English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The paper discusses the synonymy of the species Coprophilus (Zonyptilus) solskyi Bernhauer, 1908. In 1991, Toth described a new species Coprophilus (Zonyptilus) drugmandi by a single specimen from Dobrudja. In this work he also gives redescriptions of the following species: Coprophilus bimaculatus Luze, 1904; C. longicornis Bernhauer, 1903; C. pentatoma Fauvel, 1897 and C. solskyi Bernhauer, 1908. Toth illustrates the detailed characteristics of these species with drawings of the aedeagus, antennae, and pronotal contours. Despite the serious differences in the structure of the aedeagus and antennae illustrated by Toth, it should be noted that when studying the holotype of C. longicornis and the lectotypes of C. bimaculatus and C. pentatoma, we did not reveal any differences in the structure of these species and they were synonymized. Later, Toth described another new species from Azerbaijan, Coprophilus (Zonyptilus) fauveli Tóth, 1992. When describing C. fauveli, in addition to the structure of the aedeagus, Toth considered a brown spot in the scutellum and a shiny clypeus as the key features that distinguish this species from C. solskyi and a shiny clypeus as a distinctive feature from C. drugmandi. Toth considered the structure of the clypeus a significant feature – as for C. solskyi and C. drugmandi it is opaque, as for C. pentatoma, C. bimaculatus, C. longicornis and C. fauveli it is shiny. The study of type materials for C. pentatoma, C. bimaculatus, C. longicornis, C. solskyi and C. fauveli showed that they all has a shiny clypeus without signs of shagreening and opacity. The holotype of C. fauveli does not have a pronounced brown spot in the scutellum region, which contradicts Toth’s description; there are also no differences between C. fauveli and C. solskyi in the structure of the aedeagus – these species were synonymized. Considering that the differences in the structure of the aedeagus of C. pentatoma, C. bimaculatus, and C. longicornis cited by Toth, as well as the differences in the structure of the aedeagus between C. solskyi and C. fauveli, have not been confirmed, the only feature that distinguishes C. drugmandi from C. solskyi should be consiГильденков М.Ю. О синонимах вида Coprophilus (Zonyptilus) solskyi Bernhauer, 1908 (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae: Oxytelinae) Общая биология 44 Самарский научный вестник. 2020. Т. 9, No 4 dered as having a brown spot in the scutellum region. However, the specimens of C. solskyi studied by us also have such a spot. Thus, considering the study of the features set out in the descriptions of C. solskyi, C. fauveli and C. drugmandi, as well as materials for the species C. solskyi, including the types, we consider it reasonable to establish the synonymy: Coprophilus (Zonyptilus) solskyi Bernhauer, 1908 = Coprophilus (Zonyptilus) drugmandi Tóth, 1991, syn. n.

A new synonym for Coprophilus (Zonyptilus) solskyi Bernhauer, 1908 (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae: Oxytelinae)