PROC. ENTOMOL. SOC. WASH. 93(2), 1991, pp. 356-389 THE TRIBE CICINDINI BANNINGER (COLEOPTERA: CARABIDAE): COMPARATIVE MORPHOLOGY, CLASSIFICATION, NATURAL HISTORY, AND EVOLUTION David H. Kavanaugh and Terry L. Erwin (DHK) California Academy of Sciences, San Francisco, California 94118; (TLE) Na-tional Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. 20560. Abstract.— The two species of the Gondwanian carabid beetle tribe, Cicindini, are re-described in detail and their relationships within the Carabidae and among themselves are reassessed. On the basis of several autapotypic features, a new genus, Archaeocindis, is erected for the Persian Gulf species, Cicindis johnbeckeri Banninger. The type locality for Cicindis horni Bruch is restricted to Guanaco Muerto, Cordoba Province, Argentina. For each taxon, a synthesis of available literature on both taxonomy and natural history is presented. The name of the tribe is determined to be Cicindini, not Cicindisini, according to the rules of zoological nomenclature. Based on a detailed analysis of characters of external structure and genitalia and consideration of past and present classifications of carabidae, cicindines are placed in a separate supertribe, the Cicinditae, near the Nebriitae and Elaphritae {sensu Kryzhanovskiy 1976). Present geographical distributions of the tribe and genera suggest that cicindines are a western Gondwanian lineage, the distribution of which was divided by development of the South Atlantic Basin in the Late Mesozoic. Resulting South American and African isolates gave rise to Cicindis and Archaeocindis, respectively. Members of the former taxon occupy interior saline lake shore habitats, those of the latter occur in tidal flats of bays in the Persian Gulf. Based on interpretation of a suite of unusual structural features, cicindines probably behave like diurnal tiger beetles that also can survive submersion in and swim on the surface of salt water. Key Words: Cicindini, Cicindis, Archaeocindis, Gondwanian lineages, carabid classifi-cation In 1979, one of us (TLE) wrote that spe-able us to gather additional specimens and cies of the tribe Cicindini "surely represent data in the future. It is with this prospect the most obscure group of carabid beetles in mind that we provide a synthesis of cur-remaining today. Their bizarre features in rent knowledge and add new information combination with lack of available material on the structure, distribution, and phylo-make them nearly impossible to deal with genetic relationships of these beetles, based effectively." Eleven years later, we reject the on our study of available specimens, latter, rather defeatist notion, and take up Bruch (1908) recognized his new species the challenge to better understand this ob-as something peculiar and placed it near the scure group, even though only one more tiger beetles. He did so without formally specimen is now available to aid in the study, classifying them, probably because he was Luckily, this specimen came with important not a carabid specialist. Banninger (1925, new biological information that should en-1927a, b) studied the Argentine specimen
BioStor
