Two new species of Neolindus from Peru and Venezuela ( Coleoptera : Staphylinidae : Paederinae : Cylindroxystina )

The subtribe Cylindroxystina is one of the few Neotropical paederine taxa that have been subject to modern revisions. According to Herman (1991), it comprises two genera and 47 species, Cylindroxystus Bierig, 1943 (14 species) and Neolindus Scheerpeltz, 1933 (33 species). Four additional species of Neolindus were described recently by Asenjo (2011) and Irmler (2011). Both Cylindroxystus and Neolindus have been collected remarkably rarely and in small numbers; numerous species are represented only by single specimens. The revision by Herman (1991) is based on a total of merely 37 (Cylindroxystus) and 79 specimens (Neolindus), respectively. Most of them were found in leaf litter and at lower elevations, but the reproduction habitat is essentially unknown. In material of Staphylinidae collected by Volker Brachat (Geretsried) in Venezuela in 2005 and 2007 and by Günter Riedel (München) in Peru in October 2010, five specimens of Neolindus


Introduction
The subtribe Cylindroxystina is one of the few Neotropical paederine taxa that have been subject to modern revisions.According to Herman (1991), it comprises two genera and 47 species, Cylindroxystus Bierig, 1943 (14 species) and Neolindus Scheerpeltz, 1933 (33 species).Four additional species of Neolindus were described recently by Asenjo (2011) and Irmler (2011).Both Cylindroxystus and Neolindus have been collected remarkably rarely and in small numbers; numerous species are represented only by single specimens.The revision by Herman (1991) is based on a total of merely 37 (Cylindroxystus) and 79 specimens (Neolindus), respectively.Most of them were found in leaf litter and at lower elevations, but the reproduction habitat is essentially unknown.In material of Staphylinidae collected by Volker Brachat (Geretsried) in Venezuela in 2005 and2007 andby Günter Riedel (München) in Peru in October 2010, five specimens of Neolindus were discovered, a female of unknown identity (probably undescribed), a female of N. rudiculus Herman, 1991, and three specimens (two males and one female) belonging to two undescribed species from Peru and Venezuela.

Material and methods
The material treated in this study is deposited in the author´s collection.The morphological studies were conducted using a Stemi SV 11 microscope (Zeiss Germany) and a Jenalab compound microscope (Carl Zeiss Jena).A digital camera (Nikon Coolpix 995) was used for the photographs.Head length was measured from the anterior margin of the frons to the posterior mar gin of the head, elytral length at the suture from the apex of the scutellum to the posterior margin of the elytra, total length from the anterior margin of the mandibles to the apex of the abdomen, the length of the forebody from the anterior margin of the mandibles to the posterior margin of the elytra, aedeagal length from the apex of the internal structures or from the apex of the dorsal plate (whichever is the longest) to the base of the capsule.The parameral side of the aedeagus (i.e., the side where the sperm duct enters) is referred to as the ventral, the opposite side as the dorsal aspect.

Etymology:
The specific epithet is composed of the Latin noun lux (light) and the present participle of the Latin verb amare (to love).It refers to the fact that the holotype was attracted to a light source.

Description:
Body length 7 mm; length of forebody 3 mm.Coloration: head and pronotum reddish; elytra reddish-brown; abdomen brown with reddish apex; legs and antennae pale-reddish.Head (Fig. 2) strongly transverse, 1.35 times as broad as long, widest across eyes; posterior angles moderately marked; dorsal surface only laterally with few setiferous macropunctures, median portion extensively without macropunctures, but with relatively dense micropunctation; microsculpture absent; on either side with only one trichobothrium (for illustrations of this structure see Herman 1991) near antero-dorsal margin of eye.Eyes strongly convex and moderately large, approximately twice as long as postgenae and distinctly shorter than distance between posterior margin of eye and neck.Antenna with antennomeres II and III distinctly elongate and of subequal length; IV with dense pubescence, distinctly shorter than III, and weakly oblong; V-VII approximately as broad as long; X weakly transverse; XI little longer than X.  3); male tergite VIII (4); male sternite VII (5); male sternite VIII (6); median posterior portion of male sternite VIII (7); male tergites IX-X (8); aedeagus in ventral and in lateral view (9-10).Scale bars: 1-3: 1.0 mm; 4-6, 8-10: 0.5 mm; 7: 0.1 mm.Pronotum (Fig. 1) 1.1 times as broad as long and 1.12 times as wide as head; posterior angles weakly marked, broadly rounded; punctation moderately coarse and moderately dense; on either side of the broadly impunctate midline without distinct dorsal series of punctures (i.e., dorsal series not separated from lateral punctures); interstices without microsculpture.Elytra (Fig. 1) slightly (1.05 x) longer and distinctly (1.15 x) broader than pronotum; humeral angles marked; punctation coarser than that of pronotum, defined, randomly distributed (except for sutural series), and moderately dense; interstices in central portion approximately as broad as diameter of punctures and without microsculpture.Hind wings fully developed.Metatarsomere I distinctly longer than II.Abdomen slightly narrower than elytra; punctation coarse and dense on anterior, much finer and sparser on posterior tergites (Fig. 3); posterior margin of tergite VII with palisade fringe.: posterior margin of tergite VIII weakly and obtusely produced in the middle (Fig. 4); sternite VII strongly transverse, posteriorly with pronounced emargination, on either side of this emargination with distinct process (Fig. 5); sternite VIII (Figs 6-7) approximately as long as broad, posteriorly with conspicuous modifications: in the middle with small excision, laterally with pronounced process, and with acute tooth-like process between lateral process and median excision; tergite IX (Fig. 8) with anterior portion in the middle much longer than posterior processes and than tergite X, anterior portion without median suture; aedeagus (Figs 9-10) approximately 0.9 mm long, strongly sclerotised, and of distinctive shape.: unknown.

Comparative notes:
The similarly modified male secondary sexual characters, the similar general morphology of the aedeagus, and similar external characters suggest that N. luciamans is closely related to N. dichymus Herman, 1991, whose description is based on a single male from Ecuador.It is distinguished from this species by slightly larger body size, the posteriorly produced male tergite VIII, the much broader posterior excavation of the male sternite VII, the differently shaped posterior modifications of the male sternite VIII, as well as by the basally constricted aedeagus with differently shaped apical structures.For illustrations of N. dichymus see figures 213-217 in Herman (1991).

Distribution and natural history:
The type locality is situated in Huanuco province, central Peru, near the junction of the Llullapichis and Pachitea rivers.The holotype was collected with a light trap at an altitude of 260 m in October.

Etymology:
This species is dedicated to Volker Brachat, specialist of Pselaphinae, to whom I owe all the Neolindus specimens treated in this paper, including the type material of both newly described species.