Neosisyphus setiger Roth 1851

Neosisyphus setiger Roth (1851) (Figs. 7, 8D)

Montreuil 2015b: 11

Sisyphus setiger Roth, 1851

Roth 1851: 124; Montreuil 2015b: 11

Neosisyphus confrater (Kolbe, 1914)

Montreuil 2015b: 11

Sisyphus confrater Kolbe, 1914

Kolbe 1914: 317; Haaf 1955: 376;

Type local: Bukoba (Tanzania)

Size: Male: length: 9.0–5.0 mm; width: 4.8–3.0 mm. Female: length: 9.2–5.0 mm; width: 4.5–3.0 mm

Diagnosis: N. setiger is distinguished from other members of the barbarossa speciesgroup, by a combination of the following features: a triangular protrusion on the midposterior edge of the metafemur in males. Additionally, the projected metatrochanter is relatively short, comprising ¼ of the total length of the metafemur in males.

Examined non-type material: See Supplementary information.

Distribution: As defined by Montreuil (2015b), N. setiger is distributed in moist lowland and upland vegetation from northeast to southern Africa (Fig. 19).

Remarks: We have compared Kenyan specimens identified as N. setiger with southeast African specimens identified as N. confrater by Paschalidis (1974). Females of N. confrater and N. setiger are close morphologically making it difficult to separate them into species. However, we have observed that males of southern Africa “ N. confrater ” bear a short blunt triangular projection on the mid-posterior edge of the metafemur and a short projecting metatrochanter. By contrast, males of east African “ N. setiger ” have a sharp projecting spine on the mid-posterior edge of the metafemur and a metatrochanter as large as in Neosisyphus jossoi Montreuil, 2015.

Montreuil (2015b) synonymized N. confrater with Neosisyphus setiger (Roth 1851). The synonymy seems to be based on the holotype female of N. setiger from Ethiopia and a lectotype male of N. confrater from Tanzania. This is questionable as females are often difficult to separate into species as stated above. Furthermore, although the photograph of a major male of N. setiger (Montreuil 2015b) closely resembles “ N. confrater ”, there is no indication of where the individual was collected. Nevertheless, we have retained the name N. setiger for southern African material as we have not been able to compare it with the type and non-type material used in Montreuil’s study (2015b).