2015
DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3949.3.8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A new synonymy in the fidius group of Copris Müller 1764 (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Scarabaeinae) and a new species from the highland grasslands of South Africa

Abstract: The fidius group constitutes the basal clade in a phylogeny of the Afrotropical members of the genus, Copris Müller, 1764. In this paper we describe Copris crassus Deschodt and Davis as a new species in this group. We also demonstrate that the distributional function between two body dimensions (lateral horn length and mid-line elytron length) differs between Copris fidius (Olivier 1789) and C. crassus. Copris bihamatus Balthasar, 1965 is also a member of the fidius group. Nguyen-Phung (1988) suspected that it… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
1
1

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 4 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The collected specimens were identified morphologically using a variety of pertinent taxonomic literature (Ferreira 1972; Palestrini 1992; Davis, Frolov & Scholtz 2008; Deschodt, Davis & Scholtz 2015; Pokorny & Zídek 2015) and through comparison to specimens in the first author’s entomological reference collection. From among them, ten species representing a wide phylogenetic, ecological, and size diversity, were selected for intestinal content DNA extraction.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The collected specimens were identified morphologically using a variety of pertinent taxonomic literature (Ferreira 1972; Palestrini 1992; Davis, Frolov & Scholtz 2008; Deschodt, Davis & Scholtz 2015; Pokorny & Zídek 2015) and through comparison to specimens in the first author’s entomological reference collection. From among them, ten species representing a wide phylogenetic, ecological, and size diversity, were selected for intestinal content DNA extraction.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%