Idiocerus concinnus

Size and general appearance of brunneus , more highly coloured, resembling rufus , but larger, broader, and with antennal discs. Vertex and face moderately broad, much less inflated than in brunneus , margins of genae but slightly rounding; elytra nearly opaque, the venation indistinct; nervures with setigerous punctures ; outer anteapical cell present, rather long. Female segment almost twice the length of the penultimate; posterior margin slightly rounded, often slightly sinuate; pygofers stout, moderately long, twice longer than in brunneus , nearly half longer than in amabilis , the ovipositor exceeding them by its own width. Male valve with a blunt median tooth, distinctly exceeded by the strong lateral angles ; antennal plates large, oval. Colour: Female pale cinnamon brown, the pronotum darker; face and all below yellow. Male darker, especially along the dorsum of elytra, where the dark tergum shows through. Face and below pale yellow, with faint stripes beneath the eyes. This has been received as rufus G. and B., but it is quite distinct. The discs of the male antennae alone would readily distinguish them. It more closely resembles brunneus from which the third anteapical cell and the distinct genitalia, as well as the absence of spots on vertex, will readily separate it. (Ball, 1902) Bliven's (1966) rebuttal to Freytag's (1965) synonymy with Idiocerus amabilis Ball, 1902: Freytag has listed this well-known species as a synonym of concinnus , but his figures do not agree with those published by Beirne. It is significant that the latter author did not mention concinnus in his work. Bliven's (1966) interesting comments when synonymizing Idiocerus concinnus with I. brunneus Osborn & Ball, 1898: Although most authors up to the present time have treated concinnus Ball as a doubtful name, Freytag has seen fit to designate a male lectotype and states that the genitalia have been removed and are in a vial attached to the pin. The chief objection to this currently accepted practice is this: there is no way of proving that the genitalia in the vial actually came from the specimen on the pin. Hamilton (1980) treats Idiocerus amabilis , I. brunneus and I. concinnus as three distinct taxa.