9. Craspedophorus latemaculatus Alluaud, 1930 (Plate 2, Figs 12, 13; Plate 4, Fig. 33a–c, Plate 12, Fig. 100) Craspedophorus latemaculatus Alluaud, 1930: 4 (type locality “Joko, Kamerun [=Cameroon, Central]”). Lorenz 2005: 320, Häckel and Farkač 2012: 81, Häckel 2016: 511. Type material. Holotype (♀): “Joko / Kamerun [printed, white label]// latemacula - / tus Type [handwritten in black]/ Alluaud, 1930 [printed in black, corrected by hand in black]” (Plate 2, Fig. 13, MNHN). Paratypes. 2♂: “ Paratype [printed in black on red circumscribed label]// Joko / Kamerun [printed in black on white label]/ R. dét / 1783 [printed in black]/ N [handwritten in black on white label]// Musée du Congo [printed in black]/ Joko (Kamerun) / don [handwritten in black] L. Burgeon [printed in black on white label]// C. latimaculat / All. [handwritten in black on white label]” (MRAC). Additional material examined. Cameroon: Centre. 1♂: “Joko” (Plate 2, Fig. 12, Plate 12, Fig. 100, cMH). Note. The original description of this species was based on three specimens labeled “Joko, Kamerun”. In my last article concerning C. reflexus group I noted (2016: 512): “This species markedly differs from others here described [C. reflexus group Häckel 2016] namely in the shape and sculpture of the pronotum (cordate, smooth, reminding of species of the C. strachani group sensu Häckel), and also in the extent and shape of the orange elytral maculae. These characters isolate it within the group, but despite that the shape of the metepisternum and absence of crenulations on anterior margins of ventrites place C. latemaculatus in the C. reflexus group”. In Basilewsky's collection in MRAC I have found both paratypes (donated by L. Burgeon) which were correctly determined, labeled and placed among other species of the C. strachani group and one similarly labeled non-paratype specimen (Plate 2, Fig. 12). When checking the (rhombic) mepisternum in both MRAC paratypes I have realized that the mepisternum of the first specimen I examined, the holotype, is covered in dirt (Plate 4, Fig. 33b, c, MNHN). Originally, I was hesitant to attack the holotype and influenced my own mistake in translation, i. e. that the mepisternum in this holotype is trapezoid (prolonged, a trait typical of the C. reflexus group). Based on this wrong assumption the species was allocated to the first part of my work. This mistake of mine also appears in the previous work: (Häckel 2016: 512): “...Ventral segments on posterior margin without crenulation. Metepisterna longitudinally longer than wide…” [translated from French]. However, the original descripton (see Alluaud 1930: 5) states: “Épisternes métathoraciques en losange pas plus long que large” [metepisterna rhombic, not longer than wide]. On the same page, Alluaud notes: “By the shape of the pronotum it resembles C. grossus Hope, but it is smaller, more slender and the elytral macula much larger”. First after having studied the paratypes in which I was able to examine the clean metepisterna made me revise my opinion and transfer the C. grossus Hope species into C. strachani group with the rhombic metepisternum. The main characteristics separating this species from others remains the absence of crenulation in the anterior ventral margin (Plate 4, Fig. 33a). Distribution. Central Cameroon.

Published as part of Häckel, Martin, 2017, A contribution to the knowledge of the subfamily Panagaeinae Hope, 1838 from Africa. Part 3. Revision of the Craspedophorus strachani and C. brevicollis groups (Coleoptera: Carabidae), pp. 1-67 in Zootaxa 4330 (1) on page 16, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4330.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/1010167