Micrambe woodroffei

Having recently processed a couple of Micrambe ulicis, when I examined this one I was pretty quickly confident that it would be another one. But I checked the key just to make sure and there I started to wonder. It keyed straightforwardly to either Micrambe ulicis or Micrambe woodroffei, but at this point it became more difficult. In the end I think it is woodroffei, but I am open to correction - please get in touch if you disagree.

Micrambe woodroffei showing pronotum shape, North Elmham Cathedral Meadows (Norfolk, UK), 17th April 2021

The punctures at the base of the elytra weren't easy to see, being covered in hair, but I eventually found an angle at which I could see both the elytral punctures and the pronotal ones, and I could see no difference in size. On ulicis the punctures at the base of the elytra are meant to be smaller than those on the pronotum, but I really couldn't see that this was the case here. That suggested woodroffei.

same Micrambe woodroffei showing punctures on elyra bases and pronotum, North Elmham Cathedral Meadows (Norfolk, UK), 17th April 2021

The majority of elytral hairs were decumbent, but there were quite a few erect ones among them which stood taller than the decumbent ones, and that again points to woodroffei. However, a couple of reasons to hesitate on this one - firstly, although they were clearly erect (and thus stood prouder) I wasn't initially convinced they were really much longer, as they're meant to be on woodroffei. In the end I convinced myself that they were in fact longer than at least many of the decumbent hairs, though perhaps not by as big a margin as I was expecting. The other reason to hesitate was that I found a photo of woodroffei online (this one) on which the long erect hairs seemed a lot more obvious than they did on mine.

same Micrambe woodroffei showing variation in hairs on elytra, North Elmham Cathedral Meadows (Norfolk, UK), 17th April 2021

There was just enough doubt here to make me want to check the genitalia. Fortunately it was a male, but unfortunately I didn't do the tidiest job of the dissection. However, the parameres seem clear enough, and I'm pretty sure these nail this as woodroffei. By the time I got them where I could photograph them I'd manage to break one of the parameres, but one is intact and I think the separation between them wasn't impacted by the fracture. You can see the parameres are well separated at the base, not close up like they would be on ulicis. You can also see that the parameres are long, about as long as the setae that emerge from their apex - they should be shorter on ulicis.

same Micrambe woodroffei showing parameres, North Elmham Cathedral Meadows (Norfolk, UK), 17th April 2021

At first I missed that there was an additional difference in the presence or absence of thorns in the internal sac, and was consequently a bit careless with this when I dissected it. There were four things in or around what I think is the sac, one pair longer than the other pair. They don't seem as pointed as the diagram in Duff and they stick out from the sac more, and I'm not entirely sure if they're the "teeth" of woodroffei or something entirely different. If they're different, then I didn't see the teeth - though whether that means it didn't have any I'm not sure. If they are the teeth, then that would support the ID as woodroffei. Only one of the longer pair is visible in these photos.

same Micrambe woodroffei showing aedeagus, North Elmham Cathedral Meadows (Norfolk, UK), 17th April 2021