Corresponding author: Chi-Feng Lee (
Academic editor: J. Santiago-Blay
All Taiwanese species formerly classified the genus
Lee C-F, Bezděk J (2015) Revision of “
Currently, the genus
Based on reduced elytral epipleurae the genus
Both species of
The Taiwan Chrysomelid Research Team
To prepare drawings of the adult reproductive systems, the abdomens of adults were separated and boiled in a 10% KOH solution, cleared in distilled water, and then mounted on microscope slides in glycerin for observation. Specimens were examined and drawings were made using a Leica M165 stereomicroscope. Microscope slides were examined and illustrated using a Nikon ECLIPSE 50i microscope. Body parts were then stored in glycerin tubes with the dry mounted specimens.
Host plants are recorded by observing adult feeding behavior in the field.
Specimens examined are deposited at the following institutes and museums.
The Natural History Museum, London, UK [Michael Geiser]
Hungarian Natural History Museum, Budapest, Hungary [Ottó Merkl]
Jan Bezděk collection, Brno, Czech Republic
Faculty of Agriculture, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan [Osamu Tadauchi]
Kitakyushu Museum of Natural History, Kitakyushu, Japan [Yûsuke Minoshima]
National Museum, Prague, Czech Republic [Jiří Hájek]
Senckenberg Deutsches Enomologisches Institut, Müncheberg, Germany [Stephan Blank]
Taiwan Agricultural Research Institute, Taichung, Taiwan
Exact label data are cited for all type specimens of the described species; a double slash (//) divides the data on different labels and a single slash (/) divides the data in different rows. Other comments and remarks are in square brackets: – preceding data are printed – preceding data are handwritten – white label – yellow label – blue label – red label
Coloration: dorsum lustrous, black or metallic blue-green. Antennae black. Legs metallic,black, or brown. Ventral side metallic or black. Body length 3.2–4.3 mm.
Head. Labrum trapezoidal, transverse, with four pores in transverse row bearing pale seta, anterior margin straight. Anterior part of head very short, almost impunctate and glabrous, several setae on anterior margin of clypeus and along lateral margins of nasal keel. Nasal keel narrow, sharp. Interantennal space very narrow, cca 0.5 as wide as transverse diameter of antennal insertion. Frontal tubercles transverse, subtriangular, slightly elevated, lustrous, glabrous, impunctate, anterior tips not separated by nasal keel. Vertex with distinct shallow impression in middle just behind frontal tubercles, with several larger punctures at each side just behind frontal tubercles bearing very long pale setae, rest of vertex impunctate or with indistinct fine punctuation and glabrous. Antennae slender, 0.80–1.00 as long as body, all antennomeres dull, covered with dense setae, antennomere II as long as wide, antennomere III three times as long as antennomere II, antennomeres III-VII ca 2.8–3.0 as long as wide.
Pronotum 1.30–1.60 times as broad as long, widest in anterior quarter, parallel anteriorly, convergent posteriorly, anterior margin straight, posterior margin rounded. Disc covered with fine punctures. Posterior half of disc with wide shallow transvese impression. Anterior margin unbordered in middle, laterally with indistinct fine border, lateral and posterior margins bordered. Anterior and posterior margins with dense short setae, lateral margins with sparse setae. Anterior angles moderately swollen, recangular, posterior angles obtuseangulate, all angles with setigerous pore bearing long pale seta.
Scutellum subtriangular, impunctate, glabrous, with rounded apex.
Elytra ca 1.90–2.10 times as long as wide, almost glabrous (with almost indistinct very scarse short pale setae on humeri, lateral margins and apical slopes), widest at apical quarter, densely covered with fine small confused punctures. Humeral calli well developed. Epipleura extremely narrow, visible only in anterior third of elytra, towards apex more or less only indicated. Macropterous.
Ventral surface lustrous, sparsely covered with fine punctures and pale setae. Anterior coxal cavities opened posteriorly. Prosternal process not visible between procoxae. Abdomen simple, posterior margin of last ventrite with two short incisions, surface behind posterior margin subtriangularly impressed.
Legs slender. All tibiae with fine apical spine in both sexes. Protarsomeres I slender, ca 0.75 times as long as II and III combined. Metatarsomeres I slender, ca as long as II and III combined. Claws appendiculate.
Penis (Figs
Females. Antennae distinctly more slender than in males. Protarsomeres I same as in males. Posterior margin of last ventrite entire. Gonocoxae (Figs
Based on
Recently, three additional genera were described and probably belong to Phyllobroticites although it is not specified in the description. From
Taiwan, China: Guanxi.
Composed from Jolivet and
Taiwan: New Taipei City, Tinshungchi [頂雙溪] (= Chosokei),
Lectotype male (
(n = 181).
Length 3.3–3.8 mm, width 1.4–1.6 mm. Color metallic green or blue (Figs
Habitus of
Length 3.6–3.9 mm, width 1.8–1.9 mm. Similar to male (Figs
Taiwan, China: Guangxi.
Distribution maps, solid line: 1000 m, broken line: 2000 m.
Four females collected in Guangxi are tentatively assigned to
Taiwan: Kaoshiung city, Chiasien [甲仙] (= Kosempo),
Holotype ♂ (
(n = 21).
Length 3.2–3.8 mm, width 1.2 mm. Color blackish brown (Figs
Habitus of
Length 4.1–4.3 mm, width 2.1–2.2 mm. Similar to male (Figs
Endemic to southern Taiwan below 1500 m elevation (Fig.
Taiwan: Chiayi county, Fenchihu [奮起湖],
Holotype ♂ (
(n = 247).
Although
Length 4.1–5.1 mm, width 1.4–1.7 mm. Color yellowish-brown (Figs
Habitus of
Length 5.7–5.9 mm, width 2.0–2.2 mm. Similar to male; ratio of length of antennomeres III to XI about 1.0 : 1.3 : 1.2 : 1.1 : 1.1 : 1.1 : 0.9 : 0.9 : 1.2; ratio of length to width from antennomere III to XI about 2.9 : 3.8 : 3.4 : 3.3 : 3.3 : 3.2 : 2.7 : 2.8 : 3.9 (Fig.
Endemic to Taiwan. Although not as widespread as
We would like to thank all curators listed above for giving us the opportunity to study the material from their collections. We thank the Taiwan Chrysomelid Research Team for assistance in collecting material, including J.-C. Chen, H.-J. Chen, Y.-T. Chung, B.-X. Guo, H. Lee, W.-C. Liao, W.-T. Liu, M.-H. Tsou, and S.-F. Yu. We especially thank T.-H. Lee and H.-T. Cheng for photos of dorsal and ventral habitus of each species. We thank Chih-Kai yang for identifying host plants.This study was supported by the Ministry of Science and Techonology MOST 103-2313-B-055-001. We are grateful to Prof. Christopher Carlton (Louisiana State Arthropod Museum, USA) for reviewing the manuscript.