Coeleburia pilosa Botero & Santos-Silva & Bezark 2026, comb. nov.

Coeleburia pilosa (Erichson, 1834) comb. nov. Figs 38, 39, 40 Stenocorus pilosus Erichson, 1834: 267. Eburia rospigliosii Brèthes, 1925: 15. Remarks. Erichson (1834) described Stenocorus pilosus as follows (translated): “ 56. Stenocorus pilosus Erichs. Tab. XXXIX. Fig. 6. Stenocorus faintly brown, ash-gray pubescent, setose; thorax with two spines, four tubercles; elytra with a paired basal line and another simple median yellow line, shaded with black. – 10 lines. Light brown, covered with fine silky gray pubescence, long-haired all over, especially on the underside and the legs. The head has a longitudinal line. The antennae are the same color and length as the body. The pronotum is as long as it is wide, finely punctured, with a pair of small humps on the back in front of the middle, and a small hump on each front corner. On the side, there is a sharp spine in the middle. Two indistinct blackish stripes run along the back. The elytra are individually punctured, sharply toothed before the tip; at the base, there are two small raised yellow lines close together, and in the middle, a single one that is bordered inwardly by a black shadow. The middle femora are slightly elongated, armed at the tip with a sharp spine. Native country: Peru. Found in Lima. ” However, the figure number on the plate (Fig. 38) is not “ 6, ” as indicated in the original description, but rather “ 7. ” Erichson (1834) also described Lamia praetoria and reported: “ Lamia praetoria Erichs. Tab. XXXIX. Fig. 7. ” However, the correct figure number is “ 6. ” This mistake was first corrected by White (1853), who reported the figure number for Stenocorus pilosus as “ 7. ” Nonetheless, the mistake persists in Monné (2024) and Tavakilian and Chevillotte (2025), both of whom still list the figure as “ 6. ”