CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · Science & Nature

Beutelius

genus of beetles

Specimen drawers, botanical folios and brass scientific instruments under study light
Science and natureInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionAug 15, 2026
Entity authorityQ92185410 ↗
Source-derived summary

Beutelius is a small genus of ommatid beetles native to Australia. It is only one of three extant genera in the family, alongside Tetraphalerus and Omma. It currently contains four species, three of which were originally assigned to Omma, and it is distinguished from Omma by the presence of flattened, ribbed scales covering most areas, as well as longer maxillary and labial palps, and an anteriorly depressed gulamentum.

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Beutelius” is genus of beetles. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Beutelius, genus and beetles, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewA practical orientation to terminology and classification, particularly when read beside dated observations, specimens or technical literature. The current 68-word lead offers orientation but no explicit four-digit date, so chronology should not be assumed. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. For this dossier, Beutelius, genus and beetles is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The phrase “genus of beetles” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.

Evidence profile

The date and method of observation matter as much as the stated conclusion, especially where classification or consensus has changed. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 15, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q92185410. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.

Critical limits

Scientific names, classifications and consensus can change while older terminology persists in catalogues and historical literature. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.

Best used for
  • Current terminology
  • Classification context
  • Finding cited technical literature
Verify next

Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Beutelius”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Beutelius primary sources, Beutelius archive and Beutelius research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Beutelius”?
  2. Is the terminology current, historical or disputed?
  3. Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Beutelius” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.