C. flaviplumus Tokunaga 1940

According to Sasa (1978), Tokunaga's description was very brief and un-illustrated.  Notes that tergal side of abdominal segments II to IV each with a small, oval, dark central spot; antennal ratio is about 3.5 and larger than 2.9 of C. dorsalis (Sasa assumes this is C. yoshimatsu).

The major reason for doubting the synonymy of C. flaviplumus with C. samoensis is the higher AR (abt 3.5-4) (Sasa 1978), and the difference in the anterior fore leg ratios of the female.  He also notes a difference in the distribution of C. flaviplumus and the Japanese C. samoensis, in that C. flaviplumus has a more northerly, cooler, distribution (Although Sasa & Hasagawa (1983) later synonymised C. flaviplumus with C. samoensis on the basis of specimens collected on the Ryukyu Islands in southern Japan, which is likely a mixed sample).
However the "C. samoensis" used as a laboratory organism and from which the cytology of Japanese specimens is obtained (see below) is probably one of the C. flaviplumus types.

Found: JAPAN - Saga, Kyoto (Type locality)

If correctly identified, this species can be bred in the laboratory, as Japanese specimens have been maintained in a laboratory culture (Kuhn et al. 1987).

Four species have been found described under this name based on the available BARCODE sequences, two in Japan, one in China and the Korean material of Ree & Kim (1981), which is actually C. yoshimatsui.
Since there has been no further study of material from the type locality, it is not certain which of these species is the true C. flaviplumus (see below).
The Chinese specimens in BOLD, and also in Northern Australia, are probably a closely related member of the C. flaviplumus complex with the manuscript name "C. orientalis".
The three types of C. flaviplumus are here referred to as Type A (probably the valid C. flaviplumus), Type B for which there is no definite valid name, and Type C. from China.  They are the most closely related members of a wider group of species called the C. flaviplumus complex, showing cytological differences and small differences in the BARCODE sequences.