Diochus conicollis

8. Diochus conicollis (Motschulsky, 1858) (Figs 1G; 9-1; 9-2; 9-3) Rhegmatocerus conicollis Motschulsky, 1858: 658 (Type locality: Indes orientales). Diochus conicollis; Gemminger and Harold, 1868: 608 (catalog); Bernhauer, 1902: 32 (Ceylon); Bernhauer and Schubert, 1914: 319 (catalog); Bernhauer, 1922: 231 (Formosa); Cameron, 1932: 45 (Ceylon; India); Scheerpeltz, 1933: 1324 (catalog); Shibata, 1973: 131 (Taiwan); Coiffait, 1977: 206 (Bhutan); Coiffait, 1981: 329 (Andaman Islands; misidentification); Coiffait, 1982: 27 (Nepal); Herman, 2001: 2445 (catalog); Smetana, 2004: 624 (Hongkong, Taiwan; Nepal, India, Bhutan); Löbl & Löbl, 2015: 1007 (Palaearctic catalog; Hongkong, Taiwan; Nepal, India, Bhutan); Zhou & Zhou, 2016 22 (lectotype designation, redescription). Syn.: Diochus major Kraatz, 1859: 113 (Type locality: India orientalis; Ceylan); Bernhauer, 1902: 32 (synonym of D. conicollis); Bernhauer and Schubert, 1914: 319 (synonym of D. conicollis); Cameron, 1932: 46 (synonym of D. conicollis); Smetana, 2004: 624 (synonym of D. conicollis); Löbl & Löbl, 2015: 1007 (Palaearctic catalog; synonym of D. conicollis). Type material. Rhegmatocerus conicollis: Zhou & Zhou (2016) examined three syntypes (one male and two females) and designated a male lectotype and two female paralectotypes deposited in ZMM. Diochus major (examined). One of us (JJ) examined two male specimens from Kraatzʼs collection (SDEI), which are not conspecific and were considered to be syntypes and not a holotype and a paratype as the specimens are labelled, because in the original description no type or holotype was mentioned. Both specimens were remounted, glued on new card plates together with the original small triangle plates, and aedeagi and last segments were embedded in Euparal on plastic strips placed on the same pin as the specimens. The male from Ceylon which is conspecific with D. conicollis, fitting the current status of D. major as a synonym of the latter by previous authors, was chosen as a lectotype to stabilize the status of the species. The second specimen was designated as paralectotype and was included in the type series of D. cameroni sp. nov. described in this paper. The male lectotype is labelled as follows: “144.” (handwritten, pink), “TYPUS” (printed, red), “ Ceylon, J. Nietner” (printed), “ Diochus major Krtz. ” (hadwritten), “coll. Kraatz”, “ LECTOTYPUS Diochus major Kraatz, J. Janák des. 2022”, “ Diochus conicollis (Motschulsky), J. Janák det. 2022” (SDEI). Additional material examined. MYANMAR: env. Maymyo: 1 male, 2 females, 12–13. 02. 1996, 700–900 m, Kurbatov (MHNG). THAILAND: 4 males, 4 females, W. THAILAND: 300 m, Thung Yai Wildlife Sanctuary, 15°28ʼN–94°48ʼE, Tak Province, Umphang District, Song Bae Stream, 18.-27.iv.1988, Evergreen rain forest, M.J.D. Brendell, B.M. 1988–183, Flight interception trap (NHMUK, JJRC). Diagnosis. The species can be separated from most other species by the shape of male sternite VIII and the dark coarse setae on the posterior margin, which are similar only of that of D. japonicus Cameron, 1930. The setae on lateral parts of male sternite VIII is much denser in D. conicollis than that of D. japonicus. Redescription. Detailed redescription based on the type series was published by Zhou & Zhou (2016). Distribution. Confirmed records are only from Myanmar, Sri Lanka (Ceylon) and Thailand. Published records from other countries (India, Nepal, Bhutan, Sri Lanka, China (Hong Kong, Taiwan)) have to be verified. Note. The specimens from Andaman Islands identified by Coiffait (1981) were revised and newly identified as D. cameroni sp. nov..