Hadrorhyparus pecki Howden 1995

Hadrorhyparus pecki Howden, 1995 Figures 17–22 Hadrorhyparus pecki Howden, 1995: 25, figs. 1–4. Type locality: Fiji, Viti Levu, Navai, Mount Tomanivi. Diagnosis. Hadrorhyparus pecki is distinguished by its robust body, length 4.0– 4.9 mm (Figs. 17–19). Clypeal margin with weak medial fringe of setae. Pronotal lateral margin with deep emargination, with large flattened anterior and intermediate lobes; submarginal costa arching inward posteriorly to a more rounded posterior angle. Elytron with discomedian costa with patch of setae on reduced postdiscal bulb; dorsal intercostal surfaces rugose with evenly distributed long setae; submarginal costa weak posteriorly, curving slightly up and into greatly reduced caudal bulb; trichome absent (Fig. 20). Metaventrite short, distance between mesocoxa and metacoxa less than or equal to width (long axis) of metacoxal; median groove evident by large, nearly circular pit in posterior half. Mesofemur of male with elongate apical spur (Figs. 17–18), female lacking spur. Metafemur with posterior margin sinuate, with strong posterior marginal face entire length. Metatibia enlarged, dorsal (posterior margin) with large median notch with large basal and apical lobes. Male genitalia with basal piece and parameres almost equal in length (Figs. 21–22). Distribution. Fiji (Viti Levu, Vanua Levu). Material examined. Holotype female (CNC): “ FIJI: Viti Levu, Navai / base of Mt. Tomanivi, / 1000m., 22. VIII.[19]78 / S. Peck, moss on logs // [red paper, handwritten] HOLOTYPE / Hadrorhyparus / pecki / H. Howden // [red paper, printed] HOLOTYPE / Hadrorhyparus / pecki / H. Howden, 1995 / CNC No. 22943 // [white paper, with blue border] CNC / 312433”. Two additional specimens were studied: FIJI: Viti Levu: Nadarivatu, 1000 m, 17.X.1977, G. Kuschel, litter and wood, 77/120 (1 ♀ NZAC). FIJI: Vanua Levu: Savusavu Saddle, 500 m, 26.X.1977, G. Kuschel, litter and wood, 77/129 (1 ♂ NZAC). Comments. The mesotibial inner apical tooth of the male is not much larger than on the females. Observed subtle variations are based on a few specimens from different islands. More materials are needed to better understand the variations within the species, sexual dimorphism, and between the populations on different islands. For now, all are within the range of variation to be considered a single species.