajcik 2012: 174 (complete list of species); Solís and Kohlmann 2012: 8 (cited for Costa Rica); Delgado and Curoe 2014: 66 (characters in key, cited for Panama); Rossini et al 2018b: 9 (list of species of the curvicornis complex). …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“… Onthophagus bidentatus : Gemminger and Harold 1869: 1026 (catalog); Harold 1880a: 33 (redescription, distribution); Gillet 1911a: 204 (catalog); Bruch 1911: 190 (cited for Argentina); Boucomont and Gillet 1927: 204 (catalog of species); Boucomont 1932: 304 (characters in key), 321 (distribution); Balthasar 1941: 352 (cited for Peru); Blackwelder 1944: 211 (list of species from Latin America); Balthasar 1951: 337 (cited for Peru); Roze 1955: 45 (cited for Venezuela); Vulcano and Pereira 1967: 564 (characters in key); Zunino and Halffter 1997: 161 (list of species); Medina et al 2001: 139 (cited for Colombia); Pulido-Herrera and Zunino 2007: 97 (catalog of species); Ratcliffe et al 2015: 195 (cited for Peru); Rossini et al 2016: 496 (comment), 497 (figure 1A); Rossini et al 2018b: 9 (list of species of the hircus complex).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The terminology adopted for the genital structures follows Tarasov & Génier (2015), referring to each endophallic structure as lamella and not 'sclerite' as originally proposed by those authors (see short remark in Rossini et al 2018). A general representation of the male copulatory organs is provided, in order to identify the correct position of each genital part ( Fig.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%