11901002 1Q 1SSINS 11ATA 1901007 10 IVNHYNOÏ SSIMS REVUE SUISSE DE ZOOLOGIE TOME 118— FASCICULE 2 Publication subventionnée par: ACADÉMIE SUISSE DES SCIENCES NATURELLES (SCNAT) VILLE DE GENÈVE SOCIÉTÉ SUISSE DE ZOOLOGIE Comité de rédaction DANIELLE DECROUEZ Directrice du Muséum d'histoire naturelle de Genève ALICE CIBOIS, PETER SCHUCHERT Chargés de recherche au Muséum d'histoire naturelle de Genève Comité de lecture A. Cibois (oiseaux), G. Cuccodoro (coléoptères), S. Fisch-Muller (poissons), B. Merz (insectes, excl. coléoptères), J. Mariaux (invertébrés excl. arthropodes), M. Ruedi (mammifères), A. Schmitz (amphibiens, reptiles), P. Schwendinger (arthropodes excl. insectes). Le comité soumet chaque manuscrit pour évaluation à des experts d’institutions suisses ou étrangères selon le sujet étudié. La préférence sera donnée aux travaux concernant les domaines suivants: taxonomie, systématique, faunistique, phylogénie, évolution, morphologie et anatomie comparée. Administration MUSÉUM D'HISTOIRE NATURELLE 1211 GENÈVE 6 Internet: http://www. ville-ge.ch/musinfo/mhng/page/rsz.htm PRIX DE L’ABONNEMENT: SUISSE Fr. 225.— UNION POSTALE Fr. 250.— (en francs suisses) Les demandes d’abonnement doivent être adressées à la rédaction de la Revue suisse de Zoologie, Muséum d'histoire naturelle, C.P. 6434, CH-1211 Genève 6, Suisse ANNALES de la SOCIÉTÉ SUISSE DE ZOOLOGIE et du MUSÉUM D'HISTOIRE NATURELLE de la Ville de Genève tome 118 fascicule 2 2011 £ ; FL GENEVE JUIN 2011 ISSN 0035 - 418 X REVUE SUISSE DE ZOOLOGIE SWISS JOURNAL OF ZOOLOGY REVUE SUISSE DE ZOOLOGIE TOME 118— FASCICULE 2 Publication subventionnée par: ACADÉMIE SUISSE DES SCIENCES NATURELLES (SCNAT) VILLE DE GENÈVE SOCIÉTÉ SUISSE DE ZOOLOGIE Comité de rédaction DANIELLE DECROUEZ Directrice du Muséum d'histoire naturelle de Genève ALICE CIBOIS, PETER SCHUCHERT Chargés de recherche au Muséum d'histoire naturelle de Genève Comité de lecture A. Cibois (oiseaux), G. Cuccodoro (coléoptères), S. Fisch-Muller (poissons), B. Merz (insectes, excl. coléoptères), J. Mariaux (invertébrés excl. arthropodes), M. Ruedi (mammifères), A. Schmitz (amphibiens, reptiles), P. Schwendinger (arthropodes excl. insectes). Le comité soumet chaque manuscrit pour évaluation à des experts d’institutions suisses ou étrangères selon le sujet étudié. La préférence sera donnée aux travaux concernant les domaines suivants: taxonomie, systématique, faunistique, phylogénie, évolution, morphologie et anatomie comparée. Administration MUSÉUM D'HISTOIRE NATURELLE 1211 GENÈVE 6 Internet: http://www.ville-ge.ch/musinfo/mhng/page/rsz.htm PRIX DE L’ABONNEMENT: SUISSE Fr. 225.— UNION POSTALE Fr. 250.— (en francs suisses) Les demandes d’abonnement doivent être adressées à la rédaction de la Revue suisse de Zoologie, Muséum d'histoire naturelle, C.P. 6434, CH-1211 Genève 6, Suisse REVUE SUISSE DE ZOOLOGIE 118 (2): 207-221; juin 2011 The spider genus Hersilia in Thaïland, with descriptions of two new species (Araneae, Hersiliidae) Pakawin DANKITTIPAKUL* & Tippawan SINGTRIPOP Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai 50200, Thaïland. *Corresponding author, e-mail: pakawin@ gmail.com The spider genus Hersilia in Thaïland, with descriptions of two new species (Araneae, Hersiliidae). - Our examination of a hersilid spider collection from Thailand revealed eight species of which two species are new (Hersilia serrata Sp. n. 4, %, H. thailandica sp. n., 4). Extended geographic ranges are recorded for H. sundaica Baehr & Baehr, 1993 and H. martensi Baehr & Baehr, 1993, which are reported from Thaïland for the first time. A. asiatica Song & Zheng, 1982, which was previously docu- mented from northeastern Thailand, is now also found in northern and southern Thailand. À substantial number of females from Thailand are similar to H. striata Wang & Yin, 1985, previously known from China, but can be distinguished by slight differences in their genital morphology. Keywords: Taxonomy - new taxa - new record - biodiversity - distribution range. INTRODUCTION To date ten species of Hersiliidae were found in Thaïland. All of them belong to the cosmotropical spider genus Hersilia Audouin. Prior to this study six species were known from Thailand. Unfortunately, the first hersiliid spider that was described from Thailand, Hersilia siamensis Simon, 1886, known only from the female type collected at ‘Canal de Bangkok, Siam’, is currently regarded as a nomen dubium (Baehr & Baehr, 1993: 78). This because the type is presumably lost (not found in the Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris, France, or in the Museo Civico di Storia Naturale “Giacomo Doria”, Genoa, Italy), and because the original description given by Simon (1886) did not include satisfactory taxonomic information to recognize or distinguish this species from its congeners (Baehr & Baehr, 1993). The other five taxa are: H. vi- cina Baehr & Baehr, 1993, H. asiatica Song & Zheng, 1982, H. simplicipalpis Baehr & Baehr, 1993, H. striata Wang & Yin, 1985 and H. clypealis Baehr & Baehr, 1993. The present study treats six Hersilia species, two of which are new and two others recorded from Thaïland for the first time. Therefore, a total of nine hersiliid species (excluding the doubtful H. siamensis) are currently known to occur in Thaïland. Following Baehr & Baehr (1993), they can be separated into five species- groups: 1) the a/bomaculata-group (H. martensi and H. vicina); 2) the asiatica-group (Æ. asiatica); 3) the savignyi-group (H. simplicipalpis, H. striata, H. clypealis, H. ser- Manuscript accepted 24.09.2010 208 P. DANKITTIPAKUL & T. SINGTRIPOP rata Sp. n.); 4) the pectinata-group (A. thailandica sp. n.); 5) the impressifrons-group (H. sundaica). This indicates not only a species-rich hersiliid fauna in Thaïland, it also reveals that this fauna is superficially known and more taxonomic work needs to be done. This study also revealed that some Hersilia species have broad distribution ranges. This article is the second in a series on faunistic and taxonomic studies on the Southeast Asian hersillids deposited in the spider collection of the Muséum d’histoire naturelle de la Ville de Genève, Switzerland. MATERIAL AND METHODS Morphological observation and illustration were made using Olympus SZX-9 and Nikon SMZ 800 stereomicroscopes, and an Olympus BX-40 compound micro- scope, each equipped with a drawing tube. Measurements of leg segments were taken from the dorsal side. AIT measurements are in millimeter. Epigynes were drawn in natural and cleared state (after immersing them in lactic acid for 10-20 minutes). Sizes of eyes are given as proportions of AME (= 1.00) in the following order: AME: ALE: PME: PLE. Leg measurements are given as: total length (femur, patella, tibia, meta- tarsus, tarsus). Abbreviations used in text and in the figures are as follows: AF, apical flange of TA; ALE, anterior lateral eyes: AME, anterior median eyes; AP, apical projection of TA; BS, bulbose sacs of spermathecae; bS, basal segment of posterior spinneret; CO, copulatory orifice; DMP, dorsal muscular pits; E, embolus; FD, fertilization duct; IP, lateral process of TA; IPf, membranous flange on lateral process of TA; IPp, prong on lateral process of TA; IPr, projection on lateral process of TA; IPt, tubercle on lateral process of TA; mP, median process of TA; mPa, apical prong on median process of TA; mPb, basal prong on median process of TA; NP, national park; PLS, posterior lateral spinnerets; PME, posterior median eyes; PLE, posterior lateral eyes; SD, insemination ducts; SR, seminal receptacle;: TA, tegular apophysis; tS, terminal segment of posterior spinneret; VMP, ventral muscular pits. In the text ‘Fig.’ refers to a figure herein, while ‘fig. refers to a figure published elsewhere. The material examined will be deposited in the spider collection of the Muséum d'histoire naturelle de la Ville de Genève, Switzerland (MHNG) and in the Thailand Natural History Museum (TNHM) of the National Science Museum, Pathumthani Province, Thailand. TAXONOMY HERSILIIDAE THORELL, 1870 Hersilia Audouin, 1826 Hersilia asiatica Song & Zheng, 1982 Figs 1-5, 27 Hersilia asiatica Song & Zheng, 1982: 40, figs 1-5; Hu, 1984: 81, figs 74.1-5.-— Song, 1987: 116, fig. 78; Feng, 1990: 48, figs 23.1-6.— Chen & Zhang, 1991: 78, figs 69.1-5.- Baehr & Baehr, 1993: 25, figs 20c-f. — Chen, 1994: 1, figs 1A-F. — Song, Zhu & Chen, 1999: 80, figs 321-J, 33C-D. — Chen, 2007: 14, figs 1, 5-12. NEW MATERIAL: MHNG-PDC-0254542121111111; Thaïland, Chiang Mai Province, Chiang Mai District, Doi Suthep-Pui NP, Doi Pui, Huay Khok Ma Watershed Station, 1200-1300 THE SPIDER GENUS HERSILIA IN THAILAND 209 FIGs 1-5 Hersilia asiatica. (1) Left male palp, prolateral view. (2) Ditto, ventral view. (3) Ditto, retro- lateral view. (4) Epigyne, ventral view. (5). Vulva, dorsal view. Scale lines = 1.0 mm. m; 1 male, 2 females; from a tree trunk in evergreen hill forest (closed canopy); 8.8.1999; leo. P. Dankittipakul. —- MHNG-PDC-541354654020213163; Thailand, Nakhon Sri Thammarat Province, Tha Sala District, Khao Nan NP, 100-200 m; 1 female; beating shrub in dry lowland evergreen forest; 17.8.2006; leg. P. Dankittipakul. —- TNHM-PDC-54651516514654; Thailand, Phetchabun Province, Lomsak District, Nam Nao NP, forests behind park headquarters, 600 m; 1 female; 16.-17.vii.2005; leg. P. Dankittipakul. REMARKS: Hersilia asiatica is an extremely long-legged species. Males are recognized by: palpal patella with strongly sclerotized ridge carrying short erect spines, the ridge is recognized by a broad cleft (Fig. 1); embolus linear (Figs 1-3); median process of TA with prolateral denticle (Figs 1-2); lateral process of TA with sharply pointed anterior margin, and carrying an elongate process (Fig. 2). Females are 210 P. DANKITTIPAKUL & T. SINGTRIPOP recognized by: epigyne a distinctly elevated mound with sclerotized anterior margin (Fig. 4); copulatory orifices situated anterior to sac-like membranous part of epigyne (Fig. 4); elongate tubular insemination ducts originating antero-medially, descending postero-laterally, connected to basal perforate sinusoids (Figs 5, 27); ovoid receptacula originating posteriorly, with tubular stalks (Fig. 5); fertilization ducts situated close to epigastric furrow, connected to vulva via short tubular ducts running obliquely (Fig. 5). Apart from the diagnostic characters given above and mentioned by Baehr & Baehr (1993), an additional feature was observed in the males examined: the lateral process of the TA bears a prolateral petal-shaped denticle (Figs 1, 3), its apex directed mesad. This structure is heavily sclerotized and sharply pointed in lateral view (Fig. 3); it is easily distinguishable from the median process of the TA which is less sclerotized and pigmented. DISTRIBUTION: China, Thailand and Laos. Hersilia asiatica Was previously recorded from northeastern Thailand (Khao Yai NP, Nakhon Ratchasima Province and Phu Kradueng NP, Loei Province) by Baehr & Baehr (1993). New localities reported herein extend the known distribution range of this species southwards to southern Thaïland (Fig. 32). Hersilia sundaica Baehr & Baehr, 1993 Figs 6-10, 28,31 Hersilia sundaica Baehr & Baehr, 1993: 58, figs 38c-f. NEW MATERIAL: MHNG-PDC-1488756462151465454: Thaïland, Phetchabun Province, Khao Kho NP, forest behind park headquarters, 650 m; 1 male; 10.-15.11.2006:; collected by Malaise trap:; leg. P., Dankittipakul. - MHNG-PDC-545464654545787; Thailand, Sakon Nakhon Province, Phu Phan NP, 800 m:; 1 female: 12.-15.9.2007; collected by Malaise trap; leg. P. Dankittipakul. - TNHM-PDC-8782511532551454514; Thaïland, Loei Province, Phu Kradueng NP, 1200 m: 1 female: 18.-20.9.2007; collected by Malaise trap; leg. P. Dankittipakul. REMARKS: Hersilia sundaica belongs to the impressifrons-group which can be easily recognized by the peculiar structure of the male palp: the TA is complicated, pro- vided with: 1) a membranous apical flange with serrated margin (Fig. 8, AF), and a bifurcated apical prong directed postero-retrolaterad (Fig. 8, AP); 2) lateral process of TA (IP) a large sclerotized, C-shaped plate, partially membranous, retrolaterally with a spoon-shaped projection (Figs 6-8, IPr), anteriorly with a median tubercle clearly visible in retrolateral view (Fig. 8, IPt), a membranous flange (Figs 7-8, IPF), and an elongated prong directed posteriad, its apex bifurcated (Fig. 7, IPp); 3) median process Of TA (mP) with two large prongs, a basal prong abruptly bent, obliquely directed an- teriad (Fig. 7, mPb), apical prong elongated, its apex membranous, fan-like (Fig. 7, mPa). Females are recognized by the protruded epigyne extending posteriorly (Fig. 9), copulatory orifices situated close to excavated posterior margin; vulva (Figs 10, 28) provided with parallel insemination ducts running mid-longitudinally, ascending ante- riorly then curving laterally to form large glandular apparatus (Fig. 28); two pilose, spherical receptacula (Fig. 31) with short stalks situated anteriorly. The females exa- mined lack a glandular patch which is present in the female paratype from Indonesia. NATURAL HISTORY: AII specimens examined were collected by means of a Malaise trap suggesting that this species is rather active and does not stay on the same tree as previous observations made us believe. THE SPIDER GENUS HERSILIA IN THAILAND | à { 1 ( \, > | S 2 À AR {L! 20 4 CC Th (42 7 CZ COL LEITL A) FiGs 6-10 Hersilia sundaica. (6) Left male palp, prolateral view. (7) Ditto, ventral view. (8) Ditto, retrola- teral view. (9) Epigyne, ventral view. (10) Vulva, dorsal view. Scale lines = 1.0 mm. DISTRIBUTION: Indonesia (Lombok, Sumbawa) and Thailand (new record, Fig. 32). Although strong resemblance in genital morphology leave no doubt that the specimens examined belong to this species, it 1S important to note that the new specimens were collected very far away from the type localities on the Lesser Sunda Islands. Hersilia sundaica seems to have a broad distribution range. Additional material will hopefully become available from SE Asian countries in the future to confirm this. Hersilia martensi Baehr & Baehr, 1993 Figs 11-14 Hersilia martensi Baehr & Baehr, 1993: 21, figs 17c-d. NEW MATERIAL: MHNG-PDC-78754131421545; Thaïland, Phetchabun Province, Nam Nao NP; 1 male; 18.7.2006; beating in forest with open canopy behind park headquarters; leg. P. Dankittipakul. LD) LD) P. DANKITTIPAKUL & T. SINGTRIPOP ASS 11 FIiGs 11-14 Hersilia martensi. (11) Left male palp, ventral view. (12) TA, ventral view. (13) Ditto, prolateral view. (14) Ditto. retrolateral view. Scale line = 1.0 mm. REMARKS: The male of this species is recognized by a retrolateral extension on the male bulb (Fig. 11), by a curved embolus gradually narrowing towards its sharply pointed apex (Figs 11-14), and by the TA carrying a lightly sclerotized prolateral pro- cess and a membranous retrolateral flange (Figs 12-14). THE SPIDER GENUS HERSILIA IN THAILAND 213 DISTRIBUTION: Nepal and Thailand (new record, Fig. 32). As H. sundaica, this species is apparently widely distributed. It was described from Nepal and, as the first new record since its original description, is here documented from a forest in north- eastern Thailand. Hersilia serrata sp. n. Figs 15-19, 30 HOLOTYPE: MHNG-PDC-244545122222-109; Thailand, Chiang Mai Province and District, Chiang Mai University campus, Ang Kaew, 300-350 m; 1 male; 4.10.2007; on a tree trunk in an open area; leg. P. Dankittipakul. PARATYPES: MHNG-PDC-875415454545987321; from the type locality; 1 female: 10.11.2007; leg. P. Dankittipakul. - MHNG-PDC-457857181554543222-256; Thailand, Chiang Mai Province, Chomthong District, Doi Inthanon NP, Doi Inthanon, on a tree trunk in degraded natural forest interspersed with pine trees behind a guest house, 1200-1300 m; 1 female: 1.-4.7.2002; leg. P. Dankittipakul. - MHNG-PDC-515432321544142114789; Thailand, Phitsanulok Province, Nakhon Thai District, Thung Salaeng Luang NP, Kaeng So Pha Waterfalls, 200-250 m, on tree trunk in dry deciduous forest close to a stream; 1 female: 2.5.2001; leg. P. Dankittipakul. ETYMOLOGY: The Latin adjective “serratus -a, -um” (= saw like, serrated, saw toothed), refers to the serrated margin of the baso-median process on the TA of the male palp. DIAGNOSIS: Hersilia serrata sp. n. clearly belongs to a presumably monophyle- tic clade consisting of 10 closely related species known as the savignyi-group. The male palpal patella of the savignyi-group is characterized by the presence of an ele- vated dorsal projection carrying minute erect spines (Fig. 15). The male of H. serrata Sp. n. is distinguished from other members of the savignyi-group by the serrated baso- median process of the TA; females by the very broad and heavily sclerotized apices of the bulbose sacs of the spermathecae. DESCRIPTION Male holotype: Prosoma 2.5 long, 2.4 wide; opisthosoma 4.0 long, 2.5 wide. PLS 6.9 long, bS 0.9 long, tS 6.0 long. Prosoma: Prosoma almost disc-shaped, as long as wide, with distinct clypeal projection, ocular region relatively low; clypeus about half length of ocular region: chelicerae elongated, slightly less than two times longer than wide; sternum triangular, anterior margin With shallow median incision. Eye size and interdistances: AME distinctly larger than PME: ALE = PLE > PME; eye ratio: 1.0: 0.80: 0.38: 0.88. AME = 1.0; AME-AME = 0.48; AME-ALE = 0.68; PME = 1.0; PME-PME = 0.62; PME-PLE = 0.84. Opisthosoma: Opisthosoma ovoid, longer than wide, widest in the middle, posteriorly with triangular anal tubercle; dorsum with four pairs of large circular DMP, second pair largest, first and fourth pairs subequal, slightly smaller than third pair: VMP numerous, forming parallel longitudinal lines but distinctly narrower posteriorly. Spinnerets: PLS elongated, slightly less than twice as long as opisthosoma: other spinnerets slightly shorter than bS. Lébimeasurements:0Æ, 21:64 (550; 1:24,:5.82;:8.1,:0:98); Ir, 22.08 (58, 1.1. 56/8202) 41 5:60(184;0.58; 1:12,1:32;0.74); IV, 12:96 (4.88, 0.96,292,3.22, 0.98). 214 P. DANKITTIPAKUL & T. SINGTRIPOP FiGs 15-19 Hersilia serrata Sp. n., holotype (15-17), paratype (18-19). (15) Left male palp, prolateral view. (16) Ditto, ventral view. (17) Ditto, retrolateral view. (18) Epigyne, ventral view. (19) Vulva, dorsal view. Scale lines = 1.0 mm. Male palp (Figs 15-17): Patella with dorsal projection carrying several short spines. Tibia prolaterally with bifurcated apical portion. Cymbium slender, with three stout apical spines. Bulbus almost globular, posteriorly narrowed. Embolus slender, linear, apex slightly curved, pointing downwards. TA with two processes: baso-median process strongly sclerotized, with bifurcated projection and serrated margin; apico- THE SPIDER GENUS HERSILIA IN THAILAND 215 retrolateral process with columnar membrane situated apically, and with larger, concave, sclerotized part situated retrolaterally, its apex sharply pointed, directed mesad. Female paratype (from Chiang Mai): Prosoma 2.8 long, 2.6 wide; opisthosoma 4.2 long, 2.6 wide. PLS 7.52 long, bS 1.10 long, tS 6.42 long. Prosoma: Prosoma circular, clypeal area protruded, frontal clypeal margin semicircular; ocular region relatively low: clypeus approximately of same height as ocular region; chelicerae elongated, almost twice as long as wide; sternum triangular, anterior margin With shallow median incision. Eye size and interdistances: Eyes almost subequal; AME largest > ALE = PLE > PME; ratio: 1.0: 0.94; 0.28; 0.90. AME = 1 0; AME-AME = 0.48; AME-ALE = 0.66; PME = 1.0; PME-PME = 0.68; PME-PLE = 0.88. Opisthosoma: Opisthosma longer than wide, widest posteriorly, triangular anal tubercle indistinct; dorsum with four pairs of large circular DMP, fourth pair slightly smaller, others subequal; VMP numerous, forming V-shaped longitudinal lines. Spinnerets: PLS elongated, slightly longer than opisthosoma; other spinnerets shorter than bS. Leg measurements: I, 21.18 (5.10, 2.02, 5.20, 7.98, 0.88); IT, 21.32 (5.62, 1.02, 5.66, 8.1, 0.98); III, 5.02 (1.66, 0.48, 1.02, 1.22, 0.64); IV, 12.4 (4.66, 0.88, 2.86, 3.12, 0.88). Epigyne and vulva (Figs 18-19, 30): Epigyne an elevated membranous mound, posteriorly slightly higher than in anterior region, posterior margin with deep median incision; oval copulatory orifices situated medially, its margin rebordered, with reddish bands directed obliquely in antero-prolateral and antero-retrolateral direction. Vulva with broad and thickened insemination ducts, directed anteriad, then descending laterad. Receptacula widely separated, ovoid, with tubular stalks. Bulbose sacs of spermathecae rectangular, inclined towards each other, with digitiform pilose apices. TAXONOMIC REMARKS: Males of the new species closely resemble those of H. nentwigt Baehr & Baehr, 1993 (known from Sumatra, Java and Krakatau) in the general shape of the male palp and the possession of baso-median and apico-retro- lateral processes on the TA (Fig. 16). Males of both species can be distinguished by the apico-retrolateral process provided with an elongated apical membranous portion directed distad (Figs 16-17) (columnar in ventral view, beak-shaped in retrolateral view in À. serrata Sp. n., but completely absent in H. nentwigi), and by the sclerotized baso- median process with a serrated margin (carrying a bifurcated projection in H. serrata Sp. n., Fig. 15, serrated area absent in FH. nentwigi). The TA of the male palp also closely resembles that of H. feai Baehr & Baehr, 1993 (from Burma) in having an elongated membranous part and a sclerotized, beak-shaped projection directed mesad on the apico-retrolateral process of the TA (Fig. 16); the TA of the new species can be distinguished by the baso-median process being triangular and lacking a bifurcated projection. Males of H. striata Wang & Yin, 1985 (from China, Myanmar, Thailand to Java and Sumatra) differ from males of the new species by the TA without a mem- branous apical part on the apico-retrolateral process and by the baso-median process lacking a serrated area. 216 P. DANKITTIPAKUL & T. SINGTRIPOP Females of the new species are most similar to those of H. nentwigi but can be distinguished by the elongated, rectangular bulbose posterior sacs of their sperma- thecae which are provided with broad, bluntly pointed apices (Figs 19, 30) (apices and bulbose sacs not visible in H. nentwigi). Females clearly differ from those of H. sim- plicipalpis (from Khao Yai NP and Doi Suthep-Pui NP) and FH. striata in the different shapes of their vulvae: large bulbose sacs are present in Æ. simplicipalpis, thickened bulbose sacs in A. striata. DISTRIBUTION: Northern Thaïland (Chiang Mai and Phitsanulok Provinces). Hersilia thailandica Sp. n. Figs 20-24 HOLOTYPE: MHNG-PDC-65465444442244741976-109; Thailand, Chiang Mai Province, Mae Rim District, Queen Sirikit Botanic Garden, 600-700 m, on a tree trunk in degraded forest in front of museum building; 1 male: 6.-13.10.2006:; leg. P. Dankittipakul. PARATYPES: MHNG-PDC-12546554574875655; same data as for holotype; 3 males. ETYMOLOGY: The specific name is an adjective (‘“thailandicus, -a, -um”) and re- fers to the presence of this species in Thailand. DIAGNOSIS: Hersilia thailandica Sp. n. belongs to the pectinata-group, which 1s easily recognized by the male palpal patella being short, and the palpal tibia with an elevated dorsal projection carrying a group of long erect spines (Figs 21-23). The new species 1s most similar to H. pectinata Thorell, 1895 from Burma in the similar male palp with an enlarged, ovoid bulbus, an elongated, curved embolus thickening and a T- shaped TA. Hersilia thailandica Sp. n. can be distinguished from H. pectinata by: seven large erected spines on palpal tibia directed anteriad (Figs 21, 23) instead of laterad (almost perpendicular to the axis of the tibia in H. pectinata); the embolus terminally abruptly bending distad, gradually narrowing towards its bluntly pointed apex (Figs 20, 22); the ovoid bulbus with enlarged tubular TA (Fig. 22) instead of being a reniform plate. DESCRIPTION Male holotype: Prosoma 2.8 long, 2.6 wide; opisthosoma 4.4 long, 2.8 wide. PLS 7.3 long, bS 1.1 long, tS 6.2 long. Prosoma: Prosoma pear-shaped, posteriorly distinctly disc-shaped: ocular region relatively low; clypeus slightly shorter than ocular region; chelicerae elongated, twice as long as wide; sternum triangular, anterior margin with shallow median inCision. Eye size and interdistances: Eyes almost subequal; AME slightly larger than PME; ALE = PLE < AME; eye ratio: 1.0: 0.82: 0.84: 0.96. AME = 1.0; AME-AME = 0.78; AME-ALE = 0.98; PME = 1.0; PME-PME = 0.68; PME-PLE = 0.72. Opisthosoma: Opisthosoma longer than wide, widest behind the middle, anterior margin almost straight, posteriorly with triangular anal tubercle; dorsum with four pairs of large circular DMP, second pair slightly larger, others subequal; VMP numerous, forming parallel longitudinal lines but distance distinctly narrower posteriorly. Spinnerets: PLS elongated, twice as long as opisthosoma; other spinnerets not visible in dorsal view. THE SPIDER GENUS HERSILIA IN THAILAND 217 FiGs 20-21 Hersilia thailandica sp. n., holotype. (20) Left male palp, ventral view. (21) Ditto, retrolateral view. Scale lines = 1.0 mm. Leg measurements: I, 20.24 (4.96, 1.92, 5.02, 7.58, 0.76); IT, 20.7 (5.42, 0.98, 5.44, 7.98, 0.88), IT, 4.52 (1.46, 0.42, 0.98, 1.12, 0.54), IV 11.7 (4.46, 0.8, 2.58, 3.08, 0.78). Male palp (Figs 20-24): Tibia short, dorsally with elevated projection carrying seven long erect spines directed anteriad (Fig. 23). Cymbium with three stout apical spines. Bulbus large, ovoid; lateral borders rounded. Embolus broad, heavily pig- mented, without accessory process, originating postero-medially, curving in anti- clockwise direction (on left palp), terminally abruptly bending distad, gradually narrowing towards it bluntly pointed apex (Figs 20, 22). TA developed as a large elongated prong, its base broad, with a retro-basal ridge, narrowing to form a tubular stalk and abruptly bending mesad (Figs 20, 22), apex spoon-shaped, curling inwards (Fig. 24). 218 P. DANKITTIPAKUL & T. SINGTRIPOP FIGs 22-24 Hersilia thailandica sp. n., holotype. (22) Left male palp, proventral view. (23) Ditto, dorsal view. (24) Apex of TA, prolateral view. Scale lines = 1.0 mm. Female: Unknown. DISTRIBUTION: Known only from the type locality in Chiang Mai Province (Fis32); Hersilia cf. striata Wang & Yin, 1985 Figs 25-26, 29 Hersilia striata Wang & Yin, 1985: 45, figs 1A-E. — Song, 1987: 117, fig. 79. — Baehr & Baehr, 1993: 37, figs 26c-g. — Song, Zhu & Chen, 1999: 80, figs 12C, 32K-L, 33E. — Chen, 2007: 17, figs 2, 13-18. MATERIAL EXAMINED: MHNG-PDC-74164642342654656687; Thailand, Prae Province, Long District, on a trunk of teak in a deciduous dipterocarp forests en route to Prae City; 1 fe- male; 26.5.2002; leg. P. Dankittipakul. REMARKS: The female examined belongs to the savignyi-group on the basis of genital morphology. It is most similar to H. striata in having the insemination ducts curving downwards and then ascending laterad, the rectangular bulbose sacs of the THE SPIDER GENUS HERSILIA IN THAILAND 219 FIGs 25-26 Hersilia cf. striata. (25) Epigyne, ventral view. (26) Vulva, dorsal view. Scale lines = 1.0 mm. Fics 27-31 Hersilia asiatica (27), H. sundaica (28, 31), H. cf. striata (29), H. serrata sp. n., paratype (30). (27-28) Vulva, dorsal view. (29-30) Right half of vulva, dorsal view. (31) Seminal receptacle. spermathecae with pilose apices and the ovoid receptacula separated from one other. However, the female examined slightly differ in the shape of the apices on the bulbose sacs which are round and clearly separate from the remaining membranous parts by thickenings (Figs 26, 29). The separation is indistinct and the thickening of the apices 220 P. DANKITTIPAKUL & T. SINGTRIPOP H. asiatica H. clypealis H. martensi H. serrata H. simplicipalpis H. cf. striata H. sundaica H. thailandica H. vicina FIG. 32 Currently known Hersilia localities in Thaïland. is not prominent in females of H. striata. Therefore, the female examined from Thailand cannot be identified with certainty pending an examination of the Chinese types. THE SPIDER GENUS HERSILIA IN THAILAND 221 DISTRIBUTION: China, Myanmar, Thailand (Sam Roi Yod NP, Prachuap Kirikhan Province, and Doi Inthanon NP, Chiang Mai Province, given by Baehr & Baehr, 1993; Long, Prae Province), Indonesia (Java, Sumatra). Hersilia Spp. Females of two additional, presumably undescribed species of the savignyi- group were found in the provinces of Lampang and Kanchanaburi. They will be formally described as soon as conspecific males are available. Three other Hersilia species previously recorded from Thailand are not included in the present study because no new material is available. These taxa are: H. clypealis (Khao Yai NP), H. simplicipalpis (Khao Yai NP, Doi Suthep-Pui NP), H. vicina (Khao Yai NP, Pa Hin Ngam NP, Nam Nao NP). ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We thank Dr Peter Schwendinger for the allowing us to deposit the type spe- cimen at MHNG. He and Dr Barbara Baehr (University of Newcastle, Australia) kindly provided constructive comments on earlier versions of the manuscript. The Thaïland Research Fund provided a grant through the Royal Golden Jubilee Ph. D. Program (PHD/0017/2551) to T.S. and P.D. The Graduate School and the Faculty of Science of Chiang Mai University supported P.D. during his study. The Royal Forest Department gave permission to collect spider specimens in national parks and other protected areas. P.D. wishes to express his sincerer gratitude to Dr Angoon Lewvanich (The Royal Academy of Thaïland, Bangkok) and Christopher J. Sain (The University of Auckland, New Zealand) for their support throughout the years. REFERENCES AUDOUIN, V. 1826. Explication sommaire des planches d’arachnides de l’Egypte et de la Syrie publiées par Jules-César Savigny: offrent un exposé des charactères naturels des genres, avec la distinction des espèces (pp. 99-186, pl. 1-9). Zn: SAVIGNY, J. C. (ed.). Description de l’Egypte. Histoire Naturelle, Animaux invertébrés (Paris) 1 (4): 1-339. BAEHR, M. & BAEHR, B. 1993. The Hersiliidae of the Oriental Region including New Guinea. Taxonomy, phylogeny, zoogeography (Arachnida, Araneae). Spixiana Supplement 19: 1- x: CHEN, S. H. 2007. Spiders of the genus Hersilia from Taiwan (Araneae: Hersiliidae). Zoological Studies 46: 12-25. SIMON, E. 1886. Arachnides recueillis par M. A. Pavie (sous-chef du service des postes au Cambodge) dans le royaume de Siam, au Cambodge et en Cochinchine. Actes de la Société linnéenne de Bordeaux 40: 137-166. SONG, D. X. 1987. Spiders from agricultural regions of China (Arachnida: Araneae). Agriculture Publishing House, Beijing, 376 pp. SONG, D. X. & ZHENG, S. X. 1982. A new spider of the genus Hersilia from China (Araneae: Hersiliidae). Acta Zootaxonomica Sinica 7: 40-42. SONG, D. X., ZHU, M.S. & CHEN, J. 1999. The Spiders of China. Hebei Science and Technology Publishing House, Shijiazhuang, 640 pp. THORELL, T. 1870. On European spiders. Nova Acta Regiae Societatis Scientiarum Upsaliensis (3)7: 109-242. WANG, J. F. & YIN, C. M. 1985. Two new species of spiders of the genus Hersilia from China (Araneae: Hersiliidae). Acta Zootaxonomica Sinica 10: 45-49. Rule LS RES LUTTE mule | ‘ENT ra et pt init leur 1e ONE CE = € . Lists li au anht ki 3 É tan Fe, d AS “p+ SE +] 0BTRE : ONE. Pret 1# PIE MA A ee £ AT AA" Fe Le VUE ét | ty Penn BELL À b= pb | délais RE op RTE a pe rémts strass d rm se 1 ufr 7. 1 vu 2 ts on ès bé M dan | 2 Satis 6 t : ed n fs . NUS és), 4 HS +2 r Vanne t has TS AUTRE . Le Ù MES Ve Part AS UT y pe D” N . pin FETE e Cn LL + AA li [AR | - REVUE SUISSE DE ZOOLOGIE 118 (2): 223-230; juin 2011 Two new species of Amynthas (Clitellata: Megascolecidae) from lettuce fields of Mt. Taebaek, Korea Yong HONG Department of Agricultural Biology, College of Agriculture & Life Sciences, Chonbuk National University, Jeonju 561-756, Korea Two new species of Amynthas (Clitellata: Megascolecidae) from lettuce fields of Mt. Taebaek, Korea. - Two new species of earthworms were found in a survey of lettuce cultivation fields, created by slash and burn. Amynthas hasamensis Sp. n. and Amynthas samgaki Sp. n. have simple intestinal caeca and no genital markings. Amynthas hasamensis Sp. n. keys to the hawayanus group in Sims & Easton (1972) with three pairs of spermathecae in VI, VIT, and VII. Its male field areas in XVIII are complex with paired oval male discs bearing two transverse ridges with seminal grooves between the ridges. Amynthas samgaki Sp. n. keys to the morrisi group With two pairs of spermathecae in VI and VIF, and has a male field with large egg-shaped raised pads with transverse seminal grooves. Keywords: Earthworms - Amynthas - Megascolecidae - Clitellata - Korea - lettuce fields - taxonomy. INTRODUCTION Korean earthworm communities in forests and agricultural ecosystems are dominated by species of the genus Amynthas (Megascolecidae). Many new Korean species have been described recently, further expanding the genus Amynthas (Hong & James, 2001a, b; Hong & Lee, 2001; Hong ef al., 2001; Hong & Kim, 2002a, b; Hong, 2007; Hong & James, 2009). The shape of the male pore region, especially the male discs, is useful for taxonomy of Korean Amynthas and has been used throughout the history of this taxon. Species with male discs were reported in Hong & James (2001àa) and Hong (2007). In this study, I describe two species with male discs: Amynthas ha- samensis Sp. n. and Amynthas samgaki sp. n. Exotic Drawida species (Moniligastridae) were also found in the area, so I conclude that endemic and exotic species are living together. An earlier report of the earthworm fauna from Mt. Taebaek found only one species, Amynthas taebaekensis (Hong & James, 2001a). Mt. Taebaek 1s located to the north of Seoul in Gangwon Provincial Park, which has natural forests. Among its big mountains are Janggun peak (1,567 m), Munsoo peak (1,517 m), and Busoe peak (1,546 m). Specimens were collected by digging and hand sorting in June 2006 and July 2007 in slash-and-burn fields used for lettuce cultivation. Taxonomy in this paper follows Sims & Easton (1972), and Easton (1979). In the location data the terms “dong” and “ri” refer to successively smaller Korean political divisions and do not have direct English equivalents. The “ri” division is Manuscript accepted08.12.2010 224 Y. HONG preceded by a number if there is more than one r1 of a particular name. In this paper, “Hasam 2-ri° indicates the second ri named Hasam. Illustrations are of anatomical views containing important features, prepared with a camera lucida. Descriptions are based on the external examination and dorsal dissection under the stereomicroscope. Holotype and some paratypes are deposited in the National Institute of Biologocal Resources, Korea (NIBR), and other paratypes are deposited in the Museum of Natural History of Geneva (MHNG). DESCRIPTION FAMILY MEGASCOLECIDAE RoOSA, 1891 Genus Amynthas Kinberg, 1867 Amynthas hasamensis Sp. n. Figs 1 A-B MATERIAL: Holotype: clitellate (NIBRIVO000224640); Korea, Gangwon province, Taebaek municipality, Samsu-dong, Hasam 2-ri, Mt. Taebaek (37° 14.074°N, 128° 59.151°E), 600-800 m, fields cleared for cultivation by burning, soil and litter layers, 29 June 2006, Y. Hong coll. — Paratypes: 1 clitellate (NIBRIVO000224641), 1 clitellate (MHNG INVE 75339); same data as for holotype. — Nontype material: 2 clitellate specimens, Taebaek municipality, Samsu- dong, Hasam 2-ri, Mt. Taebaek (37° 14.074°N, 128° 59.151°E), 600-800 m, soil and litter layers, 4 July 2007, Y. Hong coll. ETYMOLOGY: The species is named for Hasam 2-ri, its type locality. DIAGNOSIS: Three pairs of spermathecal pores in 5/6-7/8; male discs each with two transverse low ridges, short diagonal seminal groove between ridges, no other genital markings. DESCRIPTION: Dimensions 80-130 mm by 5.5-6.5 mm at segment X,6.0-6.5 mm at segment XXX, 6.0-8.0 mm at clitellum; body cylindrical, segments 59-109. Setae regularly distributed around segmental equators numbering 31-35 at VII, 63-66 at XX, 0 between male pores, setal formula AA:AB:ZZ:YZ= 2:2:4:3 at XIII. Female pore single in XIV, within 0.8-1.0 mm circular porophore. Prostomium epilobic with tongue open, clitellum coffee color, formalin preservation. First dorsal pores at 12/13, one individual 11/12. Clitellum annular XIV-XVI; setae invisible externally. Male field composed of paired male discs, each approximately ovate with longer axis transverse; each disc with two narrow transverse ridges, one equatorial, centered to slightly lateral of center on disc; one on posterior margin of disc, almost as long as long axis of disc. Surface between ridges and within outer margins of discs generally depressed; midventral gap between discs even more depressed. Seminal grooves short, from just posterior to medial end of equatorial ridge, diagonally posterior, lateral in a short arc convex anterior-laterally across depressed area between ridges to meet posterior ridge. Male pores at medial ends of seminal grooves, close to equatorial ridges, 0.15 circumference apart. Spermathecal pores in 5/6-7/8, 0.16 circumference apart, each with small tongue-like appendage within furrow: thickened lips immediately adjacent to each pore; ventral surface of VI-VIIT thickened, slightly rugose, faintly pigmented. Septa 5/6-7/8 thick, 8/9/10 absent, 10/11-13/14 thinly muscular. Gizzard large in VIII-X. Intestine begins in XV; lymph glands not found. Typhlosole medium sized TWO NEW AMYNTHAS FROM KOREA 225 dl FIG. 1 Amynthas hasamensis sp. n. (A) Ventral view. (B) Spermathecae and diverticulum. Scale bars = 2.5 mm (A), 2 mm (B). 226 Y. HONG from XXVI. Intestinal caeca originating in XX VII and extending anteriorly about to XXII, simple finger-shaped sac. Oesophageal hearts three pairs in XI-XIIT; X, only one side. Male sexual system holandric, testes and funnels in ventrally joined sacs in X-XI. Seminal vesicles two pairs in XI-XII medium sized with dorsal lobes. Prostates in XVIIT, extending over XVI-XIX, stout ducts, both glands consist of two main lobes, each divided again into many small lobes. Ovaries in XIII. Paired spermathecae in VI-VIIT, VI smallest; ampulla surface wrinkled egg-shaped, duct slender, shorter than ampulla, diverticulum chamber clavate, almost transparent with slender stalk shorter than ampulla, no nephridia on spermathecal ducts. Genital marking glands not found. REMARKS: In Sims & Easton (1972), Amynthas hasamensis Sp. n. keys to the hawayanus (gracilis) group. The new species 1s not À. gracilis (Kinberg 1867) or its possible and actual synonyms (Blakemore, 2003), all of which have several small genital markings in the spermathecal and male field segments, and lack the large porophores with seminal grooves. The gracilis species group includes 13 species found in Korea and/or Japan: À. acinctus (Goto & Hatai, 1899), À. agrestis (part) (Goto & Hatai, 1898), À. carnosus (Goto & Hatai, 1899), À. communissimus (Goto & Hatai, 1899), À. hilgendorfi (part) (Michaelsen, 1892), À. kamitai (Kobayashi, 1934), À. pa - pulosus (Rosa,1896), A. phaselus (Hatai, 1930), À. serratus (Kobayashi, 1936), À. vallis (Kobayash1, 1936), A. palgongensis Hong, 2001, À. minjae Hong, 2001, and A. jamesi Hong, 2007. Most of these lack large porophores with seminal grooves and most have small genital markings in spermathecal and/or male field segments. Amynthas communissimus has manicate caeca. Only À. vallis, À. jamesi, and A. pal- gongensis have seminal grooves on large porophores. Annular testes sacs are present in À. vallis and À. palgongensis, but À. vallis has very long diagonal seminal grooves extending back towards 18/19. The new species is similar to À. palgongensis, but has a different shape of the spermathecal diverticulum, a shorter diverticulum relative to the ampulla, fewer setae per segment at VIT, and no setae between male pores (0 vs. 1-4). The T-shaped seminal grooves of A. palgongensis are also very distinct. Looking beyond the rather superficially-defined species groups in Sims & Easton (1972), the species 1s similar to À. cuneatus Hong & James, 2001, whose male field consists of male discs with short seminal grooves of the same orientation. It differs from À. cu- neatus in having the transverse ridges and in not having the male discs mounted on large alate extensions of XVIII. The two species differ in number of spermathecal pores, and the thickened rugose slightly pigmented areas of VI-VIIT (genital patches) are lateral in À. cuneatus, rather than ventral. Chen (1933; 1936; 1938; 1946) reported ten species of the gracilis group in China. Amynthas hasamensis Sp. n. is similar to the Chinese A. muticus (Chen, 1938) and À. magnificus (Chen, 1936) by having male discs, but the disc shapes and spermathecal characters are different, and there are no ridges in the discs of either Chinese species. Amynthas samgaki sp. n. Figs 2A-B MATERIAL: Holotype; clitellate (NIBRIVO000224642); Korea, Gangwon province, Taebaek municipality, Samsu-dong, Hasam 2-ri, Mt. Taebaek (37° 14.074°N, 128° 59.151°E), TWO NEW AMYNTHAS FROM KOREA F5. : FIG. 2 Amynthas samgaki sp. n. (A) Ventral view. (B) Spermathecae and diverticulum. Scale bars = 4 mm (A),2 mm (B). 228 Y. HONG 600-800 m, soil and litter layers, 29 June 2006, Y. Hong coll. — Paratypes; 1 clitellate (NI- BRIV0000224643), 1 clitellate (MHNG INVE 75338); same data as for holotype. - Nontype material; 1 clitellate specimen, Taebaek municipality, Samsu-dong, Hasam 2-ri, Mt. Taebaek (37° 14.074 N, 128° 59.151°E), 600-800 m, soil and litter layers, 4 July 2007, Y. Hong coll. ETYMOLOGY: The species is named after Sim Samgak, whose farm is its type locality. DIAGNOSIS: Paired spermathecal pores in 5/6, 6/7; male field with large egg- shaped raised pads with transverse seminal groove across pad center, 2.5-3.0 mm distance between male pores, testes sacs ventral, paired. DESCRIPTION: Dimensions 77-110.5 mm by 4.5-4.7 mm at segment X, 6.0-6.5 mm at segment XXX, 5.5-6.5 mm at clitellum; segments 64-79. Setae regularly distri- buted around segmental equators, numbering 24-32 at VII, 52-63 at XX, 7 between male pores, setal formula AA:AB:ZZ:YZ= 2.5:2:2:2 at XIII. Female pore single in XIV, on 0.6-0.9 mm circle or oval. Prostomium epilobic with tongue open, clitellum coffee color, formalin preservation. First dorsal pore at 12/13. Clitellum annular XIV- XVI, setae invisible externally. Male field with large egg-shaped raised pads, narrow end lateral, with trans- verse seminal groove from center of pad to just inside lateral edge, male pore at medial end of groove. Three to four concentric arcs around lateral end of pad, 2.5-3.0 mm distance between male pores. Paired spermathecal pores in 5/6 and 6/7, lateral, minute. Genital markings lacking. Septa 5/6-7/8 thick, 8/9, 9/10 absent, 10/11-12/13 thickened. Gizzard large in VIII-X. Intestine begins in XV, lymph glands not found. Typhlosole medium sized from XX VI. Intestinal cecum originating in XX VII and extending anteriorly about to XXIV, bent down to ventral body wall, simple finger-shaped. Oesophageal hearts four pairs in X-XII; X, XII and XIII large. Male sexual system holandric, testes and funnels in ventrally paired sacs in X-XI. Seminal vesicles two pairs in XI-XII medium sized. Prostates in XVIII, extending through XVII-XIX, long stout duct, glands divided into small lobes. Ovaries in XIII. Paired spermathecae in VI, VIT, each ampulla roughly ovate, flattened, wrinkled on surfaces, slender duct as long as ampulla; diverticulum chamber club-shaped, white; slender stalk as long as ampulla, no nephridia on spermathecae ducts. Genital marking glands not found. REMARKS: Amynthas samgaki Sp. n. keys to the morrisi group in Sims & Easton (1972), which is composed of 30 species. Chen (1933; 1936; 1938; 1946) recorded 12 species of the morrisi group from China. Among them, none has male pores on discs or Similar pads. Amynthas oculatus (Chen, 1938) has a large pair of postsetal genital papillae but the male pores lie outside these. Two species of the canaliculatus-group, A. jangbogoi and A. jindoensis, also have male discs with seminal grooves, and the pairs of spermathecal pores are intrasegmental on VI and VII, rather than in 5/6/7. In A. jangbogoi the disc is bowling-pin shaped. The spermathecal diverticulum stalk of the latter has numerous tight kinks, as opposed to straight. I include this comparison because the canaliculatus-group could include morrisi-group species with indepen- dently evolved intrasegmental spermathecal pores. TWO NEW AMYNTHAS FROM KOREA 229 The following Korean morrisi-group species are known: À. fibulus fibulus (Kobayashi, 1936), A. fibulus ranunculus (Kobayashi, 1936), A. kobayashii (Kobayashi, 1938), À. koreanus (Kobayashi, 1938), A. geojeinsulae (Song & Paik, 1970), À. draconis Hong & James, 2001, À. naejangensis Hong & James, 2001, A. assimilis Hong & Kim 2002, and À. gyeryongensis Hong & Kim, 2002. Amynthas assimilis and À. naejangensis have male discs with seminal grooves. In À. assimilis the disc and groove are oriented diagonally. Amynthas naejangensis 1s larger and has more segments (116-153 mm vs 77-110 mm, 96-117 vs 64-79 respectively) but is very similar in most respects. The following details of À. naejangensis are to be contrasted to the description of Amynthas samgaki Sp. n.: testes sacs dorsally united in X and XI, and enclosing seminal vesicles of XI, Iymph glands present, male discs encroaching on adjacent segments, dorsal setal gap present, as indicated in the setal formula YZ:ZZ = 2.5:4. Clearly the two species are quite similar and could be regionally-differentiated descendants of a common ancestor. Amynthas samgaki Sp. n. is probably an endemic species, but more distri- butional and ecological data are needed to establish its relationships to soils and land use patterns. Further investigations are needed on its phylogenetic relationships with other Amynthas species, particularly À. naejangensis. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author would like to express appreciation to Dr Samuel W. James, University of Kansas, USA, who kindly shared valuable bionomical information and reviewed the taxonomic descriptions in the manuscript. This work was supported by a grant from Rural Development Administration, Korea (2006). REFERENCES BLAKEMORE, R. J. 2003. Japanese earthworms (Annelida: Oligochaeta): a review and checklist of species. Organisms, Diversity and Evolution 3. Electronic Supplement 11: 1-43. CHEN, Ÿ. 1933. A preliminary survey of the earthworms of the Lower Yangtze valley. Contributions of the Biology Laboratory Sciences Society of China (Zoology), Nanking 9: 178-296. CHEN, ŸY. 1936. On the terrestrial Oligochaeta from Szechwan IT with the notes on Gates’ types. Contributions of the Biology Laboratory Sciences Society of China (Zoology), Nanking 11: 269-306. CHEN, Y. 1938. Oligochaeta from Hainan, Kwangtung. Contributions from Biological Laboratory of Science Society of China (Zoological series) 12: 375-427. CHEN, Ÿ. 1946. On the terrestrial Oligochaeta from Szechwan III. Journal of the West China Border Research Society 16: 83-141. EASTON, E. G. 1979. Acaecate earthworms of the Pheretima group (Megascolecidae: Oligochaeta): Archipheretima, Metapheretima, Planapheretima, Pleionogaster and Polypheretima. Bulletin of the British Museum of Natural History (Zoology) 35(1): 1-126. HONG, Y. 2007. Some new earthworms of the genus Amynthas (Oligochaeta: Megascolecidae) with male discs from Bogildo Island, Korea. Revue suisse de Zoologie 114: 721-728. HONG, Y. & JAMES, S. W. 2001a. New species of Korean Amynthas Kinberg, 1867 (Oligochaeta, Megascolecidae) with two pairs of spermathecae. Revue suisse de Zoologie 108: 65-93. HONG, Y. & JAMES, S. W. 2001b. Five new earthworms of the genus Amynthas Kinberg (Megascolecidae) with four pairs of spermathecae. Zoological Studies 40: 269-275. 230 Y. HONG HONG, Y. & JAMES, S. W. 2009. Some new Korean megascolecoid earthworms (Oligochaeta). Journal of Natural History 43: 1229-1256. HONG, Y. & KIM, T. H. 2002a. Three new earthworms of the genus Amynthas (Megascolecidae) from Mt. Gyeryong, Korea. Revue suisse de Zoologie 109: 483-489. HONG, Y. & KiM, T. H. 2002b. Four new earthworms of the genus Amynthas (Oligochaeta: Megascolecidae) from Korea. Korean Journal of Biological Science 6: 195-199. HONG, Y. & LEE, W. K. 2001. Description of three new Korean earthworms of the genus Amynthas Kinberg, 1867 (Oligochaeta, Megascolecidae) with multiple genital markings. Revue suisse de Zoologie 108: 283-290. HONG, Y., LEE, W. K. & KiM, T. H. 2001. Four new species of the genus Amynthas Kinberg (Oligochaeta: Megascolecidae) from Korea. Zoological Studies 40: 263-268. SIMS, R. W. & EASTON, E. G. 1972. A numerical revision of the earthworm genus Pheretima auct. (Megascolecidae: Oligochaeta) with the recognition of new genera and an appendix on the earthworms collected by the Royal Society North Borneo Expedition. The Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, London 4: 169-268. REVUE SUISSE DE ZOOLOGIE 118 (2): 231-249; juin 2011 Long-term study on the variability in duration of larval period and timing of metamorphosis in a salamander: à way to regulate dispersal Michael R. WARBURG Dept. of Biology, Technion- Israel Institute of Technology, Haïifa 32000, Israel. E-mail: Warburg@tx.technion.ac 1l Long-term study on the variability in duration of larval period and timing of metamorphosis in a salamander: à way to regulate dispersal. - In all animals undergoing complex life cycles (CLC) timing of emergence and completion of metamorphosis is critical for survival of the juveniles since the time available for dispersal is generally both spatially and tempo- rally limited. Metamorphosis was studied in the laboratory over many years in several half-sib larval cohorts (1.e. each larval cohort born to a single mother on the same day, so that it consists of half-sib larvae of the same age). These larvae were born to freshly-collected females of an endangered salamander species Salamandra infraimmaculata Martens, 1885. The larvae were raised resource-independent (singly and food unlimited) and allowed to metamorphose. The post-metamorphs within the same cohort, varied in numbers, age, and size (mass, length) at metamorphosis. Moreover, cohorts differed among themselves in all these aspects. The findings show variability in timing of metamorphosis both within and among cohorts. An attempt is made to assess the evolutionary significance of this developmental aspect to dispersal of the post-metamorphs which 1s date-limited, and to the survival of the species. Keywords: Salamandra - caudata - dispersal - larval cohorts - long-term study - metamorphic timing. INTRODUCTION COMPLEX LIFE CYCLES (CLCS) Life history theory is concerned with investigating and explaining by exami- nation of the variations in life history traits (Crump, 1989). Reproductive strategies vary largely in response to environmental conditions. Different life histories are one way to spread the risk of reproductive failure which may be a result of unpredictable duration of unfavourable environment (Lampert & Linsenmair, 2002). Many aquatic taxa including amphibians have a complex life cycle (CLC) a term coined by Wilbur (1980) for such animals that undergo a dramatic change during their life cycle (mostly insects not only aquatic). CLCSs are abundant in the animal kingdom or ubiquitous and they have adaptive mechanisms allowing each phase to respond independently to different selective forces (Moran, 1994). It can be viewed as Manuscript accepted 27.01.2011 M. R. WARBURG LD) ee) LD) an adaptation that allows a species to exploit two or more different ecological envi- ronments (Wassersug, 1975; Wilbur & Collins, 1973). The main ecological feature of CLEC is the shift in niches that occurs at metamorphosis (Werner & Gilliam, 1984; Werner, 1986). Animals may change their use of resources and their niches during their life cycle, utilizing different niches during different life stages (Ebenman, 1992). Thus, alternate phases occupy different niches where each alternating phase has a separate niche (Moran, 1994). These changes include ontogenetic changes in the individual animal’s morphology, physiology and behaviour associated with a major change in habitat. Larvae and adults of organisms undergoing CLC evolve somewhat indepen- dently of each other having different body plans (Ebenman, 1992; Werner, 1986). Consequently, an ontogenetic niche shift takes place (Moran, 1994), and these species occupy two different niches: one by the adult (a terrestrial niche), and the other by the larva (an aquatic niche). They are different animals in many respects but belong to the same species having the same genome in spite of the fact that each developmental stage occupies a different ecological niche. Amphibians that have a CLC inhabiting two different environments exhibit plasticity in timing of, and in achieving an optimal size at metamorphosis (Wilbur & Collins, 1973). TERMINOLOGY USED IN DESCRIBING THE TIME ELEMENT IN METAMORPHOSIS Five different terms have been used to describe the elements of time in studies on metamorphosis. 1. Duration: the duration of the larval period, measured from the day the egg hatches or the larva was born, to the time of metamorphosis. 2. Date: meaning the chronological date during which metamorphosis takes place. 3. Time: or the actual time it takes to metamorphose presumably from the date of birth. 4. Age: meaning the actual age at metamorphosis measured from the larval birth-date or the day the egg hatched (the day the egg was laid 1s generally not known in nature). 5. Timing: this vague term implies a certain date or condition suitable for metamorphosis. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY The objectives of this study are to clarify two main points involved in meta- morphosis: 1. Do age and mass at metamorphosis vary within a cohort and if so to what extent? 2. What could be the significance of the variability in metamorphosis, for timing the dispersal of post-metamorphs and for the survival of the species. For statistical analyses both t-tests and regression analysis were used. The rela- tionship between age and dimension at metamorphosis was tested by regressions analysis, whereas the statistical difference between the age groups was tested using t-tests. METAMORPHIC VARIABILITY 233 MATERIALS AND METHODS The adult population of Salamandra infraimmaculata Martens, 1855, was studied at a single breeding site on Mt. Carmel for 25 years 1974-1999. The site, about 60 x 100m, surrounds four shallow (50-100cm deep) rock-pools which are one of the main breeding sites for the salamanders in this area. The climate in this region 1s characterized by irregular and interrupted rainfall pattern resulting in intermission in the rains after the onset of the rainy season in mid- autumn. This results in a cyclic pattern of dehydration of the breeding ponds (Warburg, 1992). Annual rainfall ranged between 397-1160 mm averaging 690 mm over the 25- year study period (1974-1999). Of this 449 mm (65.1%) rain fell during the breeding season October-January, and the remaining 241mm (349%) during the rest of the rainy season (until the end of February). The later rains are of the utmost significance to the larvae that need at least six weeks to complete their metamorphic cycle (Warburg, 2010). The larvae might not be able to complete metamorphosis once the pond water warms up and/or dries out. Conditions for this urodele, are part of the time suboptimal (.e. winter 1s rather short, with dry and warm periods), as 1t has a rather short breeding season, and there is a limited time period suitable (cool and wet) for dispersal of post- metamorphs. Adult salamanders were observed near their breeding sites on stormy winter nights throughout the entire breeding season. The breeding season lasted for 10-12 weeks from the 2nd half of October to the beginning of January starting at the onset of the rainy season (October or November) and continuing until mid-January. The ovo- viviparous females laid their eggs into rock-pools and the larvae hatched immediately upon contact with the water (Warburg ef al., 1978/79). Females that bore their young in the laboratory were released back to nature on the same, or the following might (Warburg, 2007b, 2008a). This salamander is well adapted to life in a xeric habitat both as adult (Warburg, 1986a, 1986b, 1994, 1997, 2006, 2007a, 2007b, 2008a, 2008b, 2009a, 2009b, 2009c), and as larva (Warburg, 1992, Cohen ef al., 2005, 2006). During the long-term study (1974-1998) period, a total of 74 cohorts of half- sib larvae were born in the laboratory (see Warburg, 2010). These cohorts contained 4085 larvae that were all born to freshly-collected females. Some of the larvae were kept in the laboratory and were raised to metamorphosis. Of these some were used for experiments (Cohen ef al., 2005, 2006), whereas others (70 larvae) were raised to metamorphosis and for an additional 3-4 years to be released later as juveniles back to nature in order to replenish the dwindling population of this rare salamander (Warburg, 2007b, 2008a). AIT remaining larvae were released back to the ponds where their mothers were captured the night before. The present report is based on a study of 396 of these larvae which were raised in the laboratory to metamorphosis. They were kept singularly and fed ad-libitum on beef liver and Tubifex until they metamorphosed. 234 M. R. WARBURG RESULTS The percentage of both half-sib larvae and cohorts born each month, are given in Figs 1 A and 1B respectively. Most cohorts were born during November (41.9%) and December (40.5%) (see Fig 1A). Most larvae were born during November-December compared to (Fig. 1B). À Percentage cohorts born each month Jan 8.1% Oct 9.5% Le) BR Percentage larvae born each month Jan 9.2% Oct 10.4% Dec ee CS Nov 36.9% FIG. 1 Percentage of cohorts and larvae born each month of the breeding season: Most cohorts (41.9%) were born in November (A) whereas most larvae (43%) in December (B). The larvae that were born in November metamorphosed at the latest during the Ist week in January (Fig 2A), whereas most larvae born later metamorphosed by mid- February (Fig. 2B). The numbers of post-metamorphs and their age are given for four larval cohorts (F-69, F-163, F-168, F-233 see Fig. 3). Both numbers and ages differed among the cohorts (P<0.05, ANOVA). Only in one of the cohorts (F-163) was there a significant positive relationship between the numbers of post-metamorphs and their age. METAMORPHIC VARIABILITY 235 A Percentage of earliest metamorphosing larvae 13.1 14 11.9 si 9.4 10 8 | e 8 6 4 % 2 2 nn | | 4th ist 2nd 3rd ath 1st NOV DEC JAN Months Weeks B Percentage of latest metamorphosing larvae 18 17.7 16 14. 13 12. 10.2 10. 8.6 EX 2: 6 - 4: 2.1 À + A | | | _ 1st 2nd 3rd ath 1st 2nd JAN FEB Months Weeks FIG. 2 Percentage of earliest (Oct-Nov) and latest (Dec-Jan) metamorphs: Early-born larvae metamor- phosed starting from the 4th week in November to the 1st week in January (A). Most (17.7%) of the late-born larvae metamorphosed during the 4th week in January until mid-February (B). AGE AT METAMORPHOSIS The number of metamorphosing larvae and their age at metamorphosis are given in Fig. 4A for 130 post-metamorphs. There was no significant relationship between their numbers of and their age (P<0.05, ANOVA). When grouped into 10-day age groups (Fig. 4B), a significant relationship was noticed between the number of larvae metamorphosing and their age (R2 = 0.8823 logarithmic n = 130) meaning that most larvae (n = 70 or 54.8 %) metamorphosed when 40-60 days old. No such signi- ficant difference was noted when the number metamorphosing was compared between the remaining different age groups. Age at metamorphosis differed significantly among cohorts. Four cohorts are compared (F-163,F-168,F-69,F-233 see Fig. 5A-B).Thus, age of cohort F-69 differed 236 M. R. WARBURG Cohort F-69 œ 4 £ FE L 3 e Ô E 2 + + KE ] E 1 50 60 70 80 90 Age (days) D 44 Cohort F-163 £ e ® 12 & 10. © 8 Ë 6. : Co] RE. Pt @ 2- : 2 0. ee 60 70 80 90 Age (days) Cohort F-168 D'12 on © 8 + & + 6 6 + E + S 4. ] & E 2. . 8 & 2 EE - = ns 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 Age (days) Cohort F-233 D 30 D 25 + = 2 20 [e] £ 15 5 10 © a + L2 + + = 0! + Vos + 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 Age (days) FIG. 3 Numbers and age at metamorphosis in four cohorts born in December: Note the variability between the four cohorts, in both numbers and age at metamorphosis from F-163 (T value= -3.27; P value= 0.002; DF=31), and from cohort F-168 F (T value= 8.18; P value < 0 0001; DF=40), and age of cohort F.163 differed from cohort F-168 (T value= 20.9; P value < 0.0001; DF=53). METAMORPHIC VARIABILITY 237 Duration of metamorphosis or the metamorphosis span i.e. from the time the first larva metamorphosed (minimal time) until the last larva metamorphosed (maximal time), ranged between 14 days in cohort F-163 to 71 days in cohort F-233 (Fig. 5A). AGE AND MASS AT METAMORPHOSIS The relationship between the average mass and the age at metamorphosis in two half-sib larval cohorts (F-69, F-163) both born in the laboratory, is depicted in Figs 6A-B. In one cohort (F-69), no significant relationship could be found between age and mass of metamorphosing larvae, whereas in the second cohort (F-163) mass related significantly to age (R? = 0.9071 power). A significant difference (t-tests) between mass of post-metamorphs was also observed in some age classes (Table 1). TABLE 1. Differences (t-tests) between mass of metamorphs (grouped in age groups), values in bold are significant Âge Broups 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 (days) 50-59 ; 0.275 P 0.784 DF 107 60-69 T 4.38 2.98 P 0.0001 0.004 DF 109 56 70-79 x 5.88 4.03 0.055 P 0.0001 0.0001 0.582 DF 121 68 70 80-89 à; 3.06 2.37 0.18 87 P 0.003 0.02 0.85 0.85 DF 88 35 37 49 90-99 à à 2.28 1.76 -1.04 -0.38 -0.25 P 0.025 0.087 0.967 0.71 0.807 DF 85 32 34 46 13 MASS AND LENGTH AT METAMORPHOSIS Average length showed no significant relationship with average mass (see Fig. 7). There was a significant difference (t-tests) between length of post-metamorphs when arranged in age classes (Table 2). AGE-MASS-LENGTH RELATIONSHIPS No significant relationship could be seen between either mass or length with age at metamorphosis in larvae born in the laboratory belonging to either a single cohort (F-168 see Fig. 8A), or for metamorphs belonging to six different cohorts in Fig. 8B. 238 M. R. WARBURG TABLE 2. Differences (t-tests) between length of metamorphs (grouped in age groups), values in bold are significant. Age groups (days) 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 50-59 La 0.346 P 0.97 DF 111 60-69 ik HAS 3.15 F 0.0001 0.0001 DF 108 59 70-79 D 11.961 79 3.06 P 0.0001 0.0001 0.003 DF 121 12 69 80-89 Æ 2395 1.667 -1.67 -3.27 F 0°19 0.103 0.1 0.002 DF 88 39 36 49 90-99 dE 972 141 -1.66 -2.91 -0.088 L 0.052 0.168 0.002 0.005 0931 DF 85 49 46 13 MONTHS OF DISPERSAL Most of the earliest born larvae (mid-October-November) will metamorphose 50 days later z.e. during December-January, and the latest born will metamorphose and disperse by the end of March. Most metamorphosis (83%) will take place during January-February (Fig. 9A). Rainfall dropped significantly during this period from 33% during December to 15% in March (Fig. 9B). DATE OF METAMORPHOSIS (MONTH/WEEKS) A scheme depicting larval period in the ponds, and putative earliest and latest dates of metamorphosis is given in Fig. 10A-B. The earliest larvae are born in the 4th week of October (Fig. 10A) provided that there had been sufficient rain to form the ponds (Fig. 10B). The last larvae were born at the beginning of January. This scheme assumes the maximal time it takes to metamorphose to be 11 weeks. Based on such an assumption, the larvae born in October will have metamorphosed by the 4th week in February, whereas those born in January will have metamorphosed by the end of May. This 1s not realistic since the ponds usually dry out long before then, even during rainy years. As indicated by the average monthly rainfall during the breeding season (October-January) with most rains falling during December-January (Fig. 10B). DISCUSSION The onset of the breeding season is the egg-laying period (in oviparous species), or the period during which larvae are born (in ovoviviparous and viviparous species). The date an egg was laid or a larva was born or hatched, is the start of the breeding METAMORPHIC VARIABILITY 239 A Age at metamorphosis 30 27 O £ 25 fn £ 20 Ês É — 15 Se 10 11 0 6 : 5 5 555 d 3494 4 AE S M 1 24 TT Cl "l OAI TESt 0 nm EL LL ERA RL RSR LR RAR RL E ELA S À S S&P & E à À © P & YF PE à Age (days) B Age at metamorphosis 50 F2 = 0.8823 Logarithmic ti E 40 E 35 gs LE E— | E 15. a 10 - Z 5 - 0 ! 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 90-99 100-115 Age groups (days) FIG. 4 Numbers and age at metamorphosis: Of the 130 metamorphs most (27) were 46 days old (A). The majority (45) metamorphosed when 40-49 days old (B). Note the remarkable range in age at metamorphosis (40-115 days). season. Hatching, or the date the egg hatched is the onset of the larval period in egg- laying animals with CLCSs. BIRTH AND HATCHING There is rather little information on hatching dates in urodele amphibians. More information is available on the aquatic dragonfly larvae. Hatching was found to be asynchronous spreading over 25 days, thereby producing a broad range of larval size- distribution (Hopper et al., 1996). In the salamander studied here, the variation in new- 240 M. R. WARBURG A Metamorphosis span 80 71 70 60 n 50 > œ T 40 © Z 30 22 24 20 14 0 F-163 F-168 F-69 F-233 Cohorts B Minimum (triangles) and maximum (quadrates) age at metamorphosis in four cohorts 120 115 90 - 85 y 81 81 be & 90 67 Le - TD 70 & ® 60 A 65 © eo 67 * o & . 57 60 © é [= S +0 Fi ets 55 È = x _S = 50 | s - 45 0. - : : - - - ——+ 40 F-163 F-168 F-69 F-233 Cohorts FIG. 5 Metamorphosis span and minimal and maximal age in four cohorts: The span in number of days between the minimum and maximum age at metamorphosis (see A) ranged between 14 days in one cohort (F-163) and 71 days in another (F-233) (A). The maximum and minimum age at metamorphosis in the same cohorts (see B) differed in the four cohorts. The minimal age ranged between 44 days (in cohort F-233), and 67 days (in cohort F-163). The maximal age ranged between 81 days to 115 day. born larval size varies and there are half-sib cohorts in which this variance is larger (Degani & Warburg, 1995). The reasons for this are discussed at length in Cohen ef al. (2005). THE LARVAL PERIOD It is well known that the pre-metamorphosis (first 3-4 weeks of life) of amphibian larvae is entirely dedicated to growth (Etkin, 1963). The following 5-6 weeks are dedicated to differentiation. METAMORPHIC VARIABILITY 241 A Cohort F-69 (n=10) 12: 1.31 1.21 1.16 12 - 1.09 1.08 0.93 1.01 1.05 1 - 0.89 0.83 © 08 - A a 0.6 - = 0.4 - 0.2 - 0 | | 57 57 57 72 72 75 75 75 81 81 Age (days) B Cohort F-163 (n=23) °2- 2 J 1.8 - 1.6 = 0 ©) n n Le) = J [=] LS] i 12 : 1 - 0.8 0.6 - 0.4 - 0 67 72 72 72 76 76 76 76 76 76 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 Age (days) FIG. 6 Age and mass at metamorphosis in two cohorts: Mass at metamorphosis is shown in two cohorts: F-69 (n=10, see A) and F-163 (n=23 see B). In both cohorts there is no significant relationship between age and mass at metamorphosis. LARVAL GROWTH The growth of larvae belonging to cohorts known to be of the same age and of a single maternal origin (thereby lowering variability), was followed by raising them under conditions in which both food, and density conditions remained constant throughout larval life, and growth inhibitory factors (excreted by other larvae in the pond see Warburg, 1997) were eliminated (by daily changing the water). It was possible to calculate the percentage of mass added during larval life. This way different growth modes could be identified and described. As a result, it was 242 M. R. WARBURG Relationship between mass and length in newly metamorphosed 70 68 + + 66 je + = 64 + E + + +. + + £ 62 +... e = + + + £ 60 t2 e + 2 58 1 7 56" + 54 - 52 - 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 Mass (mg) FIG. 7 Mass and length at metamorphosis: There was no significant relationship between length and mass at metamorphosis. shown that half-sib larvae belonging to a single cohort (born at the same time to one mother) grow at more than one growth rate. Some grow fast whereas others grow slow (Cohen ef al., 2006). The duration of the larval period (5.e. their age), as well as their size at metamorphosis depend on their larval growth history (Cohen et al., 2005, 2006). DIFFERENTIATION Differentiation during the pro-metamorphosis period (that starts at 5-6 weeks age see Etkin, 1963), results in the formation of three main organs that are essential in physiological adaptation of amphibians to terrestrial life (skin, lungs and kidneys). These differentiate and become functional at metamorphic climax, enabling terrestrial breathing and functional excretion organs. Metamorphosis does not seem possible un- til a minimum size 1s attained. Age and size at metamorphosis are inversely correlated (Koop & Baur, 2000). The onset of metamorphosis depends on larvae reaching the appropriate developmental stage when these organs essential for survival on land are ready (lungs, see Warburg, 1997; skin, see Warburg et al., 1994: kidney, see Gealekman & Warburg, 2000). The time table involved in organogenesis 1s largely variable. | METAMORPHOSIS There are several risks involved in successful completion of metamorphosis, these are: 1. The onset of pond formation. This depends on the date of first heavy rains which determines the onset of the breeding season. A delay in rains can disrupt the entire breeding season. 2. The amount of rain sufficient to fill the ponds. Will rains come early enough and in sufficient quantities to fill the ponds? This will determine the extent of the breeding season. Will the ponds fill with sufficient water to sustain larval growth until the completion of metamorphosis? METAMORPHIC VARIABILITY 24 e2 A Average age, length (line) and mass (columns) in cohort 168 (n=32) 70 1.8 65 - 1.7 > 1.6 E Le 15 © £ 95 1.4 9 1.3 œ 0 = es 1.2 .Î | | : 40 =, 1 w w À © © © ww ww © 4 4 A & & & Age (days) B Relationships between age, mass (squares) and length (triangles) in six half-sib cohorts (n=201) 80 2.1 70 A 1.9 A À g 60 À Fo 17 £ 50 - - 1.5 © — = L] ci £ 40 - s 153 8 D ! î œ = 30 - = ñ 115 - ! 20 0.9 ä 0 - 0.5 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 Age (days) FIG. 8 Mass, length and age at metamorphosis in a single cohort (F-168) (A), and in six different cohorts (B): There was no significant relationship between length, mass and age at meta- morphosis when compared in either metamorphs of a single cohort: F-168 (A), or in six cohorts (B). 3. The pattern of rainfall :.e. the timing and extent of intermissions in rainfall (Warburg, 1986b). Will the break in rainfall happen too soon after the larvae were born? This determines survival of early-born larvae? Will the break in rain be short enough so that larvae born early will be able to survive? (Warburg, 1992)? 4. Will there be enough food in the ponds to enable larval growth, and will larval density enable rapid development (see Cohen ef al., 2006; Warburg, 2009b)? 244 M. R. WARBURG A Percentage of metamorphs during dispersal months Mar (6%) Dec (11%) Feb (40%) Jan (43%) B Percentage rainfall during months of metamorphosis Mar (15%) Dec (33%) Feb (23%) Jan (29%) FiG. 9 Percentage of metamorphs (A) and rainfall (B) during months of dispersal: The majority of metamorphs emerged and dispersed during January (43%) and February (40%) (A). Most rain fell during December (33%) and January (29%) (B). 5. Will late-born larval cohorts be lost because they provide food for early-born cannibal larvae (see Cohen et al., 2005)? The successful survival of post-metamorphs depends on the survival of the lar- vae in spite of all these risks. Two main points emerge from this study: 1. The significance in timing of metamorphosis. 2.The variability observed during all phases of the metamorphic cycle. TIMING OF EMERGENCE It is not surprising that as a result of asynchronous hatching followed by differential growth rates, the subsequent emergence of aquatic larvae from the water onto land, spreads over a longer period of time. Thus, in some dragonfly species emer- gence lasted 4-7 days (Ubukata, 1974, cited in Corbet, 1980), in others emergence spread over 11 days (Suhling, 1995), or 24 days (Falk & Johansson, 2000). Aoki (1999) describes temporal variation in emergence lasting about 26 days, whereas Suhling METAMORPHIC VARIABILITY LD) pa un A Larval (bottom line) and metamorphic periods of Oct- Jan larvae Jan. born Re Dec. born BREL Nov. born Oct. born Larval period Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Months Weeks B Average monthly rainfall during the breeding seasons 1974-1998 200 181 160 = 140 121.9 É 120 106.5 TZ 100. 78.8 Ë 5 42 i Le 20 4.3 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Months FiG.10 Earliest and latest dates of larval and metamorphosis periods and average monthly rainfall: This scheme (A) depicts the larval period (bottom) followed by the periods during which larvae that were born from October to January, metamorphosed. The last of the January-born larvae meta- morphosed during the 4th week in May. The average monthly rainfall is given in B showing how very dangerous it 1s to metamorphose late in the season (after March). et al. (2004) found that duration of larval stages from oviposition to emergence ranged between 38-70 (up to 285) days in some dragonfly species. The young urodelan post-metamorphs will have to time their emergence onto land so that temperatures will be sufficiently low and the soil will be still moist to enable successful dispersal. This depends on the amount of rains until then, and on the season. Emergence in winter 1s preferable to spring emergence. Thus, the timing of emergence to fit a certain date is of great significance. Moreover, both their age at metamorphosis (measured from their birth in the laboratory), as well as the duration of the larval period (i.e. the time it takes to metamorphose), are of great significance. Finally, the size attained by the larvae before metamorphosing 1s of great consequence to the survival of the post-metamorphs. The survival of the young post-metamorphs depends on the following three factors: Date of birth, time or timing of metamorphosis, and age at metamorphosis In Nothophthalmus viridescens the timing of post-metamorphs’ emigration is strongly influenced by rainfall (Healy, 1975). Likewise, the hydroperiod significantly 246 M. R. WARBURG affected timing of metamorphosis in Ambystoma texanum (Ryan, 2007), and Ambystoma talpoideum can adjust the timing of metamorphosis in response to water level (Semlitsch & Wilbur, 1988). Hurlbert (1970) noted that extended breeding period in NV. viridescens (10 wks) influence timing of metamorphosis (160-200 dys). It appears that the variations in growth rates induce variation in metamorphic timing in Desmognathus quadramaculatus (Holbrook) (see Hichersion et al., 2005).Timm et al., (2007a) found considerable intra-specific variation in several urodeles, in the timing of emigration over the years. These variations may be due to ambient conditions (Timm et al., 2007a, 2007b). DISPERSAL Post-metamorphic dispersal is an ecological phenomenon of fundamental importance to population biology because of its significance in juvenile recruitment. However, it is notoriously difficult to measure especially in amphibians, because of technical problems involved in marking the delicate larvae. Very little is known about dispersal timing in nature of young salamander post-metamorphs (as indeed also of any other taxa). This post-metamorphs” dispersal or ‘emigration’ depends on both time and size of the juveniles that will enable them to disperse as soon as possible and to maximal distance. The chance of the species’ survival depends on its potential as a colonizer. There is one exception perhaps, in dragonflies (Anholt, 1990). Unlike amphibians, dragonfly larvae are unique in that emergence from water can be noted accurately since marking larvae with paint allows identification of their exuviae (cast skins) after emergence following their completion of metamorphosis (Corbet ef al., 1960). Similar studies are not possible in amphibians. There, the only technique used is by collecting animals emigrating from the ponds by drift fences. (This however was not possible in the present study because of the ponds proximity to a high-security prison). Conrad ef al. (1999) studied dispersal in seven dragonfly species and found that it differed significantly among species. After metamorphosis, the post-metamorphs need to disperse and emigrate as soon and as far as possible during the suitable season since dispersal is limited both spatially and temporally. The sooner the larvae metamorphose and the farther away they disperse, their chance of survival and of successful colonization will increase. Size of the juveniles is crucial in enabling them to disperse to maximal distance. AII these are of great significance because of the need to disperse before the onset of heat- spells in spring The latest born salamander larvae were in mid-January. Since the maximal time it takes to metamorphose is about three months they will have to disperse by mid-April. AS an example: larvae of female F-233 were born on 20 Dec. 1998. Consequently the first ones to metamorphose after 40 days dispersed late January and the last ones dispersed mid March after 88 days. AII these are of great significance because of the need to disperse before the onset of heat-spells in late spring. METAMORPHIC VARIABILITY 247 REFERENCES ANHOLT, T. B. R.1990. Size-biased dispersal prior to breeding in a damselfly. Oecologia 83: 385-387. AOKI, T. 1999. Larval development, emergence and seasonal regulation in Asiagomphus pryeri (Selys) (Odonata: Gomphidae). Hydrobiologia 394: 179-192. COHEN, M., FLAM, R., SHARON, R.., IFRACH, H., YEHESKELY-HAYON, D. & WARBURG, M. R. 2005. The evolutionary significance of intra-cohort cannibalism in larvae of a xeric-inhabiting salamander: an inter-cohort comparison. Current Herpetology 24: 55-66. COHEN, M., YEHESKELY-HAYON, D., WARBURG, M. R., DAVIDSON, D., HALEVI, G. & SHARON, R., 2006. Differential growth identified in salamander larvae half-sib cohorts: a survival strategy? Develoment, Growth & Differentiation 48: 537-548. CONRAD, K. F., WILLSON, K. H., HARVEY, L. F., THOMAS, C. J. & SHERRATT, T. N. 1999. Dispersal characteristics of seven odonate species in agricultural landscape. Ecography 22: 524-531. CORBET, P. S. 1980. Biology of Odonata. Annual Review of Entomology 25: 189-217. CORBET, P. S., LONGFIELD, C. & MOORE, N. W. 1960. Dragonflies. Collins, London. CRUMP, M. L. 1989. Effect of habitat drying on the developmental time and size at metamor- phosis in Hyla pseudopuma. Copeia 1989: 794-797. DEGANI, G. and WARBURG, M. R. 1995. Variation in brood size and birth rate of Salamandra salamandra L. (Amphibia, Urodela) from different habitats in northern Israel. Amphibia/Reptilia 16: 341-349. EBENMAN, B. 1992. Evolution in organisms that change their niches during the life cycle. American Naturalist 139: 990-1021. ETKIN, W. 1963. Metamorphosis-activating system of the frog. Science, 139, 810-814. FALCK, J. & JOHANSSON, F. 2000, Patterns in size, sex ratio and time of emergence in a South Swedish population of Sympetrum sanguineum (Odonata). Aguatic Insects 22: 311-317. GEALEKMAN, O. & WARBURG, M. R. 2000. Changes in numbers and dimensions of glomeruli during metamorphosis of Pelobates syriacus (Anura; Pelobatidae). European Journal of Morpholology 38: 80-87. HEALY, W. R. 1975. Breeding and postlarval migrations of the red-spotted newt, Notophthalmus viridescens, in Massachusetts. Ecology 56: 673-680. HICKERSON, C-A. M., BARKER, E. L. & BEACHY, C. K. 2005. Determinants of metamorphic ti- ming in the black-bellied salamander, Desmognathus quadramaculatus. Southeastern Naturalist 4: 33-50. HOPPER, K. R., CROWLEY, P. H. & KIELMAN, D. 1996. Density dependence, hatching synchrony, and within-cohort cannibalism in young dragonfly larvae. Ecology 77: 191-200. HURLBERT, S. H. 1970. The post-larval migration of the red-spotted newt Notophthalmus viri- descens (Rafinesque). Copeia 1970: 515-528. Kopp, M. & BAUR, B. 2000. Intra- and inter-litter variation in life-history traits in a population of fire salamanders (Salamandra salamandra terrestris), Journal of Zoology London 250: 231-236. LAMPERT, K. P. & LINSENMAR, K. E. 2002. Alternative life cycle strategies in the West African reed frog Hyperolius nitidulus: the answer to an unpredictable environment? Oecologia 130: 364-372. MARTENS, E. VON 1885. Über Vorkommen und Zeichnungs-Varietäten von Salamandra macu- losa. Sitzungsberichte der Gesellschaft Naturforschender Freunde zu Berlin 1884: 193-195. MORAN, N. A. 1994. Adaptation and constraint in the complex life cycles of animals. Annual Review of Ecology & Systematic 25: 573-600. RYAN, T. J. 2007. Hydroperiod and metamorphosis in small-mouthed salamanders (Ambystoma texanum). Northeast. Naturalist 14: 619-628. 248 M. R. WARBURG SEMLITSCH, R. D. & WILBUR, H. M. 1988. Effects of pond drying time on metamorphosis and survival in the salamander Ambystoma talpoideum. Copeia 1988: 978-983 SUHLING, F. 1995. Temporal patterns of emergence of the riverine dragonfly Onychogomphus uncatus (Odonata: Gomphidae). Hydrobiologia 302: 113-118. SUHLING, F., SCHENK, K., PADEFFKE, T. & MARTENS, À. 2004. A field study of larval development in a dragonfly assemblage in African desert ponds (Odonata). Hydrobiologia 528: 75-85. TIMM, B. C., MCGARIGAL, K. & GAMBLE, L. R., 2007a. Emigration timing of juvenile pond-bree- ding amphibians in western Massachsetts. Journal of Herpetology 41: 243-250. TIMM, B. C., MCGARIGAL, K. & COMPTON, B. W. 2007b. Timing of large movement events of pond-breeding amphibians in western Massachsetts, USA. Biological Conservation 136: 442-454. WARBURG, M. R. 1986a. A relic population of Salamandra salamandra on Mt. Carmel: A ten- year study. Herpetologica 42: 174-179. WARBURG, M. R. 1986b. Observations on a relic population of Salamandra salamandra on Mt. Carmel during eleven years. /n: Z. Roëek (ed.). Studies in Herpetology. Charles University Press, Prague, pp 389-394. WARBURG, M. R. 1992. Breeding patterns in a fringe population of fire salamanders, Salamandra salamandra. Herpetological Journal 2: 54-58. WARBURG, M. R. 1994. Population ecology, breeding activity, longevity and reproductive stra- tegies of Salamandra salamandra (Urodela; Salamandridae), during an 18-year long study of an isolated population on Mt.Carmel. Mertensiella Monographs 4: 399-452 WARBURG, M. R. 1997. Ecophysiology of amphibians inhabiting xeric environments. Springer Verlag, Heidelberg, Germany, 182 pp. WARBURG, M. R. 2006. Breeding site tenacity during a quarter of a century, in a rare, xeric-adap- ted salamander within an isolated metapopulation. Bulletin de la Societe Herpetologique Francaise 118: 1-18. WARBURG, M. R. 2007a. Longevity in Salamandra infraimmaculata from Israel with a partial review of life expectancy on urodeles. Salamandra 43: 21-43. WARBURG, M. R. 2007b. The phenology of a rare salamander (Salamandra infraimmaculata) in a population breeding under unpredictable conditions: a 25 year study. Acta Herpeto- logica 2: 247-257. WARBURG, M. R. 2008a. Changes in recapture rate of a rare salamander in an isolated meta- population studied for 25-years. Russian Journal of Herpetology 15: 11-18. WARBURG, M. R. 2008b. Temporal variations in body dimensions followed for 25 years in a bree- ding population of adult salamanders, with a partial review on other Urodela. Senckenbergiana Biologica 88: 81-105. WARBURG, M. R. 2009a. Long-term study on the reproductive strategy of Salamandra infra- immaculata (Amphibia: Urodela: Salamandridae) females in a single population breeding under precarious ambient conditions. Herpetozoa 22: 27-42. WARBURG, M. R. 2009b. Age and size at metamorphosis of half-sib Salamandra infraimmacu- lata larvae born in the laboratory and raised singly under three different food regimes. Belgian Journal of Zoology 139: 156-165. WaARBURG, M. R. 2009c. Variations in sex ratio studied in a single breeding population of an endangered salamander: a long-term study. Revue suisse de Zoologie 116 (3-4): 359-377. WaARBURG, M. R. 2010. Studies on 74 half-sib larval cohorts born to individually identifiable Salamandra infraimmaculata females belonging to a single population; a long-term study. Journal of Zoology London 280: 332-342. WARBURG, M. R., DEGANI, G. & WARBURG, I. 1978/79. Ovoviviparity in Salamandra sala- mandra (L.) (Amphibia, Urodela) from northern Israel. Vie et Milieu 28/29C: 247-257. WARBURG, M. R., LEWINSON, D.& ROSENBERG, M. 1994. Ontogenesis of amphibian epidermis. In: H. Heatwole & G.T. Barthalmus (eds.). Amphibian Biology vol.1.The Integument.), Surrey Beattty & Sons, Sydney, pp 33-63. METAMORPHIC VARIABILITY 249 WASSERSUG, R. J. 1975. The adaptive significance of the tadpole stage with comments on the maintenance of complex tadpole stage with comments on the maintenance of complex life cycles in anurans. American Zoologist 15: 405-417. WERNER, E. E. 1986. Amphibian metamorphosis: growth rate, predation risk and the optimal size at transformation. American Naturalist 128: 319-341. WERNER, E. E. & GILLIAM, J. F. 1984. The ontogenetic niche and species interactions in size structured populations. Annual Review of Ecology & Systematic 15: 393-425. WILBUR, H. M. 1980. Complex life cycles. Annual Review of Ecology & Systematics 11: 67-93. WILBUR, H. M. & COLLINS, J. P. 1973. Ecological aspects of amphibian metamorphosis. Science, 182: 1305-1314. qe Si ernlinane ; *Ch,ENE ant qe ce En opt dame te ie Rae TL bg 1@ + VA" nul le h here OS Es Sirius fe } & RAIN MA: PO: L'art ù » LES pit Gore SE LS L A a » Se ne ” ave ca en DLLOERT 14, or (nf No, ner NUE ES Lars ts VAT | art tir rt DU 2 st: pare vs r27 12 pr nn L 4 si _. fl an Pts Lé ti cts (0 D Co 2 p ts laétäié 5 sérros 2e" à REVUE SUISSE DE ZOOLOGIE 118 (2): 251-256; juin 2011 A new Scutpelecopsis Marusik & Gnelitsa from Romania (Araneae, Linyphiidae, Erigoninae) Ioan DUMAÏ & Andrei V. TANASEVITCH? l Department of Biology, Faculty of Chemistry-Biology-Geography, West University of Timisoara, Pestalozzi 16, Timisoara 300115, Timis county, Romania. E-mail: ioan.duma@ gmail. com 2 Centre for Forest Ecology and Production, Russian Academy of Sciences, Profsoyuznaya Str. 84/32, Moscow 117997, Russia. E-mail: and-tan@mail.ru À new Scutpelecopsis Marusik & Gnelitsa from Romania (Araneae, Linyphiidae, Erigoninae). - A new species, S. loricata Sp. n., is described from the southern Carpathians, Romania, differing from the two known congeners by details of the palp and epigyne conformation. AIl records of Scutpelecopsis krausi (Wunderlich, 1980) from the Caucasus actually refer to S. wunderlichi Marusik & Gnelitsa, 2009, thus the known distribution of S. krausi remains restricted to the type locality in Macedonia. Keywords: Arachnida - dwarf spiders - new species - Carpathians. INTRODUCTION The genus Scutpelecopsis Marusik & Gnelitsa, 2009 was recently established for two species: the Caucasian S. wunderlichi Marusik & Gnelitsa, 2009, as the type species, and the Macedonian S. krausi (Wunderlich, 1980) (Marusik & Gnelitsa, 2009). A third congener, S. loricata Sp. n., was found in the southern Carpathians, and its description 1s the subject of this paper. The genus Scutpelecopsis now comprises three similar species, which differ from each other by small differences in palp and epigyne structure, as well as by the arrangement and dimensions of the abdominal scuta. The genus 1s closely related to Pelecopsis Simon, 1864, and its representatives are distinguished by a strongly armo- red body, as well as by the peculiar shape of the male palpal tibia and the ventral epi- gynal plate. MATERIAL AND METHODS This paper is based on the spider material collected by Ioan and Violeta-Alina Duma from the southern Carpathians, Romania in 2009-2010. Some comparative material from the Zoological Museum of the Moscow State University (Moscow, Russia) and the personal collection of Andreï Tanasevitch (Moscow, Russia) was examined. Specimens, preserved in 70% ethanol, were studied using a Zeiss stereomicro- scope. Close examinations of the palp and epigyne were made in glycerol using an Manuscript accepted 03.09.2010 232 I. DUMA & A. V. TANASEVITCH Olympus BXSI compound microscope with an Olympus E-330 digital camera. A camera lucida was used for the drawings. AI] measurements are given in mm. Scale li- nes in the figures correspond to 0.1 mm unless otherwise indicated. The terminology of the male palpal tibia details follows that of Marusik & Gnelitsa (2009). À new terminology for the ventral abdominal scuta is proposed by us as more logical and related to their position on the abdomen. Abbreviations used in the text and figures: AO - anterior tegular outgrowth, CAT - personal collection of Andreï Tanasevitch, DA - dorsal tibial apophysis, E - embolus, IA - intermediate tibial apophysis, ME - membranous edge, MM - median membrane, MS - mesal abdominal scuta, PO - posterior tegular outgrowth, PS - pedicel scuta, PVS - posteroventral scutum, RA - retrolateral tibial apophysis, TmI - position of trichobothrium on tibia I, VP - ventral plate, ZMMU - Zoological Museum of the Moscow State University. AII type material is without registration numbers and deposited in the Muséum d'histoire naturelle, Geneva, Switzerland. Scutpelecopsis loricafa sp. n. Figs 1-11 HOLOTYPE: 4 , Romania, Caras-Severin, Bäile Herculane, Domogled Mountain, Cheile Feregari (44°51"59°N, 22°24°53"E), 350 m asl., dry valley, under limestone rocks, hand collecting, 3.1V.2010, leg. I. Duma. PARATYPES: 6 G ,4 ©, same locality and date as for holotype. — 1 &, Caras-Severin, Dubova, Mraconia valley (44°37°5SS°N 22°16’55"E), 200 m a.s.., 4.VIL.2010, leg. I. Duma. — 1 ©, Baïle Herculane, Domogled Mountain, Cheile Feregari (44°51°59°N,22°24’53"E), 359 m a.s.l., dry valley, under rocks, hand collecting, 14.V.2009, leg. V.-A. Duma. ETYMOLOGY: The specific name, an adjective, translated from Latin as “iron- clad”, refers to the strong body armor. DIAGNOSIS: The new species is characterized by the strongly armored body in both sexes, as well as by the peculiar shape of the palpal tibia in male and the ventral plate of the epigyne in female. DESCRIPTION: Male holotype. Total length 1.61. Carapace unmodified, as shown in Figs 1-2, with fine granulation, 0.67 long, 0.63 wide posteriorly. Sternum extended between coxae IV, 0.43 long, 0.42 wide posteriorly, with fine granulation. Chelicerae 0.26 long, anterior margin with five teeth, posterior one with two teeth. Stridulatory files fine. Labium wider than long. Legs brownish yellow, with darker femora. Length of leg segments, see Table 1. Chaetotaxy: 1.1.1.1, length of spines about diameter of segment. Metatarsus IV without trichobothrium. TmI 0.31. Palp (Figs 5-8): Tibia with tree apophyses: dorsal one hook-shaped; retrolateral one flattened, slightly widened and concave terminally: intermediate apophysis small, triangular, flattened. Paracymbium simple, narrow, hook-shaped. Tegulum with an anterior conical outgrowth directed forward, as well as with a small outgrowth in posterior part directed backward. Median membrane large, funnel-shaped. Embolus thin, long and coiled, membranous edge narrow. Tuberculated outgrowth present, hidden by median membrane. Abdomen 1.10 long, 0.80 wide, dorsal scutum with fine granulation covering entire dorsal surface. Sigilla well visible. Abdomen ventrally covered with a large scutum extending from pedicel to spinnerets. A NEW SCUTPELECOPSIS FROM ROMANIA LD Un œ Fics 1-4 Carapace of Scutpelecopsis loricata sp. n., & holotype (1-2), ? (3-4). (1, 3) Dorsal view. (2, 4) Lateral view. Female (from the type locality). Total length 1.94. Carapace unmodified, as shown in Figs 3-4, 0.76 long, 0.73 wide, dark brown to almost black, with fine granu- lation except on cephalic region. Sternum 0.41 long, 0.43 wide, dark brown, with sparse hairs. Chelicerae 0.23 long, anterior margin with five teeth, posterior one with two teeth. Stridulatory files fine. Chaetotaxy as in male, length of spines about diameter of segment. Metatarsus IV without trichobothrium. TmI 0.30. Length of leg segments, see Table 1. Abdomen 1.37 long, 1.15 wide, dorsal scutum with fine granulation, covering almost entire dorsal surface. Anterior pair of sigilla well visible, posterior pair indis- tinct. Venter (Fig. 9) with a pair of pedicel scuta, a pair of large mesal scuta, as well as with an unpaired posteroventral scutum. Epigyne somewhat anchoriform, with long, weakly sclerotized lateral parts. Two round and weakly sclerotized depressions present on each side of base of ventral plate as shown in Fig. 10. Vulva as shown in Fig. 11. VARIABILITY: AII examined specimens do not differ in size and position of the intermediate tibial apophysis, number of teeth on the chelicerae, size and shape of scuta. Some differences exist in the body size: males vary from 1.61 to 1.7, females from 1.8 to 1.94. 254 I. DUMA & A. V. TANASEVITCH TABLE 1. Length of leg segments in male and female (in parentheses) of Scutpelecopsis loricata Sp. n. Leg Femur Patella Tibia Metatarsus Tarsus Total I 0.56 (0.56) 0.16 (0.15) 0.46 (0.44) 0.35(0.36) 0.34(0.34) 1.87 (1.85) IL. 0.52 (0:55) 0.14 (0.14) 0.39 (0:39) 032032): 030 (03 LÉ ED IT 0.43 (0.46) 0:13 (0:13) 0.29 (0.33) 0.28 (0.30) 0.26(027) 1.39 (1.49) IV 0.61 (0.72) 0.16 (0.16) 0:52 (0.52) 2053810420)" 032 (032) 000 1%) TAXONOMIC REMARKS: The new species differs from the two known congeners by the longer embolus with a narrowing membranous edge, by the presence of a distinct anterior conical outgrowth, by small details of the male palpal tibia, as well as by the number of cheliceral teeth (5/2 versus 6/5 in others). S. loricata Sp. n. is most similar to S. wunderlichi, but differs clearly by the smaller size and the position of the intermediate apophysis on the male palp: in the new species it 1s situated higher and closer to the dorsal tibial apophysis. The female of S. loricata Sp. n., differs by the wider ventral plate of the epigyne, as well as by the length of the posteroventral scutum (b in Fig. 9): ca. 1/4 of the abdomen length instead of 1/3 as in S. wunderlichi, and by the distance between mesal scuta and posteroventral scutum: in S. loricata sp. n. this distance is about 1/2 of the length of the posteroventral scutum (a/b in Fig. 9), in S. wunderlichi it is much less, about 1/5-1/6). The female of the new species clearly differs from that of S. krausi by having a scutum which covers the entire dorsal abdominal surface, whereas in S. krausi the dorsal scutum is developed as a large spot around the sigilla. The male of S. loricata Sp. n. can be distinguished from that of S. krausi by the longer embolus and by the triangular shape of the intermediate tibial apophysis, which is truncate in S. krausi. DISTRIBUTION: The new species is known from only two localities (close to each other) in Romania. Scutpelecopsis wunderlichi Marusik & Gnelitsa, 2009 Pelecopsis krausi Wunderlich, 1980. — Tanasevitch, 1987: 360, misidentification, examined. Tanasevitch, 1990: 58, 106, figs 23.8, 24.5, misidentification, examined. Scutpelecopsis wunderlichi Marusik & Gnelitsa, 2009: 60, figs 1-11, 15-17, 20-26, 29-30, 35-43, 48-54, description 4 & 9% , types not examined. MATERIAL EXAMINED: Specimens previously determined as S. krausi, re-examined by A. Tanasevitch in 2010; 10 4, 4 $ (CAT), Russia, Caucasus, Republic of Severnaya Osetiya- Alaniya, S slope of Tsey Mt Ridge, 3-4 km E of Tsey Village, 2300 m a.s.l., burned-out Pinus forest, young Pinus, Salix caprea, tallgrass, 18.IV.-8.VI.1985, leg. S. Alekseev. — 1 4 (ZMMU)), same locality, 2000 m a.s.1., Pinus with Azalea, 28.1X.1985, leg. S. Alekseev. — 1 4 (ZMMU), same locality, 3000 m a.s.1., alpine meadow, 28.IX.1985, leg. S. Alekseev. — 10 d ,4 9 (CAT), Caucasus, Georgia, Borzhomi District, Akhaldaba, 1000 m a.s.1., Nedzura River Valley, Picea, Carpinus & Fagus forest, litter, logs, 12.V.1983, leg. S. Golovatch. — 1 & (ZMMU), Caucasus, Armenia, Shnokh Village (between Alaverdi & Bagratashen), 750 m a.s1., Carpinus forest, 24.V.1987, leg. S. Golovatch & K. Eskov. REMARKS: When describing S. wunderlichi from Abkhazia, Caucasus, Marusik & Gnelitsa (2009) noted that they have not seen the material of Pelecopsis krausi (now in Scutpelecopsis) reported by A. Tanasevitch from the Caucasus (Tanasevitch, 1987, 1990). This material is available in the Zoological Museum of the Moscow State A NEW SCUTPELECOPSIS FROM ROMANIA 255 FIiGs 5-8 Scutpelecopsis loricata sp. n., 4 holotype. (5) Left palp, retrolateral view. (6) Same, prolateral view. (7) Same, ventral view. (8) Palpal tibia, dorsal view. University and in the personal collection of Andreï Tanasevitch. Our examination of the material listed above has shown that all records of S. krausi from the Caucasus actually refer to S. wunderlichi, thus the known distribution of S. krausi is restricted to the type locality in Macedonia. DISTRIBUTION: Caucasus: Armenia, Georgia, Republic of Severnaya Osetiya- Alaniya, Russia (Tanasevitch, 1987, 1990, under Pelecopsis krausi) and Abkhazia (Marusik & Gnelitsa, 2009). RANGE: Caucasian. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We are indebted to Peter Schwendinger (Geneva, Switzerland) for valuable comments, corrections and help in preparing the final manuscript. We would also like 256 I. DUMA & A. V. TANASEVITCH PS FiGs 9-11 Scutpelecopsis loricata sp. n., 9. (9) Abdomen, ventral view. (10) Epigyne, ventral view. (11) Vulva., ventral view. to thank Jürg Wunderlich (Hirschberg, Germany), Yuri Marusik (Magadan, Russia) and Christo Deltshev (Sofia, Bulgaria) for their comments on earlier drafts of the ma- nuscript. For collecting some of the material used here we thank Violeta-Alina Duma. REFERENCES MARUSIK, Ÿ. M. & GNELITSA, V. À. 2009. Description of a new genus of spiders from eastern Mediterranean and the most armored erigonid species from the western Caucasus (Aranei: Linyphiidae: Erigoninae). Arthropoda Selecta 18 (1-2): 57-68. TANASEVITCH, À. V. 1987. The linyphiid spiders of the Caucasus, USSR (Arachnida: Araneae: Linyphidae). Senckenbergiana biologica 67 (4/6): 297-383. TANASEVITCH, A. V. 1990. The spider family Linyphiidae in the fauna of the Caucasus (Arachnida, Aranei) (pp. 5-114). /n: STRIGANOVA, B. R. (ed.). Fauna of the terrestrial invertebrates of the Caucasus. Nauka Publisher, Moscow, 237 pp. WUNDERLICH, J. 1980. Linyphiidae aus Süd-Europa und Nord-Afrika (Arachnida: Araneae). Abhandlungen und Verhandlungen des Naturwissenschaftlichen Vereins zu Hamburg (NF.) 23: 319-337. REVUE SUISSE DE ZOOLOGIE 118 (2): 257-264; juin 2011 Ceratophysella lobata sp. n. from Siberia with notes on C. brevisensillata Yosïi, 1961 (Collembola: Hypogastruridae) Anatoly BABENKO! & Dariusz SKARZYNSKI2 l The Severtsov Institute of Ecology & Evolution, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow 119071, Leninski pr., 33, Russia. E-mail: Isdc@mail.ru 2 Zoological Institute, Wroctaw University, Przybyszewskiego 63/77, 51-148 Wroctaw, Poland; E-mail: hypogast@ biol.uni.wroc.pl Ceratophysella lobafa sp. n. from Siberia with notes on C. brevisensillata Yosii, 1961 (Collembola: Hypogastruridae). - Ceratophysella lobata sp. n. from Siberia (Russia) and Alaska (USA) is described. Notes on morphology and taxonomic status of the similar species Ceratophysella brevisensillata Yosti, 1961 are given. Keywords: Collembola - Siberia - Alaska - taxonomy. INTRODUCTION Ceratophysella Bürner, 1932 is a large collembolan genus comprising 125 hemiedaphic species (Bellinger ef al., 2010). The genus 1s generally cosmopolitic, but the majority of species live in temperate climatic zone of Palaearctic (Babenko et al., 1994, Thibaud ef al., 2004) and Nearctic (Christiansen & Bellinger, 1980). For long time Ceratophysella brevisensillata Yosn, 1961, described on material from the north- eastern part of the USA (Yosii, 1960, 1961), was one of the most easily distinguishable species of the genus mainly because of a notable difference in sensilla length on thoracic and abdominal terga. Based on specimens from Alaska, Fjellberg (1985) added new diagnostic features, namely a specific shape of one of the maxillary lamellae. However, in the eastern Palaearctic two distinct forms with short thoracic sensilla but different maxillae were detected (Babenko et al., 1994) and it was not clear which one belongs to the true C. brevisensillata. Two different types of maxillae in the “species” were also found in Alaska (Arne Fjellberg, pers. comm.). Due to the kindness of Dr. Peter Schwendinger (Museum of Natural History Geneva) we were able to study several types of C. brevisensillata from Massachusetts, USA and to solve a problem of two east Palaearctic-Alaskan forms of this “species”. Below we redescribe types of C. brevisensillata and describe a new species having a different type of maxillae. MATERIAL AND METHODS Terminology for the descriptions follows that given in Fjellberg (1984, 1999), Babenko et al. (1994) and Thibaud et al. (2004). Abbreviations used: ant. I-IV — antennal segments I-IV, th. I-III — thoracic terga I-IIT, abd. I-VI — abdominal terga I-VI. Depositories: MNHG — Museum of Natural History, Geneva, Switzerland; MPGU -— Manuscript accepted 31.10.2010 258 A. BABENKO & D. SKARZYNSKI Chair of Zoology and Ecology of the Moscow State Pedagogical University, Russia; DBET -— Department of Biodiversity and Evolutionary Taxonomy, Wroctaw University, Poland; AF — collection of A. Fjellberg, Tjôme, Norway. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Ceratophysella brevisensillata Yosïi, 1961 Figs 1-9 MATERIAL EXAMINED: 10 paratypes (?) on slides, formerly in alcoholic vial labeled: .Hypogastrura (Ceratophysella) pseudarmata (Folsom) det. Yoshii, USA (Massachusetts), Arlington 15.X1.1950, leg. Bonet, on rain pools” (MNHG). REDESCRIPTION: Body length 1-1.3 mm. Color in alcohol grey to dark grey. Eye patches black, anal spines light. Granulation fine and uniform, with 14-22 granules between setae p, on abd. V. Dorsal chaetotaxy of B type, macrosetae p, on th. I-III set nearly in line with setae p,, setae m; and m, on th. Il usually present, setae a, longer than a;, setae m, absent, setae p, and p;, on abd. IV macro- and microsetae respectively, setae p; present (Figs 1-2). Arrangement of setae on head typical for the genus. Differentiation of dorsal setae into micro- and macrosetae distinct. Setae long, pointed, slightly curved and serrated (Fig. 3). Body sensilla (s) p, on th. IT-IIT and ps on abd. I short, about 1/3-1/2 of microsetae. Body sensilla on abd. IT-V and lateral parts of th. I-IIT long, but shorter than macrosetae (Fig. 3). Microsensilla (ms) on th. II present. Subcoxae I-IIT with 1,2, 3 setae respectively. Ant. IV with simple apical vesicle, subapical organite (or), microsensillum (ms), 7 cylindrical sensilla (2 lateral and 5 dorsal), about 15-20 short curved flattened at tips sensilla in ventral file (Fig. 4). Ant. Il-organ with two long (lateral) and two short (internal) curved sensilla. Microsensillum on ant. III present. Eversible sac between ant. IIT-IV present. Ant. I with 7 setae. Ocelli 8 + 8. Postantennal organ about twice as large as single ocellus, with four lobes of which the anterior pair larger than the posterior. Accessory boss present (Fis:-5S7 Labrum with 5, 5, 4 setae and without apical papillae. 4 prelabrals present. Labium and head of maxilla (Fig. 6) of the C. armata type. Outer lobe with 2 sublobal hairs. Tibiotarsi I, Il, III with 19, 19, 18 setae respectively, tibiotarsal tenent hairs slightly longer than inner edge of claws and pointed. Claws with inner tooth and pair of indistinct lateral teeth. Empodial appendage with broad basal lamella and apical filament reaching inner tooth or slightly beyond (Fig. 9). Ventral tube with 4 + 4 setae. Furca well developed (Fig. 8). Dens/mucro ratio = ca. 2. Dens with 7 setae (2-4 inner modified). Mucro boat-like. Retinaculum with 4 + 4 teeth. Anal spines short, half as long as inner edge of claws III, situated on basal papillae (Figs 2, 7). REMARKS: The species was originally described from the north-eastern part of the USA. Later it was recorded from several localities within the same region (Christiansen & Bellinger, 1980), from Alaska and Chukotka (Fjellberg, 1985) and Siberia (Babenko ef al., 1994). Alaskan and East Palaearctic specimens treated as CERATOPHYSELLA LOBATA SP. N. FROM SIBERIA 259 S ET 4 he 0.01 mm Ke RTE SS 4 | Fams 7(S) sa: Lo KŸ s” TL AERCE, S 7 U E 1 . LS à KL ion FIGs 1-9 Ceratophysella brevisensillata Yosi, 1961. (1) Chaetotaxy of th. II. (2) Chaetotaxy of abd. II-VI. (3) From left to right: macroseta p,, microseta p,, sensilla m;, sensilla p, on th. II and sensilla ps on abd. I. (4) Sensilla in ventral file on ant. IV. (5) Postantennal organ, accessory boss and neighbour ocelli. (6) Head of maxilla, lateral view. (7) Anal spine. (8) Dens and mucro. (9) Claw I with empodial appendage. 260 A. BABENKO & D. SKARZYNSKI C. brevisensillata clearly differ from the above redescription of Yosii’s types by having longer anal spines and coarser integument granulation. They could be considered as a separate species 1f their morphology was homogeneous within the area. Unfortunately it 1s not so and many important diagnostic characters vary in different parts of the distributional range without forming clear geographical pattern. Thus, inner margin of claw IIT/anal spine ratio varies in Palaearctic specimens from 1.8: 1 to 0.9: 1, being usually about 1: 1. Yosi1’s “a” measure is usually 10-12, but the whole range is 9-16. Chaetom differentiation into macro and microsetae is strong in most Palaearctic regions but specimens from Kemerovo Province and eastern Tuva are characterized by weak differences in seta length with a, on th. IT almost as long as a, and a. Intermediary conditions have been also seen. The single available specimen from the Kyrgyz mountains has rather short but strong (almost spine-like) macrosetae. Alaskan and Chukotka specimens have 2 sublobals on maxillary outer lobe and p; setae on abd. IV are usually absent. Populations from more western parts of Palaearctic differ by having only 1 sublobal hair and both p;, and p3 microsetae present on abd. IV. Nevertheless, two sublobals have been also seen in populations from Buryatia, eastern Tuva, north-eastern Altai and Kyrgyzstan and specimens without p3 on one or both sides on abd. IV can be found within many studied populations. Just now we prefer to treat all these forms as a single polymorphic species with a wide Siberian-American distributional range being sure that more work and material are needed to clear up their status. However the existing distributional gap (see Fig. 21) between east and west American populations raises some doubts that they are conspecific. Ceratophysella lobata sp. n. Figs 10-20 Hypogastrura (Ceratophysella) brevisensillata: Fjellberg (1985): 37 Hypogastrura (Ceratophysella) cf. brevisensillata: Babenko et al. (1994): 127 MATERIAL EXAMINED: Holotype, female, Russia, Jakutia (Sakha Republic), Suntar- Khayata Mt. Range, upper current of Kyumyume River (63° 13°N 139° 32°E), 1,800 m as, willow bushes with lichen cover, 9.VII.2002, leg. O. Makarova (MPGU). — Paratypes, 12 fe- males, 11 males on slides and many specimens in alcohol, same data as holotype (MPGU, DBET and MNHG). OTHER MATERIAL: Russia: 3 females, Ural Mts., Perm’ Province, State nature reserve “Basegi”, Srednii Baseg Mt. (58° SON 58° 40°E), alpine tundra, 23.VII.1990, leg. S. Esyunin (MPGU). — 2 females, same region but mixed forest with fern cover, 4.1X.1990, leg. S. Esyunin (MPGU). — 13 females and 3 males, Siberia, Putorana plateau, vicinity of Yt-Kyuel”’ lake (68° O8’N 91° 50’E), 700-900 m a.s.l., nival desert, 28.VII-13.VIIL.1996, leg. A. Babenko (MPGU). — 7 females and 1 male, Siberia, Taimyr peninsula, upper current of Nizhnaya Agapa River (70° O6N 87° 25°E), tundra, 6.VII-5.VIIL.1999, les. A. Babenko (MPGU). — 2 females and 1 male, Chukotka, vicinity of El gygytgyn Lake (67° 26° 172° 10°E), tundra, 20.VIIL.1974, leg. E. Bondarenko (MPGU). — 10 specimens, Chukotka, Aborigen, in fungi on dry ridge, 29.VIT.1979, leg. A. Fjellberg (AF). — 9 specimens, USA, Alaska, Brook Range, W of Atigun Camp, dry alpine meadow, c. 1600 m a.s.l., 19.VII.1976, leg. A. Fjellberg (AF).— 7 specimens, USA, Alaska,vicinity of Fairbanks, litter in aspen forest, 21.VIL.1980, leg. A. Fjellberg (AF). DESCRIPTION: Body length 1-1.2 mm. Color in alcohol light to dark grey-brown. Eye patches black, anal spines light. Granulation fine and uniform, usually 12-15 gra- nules between setae p, on abd. V. Dorsal chaetotaxy of B type, macrosetae p, on th. I-IIT set nearly in line with setae p,, setae m; and m, on th. IT usually present, setae a, slightly longer than a;, setae m, absent, setae p, and p;, on abd. IV macro- and micro- CERATOPHYSELLA LOBATA SP. N. FROM SIBERIA 261 0.1 mm 0.01 mm FiGs 10-20 Ceratophysella lobata sp. n. (10) Chaetotaxy of th. IL. (11) Chaetotaxy of abd. II-VI. (12) From left to right: macroseta p,, microseta p,, sensilla m;, sensilla p, on th. IT and sensilla ps on abd. I. (13) Postantennal organ, accessory boss and neighbour ocelli. (14) Sensilla in ventral file on ant. IV. (15), Chaetotaxy of ant. IIT-IV. (16) Head of maxilla. (17) Head of maxilla, lateral view. (18) Claw IIT with empodial appendage. (19) Anal spine. (20) Dens and mucro. 262 A. BABENKO & D. SKARZYNSKI FIG. 21 Known distribution of C. lobata sp.n. (white dots) and C.brevisensillata Yosïi, 1961 (black dots, American data according to Christiansen & Bellinger (1980)). Black & white dots in Alaska and Chukotka indicate uncertain records (data from Fjellberg (1985). setae respectively, setae p; absent (Figs 10-11). Arrangement of setae on head typical for the genus. Differentiation of dorsal setae into micro- and macrosetae not strong and more pronounced on last abdominal terga. Setae short, fine, pointed, slightly curved and serrated. Body sensilla p, on th. I-IIT and ps on abd. I usually equal to microsetae, thick and sometimes curved. Body sensilla (s) on abd. IT-V and lateral parts of th. I-IIT about as long as macrosetae (Fig 12). Microsensilla (ms) on th. II present. Subcoxae I-IIT with 1,2, 3 setae respectively. Ant. IV with simple apical vesicle, subapical organite (or), microsensillum (ms), 5-7 (usually 7) cylindrical sensilla (2 lateral and 3-5 dorsal) (Fig. 15) and about 15 short curved flattened at tips sensilla in ventral file (Fig. 14). Ant. [l-organ with two long (lateral) and two short (internal) curved sensilla (Fig. 15). Microsensillum on ant. IT present. Eversible sac between ant. III-IV present. Ant. I with 7 setae. Ocelli 8 + 8. Postantennal organ about twice as large as single ocellus, with four lobes of which the anterior pair larger than the posterior. Accessory boss present (Fig.13): Labrum with 5, 5, 4 setae and without apical papillae. 4 prelabrals present. Labium of the C. armata type. Maxillary head with prolonged denticulate lobe on lamella 5 which only slightly shorter than lamella 4 (Figs 16-17). Outer lobe with 2 sublobal hairs. Tibiotarsi I, II, III with 19, 19, 18 setae respectively, tibiotarsal tenent hairs nearly as long as inner edge of claws and usually pointed, sometimes truncate. Claws with inner tooth and pair of indistinct lateral teeth. Empodial appendage with broad basal lamella and apical filament reaching inner tooth or slightly beyond (Fig. 18). Ventral tube with 4 + 4 setae. Furca well developed. Dens/mucro ratio = ca. 2. Dens with 7 setae (2 inner modified). Mucro boat-like (Fig. 20). Retinaculum with 4 + 4 teeth. Anal spines equal to or slightly longer than inner edge of claws II, situated on basal papillae (Figs 11, 19). VARIABILITY: Siberian and available Alaskan material appears to be morpho- logically homogeneous throughout the distributional range. However Fjellberg (1985) mentioned that in Alaska “exact chaetotaxy and differentiation in macro/microchaetae is rather variable” and alpine specimens from Brook Range “frequently have long, CERATOPHYSELLA LOBATA SP. N. FROM SIBERIA 263 hair-like ps sensilla on Abd.F”. It may indicate the presence of the third separate form there apart from C. lobata sp. n. and C. brevisensillata s. 1. ETYMOLOGY: The name reflects the most characteristic feature of the new species - the presence of an additional lobe on one of the maxillary lamellae. DISTRIBUTION: The new species which seems to be a usual inhabitant of Subarctic Mountains was found in few remote Palaearctic regions from Ufral to Chukotka and in Alaska (see map on Fig. 21 and material above). AFFINITIES: À combination of four features, viz. a full number of ocelli, a chaetotaxy of B type, shortened dorsal sensilla on three first terga and maxillae with prolonged lobe on lamella 5, distinguishes C. lobata Sp. n. from all other known species of the ceratophysellan lineage. Thus, only C. brevisensillata and Boneto - gastrura nivalis (Martynova) are characterized by the same type of sensillar differen- tiation, but both have the usual armata-type of maxillae and longer dorsal setae which are more clearly differentiated into macro/microsetae. Apart from this, B. nivalis has only 4 + 4 ocelli and partly reduced chaetotaxy (m; always and m, usually absent on th. I-IIT, abd. I-IIT without m-setae as a rule and p; often absent on abd. I-IV). Shortened dorsal sensilla on thorax similar to those in C. lobata sp. n. are also characteristic of C. bengtssoni (Âgren), C. microchaeta (Babenko) and B. variabilis (Christiansen) but maxillae of all these species are modified differently with broadened lamella 1 and without prolonged lobe on lamella 5. The same type of maxillae as in C. /obata Sp. n. is known only for C. sigillata (Uzel), C. sibirica Martynova and C. pseudarmata (Folsom)!. They can be easily distinguished from C. lobata sp. n. due to long dorsal sensilla on all terga and clearly clavate tibiotarsal tenent hairs (pointed or truncate in C. lobafa sp. n..). The new species runs in the most recent key to the Palaearctic Ceratophysella species (Thibaud et al., 2004) to couplet 11 which needs to be modified as follows: 11 Sensillum ps on abd. I small, spine-like; micro- and macrosetae clearly en nu bia dre Puits rm RS RPM NE Us — Sensillum ps on abd. I long, hair like; micro- and macrosetae weakly . . RE ES Min host sde microchaeta (Babenko, 1994) 11* Maxillary head of the armata type without prolonged lobe on lamella 5 A ER EL Je 2 CR PTRURE brevisensillata Yosui, 1961 — Maxillary head with prolonged denticulate lobe on lamella 5 (Figs 16-17) LM PE EVA, TER ON MEN lobata sp. n. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We would like to express our sincere thanks to Peter Schwendinger (Museum of Natural History Geneva) and Arne Fjellberg (Tjôme, Norway) for the loan of the material. l According to Babenko ef al. (1994) a specific status of these three species needs further confir- mation. 264 A. BABENKO & D. SKARZYNSKI REFERENCES BABENKO, À. B., CHERNOVA, N. M., POTAPOV, M. B. & STEBAEVA, S. K. 1994. Collembola of Russia and adjacent countries: Family Hypogastruridae. Nauka, Moscow, 336 pp. BELLINGER, P., CHRISTIANSEN, K. A. & JANSSENS, F. 2010. Checklist of the Collembola of the World. Available from: http://www.collembola.org (date of access: 29.1X.2010). CHRISTIANSEN, K. & BELLINGER, P. 1980. The Collembola of North America north of the Rio Grande. Grinnell College, Grinnell, Iowa, 1312 pp. FIELLBERG, À. 1984. Maxillary structures in Hypogastruridae (Collembola). Annales de la Société Royale Zoologique de Belgique 114: 89-99, FIELLBERG, À. 1985. Arctic Collembola. 1. The collembolan fauna of Alaska: Families Podu- ridae, Hypogastruridae, Odontellidae, Brachystomellidae and Neanuridae. Entomologica Scandinavica Supplement 21: 1-126. FJIELLBERG, À. 1999. The Labial Palp in Collembola. Zoologischer Anzeiger 237: 309-330. THIBAUD, J. -M., SCHULZ H.-J., GAMA, M. M. da 2004. Synopses on Palaearctic Collembola. Hypogastruridae. Vol. 4. Abhandlungen und Berichte des Naturkundemuseums Gôrlitz 75(2): 1-287. Yosrr, R. 1960. Studies on the Collembolan Genus Hypogastrura. The American Midland Naturalist 64(2): 257-281. Yosnr, R. 1961. Further Remarks on the Collembolan Genus Hypogastrura With Description of a New Genus. The American Midland Naturalist 66(1): 250-251. REVUE SUISSE DE ZOOLOGIE 118 (2): 265-292; juin 2011 Taxonomie et répartition des chiroptères de Tunisie Ridha DALHOUMI!, Patricia AISSAI & Stéphane AULAGNIER? l Laboratoire de Biosurveillance de l'Environnement, Faculté des sciences de Bizerte, 7021 Zarzouna (Tunisie) 2 Comportement et Ecologie de la Faune Sauvage, I.N.R.A., B.P. 52627, 31326 Castanet Tolosan cedex (France) Courriels : dalhoumi_ridha@ yahoo.com; Stephane .Aulagnier @toulouse.inra.fr Taxonomie et répartition des chiroptères de Tunisie. - À partir d’une compilation des données publiées, y compris dans la littérature grise, le présent travail fournit une liste actualisée des 19 espèces de Chiroptères inventoriées en Tunisie ainsi que des cartes précises de leur répartition géo- graphique. Avec six genres et dix espèces la famille des Vespertilionidae est la plus diversifiée devant les Rhinolophidae (un genre, cinq espèces). Hipposideridae, Rhinopomatidae, Molossidae et Miniopteridae sont représentés chacune par une seule espèce. Certaines espèces sont très large- ment distribuées (espèces méditerranéennes), d'autres sont seulement présentes dans le nord du pays (espèces paléarctiques), d'autres enfin sont inféodées aux zones désertiques du sud (espèces saharo-sindiennes). Trois espèces classées vulnérables et cinq espèces classées quasi-menacées sur la liste rouge de l'U.I.C.N. devraient bénéficier de mesures de conservation. Mots clés: Chauves-souris - inventaire - répartition - biogéographie - conservation - Tunisie Taxonomic status and distribution of Tunisian bats. - An extensive review of the published and unpublished literature resulted in an updated list of 19 bat species for Tunisia. Provisional distribution was mapped for all of them. The family Vespertilionidae (six genera, ten species) is the most diversified, beyond Rhinolophidae (one genus, five species). Only one species each of Hipposideridae, Rhinopomatidae, Molossidae and Miniopteridae have been recorded so far. Some species are widely distri - buted over the country (mediterranean species), when others are restricted to the northern part (palaearctic species) and some are only distributed in the southern desert areas (saharo-sindian species). Three species are classified as vulnerable and five species are classified as near threatened according to the I.U.C.N. redlist; they should benefit conservation measures. Keywords: Chiroptera - taxonomy - distribution - biogeography - conser- vation - Tunisia Manuscrit accepté le 02.12.2010 266 R. DALHOUMI ET AL. INTRODUCTION En Tunisie, les Chiroptères constituent sans aucun doute l’un des ordres de Mammifères terrestres les plus méconnus du grand public. Ceci semble lié en partie à l’absence de prospections récentes mais également au mode de vie nocturne des chauves-souris et à la crainte superstitieuse qu’elles inspirent encore. Pourtant, les pre- mières notes sur les Chiroptères tunisiens remontent au XIXème siècle. Le premier, Hartmann (1868) signale la présence de deux espèces, Rhinolophus Ferrum-equinum et Miniopterus Schreibersii (sic), puis Fitzinger (1870) en rapporte une troisième, Vesperugo marginatus (= Pipistrellus kuhlii), sans préciser de localisations. Huit ans plus tard, Dobson (1878) recense une nouvelle espèce en provenance de "Tunis" : Vespertilio murinus (= Myotis punicus). En 1885, Lataste rajoute Phyllorhina Tridens (= Asellia tridens) et Vesperugo isabellinus (= Eptesicus isabellinus). I précise la répartition des cinq espèces inventoriées dans son catalogue critique des mammifères apélagiques sauvages de la Tunisie publié en 1887. Par la suite, Anderson (1892) complète la liste avec Plecotus auritus (= Plecotus gaisleri). Au début du XXème siècle, Andersen & Matschie (1904), Gadeau de Kerville (1908) et Olivier (1909) rapportent, entre autres, la présence de trois espèces supplé- mentaires: Euryale barbarus (= Rhinolophus euryale), Rhinolophus hipposideros et Rhinopoma microphyllum (= Rhinopoma cystops). Dans les années trente, la synthèse de Blanc (1935) sur les Mammifères de Tunisie, l'analyse biogéographique d'Heim de Balsac (1936) et la clef dichotomique des Chéiroptères de la Barbarie (Laurent, 1937) ne mentionnent aucune nouvelle espèce de Chiroptères. Les prospections de Deleuil & Labbe (1955a) dans plusieurs sites du nord tunisien donnent lieu à une synthèse rapidement dépassée par la découverte d'Otonycteris Hemprichi (sic) près de Redeyef (Deleuil, 1957). Un an plus tard, Kahmann (1958) signale pour la première fois en Tunisie Rhinolophus mehelyi. Lors de leur parcours spéléologique réalisé en octobre 1967 dans les grottes des chauves- souris, du Cheval et de Kef El Agab, Aellen & Strinati (1969) fournissent la première liste des Chiroptères cavernicoles de Tunisie; leur inventaire décrit la répartition des 13 espèces précédemment identifiées (dont Vespertilio pipistrellus (= Pipistrellus pipi- strellus) rapportée de Djerba par Galli-Valerio en 1911 à la suite d’une probable erreur d'identification) et d’une espèce nouvelle pour le pays: Rhinolophus blasir. Avec l’expédition de la Smithsonian Institution (1972-1975), Cockrum (1976a) complète l’inventaire des chauves-souris tunisiennes avec quatre espèces: Myofis ca- paccinii, M. emarginatus, Pipistrellus pipistrellus et Pipistrellus savii (= Hypsugo savii) et fournit quelques nouvelles localisations pour les espèces déjà connues. Enfin, en 1981 Beaucournu ef al. rapportent la première observation de Tadarida teniotis, dont la première capture en 1963 n'a été rapportée que plus tard par Kock & Nader (1984). Depuis lors, contrairement aux autres pays du Maghreb, la Tunisie n'a pas été prospectée extensivement, toutefois plusieurs travaux récents rapportent des données locales (e.g. Zava & Masseti, 2007; Hizem & Allegrini, 2009). Toutefois le travail le plus complet est la thèse de Gharaibeh (1997) qui fournit une liste de 18 espèces accompagnée de cartes de répartition, mais sans analyse critique de la systématique et des données publiées. Une dix-neuvième espèce, Pipistrellus rueppellii, est connue par CHIROPTÈRES DE TUNISIE 267 un spécimen des collections du Zoologisches Forschungsinstitut und Museum Alexander Koenig de Bonn (ZFMK) (Van Cakenberghe & Seamark, 2006). Le présent travail de compilation bibliographique propose une actualisation critique de l'inventaire des six familles de chauves-souris recensées en Tunisie et la cartographie de leur distribution à partir d'une analyse bibliographique plus appro- fondie. RESULTATS RHINOLOPHIDAE Rhinolophus blasii Peters, 1866 Rhinolophus blasii blasii. — Aellen & Strinati, 1969 Rhinolophus blasii. — Wiersema & Vreugdenhil, 1975 Le Rhinolophe de Blasius a été recensé uniquement dans trois sites cavernicoles de la Tunisie. Ainsi, un mâle a été trouvé par Aellen & Strinati (1970) dans la grotte des Chauves-souris d’EI Haouaria le 3 octobre 1967 (Fig. 1). Cockrum (1976a) a signalé cette espèce dans la mine du Djebel Ressas et dans la mine du Djebel Zaghouan. Enfin, Deleuil & Labbe (1955a) ont publié les mensurations de deux spé- cimens de rhinolophes appartenant très probablement à cette espèce (cf. R. euryale) provenant de la grotte des chauves-souris d'El Haouaria (Cap Bon) et d'une grotte profonde entre Testour et El Aroussa. Rhinolophus euryale Blasius, 1853 Euryale barbarus.-— Andersen & Matschie, 1904 Rhinolophus euryale barbarus.-— Andersen, 1905 Rhinolophus euryali. — Trouessart, 1906 Rhinolophus euryale.-— Gadeau de Kerville, 1908 Rhinolophus euriale.-— Karaman, 1939 Rhinolophus (?) euryale.— Aellen & Strinati, 1970 Le Rhinolophe euryale est assez difficilement identifiable des deux autres espèces de taille moyenne, au point que Deleuil & Labbe (1955a) ont décrit la sous- espèce tuneti d'après un Rhinolophus mehelyi (photographie et mesures du type) et deux R. blasii (mesures des paratypes). Dans la grotte des chauves-souris d'EI Haouaria successivement Kahmann (1958), Aellen & Strinati (1969, 1970) et Cockrum (1976a, b) n'ont observé que des rhinolophes de Méhely. Aussi les données rapportées pour À. euryale doivent être reprises avec prudence. Le Rhinolophe euryale a été rapporté pour la première fois par Andersen & Matschie (1904) dans une grotte près de Tebourba (Fig. 1) le 12 mars 1898 (le second auteur étant le descripteur de R. mehelyi). Aellen & Strinati (1970) attribuent à cette espèce deux radius collectés dans la grotte du Cheval du Djebel Zaghouan le 5 octobre 1967. Cockrum (1976a) a collecté huit spécimens dans la mine de kohl, à 5km au nord- est d’Aïn Draham. Parmi les données à confirmer, Gadeau de Kerville (1908) a trouvé un essaim de 96 mâles et de 26 femelles dans la grotte de Djebel Gloub le 18 mai 1906 (donnée publiée aussi par Trouessart, 1906). Blanc (1935), qui n'a pas observé R. mehelyi, rapporte À. euryale d'une grotte du Djebel Ichkeul, près de Mateur et d'une carrière de pierres située à l’est de Gafsa. Deux spécimens de cette dernière provenance sont 268 R. DALHOUMI ET AL. déposés dans les collections du Museum für Naturkunde Berlin (ZMB), ainsi qu'un individu provenant d'El Hamma de Gabès. Enfin, une femelle a été capturée dans le grenier d'une maison du Parc National d’El Feidja (Zava & Masseti, 2007). Rhinolophus ferrumequinum (Schreber, 1774) Rhinolophus Ferrum-equinum. — Hartmann, 1868 Rhinolophus ferrum-equinum. — Trouessart, 1905 Rhinolophus ferrum equinum. — Blanc, 1935 Rhinolophus ferrum equinum obscurus.-— Laurent, 1937 Rhinolophus ferrumequinum ferrumequinum. — Aellen & Strinati, 1969 Rhinolophus ferrumequinum. — Baker et al., 1974 Le Grand rhinolophe a été signalé dans une quinzaine de sites de Tunisie (Fig. 2), mines, caves et grottes, mais aussi bâtiments. Du nord au sud cette espèce a été observée à El Haouaria (Naturhistorisches Museum Wien - NMW), dans une pelote de Chouette effraie (Tyto alba) collectée entre EI Haouaria et Sidi Daoud (Heim de Balsac ef al., 1954), dans une mine abandonnée du Djebel Bou Kornine (Deleuil & Labbe, 1955a), dans une mine du Djebel Ressas (Deleuil & Labbe, 1955a; Cockrum, 1976a; Noblet & Nefzi, 1991), dans une grotte du Djebel Oust (Cockrum, 1976a) où Gharaibeh (1997) a observé le 29 juillet 1996 des femelles allaitantes et des juvéniles, dans la grotte du Cheval du Djebel Zaghouan (Deleuil & Labbe, 1955a; Aellen & Strinati, 1969), mais aussi la grotte du poste d'observation (Cockrum, 1976a) et dans la mine abandonnée de kohl au nord-est d'Aïn Draham(Cockrum, 1976àa). Une colonie de 80 individus a été trouvée dans une bâtisse du Parc National d’El Feidja, ainsi qu'une femelle isolée dans un entrepôt (Zava & Masseti, 2007). Une galerie de mine à El Akhouat hébergeait deux femelles le 23 décembre 1954 (Deleuil & Labbe, 1955a), la mine abandonnée de Scarna (Djebel Barbrou) abritait plusieurs individus dont un juvénile mâle le 26 juillet 1996 (Gharaïibeh, 1997) là où dix spé- cimens avaient auparavant été collectés par Cockrum (1976). Plus au sud, R. ferrumequinum a été également signalé à Feriana (Lataste, 1885), au sud de Redeyef sur la route en direction d’Aïn Ameur (Cockrum, 1976a) et dans une grotte au nord-ouest de Toujane (Baker ef al., 1974). Enfin, R. ferrumequinum a été collecté à Foum Tataouine, dans le tunnel sous la montagne située au sud de Tataouine (Baker et al., 1974), ainsi que dans les fortifications de la ville (Cockrum, 1976a). Rhinolophus hipposideros (Bechstein, 1800) Rhinolophus hipposideros.-— Gadeau de Kerville, 1908 Rhinolophus hipposideros minimus.— Laurent, 1937 Rhinolophus hipposideros escalerae.-— Cockrum, 1976a Apparemment plus rare, le Petit rhinolophe a été surtout rapporté dans l’extrême nord tunisien (Fig. 3). Ainsi, l’espèce a été recensée dans le Parc National d’Ichkeul les 30-31 décembre 1991 (Noblet & Nefzi, 1991), dans une forêt claire de pins à Nefza le 10 septembre 2004 (Rebelo & Brito, 2006), près d’Aïn Draham dans un tombeau antique appelé grotte de Kaloi (Gadeau de Kerville, 1908) et dans la grotte des chauves-souris d'El Haouaria (Heim de Balsac ef al., 1954). Au Djebel Zaghouan, ce rhinolophe été observé dans une grotte au niveau du poste d’observation: quatre CHIROPTÈRES DE TUNISIE 269 FiG. 1: Carte des observations de Rhinolophus blasii (@) et de Rhinolophus euryale (&) en Tunisie. l: Djebel Ichkeul, 2: Mateur, 3: Tebourba, 4: Aïn Draham, 5: Djebel Gloub, 6: El Feidja, 7: Testour, 8: Djebel Zaghouan (mine), 9: Djebel Zaghouan (grotte du Cheval), 10: Djebel Ressas (mine), 11: El Haouaria (grotte des chauves-souris), 12: Gafsa Carrière), 13: EI Hamma de Gabès. FIG. 2: Carte des observations de Rhinolophus ferrumequinum en Tunisie l: El Haouaria, 2: Sidi Daoud, 3: Djebel Bou Kornine, 4: Djebel Ressas (mine), 5: Djebel Oust, 6: Djebel Zaghouan (grotte du Cheval, grotte du poste d'observation), 7: Aïn Draham, 8: El Feidja, 9: EI Akhouat, 10: Djebel Barbrou, 11: Feriana, 12: Redeyef (mine), 13: Toujane, 14: Tataouine, 15: Foum Tataouine. mâles le 13 février 1955 (Deleuil & Labbe, 1955a) et 13 le 30 avril 1975 (Cockrum, 1976a). Dans le centre tunisien, trois femelles ont été collectées dans des catacombes à Sousse (Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris - MNHN) et Blanc (1935) rapporte l'espèce des anfractuosités de rocher dans les montagnes près de Kasserine. Rhinolophus mehelyi Matschie, 1901 Rhinolophus euryale tuneti.- Deleuil & Labbe, 1955a Rhinolophus mehelyi.- Kahmann, 1958 Rhinolophus mehelyi tuneti.- Cockrum, 1976b La présence en Tunisie du Rhinolophe de Méhely est rapportée pour la première fois par Kahmann (1958) qui l’a trouvé avec Miniopterus schreibersii et Myotis 270 R. DALHOUMI ET AL. punicus dans la grotte des chauves-souris à El Haouaria (Fig. 4) le 23 octobre 1957. Dans cette même grotte, Deleuil & Labbe (1955a) ont décrit R. mehelyi tuneti, Aellen & Strinati (1970) y ont observé un essaim contenant plusieurs centaines de R. mehelyi le 3 octobre 1967, 500 à 600 en 1971 selon Vesmanis (1976), et Cockrum (1976a) y a prélevé 17 spécimens. Ce rhinolophe a été observé à proximité dans les grottes romaines (Baker et al., 1974), à 2 km au nord d'El Haouaria (Cockrum, 1976a), à Djebel Sidi Abiod (NMW) et dans au moins deux sites du Cap Bon près d'El Ouidane (11 km à l'ouest sur MC 27) et dans la mine de charbon abandonnée (Cockrum, 1976a), dont très certainement la station mentionnée par Felten ef al. (1977). Gharaïibeh (1997) l'a aussi trouvé dans la carrière de sable de Menzel Témime. Un autre groupe de données provient du sud de Tunis: mines Entouna, du Djebel Ressas et du Djebel Zaghouan, avec l'observation insolite d'un individu sur la calandre d'une voiture entre Zaghouan et Khereddine (Cockrum, 1976a). En 1958, C.J. Marinkelle a collecté un spécimen de Tunis et trois autres de Nabeul (The Field Museum Chicago - FMNH). Plus au nord, le Rhinolophe de Méhely a aussi été observé dans une grotte et une mine du Djebel Ichkeul (Kahmann, 1958; Cockrum, 1976a), dans la mine près du cimetière de Ras Rajel (Cockrum, 1976a) et dans la grotte de Djebel Gloub (MNHN). Zava & Masseti (2005) ont trouvé une colonie de 30 individus dans le Parc National d'El Feidja (Kef en Negcha) le 31 mai 2000, avec capture d'un mâle et d'une femelle. Outre une première mention dans ce parc national, Gharaïibeh (1997) rajoute deux localités: Ghar Kraiz et Damous Saïd (Djebel Serdj). Enfin, le Rhinolophe de Méhely a été noté dans le Parc National de Bou Hedma (GOPA - DGF, 2005) et dans une grotte du Djebel Orbata (Kahmann, 1958). HIPPOSIDERIDAE Asellia tridens (É. Geoffroy, 1813) Phyllorhina Tridens.-— Lataste, 1885 Hipposiderus tridens.-— Trouessart, 1905 Asellia tridens diluta.-— Laurent, 1937 Asellia tridens.-— Kock, 1969 Faute de prospections dans les régions les plus sahariennes, le Trident du désert a été recensé essentiellement au voisinage du Chott Djerid (Fig. 3). Au nord de ce chott, l’espèce a été rencontrée à Redeyef (Lataste, 1885), dans une mine abandonnée à 4 km au sud de Redeyef et dans la mine de phosphate abandonnée de M’dhila (Cockrum, 1976a). Cette espèce a été aussi inventoriée à El Hamma de Tozeur (= El Hamma de Dijerid) par Kock (1969), Baker ef al. (1974), Vesmanis (1976) et Benda ef al. (2006) et à Tozeur même, dans un aqueduc abandonné, par Kock (1969) et Cockrum (1976a). À l’est du Chott Djerid, Asellia tridens a été observée dans les constructions romaines (sources chaudes) d’EI Hamma de Gabès (Lataste, 1885), inopportunément rapporté à Gabès par Heim de Balsac (1936) et Laurent (1937). Au sud-est enfin, deux spécimens ont été collectés à Djerba (MNHN) et un autre à Zarsis (Cockrum, 1976a). RHINOPOMATIDAE Rhinopoma cystops Thomas, 1903 Rhinopoma microphyllum.— Olivier, 1909 Rhinopoma cystops arabium. — Laurent, 1941a CHIROPTÈRES DE TUNISIE 271 FiG. 3: Carte des observations de Rhinolophus hipposideros (@) et d’Asellia tridens (&) en Tunisie. 1: Ichkeul, 2: Nefza, 3: Aïn Draham (grotte de Kaloi), 4: El Haouaria (grotte des chauves-souris), 5: Djebel Zaghouan (grotte du poste d'observation), 6: Sousse, 7; Kasserine. 8: M’dbhila, 9: Redeyef, 10: El Hamma de Tozeur (palmeraie STIL, aqueduc), 11: Tozeur, 12: EI Hamma de Gabès, 13: Djerba, 14: Zarzis. FiG. 4: Carte des observations de Rhinolophus mehelyi en Tunisie. 1: El Haouaria (grotte des chauves-souris, grottes romaines, 2 km N, Djebel Sidi Abiod), 2: El Ouidane, 3: Menzel Temime, 4: Nabeul, 5: Djebel Zaghouan (mine), 6: Djebel Ressas (mine), 7: Entouna, 8: Tunis 9: Djebel Ichkeul, 10: Ras Rajel, 11: Djebel Gloub, 12: Kef en Negcha, 13: Ghar Krarz, 14: Djebel Serdj, 15: Bou Hedma, 16: Djebel Orbata. Rhinopoma cystops.-— Rode, 1947 Rhinopoma hardwickei cystops.— Aellen & Strinati, 1969 Rhinopoma hardwickei.— Hayman & Hill, 1971 Rhinopoma hardwickei arabium. — Hill, 1977 Rhinopoma hardwickii.-— Dietz et al., 2007 Rhinopoma hardwicki.— Hizem & Allegrini, 2009 Seul représentant à ce jour de la famille des Rhinopomatidae en Tunisie, Rhinopoma cystops a récemment été élevé au rang spécifique (Hulva ef al., 2007) et par conséquent individualisé par rapport à À. hardwickii, l'espèce asiatique. Le Petit rhinopome est un hôte des zones arides de Tunisie, recensé parti - culièrement au nord du Chott Djerid (Fig. 5), mais aussi dans le Parc National de Bou 212 R. DALHOUMI ET AL. Hedma (GOPA - DGF, 2005). Rapporté de Redeyef (Olivier, 1909), entre Redeyef et Metlaoui (Laurent, 1941a; b), Gharaïibeh (1997) a capturé deux femelles gravides dans la Réserve de Dghomous le 26 mai 1996. Le 9 juin 2002, De Smet (in litt.) a observé entre 100 et 200 individus dans une grotte du Djebel Morra dans le Parc National de Dghoumes. MOLOSSIDAE Tadarida teniotis (Rafinesque, 1814) Tadarida teniotis.— Beaucournu et al,. 1983 Tadarida taeniotis.— Chastel et al,. 1983 Tadarida teniotis teniotis. — Kock & Nader, 1983 Seul représentant de la famille des Molossidae observé en Tunisie, le Molosse de Cestoni n’a été signalé que de quatre sites (Fig. 5). Du nord au sud, ses émissions sonores et ultrasonores ont été enregistrées au Cap Serrat le 9 septembre 2004 (Rebelo & Brito, 2006). Dans le Parc National de Bou Hedma, un mâle et une femelle ont été capturés entre le 14 et le 20 septembre 2006 (Hizem, 2007) et trois spécimens ont été identifiés dans les pelotes des rapaces (Hizem & Allegrini, 2009). Dans la région des chotts et notamment dans la gorge de Seldja, cette espèce a été recensée par Kock & Nader (1984). Mais la première observation provient d'une profonde fissure verticale d’une falaise à Ksar Haddada (Beaucournu et al., 1981; 1983). Des observations en vol à Tamerza, près de la frontière algérienne, restent à confirmer (Beaucournu ef al., 1985): MINIOPTERIDAE Miniopterus schreibersii (Kuhl, 1817) Miniopterus Schreibersii. —- Hartmann, 1868 Miniopterus Schreibersi. — Blanc, 1935 Miniopterus schreibersii. — Deleuil & Labbe, 1955a Miniopterus schreibersi schreibersi. — Aellen & Strinati, 1969 Miniopterus schreibersi.— Baker et al., 1974 Le Minioptère de Schreibers, récemment attribué à la famille des Miniopteridae, est très largement répandu en Tunisie, de l’extrême nord jusqu’à la région des chotts (Fig. 6). Rapporté dès 1868 par Hartmann, il a fait l'objet de nombreuses collectes par l'expédition de la Smithsonian Institution (Cockrum, 1976a) alors qu'il n'était connu que de huit localités. Blanc (1935) a listé la grotte de Tebourba (12 spécimens au ZMB), le Djebel Ichkeul (où il a été retrouvé par Noblet & Nefzi, 1991) et une grotte à Gafsa. Puis Deleuil & Labbe (1955a) l'ont observé dans la grotte des chauves-souris d'El Haouaria (où la colonie a été revue par Aellen & Strinati (1970) le 3 octobre 1967, puis par Cockrum (1976a) avec 9 spécimens collectés) et les ruines d'Utique, et l'ont reçu de la région de Ghardimaou, de Bulla Regia, de Souk el Arba (ville de Jendouba). Cockrum (1976a) l’a aussi collecté dans la mine près du cimetière de Ras Rajel, dans la mine de kohl abandonnée près d'Aïn Draham, dans la carrière de Chemtou (à l’ouest de Jendouba), au Djebel Zaghouan (grotte du poste d’observation, bassins d'irrigation à 4 km et à 6 km à l’ouest de ce poste, mines à 3 km au sud-est), au Djebel Ressas, dans la mine Entouna, au Djebel Barbrou (mine Scarna), au voisinage du CHIROPTÈRES DE TUNISIE 273 FiG. 5: Carte des observations de Rhinopoma cystops (@) et de Tadarida teniotis (&) en Tunisie. l: Cap Serrat, 2: Bou Hedma, 3: Redeyef, 4: Gorge de Seldja, 5: Metlaoui - Redeyef, 6: Dghoumes, 7: Djebel Morra, 8: Ksar Haddada FiG. 6 : Carte des observations de Miniopterus schreibersii en Tunisie. 1: Utique (ruines), 2: Tebourba, 3: Ichkeul, 4: Ras Rajel, 5: Aïn Draham, 6: El Feidja, 7: Ghardimaou, 8: Chemtou (carrière), 9: Bulla Regia, 10: Souk el Arba, 11: Ghar Kraïz, 12: Djebel Zaghouan (grotte du poste d'observation, bassin d'irrigation, mine, 6 km O), 13: Nabeul, 14: Djebel Ressas (mine), 15: Entouna, 16: EI Haouaria (grotte des chauves-souris), 17: Aïn Dhab, 18: Djebel Barbrou, 19: EI Hamrouni, 20: Bou Hedma (parc, bordj), 21: Gafsa, 22: Redeyef (mine). Ressas, dans la mine Entouna, au Djebel Barbrou (mine Scarna), au voisinage du bassin d’El Hamrouni et dans une mine située à l'ouest de Redeyef sur la route d’Aiïoun Ameur. En 1958, C.J. Marinkelle a prélevé un spécimen à Nabeul (FMNH). Gharaibeh (1997) a rajouté Ghar Kraiz et Aïn Dhab, avant les observations plus récentes dans le Parc National d’El Feidja (Dhouib, 1998) et le Parc National de Bou Hedma (Moldrzyk, 2003) où il a été capturé entre le 10 et le 13 mai 2008 devant le Borj (Hizem & Allegrini, 2009). VESPERTILIONIDAE Eptesicus isabellinus (Temminck, 1840) Vesperugo isabellinus.— Lataste, 1885 Vespertilio serotinus isabellinus.— Trouessart, 1905 Éptesicus isabellinus.— Laurent, 1937 274 R. DALHOUMI ET AL. Récemment élevée au rang d'espèce (Ibañez ef al., 2006; Mayer et al., 2007; Juste ef al., 2009), la Sérotine isabelle, seule sérotine d'Afrique du Nord, est une espèce assez commune pour la Tunisie, mais peu cavernicole elle a échappé aux prospections anciennes (Fig. 7). Par exemple Cockrum (1976a) rapporte la collecte de spécimens dans trois localités (contre 13 pour Miniopterus schreibersii) par capture au filet uniquement. Au nord du pays, elle a été trouvée à Tunis (Lataste, 1885) puis capturée à l'entrée d'une galerie de mine du Djebel Ressas le 23 août 1974 (Vaughan er al., 1977), et au-dessus d'un bassin au Djebel Zaghouan le 26 avril 1975 (Cockrum, 1976a), donnée ensuite attribuée à la mine située au sud-est de Zaghouan, mais confirmée au niveau du bassin par Gharaibeh (1997) après consultation des spécimens conservés au Texas. Ce dernier rajoute une capture au-dessus d'un bassin d'irrigation du Djebel Ressas. Au centre, l’espèce a été capturée au voisinage du bassin d'El Hamrouni (Cockrum, 1976a), à Sidi Bouzid (MNHN) et dans le Parc National de Bou Hedma. Ainsi, un spécimen a été capturé au filet en mai 1996 dans un bosquet d’Eucalyptus irrigué par la seguia (Gharaibeh, 1997), quatre mâles et six femelles en septembre 2006, puis trente cinq individus entre le 10 et le 13 mai 2008, devant le Bordj de Bou Hedma (Hizem, 2007; Hizem & Allegrini, 2009). Eptesicus isabellinus a également été inventorié à 4 km au sud de Redeyef (Cockrum, 1976a), à Tozeur (Djerid, Deleuil & Labbe, 1955a) et à Gabès (ZMB). Au sud, l’espèce a été signalée à Foum Tataouine par Baker ef al. (1974) qui ont étudié quatre des six femelles allaitantes capturées le 5 juin 1973 (Cockrum, 1976a). Pipistrellus kuhlii (Kuhl, 1817) Vesperugo marginatus.-— Fitzinger, 1870 Vesperugo Kuhlii. — Dobson, 1878 Vesperugo Kuhli.— Lataste, 1885 Vespertilio Kuhli.— Trouessart, 1905 Vespertilio pipistrellus.— Galli-Valerio, 1911 Pipistrellus Kühli Kühli.— Laurent, 1937 Pipistrellus Kühli albolimbatus. — Laurent, 1937 Pipistrellus kuhlii kuhlii. — Deleuil & Labbe, 1955a Pipistrellus kuhlii albolimbatus.— Deleuil & Labbe, 1955a Pipistrellus Kuhli.— Deleuil & Labbe, 1955b : Pipistrellus kuhli. — Aellen & Strinati, 1969 Pipistrellus kuhlii. - Hayman & Hill, 1971 Pipistrellus kuhli kuhli. —- Cockrum, 1976a Pipistrellus kühli. — Beaucournu ef al,. 1981 Pipistrellus (Pipistrellus) kuhlii. —- Kock, 2001 La Pipistrelle de Kuhl est sans doute la chauve-souris la plus commune en Tunisie où elle est largement répandue dans le nord et le centre (Fig. 8). Elle a le plus souvent été capturée en sortie de gîte, sous les toits ou dans des fentes de bâtiments, ou en vol au-dessus de plans d'eau. Dans l’extrême nord tunisien, l’espè ce a été trouvée dans l’île de la Galite (Vesmanis, 1972), entendue à Nefza (au-dessus de la route dans une forêt dense de pins et dans une forêt claire sur une dune fossile) et au Cap Serrat (Rebelo in litt.), dans le CHIROPTÈRES DE TUNISIE 215 FIG. 7: Carte des observations d’EÉptesicus isabellinus en Tunisie. 1: Tunis, 2: Djebel Ressas (bassin, mine), 3: Djebel Zaghouan (bassin), 4: EI Hamrouni, 5: Sidi Bouzid, 6: Bou Hedma (parc, bordj), 7: Redeyef (mine), 8: Tozeur, 9: Gabès, 10: Foum Tataouine. FiG. 8: Carte des observations de Pipistrellus kuhlii en Tunisie. l: Galite, 2: Nefza, 3: Cap Serrat, 4: Ichkeul, 5: Oued Medjerda, 6: Carthage (ruines, port punique), 7: Tunis, Sidi Mansour, Khereddine, Dubosville, Megrine, 8: Oudna, 9: Djebel Ressas (bassin), 10: Mornag, 11: Grombalia, 12: Sidi Daoud, 13: El Haouaria, 14: Oued Lebna, 15: Hammamet, 16: Enfidaville, 17: Oued Zriba, 18: Djebel Zaghouan (temple des eaux), 19: Massicault, 20: El Bathan, 21: EI Hamaïn, 22: Beja, 23: Ain Jammalah, 24: Bulla Regia, 25: Chemtou (théâtre romain), 26: Hammam-sousse, 27: Sousse, 28: Kairouan, 29: EI Hamrouni, 30: Gamouda, 31: Thyna, 32: Bou Hedma (parc, bordj), 33: Gafsa, 34: Bled Douarah, 35: Moularès, 36: Redeyef, 37: Tamerza, 38: Tozeur, 39: Nefta, 40: Kebili, 41: Douz, 42: El Hamma de Gabès, 43: Gabès, 44: Adjim, 45: Djerba, 46: Zarzis, 47: Ksar Haddada, 48: Tataouine, 49: Foum Tataouine, 50: Douirat, 51: Ghomrassen. Dans l’extrême nord tunisien, l’espè ce a été trouvée dans l’île de la Galite (Vesmanis, 1972), entendue à Nefza (au-dessus de la route dans une forêt dense de pins et dans une forêt claire sur une dune fossile) et au Cap Serrat (Rebelo in litt.), dans le Parc National de l’Ichkeul (Noblet & Nefzi, 1991) et à l’embouchure de l’Oued Medijerda (Deleuil & Labbe, 1955a). Dans la région de Tunis, cette espèce a été collectée au port punique de Carthage (Vesmanis, 1972; Cockrum, 1976a), dans la ville de Tunis (Dobson, 1878; 276 R. DALHOUMI ET AL. Au sud de Tunis, elle a été citée dans la plaine de Mornag (Deleuil & Labbe, 1955a), à 1 km au sud-est de la station Oudna, près d'un bassin d'irrigation du Djebel Ressas et dans un bâtiment situé à 10 km à l’ouest de Grombalia sur la route C 34 par Cockrum (1976a). Plus au sud, cette espèce a aussi été capturée au Temple des eaux du Djebel Zaghouan (Beaucournu ef al.,; 1981), à Hammamet, à l'oued Zriba et à Enfidaville (Harrison Institute). Au nord-est et à l'est, la Pipistrelle de Kuhl a été notée à Sidi Daoud (Deleuil & Labbe, 1955a), EI Haouaria (Vesmanis, 1972) et à l'oued Lebna (Deleuil & Labbe, 1955b). Au sud-ouest, Deleuil & Labbe (1955b) l’ont égale- ment signalée à El Baten et à Massicault. À l’école d’El Hamain, ils ont trouvé aussi soixante-cinq femelles et deux mâles le 22 mai 1955 sous les tuiles; le 25 juillet 1955 trois femelles sur dix étaient allaitantes. Gharaibeh (1997) a collecté quatre spécimens entre les briques d’une maison dans la pépinière forestière d’ Ain Jammalah. A l'ouest, cette pipistrelle a été trouvée à Béja (Cockrum, 1976a), Bulla Regia (Deleuil & Labbe, 1955a) et dans le théâtre romain de Chemtou (Baker et al., 1974). Dans le centre tunisien, l’espèce a été trouvée à Hammam Sousse (NMW), à Sousse et Kairouan (Olivier, 1896), à proximité du bassin d’El Hamrouni, à Gamouda (Cockrum, 1976a) et à Thyna (Kayser, 1995). Dans le Parc National de Bou Hedma, trois mâ les et deux femelles ont été capturés au filet et 10 individus ont été identifiés à partir des fragments de crânes retrouvés dans les pelotes de rapaces (Hizem, 2007). En mai 2008, une colonie a été découverte sous l’écorce décollée d’un Acacia radiana et 20 spécimens ont été capturés au filet devant le Bordj (Hizem & Allegrini, 2009). Dans la région des chotts, la Pipistrelle de Kuhl a été signalée pour la première fois par Lataste (in Roudaire, 1881) mais sans localisation précise. Ultérieurement, cette pipistrelle a été rapportée à Gafsa (NMW), à Bled Douarah (University of Colorado Museum - UCM), à Moularès et Redeyef (Deleuil & Labbe, 1955b), dans les oasis de Tamerza et Tozeur (Cockrum, 1976a), au Mausolée de Sidi Hassen Ayed situé à 4,5 km au sud de Nefta (Baker ef al., 1974), à Kebili (Vesmanis, 1972), à Douz (Kock, 2001), à EI Hamma de Gabès (Lataste, 1885), à Gabès (Aellen, 1957; Benda er al., 2006) et dans la région de Ghomrassen (= 100 km au sud de Gabès) (Benda et al., 2006). Dans le sud tunisien, cette pipistrelle a été rapportée de Adjim (après correction de l'identification de Galli-Valerio, 1911), Djerba et Zarzis (Blanc, 1935), capturée dans la gorge près de Ksar Hadada (Beaucournu & Hellal, 1977; Beaucournu ef al., 1983), à Tataouine (Blanc, 1935), à Foum Tataouine (Baker ef al., 1974; Cockrum, 1976a) et à Douirat (Anderson, 1892). Malgré ces données anciennes, Heim de Balsac (1936) considè re que cette espè ce a été rarement signalée dans l’extrême sud tunisien. De toute évidence cette région manque de prospections récentes, d'autant que ses pipistrelles ont souvent été rapportées à la sous-espèce albolimbatus, voire pallidus, variété plus claire dans laquelle certains auteurs distinguent une autre espèce: Pipistrellus deserti. Pipistrellus pipistrellus Schreber, 1774 Pipistrellus pipistrellus.— Cockrum, 1976a Une récente étude morphométrique et génétique (Benda ef al., 2004a) a montré que les Pipistrellus pipistrellus du Maghreb divergent des populations européennes, sans pour autant supporter un statut spécifique. CHIROPTÈRES DE TUNISIE 24 dé | La Pipistrelle commune n’a été recensée avec certitude que dans deux sites en Tunisie (Fig. 9). Au Djebel Ressas, deux mâ les ont été capturés au filet le 24 octobre 1974 à l'entrée de la mine (Cockrum, 1976a; Vaughan et al., 1977) et une femelle au- dessus d'un bassin d'irrigation le 8 mai 1975 (Cockrum, 1976a). Cette pipistrelle a été également signalée dans le Parc National d’El Feidja (DGF, 1988). Le spécimen identifié à Adjim par Galli-Valerio (1911), un parasitologue, est sujet à caution. En effet, l’observation de cet auteur semble erronée et correspondre à celle de Pipistrellus kuhlii, espèce commune sur l'île de Djerba (Aellen & Strinati, 1969). Pipistrellus rueppellii (Fischer, 1829) Pipistrellus rueppellii. — Van Cakenberghe & Seamark, 2006 L’unique Pipistrelle de Rüppell recensée en Tunisie a été collectée près de Matmata (Fig. 9) par G. Nobis (ZFMK). Otonycteris hemprichii Peters, 1859 Otonycteris Hemprichi.-— Deleuil, 1957 Otonycteris hemprichi.— Fain, 1959 Otonycteris hemprichi hemprichi.-— Aellen & Strinati, 1969 Otonycteris hemprichii. — Gharaibeh, 1997 La distribution de l'Oreillard d'Hemprich est limitée aux zones arides et saha- riennes de la Tunisie (Fig. 9). Rapporté par Deleuil (1957) de Redeyef sur la base d'un spécimen trouvé noyé le 4 janvier 1956 dans un oued, cette chauve-souris a été collectée à Sfax (Fain, 1959) et dans la gorge de Seldja le 1er septembre 1972 (Nader & Kock, 1983). Au sud, elle a été capturée de jour dans une fente de la falaise fissurée de la gorge au voisinage du Ksar Hadada (Beaucournu ef al., 1983). Plecotus gaisleri Benda, Kiefer, Hanäk & Veith, 2004 Plecotus auritus.-— Anderson, 1892 Plecotus auritus auritus.— Laurent, 1939 Plecotus austriacus christiei. — Ellerman & Morrison-Scott, 1951 Plecotus austriacus aegyptius.— Aellen & Strinati, 1969 Plecotus austriacus.— Hayman & Hill, 1971 Plecotus teneriffae cf. gaisleri. — Benda et al., 2004b Plecotus kolombatovici.— Spitzenberger et al., 2006 Plecotus gaisleri. — Dietz et al., 2007 La systématique du genre Plecotus a été abondamment discutée ces dernières années, à la faveur d'analyses génétiques notamment. Pour le nord-ouest de l'Afrique tous les auteurs s'accordent cependant à reconnaître un seul taxon, tantôt sous-espèce de P. teneriffae (Benda et al., 2004b) ou de P. kolombatovici (Spitzenberger ef al., 2006), tantôt espèce (Mayer et al., 2007; Dietz ef al., 2007). L'Oreillard du Maghreb a été rapporté pour la première fois en Tunisie par Anderson (1892) comme Plecotus auritus, alors seul taxon identifié pour le Paléarctique occidental. Les spécimens, 2 mâles et 14 femelles, en provenance de Douirat, étaient caractérisés par un pelage cendré clair sur le dos. C'est actuellement la localisation la plus méridionale d'une espèce qui, curieusement, a peu été contactée dans le nord du pays (Fig. 10). 278 R. DALHOUMI ET AL. FiG. 9: Carte des observations de Pipistrellus pipistrellus (M), de Pipistrellus rueppellii (+) et d'Otonycteris hemprichii (@) en Tunisie. l: Djebel Ressas (bassin, mine), 2: El Feidja, 3: Sfax, 4: Gorge de Seldja, 5: Redeyef, 6: Matmata, 7: Ksar Haddada. FIG. 10: Carte des observations de Plecotus gaisleri (@) et de Hypsugo savii (lt) en Tunisie. 1: Bizerte, 2: El Haouaria, 3: Djebel Zaghouan (bassin), 4: Bou Hedma (parc, bordj), 5: Gafsa, 6: Djebel Ank, 7: Redeyef (mine), 8: Toujane, 9: Tataouine, 10: Foum Tataouine, 11: Douirat. Douirat, étaient caractérisés par un pelage cendré clair sur le dos. C'est actuellement la localisation la plus méridionale d'une espèce qui, curieusement, a peu été contactée dans le nord du pays (Fig. 10). En effet les seules mentions septentrionales sont un spécimen collecté en 1930 à Bizerte (Närodni Muzeum Praha - NMP) et une femelle capturée le 12 mars 1963 à El Haouaria (Kock, 1969). Dans le centre, l'oreillard a été recensé dans le Parc National de Bou Hedma (GOPA - DGEF, 2005; Hizem & Allegrini, 2009), dans une mine du Djebel Ank (Cockrum, 1976a), dans une grotte près de Gaïfsa (NMP) et une mine au sud de Redeyef (Cockrum, 1976a), localité d'où Deleuil & Labbe (1955a) ont reçu un spécimen "couleur de poussière". Plus au sud, il a été capturé près de Toujane dans une fissure de grotte (19 spéci- mens dont treize mâles) et au sud de Foum Tataouine dans un tunnel fortifié abandonné (9 spécimens sont 5 mâles et 1 femelle) (Baker er al., 1974; Cockrum, 1976a). A CHIROPTÈRES DE TUNISIE 279 Hypsugo savii (Bonaparte, 1837) Pipistrellus savii. — Cockrum, 1976a Pipistrellus savii ochromixus.— Cockrum, 1976a Hypsugo savii.— Noblet & Nefzi, 1991 Le Vespère de Savi n’a été signalé en Tunisie qu’au Djebel Zaghouan (Fig. 10) où trois mâles ont été capturés au filet le 30 avril 1975 au-dessus d'un bassin à 4 km à l’ouest du poste d’observation (Cockrum, 1976a; Vaughan et al., 1977). Mhyotis capaccinii (Bonaparte, 1837) Myotis capaccinii. — Cockrum, 1976a Le Murin de Capaccini, souvent oublié de Tunisie dans les ouvrages de synthèse, n’a été signalé que dans trois sites du nord tunisien (Fig. 11). La première mention (Cockrum, 1976a; Vaughan ef al., 1977) est celle de la capture par quatre fois dans une mine de plomb abandonnée du Djebel Ressas (1 mâle le 7 août 1974, 12 mâles et 6 femelles le 23 août, 10 femelles le 24 octobre, puis 24 mâles le 8 mai 1975). Il a aussi été collecté dans la grotte de Tebourba (ZMB). Enfin, Noblet & Nefzi (1991) ont capturé 10 mâles et une femelle dans le Parc National de l’Ichkeul les 30-31 décembre 2001. Myotis emarginatus (É. Geoffroy, 1806) Myotis emarginatus.-— Cockrum, 1976a Le Murin à oreilles échancrées n'est connu en Tunisie que de quatre localités, dont trois dans le nord (Fig. 11). Il a d'abord été capturé au Djebel Oust (1 mâle et 2 femelles post-allaitantes le 29 juillet 1974) et dans la grotte proche du poste d'obser- vation du Djebel Zaghouan (4 femelles le 30 avril 1975, Cockrum, 1976a; Vaughan ef al., 1977). Dans le Parc National d’El Feidja, Gharaïibeh (1997) a collecté en juin 1996 huit individus dans une colonie mixte avec Rhinolophus mehelyi de 200 à 300 individus, puis Zava & Masseti (2007) ont observé en mai 2000 une colonie de 50 individus dans un bâtiment ainsi que 3 mâles et 2 femelles dans un logement du parc. Par ailleurs, cette espèce a été capturée en novembre 2001 par De Smet (in litt.) dans le Parc National de Sidi Toui, à proximité de la frontière libyenne. Mhyotis punicus Felten, 1977 Vespertilio murinus.— Dobson, 1878 Myotis murinus.-— Trouessart, 1905 Myotis myotis (vel. murinus).— Trouessart, 1906 Myotis myotis myotis.— Laurent, 1937 Myotis myotis.— Karaman, 1939 Myotis myotis oxygnathus.-— Rode, 1947 Myotis blythi. — Ellerman & Morrison-Scott, 1951 Myotis blythi oxygnathus.— Aellen & Strinati, 1969 Myotis blythii. —- Hayman & Hill, 1971 Myotis blythi punicus.-— Felten et al., 1977 Moyotis punicus.-— Simmons, 2005 Après de nombreux changements taxonomiques, tantôt Myotis myotis de petite taille, tantôt Myotis blythii de grande taille et décrit comme une sous-espèce de ce 280 R. DALHOUMI ET AL. FiG. 11: Carte des observations de Myotis capaccinii (M) et de Myotis emarginatus (@) en Tunisie. 1: Ichkeul, 2: Tebourba, 3: Djebel Ressas (mine), 4: Djebel Oust, 5: Djebel Zaghouan (grotte du poste d'observation), 6: El Feidja, 7: Sidi Tout. FiG. 12: Carte des observations de Myotis punicus en Tunisie. l: Djebel Abiod, 2: Ras Rajel, 3: Tabarka, 4: Djebel Gloub, 5: El Feidja, 6: Chemtou (théâtre romain), /: Bulla Regia, 8: Kef El Agab, 9: Beja, 10: Djebel Kalina, 11: Testour - El Aroussa, 12: Tebourba, 13: Ichkeul, 14: Djebel Ichkeul, 15: Utique (citerne, ruines), 16: Tunis, 17: Entouna, 18: Djebel Gattuna, 19: Djebel Ressas (mine, bassin), 20: Djebel Zaghouan (grotte du poste d'observation, mine, mine Sioitayeaa), 21: Hammam Djedidi, 22: Nabeul, 23: Menzel Temime, 24: EI Ouidane, 25: El Haouaria (grotte des chauves-souris, 2 km N, grottes romaines), 26: Ghar Kraiz, 27: El Akhouat, 28: Damous Saïd, 29: Aïn Dhab, 30: Makthar, 31: Djebel Barbrou, 32: Djebel Trozza, 33: El Hamrouni, 34: El Djem, 35: Sfax, 36: Feriana, 37: Bou Hedma (parc, bordj), 38: Gafsa, 39: Nefta, 40: Toujane, 41: Djebel Saikra. Myotis punicus.— Simmons, 2005 Après de nombreux changements taxonomiques, tantôt Myotis myotis de petite taille, tantôt Myotis blythii de grande taille et décrit comme une sous-espèce de ce taxon, le statut spécifique de Myotis punicus a été établi génétiquement, puis confirmé par la morphométrie (Castella ef al., 2000; Evin ef al., 2008). Felten ef al. (1977) ont étudié des spécimens tunisiens de plusieurs provenances pour la description du taxon; CHIROPTÈRES DE TUNISIE 281 Ensuite, Gadeau de Kerville (1908) l'a collecté dans une grotte du Djebel Gloub (46 mâles le 18 mai 1906) et Blanc (1935) l'a rapporté d'une grotte du Djebel Ichkeul (il a été retrouvé dans le Parc National par Noblet & Nefzi, 1991) et d'une grotte près de Tebourba. Puis, il a été surtout recensé lors des prospections de Deleuil & Labbe (1955a) et de la Smithsonian Institution. Deleuil & Labbe (1955a) l'ont observé en hiver dans une citerne des ruines d’Utique (site de collecte pour Cockrum, 1976a), dans une caverne du Djebel Abiod, dans une grotte profonde entre El Aroussa et Testour, dans deux galeries de mine d’El Akhouat, dans une grotte du Djebel Zaghouan, dans les galeries sud des mines du Djebel Ressas (observation confirmée par Cockrum, 1976a). Dans la grotte des chauves-souris d’EI Haouaria, de nombreux spécimens ont été observés par Aellen & Strinati (1970), puis l'holotype défini par Felten (in Felten ef al., 1977) a été collecté le 25 mars 1971, avec quatorze mâles et une femelle selon Baker ef al. (1974). L’espè ce a aussi été notée au Djebel Kalina (NMW) et dans un gouffre du Djebel Saikra (95 sujets mesurés en décembre 1954). En 1958, C.J. Marinkelle a collecté des spécimens à Nabeul et Sfax (FMNH). Dans leur étude sur le caryotype de l'espèce, Baker ef al. (1974) ont disposé de huit mâles et cinq femelles provenant du palais romain d'Amphitrite à Bulla Regia, quatre mâles et une femelle collectés dans le théâtre romain de Chemtou, trois mâles et deux femelles des grottes romaines d’El Haouaria, quatorze mâles et une femelle de la grotte des chauves-souris, ainsi que cinq mâles prélevés à 3 km au nord-ouest de Toujane. Ces données sont complétées par Cockrum (1976a) qui rajoute des captures dans le tunnel d’une mine près de Sidi Messaoud (Djebel Ichkeul), dans la mine près du cimetière de Ras Rajel, à Bulla Regia, à Beja et au Djebel Zaghouan (20 spécimens dans une mine située sur la route en direction de Aïn Ayed à 3 km au sud-ouest de Zaghouan , 7 dans la mine Sioutayea située à 1 km à l’est sur la route MC 133 ,3 dans la grotte du poste d’observation). Des murins du Maghreb ont aussi été collectés dans une galerie de mine à Hammam Djedid (20 km à l'est de Zaghouan), près d'un bassin d'irrigation au Djebel Ressas, dans la mine Entouna (22 spécimens prélevés), dans les grottes romaines d’El Haouaria et à 2 km au nord (7 spécimens). Toujours à proximité du Cap Bon, 4 murins ont été capturés dans une mine de charbon abandonnée d’El Ouidane et 2 autres dans la carrière de sable de Menzel Temime. Enfin, des prélè - vements ont été opérés dans la mine de Scarna (Djebel Barbrou) (11 individus), une mine du Djebel Trozza (5), près du bassin d’El Hamrounti (15), sous les bains dans les ruines de Maktha (12) et à 3 km au nord-ouest de Toujane (14). De plus, Aellen & Strinati (1970) ont examiné trois mâles et une femelle à Kef el Agab le 7 octobre 1967, Felten ef al. (1977) rapportent des collectes à Tunis et Tabarka (Senckenberg Museum Frankfurt - SMF) et Benda & Horâtek (1995) des spécimens d'El Djem (10 mâles, 2 femelles). G.B. Gharaibeh a légué au Texas Tech University Museum des spécimens de Ghar Tabouda (El Haouaria), Ghar Kraïz, Damous Saïd (Djebel Serdj) et Aïn Dhab. Le Murin du Maghreb a également été observé dans le Parc National d'El Feidja (DGF, 1988) et dans le Parc National de Bou Hedma (GOPA - DGF, 2005). Enfin, la seule citation dans l'étage bioclimatique saharien provient de l'oasis de Nefta (Wandeler, 1967). 282 R. DALHOUMI ET AL. DISCUSSION Pour réaliser cette synthèse, plusieurs difficultés ont dû être surmontées, à commencer par identifier les références des documents produits, y compris les travaux non indexés, localiser des publications indisponibles en Tunisie et consulter la littéra- ture "grise" (e.g. Blanc, 1935; Wiersema & Vreugdenhil, 1975; DGF, 1988; Noblet & Nefzi, 1991; Dhouib, 1998: Hizem, 2007). Ensuite, la localisation de certaines données s'est avérée délicate avec des désignations imprécises, comme "Djebel Gattuna" ou "Djebel Saïkra", mais aussi des sites difficilement repérables sur les cartes, comme "Mine Entouna" ou "Grotte de Kaloi (près d’Aïn Draham)". Des sites ont été désignés par plusieurs noms, comme "Tataouine" aussi appelé "Foum Tataouine", situé à 2 kilo- mètres de la ville, ou "El Hamma de Tozeur" dénommé tantôt "El Hamma de Djerid", tantôt "12 km au nord de Tozeur". L'orthographe a été fluctuante avec le temps (ou plutôt l'origine des auteurs) avec "Ichkeul" nommé "Achkeul" par Kahmann (1958) ou encore "Gañfsa" transcrit "Kaphja" par Felten et al. (1977) pour "Kaphza" (ZMB). Malgré des recherches approfondies, certaines localités n'ont pu être identifiées (et localisées) comme "Djebel Glong" (Cockrum, 1976a) ou "Therma" (Stockholm Museum). Par ailleurs, cette synthèse met en évidence que des sites ont été plus parti- culièrement prospectés: ce sont les régions d’El Haouaria, de Zaghouan, de Jendouba (Chemtou, Bulla Regia, Parc National El Feidja, Souk El Arba), du Djebel Ichkeul, des chotts (Gafsa, Redeyef, Tozeur) et de Tataouine. Dans ces régions le peuplement de chauves-souris apparaît relativement diversifié avec, par exemple, 13 espèces recen- sées au Djebel Zaghouan, 10 espèces au Djebel Ressas et à Redeyef. D’autres sites comme El Djem, Hammam Djedidi, Tabarka n’ont été visités qu’en une seule occasion et une grande partie du territoire tunisien reste à explorer. Les Chiroptères de Tunisie se répartissent en 6 familles, 11 genres et 19 espèces. Avec 6 genres (Eptesicus, Pipistrellus, Otonycteris, Plecotus, Hypsugo et Myotis) et 10 espèces, la famille des Vespertilionidae apparaît la plus diversifiée, comme dans toute la région paléarctique (Corbet, 1978; Simmons, 2005). Les Rhinolophidae, mono - génériques (Rhinolophus) comptent 5 espèces. Les autres familles, Hipposideridae, Rhinopomatidae, Molossidae et Miniopteridae, nettement moins diversifiées, sont représentées chacune par une seule espèce. Cette diversité apparaît nettement infé - rieure à celle des autres pays du Maghreb, comme le Maroc, qui héberge 29 espèces dont une de la famille des Nycteridae (Aulagnier & Denys, 2000), ou l’Algérie, qui partage avec le Maroc une espèce d'Emballonuridae pour un total de 24 espèces (Kowalski & Rzebik-Kowalska, 1991). Cette dernière espèce, Taphozous nudiventris, pourrait fréquenter les zones sahariennes du sud tunisien, tout comme Rhinopoma microphyllum et Tadarida aegyptiaca, deux autres espèces présentes dans les zones désertiques d'Egypte au Maroc (Aulagnier ef al., 2009). Parallèlement, des prospec- tions approfondies en Kroumirie pourraient révéler la présence de Barbastella barbastellus où Nyctalus leisleri, voire celle de Myotis escalerai. Nyctalus lasiopterus, espèce arboricole méconnue, rapportée du Maroc, de Cyrénaïque et de Sicile, devrait aussi faire l'objet de recherches spécifiques. CHIROPTÈRES DE TUNISIE 283 Certaines espèces sont très largement distribuées en Tunisie depuis le cap Blanc jusqu'aux confins désertiques: Rhinolophus ferrumequinum, Tadarida teniotis, Eptesicus isabellinus, Pipistrellus kuhlii, Plecotus gaisleri et Myotis punicus. D'autres espèces sont seulement présentes dans le nord du pays: Rhinolophus hipposideros, R. mehelyi et Miniopterus schreibersii, voire l'extrême nord: Myotis capaccinii. D'autres sont inféodées aux zones désertiques du sud: Asellia tridens, Rhinopoma cystops, Otonycteris hemprichii. D'autres présentent une distribution qui devra être révisée par des identifications confirmées: Rhinolophus blasii, R. euryale. D'autres enfin, ont été trop rarement observées pour définir leur patron de répartition: Pipistrellus pipistrellus, P. rueppellii, Hypsugo savii et Myotis emarginatus. L'opposition entre peuplements septentrional et méridional est typique des pays du Maghreb, tant pour les Chiroptères que pour les petits vertébrés terrestres (e.g. Blondel & Aronson, 1999). Pour l'Algérie, à la suite de Heim de Balsac (1936), Kowalski & Rzebik-Kowalska (1991) identifient la Berbérie, qui possède un peuple- ment paléarctique incluant de nombreuses formes méditerranéennes, et le Sahara, caractérisé par des espèces érémiques dont la distribution s'étend souvent aux déserts d'Asie. La limite entre les deux entités est assez floue tant certaines espèces palé- arctiques peuvent pénétrer l'espace saharien à la faveur des oasis ou bien, pour les Chiroptères, bénéficier de conditions favorables dans des gîtes souterrains. En fonction des récentes révisions systématiques et chorologiques, ces 19 espèces peuvent également être réparties entre sept types fauniques: paléarctique (1), paléarctique occidental (4), méditerranéen (7), méditerranéen occidental (2), méditer- ranéo-turkestanien (1), saharo-sindien (3) et saharien (1). Cette classification enracine nettement le peuplement tunisien dans l'espace méditerranéen, avec une composante érémique caractéristique des pays du Maghreb (Aulagnier, 1991). Le statut de conservation des Mammifères méditerranéens a récemment été évalué par l’U.IC.N. (Temple & Cuttelod, 2009). Trois espèces de Chiroptères présentes en Tunisie sont listées "Vulnérable" sur la liste rouge: Rhinolophus euryale, R. mehelyi et Myotis capaccinii. Il convient de noter qu'aucune donnée récente n'est venue confirmer la présence du murin, tandis que les rhinolophes, souvent confondus par le passé, devraient susciter une attention particulière et leurs gîtes bénéficier d'une protection réglementaire, voire physique (Mitchell-Jones ef al., 2007). De plus, cinq espèces sont listées "Quasi-menacé" dont trois déjà inscrites sur la liste du Groupe de Spécialistes Chiroptères de l’U.I.C.N. (Hutson ef al., 2001), qui ne recensait que douze espèces en Tunisie (!). Aux Rhinolophus blasii, R. ferrumequinum et Miniopterus schreibersii, assez bien distribués en Tunisie, ont été rajoutés Rhinolophus hippo - sideros, qui régresse en Europe, et Myotis punicus, élevé récemment au rang spéci- fique. Toutes ces espèces, vulnérables et quasi-menacées, sont principalement, voire totalement, cavernicoles, ce qui confère à la Tunisie une responsabilité en matière de conservation des gîtes souterrains, naturels (grottes) et artificiels (carrières, mines). CONCLUSION Les recherches sur les chauves-souris tunisiennes ont connu deux périodes. Initiées durant la seconde moitié du XIXè me siècle, de Hartmann (1868) à Olivier (1909), elles ont repris dans les années cinquante avec Deleuil & Labbe (1955a; b) 284 R. DALHOUMI ET AL. pour culminer dans les années soixante-dix avec Aellen & Strinati (1969; 1970) et Cockrum (1976a). Depuis, contrairement aux autres pays du Maghreb, les prospections ont été limitées dans l'espace et dans le temps. Cette compilation de la littérature nous a permis de réviser la liste fournie par Gharaibeh (1997) et de fournir des cartes de répartition actualisées pour les espèces actuellement reconnues. Elle devrait également contribuer à diffuser une information validée et éviter l'utilisation de listes mal étayées comme celle de Pereswiet-Soltan (2007). La majorité de ces espèces ayant été observées dans des gîtes de repos (grottes, caves, fissures), cette liste n’est encore que provisoire. Incontestablement, l’emploi de méthodes modernes et de matériels adéquats (détecteurs d'ultrasons, filets ja- ponais...), mais aussi l'analyse de pelotes de réjection de rapaces nocturnes, devraient permettre de découvrir d’autres espèces et de préciser la répartition d'espèces encore rarement recensées en Tunisie. Enfin, des contrôles s'imposent pour les gîtes ancien- nement connus, en utilisant des techniques limitant le dérangement (comptages en sortie de gîte par exemple) afin d'entreprendre des démarches de protection pour les plus fragiles. De manière plus générale, les chauves-souris devraient bénéficier de mesures de conservation qui passent par une sensibilisation du public. REMERCIEMENTS En complément des collections répertoriées dans le Gobal Biodiversity Information Facility, des inventaires inédits nous ont été communiqués par Milos Andfira (Näârodnf Muzeum, Praha), Barbara Henzig (Naturhistorisches Museum, Wien), Katrin Krohmann (Senckenberg Museum, Frankfurt), Frieder Mayer (Museum für Naturkunde, Berlin), Violaine Nicolas (Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris), qu'ils en soient vivement remerciés. Le travail de RD est financé par Bat Conservation International et Eurobats. REFERENCES AELLEN, V. 1957. Les Chiroptères africains du Musée zoologique de Strasbourg. Revue suisse de Zoologie 64: 189-214. AELLEN, V. & STRINATI, P. 1969. Liste des Chiroptères de la Tunisie. Revue suisse de Zoologie 76: 421-431. AELLEN, V. & STRINATI, P. 1970. Chauves-souris cavernicoles de Tunisie. Mammalia 34: 228-236. ANDERSEN, K. 1905. A list of the species and subspecies of the genus Rhinolophus, With some notes on their geographical distribution. The Annals and Magazine of natural History (7) 16: 648-662. ANDERSEN, K. & MATSCHIE, P. 1904. Uebersicht einiger geographischen Formen der Unter- gattung Euryalus. Sitzungs-Berichte der Gesellschaft Naturforschender Freunde zu Berlin 5: 71-83. ANDERSON, J. 1892. On a small collection of mammals, reptiles, and batrachians from Barbary. Proceedings of the zoological Society, London 3-24. AULAGNIER, S. 1991. Zoogegraphical notes on Moroccan bat fauna. Myotis 29: 83-89. AULAGNIER, S. & DENYS, C. 2000. Présence du Taphien à ventre nu, 7aphozous nudiventris, (Chiroptera, Emballonuridae) au Maroc. Mammalia 64: 116-118. AULAGNIER, S., HAFFNER, P., MITCHELL-JONES, T., MOUTOU, F. & ZIMA, J. 2009. Mammals of Europe, North Africa and the Middle East. A&C Black, London, 272 pp. BAKER, R. J., Davis, B. L., JORDAN, R. G. & BINOUS, A. 1974. Karyotypic and morphometric studies of Tunisian mammals: bats. Mammalia 38: 695-705. CHIROPTÈRES DE TUNISIE 285 BEAUCOURNU, J. C. & HELLAL, H. 1977. Liste annotée des Siphonaptères de Tunisie. Bulletin de la Société de Pathologie exotique 70: 524-537. BEAUCOURNU, J. C., BACH-HAMBA, D., LAUNAY, H., HELLAL, H. & CHASTEL, C. 1981. Contributions à l'étude des Siphonaptè res de Tunisie (3ème note). Bulletin de la Société de Sciences naturelles de Tunisie 16: 3-10. BEAUCOURNU, J. C., BACH-HAMBA, D., LAUNAY, H., HELLAL, H. & CHASTEL, C. 1983. Deux chi- roptères peu connus de Tunisie. Mammalia 47: 127-128. BENDA, P. & HORACEK, I. 1995. Geographic variation on three species of Myotis (Mammalia: Chiroptera) in South of the Western Palaearctics. Acta Societatis Zoologicae Bohemicae je M NS LA BENDA, P., ANDREAS, M. KoOCK, D., LUCAN, R. K., MUNCLINGER, P., NovVA, P., OBUCH, J., OCHMAN, K., REITER, AÀ., UHRIN, M. & WEINFURTOVA, D. 2006. Bats (Mammalia: Chiroptera) of the Eastern Mediterranean. Part 4. Bat fauna of Syria: distribution, systematics, ecology. Acta Societatis Zoologicae Bohemicae 70: 1-329. BENDA, P., HULVA, P. & GAISLER, J. 2004a. Systematic status of African populations of Pipistrellus pipistrellus complex (Chiroptera: Vespertilionidae), with a description of a new species from Cyrenaica, Libya. Acta Chiropterologica 6: 193-217. BENDA, P., KIEFER, A., HANAK, V. & VEITH, M. 2004b. Systematic status of African populations of long-eared bats, genus Plecotus (Mammalia Chiroptera). Folia Zoologica 53 (Monograph 1): 1-47. BIOLLAZ, F., BRUYNDONCKX, N., BEUNEUX, G., MUCEDDA, M. GOUDET, J. & CHRISTE, P. 2010. Genetic isolation of insular populations of the Maghrebian bat, Myotis punicus, in the Mediterranean Basin. Journal of Biogeography 37: 1557-1569. BLANC, M. 1935. Faune tunisienne. 1. Mammifères. Document dactylographié, Tunis, 1-43. BLONDEL, J. & ARONSON, J. 1999. Biology and wildlife of the Mediterranean region. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 328 pp. CASTELLA, V., RUEDI, M., EXCOFFIER, L., IBANEZ, C., ARLETTAZ, R. & HAUSSER, J. 2000. Is the Gibraltar Strait a barrier to gene flow for the bat Myotis myotis (Chiroptera: Vesperti - lhionidae)? Molecular Ecology 9: 1761-1772. CHASTEL, C., BACH-HAMBA, D., DELAUNAY, H., LE LAY, G., HELLAL, H. & BEAUCOURNU, J. C. 1977. Enquête séro-épidémiologique mixte arbovirus-arénavirus chez les petits mammi - fères de Tunisie. Bulletin de la Société de Pathologie exotique 70: 471-479. CHASTEL, C., ROGUES, G., BEAUCOURNU-Saguez, F., Hellal, H., Le Goff, F. & BEAUCOURNU, J. C. 1983. Infections à arbovirus en Tunisie: nouvelle enquête sérologique chez les petits mammifères sauvages. Bulletin de la Société de Pathologie exotique 76: 21-33. CHENITI, T.L. 2001. Conservation des zones humides littorales et des écosystèmes côtiers du Cap-Bon. Partie relative aux Mammifères. MedWetCoast, Tunis, 33 pp. CocKkRUM, E. L. 1976a. Order Chiroptera (pp. 72-126). /n: Mammals of Tunisia. Unpublished Report. CocKRUM, E. L. 1976b. Status of the name of a rhinolophid bat, Rhinolophus euryale tuneti Deleuil and Labbe, 1955. Mammalia 40: 685-686. CoRBET, G.B. 1978. The Mammals of the Palaearctic Region: a taxonomic review. British Museum (Natural History) - Cornell University Press, London - Ithaca, 314 pp. DELEUIL, R. 1957. Une nouvelle chauve-souris pour la Tunisie, Otonycteris hemprichi Peters, 1860. Mammalia 21: 190. DELEULL, R. & LABBE, A. 1955a. Contributions à l'étude des chauves-souris de Tunisie. Bulletin de la Société de Sciences naturelles de Tunisie 8: 39-55. DELEUIL, R. & LABBE, À. 1955b. Sur la variabilité de la Pipistrelle de Kuhl (Pipistrellus kuhli). Bulletin de la Société de Sciences naturelles de Tunisie 8: 237-242. DGF (Direction Générale des Forêts) 1988. Avant-projet de création et d'aménagement du Parc National d'El Feidja. Sous-Direction de la Chasse et des Parcs Nationaux, Tunis, 18 pp. DHOUIB, S. 1998. Contribution à l'étude du Cerf de Berbérie (Cervus elaphus barbarus Bennett, 1833), espè ce préservée du Parc National de El Feidja: régime alimentaire et recen- sement de la population. DEA. Sciences de l'Environnement, Faculté des Sciences de Bizerte, 120 pp. 286 R. DALHOUMI ET AL. DIETZ, C., HELVERSEN, O. VON & NILL, D. 2007. Handbuch der Fledermäuse Europas und Nordwestafrikas. Biologie, Kennzeichen, Gefährdung. Franckh-Kosmos, Stuttgart, 399 pp. DOBSON, G. E. 1878. Catalogue of the Chiroptera in the collection of the British Museum. Bristish Museum (Natural History), London, 567 pp. ELLERMAN, J. R. & MORRISON-SCOTT, T. C. S. 1951. Checklist of Palaearctic and Indian Mammals 1758 to 1946. Trustees of the British Museum, London, 810 pp. EVIN, A., BAYLAC, M., RUEDI, M., MUCCEDA, M. & PONS, J. M. 2008. Taxonomy, skull diversity and evolution in a species complex of Myotis (Chiroptera: Vespertilionidae): a geometric morphometric appraisal. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 95: 529-538. FAIN, À. 1959. La famille Gastronyssidae Fain, 1956. Description de deux nouvelles espè ces chez des chauves-souris asiatiques (Acarina : Sarcoptiformes). Institut Royal de Sciences naturelles de Belgique 35: 1-22. FELTEN, H., SPITZENBERGER, F. & STORCH, G. 1977. Zur Kleinsäugerfauna West-Anatoliens. Teil Ia. Senckenbergiana Biologica 58: 1-44. FITZINGER, L. J. 1870. Kritische Durchsicht der Ordnung der Flatterthiere oder Handflüger (Chiroptera). Familie der Fledermäuse (Vespertiliones). IV Abtheïlung. Sitzungsberichte der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Mathematisch-Naturwissenschafiliche Classe 62: 211-317; GADEAU DE KERVILLE, H. 1908. Voyage zoologique en Khroumirie (Tunisie) mai-juin 1906. J.B. Baillière, Paris, 316 pp + 30 pl. GALLI-VALERIO, B, 1911. Notes de parasitologie et de technique parasitologique. Zentralblatt für Bakteriologie X 60: 358-363. GHARAIBEH, B. M. 1997. Systematics, distribution and zoogeography of Mammals in Tunisia. PhD Thesis, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, 354 pp. GOPA — DGE, 2005. Plan d'aménagement et de gestion du Parc National de Bou Hedma et de sa périphérie — rapport final. ZGIP - GOPA Consultants, Tunis - Bad Hamburg, 63 pp + annexes. GUSTAFSON, Ÿ. & SCHNITZLER, H. U. 1979. Echolocation and obstacle avoidance in the hippo- siderid bat Asellia tridens. Journal of comparative Physiology À 131: 161-167. HARTMANN, R. 1868. Geographische Verbreitung der im nordôstichen Afrika wild lebenden Säugethiere. Zeitschrift der Gesellschaft für Erdkunde zu Berlin 3: 28-69. HAYMAN, R. W. & HILL, J. E. 1971. Order Chiroptera. Part 2. /n: Meester, J. & Setzer, H. W. (eds). The Mammals of Africa: an identification manual". Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, 73 pp. HEIM DE BALSAC, H. 1936. Biogéographie des Mammifères et des Oiseaux de l’Afrique du Nord. Bulletin biologique de France et de Belgique 21(Supplément): 1-446. HEIM DE BALSAC, H., ARNOUD, M., CANTONI, J. & DELEUIL, R. 1954. Notes sur les régurgitations de la chouette effraie (Tyto alba Scop.). Bulletin de la Société de Sciences naturelles de Tunisie 7: 139-140. HizL, J. E. 1977. A review of the Rhinopomatidae (Mammalia: Chiroptera). Bulletin of the British Museum natural History (Zoology) 32: 29-43. HizEM, M. W. 2007. Contribution à la connaissance de l'écologie du peuplement des Mammi- fères dans le Parc National de Bou Hedma. Mastère Ecologie Biologie des Populations, Université Tunis El Manar, 110 pp. HIZEM, M. W. & ALLEGRINI, B. 2009. Contribution à la connaissance des Chiroptères du Parc National de Bou Hedma (Tunisie). Poiretia 1: 5-9. HULVA, P., HORACEK, I. & BENDA, P. 2007. Molecules, morphometrics and new fossils provide an integrated view of the evolutionary history of Rhinopomatidae (Mammalia: Chiroptera). BMC evolutionary Biology 7: 165. HUTSON, À. M., MICKLEBURGH, S. P. & RACEY, P. À. 2001. Microchiropteran bats. Global status survey and conservation action plan. Z.U.C.N., Gland - Cambridge, 256 pp. CHIROPTÈRES DE TUNISIE 287 IBANEZ, C., GARCIA-MUDARRA, J. L., RUEDI, M., STADELMANN, B. & JUSTE, J. 2006. The Iberian contribution to cryptic diversity in European bats. Acta Chiropterologica 8: 277-297. JUSTE, J., BILGIN, R., MUNOZ, J. & IBANEZ, C. 2009. Mitochondrial DNA signatures at different spatial scales: from the effects of the Straits of Gibraltar to population structure in the Meridional serotine bat (Eptesicus isabellinus). Heredity 103: 178-187. KAHMANN, H. 1958. Die Fledermaus Rhinolophus mehelyi Matschie, 1901 als Glied der Säuge- tierfauna in Tunesien. Zoologischer Anzeiger 161: 227-237. KARAMAN, Z. V. 1939. II. Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Nycteribien. Annales Musei Serbiae Meridionalis 1: 31-44. KAYSER, Ÿ. 1995. Régime alimentaire inhabituel de la Chouette chevêche (Afhene noctua) dans les salins de Thyna, Tunisie. A/auda 63: 152-153. Kock, D. 1969. Die Fledermaus-Fauna der Sudan. Abhandlungen der Senckenbergischen Naturforschenden Gesellschaft 521: 1-238. KocK, D. 2001. Identity of the African Vespertilio hesperida Temminck, 1840 (Mammalia, Chiroptera, Vespertilionidae). Senckenbergiana Biologica 81: 277-283. KOCK, D. & NADER, I. À. 1984. Tadarida teniotis (Rafinesque, 1814) in the W-Palaearctic and a lectotype for Dysopes rupelii Temminck, 1826 (Chiroptera: Molossida). Zeitschrift für Säugetierkunde 49: 129-135. KOWALSKI, K. & RZEBIK-KOWALSKA, B. 1991. Mammals of Algeria. Ossolineum, Wroklaw, 353 pp. LATASTE, F. 1885. Etude de la faune des Vertébrés de Barbarie (Algérie, Tunisie et Maroc). Catalogue provisoire des Mammifères apélagiques sauvages. Actes de la Société Linnéenne de Bordeaux 39: 129-289. LATASTE, F. 1887. Catalogue critique des Mammifères apélagiques sauvages de la Tunisie. /n: Exploration scientifique de la Tunisie. Imprimerie Nationale, Paris, XV + 42 pp. LAURENT, P. 1937. Essai d'une clef dichotomique des Chiroptères de la Barbarie. Mammalia 1: 133-159. LAURENT, P. 1939. Présence de l'Oreillard d'Europe, Plecotus a. auritus, dans le sud tunisien. Bulletin du Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle, Paris, Série 2 11: 279-281. LAURENT, P. 1941a. Une addition à la faune mammalogique nord-africaine: Rhinopoma cystops arabium Thomas. Mammalia 5: 11-17. LAURENT, P. 1941b. A propos de la rhinopome tunisienne. Mammalia 5: 99-100. LE BERRE, M. 1990. Faune du Sahara. 2. Mammifères. Lechevalier - Chabaud, Paris, 360 pp. LE LAY-ROGUES, G. & CHASTEL, C. 1986. Virus des Chiroptères transmis ou non par arthropodes. Médecine tropicale 46: 389-395. MAYER, F., DIETZ, C. & KIEFER, A. 2007. Molecular species identification boosts bat diversity. Frontiers in Zoology 4: 4. MITCHELL-JONES, À. J., BIHARI, Z., MASING, M. & RODRIGUES, L. 2007. Protection et gestion des gîtes souterrains pour les Chiroptères. Eurobats Publication Series 2: 1-38. MoLDRZYK, U. 2003. Preliminary faunal list of the Bou Hedma National Park, southern Tunisia. Kaupia 12: 29-41. NADER, I. À. & KOCK, D. 1983. Notes on some bats from the Near East (Mammalia: Chiroptera). Zeitschrift für Säugetierkunde 48: 1-9. NOBLET, J. F. & NEFZI, T. 1991. Les chauves-souris de Tunisie. Etude et protection. Document dactylographié, 5p + ann. OLIVIER, E. 1896. Matériaux pour la faune de la Tunisie. Revue scientifique du Bourbonnais et du Centre de la France 12: 118-133. OLIVIER, E. 1909. Rhinopoma microphyllum en Tunisie. Bulletin de la Société zoologique de France 34: 148. OWEN, R. D. & QUMSIYEH, M. B. 1987. The subspecies problem in the Trident leaf-nosed bat, Asellia tridens: homomorphism in widely separated populations. Zeitschrift für Säuge - tierkunde 52: 329-337. 288 R. DALHOUMI ET AL. PERESWIET-SOLTAN, À. 2007. Relation between climate and bat fauna in Europe. Travaux du Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle "Grigore Antipa" 50: 505-515. REBELO, H. & BRITO, J. C. 2006. Bat guild structure and habitat use in the Sahara desert. African Journal of Ecology 54: 228-230. RODE, P. 1947 Les Mammifères de l'Afrique du Nord. I. La Terre et la Vie 94: 120-142. ROUDAIRE, C., 1881. Liste des Vertébrés recueillis par M. le Dr André pendant l'expédition des chotts et déterminés par M. F. Lataste. Zn: Rapport à M. le Ministre de l'Instruction Publique sur la derniè re expédition des chotts. Complément des études relatives au pro- jet de mer intérieure. /mprimerie Nationale, Paris, 172-174. SIMMONS, N. B. 2005. Order Chiroptera. /n: Wilson, D.E. & Reeder, D.M. (eds). Mammal species of the World. À taxonomic and geographic reference. Third edition. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 312-529. SPITZENBERGER, F., STRELKOV, P. P., WINKLER, H. & HARING, E. 2006. A preliminary revision of the genus Plecotus (Chiroptera, Vespertilionidae) based on genetic and morphological results. Zoologica Scripta 35: 187-230. TEMPLE, H. J. & CUTTELOD, A. (comp.) 2009. The status and distribution of Mediterranean mammals. Z.U.C.N., Gland - Cambridge, 32 pp. TROUESSART, E. L. 1905. La faune des Mammifères de l'Algérie, du Maroc et de la Tunisie. Causeries scientifiques de la Société zoologique de France 1: 353-410. TROUESSART, E. L. 1906. Liste des Mammifères rapportés par M. H. Gadeau de Kerville de Khroumirie (Tunisie occidentale). Bulletin du Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle, Paris 12: 447-448. VAN CAKENBERGHE, V. & SEAMARK, E. C. J. (eds) 2006. African Chiroptera Report 2006. African Chiroptera Project, Pretoria, 1198 pp. VAN CAKENBERGHE, V. & VREE, F. de 1994. A revision of the Rhinopomatidae Dobson, 1872, with the description of a new subspecies (Mammalia: Chiroptera). Senckenbergiana Biologica 73: 1-24. VAUGHAN, T. C., COCKRUM, E. L. & VAUGHAN, P. J. 1977. Four Vespertilionid bats new to the fauna of Tunisia. Mammalia 41: 517-522. VESMANIS, I. 1972. Einige Kleinsäuger vom Galita-Archipel, Tunesien. Senckenbergiana Bio- logica 53: 189-195. VESMANIS, [. 1976. Bemerkungen über zwei interessante Fledermaus-populationen in Tunesien. Deutsch-Tunesische Rundschau, Bonn, 14: 16-17. WANDELER, À. I. 1967. Die Wirbeltiere von Nefta. Beitrag zur Okologie einer Oase. Natur - historisches Museum Bern, Jahrbuch 1963-1965: 229-297. WIERSEMA, G. J. & VREUGDENHIL, À. 1975. Proposition pour la protection de la grotte des chauves-souris près d'El Haouaria en Tunisie. Document dactylographié, 5 pp. ZAVA, B. & MaASssETI, M. 2007. First record of four species of bats from the national park of El Feidja (NW Tunisia) with a note on the non- flying mammals of the Khroumiria region. Hystrix (n.s.) 18: 83-90. ANNEXE: Liste des localités de Tunisie mentionnées dans le texte et/ou les légendes des cartes: localisation, implantation administrative et coordonnées géographiques. Localités Localisation Gouvernorat Délégation Coordonnées Adjim Medenine Djerba - Adjim 33°44' N 10°45'E Aïn Dhab Djebel Serdj, 10km Siliana Siliana sud 352554N O9SDLE NO EI Ouesslatia Aïn Draham Mine de kohl, 5km Jendouba Aïn Draham 36°49' N O8°4Wd'E NE Aïn Draham Aïn Draham Tombeau antique Jendouba Aïn Draham 36°47'N O8°4l'E (Grotte de Kaloi) Aïn Jammalah Toit de la pépinière Baja Téboursouk 36°27' NOSI4'E forestière Beja Bizerte Bled Douarah Bou Hedma Bulla Regia Cap Serrat Carthage Carthage Chemtou Dghoumes Djebel Abiod Djebel Ank Djebel Barbrou Djebel Bou Kornine Djebel Gloub Djebel Ichkeul Djebel Ichkeul (Sidi Messaoud) Djebel Morra Djebel Orbata Djebel Oust Djebel Ressas Djebel Ressas Djebel Saïkra Djebel Serd) Djebel Sidi Bel Abiod Djebel Trozza Djebel Zaghouan Djebel Zaghouan Djebel Zaghouan Djebel Zaghouan Djebel Zaghouan Djebel Zaghouan Djebel Zaghouan Djebel Zaghouan CHIROPTÈRES DE TUNISIE 43km O Gafsa Parc National, Bordj, Oued Bou Hedma, 26 km SO sur C 124 Palais romain d'Amphi- trite, 7km NNO Jendouba Versant NE Djebel EI Hamar Ruines Port punique Carrière & théâtre romain, 17km O Jendouba (= Dgomous), Entrée du Parc National, rive N Chott EI Dijerid, 20km E Degache Mine de fer, 30 km ESE Gafsa Mine Scarna, 10km NE Rohia (= Djebel Gattuna), sud Hammam Lif Grotte, 10km O Fernana Grotte, N Mateur Mine, 25km SO Bizerte Parc National Dghoumes, 20km E Degache 6km NE Bou Omrane, 32km E Gafsa Grotte, 6km S Oum Djeddour, E Thala Mine, 28km SE Tunis Bassin d'irrigation, 28km SE Tunis 7km E Helg Jimel, 22km NO Medenine Damous Saïd, 10km N Ouesslatia El Haouaria Mine, 7km SE EI Alâa, 50km OSO Kairouan Bassin d'irrigation, 4km O poste d'observation Cavernes et grottes Grotte du poste d'observation Mine, 3km SE Zaghouan sur route vers Aïn Ayed Temple des eaux 6km O poste d'observation Grotte du Cheval Mine Sioitayeaa, 1km E Zaghouan sur C 133, Ikm S autoroute Beja Bizerte Gafsa Sidi Bouzid Jendouba Bizerte Tunis Tunis Jendouba Tozeur Beja Gafsa Siliana Ben Arous Jendouba Bizerte Bizerte Tozeur Gafsa Kasserine Nabeul Nabeul Medenine Siliana Nabeul Kairouan Zaghouan Zaghouan Zaghouan Zaghouan Zaghouan Zaghouan Zaghouan Zaghouan Beja Nord Bizerte Nord Metlaoui Mezzouna Jendouba Nord Sejenane Carthage Carthage Jendouba Nord Degache Nefza EI Guettar Rouhia Hammam Lif Fernana Tinja Tinja Degache EI Guettar EI Ayoun Grombalia Grombalia Medenine Nord Siliana Sud EI Haouaria Alaâ Zaghouan Zaghouan Zaghouan Zaghouan Zaghouan Zaghouan Zaghouan Zaghouan 289 36°44' N O91I0'E 37°17 N'09°52E 34°24’N 08°19°E 34°28'N 09°39°E 36°33' N 08°45'E 37° 12 N'OSE 36°51 N 10720:E 36°51 N10°19"E 36° 29: N\08735"E 34°03' N 08°34'E 36°59" N O9 "05 "E 34° 19" N'O9°"07 E 35°43' N 09°08'E 36°’A1'N 10721 E 36°39' N 08°34''E 37°08' N 09°40'E 37°08' N 09°40'E 34°04' N 08°34'E 34°24' N 09°08'E 35°34' N 08°58'E 36°36 N 10°20'E 36°36' N 10°20'E 33-20 N'I047ÈE 35°50 N'O933PE AO NICOLE 35°34' N 09°36'E 2607210 N1 10F07LE 36P21:N4O0°OT'E 36°21°N 1007 E 36° 21 NA10"07 E 36P2LNAO OT E 20"21/N:10°07"E 30°21"NAMOSO7SE 30°21"N'107071E 290 Djerba Douirat Douz Dubosville EI Akhouat EI Bathan El Djem El Feidja EI Hamaïn EI Hamma de Gabès EI Hamma de Tozeur El Hamrouni EI Haouaria EI Haouaria El Haouaria El Ouidane El Ouidane Enfidaville Entouna Feriana Foum Tataouine Gabès Gafsa Gafsa Gafsa Galite Gamouda Ghar Kraiz Ghardimaou Ghomrassen Gorge de Seldja Grombalia R. DALHOUMI ET AL. 2,5km E EI May 17km OSO Tataouine Région de Tunis Mine, 10km SO Gaâfour Plaine SE de la ville Parc National, bâtisse et entrepôt du parc Ecole Constructions romaines, sources chaudes (Gabès par Laurent 1941) (= El Hamma de Djerid), palmeraie STIL - aqueduc abandonné, 12km N Tozeur sur GP 3 Bassin (= GP3 - 4km NO), 6 km NO GP3 sur C77, 8 km NO Hajeb El Aioun Grotte des chauves-souris (= Grotte de l'oued Tabouda = Ghar Tabouda = Grotte d'El Haouaria = Grotte de Médenine Tataouine Kébéli Tunis Siliana Manouba Mahdia Jendouba Béja Gabès Tozeur Sidi Bouzid Nabeul Djebel Sidi Bel Abiod), 4km NE 2 km N Grottes romaines, 1,5 km NO 11 km O C27 Mine de charbon n°7, 60km E Tunis Plaine, 4km N de la ville Mine, 23,5 km SE Tunis sur GP1, 2 km O autoroute 1km NNE Feriana Tunnel dans les fortifi- cations, 2km S Tataouine sur GP9, 1Ikm E route Ville Grotte Carriè re E Gafsa Île, 85km ONO Bizerte, 65km NNE Tabarka Sidi Bouzid 8km NO El Aroussa (= 100 km S Gabès), 20km OSO Ghomrassen Entre Redeyef et Metlaoui, 9km ONO Metlaoui Bâtiment, 10km O Grombalia sur MC34 Hammam Djedidi 27km E Zaghouan Hammam Sousse Hammamet Ichkeul Kairouan Parc National, 24km SO Bizerte Nabeul Nabeul Nabeul Nabeul Sousse Ben Arous Kasserine Tataouine Gabès Gafsa Gafsa Gafsa * Sidi Bouzid Béja Jendouba Tataouine Gafsa Nabeul Nabeul Sousse Nabeul Bizerte Kairouan Djerba - Midoun 36°21'N 10°07'E Tataouine Sud Douz Nord Djebel Jelloud Gaû four El Battan EI Jem Ghardimaou Medjez El-Bab EI Hamma Degache Jelma EI Haouaria El Haouaria EI Haouaria El Mida El Mida Enfidha Mornag Feriana Tataouine Sud Gabès Medina Gafsa Nord Gafsa Nord Gafsa Sud # 30°21!:N'IOFO7HE 33°28'"N O9°01'E 36°47' N 10°12'E 36,15 N'OSE 36°48'N O9°SI'E 35°18' N 10°42'E 36°45'"N 08°38'E 36°39!NID9PSNE 33°54' N 09°48'E 34°0O1'N 08°08'E 35225 N1092289E 37-05 NP ONE 37°03'N MOVE 37 "OS NMHPORNE 36° ATINAOPSANE 36°47' N I0SSI'E 36 10'NA107238E 36°42' N 10°18'E 34°57'N 08°34'E 32°54' N 10°26'E 33° 53 NL IOPO/RE 34°26' N 08°47'E 34°26' N O8°47'E 34°25'N 08°48'E 3731: N'085S$E Sidi Bouzid Ouest 35°02' N 09°25'E Testour Ghardimaou Ghomrassen Metlaoui Grombalia Hammamet Hammam Sousse Hammamet Tinja Kairouan Nord 36°26/N\09P23%E 36°27" N'0826/E 32259" NH1OSOFEE 34°21'N O8°19'E 36°31N I027%E 36225) NADEZPRE 35°S1XN A10P385%E 36° 24 INUOPSTRE 37°08' N O9°4l'E 35°41'N I0°07'E Kasserine Kebili (Nefzaoua) Kef el Agab Kef en Negcha Kherredine Ksar Haddada Makthar Massicault Matmata M'dhila Megrine Menzel Temime Metlaoui - Redeyef Mornag Moulares Nabeul Nefta Nefta Nefza Nefza Oudna Oued Lebna Oued Medjerdja Oued Zriba Ras Rajel Redeyef Redeyef Sfax Sidi Bouzid Sidi Daoud Sidi Mansour Sidi Toui Souk el Arba Sousse Tabarka Tamerza Tataouine Tebourba CHIROPTÈRES DE TUNISIE Anfractuosités de rocher Djebel Châambi 4km ONO Souk el Arba Parc National El Feidja Entre la Goulette et EI Kram Fissure dans une falaise, NO Tataouine Ruines, sous les bains N Bordj El Amri 10km NO Matmata Mine de phosphate, 20km S Gafsa Région de Tunis Carrière de sable, 3km SE sur C27 Grotte Plaine, SO Djebel Bou Kornine Oasis Mausolée Sidi Hassen Ayed, 4,5km S Forêt de pins claire, 10km O Nefza Forêt de pins dense, 9km O Nefza Bâtiment, 1km SE station Oudna, prè s Khelidia, O Djbel Ressas Estuaire, rive sud Cap Bon, 7,5km SSO Menzel Temime Estuaire, rive SE lagune Ghar El Maleh, 6km SSE Ghar el Maleh Versant E montagne, 6km SSO Ez Zriba Mine près cimetière, 6km O Tabarka Mine, 4km S Redeyef sur route Aïoun Ameur Sfax ville Plaine Rive nord Cap Bon Garage Service géologique, région Tunis Parc National, 50km S Ben Guerdane Ville de Jendouba Ville Siège de la délégation (Mu'tamadiyat) Oasis Fortifications montagne S Grotte du Djebel Lansarine, NO Tebourba Kasserine Kebili Jendouba Jendouba Tunis Tataouine Siliana Manouba Gabes Gafsa Ben Arous Nabeul Gafsa Ben Arous Gafsa Nabeul Nefta Nefta Nefza Nefza Ben Arous Nabeul Bizerte Zaghouan Jendouba Gafsa Gafsa Sfax Sidi Bouzid Nabeul Tunis Medinie Jendouba Sousse Jendouba Tozeur Tataouine Manouba Kasserine Nord Kebili nord Jendouba Ghardimaou Tunis Tataouine Nord Makthar Bordj El Amri Matmata M'dhila Mégrine Menzel Temime Metlaoui Mornag Moularès Nabeul Tozeur Tozeur Béja Béja Mohammedia Menzel Temime Ghar El Melh Zriba Tabarka Redeyef Redeyef Sfax Ville 291 35°11' N 08°48'E 33°43'N 08°58'E 36°30' N 08°45'E 36°45'" N 08°38'E 36°50' N 10°19'E 32°50 N'I0P2NE 35°51 N 09°12"E 36°43' N 09°5S3'E 33°37 N'09°54°E 34°15'N 08°45'E 36°46' N IO°I4'E 36°46' N 10°59'E 34°21'N 08°19'E 36°40' N I0°18'E 34°29'N O8°16'E 26°27' N 10°48'E 33232"N'OT5S3"E 3330 :N07F53-E 20259" N'08°58"E 3658 N:08590E 36°38' N 10°09'E 36°43' N 10°58'E SOON 10 I13PE J0 8" NUOPLSYE 36°57 N 08°43'E 34°23' N 08°09'E 34°21'N 08°09'E 34°44' N 10°46'E Sidi Bouzid Ouest 35°01'" N 09°30'E EI Haouaria Tunis Ben Guerdane Jendouba Sousse Medina Tabarka Tamerza Tataouine Sud Tebourba 37°00' N I0°54'E 36°48' N IO°I1l'E 32°42' N 1l°14d'E 36°30' N 08°45'E 35°49' N 10°38'E 36°57'N 08°45'E 34°22'N 07°56'E 3235 °N10°267E 36°50'N'09°50'E 292 R. DALHOUMI ET AL. Testour Grotte entre Testour et Beja Testour 36°33'" IN 09727ME EI Aroussa Thyna Salines Sfax Tyna 34°40' N 10°42'E Toujane Grotte, 3km NO Toujane Gabes Mareth 33°29'Nu0°072E sur C104, 45km S Gabes Tozeur Ville Tozeur Tozeur 33°55' N 08°08'E Tunis Ville Tunis Tunis 36°48' N 10°1l'E Utique Citerne, ruines Bizerte Utique 37°04' N 10°0O4'E Zarzis Ville Medinine Zarzis 33°30' N 11°07'E REVUE SUISSE DE ZOOLOGIE 118 (2): 293-306; juin 2011 A new species of Siamoglaris from Thaïland with complementary description of the type species (Psocodea: ‘Psocoptera”: Prionoglarididae) Charles LIENHARD Muséum d'histoire naturelle, c. p. 6434, CH-1211 Genève 6, Switzerland. E-mail: charleslienhard@bluewin.ch A new species of Siamoglaris from Thailand with complementary description of the type species (Psocodea: ‘Psocoptera”: Prionoglari - didae). - À new species of the previously monotypic genus Siamoglaris Lienhard, S. fheresiae Sp. n., is described and illustrated, based on three males from Thailand (female unknown). The female of the type species, S. zebrina Lienhard, 1s described for the first time and complements to the description of the male of this species are given. The generic diagnosis is revised. For the first time in Psocoptera, numerous thin-walled papilliferous spatulate setae (scent setae?) were observed on female gonapophyses and paraprocts; they are 1llustrated by scanning electron micrographs. Figures of female terminalia of the closely related genus Prionoglaris Enderlein are also presented. Keywords: Prionoglaridinae - Prionoglaris - scent setae - living fossils. INTRODUCTION The psocids mentioned in this study have been collected by the Thailand Inventory Group for Entomological Research (TIGER) in the course of their project on the insect fauna of Thailand, the field work of which was realized during the years 2006-2009 (see: http://sharkeylab.org/tiger/). The present paper contains the first published results on psocids collected during this monumental faunistic survey. 1839 samples containing psocids were sent to the Muséum d'histoire naturelle of the City of Geneva (Switzerland), where thousands of specimens were labeled and sorted to mor- phospecies by Mrs Thérèse Cuche. About 20 families of Psocoptera are represented in this material. One of them, the Prionoglarididae, is treated in the present paper; it is represented by 17 specimens of the endemic genus Siamoglaris Lienhard, 2004. Within the order Psocodea (sensu Yoshizawa & Johnson, 2006) the ‘Psocoptera” family Prionoglarididae belongs to the basal suborder Trogiomorpha and has recently been placed in an infraorder of its own, the Prionoglaridetae (see Yoshizawa ef al., 2006). Due to their basal position within Trogiomorpha and their similarity to fossils of this suborder, based on a plesiomorphic wing venation, the extant prionoglaridids are considered as "living fossils" (Lienhard, 2007). The family has been subdivided into two subfamilies by Lienhard (2004), Prionoglaridinae and Speleketorinae. The nominate subfamily contains the Palaearctic genus Prionoglaris Enderlein (3 species; see Lienhard & Smithers, 2002), the Neotropical genus Speleopsocus Lienhard (mono- Manuscript accepted 11.01.2011 294 C. LIENHARD typic; see Lienhard ef al., 2010a) and the previously monotypic Oriental genus Siamoglaris Lienhard (Lienhard, 2004). The latter genus was represented in the TIGER-project material by 9 males and 5 females belonging to the type species, Siamoglaris zebrina Lienhard, 2004, pre- viously only known from the male holotype. The female is described in the following and complements to the description of the male are given. The remaining three Siamoglaris individuals discovered in this material are males and represent a new species described below. Based on these data a revised generic diagnosis is proposed and some morphological characters are discussed. MATERIAL AND METHODS Dissection and slide-mounting followed the methods described by Lienhard (1998). After clearing the male terminalia in lactophenol, complete or partial eversion of the retracted eversible distal structures of the phallosome could be provoked by a short immersion (some minutes) in Sellnick fluid (Sellnick, 1960: 45; Weidner, 1993: 5: Lienhard, 1998: 60), while observing the phallosome under a stereomicroscope. The material examined 1s deposited in the arthropod collections of the Muséum d'histoire naturelle, Geneva, Switzerland (MHNG) and of the Queen Sirikit Botanical Gardens, Mae Rim, Chiang Mai Province, Thailand (QSBG). For all material examined the TIGER-project sample numbers are mentioned (T-number). The following abbreviations are used in the descriptions: BL = body length (in alcohol); F = hindfemur (length); FW = forewing (length); HT = holotype; HW = hind- wing (length); I0/D = shortest distance between compound eyes divided by antero- posterior diameter of compound eye in dorsal view of head; PT = paratype; T = hindtibia (length); t1, t2,t3 = tarsomeres of hindtarsus (length, measured from condyle to condyle). DESCRIPTIONS AND DISCUSSIONS Siamoglaris Lienhard, 2004 Lienhard, 2004: 866. Type species: Siamoglaris zebrina Lienhard, 2004: 866. Other species included: Siamoglaris theresiae Sp. n. (see description below). REVISED DIAGNOSIS: See original diagnosis by Lienhard (2004), with the fol- lowing additions or modifications. Habitus as shown in Fig. 1. Membranous extension of anterior preapical claw of each leg somewhat variable in size (F1g. 5e and Lienhard, 2004: fig. 5; see also Discussion below). Male terminalia (Figs 4a-c, 5f-g, 6c-e): Mediointernal structure of posterior part of phallosome not differentiated as a simple slender process like in Prionoglaris (see Lienhard, 1988, 1998), but as a relatively wide and weakly sclerotized internal tube bearing distally the opening of the ejacu- latory duct and various membranous or sclerotized eversible structures of specific shapes. Female terminalia (Figs 2-3): In general similar to Prionoglaris (Fig. 7), but ovipositor valvulae and paraprocts lacking hooked stout setae and basal part of epiproct lacking pilosity. Ventral and dorsal gonapophyses almost completely reduced. External gonapophyses well-developed, basally rounded, apically angulate, pilose: besides normal pilosity bearing also numerous thin-walled broadened papilliferous setae (Figs 2b, 3). Some such setae also present in ventral half of paraproct (Fig. 3a). SIAMOGLARIS FROM THAILAND 295 Subgenital plate short and simple, its posterior margin forming a wide angle but lacking a distinct medio-apical lobe. Spermapore region simple. DisCUSsION: The shape of the membranous part of the anterior preapical claws is somewhat variable (partially due to different degrees of swelling after slide- mounting of the legs). Contrary to Lienhard (2004: key on p. 871) no clear difference between Siamoglaris and Prionoglaris could be observed in this character (see Figs 5e and 7b). The internal basal bristle of the anterior pretarsal claws is also present in Prionoglaris (Fig. 7b), but usually 1t is very short and fine, difficult to distinguish from adjacent microtrichia; therefore it has not previously been recognized by Lienhard (1988: fig. 8; 1998: fig. 39e). The other differences between these two genera men- tioned by Lienhard (2004) could be confirmed. However, in Prionoglaris the posterior parts of the phallosome are more heavily sclerotized than in Siamoglaris and no ever- sible structures have been observed. The opening of the ejaculatory duct is hardly visible in Prionoglaris, probably it 1s situated just dorsally of the base of the medio- ventral process near the base of the mediointernal process (see figures in Lienhard, 1988, 1998). Lienhard (2004) has tentatively interpreted the presence of a pair of sclerotized hooked claspers apically on the eversible posterior parts of the phallosome as a generic character of Siamoglaris, but the new material shows that this character is only present in the type species. The female genitalia of Siamoglaris are similar to those of the other priono - glaridine genera (Prionoglaris: Fig. 7e; Speleopsocus: see Lienhard et al., 2010a: fig. 3b). The presence of special papilliferous setae on female terminalia of S. zebrina is here tentatively interpreted as an autapomorphy of the genus Siamoglaris (see also Discussion of the type species, below). The female of the monotypic Neotropical genus Speleopsocus, the male of which is still unknown, can easily be distinguished from Siamoglaris by several striking characters, as indicated by Lienhard ef al. (2010a).The discovery of the female of Siamoglaris does not provide significant new information for a better understanding of phylogenetic relationships between the three genera of Prionoglaridinae. The trichotomy in this subfamily remains unresolved (see Lienhard et al., 2010a). At present it seems that only molecular data (DNA analysis will be undertaken by Kazunori Yoshizawa, Sapporo) or the discovery of the male of Speleopsocus can bring some progress in this field. Siamoglaris zebrina Lienhard, 2004 Figs 1-4 Siamoglaris zebrina Lienhard, 2004: 866; description of male. TYPE MATERIAL: MHNG, d holotype (re-examined), Thailand, Kanchanaburi Province, Sai Yok District, near Wang Badan Cave, ca. 2 km N of Sai Yok Noi Waterfall, dry stream bed (on low vegetation), 9.xii.2003, leg. P. Schwendinger. NEW MATERIAL EXAMINED: MHNG and QSBG, Thailand, Kanchanaburi Province, Khuean Srinagarindra National Park, 9 and 59 in Malaise traps from the following localities, leg. TIGER-project: Huai Mae Kamint / Tourist center (1, 11-18.ix.2008, T3442; 26, 29, 18-251x.2008, T3443; 19, 25ix-2.x.2008, T3444; 16, 19, 2-9.x.2008, T3445; 16, 23- 30.x.2008, T3463; 1 , 30.x-6.x1.2008, T3464); Tha Thung-na / Chong Kraborg (18,19 ,30.x- 6.x1.2008, T3472; 24 , lacking abdomen, 6-13.xi.2008, T4431, these two specimens could be identified as males due to their small body size and their relatively large compound eyes, i.e. IO/D 1.16 and 1.15, see also Complementary description of male, below). 296 C. LIENHARD FIG. 1 Siamoglaris zebrina Lienhard, male: Habitus, lateral view (body length 2.5 mm); antenna incomplete; pilosity, hindwing and right appendages not shown. DESCRIPTION OF FEMALE: Colouration and general morphology as described for male by Lienhard (2004). Body size distinctly larger than in male, but compound eyes relatively smaller (see Complementary description of male, below). Femora lacking dark brown transversal band of hypodermal pigment in 2/3 of their length (Fig. 4d, cf. Fig. 51 showing this band in S. fheresiae). Colour pattern of eyes not well-preserved in the specimens examined (observed after two years in alcohol), but still partially visible (cf. Fig. 5a). Pterostigma colourless, transparent or very slightly opaque. Antennae damaged in all specimens examined. Anterodorsal region of abdomen without small humps (see also Fig. 6f, showing pair of humps present in male of S. fheresiae). Terminalia shown in Figs 2,3; see also revised generic diagnosis, above. Epiproct rela- tively small, pilosity only developed in apical half, consisting of a pair of long setae and some shorter hairs. Paraproct in middle with a transversal row of some long setae, in its apical half with a dense group of haiïrs, some of them differentiated as papilli - ferous setae, similar to those on the external gonapophysis (in some cases weakly differentiated, see Fig. 2b: 4); sense cushion well-differentiated, bearing one normal seta and numerous fine trichobothria, the latter without basal rosettes. Subgenital plate short, With a anteriorly narrowing pigmented area. External gonapophyses well- developed, bearing some long stout setae and many shorter acuminate hairs; towards posteroventral margin with numerous apically thin-walled and usually slightly curved papilliferous spatulate or club-shaped setae of unknown function (see Discussion, below). An approximately oval structure present on each side at base of external gonapophysis (shown by interrupted lines in Fig. 2a), originating from anteroventral margin of clunium, covered by rounded basal part of gonapophysis and lateral part of subgenital plate (rudiments of ventral and dorsal gonapophyses?). Spermapore region with a weakly sclerotized suboval posterior area and a membranous anterior area bearing the spermapore. Spermathecal duct very long and more or less spirally coiled SIAMOGLARIS FROM THAILAND 297 FIG. 2 Siamoglaris zebrina Lienhard, female: (a) Subgenital plate, ovipositor valvulae (pilosity on right side not figured), ventrolateral parts of clunium, spermapore region and distal part of sperma- thecal duct. (b) Papilliferous setae on external gonapophysis and paraproct; 1 erect seta, 2 curved seta, 3 slender seta, 4 weakly differentiated seta. (c) Epiproct and right paraproct. 298 C. LIENHARD (at least more than twice as long as the distal part of the spermathecal duct shown in Fig. 2a), spermathecal sac not examined (lost during dissection). Measurements (female of sample T3472): BL = 3.5 mm; FW = 4.2 mm; HW = 2.8 mm; F = 917 ym; T = 1610 pm; t1 = 818 pm; t2 = 182 yum; t3 = 185 pm, IO/D = 1.35. COMPLEMENTARY DESCRIPTION OF MALE: Body size smaller than in female (BLG < 3 mm; BL® > 3 mm), but compound eyes relatively larger (10/D& < 1.2; IO/DS > 1.3). Colouration as in female. Antennae damaged in all specimens examined. Anterodorsal region of abdomen without small humps (see also Fig. 6f, showing pair of humps present in male of S. fheresiae).Terminalia (Fig. 4a-c): Paraproct simple (see Lienhard, 2004: fig. 14), its pilosity normal (1.e. lacking the papilliferous setae observed in female). Shape of apical part of phallosome variable due to different positions of the eversible distal structures and variable tumescence of the membranous blisters. For a view of all structures completely everted and blisters swollen see Fig. 4c and the figures of the holotype in Lienhard (2004); for retracted apical structures and collapsed blisters see Fig. 4a: for everted apical structures but collapsed blisters see Fig. 4b. Characteristical distal pair of sclerotized hooks visible in all positions. Rounded medioventral process (sensu Lienhard, 2004) posteriorly delimited by a transversal reticulate membrane: slightly concave mediodistal margin of this mem- brane well visible in ventral view (Fig. 4b), but also visible in dorsal view on cleared phallosome (Fig. 4c, interrupted line), always lacking sclerotized posterolateral lobes (see also Figs Sf, g and 6d, e showing posterolateral lobes present in S. fheresiae). DISCUSSION: The female terminalia of S. zebrina resemble those of the other known prionoglaridine genera due to symplesiomorphy. However, the presence of special papilliferous setae on the gonapophyses (some of them also on paraprocts) can be interpreted as an autapomorphy of Siamoglaris. This interesting character deserves additional comments. The socket and the basal part of these modified setae are iden- tical to those of the adjacent acuminate hairs. The basal part is brown, thick-walled and longitudinally grooved (Fig. 2b) as usual in chaetal sensilla (grooves not visible in the scanning electron micrographs of Fig. 3, but clearly visible under a light microscope: see also Slifer & Sekhon, 1977 and Hu ef al., 2009). However, the distal half of these modified setae is thin-walled and completely transparent, and the surface area is augmented by its broadening (spatulate to club-shaped) and by the presence of many small papilliform spicules (Figs 2b; 3d, f). Several more acuminate spicules are also present in the basal half of many of these setae (Figs 2b, 3c). As far as I know, it 1s the first time that such modified setae have been observed in Psocoptera. In general, the pilosity of the female gonapophyses of psocids consists of normal acuminate setae (probably mechanoreceptors). The particular morphology of these modified setae suggests a possible function as scent organs involved in sexual behaviour (emitting an aphrodisiac pheromone?). Brush-like pheromone-diffusing scent scales of somewhat similar morphology have been observed in several Lepidoptera (Grassé, 1975; Wüest, 1996). The presence of eversible distal structures on the phallosome, often retracted in alcohol preserved specimens, may pose a problem for the interpretation of the micro- morphology of the posterior part of the phallosome. Therefore they have been 1llus- SIAMOGLARIS FROM THAILAND FIG. 3. Siamoglaris zebrina Lienhard, female, scanning electron micrographs (made by A. Piuz, MHNG): (a) Abdominal apex (ventral side above, paraprocts left). (b) Posteroventral margin of external gonapophyses (same position as in Fig. 3a). (c) Papilliferous setae on posteroventral margin of external gonapophysis. (d) Papilliferous seta on posteroventral margin of external gonapophysis (same seta also recognizable in Fig. 3b, slightly left above middle). (e) Ditto (other seta, not recognizable in Fig. 3b). (f) Detail of apical part of same seta. 300 C. LIENHARD RS TRE = sen LA ÿ É) : FA €.) É: ï FIG. 4 Siamoglaris zebrina Lienhard, male: (a) Posterior part of phallosome (dorsal view) with retracted distal structures. (b) Ditto (same specimen, ventral view) after artificially provoked eversion of distal structures (see Material and methods). (c) Ditto (other specimen, dorsal view) with naturally everted distal structures and swollen membranous blisters. (d) Hindleg (pilosity not shown). SIAMOGLARIS FROM THAILAND 301 trated here in the retracted (F1g. 4a) and in the everted position (Fig. 4b, c). In Fig. 4c the membranous blisters of this region of the phallosome are presented in the swollen position, though not exhibiting the maximal swelling as shown for the holotype by Lienhard (2004: fig. 11). In this figure of the holotype the slightly concave mediodistal margin of the reticulate membrane is not well recognizable (probably due to the excessive swelling of lateral blisters), but in the re-examined phallosome of the holo- type it is well visible (blisters collapsed after permanent slide-mounting). The eversion of the distal structures of the phallosome could be directly observed under the stereo - microscope for the specimen shown in Fig. 4a, b (see Material and methods). In the retracted position the distal part of the phallosome is anterodorsally folded and the tips of the pair of sclerotized claspers are anteriorly directed, well visible in dorsal view (Fig. da). During eversion this part rises dorsally and finally unfolds backwards, so that the free tips of the hooked claspers are situated at the posterior end of the phallosome (Fig. 4b). Several intermediate states can be observed in alcohol preserved material. When identifying males of Siamoglaris one has to pay attention to this phenomenon and not mistake it for variation in the morphology of the terminal structures of the phallosome. For a distinction between S. zebrina and S. theresiae see Discussion of the latter species. Almost nothing is known about the biology of this species. The type locality is situated about 200-300 m from the main entrance of Wang Badan Cave, in a rocky limestone region full of subterranean crevices (Lienhard, 2004). The new material has been collected in a very similar limestone region of Kanchanaburi Province. Therefore it seems possible that Siamoglaris zebrina has some affinities to caves or similar sub- terranean habitats, at least during its nymphal life, as known for most Prionoglarididae (see Lienhard er al., 2010a, 2010b). Siamoglaris theresiae sp. n. Figs 5-6 HOLOTYPE: QSBG, 4 (on 3 microscopical slides), Thailand, Chiang Mai Province, Doi Chiang Dao Wildlife Sanctuary, nature trail, 491m, Malaise trap, 30 :1x-7.x.2007, leg. Songkran & Apichart, T3174. PARATYPES: MHNG, 24 , Thailand, Kamphaeng Phet Province, Mae Wong National Park, Chong Yen, 1306m, Malaise trap, 8-15.x.2007, leg. C. Piluek & A. Inpuang (T3686) and 17-24 111.2008, leg. C. Piluek (T3641). DESCRIPTION OF MALE (female unknown): Habitus as in S. zebrina (cf. Fig. 1). Colouration in general as describd for S. zebrina by Lienhard (2004), with the following slight differences: head anteroventrally with more dark pigment (Fig. Sa); colour pattern of the legs highly contrasted, femora with a dark brown transversal band of hypodermal pigment in 2/3 of their length (Fig. 51); some brown pigmentation present along the pterostigmal veins in forewing (Fig. 6a of PT, forewings of HT damaged). Colour pattern of eyes not well-preserved in the specimens examined (after 2-3 years in alcohol) but still partially visible (Fig. 5a). General morphology as described for S. zebrina by Lienhard (2004), with the following differences. Vertex with a pair of small lateral protuberances near compound eyes (Fig. 5a). Antennae damaged in all specimens examined. Both maxillary palps broken in HT. Maxillary palp of PT (sample T3641) as figured for S. zebrina by Lienhard (2004: figs 1 and 10), its terminal article with 5 thin-walled conical sensilla in apical half (as figured for 302 C. LIENHARD FIG. 5 Siamoglaris theresiae Sp. n., male holotype: (a) Head (frontal view, pilosity not shown). (b) Remnant of left lacinia (length about 70 ym). (c) Remnant of right lacinia. (d) Posterior pretarsal claw of midleg (internal view). (e) Anterior pretarsal claw of midleg (external view). (f) Phallosome (ventral view) with naturally everted distal structures and slightly swollen blisters. (g) Posterior part of phallosome (ventral view) showing details of everted distal structures. (h) Labial palpus (pilosity not shown, except for thin-walled internal sensilla). (1) hindleg (pilosity not shown). SIAMOGLARIS FROM THAILAND 2 æ) ee) FIG. 6 Siamoglaris theresiae Sp. n., male paratype (sample T3686): (a) Forewing. (b) Hindwing. (c) Phallosome (lateral view) with retracted distal structures. (d) Ditto (dorsal view). (e) Posterior part of phallosome (ventral view) with artificially provoked partial eversion of distal structures (see Material and methods). (f) Abdominal base (dorsal view) showing pair of small hemi- spherical humps anteromedially of spiracles of segment 3. S.zebrina by Lienhard, 2007: fig. 3b). Remnant of lacinia relatively short (length about 70 yum), apically weakly sclerotized and slightly bidenticulate (Fig. Sb, c). Anterodorsal region of abdomen with a pair of small hemispherical humps (Fig. 6f). Terminalia (Figs 5f-g, 6c-e): Epiproct, paraproct and hypandrium simple, similar to those of S. zebrina (Lienhard, 2004: figs 14, 15). Apex of dorsolateral appendages of 304 C. LIENHARD phallosome rather abruptly narrowed (Figs Sf, 6d). Shape of apical part of phallosome variable due to movable distal structures and inflatable membranous blisters. For a view of all structures completely everted see Fig. Sf, g; for apical structures retracted see Fig. 6c, d; for partially everted apical structures see Fig. 6e. Eversible structures lacking conspicuous hooked claspers but bearing a small finely spiculate conical lobe near opening of ejaculatory duct; this median lobe directed anteriad after eversion of the apical structures of the phallosome (Figs Sf, g and 6e); distal part of ejaculatory duct curved in retracted state (Fig. 6c, interrupted lines). Medioventral process (sensu Lienhard, 2004) posteriorly delimited by a transversal reticulate membrane bearing a pair of slightly sclerotized posterolateral lobes (Figs 5f, g and 6e); these conspicuous lobes also visible in retracted state (Fig. 6d). Measurements (HT except for wing lengths): BL = 2.3 mm; FW = 4.0 mm (PT); HW = 2.7 mm (PT); F = 846 pm; T = 1450 um; t1 = 804 4m: =210/ 4m: 5 = 193 4m; I10/DE=M06 ETYMOLOGY: The species is dedicated to my friend and colleague Thérèse Cuche (MHNOG) in recognition of her invaluable assistance in my research on Psocoptera during more than 20 years. After retiring in 2007 she continues to work voluntarily for the Geneva Museum. Due to her competent sorting to morphospecies and labeling of the thousands of psocids collected by the TIGER-project this fasci- nating material became accessible to scientific studies. DISCUSSION: The new species 1s easy to distinguish from S. zebrina by the presence of a pair of small protuberances of the vertex, near the compound eyes (Fig. 5a), and of a pair of small hemispherical humps anterodorsally on the abdomen (Fig. 6f). These characters are probably present in both sexes, but as the female is unknown, the possibility of sexual dimorphism cannot be ruled out. Two colour characters should also be mentioned here, although probably of limited diagnostic value, 1.e. the presence, in S. theresiae, of a brown transversal band in about 2/3 of the femora (F1g. 51) and of some brown pigmentation along the pterostigmal veins in the forewing (Fig. 6a). The phallosomes of the two species of Siamoglaris differ by the shape of the dorsolateral appendages, distally more abruptly narrowed in S. fheresiae (Figs 5f, 6d) than in S. zebrina (Fig. 4), by the presence of a pair of sclerotized terminal claspers in S. zebrina (Fig. 4), absent in S. fheresiae (Figs Sf, g and 6d, e), by the presence of a pair of slightly sclerotized lateral lobes at the posterior margin of the medioventral part in S. fheresiae (Figs 5f, g and 6d, e), absent in S. zebrina (Fig. 4), and by some details of the eversible posterior structures, especially the presence, medially near the opening of the ejaculatory duct, of a spiculate conical lobe in S. theresiae (Figs 5g, 6e) which could not be observed in S. zebrina (Fig. 4b, c). The mechanism of everting the distal parts of the phallosome (observed in one paratype) corresponds to that described for S. zebrina. For S. theresiae it has to be noted that the characteristic spiculate conical lobe near the opening of the ejaculatory duct is difficult or impossible to observe in the retracted state (Fig. 6d). Almost nothing is known about the biology of S. fheresiae. The type locality 1s situated at the foot of a large limestone mountain with caves (e. g. Chiang Dao Cave) and subterranean crevices (Peter Schwendinger, pers. comm.). The paratypes were collected in a area with isolated limestone outcrops. Therefore it seems possible that SIAMOGLARIS FROM THAILAND 305 FIG. 7 Prionoglaris stygia Enderlein: (a) Posterior pretarsal claw of hindleg (internal view). (b) Anterior pretarsal claw of hindleg (external view). (c) Left paraproct of female (specimen from the type locality). (d) Epiproct of female (same specimen; posterior margin pointing to bottom of figure plate). (e) Subgenital plate, ovipositor valvulae (pilosity on right side not shown), ventrolateral parts of clunium, spermapore region and distal part of spermathecal duct (same specimen). 306 C. LIENHARD also this species has some affinities to caves or similar subterranean habitats, at least during its nymphal life, as has been observed in most Prionoglarididae and postulated for S. zebrina (see Discussion of the latter species, above). ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am very grateful to Michael Sharkey and Stephanie Clutts (both University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA) for entrusting the Psocoptera collected in the course of the TIGER-project to the MHNG., to Thérèse Cuche (MHNOG) for her tireless sorting and labeling of this huge collection, to Kazunori Yoshizawa (Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan) and Peter Schwendinger (MHNOG) for reviewing the manuscript and making valuable suggestions, to André Piuz (MHNG) and Manuela Lienhard (St Blaise) for technical assistance and to John Hollier (MHNG)) and Jean Wüest (Geneva) for interesting discussions. REFERENCES GRASSÉ, P. P. 1975. Phanères épidermiques (pp. 48-67). In: GRASSÉ. P. P. (ed.). Insectes: tégu- ments, système nerveux, organes sensoriels. Traité de Zoologie, vol. VIII, fasc. III. Masson, Paris, 910 pp. HU, F., ZHANG, G. N. & WANG, J. J. 2009. Antennal sensillae of five stored-product psocids pests (Psocoptera: Liposcelididae). Micron 40: 628-634. LIENHARD, C. 1988. Vorarbeiten zu einer Psocopteren Fauna der Westpaläarktis. IV. Die Gattung Prionoglaris Enderlein (Psocoptera: Prionoglarididae). Mitteilungen der Schweizer- ischen Entomologischen Gesellschaft 61: 89-108. LIENHARD, C. 1998. Psocoptères euro-méditerranéens. Faune de France 83: XX+517 pp. LIENHARD, C. 2004. Siamoglaris zebrina gen. n., Sp. n., the first representative of Priono- glarididae from the Oriental Region (Insecta: Psocoptera). Revue suisse de Zoologie 111(4): 865-875. LIENHARD, C. 2007. Description of a new African genus and a new tribe of Speleketorinae (Psocodea: ‘Psocoptera’: Prionoglarididae). Revue suisse de Zoologie 114(3): 441-469. LIENHARD, C. & SMITHERS, C. N. 2002. Psocoptera (Insecta): World Catalogue and Bibliography. Instrumenta Biodiversitatis (Muséum d'histoire naturelle, Genève) 5: xhi+745 pp. LIENHARD, C., HOLUSA, O. & GRAFITTI, G. 2010. Two new cave-dwelling Prionoglarididae from Venezuela and Namibia (Psocodea: ‘Psocoptera’: Trogiomorpha). Revue suisse de Zoologie 117(2): 185-197. (= Lienhard ef al., 2010a). LIENHARD, C., OLIVEIRA DO CARMO, T. & LOPES FERREIRA, R. 2010. A new genus of Sensitibillini : from Brazilian caves (Psocodea: ‘Psocoptera’: Prionoglarididae). Revue suisse de Zoologie 117(4): 611-635. (= Lienhard er al., 2010b). SELLNICK , M. 1960. Oribatei (Nachtrag). Tierwelt Mitteleuropas 3 (Lief. 4): 45-134. SLIFER, E. H. & SEKHON, S. S. 1977. Sense organs on the antennal flagellum of psocids (Insecta, ‘ Psocoptera). Journal of Morphology 151(3): 315-323. WEIDNER, H. 1993. Bestimmungstabellen der Vorratsschädlinge und des Hausungeziefers ‘ Mitteleuropas. 5Sth rev. ed. Gustav Fischer, Stuttgart, XI + 328 pp. WÜEST, J. 1996. L'appareil à phéromone d'Argynnis paphia et de Mesoacidalia aglaja mâles . (Lépidoptères, Nymphalides) en microscopie électronique à balayage. Bulletin romand d'entomologie 14: 47-56. YOSHIZAWA, K. & JOHNSON, K.. P. 2006. Morphology of male genitalia in lice and their relatives and phylogenetic implications. Systematic Entomology 31: 350-361. YOSHIZAWA, K., LIENHARD, C. & JOHNSON, K. P. 2006. Molecular systematics of the suborder Trogiomorpha (Insecta: Psocodea: 'Psocoptera'). Zoological Journal of the Linnean - Society 146: 287-299. REVUE SUISSE DE ZOOLOGIE 118 (2): 307-318; juin 2011 Centrorhynchidae (Acanthocephala) including the description of new species of Centrorhynchus from birds from the Côte d’Ivoire, Africa. Lesley R. SMALES Parasitology Section, South Australian Museum, North Terrace, Adelaide 5000 South Australia, Australia. Email: l.warner@cqu.edu au Centrorhynchidae (Acanthocephala) including the description of new species of Centrorhynchus from birds from the Côte d’Ivoire, Africa. - Centrorhynchidae, including Centrorhynchus chabaudi, Golvan, 1958, and two new species C. mariauxi and C. halcyonicola are reported from the Côte d'Ivoire, for the first time. The new species are distinguished from congenerics by a combination of proboscis armature and the morphometrics of the male reproductive system. Keywords: Parasite - Acanthocephala - Centrorhynchus - Africa - Côte d'Ivoire - birds - Accipiter - Halcyon - Kaupifalco. INTRODUCTION The Centrorhynchidae (Palaeacanthocephala) is a cosmopolitan family occurring in birds and mammals and comprising three genera; Centrorhynchus Van Cleave, 1916, usually found in raptores, Sphaerirostris Golvan, 1956, usually found in passerines (Corvidae and Turdidae) and Neolacunisoma Amin & Canaris, 1997 found in shorebirds (Golvan, 1956, 1960, 1994; Amin & Canaris, 1997). Centrorhynchus is a large genus of about 90 known species (Golvan, 1994, Richardson & Nickol, 1995; Khan ef al., 2001, 2002a; Bhattacharya, 2003; Bilqgees & Khan, 2005; Ghazi ef al., 2005; Lunaschi & Drago, 2010). The exact number of valid species in the genus is difficult to determine because the literature is confounded by many synonymies and misidentifications, some yet to be resolved. The species of Centrorhynchus described by Khan ef al. (2002b) from a house crow, for example, may on further examination be found to belong in the genus Sphaerirostris. Eleven species, including Centrorhynchus chabaudi Golvan, 1958, C. gendrei, Golvan, 1957, C. globocaudatus (Zeder, 1800) and C. milvus Ward, 1956 from West Africa, have been reported from the African continent (Ward, 1956; Golvan, 1957, 1958; Dimitrova & Gibson, 2005). No centrorhynchids have been reported as yet from the Republic of the Côte d’Ivoire. Between 1985 and 1988, during the course of a Ph D project of Dr J. Mariaux to study the cestode parasites of the birds of the Republic of Côte d’Ivoire, an incidental collection of Acanthocephala from 22 species representing 15 families of birds was made. Within this collection three bird species were infected, one with C. chabaudi and two with new species of Centrorhynchus. In this paper a redescription of C. chaubaudi, with new host records and geographic locations documented, 1s given and the new species of Centrorhynchus are described. Manuscript accepted 11.10.2010 308 L. R. SMALES MATERIALS AND METHODS The birds examined included 8 individuals of 3 species from 2 families. The collection localities of hosts from which Centrorhynchus spp. were dissected, with the number of hosts examined in parentheses were as follows: Halcyon malimbica forbesi (Shaw, 1811) from Korhogo 9° 27°N 4°03°W and Lamto Research Station 6° 13°N 5°00°W (5); Kaupifalco m.monogrammicus (Temminck, 1824) from Lamto 6° 13°N 5°00°’W (2); Accipiter badius sphenuris Gmelin, 1788 from Lamto 6° 13°N 5° O0’W (1). On dissection all specimens were fixed with neutral buffered 4% formalin and stored in 75% ethanol. Before microscopic examination all specimens were cleared in lactophenol or beechwood creosote to be studied as wet mounts. AIl measurements were taken using an eyepiece micrometer and are given in micrometers unless other- wise stated. Figures were drawn with the aid of a drawing tube. Golvan’s (1994) review of the Acanthocephala has been used as the foundation source for listing the valid species of Centrorhynchus supplemented by information from all the more recent publications. AIl specimens collected for this study are registered in the Muséum d'Histoire Naturelle, Geneva, Switzerland (MHNG). RESULTS The three species of Centrorhynchus found are given in Table 1. These all represent new host and locality records. Comparative measurements of all the species of Centrorhynchus known to occur in West Africa are given in Table 2. TABLE 1. Acanthocephala from three bird hosts from the Republic of Côte d'Ivoire, West Africa, collected between 9.02.1987 and 13.02.1987. Host Host field no. Locality Centrorhynchidae Accipitridae Accipiter badius CI 618 Lamto Centrorhynchus chabaudi Kaupifalco monogrammicus CI 586 Lamto Centrorhynchus mariauxi Alcedinidae Halcyon malimbica CI 625 Lamto Centrorhynchus halcyonicola CI 519 Korhogo Centrorhynchus halcyonicola TABLE II Comparative measurements of Centrorhynchus spp. from West Africa; data from Dimitrova C. chaubadi C. gendrei C. globocaudatus male female male female male Trunk length mm 22, 48 46 84 22 Neck length 150 450 - - 500 Proboscis length 884 1350 800 1300 1030 rows hooks 30-34 38-40 30-32 hooks per row 17-23 34-40 20-21 true hooks thorn length 55-96 38-84 45-67.5 Proboscis receptacle length 2250 2200 1500 1400 Lemnsci length 2900 3400 2000-2500 2100 Testes 935x425 350x 160 820x440 1020x408 400x120 900x450 Cement glands mm 11.4 29 12.6 Genital apparatus female, length 2000 2000 Egg 60x23 30-35x20-22 NEW SPECIES OF CENTRORHY NCHUS FROM THE CÔTE D'IVOIRE 309 Centrorhynchus chabaudi Golvan, 1958 Figs 1-4 MATERIAL EXAMINED: One male, one immature female from Accipiter badius Gmelin, 1788, small intestine; Côte d'Ivoire, Lamto, 12.02.1987, J. Mariaux (MNHG INVE 38488). DESCRIPTION General: Trunk spineless, elongate, sub cylindrical, dilated anteriorly in region of lemnisci and proboscis receptacle. Proboscis in 2 parts, widest anterior to constriction, constriction at insertion of proboscis receptacle about 55-63% of distance from apex to proboscis base. Proboscis armed with 30-34 rows 15-22 hooks and spines. Anterior 4-5 hooks with large simple roots, next 5-6 hooks transitional with short roots with luniform- cresentic manubria, next 6-11 hooks spiniform, inserted on posterior part of proboscis, the more anterior of these with small, roughly triangular shaped roots. Neck spineless, well defined, shorter than broad. Proboscis receptacle double walled. Lemnisci tubular, inserted at base of neck, extend posteriorly beyond proboscis receptacle. Cerebral ganglion located at mid region of proboscis receptacle, just posterior to neck. Principal canals of lacunar system lateral, connected by trans- verse anastomoses. Male: based on one specimen. Trunk 22 mm long, 1200 at widest part. Pro- boscis total length 884, greatest width 340, just anterior to constriction, posterior part 374 long. Hooks I-V thorns 55-80 long, hooks V-XT thorns 40-50 long, spines X-XXII 20-40 long. Neck 150 long, 374 wide at base. Proboscis receptacle 2250 long, 350 wide; lemnisci 2900 long. Testes oval, tandem, not contiguous, 0.5mm apart; anterior testis, 3.06 mm from anterior end of trunk, 935 long, 425 wide; posterior testis 1020 long, 408 wide. Cement glands elongate, tubular, begin immediately posterior to posterior testis, 11.4 mm long; number not determined; cement ducts elongated, 2805 long; Saefftigen’s pouch and retracted bursa 2210 long; entire male system occupying about 86% trunk length. Female: based on 1 immature female. Trunk 15 mm long, dilated anterior portion 3060 long, 510 wide, main trunk 255 wide. Proboscis partially inverted about 910 long, greatest width 400, just anterior to constriction; posterior part 370 long. et al., 1995, Golvan, 1956, 1957, 1958; Ward, 1956; Dimitrova & Gibson, 2005; and this study. C. milvus C. mariaux C. halcyonicola female male female male female male 20-21 12-20 24-48 25 70+ 20 600-800 150 - 300 - - 1110-1130 800-1000 1100-1200 605 780 640 36-38 28-38 34-36 38-40 18 18-26 15-19 14-17 41-60 35-50 20-25.5 40-45 1100-1200 1300-1350 1600 1360 1400-2200 1370 1800 2800 1273 1615 1530 800x300 525x268 40x340 1100x500 S56x275 510x290 5-10 172 14 2440 1000 2000 45-50x20-24 45x22 310 L. R. SMALES VV "LL = - _ . s “ ST Ss INÈNT LS - VIS ss ver ri bo 4 VRIS SON Ü LORS Vs." ss . < PAL 2 cut C4 141 , Dr ur , FAC UO ( FIGs 1-5 Centrorhynchus chabaudi Golvan, 1958. (1) Male anterior end. (2) Male proboscis showing armature. (3) Male anterior and transitional hooks. (4) Male posterior end. (5) Male spiniform hooks. Scale bars: 1,4, 750 y m; 2, 200um; 3, 50 pm; 5, 10 ym. Hooks V-VII 30-40 long, spines 20-26. Neck 135 long by 400 wide. Proboscis receptacle 1020 long, 205 wide; lemnisci 3400 long. Genital apparatus not observed, no mature eggs seen. Genital pore sub terminal. COMMENTS: Centrorhynchus chabaudi Was described by Golvan (1958) from two female worms up to 48mm long, main trunk 1000 wide, with a proboscis armature Of 30-34 longitudinal rows of 15-16 hooks. The proboscis was 1350 long and 650 wide just anterior to the constriction and 700 wide at the base, with the neck 850 long by 450 wide. Hooks I-V thorns 55-96 long, hooks VI-X thorns 57-67 long, spines XVI 36 long. Neck 450 long, 850 wide at base. The proboscis receptacle was 2200 long by 400 NEW SPECIES OF CENTRORHY NCHUS FROM THE CÔTE D'IVOIRE 311 wide and the lemnisci about 2000 long. Golvan (1958) also described the female genital apparatus (uterine bell to genital pore, 2000 long, genital pore sub terminal, at base of distinct terminal digitiform process) and eggs (oval, external shell thickened, sculptured with longitudinal ridges and grooves, 60 long, 23 wide). The type host Gyps africanus (Salvadore, 1865) was given as Pseudogyps afri- canus, the white backed vulture, collected from Nioro du Sahel in ‘the Sudan.’ This locality is a town in the Kayes Region of the Republic of Mali bordering on the Côte d'Ivoire to the south. There have been no further records of C. chabaudi since then. The two specimens, both the male and the immature female, from A. badius from Lamto in the Côte d'Ivoire conformed to the description given by Golvan (1958) as to general body shape and the proportions of the proboscis and lemnisci and in particular to the proportions and shapes of the proboscis hooks and spines. The pro- boscis armature varied only in the number of spines in each row. The number of spines on the specimens examined by Golvan (1958) is not clear. He describes the proboscis armature as having a total of 15 or 16 hooks, which would give 6- 7 spines per row. In his figure 4, however, a total of 17 hooks 1s shown. This would suggest 6-8 spines for the specimens from Nioro du Sahel compared with the 10-11 spines for the specimens from Lamto. This variation in number of spines can be accommodated as either indi- vidual variation (only four worms having been examined in total) or perhaps host induced variation. The finding of a male specimen of C. chabaudi has enabled the preparation of a more complete description of the species. The number of cement glands, however, three or four, could not be determined from the whole mount of the male and there was no other specimen that could be dissected to confirm the number. Centrorhynchus mariauxi sp. n. Figs 5-13 MATERIAL EXAMINED: Holotype male, paratypes, 8 pieces males, 2 females without proboscis, 4 pieces females from Kaupifalco m. monogrammicus (Temminck, 1824) small intestine; Côte d’Ivoire, Lamto, 9.02.1987, J. Mariaux (MNHG INVE 38486, INVE 69971). Prevalence: 50%. DESCRIPTION General: Trunk, spineless, elongate, cylindrical, female dilated posteriorly from about 500 to about 1500 above posterior end. Proboscis in 2 parts with constriction at insertion of proboscis receptacle, about 45% of distance from apex to proboscis base: anterior proboscis sub spherical. Proboscis armed with 34-36 rows 15-19 hooks. Anterior 2-3 hooks with large simple roots, thorns 20-25.5 (male) long; next 4-5 hooks transitional, having short roots with luniform- cresentic manubria, thorns 25.5- 44 (male) long; 9-11 spiniform hooks inserted on posterior part of proboscis posterior to constriction, thorns 20-40 (male) long. Neck spineless, well defined, shorter than broad. Proboscis receptacle double walled. Lemnisci tubular, inserted at base of neck, extend posteriorly beyond proboscis receptacle. Cerebral ganglion located at mid region of proboscis receptacle, just posterior to neck. Principal canals of lacunar system lateral, connected by transverse anastomoses. Male: based on one intact specimen. Trunk 25 mm long, 1200 at widest part. Proboscis total length 605, greatest width 368; posterior part 335 long 315 wide. Neck 312 L. R. SMAIES Le = ut rues, EE see £ ie ext à N Æ 13 FIiGs 6-13 Centrorhynchus mariauxi n. sp. (6) Holotype male, proboscis showing armature. (7) Holotype male, anterior, transitional and spiniform hooks. (8) Holotype male anterior end. (9) Female posterior and showing ovejector. (10) Egg. (11) Holotype male, posterior end showing bursa. (12) Female posterior end lateral view. (13) Female posterior end dorsal view. Scale bars: 6, 9, 200um; 7a, 35um; 7b, 18um; 8, 11, Imm; 10, 15ym; 12, 13, 500um. NEW SPECIES OF CENTRORHY NCHUS FROM THE CÔTE D'IVOIRE 313 300 long, 400 wide. Proboscis receptacle 1360 long, 235 wide; lemnisci 1273 long. Testes oval, tandem, not contiguous 1.1mm apart; anterior testis, 3.00 mm from anterior end of trunk, 529 long, 268 wide; posterior testis 556 long, 275 wide. Cement glands, 3, elongate, tubular, begin immediately posterior to end of posterior testis, 17.5 mm long; cement ducts elongated, 1800 long; Saefftigen’s pouch 1250 long; entire male system occupying about 88% trunk length. Female: based on anterior end one specimen, posterior end one specimen and longest piece. Trunk longer than 70mm, main trunk 500-600 wide, dilated posterior part 700-900 wide. Proboscis total length, 780 greatest width 390, posterior part 420 long 350 wide. Proboscis receptacle 1400-2200 long, 290-400 wide; lemnisci 1615 long. Genital apparatus, uterine bell to genital pore, 2000 long. Genital pore sub terminal. Eggs oval, external shell smooth, thick, 45 long, 22 wide. COMMENTS: Centrorhynchus mariauxi n. sp. conforms to the diagnosis of the genus given by Golvan (1956, 1960). In his examination of the morphological characters available in the family for systematic analysis those of the proboscis arma- ture, the number of longitudinal rows of hooks, the number of hooks in each row and the dimensions of the thorns and roots of the hooks were the most useful. Further he determined that the number of hooks per row was the most stable of these characters (Golvan 1956). Accordingly he subdivided the genus Centrorhynchus into 3 groups; those species with less than 30 longitudinal rows of hooks, those with 30-40 rows and those with more than 40 rows of hooks. With a proboscis armature of more than 30 rows C. mariauxi falls into Group 2 (Golvan 1956). The hook formula of 34-36 longi- tudinal rows of 15-19 hooks comprising 6-8 hooks with roots and 9-11 spiniform hooks distinguishes it from all other species in that group. Since then about 50 valid species of Centrorhynchus have been added to the genus including 20 species that have between 30 and 40 longitudinal rows of hooks. Species known to occur in continental Africa that have a proboscis armature of 30-40 rows of hooks include C. chabaudi, from the Sudan and now the Côte d’Ivoire, C. gendrei from the Republic of Guinea, C. milvus from Egypt and Senegal, C. clito- rideus (Meyer, 1931) from Egypt, C. globocaudatus from Egypt and West Africa, C. polemati Troncy, 1970 from Chad and C. undulatus Dollfus, 1951 from Morocco. Of these only C. chabaudi With 17-24, C. milvus with 18-21 and C. undulatus With 21 have a similar number of hooks per row. C. chabaudi can be distinguished by having 5-6 anterior hooks with longer thorns, 55-96 compared with 20-25 for C. mariauxi and small triangular roots on the anterior-most rows of spiniform hooks. The lemnisci of C. mariauxi are shorter and the testes smaller, further apart and more posterior than those of C. chabaudi (see Golvan, 1957 and this study). C. milvus differs from C. ma- riauxi in the hook pattern and proboscis length; 8-9 hooks with large roots, 5-6 trans- itional hooks and 5-6 spines on a longer proboscis, 0.8-1.19mm, compared with 2-3 large, 4-5 transitional and 9-11 spiniform hooks on a shorter proboscis, 0.61-0.77 (Ward, 1956; Dimitrova & Gibson 2005). The description of C. undulatus (females only) is brief. The only measurements are of the trunk, 15-18 mm, much shorter than for female C. mariauxi which are longer than 70 mm. Comparison of text and figures for C. undulatus suggests that the proboscis was about Imm long with an armature of 314 L. R. SMALES 21 hooks per row comprising 6 with large simple roots, thorns about 35-45 long, 3 transitional forms and 12 spiniform hooks (Dollfus, 1951). These differences seem sufficient to distinguish the two species. Comparative measurements for the west African species are given in table 2. There are 12 known extra- limital species with 30-40 longitudinal rows of hooks: namely C. bethaniae George & Nadakal, 1987, C. brygooi Golvan, 1965, C. conspectus Van Cleave & Pratt, 1940, C. crotophagicola Schmidt & Neïland, 1966, C. fukiensis, Wang 1966, C. guira Lunaschi & Drago, 2010, C. hagiangensis Petrochenko & Phan, 1969, C. kuntzi Schmidt & Neïland, 1966, C. madagascarensis (Golvan, 1957), C. nicaraguaensis Schmidt & Neïland, 1966, Centrorhynchus cf poly- morphus Travassos, 1926, C. undulatus (Nitzsch in Giebel, 1886) (see Dollfus 1951; Golvan 1957, 1965, 1994: Hartwich 1956; Schmidt & Neïiland 1966; Wang 1966, George & Nadakal 1987; Richardson & Nickol 1995; Dimitrova ef al. 1997; Dimitrova & Gibson 2005; Lunaschi & Drago, 2010). None of the species listed, however, has a similar hook pattern to that of C. mariauxi With as few as 2-3 true hooks in each row. The most similar extra-limital species 1s C. conspectus Van Cleave & Pratt, 1940 which has 28-38 rows of 16 -19 hooks of which 4-5 have long simple roots and 12-15 are spiniform, but differs from C. mariauxi in having no transitional hooks (Richardson & Nickol 1995). Other species with a similar total number of proboscis hooks differ in numbers and sizes of each hook form. For example C. nicaraguensis has 39 rows of 17 hooks but no transitional hooks; and C. crotophagicola has 32-35 rows Of 15-17 hooks, but differs in having 8-9 hooks with long simple roots and 7-9 hooks with manubria (Schmidt & Neiïland, 1966). C. acanthotrias (Linstow, 1883) was assigned to C. buteonis by Meyer (1932, see Yamaguti 1963), listed as Echinorhynchus 5. [. by Petrochenko (1985) and under genera incertae sedis by Yamaguti (1963) and Amin (1985). Never the less the species was noted by Petrochenko (1958) as ‘obvious that it belongs to the Centrorhynchinae or even Centrorhynchus’ and listed as a valid species by Golvan (1994). However the description is incomplete. Having 33-40 longitudinal rows of hooks the most anterior ones with straight roots, the median ones with bifurcated roots and the posterior ones with simple roots (Petrochenko 1958) C. acanthotrias may also be similar to C. ma- riauxi. Centrorhynchus halcyonicola sp. n. Figs 14-17 MATERIAL EXAMINED: Holotype male from Halcyon malimbica (Shaw, 1811) small intestine; Côte d’Ivoire, Korhogo, 27.01.1987, J. Mariaux (MNHG INVE 38485). — 1 male, pro- boscis missing and 1 piece male from H. malimbica small intestine; Côte d'Ivoire, Lamto, 13.02.1987, J. Mariaux (MNHG INVE 38490). Prevalence: 40 %. DESCRIPTION General: Trunk, spineless, elongate, cylindrical. Proboscis in 2 parts with constriction at insertion of proboscis receptacle about half way between apex and pro- boscis base, anterior part sub cylindrical. Proboscis armed with 38-40 rows 14-17 hooks. Anterior 2-3 hooks with large simple roots, thorns 40-405 long; next 2-3 hooks transitional, having laterally directed manubria, thorns 25- 30 long; next 2 hooks tran - NEW SPECIES OF CENTRORHY NCHUS FROM THE CÔTE D'IVOIRE 315 FIGs 14-17 Centrorhynchus halcyonicola n. sp. (14) Holotype male, anterior end. (15) Holotype male, anterior transitional and spiniform hooks. (16) Holotype male, proboscis showing armature. (17) Holotype male, posterior end, bursa not everted. Scale bars: 14, 17, 500ym; 15, 20ym; 16, 80um. sitional with anteriorly directed manubria, thorns 40 long; 8-9 spiniform hooks inserted on posterior part of proboscis posterior to constriction, thorns 20-40 long. Neck spine- less, not well defined. Proboscis receptacle double walled. Lemnisci tubular, inserted at base of neck, extend posteriorly beyond proboscis receptacle. Cerebral ganglion located at mid region of proboscis receptacle. Principal canals of lacunar system lateral, connected by transverse anastomoses. Male: measurements taken from holotype. Trunk 20 mm long, 400 at widest part. Proboscis total length 640, greatest width 335; posterior part 335 long 268 wide. 316 L. R. SMALES Proboscis receptacle 1370 long 205 wide; lemmisci 1530 long. Testes oval, tandem, close together, not contiguous 150 apart; anterior testis, 1.8 mm from anterior end of trunk, 440 long, 340 wide: posterior testis 510 long, 290 wide. Cement glands, 3, elon- gate, tubular, begin posterior to posterior testis, 14 mm long; cement ducts elongated, 1955 long; Saefftigen’s pouch and infolded bursa 1105 long; entire male system occu- pying about 85% trunk length. COMMENTS: Although only male specimens were available for examination they were sufficiently distinctive to allow differentiation from all other species of Centro- rhynchus. Despite the proboscis being slightly inverted in the only intact specimen the total length and hook formula could be calculated by observing the clearly visible inverted portion of the proboscis. Centrorhynchus halcyonicola sp. n. with a proboscis armature Of 38-40 rows of 14-17 hooks falls within the same group as C. mariauxi as discussed above. Within that group C. halcyonicola is closest to C. mariauxi which has 34-36 rows of 15-20 hooks, 2-4 of which are hooks with large simple roots. The shapes of the roots of the transitional hooks of C. halcyonicola, however differ from those of C. mariauxi (figs 7, 15), the thorns of the anterior hooks are longer in C. halcyonicola, 40-40.5 compared with 20-255 and there are fewer spines. Centroryhnchus halcyoni- cola further differs from C. mariauxi in the size of the testes, larger in C. halcyonicola, and the proportions of the male system, the testes being placed more anteriorly and closer together in C. halcyonicola. Similarly C. halcyonicola differs from all other species known from Africa as discussed above for C. mariauxi. The proboscis hook morphology of C. halcyonicola is similar to that described for C. alcuonis (Müller, 1780) from Asio atus, Linneaus, 1758, the long eared owl and Strix aluco Linneaus, 1758, the tawny owl from Hungary by Dimitrova ef al. (1995), particularly in regard to the shapes of the roots of the anterior and transitional hooks. The armature differs, however, in the number of rows of hooks, 38-40 compared with 28 and C. alcuonis further differs in the size of the proboscis receptacle, 1370 compared with 1450-1800 and the proportions of the male system (Dimitrova ef al., 1995). Both owl species also occur in North Africa supporting the possibility that there could be a link between the two species of Centrorhynchus. DISCUSSION The hosts and distribution of C. chabaudi have been extended in this study to include another West African country, the Republic of the Côte d’Ivoire, and accipitrid host, À. badius. The finding of two new species in the Côte d’Ivoire increases the number of species of Centrorhynchus known from West Africa from four, C. chabaudi from À. badius and Gyps africanus, C. gendrei from K. monogrammicus as Asturinula monogrammica, C. milvus from Milvus migrans (Boddart, 1783) and Lamprophis Juliginosus (Boie, 1827) as Boaedon fuliginosus and C. globocaudatus from Falco ardosiaceus Viellot, 1823, to six. Five of these species can easily be distinguished by differences in the armature of the proboscis (Golvan, 1956, 1957, 1958; Dimitrova & Gibson, 2005) as well as host species. The sixth, C. gendrei, occurs in the same host, K. monogrammicus, as C. mariauxi but differs in proboscis armature and morpho - metrics (Golvan, 1958). NEW SPECIES OF CENTRORHYNCHUS FROM THE CÔTE D'IVOIRE s17 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS My thanks to Prof. Mariaux for giving access to the specimens and for hospita- lity in Geneva. REFERENCES AMIN, M. O. 1985. 4. Classification. Zn: CROMPTON, D. W. T. & NiCKOL, B. B. (eds). Biology of the Acanthocephala. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 519 pp. AMIN, M. O. & CANARIS À. 1997. Description of Neolacunisoma geraldschmidti gen. n., sp. n., (Acanthocephala: Centrorhynchidae) from South African shorebirds. Journal of the Helminthological Society of Washington 62: 275-280. BHATTACHARYA, S. B. 2003. Fauna of Sikkim (part 5) /n: ALFRED, J. R. B. (ed.) State Fauna Series 9: 71-78. BILQEES, F. M. & KHAN, À. 2005. Two new helminth parasites from Pakistan, with redescription of the acanthocephalan Centrorhynchus fasciatum (Westrumb, 1821). Pakistan Journal of Zoology 37: 257-263. DIMITROVA, Z. M. & GIBSON, D. I. 2005. Some species of Centrorhynchus Luhe, 1911 (Acanthocephala: Centrorhynchidae) from the collection of the Natural History Museum, London. Systematic Parasitology 62: 117-134. DIMITROVA, Z. M., MURAI, E. & GENOV, T. 1995. Some species of the family Centrorhynchidae Van Cleave, 1916 (Acanthocephala) from Hungarian birds. Parasitologica Hungarica 28: 89-99, DIMITROVA, Z. M., GEORGIEV, B. B. & GENOV, T. 1997. Acanthocephalans of the family Centrorhynchidae (Paleoacanthocephala) from Bulgaria. Parasitologica Hungarica 28: 89-99. DOLLFUS, R. P. 1951. Miscellanea Helminthologica Maroccana I. Quelques Trématodes, Cestodes et Acanthocéphales. Archives de l’Institut Pasteur du Maroc 4: 104-229. GEORGE, P. V. & NADAKAL A. M. 1987. Centrorhynchus bethaniae Sp. n. (Acanthocephala: Gigantorhynchidae) from bird, Accipter badius (Gemlin) of Kerala India. Japanese Journal of Parasitology 36: 9-12. GHAZI, R. R., KHAN, A. & NOORUN-NISA, M. 2005. Two new species of helminth parasites from frog (Rana tigrina Daudin). Pakistan Journal of Zoology 37: 107-111. GOLVAN, Y. J. 1956. Le genre Centrorhynchus Lühe 1911 (Acanthocephala- Polymorphidae) Révision des espèces européennes et description d’une nouvelle espèce africaine para- site de rapace diurne. Bulletin de l’instut Française Afrique Noire 20: sér. A: 732-785. GOLVAN, Ÿ. J. 1957. Acanthocéphales d’oiseaux, sixième note deux espèces nouvelles parasites d'oiseaux d’Afrique occidentale Française: Gordiorhynchus (Gordiorhynchus) gendrei n. sp. et Pseudogordiorhynchus antonmeyeri n. gen et n. sp. Annales de Parasitologie 32: 83-97. GOLVAN, Ÿ. J. 1958. Acanthocéphales d’Afrique occidentale française récoltés par le Dr Pierre- Claude Morel. Bulletin de l’instut Française Afrique Noire 20: sér. A: 60-72. GOLVAN, Y. J. 1960. Le Phylum des Acanthocephala 3° note La Classe des Paleoacanthocephala (Meyer 1931). Annales de Parasitologie 35: 575-593. GOLVAN, Ÿ. J. 1965. Acanthocéphales de Madagascar récoltés par E.R. Brygoo. Annales de Parasitologie 40: 303-316. GOLVAN, Y. J. 1994. Nomenclature of the Acanthocephala. Research and Reviews for Parasi - tology 54: 135-205. HARTWICH, G. 1956. Südamerikanische Acanthocephalen aus der Zoologischen Sammlung des Bayerischen Staates. Zoologicher anzeiger 156: 229-308. KHAN, A., GHAZI, R. R. & BILQEES, F. M. 2001. Acanthocephalan parasite Centrorhynchus nickoli n. sp. from Eurasian Roller (Coracias garrulous Linn). Proceedings of Parasi - tology 32: 33-39. 318 L. R. SMALES KHAN, A., KHATOON, N. & BILQEES, F. M. 2002a. Centrorhynchus sindhensis, New Species (Acanthocephala: Centrorhynchinae) from the snake (Naja naja) intestine. Pakistan Journal of Zoology 34: 309-310. KHAN, À., RAFIA, R. G. & BILQEES, F. M. 2002b. Two new species of acanthocephalan parasites of house crow (Corvus splendens Vieillot). Pakistan Journal of Zoology 34: 139-146. LUNASCHI, L. I. & DRAGO, F. B. 2010. À new species of Centrorhynchus (Acanthocephala, Centrorhynchidae) endoparasite of Guira guira (Aves, Cuculidae) from Argentina. Helminthologia 47: 38-47. PETROSCHENKO, V. I. 1958. Acanthocephala of domestic and wild animals. Vol II. Academy of Sciences of the USSR. Israel Program for Scientific Translations, Jerusalem 1971. 478 pp. RICHARDSON, D. J. & NiCKOL, B. B. 1995. The genus Centrorhynchus (Acanthocephala) in North America with description of Centrorhynchus robustus n. sp., redescription of Centro - rhynchus conspectus, and a key to the species. Journal of Parasitology 81: 767-772. SCHMDT, G. D. & NEILAND, K. A. 1966. Helminth fauna of Nicaragua. III. Some Acanthocephala of birds, including three new species of Centrorhynchus. Journal of Parasitology 52: 739-745. WANG, P. C. 1966. Notes on Acanthocephala from Fukien. Acta Zootaxonomica Sinica: 3 14-18. WARD, H. L. 1956. A new species of Centrorhynchus (Acanthocephala) from the kite Milvus migrans in Egypt. Journal of Parasitology 41: 39-42. YAMAGUTI, S. 1963. Acanthocephala. Vol V Systema Helminthum. /nterscience, New York. 423 pp. REVUE SUISSE DE ZOOLOGIE 118 (2): 319-327; juin 2011 Heptapterus mbya (Siluriformes: Heptapteridae), a new species of catfish from the Paranà river basin, in Argentina Maria de las Mercedes AZPELICUETA!, Gastôn AGUILERA? & Juan Marcos MIRANDE* l Divisién Zoologfa Vertebrados, Museo de La Plata, Paseo del Bosque, 1900 La Plata, Argentina. E-mail: azpel\ @fcnym.unlp.edu.ar 2 CONICET-Fundaciôn Miguel Lillo, Miguel Lillo 251, 4000 San Miguel de Tucumän, Argentina. E-mail: aguileragaston @ gmail.com 3 CONICET-Fundacién Miguel Lillo, Miguel Lillo 251, 4000 San Miguel de Tucumän, Argentina. E-mail: memirande@ gmail.com Heptapterus mbya (Siluriformes: Heptapteridae), a new species of catfish from the Paranä river basin, in Argentina. - We describe a new species of heptapterid catfish of the genus Heptapterus from the streams Cuña-Pirû, Azul, and Moreno, in the province of Misiones, Argentina. Heptapterus mbya Sp. n. is distinguished from all other congeners by dark plumbeous body and a low number of anal-fin rays that are branched (11-12) out of a total number of 15-17 anal fin rays, a large eye (13.8- 17.9 % of HL), prepectoral distance 31.9-37.8 % of SL, distance between the last dorsal-fin ray and the adipose-fin origin 5.24-8.33 % of SL, adipose- fin base 47.4-58.5 % of SL, 13 principal caudal-fin rays, and 10-13 gill rakers on the first arch. Keywords: new Heptapterus - Southernmost South America - Neotropical ichthyofauna INTRODUCTION The genus Heptapterus is distributed throughout the rivers and streams of southernmost South America. The type species of the genus is H. mustelinus originally collected in the Rio de la Plata, as cited by Valenciennes in 1835. In this paper we describe a new species, Heptapterus mbya sp. n., collected from the streams Azul, Moreno, and Cuña-Pirû in the Province of Misiones, Argentina. Heptapterus mbya Sp. n. is a new endemic heptapterid catfish species to be added to the ichthyofauna of the Cuña-Pirû Valley. The Cuña-Pirü stream is located inside the Parque Provincial Salto Encantado and traverses the deep Cuña-Pirû Valley, eventually empting into the Paranä. The Azul and Moreno streams are the very headwaters of Garuhapé stream, an affluent of the Paranä. The Parque Provincial Salto Encantado and the Cuña-Pirû Valley comprise 13.227 ha in the middle of Misiones and constitute a protected area where man-made transformations of the environment are minimal. Some endemic species from the area have been described, such as the characiforms Asfyanax tupi Azpelicueta, Mirande, Almirén & Casciotta and À. troya Azpelicueta & Casciotta, Almirén and the freshwater catfish Rhamdella cainguae Bockmann & Miquelarena. Manuscript accepted01.03.2011 320 M. M. AZPELICUETA ET AL. MATERIAL AND METHODS The measurements, following Aguilera ef al. (2011), are straight-line distances made with a caliper down to nearest 0.1 mm. The vertebral count includes the elements of the Weberian complex and the compound preural+ural centra counted as one. The proportions are expressed as percentages of standard length (SL), head length (HL), or otherwise as indicated. Specimens were cleared and counterstained following Taylor and Van Dyke (1985). Multivariate analysis was perfomed with SPSS version 1997 in order to detect significant variables that can be used to distinguish H. mbya sp. n. from H. mustelinus. Institutional acronyms follow Fricke & Eschmeyer (2010), with the exception of ZVC-P (Zoologfa de Vertebrados, Facultad de Ciencias, Montevideo). COMPARATIVE MATERIAL: Heptapterus mustelinus (Valenciennes, 1835): MACN 359, 1 ex., 190.0 mm SL, Rio de la Plata, in Olivos; MACN 2050, 1 ex., 120.0 mm SL, Rio de la Plata, without precise locality; MACN 3370,3 ex., 115.0-137.2 mm SL, Rio de la Plata, in Vicente Lôpez; MACN 6187,9 ex., 88.4-234.0 mm SL, Rio de la Plata in Buenos Aires, Obras Sanitarias. AÏl from Uruguay, Rio de la Plata basin: ZVC-P 304, 3 ex., 146.0-169.0 mm SL, Departamento (Dep.) Canelones, rio Mosquito; ZVC- P 3422, 10 ex., 68.1-144.8 mm SL, Dep. Florida, arroyo Milano, affluent of rio Santa Lucia; ZVC-P 3874, 2 ex., 46.3-96.0 SL, Dep. Maldonado, arroyo Espinoso; ZVC-P 4147,3 ex., 48.6-61.2 mm SL, Dep. Colomia, rio San Juan; ZVC-P 5633, 4 ex., 116.2- 128.6 mm SL, Dep. Montevideo, rio Santa Lucfa, cañada del Dragôn in rio de las Piedras. Heptapterus gengo: A from Argentina, in Tucumän: AI 248, 1 ex. C&sS, 121.8 mm SL, Dep. Juan Bautista Alberdi, rio Chavarria; AI 252, 3 ex., 107.3-178.9 mm SL, Dep. Trancas, rio Vipos, rio Salf basin; CI-FML 3954, holotype, 183.5 mm SL, Dep. Trancas, rio Rearte, rio Salf basin; CI-FML 3955, 1 ex., 213.1 mm SL, Dep. Monteros, rio Los Sosa, rio Sali basin; CI-FML 3956, 1 ex. C&S, 168.9 mm SL, Dep. Burruyacu, rio Medina, rio Salf basin;, CI-FML 3957, 1 ex. C&S, 121.8 mm SL, Dep. Juan Bautista Alberdi, rio Chavarrfa; CI-FML 3958, 2 ex., 95.0-107.0 mm SL, Dep. Burruyacu, rio Medina, rio Salf basin; CI-FML 3959, 2 ex., 123.1-140.2 mm SL, Dep. Trancas, rio Choromoro, rio Salf basin; CI-FML 3960, 1 ex., 106.6 mm SL, Dep. Trancas, rio Choromoro, rio Salf basin; CI-FML 3961, 1 ex., 123.5 mm SL, Dep. Chicligasta, rio Cochuna, rio Salf basin; CI-FML 3962, 1 ex., 67.3 mm SL, Dep. Trancas, rio Vipos, rio Salf. Heptapterus stewarti Haseman, 1911: FMNH 54234, ho- lotype, photographed by M. Littman. Heptapterus sympterygium Buckup, 1988: MZUSP 19179, holotype, photographed by E. Baena. Images have been examined from the AIl Catfish Species image base (Morris, Yager & Sabaj, 2010). RESULTS Heptapterus mbya, sp. n. Figs. 1-3, Tables 1, 2 HoLOTYPE: CI-FML 4008, 136.0 mm SL, Argentina, Misiones, rio Paranä basin, arroyo Moreno at Ruta Provincial 202 (26° 54' 24" S-54° 54' 50" W) headwaters of arroyo Garuhapé, October 21, 2004, M. Azpelicueta, D. Aichino, D. Méndez (Fig. 1). PARATYPES: AIl specimens come from Argentina, province of Misiones. AI 247, 4 ex. (1 C&S), 88.0-116.5 mm SL, arroyo Azul (200 m downstream from Puente Quemado, 27° 00 46" S-54° 57! 06" W), October 21, 2004, M. Azpelicueta, D. Aichino, D. Méndez; AI 269,2 ex., NEW CATFISH FROM THE PARANA RIVER 321 85.0-116.3 mm SL, arroyo Cuña-Pirû (26° 30° 20” S-54° 48° 03” W), March 10, 2005, M. Azpelicueta; CI-FML 4009, 2 ex., 136.6-165.8 mm SL, same collecting data; CI-FML 4010, 2 ex., 126.8-136.6 mm SL, arroyo Azul (27° 00' 46" S-54° 57' 06" W), October 21 2004, coll. M. Azpelicueta, D. Aichino, D. Méndez. MHNG 2722092, 4 ex., 85-1294 mm SL, same collecting data. DIAGNOSIS: Heptapterus mbya Sp. n. is distinguished from other species of the genus by the following combination of characters: adipose and caudal fins confluent, largest specimen less than 170 mm SL (maximum length 166.0 mm), dark plumbeous body, low number of anal-fin rays that are branched (11-12) out of a total number of 15-17 anal fin rays, a large eye 13.8-17.9 % of HL, prepectoral distance 31.9-37.8 % of SL, distance between last dorsal-fin ray and adipose-fin origin 5.24-8.33 % of SL, adipose-fin base 47.4-58.5 % of SL, 10-13 g1ll rakers on first branchial arch, 13 prin- cipal branched caudal rays, and 56-58 vertebrae. Heptapterus gengo (Aguilera ef al., 2011) has the same number of anal-fin rays but it is distinguished by the presence of rudimentary serrae at base of the pectoral-fin spine (absent in H. mbya sp. n..). DESCRIPTION: Morphometric data of the holotype and 14 paratypes are pre- sented in Table 1. Heptapterus mbya sp. n. has a maximum of 166.0 mm SL (Figs. 1, 2). The body is covered by a deep layer of mucus; numerous sensory pits (pit organs) are distributed all over the body and fins. There are rare minute black soft structures, very fine, spiniform, embedded in soft tissues of the caudal fin, dorsal surface of pectoral and pelvic fins of females and males, independent of body size but with low number in young specimens. Spine-like structures form parallel rows, specially notably on caudal membrane (Fig. 3). Dorsal profile of body nearly straight from snout tip to posterior region of head, scarcely convex from this point to dorsal-fin origin, straight from dorsal-fin origin to adipose-fin origin, then slightly tapering to end of caudal peduncle. Ventral profile slanting ventrally or straight from snout tip to pectoral-fin origin, straight or convex between pectoral and pelvic fins, straight between pelvic and anal fins, and scarcely slanting dorsally to end of caudal peduncle. Maximum body width at level of pectoral fins; posterior half of body increasingly laterally compressed to caudal peduncle. Maximum body depth at dorsal-fin origin, contained 8.2-10.2 times in SL. Head relatively small contained 4.9-6.2 times in SL; head dorsoventrally depressed (depth of head between eyes 2.3-2.9 times into HL; depth of head at supra- occipital 1.8-2.2 into HL). Head covered by thick skin and a layer of mucus, head sur- face smooth with many sensory pits. Snout of moderate length (contained 2.6-3.0 in HL), rounded in dorsal view. Upper jaw scarcely projecting (projection 4.3-8.2 % of HL); premaxillary teeth covered by lower jaw when mouth closed. Anterior nostril with a very well developed tubular rim. Posterior nostrils preceded by large semi - circular membrane. Distance between posterior nostrils and eye shorter than internarial distance. Eye placed dorsally, covered by skin, small (its length 5.5-7.2 times in HL); interorbital relatively wide and straight, containing eye diameter 0.6-1.3 times (13.4- 18.1 % of HL). Width of head at eye level 1.3-1.6 times into HL (71.8-78.7 % of HL). Mouth subterminal, opening anteriorly, wide; lips thin. Premaxilla with slightly rounded posterolateral corners; its anteroposterior length 3.6-4.2 times in premaxillary width (6 specimens measured). All teeth conical and fine, placed in 8-10 irregular rows in premaxilla, larger specimens with more rows; 6-8 tooth rows on dentary at 322 M. M. AZPELICUETA ET AL. FIG. Heptapterus mbya sp. n., holotype, CI-FML 4008, 136.0 mm SL, lateral view. FIG. 2 Heptapterus mbya sp. n., holotype, CI-FML 4008, 136.0 mm SL, dorsal view. FIG. 3 Heptapterus mbya sp. n. Spiniform structures embedded on most superficial mucous layer of the caudal fin. CI-FML 4008, detail of the holotype, 136.0 mm SL. Bar= 1 mm. NEW CATFISH FROM THE PARANA RIVER 325 TABLE 1. Measurement data for Heptapterus mbya sp. n.expressed in percentages of the standard dimensions given above measurements. SL in mm. Holotype Mean Min Max Standard Length 136.0 85.0 165.8 Percent of SL Predorsal-fin length 34.7 34.5 30.6 37,1 Preadipose-fin length 50.8 50.2 43 4 54.8 Prepectoral-fin length 17.6 172 15.0 18.9 Prepelvic-fin length 39:71 39; 1 31.9 37.8 Preanal-fin length 58.8 60.2 392 64.9 Body depth at dorsal-fin origin 12.9 LS 8.8 13.9 Caudal peduncle depth 02 6.4 5.8 m2 Caudal peduncle length 20.9 20.6 F9 24.2 Head length 19.1 18.8 16.1 20 4 Body width 13.8 13.9 11.8 15.4 Second dorsal ray 123 7.8 5.9 9.4 Second dorsal-fin ray 9.6 92 7.6 121 Dorsal-fin base 10.0 9.4 8.5 10.0 Last dorsal-fin ray to adipose-fin origin 6.9 6.9 52 8.3 Adipose-fin length 50.5 1 47 4 58.5 Adipose-fin depth 5:6 3.4 2.9 4.6 First pectoral-fin ray 10.2 10.6 9.0 11.8 Second pelvic-fin ray 11.4 11.0 9.4 12.7 Anal-fin base 19.8 18.8 14.5 21.6 Anal-fin height 3.0 4.5 30 6.0 Dorsal-fin origin to caudal-fin base 67.6 66.9 64.3 70.9 Pelvic-fin origin to caudal-fin base 62.7 65.1 62.7 67.2 Anal-fin origin to caudal-fin base 39.1 393 36.2 42.1 Pectoral-fin to pelvic-fin origins 205 no 17.8 21.8 Pelvic-fin to anal-fin origins 250 26.3 24.8 28.7 Percent of head length Snout length 32.6 35.2 326 37.6 Horizontal eye diameter 165 15.4 13.8 17.9 Eye to posterior margin of head 52.6 31:20 48.6 52.8 Bony interorbital F5 15.4 153 18.0 Head depth at occiput 53.0 49.2 45 4 33:60 Head width 74.2 74.9 71.8 78.1 Gape width 43.8 43.7 40.0 47.5 Anterior tip to anterior nostril LL 122%) 10.4 14.1 Distance between nares 12.6 M6 95 133 Posterior naris to anterior eye margin 11.9 10.5 8.2 12.2 Percent of peduncle length Caudal peduncle depth 30.5 15 26.6 37.4 symphysis and fewer posteriorly. Origin of maxillary barbel close to anterior nostril, above rictus; basal third of maxillary barbel resting in a deep sulcus. Maxillary barbel usually reaching a vertical through mid of pectoral fin and scarcely surpassing pectoral-fin origin in few specimens. Tip of outer mental barbel usually reaching pectoral-fin origin, scarcely reaching branchiostegal membrane in two specimens. Tip of inner mental barbel scarcely reaching branchiostegal membrane. Dorsal fin with one soft segmented ray and six branched rays; first dorsal-fin ray small, about two thirds of first branched ray. Second branched dorsal-fin ray 324 M. M. AZPELICUETA ET AL. longest, about twice of last branched ray. Dorsal-fin origin anterior to a vertical through pelvic-fin insertion; in small specimens, dorsal-fin origin located scarcely anterior or at same level of pelvic-fin origin. Last adpressed dorsal-fin ray close to adipose-fin origin, increasingly so in smaller specimens. Adipose-fin origin located at a vertical through tip of pelvic fins or little posterior. Adipose fin long, confluent with caudal fin; adipose fin low, 12-18 times in its base. Caudal fin rounded, its upper lobe longer and broader than lower lobe. Principal caudal-fin rays 1+(6-7)+1. Dorsal procurrent caudal-fin rays 12-14, ventral procurrent caudal-fin rays 17-21 (counted in 6 specimens). Anal fin short, low, its origin at a ver- tical through anterior fourth of adipose fin; in small specimens, anal-fin origin placed at anterior third of adipose fin. Distal margin of anal fin straight or slightly convex. Tips of last anal-fin rays close to or surpassing origin of caudal fin. Anal-fin with 15- 17 rays (ini-v, 11-13; 2 with 11 branched rays; 9 including holotype with 12; 4 with 13). Pectoral fin 1,6-8 (1 with 6 branched rays; 10 with 7 including holotype; 4 with 8); first pectoral-fin ray soft and segmented. Distal margin of pectoral fin rounded. First ray short, 1.2-1.7 times in fin length; third ray longest. Tip of pectoral fin reaching half length between pectoral and pelvic fin origins. À large axillary gland pore, above pectoral-fin insertion, close to posterior angle of opercle. Pelvic fin with 1,6 rays; second branched ray longest; its distal margin rounded. Tip of pelvic fin reaching one third of distance between pelvic and anal fin origins. Inner pelvic-fin ray surpassing anus and urogenital papillae. Urogenital papillae located immediately behind anus, somewhat tubular in males. Gonads of males with broad, finger-like projections. Lateral line complete, ending on caudal peduncle; anterior lateral line ossicles without small plate-like expansions. Pores of cephalic sensory canals distributed as follows: supraorbital branch with four pores, infraorbital branch with six pores, mandibular branch with five pores, preopercular branch with six pores, and pterotic branch with 3 pores. Swim bladder small, bilobed in shape (as an eight) transversely placed. Gill rakers somewhat short, slightly laterally compressed. Ten to thirteen gill rakers on first arch, distributed as follows: 0-3 on epibranchial, 1 on cartilage between epibranchial and ceratobranchial, 8-9 on ceratobranchial. In two specimens, total number of vertebrae 56-58 (29-31 precaudal, 27 caudal); 9-10 pairs of ribs. COLOR UPON CAPTURE: Background dark gray, whitish only on vent; a very slender lateral stripe from opercle to end of caudal peduncle. AIT unpaired fins dark gray With a notably darker margin on anal fin; pectoral and pelvic fins yellowish. Transverse dorsal bands barely visible. COLOR IN ALCOHOL: Dark gray on dorsum, gray on sides of body and very light gray on ventral surface; head dark gray. Four transverse bands almost black, first one over supraoccipital region, second one at level of pectoral fins; third one at dorsal-fin origin, many times continued with an oval spot around dorsal-fin base; fourth band at adipose-fin origin. À very slender stripe developed from a dark area posterior to opercle to end of caudal peduncle. A light area on cheek. AIT fins dark gray, especially a) LD) Un NEW CATFISH FROM THE PARANA RIVER LE (s FIG. 4 Type locality, arroyo Moreno at Ruta Provincial 202, province of Misiones, Argentina (26° 54' 24"S-54° 54' 50" W). caudal fin. Dorsal fin with a light stripe near its base; anal fin with a dark band along its margin. Minute black rounded chromatophores scattered all over body, at different depths of skin. Large black, deep and star-like chromatophores spread on body. Chromatophores on myosepta, making myomeres very evident. ETYMOLOGY: The Guarani word mbya is the name of the aborigines that live in the Cuña-Pirü Valley and the Parque Provincial Salto Encantado. The name is applied as a noun in apposition. DISTRIBUTION AND HABITAT: Heptapterus mbya Sp. n. is found in the Cuña-Pirü, Moreno (Fig. 4), and Azul streams. The three streams are located in the rio Paranä basin in Misiones, Argentina, the latter two, though, are headwaters of the Garuhapé stream. The largest number of specimens were collected in a pond about 1 m deep, with a slow current, and a sandy bottom; the place was bordered by dense vegetation, completely covered by shadow. The parameters measured were temperature at 18-20 °C, conductivity= 81 S/cm, and pH= 6.3. DISCUSSION Heptapterus mustelinus, the type species of the genus, is the only member of Heptapterus recorded from the basins of Argentina, southernmost Brazil and Uruguay (Buckup, 1988; Bockmann & Guazelli, 2003). The type locality is the Rio de la Plata 326 M. M. AZPELICUETA ET AL. TABLE 2. Disciminant ratios, using eight measurements, for differentiation of Heptapterus mbya sp. n. and H. mustelinus. H. mbya H. mustelinus mean min-max mean min-max anal-fin base/dorsal-adipose length 057 0.31-0.47 0.16 0.13-0.22 pelvic-fin length/interorbital width 027 0.22-0.34 0.44 0.34-0.67 pelvic-anal fin origins/internarial length 0.21 0.18-0.25 0.60 0.36-0.92 pelvic-anal fin origins/interorbital width 0.11 0.09-0.13 0.18 0.14-0.21 anal-fin base/pelvic-fin length 0.60 0.50-1.04 0.38 0.28-0.43 anal-fin base/pelvic-anal fin origins 0.71 0.43-0.86 1.09 0.92-1 43 anal-fin base/internarial length 0.12 0.09-0.19 0.08 0.07-0.09 anal-fin base/posterior nostril-eye 0.11 0.08-0.15 0.07 0.06-0.08 interorbital width/interdorsal length 0.43 0.34-0.57 1.04 0.69-1.43 interorbital width/internarial length 0.76 0.64-0.93 0.49 0.43-0.55 where the species is still common, especially in areas with lime. Heptapterus mus - telinus is distinguished from H. mbya sp. n. by a higher number of anal-fin rays (18-22 vs. 15-17), a longer anal-fin base (20.9-28.0 % of SL vs. 14.2-21.6), shorter distance between pelvic and anal-fin origins (20.4-24.0 % of SL vs. 24.8-28.7), shorter distance between last dorsal-fin ray insertion and adipose-fin origin (3.1-49 % of SL vs. 5.2-8.3), and wider interorbital (18.9-249 % of HL vs. 13.3-18.0). Moreover, multivariate analysis detected ten additional ratios of sufficient differences to enable a discrimination of H. mbya sp. n. from H. mustelinus (Table 2). At present, a new species of Heptapterus has recently been published (Aguilera et al., 2011); the specimens of this new species have been collected in northwestern Argentina, in the Salf river basin. Heptapterus gengo is distinguished from H. mbya Sp. n. by the presence of rudimentary serrae on first pectoral-fin ray of adults, smaller eye (7.4-14.2 % of HL vs. 13.8-17.9), larger postorbital length (52.5-56.0 % of HL vs. 48.6-52.8), wider interorbital (17.6-24.1 % of HL vs. 13.3-18.0), and a maxillary barbel not reaching the first pectoral-fin ray in adults vs. one reaching half pectoral length in H. mbya sp. n. The number of anal-fin rays distinguishes Heptapterus mbya sp. n. (15-17) from H. bleekeri (20-22), H. fissipinnis (23), H. multiradiatus (36), H. ornaticeps (19), H. stewarti (30), and H. sympterygium (22-29). Additionally, Heptapterus mbya sp. n. is distinguished from H. bleekeri by greater eye diameter (2.1-2.7 vs. 3.5 times in snout length), narrower interorbital distance (5.5-7.5 vs. S times in HL), and longer predorsal distance (2.7-3.3 vs. 2.6 times in SL); from H. multiradiatus by a shorter dorsal-fin base (1.8-2.2 vs. 1.5 times in HL); from }. fissipinnis by a smaller eye diameter (5.6- 7.2 vs. 5.5 times in HL); and from H. sympterygium by the presence of anal and caudal fins separated. The adipose and the caudal fins confluent differentiates H. mbya sp. n. from H. tapanahoniensis, it with the adipose and caudal fins separated. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We thank D. Aichino and D. Méndez for their assistance in the field, M. Rinas for collecting permits from Ministerio de Ecologfa de Misiones, G. Chiaramonte and M. Loureiro for the loan of specimens, L. Rasia for help with photographs of caudal NEW CATFISH FROM THE PARANA RIVER 327 structures, the Agencia Nacional de Promociôn Cientifica y Tecnolôgica (PICT 12348 and 12359), and the Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cientificas y Técnicas (PIP 5365) for financial support, J. Lundberg and one anonymous reviewer for improve- ment this paper, S. Kürber and H-G. Evers for providing us with important biblio- graphic information, and D. Haggerty for improving the English style. REFERENCES AGUILERA, G., MIRANDE, J. M. & AZPELICUETA, M. DE LAS M. (2011). À new species of Heptap - terus Bleeker 1858 (Siluriformes, Heptapteridae) from the Rio Salf basin, north- western Argentina. Journal of Fish Biology 78: 240-250. BOCKMANN, F. À. & GUAZELLI, G. M. 2003. Family Heptapteridae (Heptapterids) (pp. 406-431). In: Reis, R. E.; S. O. Kullander & C. J. Ferraris JR. Check list of the Freshwater Fishes of South and Central America. Edipucrs, Porto Alegre, Brazil, 729 pp. BUCKUP, P. A. 1988. The genus Heptapterus (Teleostei, Pimelodidae) in Southern Brazil and Uruguay, with the description of a new species. Copeia 1988 (3): 641-653. FRICKE, R. & ESCHMEYER, W. N. 2010. A guide to fish collections in The Catalog of fishes. Elec- tronic version available at http://researcharchive.calacademy.org/research/ichthyology/catalog/fishcatmain.asp MoRR IS, P. J., H. M. YAGER, [programmers] & M. H. SABAJ PÉREZ [editor] 2010. ACSImagebase: A digital archive of catfish images compiled by participants in the AII Catfish Species Inventory. [WWW image Database] URL http://acsi.acnatsci.org/base SPSS 1997. SPSS Base 9.0. SPSS Inc., Chicago, USA TAYLOR, W. R. & VAN DYKE, G. C. 1985. Revised procedures for staining and clearing small fishes and other vertebrates for bone and cartilage study. Cybium 9: 107-119. VALENCIENNES, À. 1835. Poissons, pl. 2. /n: D’ORBIGNY, A. Voyage dans l’ Amérique méri - dionale. Vol. 9. Bertrand and Levrault, Paris. [ LA "À Ten. L = Le Aï : TRE OT Hub lupresrts Ar na ÉrEs* nm PPT | ET fs Ua) LE En 1 4 \ ttc. y: amy: ECO 2 à. À Lure RéehéE) nb . But ten Cr9ffis- CR g 3 resté" Share See T A ri sai l'une nie a à," iÉ _ OA te SU. | ? t NT M ) ture to S VA re rt 1) = qd "Les si pa agi! MoPrr | LE” » RAP RER A Fall RE DE I. a La piton NN SEE RCA, Le LE EN nvéadé DUR. Le | Facnl fe LOT | ot, + (aura PROC RC selite RTE idebéniis ER ELTON #* PC raser) rer kg the tiéteanta ‘ | F sas en vont SUPER .” pre MORE > È Er VOA. 4) riaciaii setes rte ee [EE per LS TE MjubienG 04 tee | Êge ns Er : MVE LE -7u Énto L: Rama Dr = AREA] SALE PRES PR DCE SEE A. à | F Le L Lite” ; | : : : 7. Lu : REVUE SUISSE DE ZOOLOGIE 118 (2): 329-343; juin 2011 Note sulle Typhloreicheia (Holdhaus, 1924) siciliane del ‘“‘gruppo praecox” con descrizione di una nuova specie (Coleoptera Carabidae: Scaritinae). Paolo MAGRINI Via Gianfilippo Braccini 7, I-50141 Firenze, Italia. E.mail: duvalius@paolomagrini.t (Coll. esterno Museo Zoologico “La Specola” di Firenze, Italia) Cosimo BAVIERA Dipartimento di Biologia Animale ed Ecologia Marina dell'Università degli studi di Messina, Salita Sperone 31, 1-98166 Sant'Agata, Messina, Italia. E.mail: chbaviera@unime it On Sicilian Typhloreicheia (Holdhaus, 1924) of the ‘‘praecox group” with description of a new species (Coleoptera Carabidae: Scaritinae). - Taxonomic status of taxa belonging to Typhloreicheia “praecox group” is discussed and a new species from western Sicily differs from all the other known taxa in the external morphology and its aedeagus shape is described. Also included are images, dichotomic keys and distribution maps for all the sicilian species. Keywords: Typhloreicheia - New species - Taxonomy - Sicily - Italy - Key to species. INTRODUZIONE Le Typhloreicheia siciliane di più antica descrizione furono inserite da Casale (1985), in un unico “gruppo praecox”, comprendente la specie nominale e quattro taxa, tutti ritenuti di livello sottospecifico, presenti nella Sicilia centro-occidentale. Le specie successivamente descritte: Typhloreicheia berninit Magrini, Bastianini & Petrioli, 2003; Typhloreicheia zingarensis Magrini & Baviera, 2003; Typhloreicheia messanae Magrini, 2008 e Typhloreicheia bavierai Magrini, Degiovanni & Petrioli (in stampa), appaiono tutte ben distinte dai taxa del gruppo di T. praecox (sensu Casale) per vari caratteri di morfologia esterna e, spesso, edeagici. Alla luce poi dell’abbondante materiale raccolto, insieme ad alcuni colleghi, negli ultimi anni per alcune specie e al riesame di buona parte degli esemplari prece- denti, ci siamo convinti del valore specifico di tutti i taxa finora descritti per l’isola, che si presentano ben localizzati, senza forme di passaggio e con chiare differenze morfologiche, che anche in assenza spesso di una lamella copulatrice edeagica, ne ren- dono facile l’identificazione. Inoltre, durante le ricerche effettuate negli ultimi tempi, abbiamo avuto modo di raccogliere, in due vicine località del trapanese, una piccola serie di esemplari, che abbiamo identificato come appartenenti ad una specie inedita di questo gruppo: approfittiamo di questa breve nota per descriverla e aggiornare la buona revisione di Casale del 1985. Manoscritto accettato il 10.12.2010 330 P. MAGRINI & C. BAVIERA MATERIALI E METODI I materiali utilizzati nel presente lavoro sono depositati nelle collezioni qui elencate con 1 rispettivi acronimi. MHNG: Coll. Museo di Storia Naturale di Ginevra (Svizzera), MZC: Coll. Museo Zoologico “Cambria”, Messina (Italia), MSNG: Coll. Museo civico di Storia naturale “Giacomo Doria”, Genova (Italia); CM: Coll. P. Magrini, Firenze (Italia); CB: Coll. C. Baviera, Messina (Italia), CD: Coll. A. Degiovanni, Bubano di Mordano, Bologna (Italia); CP: Coll. A. Petrioli, Asciano, Siena (Italia); CBA: Coll. M. Bastianini, Follonica, Grosseto (Italia); CBU: Coll. P. Bulirsch, Praga (Repubblica Ceca): Riportiamo inoltre qui di seguito le abbreviazioni delle misure riportate nella tabella. L: lunghezza complessiva, dall’apice delle mandibole all'estremità delle elitre; HMVW: larghezza massima del capo al rigonfiamento temporale; LA: lunghezza delle antenne; PL: lunghezza del pronoto, misurata lungo la linea mediana; PMW: larghezza massima del pronoto; EL: lunghezza elitre, misurata dalla base dello scutello all’an- golo suturale; EW: larghezza massima delle elitre; PMW/PL: rapporto massima larghezza/lunghezza del pronoto; EL/EW: rapporto lunghezza/larghezza delle elitre; EW/PMVW: rapporto larghezza elitre/larghezza pronoto; LE: lunghezza edeago; AN: lunghezza articolo antennale. Le macrofotografie riportate nel testo sono state eseguite da uno di noi (P. M.) mediante camera digitale Nikon D1 applicata su microscopio ottico binoculare Nikon Labophot IT, con obiettivi diaframmati. TAXONOMIA Typhloreicheia belloi sp. n. HoLorTypus: dd, Sicilia, Monte Sparagio (Trapani), m 550 s.1.m., 16.11.2008, leg. C. Baviera e C. Belld, MZC. PARATYPI: 6 GG e 10 99: 1 9, Castello di Baida, Monte Sparagio (Trapani), m 300 s.].m., 16.111.2008, leg. C. Baviera e C. Belld, MHNG. - 1 à , Castello di Baida, Monte Sparagio (Trapani), m 300 s..m., 16.111.2009, leg. P. Magrini, CM. - 1 4 e2 99, Monte Sparagio (Trapani), m 420 s.1.m., 16.111.2009, leg. P. Magrini, CM. -— 1 4 , Monte Sparagio (Trapani), m 420 s.1.m., 16.111.2009, leg. P. Magrini, CB. -— 1 d , Purgatorio (Custonaci, Trapani), m 300 s.1.m., 17.111.2009, leg. A. Degiovanni, CM. — 1 4,4 99, Purgatorio (Custonaci, Trapani), m 300 s..m., 17.111.2009, leg. A. Degiovanni, CD. -— 1 9 , Castello di Baida, Monte Sparagio (Trapani), m 300 s.1.m., 16.11.2009, leg. P. Magrini, CBA. — 1 9 , Monte Sparagio (Trapani), m 420 s.l.m., 16.111.2009, leg. P. Magrini, CBU. — 1 & , Monte Sparagio (Trapani), m 400 s.l.m., 20.111.2009, leg. A. Degiovanni, CD. - 1 ©, Monte Sparagio (Trapani), m 420 s.l.m., 16.11.2010, leg. P. Magrini, CP. DIAGNOSI E DESCRIZIONE: Una Typhloreicheia di dimensioni medio-piccole, con- vessa, di aspetto robusto e di colore rossiccio scuro uniforme; tegumenti lucidi, con mi- croscultura a maglie poligonali ben evidente su tutto il corpo e in particolare su capo e pronoto (fig. 1). Capo di normali dimensioni, molto più stretto del torace, larghezza massima al rigonfiamento temporale; tempie moderatamente convesse, glabre; solchi frontali larghi, profondi e molto allungati, divergenti solo posteriormente; occhi totalmente assenti. Clipeo ampio e convesso, con la zona mediana del margine anteriore subretti- TY PHLOREICHEIA SICILIANE 331 FIG. 1 Typhloreicheia belloi n. sp., di Monte Sparagio (Trapani), holotypus d , (MZC): habitus. linea, rilevato in carena solo all'apice. Labbro superiore con margine distale festonato e con cinque setole marginali. Mandibole falcate. Chetotassi cefalica senza parti - colarità di rilievo, ma con setole molto lunghe. Antenne lunghe e piuttosto gracili. Primo articolo antennale cilindrico; secondo decisamente allungato, poco più lungo del terzo e del quarto presi insieme, questi ultimi più sottili dei seguenti, gli articoli dal quinto al decimo subsferici e moniliformi; undicesimo in corto ovale. Pronoto tanto largo quanto lungo, discretamente allargato nella porzione basale: lati regolarmente arcuati; angoli anteriori piccoli, acuti, appuntiti e appena salienti, margine anteriore leggermente convesso o lineare, distintamente crenellato; doccia marginale sottile e regolare; peduncolo allungato; due setole marginali per ogni lato, distanziate dal margine esterno della doccia; l’anteriore a livello del primo quinto, la posteriore a livello del terzo quinto. Elitre convesse, in corto ovale, con margini anteriore e posteriore larghi e piuttosto squadrati, omeri ampiamente arrotondati; margine basale delle elitre subret- tilineo; doccia marginale ampia e regolare, con denticoli omerali poco sporgenti, ben evidenti solo nella prima metà dell’elitra; apice elitrale arrotondato. Larghezza 332 P. MAGRINI & C. BAVIERA FIGG. 2-5 Typhloreicheia belloi n. sp. Holotypus. (2) Edeago in visione laterale. (3) Edeago in visione ven- trale. (4) Urite. (5) Parameri. massima delle due elitre alla metà o poco dopo. Strie profonde, grossolanamente e irregolarmente punteggiate, svanite all'apice; interstrie convesse. Setole discali pre - senti in serie su tutte le interstrie, escluse la prima e l'ottava. Setola basale presente, come la preapicale e le apicali; setole marginali della serie ombelicata come nelle specie congeneri. Zampe di media lunghezza; le tre spine delle protibie robuste. Edeago molto arcuato, privo di lamella copulatrice, con apice largo, spatoli- forme, ampiamente arrotondato all’apice (figg. 2 e 17-20). Vescicola setifera forte- mente pigmentata sul lato ventrale e prossimale, con cordoni di spine disposti in fasci paralleli e piccoli fasci arcuati nella zona apicale della vescicola. Edeago in visione ventrale inclinato a sinistra (fig. 3). Urite IX largo e ovale (fig. 4). Parameri normal- mente conformati, forniti di due grandi setole, poco allungate (fig. S). LOCALITÀ TIPICA: Sicilia, Monte Sparagio (Trapani). DERIVATIO NOMINIS: Dedichiamo con piacere il nuovo taxon all’amico Cesare Bellù di Castelfranco Veneto (TV), appassionato e competente specialista di Peritelini TY PHLOREICHEIA SICILIANE 333 FIG. 6 Typhloreicheia praecox (Schaum, 1857), di Monte Pellegrino (Palermo) topotypus, (MSNG), habitus. (Curculionidae), a cui va il merito di aver individuato il magnifico sito del Monte Sparagio, un lembo di Sicilia ancora ben conservato, dove abbiamo raccolto 1 primi esemplari di questa nuova entità. AFFINITÀ E NOTE COMPARATIVE: La nuova specie si interpone, nell’ambito del gruppo praecox, fra l’areale di Typhloreicheia praecox (Schaum, 1857) del Monte Pellegrino (Palermo) e quello di Typhloreicheia doderoana Casale, 1985, del Monte San Giuliano a (Trapani) (fig. 33). Dalla prima di distingue agevolmente per la diversa chetotassi discale elitrale, con setole presenti in tutte le interstrie (dalla 2 alla 7), mentre in praecox le setole sono presenti solo nelle interstrie 3-5-7; per il corpo con pronoto e elitre più stretti e molto meno convessi e dilatati e per le antenne più lunghe. Dalla seconda per le antenne più lunghe e per l’edeago con apice molto più lungo, incurvato e spatoliforme. Per i con- fronti con le altre specie del gruppo praecox vedasi la chiave analitica, la Tabella delle misure e l’iconografia riportata nel testo. 334 P. MAGRINI & C. BAVIERA NOTE ECOLOGICHE: Tutti gli esemplari sono stati raccolti mediante vagliatura di terra alla base di Olea europaea var. sylvestris (Miller) o sotto pietre interrate in bosco rado di Quercus. CATALOGO TASSONOMICO E COROLOGICO DELLE SPECIE DEL “GRUPPO PRAECOX” Il gruppo comprende attualmente 6 specie di dimensioni medio-piccole, con corpo convesso, tutte endogee e fornite di un edeago privo di lamella copulatrice (per ulteriori dettagli, oltre a quelli riportati nel testo, rimandiamo a Holdhaus, 1924 e Casale, 1985): 1. Typhloreicheia praecox (Schaum, 1857) Monte Pellegrino (Palermo): nota solo della località tipica. Nella zona sommi- tale del monte, in pascolo, sotto pietre o vagliando la terra prelevata sotto cespugli. Tabella delle misure delle specie di Typhloreicheia del “gruppo praecox L LA L PM PL PMW EL ire W Ps LA PE Typhloreicheia praecox Minimo 2,18 0,61 3,13 0,54 0,54 0,97 lE7 Massimo 2,41 073 ss] 0,59 0,59 1:02 1622 Media 229 0,68 3,34 0,57 057 0,99 JAI LE Typhloreicheia baudii Minimo 221 0,73 2,11 0,51 0,50 0,91 1187 Massimo 2,54 0,93 3,06 0,59 0,58 15 135 Media 2,39 0,83 2,88 0,54 0,53 1:02 1,24 Typhloreicheia binaghii Minimo 212 0,67 2,95 0,48 0,48 05 1516 Massimo 2925 0,73 3,14 0,50 051 Il 1,20 Media 221 0,71 3,05 0,49 0,50 0,97 0,18 Typhloreicheia doderoana Holotypus d 2725 075 3,04 0,56 0,54 1,02 1,20 Minimo 2,21 0,64 304 5e 0,53 osi 0,97 la hf Massimo 2,34 OR 3,47 0,58 0,58 1,04 1,24 Media 227 0,68 3,28 055 0,54 1,01 1521 Typhloreicheia meridionalis Holotypus 4 2,28 0,77 295 0,50 OS 0,98 12147 Paratypus © 1,96 0,70 DIT 0.46 0.48 0,96 il Typhloreicheia belloi sp. n. Holotypus 4 2,28 0,80 2,84 0,54 0,54 0,98 1,20 Minimo 2:15 0,70 2,84 0,50 0,50 0,96 1,16 Massimo 2,50 0,80 3,01 0,58 0,54 105 1,24 Media 21 0,73 3,15 0,53 0,53 0,99 1,18 TY PHLOREICHEIA SICILIANE 335 2. Typhloreicheia baudii (Ragusa, 1883) Monti Sicani (Palermo): Bosco di Ficuzza (Palermo) e probabilmente Bosco Adriano (Palazzo Adriano) (cfr. Vitale, 1927; Casale, 1985). Silvicola, sotto pietre fortemente interrate in terreno argilloso o vagliando il terriccio in profondità alla base di alberi del genere Quercus, Spesso in associazione con Duvalius marii Vanni, Magrini & Pennisi, 1992. Typhloreicheia binaghii Casale, 1985 Madonie (Palermo): Castelbuono (pendici Pizzo Carbonara 1400 m); Piano Battaglia (pendici Monte Mufara 1300 m); Piano Zucchi (fra gli 800 e 1 1000 m); Pomieri (Petralia Sottana). Silvicola, sotto pietre anche moderatamente interrate e vagliando il terriccio. Typhloreicheia doderoana Casale, 1985 Trapanese occidentale: Monte San Giuliano (Trapani). Non conosciamo catture recenti di questo taxon, noto solo della località tipica, che appare oggi assai antro- pizzata. EW EL EW LE HM AN AN AN AN AN CE W 1e 7 ch 4° 1 EW PMW 0,75 1,46 1:55 0,37 0,35 0,12 012 0,04 0.04 0,08 0,80 1,58 1,38 057 0,38 0,08 0,10 0,05 0,05 0,09 0,77 1235 135 0,37 027 0,10 0,11 0.044 0044 0,083 0,67 1,61 127 0,39 035 0,09 0,10 0,05 0,06 0,09 0,77 1,79 1,34 0,43 041 0,13 0:13 0,07 0,06 0,11 0,72 L'or 1,31 0,40 0,38 0,11 0,11 0.06 0,06 0,10 0,67 65 1:35 0,35 0,34 0,08 0,10 0,04 0,04 0,08 0,70 1,71 1,46 0,38 0,37 0,09 0,11 0,06 0,06 0,09 0,69 1,68 1,41 0,36 07 0,088 0,106 0,05 0,05 0,088 0,72 1,66 1,28 0,41 0,38 0,08 0,11 0,05 0,05 0,09 0,70 1,64 1,26 0,38 0,35 0,08 0,09 0,04 0,04 0,08 0,74 1,1 1,33 0,41 0,40 0.09 0,11 0,05 0,05 0,09 0,72 1,67 , 0,39 0,37 0084 0,10 0,044 0042 0,088 0,69 1,69 1,36 0,35 0,35 0,08 0,11 0,05 0,05 0,10 0,64 AY 1,37 0,33 0,08 0,1 0,05 0,05 0,10 0,72 1,66 1,34 057 0,38 0,12 ; 0,06 0,05 0,09 0,66 1,62 127 0,35 0,33 0,10 0,11 0,05 0,04 0,08 0,74 1573 1,34 0,40 0,38 0.12 0,13 0.06 0,06 0,10 0,70 1,67 1,30 0,38 0,37 0,11 0,12 0,056 0,05 0,09 336 P. MAGRINI & C. BAVIERA FIG. 7 Typhloreicheia baudii (Ragusa, 1883), di Ficuzza (Palermo) topotypus, (CM), habitus. Typhloreicheia meridionalis Casale, 1985 Piazza Armerina (Enna): nota solo su due esemplari raccolti nella località tipica nel 1912. Come per il taxon precedente non conosciamo catture recenti e la zona ha subito negli ultimi 100 anni drastiche riduzioni di latifoglie del genere Quercus, sostituite da specie dei generi Pinus e Eucalyptus, essenze verosimilmente meno gradite al genere Typhloreicheia. Typhloreicheia belloi Magrini e Baviera, 2011 Trapanese orientale: Monte Sparagio (Trapani): da m 420 a 550 s.1.m.; Castello di Baida (Monte Sparagio, Trapani) 300 m s.1.m.; Purgatorio (Custonaci, Trapani). Vagliando terriccio prelevato alla base di Olea europaea var. sylvestris (Müller), Quercus spp. e sotto pietre profondamente interrate ai margini del bosco. TY PHLOREICHEIA SICILIANE 397 FIG. 8 Typhloreicheia doderoana Casale, 1985, di Monte San Giuliano (Trapani), topotypus, (CM), habitus. CHIAVE ANALITICA DELLE TYPHLOREICHEIA DEL GRUPPO PRAECOX la Setole elitrali presenti solo nelle interstrie 3-5-7. Antenne molto corte, pronoto molto ampio e allargato (fig. 11), omeri fortemente arrotondati, addome ampiamente rigonfio (ognuno di questi caratteri à 1l più accen- tuato nell’ambito del gruppo). Elitre corte e larghe con EL/EW compreso fra 1,46 e 1,58, in tutte le altre specie del gruppo superiore a 1,60. Edeago allungato, con apice curvo e sottile (figg. 21-23) ............ I praecox (Schaum, 1857) (fig. 6), Monte Pellegrino (Palermo) 1b Setole elitrali presenti in tutte le interstrie, dalla 2 alla 7 ................ 2 2a EPronoto fortemente ristretto.alla base (fios. 12, 14,15)... .............. 3 2b Hosnio Deco ristretio alla base (fee. 13,46) .2. 4e 20 mm urss...…. + 3a Apice dell’edeago fortemente incurvato, uncinato (fig. 24) .......... RP CE Te meridionalis Casale, 1985 (fig. 10), Piazza Armerina (Enna) 338 3b 4a 4b Sa 5b P. MAGRINI & C. BAVIERA FIG. 9 Typhloreicheia binaghii Casale, 1985, di Piano Zucchi (Palermo), topotypus, (CM), habitus. Apice dell’edeago non o appena incurvato, comunque non uncinato ....... 5 Antenne generalmente più corte (0,64-0,73 mm), edeago con apice corto e:poco incurvato (ion. 25-28) mme ER RE CCE ÉD RETRR CEE doderoana Casale, 1985 (fig. 8), Monte San Giuliano (Trapani) Antenne generalmente più lunghe (0,70-0,80 mm), edeago con apice luns0*€ nCufvaio;'spatolionme (ep 21720) RE D eee Me belloi n. sp. (fig. 1), Monte Sparagio e Purgatorio (Trapani) Omeri fortemente spioventi, pronoto più stretto alla base (fig. 14) ed elitre più larghe (EW/PMW 1,35-1,46). Edeago di piccole dimension (0,35-0,38 mm), diafano, con apice corto e largo alla base (figg. 31-32) binaghii (fig. 9), Casale, 1985, Castelbuono, Piano Zucchi e Piano Battaglia (Palermo) Omeri poco spioventi, pronoto meno ristretto alla base ed elitre strette (EW/PMW 1,27-1,34) (fig. 12). Edeago di dimensioni più grandi (0,39- 0,43 mm), poco diafano, con apice lungo, più incurvato e dilatato (figg. be Ne M Et Ne Ale SE SE baudii (Ragusa, 1883) (fig. 7), Ficuzza (Palermo) TY PHLOREICHEIA SICILIANE 339 FIG. 10 Typhloreicheia meridionalis Casale, 1985, di Piazza Armerina (Enna), holotypus, (MSNG), habitus. RINGRAZIAMENTI Desideriamo ringraziare tutti 1 colleghi che hanno contribuito alle ricerche o che c1 hanno fornito materiale di confronto utile per la stesura della presente nota: Marco Bastianini di Follonica (GR); Augusto Degiovanni di Bubano (BO); Andrea Petrioli di Asciano (SI); Sarah Whitman di Firenze. Un ringraziamento in particolare al Dr. Roberto Poggi, Direttore del Museo civico di Storia naturale “G. Doria” di Genova, che con la consueta cortesia ci ha dato modo di esaminare tutto 1l materiale siciliano, tipico e non, presente presso il suo Istituto, fondamentale per la stesura della presente nota. Un ringraziamento anche al referee anonimo per tutti gli utili suggerimenti forniti. 340 P. MAGRINI & C. BAVIERA 15 16 FiGG. 11-16 Pronoto di: (11) Typhloreicheia praecox, topotypus. (12) Typhloreicheia baudii, topotypus. (13) Typhloreicheia doderoana, topotypus. (14) Typhloreicheia binaghii, topotypus. (15) Typhloreicheia meridionalis, holotypus. (16) Typhloreicheia belloi, n. sp. holotypus. TY PHLOREICHEIA SICILIANE 341 FIGG. 17-24 Edeago di Typhloreicheia belloi, n. sp.: (17) Holotypus; (18) Paratypus 1, Monte Sparagio, Trapani (CM); (19) Paratypus 2, Castello di Baïda, Trapani (CM); (20) Paratypus 3, Purgatorio, Trapani (CM). Edeago di: (21) Typhloreicheia praecox, topotypus (MSNG); (22-23) Typhloreicheia praecox, topotypus (CM); (24) Typhloreicheia meridionalis, holotypus (MSNG). 342 P. MAGRINI & C. BAVIERA FIGG. 25-32 Edeago di Typhloreicheia doderoana, topotypus: (25-26) CM; (27-28) MSNG. Edeago di: (29-30) Typhloreicheia baudii, topotypus (CM); (31) Typhloreicheia binaghii, topo- typus (CM); (32) Typhloreicheia binaghii di Pomieri (Petralia Sottana), Madonie (Palermo), m 1300 s.1.m. sub Quercus, 16.V.2008, leg. C. Baviera (CB). TY PHLOREICHEIA SICILIANE 343 FIG. 33 Distribuzione del genere 7yphloreicheia in Sicilia. P: Tyhloreicheia praecox (Schaum, 1857); BA: Typhloreicheia baudii (Ragusa, 1883); BI: Typhloreicheia binaghii Casale, 1985; D: Typhloreicheia doderoana Casale, 1985; M: Typhloreicheia meridionalis Casale, 1985; B: Typhloreicheia berninii Magrini, Bastianini & Petrioli, 2003; Z: Typhloreicheia zingarensis Magrini & Baviera, 2003; ME: Typhloreicheia mes- sanae Magrini, 2008; BV: Typhloreicheia bavierai Magrini, Degiovanni & Petrioli, 2011; BE: Typhloreicheia belloi n. sp. BIBLIOGRAFIA CASALE, À. 1985. Note su Typhloreicheia italiane, con descrizione di nuovi taxa di Sicilia (Col. Carabidae, Scaritinae). Annali del Museo civico di Storia Naturale “G. Doria”, Genova, 85: 259-271. HOLDHAUS, K. 1924. Monographie du genre Reicheia Saulcy (Coleoptera Carabidae). Abeille, 32: 161-220. MAGRINI, P. 2008. Una nuova Typhloreicheia endogea della Sicilia (Coleoptera, Carabidae). Fragmenta entomologica, Roma, 39 (2):179-185. MAGRINI, P., BASTIANINI, M. & PETRIOLI, A. 2003. Una nuova Typhloreicheia dell'Isola di Marettimo (Isole Egadi: Sicilia) (Coleoptera, Carabidae). Afti del Museo di Storia natu- rale della Maremma, 19 (2001): 93-98. MAGRINI, P. & BAVIERA, C. 2003. Una nuova Typhloreicheia troglobia della Sicilia (Coleoptera Carabidae). Naturalista siciliano, S. XV, 27 (3-4): 213-223. MAGRINI, P., DEGIOVANNI, A. & PETRIOLI, À. 2011. Una nuova Typhloreicheia Holdhaus, 1924 della Sicilia (Coleoptera Carabidae). Fragmenta entomologica, Roma, 42 (2) (2010): 387-393. VITALE, F., 1927. Coleotteri nuovi o poco conosciuti di sicilia. Memorie della Società entomo- logica italiana, 6:44-54. REVUE SUISSE DE ZOOLOGIE 118 (2): 345-400; juin 2011 An annotated list of the Orthoptera (Insecta) species described by Alphonse Pictet (alone, and with Henri de Saussure) with an account of the primary type material present in the Muséum d’histoire naturelle in Geneva. John HOLLIER Muséum d’histoire naturelle, C.P. 6434, CH-1211 Genève 6, Switzerland. Email: john.hollier@ ville-ge.ch An annotated list of the Orthoptera (Insecta) species described by Alphonse Pictet (alone, and with Henri de Saussure) with an account of the primary type material present in the Muséum d’histoire naturelle in Geneva. - Pictet described 193 species or subspecies, most of them in collaboration with Saussure. The names are listed alphabetically, and the location of the type material (if known) and the current nomenclatural combination are given. When there 1s primary type material in the Geneva Natural History Museum (MHNOG)) the sex, label data and condition of the specimens 1s given, along with their location within the collection. Keywords: Ensifera - Caelifera - type-catalogue - Biologia Centrali- Americana. INTRODUCTION Alphonse Pictet (1838-1903) came from a family with strong links to the Geneva Natural History Museum (MHNG). His father, François-Jules Pictet (1809- 1872), was professor of Zoology in Geneva for nearly thirty years and can be consi- dered the “godfather” of the MHNG, while his brother Edouard Pictet (1835-1879) made some important contributions to the Museum’s Neuroptera collections (Hollier, 2007). In his studies of the Orthoptera Alphonse Pictet collaborated with Henri de Saussure (1829-1905), another of François-Jules Pictet’s pupils and one of the leading authorities on the Orthopteroid insects at that time. Four papers (Pictet 1888; Pictet & Saussure, 1887, 1891, 1892) dealt primarily with material in the Museum or Saussure’s collections (the latter were officially donated to the MHNG in 1903, but the distinction between the two collections was not always made clear in the literature before that). Their collaboration on the first Orthoptera volume of the Biologia Centrali-American (BCA) (Saussure & Pictet, 1897, 1898) was a very different project. The BCA was an encyclopedia of the natural history of Mexico and Central America published in 215 parts in London by the editors Frederick DuCane Godman and Osbert Salvin (of the British Museum (Natural History)). The work was largely based on material collected specifically for the project by naturalists such as Herbert H. Smith (1851-1919), who went on to become curator of the Carnegie Museum of Natural History (Philadelphia, USA), and George C. Champion (1851-1927) who also acted as managing editor for Manuscript accepted03.01.2011 346 J. HOLLIER the series. Unless otherwise stated in the description, the assumption is that the type material of the species described in the BCA 1s in the Natural History Museum in London (BMNH). The MHNG collection was revised by Saussure, and his successor Johann Carl (see Hollier, 2010), and the material has been studied by many specialists, so that it is not always possible to tell who attached type labels to the specimens. The Neotropical material was examined by Carlos Carbonell (Montivedeo, Uruguay), who labelled many specimens as holotypes or “hololectoypes” although many of these have not been officially designated. Poitr Naskrecki (Harvard, USA) examined and photo- graphed many of the Tettigonioidea types and put the images on OSF. Pictet described 193 species, mainly in collaboration with Saussure. Type material of 158 of these has been identified in the collection of the Geneva Natural History Museum (MHNG). Presumed types of two further species have been on loan from the MHNG collections since the 1970s. Type material of 65 species is in the BMNH (in some cases syntypes of a given species occur in both collections). Pictet and Saussure did not designate holotypes, and did not normally label type material as such, and some of the specimens labelled as syntypes may be holotypes by monotypy. Some unavailable names are attributed to Pictet in the literature and these are treated at the end of the catalogue. ARRANGEMENT AND FORMAT The species are listed alphabetically. The format for each is: species name Author, Work: page [Original generic placement]. Type locality (as given in the original descrition). Type series. Number of specimens. Specimen: “Label data” [format of label]. Following the recommendations of Oh! & Oswald (2004) the condition of each specimen is noted, although minor damage to the tips of the antennae or Wing margins 1s not enumerated. Other comments. Location of material in the MHNG main Orthoptera collection. Currently valid binomen of taxon (according to OSF). The abbreviation OSF refers to Orthoptera Species File Online (Eades & Otte, 2010). CATALOGUE acutipennis Pictet & Saussure, 1892: 16-17, fig. 9 [Chlorotribonia]. Java. Unspecified number of 4 and ©. Two d and three © syntypes. A & with labels: “624 10, JAVA” [printed on yellow paper]; “Chlorotribonia brevifolia de Haan, & Java” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Mioacris acutipennis P. & S., det. C. de Jong 1938” [determination hand- written on white card with de Jong’s name and date printed]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded. A 4 with labels: “Chlorotribonia brevi - folia de Haan” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Mioacris acutipennis P. & S., det. C. de Jong 1938” [determination handwritten on white card with de Jong’s name and date printed]; “Chlorotribonia acutipennis P. + S., det. C. de Jong 1938, LECTOTYPE d” [determination and “LECTO” handwritten on white card with de Jong’s name, date and CATALOGUE OF A PICTET’S ORTHOPTERA 347 “TYPE” printed]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings spread; the tarsi of the left front and middle legs are missing. À ® with labels: “® Java” [hand- written on yellow paper]; “Chlorotribonia brevifolia de Haan” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Mioacris acutipennis P. & S., det. C. de Jong 1938” [determination hand- written on white card with de Jong’s name and date printed]; “Chlorotribonia acuti- pennis P. + S., det. C. de Jong 1938, LECTOTYPE 9” [determination and “LECTO” handwritten on white card with de Jong’s name, date and “TYPE” printed]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with left wings spread and right wings folded. A ® with labels: “JAVA, FRUHSTORF [printed on whitish paper], “Chlorotribonia brevifolia de Haan” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Mioacris acutipennis P. & S. ?, det. C. de Jong 1938” [determination handwritten on white card with de Jong’s name and date printed]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; most of the left antenna is missing. À ® with labels: “JAVA, FRUHSTORF.” [printed on whitish paper]; “Chlorotribonia brevifolia de Haan” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Mioacris acutipennis P. & S. © , det. C. de Jong 1938” [determination handwritten on white card with de Jong’s name and date printed]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded. Although the species 1s mentioned by de Jong (1938: 36) he did not designate a lectotype. Images on OSF. Box E7. Mioacris acutipennis (Pictet & Saussure, 1892). acutipennis Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 383, 384-385, pl. 19, figs 9-10 [Eriolus]. Panama, Bugaba (Champion). Unspecified number of ?. No specimens found in MHNG collections. There is a © from the type series, referred to as the holotype on OSF, in the BMNH (images on OSF). Eriolus acutipennis Saussure & Pictet, 1898. albimacula Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 451, pl. 22, figs 3-5 [Celidophylla]. Nicaragua, Chontales (Janson). Unspecified number of à. No specimens found in MHNG collections. There is a 4 from the type series, referred to as the holotype on OSF, in the BMNH (images on OSF). Celidophylla albimacula Saussure & Pictet, 1898. amplifolia Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 455, 456, pl. 22, fig. 17 [Chlorophylla]. Ecuador”?, Cashiboya. Unspecified number of ?. No specimens found in MHNG collections. Vignon (1931: 77) could not trace the type material. A junior synonym of Cycloptera speculata (Burmeister, 1838). angustipennis Saussure & Pictet, 1897: 341, 344-345 [Anaulacomera]. Guiana; Cayenne. Unspecified number of 4. Specimen missing. Box B31. Anaulacomera angustipennis Saussure & Pictet, 1897. arbustorum Saussure & Pictet, 1897: 325 [Plagiopleura]. Brazil, Espiritu Santo. More than one d (size variation mentioned). 348 J. HOLLIER Two d syntypes. A 4 with labels: “Plagiopleura arbustorum Sss. et Pict.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Holotypus, Plagiopleura arbustorum S & P” [hand- written on red card with “Holotypus” printed]. Specimen set with wings spread; two tarsal segments are missing from both front legs. A 4 with labels: “Espirito Santo, Brasil, ex coll. Fruhstorfer” [printed on green card]; “Plagiopleura arbustorum Sss. et Pict.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Geneva” [printed on a strip of yellow paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; the tibia and tarsi of the left front leg are lost, as are both middle legs and the left hind leg. The specimen with folded wings appears to be the variety “minor” referred to in the original descrip- tion. Images on OSF. Box B23. Plagiopleura arbustorum Saussure & Pictet, 1897. arcuata Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 455, 456, pl. 22, fig. 19 [Chlorophylla]. Ecuador (Mus. Genavense). One damaged 4. No specimens found in MHNG collections. Vignon (1931: 78) could not trace the type. Cycloptera arcuata (Saussure & Pictet, 1898). argentinus Pictet & Saussure, 1887: 372 [Diponthus]. République Argentine, Buenos-Ayres. Unspecified number of ©. One ? syntype with labels: “Buenos Ayres” [handwritten on white paper]; “Prionacris argentinus Pict. et Sss.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Diponthus argen- tinus P. et S.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Diponthus argentinus P.-S., Holotypus ®, C S Carbonell - 1966” [handwritten by Carbonell on red card]. Specimen set with wings spread,; the right antenna is missing. Images on OSF. Box Z15. Diponthus argentinus Pictet & Saussure, 1887. aridifolia Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 452, 454, pl. 22, figs 12-13 [Mimetica]. Costa Rica, Rio Sucio (Rogers). Unspecified number of ©. No specimens found in MHNG collections. There is a © from the type series, referred to as the holotype on OSF, in the BMNH (images on OSF). Mimetica aridifolia Saussure & Pictet, 1898. ater Saussure & Pictet, 1897: 287, 291, pl. 14, figs 8-9 [Stenopelmatus]. Costa Rica (Rogers). Unspecified number of 4. One & syntype with labels: “R. Susio, Costa Rica, H. Rogers” [printed on white paper]; “Stenopelmat. ater P. et Sss” [handwritten on green paper]; “Holotypus, Steno - pelmatus ater Pict. & Sauss.” [handwritten by Hubbell on red card with “Holotypus” printed]. Specimen lacks most of the left antenna and the last tarsal segment of the right middle leg. Although Hubbell labelled this specimen as the holotype it is actually a syntype and there are further syntypes in the BMHN according to their database. OSF states that one of these is the lectotype, but no such designation seems to have been published. Box OI. Stenopelmatus ater Saussure & Pictet, 1897. CATALOGUE OF A PICTET’S ORTHOPTERA 349 atriceps Pictet & Saussure, 1891: 305-306, fig. 8 [Gryllacris]. Indes orientales. Unspecified number of ©. One © syntype with labels: “Gr. atriceps Pic. + Ss.” [handwritten on lined white paper]; “Gryllacris atriceps, P. et S.” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Holotypus” [printed on red card]. The species name label in the insect box has the locality “Indes orient.” handwritten in the lower right corner. The specimen is set with right wings spread and left wings folded; most of the spread wings have been lost, as have both antennae, both front legs, the right middle leg and the left hind leg. The ovipositor has been broken off near the base and is missing. Box N3. A junior synonym of Stictogryllacris picteti (Kirby, 1906). atricula Pictet & Saussure, 1891: 315-316, fig. 16 [Gryllacris]. Amérique. Unspecified number of 4 and 9%. No specimens found in the MHNG collections. Griffini (1909: 402) considered this species a synonym of G. picta Brunner von Wattenwyl, 1888. He placed a 9 specimen in the collection under that name, but stated 1t was not the type of G. atricula because the measurements did not match. The whereabouts of the type material 1s unknown. Box N4. Brachybaenus atricula (Pictet & Saussure, 1891). azteca Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 376, 379, pl. 19, fig. 1 [Copiophora]. Mexico, Teapa in Tabasco (H. H: Smith). Unspecified number of ©. No specimens found in MHNG collections. There is a ? from the type series, referred to as the holotype on OSF, in the BMNH (images on OSF). Copiphora azteca Saussure & Pictet, 1898. azteca Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 346-347, pl. 16, figs 17-19 [Crenophlebia]. Mexico; Atoyac in Vera Cruz, Teapa in Tabasco (H. H. Smith); Nicaragua, Chontales (Janson); Panama, Bugaba, Volcan de Chiriqui (Campion). Unspecified number of & and ©. One & and two $ syntypes. À 4 with labels: “Bugaba, 800-1500 ft. Champion.” [printed on white card]; “Ctenophlebia azteca Brunn.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Geneva” [printed on a strip of yellow paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings spread; most of both antennae 1s missing, as is the right hind leg. The abdomen is much shrivelled. A ® with labels: “Teapa, Tabasco, Feb. H.H.S.” [printed on white card]; “Ctenophlebia azteca Brunn.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; most of the left antenna is missing. À © with labels: “Chontales, Nicaragua, Janson” [printed on white card]; “Ctenophlebia azteca Brunn.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; most of both antennae and the tibia and tarsi of the right hind leg are lost. There are further syntypes in the BMNH (images on OSF). Box B32. Viadana azteca (Saussure & Pictet, 1898). azteca Saussure & Pictet, 1897: 296, pl. 14, fig. 19 [Glaphyrosoma]. Mexico, Teapa in Tabasco (H. H. Smith). Unspecified number of %. 350 J. HOLLIER No specimens found in MHNG collections. The type material ought to be in the BMNH but OSF does not list the type depository and the species is not listed on the BMNH database. Lutosa azteca (Saussure & Pictet, 1897). azteca Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 415, 419 [Gongrocnemis]. Mexico, Cordova in Vera Cruz (Hôge, Saussure). Unspecified number of 4 and ® (size variation mentioned). Four 4 syntypes. A d with labels: “Cordova, Mexico, Hoege” [printed on white card]; “Gongrocnemis azteca Sauss.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with right wings spread and left wings folded; most of the right antenna is missing. À d with labels: “Cordova, Mexico, Hoege” [printed on white card]; “Gongrocnemis azteca Sauss.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with right wings spread and left wings folded; most of the left antenna, the tarsi of the right front leg and the left front and middle legs are lost. A & with labels: “Potrero, Sumichrast” [handwritten on white paper]; “Gongrocnemis azteca Sauss.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings spread; the right antenna is missing and the right hind leg 1s detached and secured through the femur on the original pin. A d with labels: “Gongroc-, nemis, azteca, Ss., 4 Type!” [handwritten on green paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. The species name label in the insect box has the locality “Mexico” handwritten in the lower left corner. Specimen set with wings spread; most of both antennae are missing. The left hind leg is detached and secured through the femur on the original pin, and the top of the abdomen has split so that the end is now curved under the body parallel to the proximal part. The specimens collected by Hôge are smaller than the others, which presumably represent the varieties. Although the description treats both sexes no ® specimens were identified in the MHNG collection. Box E20. A junior synonym of Gongrocnemis bivittata Brunner von Wattenwyl, 1895. aztecum Pictet & Saussure, 1892: 26, fig. 21 [Acanthoprion|]. Mexico, Oudonga. Unspecified number of 9. Two © syntypes. À ® with labels: “Mexique, Oudouga” [handwritten on white paper], ‘“azteca” [handwritten on white paper]; “Aprion aztecum P. & Sauss.” [hand- written on green paper]; “Holotypus” [printed on red card]; “Probably a syntype” [handwritten on red paper]. Specimen set with left wings spread and right wings folded; the antennae, the last tarsal segment of the left front leg, two tarsal segments of the left middle leg, the right middle leg and the left hind leg are missing. A © with labels ‘“Acanthaprion azteca P. & Ss.” [handwritten on white paper]; “Aprion aztecus p. & Sauss.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Probably a syntype of A. aztecum Pict. & S. 1892, Hollier 2010” [handwritten on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; the antennae, the left front leg, left middle leg, the tibia and tarsi of the right middle leg, the left hind leg and two tarsal segments of the right hind leg are lost. There is a detached hind leg secured on a separate pin, but it is not clear to which specimen it belongs. Images on OSF. Box E&. Acanthoprion aztecum Pictet & Saussure, 1892. CATALOGUE OF A PICTET’S ORTHOPTERA 351 aztecus Saussure & Pictet, 1897: 299, 300, pl. 14, fig. 23 [Ceuthophilus]. Mexico, Atoyac in Vera Cruz (Schumann). Unspecified number of & and 9. No specimens found in MHNG collections. There is a ? syntype, erroneously referred to as the holotype on OSF, in the BMNH according to their database. Argyrtes aztecus (Saussure & Pictet, 1897). aztecus Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 389, 391-392 [Conocephalus]. Mexico, Teapa in Tabasco (H.H. Smith); Costa Rica (Rogers), Rio General, Pacific Coast (var minor). Unspecified number of & and © (size variation mentioned). One 4 and two © syntypes. À with labels: “Teapa, Tabasco. Feb. HHS .” [printed on white card]; “Conocephalus aztecus Sauss + P [handwritten on green paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; the right antenna and the tarsi of the left middle leg are lost. A © with labels: “Teapa. Tabasco. Feb. H.H.S.” [printed on white card]; “Conocephalus aztecus Sauss + P. [handwritten on green paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; the ends of the antennae and the tarsi of the right middle leg are missing. À ® with labels: “Teapa. Tabasco. Feb. H.H.S.” [printed on white card]; “Conocephalus aztecus Sauss + P.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; the tibia and tarsi of the right front leg are missing. There are further syntypes in the BMNH. Images on OSF. Box F7. A junior synonym of Neoconocephalus affinis (Beauvois, 1805). aztecus Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 358, 363-364, pl. 17, fig. 13 [Microcentrum]. Mexico, Teapa in Tabasco (H. H. Smith). Unspecified number of &. No specimens found in MHNG collections. There is a 4 from the type series, referred to as the holotype on OSF, in the BMNH (images on OSF). Orophus aztecus (Saussure & Pictet, 1898). barellus Pictet, 1888: 11-12, fig. 4 [Posidippus]. Cayenne (Bar). Unspecified number of & and ©. One d syntype with labels: “Posidippus spec. nov. Brunn. exam.” [handwritten on white paper]; “Posidippus Barella, Pict.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Lectotype , Posidippus barellus Pictet, 1888, Desig. Emsley, 1969” [“Type” printed and the rest handwritten by Emsley on red card]. The species name label in the insect box has the locality “Cayenne” handwritten in the lower left corner. Specimen set with wings spread; both front legs and the right middle leg are missing and the left middle and hind legs lack the tarsi. Emsley (1970) referred to a male holotype and female allotype in the MHNG:, but there was no such designation in the original description and so the specimens are syntypes. The © specimen could not be found in the MHNG collection, and there was no gap in the insect box. Images on OSF. Box B27. Steirodon barellum (Pictet, 1888). bariana Pictet, 1888: 10-11, fig. 3 [Apocerycta]. Cayenne (Bar). Unspecified number of %. Two © syntypes. A © with labels: “Cayenne, Portal Guyane” [printed on green paper]; “Apocerycta bariana, Pict.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Syntypus” [printed 332 J. HOLLIER on red card]. Specimen set with wings spread; both antennae, the left front leg, the tibia and tarsi of the right front leg, the tarsi of both middle legs and the last two tarsal segments of the right hind leg are missing, as is most of the femur, the tibia and the tarsi of the left hind leg. A ® with labels: “Cayenne” [printed on green paper]; “Apocerycta bariana, Pict.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Geneva” [printed on yellowish paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; the tarsi of the left front leg, the tibia and tarsi of the right front leg, the last tarsal segment of the left middle leg and the last two tarsal segments of the right middle leg are missing. Images on OSF. Box B34. Apocerycta bariana Pictet, 1888. biloba Pictet & Saussure, 1887: 338-339 [Colpolopha]. Perou. Unspecified nuber of 9. One £ syntype with labels: “Perou, Mr H de Saussure” [handwritten on a strip of white card]; “Colpolopha biloba Sss. et Pict.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Colpolopha bilobata Pict. et S., Holotypus, € S Carbonell - 1966” [handwritten by Carbonell on red card]. Specimen lacks both antennae, the left middle leg and the tibiae and tarsi of both hind legs. Images on OSF. Box Z3. Colpolopha biloba Pictet & Saussure, 1887. brahmina Pictet & Saussure, 1891: 306-307, fig. 9 [Gryllacris]. Indes orientales. Unspecified number of %. One £ syntype with labels: “G. brahmina Pic, Ss.” [handwritten on lined white paper]; “16, Ind. orient? Musée” [handwritten on white paper]; “Gryllacris brahmina, ® P. et S.”’ [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Holotypus” [printed on red card]. Specimen set with left wings spread and right wings folded; the spread wings are rather frayed, most of both antennae, the last tarsal segment of the left front leg, the tibia and tarsi of the right front leg, the tarsi of the left middle leg, the right middle and hind legs and the tibia and tarsi of the left hind leg are all missing. This species is actually African rather than Indian, and according to the species name label in the insect box this specimen was identified as G. africana Brunner von Wattenwyl, 1888 by Griffini (a species currently placed in the genus Afrogryllacris Karny). Box N3. Gryllacris brahmina Pictet & Saussure, 1891. brevicauda Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 415, 420, pl. 20, fig. 7 [Gongrocnemis]. Costa Rica, La Uruca (Biolley). Unspecified number of 9. One £ syntype with labels: “La Uruca 107, 1100m, P. Biolley” [handwritten on white paper]; “Costa Rica” [handwritten on green paper]; “Gongrocnemis brevicauda Sauss. + P” [handwritten on green paper]; “Holotypus” [printed on red card]. Specimen set with left wings roughly spread and right wings folded. Images on OSF. Box E20. Ancistrocercus brevicauda (Saussure & Pictet, 1898). brevistylus Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 410 [Lichenochrus]. Mexico, Cordova (Mus. Genavense). Unspecified number of & and % (the latter only nymphs). CATALOGUE OF A PICTET’S ORTHOPTERA 353 One & syntype with labels: “Potrero, Sumichrast” [handwritten on white pa- per]; “Lichenochrus brevistylus Sauss et P.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with left wings spread and right wings folded: most of both antennae and two tarsal segments of the right hind leg are missing. Four © nymphs near this specimen may be those mentioned in the description, and thus syntypes. Box EI6. A junior synonym of Gongrocnemis munda Brunner von Wattenwyl, 1895. brullei Pictet & Saussure, 1892: 22 [Chloracris]. Java. Unspecified number of & and 9. One & and one ® syntype. À d with labels: “Pseudophyllus Brullei, P. & Sauss., 4 Java” [handvwritten on yellow paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded, the antennae and the front and hind legs are missing apart from a detached femur secured on the original pin. The right hind leg is detached and secured on a separate pin. À £ with labels: “Pseudophyllus Brullei P.+ Sauss, 9” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Although this specimen does not have a locality label, the measurements correspond to those given in the original description. Specimen set with wings spread; most of both antennae, the tibia and tarsi of the left middle leg and the last tarsal segment of the right hind leg are missing. Box E3. Chloracris brullei Pictet & Saussure, 1892. californicus Pictet, 1888: 64-65, fig. 35 [/diostatus]. Californie. Unspecified number of 4. Lectotype 4 (designated by Rentz, 1973: 52) with labels: “CALIFORNIE, 603 26” [name printed and number handwritten on white paper]; “LECTOTYPE, Idiostatus californicus PICTET, By DC. RENTZ 1968” [handwritten by Rentz on white card with “Lectotype” and “By” printed in red]. Specimen lacks the right antenna and the tarsi of the right middle leg. A paralectotype & is also present. Images on OSF. Box K10. Idiostatus californicus Pictet, 1888. capreolus Pictet, 1888: 69-70, fig. 33 [Acanthoproctus]. Afrique méridionale, Cap de Bonne-Espérance. Unspecified number of à. One & and one ? syntype. À & with labels: “620 91, Africa mer., Mus. de Calcutta” [handwritten on ruled white card]; “Acanthoproctus capreolus Pict.” [hand- written on pink paper], “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen lacks most of both antennae, the left front leg, the tibia and tarsi of the right front leg, the last tarsal segment of the right middle leg and both hind legs. À micro-tube containing dissected parts 1s secured on the original pin, as are the bracypterous forewings which have been glued onto card. A $ with labels: “620 91, Africa mer., Mus. de Calcutta” [handwritten on ruled white card]; “1614” [handwritten on white card]; “1038/ S. Afr.” [handwritten on a disc of whitish paper]; “Acanthoproctus capreolus Pict.” [handwritten on pink paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen lacks most of both antennae and the last tarsal segment of the left hind leg. Images on OSF. Box M3. Acanthoproctus vittatus capreolus Pictet, 1888. 354 J. HOLLIER cardinalis Pictet & Saussure, 1887: 360-361 [7ropidacris]. Guatemala. Unspecified. One ? syntype with labels: “2 14, Guatemala, Mr H. d. Sauss.” [handwritten on ruled white paper]; “Tropidacris cardinalis P.-S., Holotypus ? ,C.S. Carbonell - 1966” [handwritten by Carbonell on red card]. Specimen set with wings spread; both antennae, the last tarsal segment of the right front leg and two tarsal segments of the right middle leg are missing. Box Z11. A junior synonym of 7ropidacris cristata dux (Drury, 1773). carinata Pictet, 1888: 46-47 [Copiophora]. Haut-Amazone. Unspecified number of 4. One d syntype with labels: “Copiophora capito Stäl, (carinata Pictet), type, Amazonie” [handwritten on green paper]; “Copiophora capito Stäl” [handwritten on green paper]; “Holotypus” [printed on red card]. Specimen set with wings spread; both antennae, the left front leg, the tibia and tarsi of the right front leg and both middle legs are missing, the hind legs are detached and secured on the original pin (one glued to card, the other transfixed through the femur). The head, thorax and abdomen show signs of damage, presumably by museum beetle. Box F1. A junior synonym of Copiphora capito Stäl, 1873. carinifolia Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 457, pl. 22, fig. 20 [Cycloptera]. Guiana (Mus. Genavense). Unspecified number of 4 (almost certainly a single damaged specimen). Holotype 4 with labels: “Cycloptera carinifolia Sauss et P.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Holotypus” [printed on red card]. There is also a brownish disk of card on which any writing there might have been has faded away. The species name label in the insect box has the locality “ Amer. merid.?” handwritten in the lower left corner. Specimen set with wings spread; the antennae, both front legs (apart from a detached femur glued to card and secured on the original pin), the tarsi of the right middle leg and the ends of the femurs, the tibiae and the tarsi of both hind legs are missing. The abdomen has been eviscerated and stuffed. The specimen had lost the hind tibiae before the description. Images on OSF. Box E31. Paracycloptera carinifolia (Saussure & Pictet, 1898). carinulatus Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 442, 443-4, pl: 21, fig. 14 [Scopiorus]. Mexico (coll. Brunner), Orizaba (H. H. Smith). More than one G. No specimens found in MHNG collections. There is a syntype, erroneously referred to as the holotype on OSF, in the BMNH (images on OSF). Scopiorinus carinulatus (Saussure & Pictet, 1898). casamancae Pictet & Saussure, 1892: 23, fig. 13 [Mataeus]. Guinea, Casamanca. Unspecified number of ©. One © syntype with labels: “Casmana, Mr Ed Sarazin” [handwritten on white paper]; “casamancae” [handwritten on white paper]; “Mataeus latipennis Karsch” [handwritten on pink paper]; “Syntype of M. casamancae Pict. + Saus., 1892, Hollier CATALOGUE OF A PICTET’S ORTHOPTERA 355 2010” [handwritten on red paper]. Specimen set with wings spread; the antennae and all of the legs except the right front leg are lost. The illustration of this species accom- panying the original description 1s of a specimen with folded wings. Box El. A junior synonym of Zabalius apicalis apicalis (Bolivar, 1886). cephalotes Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 377, 380, pl. 19, fig. 2 [Copiophoral]. Brazil, Rio Janeiro. Unspecified number of ©. No specimens found in MHNG collections. The whereabouts of the type material is unknown. Copiphora cephalotes Saussure & Pictet, 1898. championi Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 445 [Caloxiphus]. Guatemala, Panzos in Vera Paz (Champion). Unspecified number of 9%. No specimens found in MHNG collections. There is a © from the type series, referred to as the holotype on OSF, in the BMNH (images on OSF). Caloxiphus championi Saussure & Pictet, 1898. championi Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 357, 360, pl. 16, fig. 30 [Microcentrum]. Panama, Bugaba (Champion). Unspecified number of 4. No specimens found in MHNG collections.There is a 4 from the type series, referred to as the holotype on OSF, in the BMNH (images on OSF). Orophus championi (Saussure & Pictet, 1898). championi Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 370, 371-372, pl. 18, figs 6-9 [Peucestes]. Guatemala, Panzos in Vera Paz (Champion, d ); Costa Rica, Caché (Rogers, %). Unspecified number of & and 9. The single & specimen in the MHNG collection, from Costa Rica was collec- ted by Biolley and so 1s not a type. The lectotype of this species, designated by Emsley (1970: 161), 1s in the BMNH. Images on OSF. Box B26. Steirodon championi (Saussure & Pictet, 1898). championi Saussure & Pictet, 1897: 298, pl. 14, figs 20-22 [Phoberopus]. Guatemala, Totonicapam 8000 to 10,000 ft., Cerro Zunil 5000 ft. (Champion). More than one à. Lectotype d (designated by Hubbell, 1977: 296) with labels: “Totonicapam, 8-10,000ft., Champion” [printed on white paper]; “Phoberopus championi P. et Sss” [handwritten on green paper]; “Holotypus” [printed on red card]. Specimen lacks the left front leg. Box O9. Phoberopus championi Saussure & Pictet, 1897. clarazianus Pictet & Saussure, 1887: 336-337 [Alcamenes!]. République Argentine (Claraz). Unspecifed number of 4 and © (colour variation mentioned). One 4 and one 9% syntype. A 4 with labels: “San José env. Claraz” [hand - written on white paper]; “Alcamenes clarazianus Sss. et Pict.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Claraziana S. et P.” [handwritten on white paper]; “ Alcamenes clarazianus P. 356 J. HOLLIER et S., Allotypus 4, C S Carbonell - 1966” [handwritten by Carbonell on red card]. Specimen lacks about half of the right antenna and two tarsal segments of the left middle leg. À ® with labels: “San José env. Claraz” [handwritten on white paper]; “Alcamenes clarazianus Sss. et Pict.” [handwritten on green paper]; ‘“Alcamenes clarazianus P. et S., Holotypus © , C S Carbonell - 1966” [handwritten by Carbonell on red card]. The original description gives measurements for the © only, which led Carbonell to regard it as the holotype (Carbonell pers. comm.), but male characters are mentioned in the description and there 1s no type designation, therefore both specimens are syntypes. Images on OSF. Box Z2. Alcamenes clarazianus Pictet & Saussure, 1887. clarazianus Pictet & Saussure, 1887: 370-371 [Diponthus]. République Argentine, Entre-Rios, Bahia Blanca, San José. Unspecified number of & and © (colour variation mentioned). Three 4 and three ® syntypes. À & with labels: “San José, Entre-Rios, env. Claraz” [handwritten on white paper]; “Prionac. clarazianus Pict. et Sss.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Diponthus clarazianus P.-S., Hololectotypus [sic] & , C S Carbonell. 1966” [handwritten by Carbonell on red card]. Specimen set with wings spread. A d with labels: “San José, env. Claraz” [handwritten on white paper]; “Prionac. clara- zianus Pict. et Sss.” [handwritten on green paper]; “CSC 1139” [handwritten by Carbonell on a strip of white card]; “Diponthus clarazianus P.-S., Paratypus CSC 1966” [handwritten by Carbonell on red card]. Specimen set with wings folded; the left antenna 1s missing. À micro-tube containing dissected parts and a label “1139” is secured on the original pin. À 4 with labels: “Bahia Blanca, env. G Claraz” [hand- written on white paper]; “Diponthus clarazianus 4 P. et S.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Prionac. clarazianus Pict. et Sss.” [handwritten on green paper]; “CSC 1141” [handwritten by Carbonell on a strip of white card]; “Diponthus clarazianus P.-S., Paratypus CSC - 1966” [handwritten by Carbonell on red card]. Specimen set with wings spread; the left front leg is missing. À micro-tube containing dissected parts and a label “1141” is secured on the original pin. A ® with labels: “Colonie Suisse de San José, Entre-Rios, env. Claraz” [handwritten on white paper]; “Prionac. clarazianus Pict. et Saus.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Diponthus clarazianus ® P. et S.” [hand - written on green paper]; “Diponthus clarazianus P.-S., Allolectotypus [sic] 9, CS Carbonell 1966” [handwritten by Carbonell on red card]. Specimen set with left wings spread and right wings folded. À © with labels: “San José, Entre-Rios, env. Claraz” [handwritten on white paper]; “Prionac. clarazianus Pict. et Sss.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Diponthus clarazianus P.-S., Paratypus CSC - 1966” [handwritten by Carbonell on red card]. Specimen set with wings folded; the left antenna, the last tarsal segment of the left front and middle legs, and the tarsi of both hind legs are missing. A %® with labels: “Bahia Blanca, env. G Claraz” [handwritten on white paper]; “Prionac. clarazianus Pict. et Saus.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Diponthus clara- Zianus P.-S., Paratypus CSC - 1966” [handvwritten by Carbonell on red card]. Specimen set with wings folded; both antennae are missing. The lectotype does not seem to have been officially designated. Images on OSE. Box Z15. Diponthus clarazianus Pictet & Saussure, 1887. CATALOGUE OF A PICTET’S ORTHOPTERA 357 comanchus Saussure & Pictet, 1897: 287, 290 [Srenopelmatus]. Northern Mexico, Durango (Hôge). Unspecified number of & and 4. No specimens found in MHNG collections. The type material 1s in the BMNH according to their database. A junior synonym of Stenopelmatus fuscus Haldeman, 1852. consobrinus Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 383, 384, pl. 19, figs 6-7 [Eriolus]. Guatemala, Lanquin in Vera Paz, Capetillo (Champion); Panama, Volcan de Chiriqui (Champion). Unspecified number of & and © (size variation mentioned). Three © syntypes. A © with labels: “V. de Chiriqui, below 1,000 ft., Champion” [printed on white card]; “Eriolus consobrinus S. et P.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Musée de Genève, No” [printed on white card with printed border]; “Eriolus conso- brinus Sauss.” [handwritten on white card]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; most of the left antenna, the tarsi of the right front and middle legs and the last tarsal segment of the left middle leg are lost. A © with labels: “V. de Chiriqui, 25-4000 ft., Champion” [printed on white card]; “Eriolus consobrinus S et P” [handwritten on green paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; the right antenna is missing and the abdomen is twisted so that the ovipositor points down and to the left. A © with labels: “V. de Chiriqui, 25-4000 ft., Champion” [printed on white card]; “Eriolus consobrinus S et P” [handwritten on green paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded: the right antenna, both front legs and the tibia and tarsi of the right hind leg are lost. OSF states that the lectotype 1s in the BMNH, although it does not seem to have been for- mally designated. There are further syntypes in the BMNH (images on OSF). Box F2. Érioloides consobrinus (Saussure & Pictet, 1898). coriacea Pictet, 1888: 9-10, fig. 2 [Prosagoga]. Guyane. Unspecified number of à. One & syntype with labels: “Cayenne, Portal Guyane” [printed on green paper]; “Prosagoga coriacea, Pict.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Holotypus” [printed on red card]. Specimen set with wings spread; both antennae, the tarsi of the left front leg, the last tarsal segment of the left middle leg and the last tarsal segment of the right hind leg are missing. Part of the terminalia is glued to a card secured on the original pin. Images on OSF. Box B33. Itarissa coriacea (Pictet, 1888). crenata Saussure & Pictet, 1897: 323, 324 [Ectemna|. Mexico, Cordova (Saussure). One ©. Holotype £ with labels: “Ectemna carinata Br. var.” [handwritten on white card with printed black border]; “Ectemna crenata Sauss.” [handwritten on green paper]: “Holotypus Ectemna crenata Sauss.” [handwritten on red card with “Holotypus” printed]. The species name label in the insect box has the locality “Mexique” hand- written in the lower left corner. Specimen set with left wings spread and right wings folded; most of both antennae is missing, the left front and middle legs lack two tarsal segments, the right middle leg lacks the tarsi and the right hind leg is missing. Images on OSF. Box B23. Ectemna crenata Saussure & Pictet, 1897. 358 J. HOLLIER cribrosum Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 358, 362 [Microcentrum]. Mexico, Teapa in Tabasco (H. H. Smith). Unspecified number of &. No specimens found in MHNG collections. There is a 4 from the type series, referred to as the holotype on OSF, in the BMNH (images on OSF). Orophus cribrosus (Saussure & Pictet, 1898). cultricornis Pictet, 1888: 47-48, fig. 23 [Copiophora]. Amérique centrale. Unspecified number of 4 and 9. Three © specimens. À ® with labels: “V. de Chiriqui, 2-3000 ft. Chen [printed on white card]; “cultricollis [sic]” [handwritten on white paper]; “cultricornis Pict., cultricollis?” [handwritten on green paper]; “Possible syntype of C. cultricornis Pictet, 1888? Hollier 2010” [handwritten on red paper]. Specimen set with wings fol- ded. À £ with labels: “V. de Chiriqui, 2-3000 ft., Champion” [printed on white card]; “Copiophora cultricornis Pict.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Possible syntype of C. cultricornis Pictet, 1888? Hollier 2010” [handwritten on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; most of the left antenna is lost. A © with labels: “Coll. G. et S., Volc. Chiriqui, G.C. Champion” [printed on white paper]; “Copiophora cultricornis Pict.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Possible syntype of C. cultricornis Pictet, 1888? Hollier 2010” [handwritten on red paper]. Specimen set with wings spread: most of both an- tennae, the right front and middle legs and both hind legs are missing. The locality labels suggest that these specimens arrived in the MHNG collection when Saussure and Pictet were preparing the first Orthoptera volume of the Biologia Centrali- Americana (Saussure & Pictet 1898), meaning that they probably arrived after the publication of the description. This impression is reinforced by the fact that the loca- lity given in the description is only “1 Amérique centrale” rather than something more specific. However, in the BCA (Saussure & Pictet, 1898) the only localities mentioned are Chiriqui and Buguba in Panama, and Redtenbacher (1891: 342) refers to specimens of this species from Chiriqui in the collection of Brunner von Wattenwyl, showing that Champion’s material (it being unlikely that any other collector would have visited this particular site at the time) was in Europe at around the time of publication. The specimens in the MHNG collection are therefore possibly syntypes: if not, the where - abouts of the type material is unknown. Images on OSF. Box F1. Copiphora cultricollis Pictet, 1888. cyclops Saussure & Pictet, 1897: 305, 308, pl. 15, fig. 9 [Gryllacris]. Panama, Chiriqui (Champion). Unspecified number of ?. No specimens found in MHNG collections. The type material 1s in the BMNH according to their database. Brachybaenus cyclops (Saussure & Pictet, 1897). denticauda Saussure & Pictet, 1897: 341, 345,:pl 16, figs 15-16 [Anaulacomera]. Mexico, Temax in N. Yucatan (Gaumer). Unspecified number of & and ©? (variation in femur mentioned). Specimen(s) missing. There is a © syntype, erroneously refered to as the holo- type on OSF, in the BMNH (images on OSF). Box B31. Anaulocomera denticauda Saussure & Pictet, 1897. CATALOGUE OF A PICTET’S ORTHOPTERA 359 dentipes Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 414,415-416 [Gongrocnemis]. Costa Rica, Caché (Rogers). Unspecified number of à. No specimens found in MHNG collections. There is a 4 from the type series, referred to as the holotype on OSF, in the BMNH (images on OSF). Clepsydronotus dentipes (Saussure & Pictet, 1898). diadematus Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 385-6; pl. 19, figs. 11 & 12 [Basileus]. Guiana, Cayenne (Portal). More than one ® (size variation mentioned). Three £ syntypes. À £ with labels: “CAYENNE” [printed on a strip of green paper]; “Basileus diadematus, Sss & P.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Holotypus” [printed on red card]; “Probably a syntype, Hollier 2010” [handwritten on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; most of the left antenna and the entire right antenna are lost. A ® with labels: “Cayenne, Portal Guyane” [printed on green paper]; “Basileus diadematus, S. & P.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Probably a syntype, Hollier 2010” [handwritten on red paper]. Specimen set with wings spread, most of the left antenna and the entire right antenna are lost, as are the tarsi of the right middle leg. A ® with labels: “Basileus diadematus, S. & P.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Probably a syntype, Hollier 2010” [handwritten on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded, the tip of the left antenna and the entire right antenna, the tarsi of the right middle leg and the last tarsal segment of the left hind leg are missing. Images on OSF. Box F3. Vestria diademata (Saussure & Pictet, 1898). dumicola Saussure & Pictet, 1897: 323 [Ectemna!]. Panama, Bugaba (Champion). Unspecified number of & and 9. Two ? syntypes. À ® with labels: “Bugaba, 800-1000 ft., Champion” [printed on white paper]; “Ectemna dumicola Sss” [handwritten on green paper]; “Geneva” [printed on a strip of yellow paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; most of both antennae is missing, the left middle leg lacks the last tarsal segment and the right hind leg is lost. A ® with labels: “Bugaba, 800-1000 ft., Champion” [printed on white paper]; “Ectemna dumicola Sss” [handwritten on green paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; the ends of the antennae are lost as are the tarsi of both front legs, both middle legs and the tarsi of both hind legs. Images on OSF. There are further syntypes in the BMNH according to their database. Box B23. Ectemna dumicola Saussure & Pictet, 1897. elliptifolia Pictet & Saussure, 1892: 18, fig. 11 [Microprion|]. Java. Unspecified number of 9%. One © syntype with labels: “Microprion ceylonicus Brunner” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Microprion elliptifolia P. & S., det. C. de Jong 1938, TYPE” [deter- mination handwritten on white card with de Jong’s name, date and “TYPE” printed]; “Holotypus” [printed on red card]. The species name label in the insect box has the locality “Java” handvwritten in the lower left corner. Specimen set with left wings spread and right wings folded; the antennae and all legs are lost. The left hind wing 1s 360 J. HOLLIER detached and glued to a piece of card pinned into the insect box next to the specimen. À second © with labels “Microprion ceylonicus Brunner” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Microprion elliptifolia P. & S., det. C. de Jong 1938” [determination hand- written on white card with de Jong’s name and date printed] may be a second syntype. Images on OSF. Box E&. Phyllomimus elliptifolius (Pictet & Saussure, 1892). ephippium Pictet & Saussure, 1887: 332-333 [Orestera|]. Perou. Unspecified number of à. One & syntype with labels: “Perou, Mr H de S.” [handwritten on white paper]; “Orestera ephippium, 4 S. et P., Perou M. H. de S.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Orestera ephippum P.-S., Holotypus, € S Carbonell 1966” [handwritten by Carbonell on red card]. Specimen set with wings spread; most of the left antenna, the tarsi of the right front leg, the last tarsal segment of the left middle leg and the tarsi of the right middle leg are missing. Images on OSF. Box ZI. Hippacris ephippium (Pictet & Saussure, 1887). excisum Pictet, 1888: 26-27, fig. 9 [Typophyllum]. Cayenne (Bar). More than one &. There are no specimens standing under this name in the MHNG even though Vignon (1931) states that he saw more than one & specimen (only 4 characters were mentioned in the original description). It is probable that the syntypes are among the specimens Of Typophyllum trapeziforme (Stoll, 1787) in the MHNG collection (box E30), which are also from Cayenne (the type locality of T. excisum), but it is not possible to identify them. The specimen in the Muséum National d’histoire naturelle (MNHN) in Paris referred to on OSF is that mentioned by Vignon (1931: 122) and not a type. À junior synonym of Typophyllum trapeziforme (Stoll, 1787). fagifolia Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 455, 456, pl. 22, fig. 18 [Chlorophylla]. Ecuador. More than one ® (colour variation mentioned). One 9 syntype with labels: “Ecuador, 6630, 1” [locality handwritten, numerals printed on white card]; “Chlorophylla fagifolia Sauss + P. var.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with right wings spread and left wings folded; most of the left antenna and the entire right antenna are missing, as are both front legs, the tarsi of the left middle leg and the tibia and tarsi of the right middle leg. The thorax is badly damaged, and the head and prothorax is separated from the rest of the body, the whole being supported on a piece of cork secured on the ori- ginal pin. Images on OSF. Box E29b. À junior synonym of Cycloptera speculata (Burmeister, 1838). falcatus Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 383, 384, pl. 19, fig. 8 [Eriolus]. Guatemala, Lanquin in Vera Paz (Champion). Unspecified number of 9. No specimens found in MHNG collections. There is a ? from the type series, referred to as the holotype on OSF, in the BMNH (images on OSF). Ériolus falcatus Saussure & Pictet, 1898. CATALOGUE OF A PICTET’S ORTHOPTERA 361 fasciculata Pictet & Saussure, 1891: 310-311, fig. 12 [Gryllacris]. Iles de la Sonde. Unspecified number of ® (hind wings frayed, probably only one). One © syntype with labels: “Lahat, Sumatra, 11 — 18” [handwritten on white card]; “Gryllacris fasciculata, ? P. et Sss.” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “G. fasci- culata Pic. et Ss. [handwritten on lined white paper ]; “Musée de Genève, No 70” [number handwritten on printed white card]; “Pict. Sss., Type” [names written and “Type” printed on pink card with black printed margin]. Specimen set with wings spread; both hind wings, particularly the left, are frayed. Most of both antennae, the left front leg and the last tarsal segment of the left hind leg are missing. Box N4. Erythrogryllacris fasciculata (Pictet & Saussure, 1891). femoratus Pictet & Saussure, 1891: 299-300 [Onosandrus]. Les Indes orientales. Unspecified number of 9. One ® syntype with labels: “Promont. B. Sper” [handwritten on a strip of white paper]; “Onosandrus sp.?” [handwritten on pink card]; “Musée de Genève, No 107” [number handwritten on printed white card]; “Onosandrus femoratus Pict. et Sss.” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Holotypus” [printed on red card]. The species name label in the insect box has the locality “Indes orient.” handwritten in the lower left corner. The specimen 1s in poor condition, having lost the antennae and all of the legs except the right hind femur and tibia, and part of a leg glued to the left side of the thorax. There are holes in the top and bottom of the thorax left by a previous pin. The current generic placement was questioned by Johns (1997: 133). It is not clear whether the specimen 1s from Asia, as is stated in the description and on the species name label in the insect box, or from Southern Africa as the label on the specimen pin indicates. Box OS. Paterdecolyus femoratus (Pictet & Saussure, 1891). fissa Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 414, 417, pl. 20, fig. 4 [Gongrocnemis]. Guatemala (Oltramare, Mus. Genavense). Unspecified number of d. No specimens found in MHNG collections. Although the original description indicates that the material is in the MHNG, there is a d from the type series, stated to be the holotype on OSE, in the BMNH (images on OSF). Gongrocnemis fissa Saussure & Pictet, 1898. flavifolium Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 455, pl. 22, fig. 6 [Typophyllum]. Venezuela (Mus. Genavense). Unspecified number of ©. One ? syntype with labels: “Venezuela” [handwritten on a strip of yellowed paper]; “Typophyllum flavifolia S. P” [handwritten on green paper]; “Holotypus” [printed on red card]. Specimen set with left wings spread and right wings folded; most of both antennae, the left front leg and two tarsal segments of the right hind leg are lost. Images on OSF. Box E30. Typophyllum flavifolium Saussure & Pictet, 1898. forceps Saussure & Pictet, 1897: 327, pl. 15, figs. 24-27 [Chloroscirtus]. Guatemala, Dueñas (Champion). One damaged à. 362 J. HOLLIER No specimens found in MHNG collections. The holotype is in the BMNH (images on OSF). Chloroscirtus forceps Saussure & Pictet, 1897. foreli Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 346, 348 [Crenophlebia]. Colombia, Santa Marta (Dr. A. Forel). Unspecified number of &. One d syntype with labels; “St Martha, Colombie, Forel, 623 3” [handwritten on white paper]; “Ctenophlebia Foreli Sauss 4 type!” [handwritten on green paper]; “Holotypus” [printed on red card]. Specimen set with wings spread, but the left forewing 1s folded back having been repaired with glue; most of both antennae and the tarsi of the left hind leg are missing. Images on OSF. Box B32. Viadana foreli (Saussure & Pictet, 1898). foreli Pictet & Saussure, 1891: 294-5, fig. 1 [Pamphagus]. Gabès (Dr. A. Forel). Unspecified number of 4. One d syntype with labels: “620 84, Gabès, Tunisie, Mr A. Forel” [handwritten on ruled white card]; “Gabès, 1-7 IV” [handwritten on white card]; “Pamphagus forelii [sic] Sss., Gabès, M. H. S,” [handwritten on white paper]; “Pamph. Foreli Sauss.” [handwritten on pink paper]; “Holotypus” [printed on red card]. Specimen lacks the right antenna and the left middle leg. Box Y5. Paracinipe foreli (Pictet & Saussure, 1891). forreriana Saussure & Pictet, 1897: 301, 302-303, pl. 15, fig. 1 [Hemiudeopsylla]. Mexico, Ciudad in Durango 8100 ft. (Forrer). Unspecified number of & and 9. One 4 and one © syntype. À & with labels: “172” [handwritten on white paper]; “Ciudad, Mex., 8100 ft., Forrer” [printed on white paper]; “Schoenobates Forreri P. et Sss.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen lacks most of the left antenna and the entire right antenna and the left hind leg. The right hind leg is detached and secured on a separate pin. À © with labels: “Ciudad, Mex., 8100 ft., Forrer” [printed on white paper]; “Hemiudeopsylla Forreriana P. + Saus.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Ceuthophilus (Hemiudeopsylla) genicularis S. & P. juv., det. T.H. Hubbell, 1960” [designation and last numeral of date handwritten on printed white card]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen lacks most of both antennae, the right front and middle legs and the left hind leg. The right hind leg 1s detached and secured through the femur on the original pin. There are further syntypes in the BMNH. Box O0. À junior synonym of Ceuthophilus genicularis (Saussure & Pictet, 1897). fraternus Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 431, 433 [Cocconotus]. Panama, Volcan de Chiriqui (Champion). Unspecified number of & and ©. Two % syntypes. À $ with labels: “Coll. G. et S., Volc. Chiriqui, G.C. Champion” [printed on white card]; “Cocconotus fraternus, ? S — P.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings spread; most of the left antenna and the last segment of the left hind leg are lost. The abdomen has shrunk laterally. A $ with labels: “Coll. G. et S., Volc. Chiriqui, G.C. Champion” CATALOGUE OF A PICTET’S ORTHOPTERA 363 [printed on white card]; “Cocconotus fraternus, S et P.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings spread, those on the left being considerably tattered; much of the right antenna is missing and the abdomen has shrivelled laterally. There is also a possible 4 syntype placed in the collection under the unpublished name “Cocconotus forceps Sauss. et Pict.” This bears the labels: “Coll. G. et S., Volc. Chiriqui, G.C. Champion” [printed on white card]; “Cocconotus forceps, S, & P.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Syntype of C. fraternus Sauss. & Pict. 18987, Hollier 2010” [handwritten on red paper]. Specimen set with wings spread; most of both antennae, the left front leg and the tarsi of the right hind leg are missing. The left hind leg 1s detached and secured through the femur on the original pin. There are further syntypes in the BMNH (images on OSF). Box E25. Docidocerus fraternus (Saussure & Pictet, 1898). frutetorum Saussure & Pictet ,1898: 365 [/Zschyra]. Guatemala (Mus. Genavense). Unspecified number of à. One d syntype with labels: “Mr Oltram. 51, Guatemala 603” [printed on white paper]; “Ischyra frutetorum Sss. et P” [handwritten on green paper]; “Holotypus” [printed on red card]. Specimen set with wings spread; most of both antennae, the tarsi of both front legs, the entire left middle leg and the last tarsal segment of both hind legs are lost. Images on OSF. Box B36. Ischyra frutetorum Saussure & Pictet, 1898. furcatum Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 424, 425-426, pl. 20, figs 16-19 [/diarthron]. Costa Rica (Biolley). More than one d (variation of the cerci mentioned) and an unspecified number of 9. Five d and three ? syntypes. A & with labels: “COSTA RICA, P. BIOLLEY” [printed on green paper]; “Idiarthron furcatum Sauss + P.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Lectotypus, Idiarthron furcatum S. & P.” [handwritten on red card with “Lectotypus” printed]. Specimen set with right wings spread and left wings folded: most of both antennae and the left middle leg is lost. A 4 with labels: “COSTA RICA, P. BIOLLEY” [printed on green paper]; “Idiarthron furcatum Sauss + P.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; most of the left antenna, the last tarsal segment of the right front leg and the left middle leg are missing. À 4 with labels: “COSTA RICA, P. BIOLLEY” {printed on green paper]; “Idiarthron furcatum Sauss + P”° [handwritten on green paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded. À & with labels: “COSTA RICA, P. BIOLLEY” [printed on green paper]; “Idiarthron furcatuum, Sauss & P., var.lamina supraanali vari” [handwritten on green paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; most of the right antenna, the last tarsal segment of the right front leg and the last tarsal segment of the right hind leg are missing. À d with labels: “339, El Campejal, 1000m, P. Biolley” [handwritten on white paper]; “Idiarthron furcatum Sss. et Pt.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded. A ® with labels: “COSTA RICA, P. BIOLLEY” [printed on green paper]; “Idiarthron furcatum Sauss & P” [handwritten on green paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with 364 J. HOLLIER wings folded; most of the right antenna and the claw of the right middle leg are missing. À © with labels: “339.” [handwritten on a square of white paper]; “Idiarthron furcatum Sss. et Pt.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; the right antenna has been repaired with glue. À with labels: “COSTA RICA, P. BIOLLEY” [printed on green paper]; “Idiarthron fur- catum Sauss & P.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; most of both antennae and two tarsal segments of the left front leg are missing. A further three 4 and one ® with a locality “ Amer. cent.” may also be syntypes. There are further syntypes in the BMNH. Images on OSF. Box E22: Idiarthron furcatum Saussure & Pictet, 1898. gaumerti Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 421, 422, pl. 20, fig. 11 [Anchiptolis]. Mexico, Temax in North Yucatan (Gaumer). Unspecified number of %. No specimens found in MHNG collections. There is a $ from the type series, referred to as the holotype on OSEF, in the BMNH (images on OSF). Gongrocnemis gaumeri (Saussure & Pictet, 1898). genicularis Saussure & Pictet 1897: 301-302 [Hemiudeopsylla]. Mexico, Cuidad in Durango 8100 ft. (Forrer). Unspecified number of à. Although OSF states that the specimen in the BMNH :ïs the holotype, the MENG collections contain a single hind femur labelled “Hemiudeopsylla geniculatus P.et Ss, Fimur! [sic]” [handwritten on green paper], the label being apparently contem- poraneous with the name labels on the other specimens in the insect box. It 1s not clear if this 1s part of the BMNH specimen or part of a second syntype. Box O9. Ceuthophilus genicularis (Saussure & Pictet 1897). genicularis Pictet & Saussure, 1892: 24, fig. 16 [Phyllozelus]. Patria? Unspecified number of ©. One © syntype with labels: “Phyllozelus genicularis P. et Sauss.” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Oviscapte large et court” [handwritten on white paper]; “Phyl - lozelus genicularis P. & S., det. C. de Jong 1938, Lectotype” [determination and “Lectotype” handwritten on white printed card]. The species name label in the insect box has the locality “Asia merid?” handwritten in the lower left corner. Specimen set with wings spread, the wings being rather tattered; the left antenna, two tarsal segments of the left front leg, the right front leg, two tarsal segments of both middle legs, the last tarsal segment of the left hind leg and the right hind leg are missing. The abdomen is much damaged, and has lost the end, which might explain why the specimen is referred to as 4 on OSF. No formal lectotype designation appears to have been published by de Jong. Images on OSF. Box E&. Phyllozelus genicularis Pictet & Saussure, 1892. godeffroyi Pictet, 1888: 50-52, fig. 29 [Agraecia]. Nouvelle Irlande. Unspecified number of 4 and 9. Two d syntypes. À 4 with labels: “603 34, New Irland” [handwritten on whitish paper]; “21” [handwritten on a square of white paper]; “Salomona godeffroy1, CATALOGUE OF A PICTET’S ORTHOPTERA 365 type! Pict.” [handwritten on lilac paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; most of the left and the entire right antenna are missing, the left middle leg lacks the tarsi, the left hind leg lacks the tibia and tarsi and the right hind leg lacks the last tarsal segment. A 4 with labels: “603 34, New Irland (21)” [hand- written on whitish paper]; “Salomona godeffroyi, type! Pict.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; most of the right antenna is missing, as are all three left legs and the last tarsal segment of the right middle leg. There is also a ® with labels: “603 34, Cape York, N. Australia” [hand- written on whitish paper]; “15” [handwritten on white paper]; “Salomona goedeffroyi Pict.” [handwritten on lilac paper]; “Syntype of S. godeffroyi Pictet?, Hollier 2010” [typewritten on white card]. Specimen set with wings folded; the antennae, right middle leg and the tibia and tarsi of the left hind leg are lost. The right front leg and left middle leg are detached and secured on the original pin. The abdomen has been eviscerated and stuffed, presumably at the time of capture. The locality label suggests that this 1s not part of the type series, but the material was acquired at the same time as the syntypes. The collection also contains two more © and two juveniles which may belong to the type series. Part of the type series of S. sigma Redtenbacher, 1891 is stated to be in the MHNG in the original description, but no specimens are labelled as such (the latter species having being placed in synonymy with S. godefrroyi). Images on OSF. Box F19. Salomona godeffroyi (Pictet, 1888). goeldianus Saussure & Pictet, 1897: 295 [Pherterus]. Brazil, Rio Janeiro (Güldi), Santa Catharina. More than one 4 and © (size variation mentioned). Three & and three © syntypes. A & with labels: “R. JANEIRO, ERNI.” [printed on green paper]; “Pherterus gôüldianus P. & Sss” [handwritten on green paper]; “Lectotypus, should be designated, TH Hubbell” [handwritten on red card with “Lectotypus” printed]. Specimen lacks most of both antennae and the tarsi of the right middle leg. A G with labels: “R. JANEIRO, ERNI.” [printed on green paper]; “Pherterus gôldianus P. & Sss” [handwritten on green paper]; “# 1B Paratypus, Pherterus goeldianus, S & P THH” [handwritten on red card with “Paratypus” printed]. Specimen lacks most of both antennae and two tarsal segments of the right hind leg. A d with labels: “R. JANEIRO, Mr. Hy de Sauss.” [printed on green paper]; “Pherterus gôldianus P. & Sss” [handwritten on green paper]; “# 1 A Paratypus, Pherterus goel- dianus, S & P THH” [handvwritten on red card with “Paratypus” printed]. Specimen lacks most of both antennae, the last tarsal segment of the left front leg, the tibia and tarsi of the right front leg, most of the tibia and the tarsi of the right middle leg and the last tarsal segment of the left hind leg. A ® with labels: “R. JANEIRO, ERNI.” [printed on green paper]; “Pherterus gôldianus P. & Sss” [handwritten on green paper]; “Allotypus, Pherterus goeldianus, P. & S. THH” [handwritten on red card with “Allotypus” printed]. Specimen lacks most of the right antenna. À ® with labels: “R. JANEIRO, ERNI.” [printed on green paper]; “Pherterus gôldianus P. & Sss” [hand- written on green paper]; “Paratypus, # 2A (Not) Pherterus goeldianus P. & $S., ad. 9 THH” [handwritten on red card with “Paratypus” printed]. Specimen lacks the tips of 366 J. HOLLIER the antennae. À © with labels: “R. JANEIRO, ERNI.” [printed on green paper]; “Pherterus gôldianus P. & Sss” [handwritten on green paper]; “Paratypus, # 2B (Not) Pherterus goeldianus P. & S., THH” [handwritten on red card with “Paratypus” printed]. Specimen lacks most of both antennae. No formal lectotype designation appears to have been published. Box O4. Lutosa goeldianus (Saussure & Pictet, 1897). grandiocellata Pictet, 1888: 37, fig. 20 [Tanusia]. Guyane? (Ancienne collection Jurine). Unspecified number of &, but the provenance strongly suggests a single specimen. One ? with labels: “Tanusia grandiocelata Pic.” [handwritten on white paper]; “Tanusia colorata Serv.” [handwritten on green paper]; “11 (Vignon)” [handwritten on white paper]; “Holotypus” [printed on red card]. The species name label for T. colorata Serville in the insect box (under which the specimen was placed) has the locality “Brasilia” written in the lower left corner. Specimen set with left forewing spread, much of the thorax and the right wings are lost. AÏI legs except the femur of the right front leg are missing; the head and the left hind wing are detached and secured on separate pins. The abdomen shows signs of damage, presumably by museum beetle. It 1S by no means clear if this is really part of the type series, given that the sex 1s not that given in the description. Box E29. À junior synonym of Tanusia colorata (Serville, 1838). grioleti Pictet & Saussure, 1892: 20, fig. 15 [Tympanoptera]. Insulae Molucca (Dom. Griolet). Unspecified number of ©. Two % syntypes. À $ with labels: “Tympanoptera Grioleti P. & Ss.” [hand- written on white paper]; “Oxyscelus grioleti P. + Sauss.” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Holotypus” [printed on red card]; “Probably a syntype! Hollier 2010” [hand- written on red paper]. The species name label in the insect box has the locality “Ins. Asiae merid.” handwritten in the lower left corner. Specimen set with wings folded; the antennae, right front and middle legs and the last tarsal segment of the left middle and hind legs are lost. A ® with labels: “Oxyscelus grioleti P. + Sauss.” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Syntype of T. grioleti Pict. & Sauss. 18927, Hollier 2010” [handwritten on red paper]. Specimen set with right wings spread and left wings folded, the entire left antenna and most of the right antenna are missing, as is the left middle leg. The left hind leg is detached and secured through the femur on the original pin. A third 9 without locality label may also be a syntype. Images on OSF. Box Eo9. Tympanoptera grioleti Pictet & Saussure, 1892. guatemalae Saussure & Pictet, 1897: 336-337, pl. 16, fig. 3 [Amblycorypha]. Guatemala (Mus. Genavense). Unspecified number of à. One d syntype with labels: “Guatemala, H d. Sauss” [handwritten on green paper]; “Amblycorypha Guatemalae 4 S. et P” [handwritten on white paper]; “Holotypus” [printed on red card]. Specimen set with wings spread; both antennae, both front legs, the right middle leg, the tarsi of the right hind leg and the last tarsal segment of the left hind leg are missing. Images on OSF. Box B28. Amblycorypha guatemalae Saussure & Pictet, 1897. CATALOGUE OF A PICTET’S ORTHOPTERA 367 hispida Pictet, 1888: 20-22, fig. 5 [Echimacris]. Haut-Amazone. Unspecified number of ©. One © syntype with labels: “Haut Amazone” [handwritten on green paper]; “Echimacris hispida Pictet” [handwritten on green paper]; “Holotypus” [printed on red card]. The specimen lacks the right antenna and one middle leg, the front legs and other middle leg are detached, as is one of the palps. Images on OSE. Box E10. A junior synonym of Choeroparnops tuberculatus (Walker, 1870). hoegei Saussure & Pictet, 1897: 334, pl. 16, fig. 1 [Phrixa]. Mexico, Cordova (Hôge). Unspecified number of à. No specimens found in MHNG collections. There is a & from the type series, referred to as the holotype on OSF, in the BMNH (images on OSF). Phrixa hoegei Saussure & Pictet, 1897. hoegei Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 450, pl. 22, fig. 1 [Tanusia|]. Mexico, Cordova (Hôge). Unspecified number of à. No specimens found in MHNG collections. There is a 4 from the type series, referred to as the holotype on OSF, in the BMNH (images on OSEF). Anommatoptera hoegi (Saussure & Pictet, 1898). humbertiana Pictet & Saussure, 1892: 24-25, fig. 18 [Scutotribonia|]. Ceylon (AI. Humbert). Unspecified number of ©. Two % syntypes. À ® with labels: “358” [handwritten on a strip of white paper]; “Ceylan, Humbert” [handwritten on white paper]; “Scutotribonia humbertiana P. + Sauss.” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Scutotribonia humbertiana P. & $S., det. C. de Jong 1938, LECTOTYPE” [determination and “LECTO” handwritten on white card with de Jong’s name, date and “TYPE” printed]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with left forewing spread and right wings folded; most of both antennae and the last tarsal segment of the right front leg are missing. À ® with labels: “Scutotribonia Humbertianus P. + Ss.” [handwritten on white paper]; “Scutotribonia humbertiana P. + Sauss.” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; most of both antennae and the left front leg are lost. No formal lectotype designation appears to have been published by de Jong. Box E7. À junior synonym of Zumala cingalensis. Walker, 1869. hybridus Pictet, 1888: 67-68, fig. 22 [Aprosphlyus]. Afrique méridionale, Angra. Unspecified number of ®. One © syntype with labels: “ANGRA” [printed on pink paper]; “Aprosphylus hybrida Pict.” [handwritten on pink paper]; “Holotype % , Aprosphylus hybrida Pictet, Det. D.C. Rentz 1980” [handwritten on white card with “Det. D.C. Rentz” printed]. Specimen set with left wings spread and right wings folded; the antennae and all legs except the right hind leg are lost. Images on OSF. Box K10. Aprosphylus hybridus Pictet, 1888. 368 J. HOLLIER ibex Pictet, 1888: 72-73, fig. 31 [Acanthoproctus]. Afrique méridionale. Unspecified number of 9. One © syntype with labels: “620 74, Transvaal, Africa mer., Mr. Péringuey” [handwritten on lined white card]; “TRANSVAAL, Peringuey” [locality printed and name handwritten on white paper]; “Acanthoproctus ibex Pict.” [handwritten on pink paper]; “Holotypus” [printed on red card]. Specimen lacks both antennae and the tarsi of both front legs and the right middle leg. Images on OSF. Box M3. A junior synonym of Acanthoproctus diadematus (Stäal, 1858). icterus Pictet & Saussure, 1887: 353 [Rhomalea!]. République Argentine; Equateur, Quito. More than one 9%. Lectotype © (designated by Roberts & Carbonell, 1982: 55) with labels: “Quito, M H de Saussure” [handwritten on white paper]; “Rhomalea icterus P. et S.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Rhomalea icterus Sss et Pict.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Rhomalea icterus P.-S., Hololectotypus [sic] % ,C S Carbonell - 1966” [hand- written by Carbonell on red card]. Specimen set with wings spread. À ® paralectotype is also present. Images on OSF. Box Z&8. Chromacris icterus (Pictet & Saussure, 1887). iheringi Pictet & Saussure, 1887: 357 [Zoniopoda]. Brèsil Méridionale (Thering). Unspecifed number of & and ©. Lectotype d (designated by Carbonell, 2007: 24) with labels: “Brésil, Rio Grande da Sul, Dr Ihering, 614. 46.” [printed on white paper]; “Zoniopoda Iheringi Pict.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Zoniopoda iheringi P.-S. 4 , Hololectotypus [sic], CS Carbonell 1966” [handwritten by Carbonell on red card]. Specimen set with wings spread. À micro-tube containing dissected parts is secured to the original pin. Four other 4 and five © paralectotypes are also present. Images on OSF. Box Z9. Chromacris iheringi (Pictet & Saussure, 1887). imbecilis Pictet & Saussure, 1891: 312-313 [Gryllacris]. Indes orientales. Unspecified number of &. Holotype 4 with labels: “Sibs., S. E. P.” [printed on white paper]; “Gryllacris imbecilis, € P. et S.” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Gryllacris imbecilis, 4 P. et S.” [handwritten on white paper]; “Gryllacris sp. n. vicina Gr. debilis Br.” [handwritten, the first word in black and the rest in red ink, on a strip of squared white paper]; “Pict. Sss., Type” [names written and “Type” printed on pink card with black printed margin]; “Holotypus” [printed on red card]. Specimen set with right wings spread and left wings folded; the forewings are missing, as is most of the right hind wing. Most of both antennae, the tibia and tarsi of the left front leg, the right front and middle legs, the left middle leg, the tarsi of the left hind leg and the tibia and tarsi of the right hind leg have been lost. Box N3. A junior synonym of Phryganogryllacris nivea (Brunner von Wattenwyl, 1888). imperialis Pictet & Saussure, 1887: 361 [Tropidacris]. Amérique central; Guatemala. Unspecifed. CATALOGUE OF A PICTET’S ORTHOPTERA 369 One ? syntype with labels: “Guatemala, [illegible words]” [printed on card (now discoloured)]|; “Tropidacris imperialis P.-S., Holotypus © , C S Carbonell - 1966” [handwritten by Carbonell on red card]. Specimen set with wings spread: the last tarsal segment of the left front leg and the last tarsal segment of the left hind leg are missing. Box Z11. A junior synonym of 7ropidacris cristata dux (Drury, 1773). inca Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 432, 436 [Cocconotus]. Peru. Unspecified number of 9. One ? syntype with labels: “Pérou, Mr Hy de Saussure” [handwritten on a strip of white paper]; “Cocconotus inca Sauss.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Holotypus” [printed on red card]. Specimen set with left wings spread and right wings folded; most of both antennae and the last tarsal segment of the left hind leg are missing. The right middle and left hind legs are detached and secured through the femur on the original pin. Images on OSF. Box E25. Incanotus inca (Saussure & Pictet, 1898). inermis Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 386, 387-388, pl. 19, fig. 17 [Pyrgocoryphal]. Costa Rica, San José (Biolley). Unspecified number of 4. One d syntype with labels: “San José, 1135m°” [handwritten on whitish paper]: “Pyrgocorypha inermis S. P.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; most of both antennae are lost. Images on OSF. Box F4. A junior synonym of Pyrgocorypha hamata (Scudder, 1878). infirmus Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 401, 402-403, pl. 19, figs 30-32 [Thydrus]. Guatemala, San Gerônimo (Champion); Guiana, Cayenne (Prudhomme). More than one 9. One © syntype with labels: “CAYENNE” [printed on a strip of green paper]; “Thydrus infirmus Sauss & Pict.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with right wings spread and left wings folded: most of the left antenna and two tarsal segments of the left hind leg are lost. There are further syntypes in the BMNH (images on OSF). Box F24. A junior synonym Of Phlugis chrysopa Bolivar, 1888. Jjavana Pictet & Saussure, 1892: 16 [Mioacris]. Java. Unspecified number of 4 and ©. One & and one © syntype. A 4 with labels: “Mioacris javana Pict. et Sss.” [handwritten on white paper]; “Chlorotribonia brevifolia de Haan” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Mioacris javana P.+S., det. C. de Jong 1938, LECTOTYPE G” [deter- mination and “LECTO” handwritten on white card with de Jong’s name, date and “TYPE” printed]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. The species name label in the insect box has the locality “Java” handwritten in the lower right corner. Specimen set with left wings spread and right wings roughly folded; both antennae are lost, as are the last tarsal segements of the front left and right hind legs. A ? with labels: “Java, 370 J. HOLLIER 601 39” [last number hand written, the rest printed on white paper]; “Chlorotribonia brevifolia de Haan” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Mioacris javana P.+S., det. C. de Jong 1938, LECTOTYPE 9” [determination and “LECTO” handwritten on white card with de Jong’s name, date and “TYPE” printed]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with left wings spread and right wings folded; most of the left and the entire right antenna are missing, as are the left middle leg, the tibia and tarsi of the right middle leg and the right hind leg. The abdomen has shrunk and there are signs of damage, presumably by museum beetle. Although the species is mentioned by de Jong (1938: 31) he did not formally designate a lectotype. Images on OSF. Box E7. Mioacris javana Pictet & Saussure, 1892. kanguroo Pictet, 1888: 14-15, fig. 38 [Macroscirtus]. Gabon. Unspecified number of 4. Two d syntypes. A d with labels: “Gabon, Afrique occ., M. Ed. Sarasin” [hand- written on ruled white card]; “Gabon, M.Ed Sarazin” [handwritten on white paper]; “Genus novum, Mecopodidarum, Br. d.” [handwritten on greyish paper]; “Macros- cirtus kanguroo Pictet” [handwritten on pink paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings spread; the right forewing is detached and secured on separate pin, both front legs are detached and secured on a separate pin, and the ends of the antennae, the left middle leg and the last tarsal segment of both hind legs are missing. À 4 with labels: “Gabon, Afrique occ., M. Ed. Sarasin” [handwritten on ruled white card]; “Confluans de l’O-gow1 Gabon, M Ed Sarazin, 78” [handwritten on white paper], “Macroscirtus kanguroo Pictet” [handwritten on pink paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; the left antenna and both front legs are missing, the left middle and hind legs lack the tarsi, the right hind leg lacks part of the tibia and the tarsi. According to OSF there is a ® syntype in the Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales (MNMS) in Madrid, but the original description only treats the à , and the Madrid specimen is labelled “Macroscirtus kangaroo var Joannis Bol.” in Bolivar’s handwriting, this is not a syntype of M. kangaroo Pictet. Images on OSF. Box D8. Euthypoda kanguroo (Pictet, 18838). latifolia Pictet, 1888: 43-44, fig.14 [Chlorophylla]. Cayenne (Bar). Unspecified number of 4. One d syntype with labels: “Cayenne, Portal Guyane” [printed on green paper]; “Chlorophylla latifolia Pic.” [handwritten on white paper]; “Chlorophylla latifolia Pict.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Holotypus” [printed on red card]. Specimen set with wings spread; most of both antennae, the left front leg, the tarsi of the right front leg, both middle legs and two tarsal segments from each of the hind legs are missing. Images on OSF. Box E29b. A junior synonym of Cycloptera speculata (Burmeister, 1838). latipennis Saussure & Pictet, 1897: 322 [Amaura]. Mexico, Ventanas (Forrer). Unspecified number of à. CATALOGUE OF A PICTET’S ORTHOPTERA 371 No specimens found in MHNG collections. There is a 4 from the type series, referred to as the holotype on OSF, in the BMNH (images on OSF). Ligocatinus latipennis (Saussure & Pictet, 1897). latipennis Pictet & Saussure, 1891: 311-312, fig. 13 [Gryllacris]. Java. Unspecified number of ©. One © syntype with labels: “Gr. latipennis” [handwritten on a strip of white card]; “Musée de Genève, No 29° [number handwritten on printed white card]; “Gryllacris latipennis, © P. et S.” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Holotypus” [printed on red card]. The species name label in the insect box has the locality “Iles de la Sonde” handwritten in the lower right corner. Specimen set with wings spread; most of both antennae and the left front leg are missing. Box N?2. À junior synonym of Capnogryllacris signatifrons (Serville, 1838). latipennis Pictet & Saussure, 1892: 15, figs 6-7 [Onomarcus]. China. Unspecified number of & and 9. One & syntype with labels: “CHINE A.NAV., 601/94” [text printed, numerals handwritten on white paper]; “Onomarchus leuconotus Serv.” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Onomarchus leuconotus Serv. à , det. C. de Jong 1938” [determination hand- written on white card with de Jong’s name and date printed]; “Syntype of O. latipennis Pict. & Saus. 1892, Hollier 2010” [handwritten on red paper]. Specimen set with right wings spread and left wings folded; both of most antennae and the last tarsal segment of the left middle leg are lost. No ® syntypes could be located in the MHNG collection. Box Es. À junior synonym of Onomarchus leuconotus (Serville, 1838). latipennis Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 370, 371, pl. 18, fig. 2 [Peucestes]. Mexico (Mus. Genavense); Colombia. More than one 9. One © syntype with labels: “Peucestes latipennis Sauss.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Holotypus” [printed on red card]. The species name label in the insect box has the locality “ Amér. Cent.” handwritten in the lower left corner. Specimen set with left wings spread and right wings folded; the antennae, the tarsi of the left front leg, the right front leg, left middle leg, the tarsi of the right middle leg, two tarsal segments of the left hind leg and the claw of the right hind leg are missing. The abdomen has been eviscerated and stuffed, presumably at the time of capture. Images on OSF. Box B26. Steirodon latipennis (Saussure & Pictet, 1898). latipennis Pictet & Saussure, 1887: 351 [Rhomaleal]. Brésil. One 4. Holotype & with labels: “477/56” [handwritten on disc of white card]; “Rhomalia [sic] latipennis Saus. Pict.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Rhomalea lati- pennis, P. et S., type” [handwritten on green paper]; “CSC 1134” [handwritten by Carbonell on a strip of white card]; “Rhomalea latipennis P.-S., Holotypus- 1134, CSC - 1966” [handwritten by Carbonell on red card]. The species name label in the insect box has the locality “Brésil” handwritten in the lower left corner. Specimen set with 372 J. HOLLIER right wings spread and left wings folded; both antennae, the right front leg and the last tarsal segment of the left hind leg are missing. À micro-tube containing dissected parts and a label “CSC 1134” 1s secured on a separate pin with the label “Rhomalea lati- pennis P.-S., Holotypus, Genitalia No. 1134, C S Carbonell” handwritten by Carbonell on red card. Images on OSF. Box Z&6. A junior synonym of Chromacris nuptialis (Gerstaecker, 1873). laurifolia Pictet, 1888: 34-35, fig. 15 [Ommatoptera]. Brésil (Ancienne collection Jurine). One damaged 9. Holotype © with labels: “Ommatoptera laurifolia Pic.” [handwritten on white paper]; “Ommatoptera laurifolia ? Pict”” [handwritten on green paper]; “Tanusia laurifolia Pict.” [handwritten on green paper]; “12 (Vignon)” [handwritten on white paper]; “Holotypus” [printed on red card]. Specimen set with wings spread, the hind wings are rather tattered; the right antenna, the right front leg, the tarsi of the left middle leg and both hind legs are lost. Images on OSF. Box E29. Ommatoptera laurifolia Pictet, 1888. licornis Pictet, 1888: 45-46, fig. 24 [Copiophoral]. Haute-Amazone. Unspecified number of ©. There are no specimens standing under this name in the MHNG. It is possible that the © type(s) are among the specimens of Copiophora longicauda Serville, 1838 in Box F1. À junior synonym of Copiphora longicauda Serville, 1838. longicauda Pictet & Saussure, 1891: 317-318, fig. 17 [Eremus]. Indes orientales, côte de Malabar. Unspecified number of 4 and 9. One 4 and one © syntype. À 4 with labels: “Malabar Coast, Atzenwyler [?]” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Eremus longicauda P. et S.” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. The specimen has lost both antennae and all of the legs except for the left hind femur. A © with labels: “Malabar Coast, Atzenwyl. [?]” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Eremus longicauda Pict. et Ss.” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. The specimen has lost both anten- nae and all of the legs except for the left hind femur. Box N6. Eremus longicauda Pictet & Saussure, 1891. longipennis Pictet & Saussure, 1891: 314-315, fig. 15 [Gryllacris]. Amérique. Unspecified number of G. No specimens found in the MHNG collections. OSEF states that the holotype 1s in the BMNH, but this may be a specimen collected by Champion for the BCA (see Saussure & Pictet 1897: 307) and not a specimen available to Pictet in 1891. Griffin (1909) did not mention this species in the MHNG collections. Abelona longipennis (Pictet & Saussure, 1891). longispina Pictet & Saussure, 1887: 345-346 [Elaeochlora]. Andes de la Nouvelle Grenade. Unspecified number of 4 and 9. CATALOGUE OF A PICTET’S ORTHOPTERA 3713 Possible © syntype with labels: “Pérou” [handwritten on white paper]; “Elaeoch. longispina Sss. et Pict.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Possible syntype? Hollier 2010” [handwritten on red paper]. The species name label in the insect box has the locality “Andes du Pérou” handvwritten in the lower left corner. Specimen lacks the tarsi of right front leg. Roberts & Carbonell (1992: 91) state that the types could not be found, assuming that when the original description gave the type locality this meant Colombia or Venezuela (Carbonell in litt.). It is possible however, that “Nouvelle Grenade” was less precisely defined by Pictet & Saussure at the time of the description than it was by Roberts & Carbonell and that this Andean specimen is a syntype. Images on OSF. Box Z4. Elaeochlora longispina Pictet & Saussure, 1887 (nomen dubium on OSF). loricatus Pictet, 1888: 6-7, fig. 1 [Srilpnothorax|]. Afrique méridionale (Péringuey, Mus. du Cap). Unspecified number of 9. One possible ? syntype with labels: “Africa” [handwritten on pink paper]; “Pomatonota dregii Burm. (= Stilpnothorax loricata Pict.)” [handwritten on pink paper]; “Possible syntype of Stilpnothorax laricatus Pictet, 1888? Hollier 2010” [hand- written on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; the ends of the antennae are missing. According to OSF there is a specimen (referred to as the holotype) in the Iz1ko Museum, Cape Town (SAMC). Unlike the specimen now in the MHNG, the illus- tration accompanying the original description is of a specimen with the wings spread. Box DI. À junior synonym of Pomatonota dregii Burmeister, 1838. lunatum Pictet, 1888: 27-28, fig. 12 [Typophyllum]. Perou, Mayobambo. Unspecified number of 9%. One ? syntype with labels: “Mayobambo, Pérou, M. H. de Saussure” [hand- written on white paper]; “Typophyllum lunatum Pict.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Holotypus” [printed on red card]. Specimen set with wings spread, the hind wings being very tattered; most of both antennae and the left hind leg are lost. Images on OSF. Box E30. Typophyllum lunatum Pictet, 1888. macilentus Pictet & Saussure, 1891: 313-314, fig. 14 [Gryllacris]. Java. More than one © (variation in number of spines on femur mentioned). Seven © syntypes. À ® with labels: “Java” [printed on yellow paper]: “Gryllacris macilenta, ? P. et S.” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Musée de Genève, No 52” [number handwritten on printed white card]; “G. macilentus Pic. + Ss.” [hand- written on lined white paper]; “Lectotypus, Gryllacris macilentus, THH P. & S.” [hand- written by Hubbell on red card with “Lectotypus” printed]. Specimen set with right wings spread and left wings folded; most of both antennae, the left front leg and two tarsal segments of the left middle leg are missing. A © with labels: “Gryllacris maci- lenta, © P. et S.” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings spread. À ® with labels: “Java” [printed on yellow paper]; “Gryllacris macilenta, P. et S.” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Syntypus” [printed 374 J. HOLLIER on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; most of the right antenna and the enti- re left antenna are missing, as is the right front leg. A © with labels: “Java” [printed on yellow paper]; “Gryllacris macilenta, © P. et S.” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings spread; the right front leg is missing. À ? with labels: “Java” [printed on yellow paper]; “Gryllacris macilenta, ® P.et S.” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Musée de Genève, No 53” [number hand- written on printed white card]; “p. 81 — vic. thysanoiïdes, H aw [?]” [handwritten in pencil on white paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with right wings spread and left wings folded; most of both antennae are missing. À $ with la- bels: “Gryllacris macilenta, © P. et S.” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Musée de Genève, No 54” [number handwritten on printed white card]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings spread; most of both antennae is lost, and the head of a second pin projects from the pronotum. À ® with labels: “Gryllacris macilenta, ® P. et S.” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “G. macilentus” [handwritten on white paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with right wings spread and left wings folded; most of the antennae, the left front leg and the tarsi of the left hind leg are lost. The specimen is somewhat distorted, and seems to be teneral. The species name label in the insect box has the locality “Java” handwritten in the lower left hand corner. No formal designation of a lectotype appears to have been published by Hubbell. Box N3. Ascarogryllacris macilenta (Pictet & Saussure, 1891). maculifolia Pictet & Saussure, 1892: 21, fig. 19 [Aprion|]. Sumatra. Unspecified number of 9. Two © syntypes. À ® with labels: ‘“maculifolia” [handwritten on white paper]; “Aprion maculifo-, lius P. + Sauss.” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Morismus 9, oleifolius Fab., det. C. de Jong 1938” [determination handwritten on white printed card]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with left wings spread and right wings folded; the tarsi of the right middle leg are lost. A ® with labels: “Toerongie [?], Sumatra VI” [handwritten on white paper]; “Aprion maculifolius P. et Sss.” [hand- written in pencil on white paper]; “Aprion maculifolia P. & Sauss.” and “LECTOTYPE by C. de Jong” [handwritten, apart from printed word “TYPE”, on white card, the two labels being glued together]; “Morsimus %, oleifolius Fabr., det. C. de Jong 1938” [determination handwritten on printed white card]. Specimen set with wings folded; most of the left antenna is missing. No formal lectotype designation or placement of the species in synonymy appears to have been published by de Jong. Box E10. Paramorsimus maculifolius (Pictet & Saussure, 1892). mancus Pictet & Saussure, 1887: 342-343 [| Draconata|]. Colombie. Unspecified number of à. One d syntype with labels: “Colombie, 603 28” [country printed, numerals handwritten on white paper]; “Draconata mancus, à S. et P., Colombia Mr. H. d. Sss.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Draconata mancus Sss. et P.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Draconata mancus P. et S. 4 , Holotypus, C S Carbonell - 1966” [handwritten by Carbonell on red card]. Specimen has lost the tip of the left antenna and the last tarsal segment of the left hind leg. Images on OSF. Box ZA. Draconata mancus Pictet & Saussure, 1887. CATALOGUE OF A PICTET’S ORTHOPTERA 375 mandarinus Pictet & Saussure, 1892: 16 [Onomarcus]. Tonkin. Unspecified number of ?. No specimens found in the MHNG collections. De Jong (1938: 22) was unable to locate the types. À junior synonym of Onomarchus uninotatus (Serville, 1838). manillensis Pictet, 1888: 7-9 [Elbenia|. Philippines, Manille. Unspecified number of %. No specimens found in the MHNG collections. The whereabouts of the type is unknown. Elbenia manillensis Pictet, 1888. maori Pictet & Saussure, 1891: 296-297, fig. 2 [Deinacrida]. Nouvelle Zélande. Unspecified number of 4 and © (colour variations men- tioned). Thirty eight & and thirty nine © syntypes, almost all with labels: “Nov. Zealand, 619 41” [printed on bluish paper]; “Deinacrida maori Pict. et Sauss.” [hand- written on lilac paper]. Some specimens have the additional label: “’Weta [sex], Mt. Cook Hermitage, 3.iv.89. H. Suter” [handwritten on white paper]. A $ specimen has the additional labels: “maori P. et S.” [handwritten on white paper]; “Lectotypus, maori Pictet & Sauss., P. M. Johns vi1.90” [“lectoypus” printed, the rest handwritten by Johns on red card]. This specimen lacks the ends of the antennae and the tibia and tarsi of the left front leg. According to OSF there are further syntypes in the Staatliches Museum für Naturkunde (SMNS) in Stuttgart, the Martin Luther Universität in Halle (MLUH), the Museo Regionale di Scienze Naturali (MRSN) in Turin and the Zoologisch Museum, Universiteit Amsterdam (ZMAN). Johns (1997) did not formally designate a lectotype. Boxes O3 and Doubles 55. Hemideina maori (Pictet & Saussure, 1891). maori Pictet & Saussure, 1891: 300-301, fig. 4 [Onosandrus]. Nouvelle Zélande. Unspecified number of & and 9. Two d and two ® syntypes. À 4 with labels: “White horse hill” [handwritten on a strip of white paper]; “Nov. Zealand” [printed on blueish paper]; “Onosandrus maori Pict. et Sauss.” [handwritten on lilac paper]; “Lectotypus, should be designated, T H Hubbell” [“Lectotypus” printed, the rest handwritten by Hubbell on red card]; “Lectotypus, Onosandrus maori P. & S., P.M. Johns vi1.90” [“Lectotypus” printed, the rest handwritten by Johns on red card]. Specimen lacks the end of the left antenna, the entire right antenna and the tarsi of the right hind leg. À 4 with labels: “White horse hill” [handwritten on a strip of white paper], “Nov. Zealand” [printed on blueish pa- per]; “Onosandrus maori Pict. et Sauss.” [handwritten on lilac paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen lacks both antennae. À © with labels: “White horse hill” [handwritten on a strip of white paper]; “Nov. Zealand” [printed on blueish paper]; “Onosandrus maori” [handwritten on white paper]; “Onosandrus maori Pict. et Sauss.” [handwritten on lilac paper]; “Allotypoid, should be designated, T H Hubbell” [“allotypoid” printed, the rest handwritten by Hubbell on red card]. Specimen lacks 376 J. HOLLIER both antennae, the tibia and tarsi of the left front leg and the entire left middle leg. A ? with labels: “White horse hill” [handwritten on a strip of white paper]; “Nov. Zealand” [printed on blueish paper]; “Onosandrus maori Pict. et Sauss.” [handwritten on lilac paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen lacks most of the left antenna and the tarsi of the right hind leg. An immature © with the same data labels may also be considered a syntype. No formal lectotype designation was published by Johns (1997). Box OS. À junior synonym of Hemiandrus maculifrons (Walker, 1869). marmorata Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 452, 453-454, pl. 22, figs 10-11 [Mimetica]. Costa Rica, Caché (Rogers); Panama, Tolé (Champion). More than one 9. One © syntype with labels: “Cache, Costa Rica, H. Rogers” [printed on white card]; “17 (Vignon)” [handwritten on a square of white paper]; “Mimetica marmorata Sauss + Pict.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Holotypus” [printed on red card]; “A syntype!, Hollier, 2010” [handwritten on red paper]. Specimen set with wings spread, the right forewing 1s detached, glued to card and secured on a separate pin, the hind wings are rather ragged; the end of the left antenna, most of the right antenna and the last tarsal segment of the right middle leg are missing. The left hind leg 1s detached, but held in place amongst the other legs. There is at least one syntype in the BMNH according to their database. Images on OSF. Box E29b. A junior synonym of Mimetica incisa (Stal, 1875). martinicum Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 357, 359-60 [Microcentrum]. Antilles, Martinique. Unspecified number of 4 and 9. One d syntype with labels: “Martinique” [handwritten on white paper]; “Microcentrum martinica Sss. et P.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Geneva” [printed on a strip of yellow paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings spread; the ends of the antennae and the last tarsal segment of each of the middle and hind legs are missing. À ® specimen without a locality label has also been labelled as a syntype, but wing is considerably larger than the measurement given in the ori - ginal description so this is doubtful. Images on OSF. Box B35. Orophus martinicus (Saussure & Pictet, 1898). maya Saussure & Pictet, 1897: 334, 335, pl. 16, fig. 2 [Phrixa]. Mexico, Valladolid in Yucatan (Gaumer). Unspecified number of d. No specimens found in MHNG collections. There is a 4 from the type series, referred to as the holotype on OSF, in the BMNH (images on OSF). Phrixa maya Saussure & Pictet, 1897. mexicana Saussure & Pictet, 1897: 303-304, pl. 15, figs 2-3 [Argyrtes]. Mexico, Amula in Guerrero 6000 ft. (H. H. Smith). Unspecified number of 4. No specimens found in MHNG collections. The type material 1s in the BMNH according to their database. Argyrtes mexicana Saussure & Pictet, 1897. CATALOGUE OF A PICTET’S ORTHOPTERA 377 mexicana Saussure & Pictet, 1897: 323, 324, pl. 15, figs 28-29 [Ectemna]. Mexico, Teapa in Tabasco (H. H. Smith). Unspecified number of 4. No specimens found in MHNG collections. There is a & from the type series, referred to as the holotype on OSF, in the BMNH (images on OSF). Ectemna mexicana Saussure & Pictet, 1897. mexicanus Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 401, 402 [Thydrus]. Mexico, Chilpancingo in Guerrero, Atoyac in Vera Cruz, Teapa in Tabasco (H. H. Smith); Guatemala, San Gerénimo, Zapote (Champion); Panama, Bugaba (Champion). Unspecified number of 4 and 9. Four & and three ? syntypes. À G with labels: “Teapa. Tabasco. Feb. HHS ” [printed on white card]; “Thydrus mexicanus S et Pt” [handwritten on green paper]: “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; most of both an- tennae, the tibia and tarsi of the right front leg and the right middle leg are missing. A 4 with labels: “Teapa. Tabasco. Feb. H.H.S.” [printed on white card]; “Thydrus mexi- canus S et Pt” [handwritten on green paper]: “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; most of both antennae, the left front leg and the last tarsal segment of the left middle leg are lost. A SG with labels: “Atoyac, Vera Cruz. April HH.S.” [printed on white card]; “Thydrus mexicanus S et P” [handwritten on green paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; most of the left antenna and the entire right antenna are lost. A 4 with labels: “S. Geronimo, Guatemala. Champion” [printed on white card]; “Thydrus mexicanus S et Pt” [hand- written on green paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; most of both antennae, the right front leg, the left hind leg and two tarsal segments of the right hind leg are missing. The tarsi of the left middle leg are detached and stuck to the original pin by verdigris. The specimen 1s splitting where the pin has been inserted, the head and prothorax being depalced, while the abdomen 1s shrivelled. A % with labels: “Zapote, Guatemala, GC. Champion.” [printed on white card]: “Thydrus mexicanus S et Pt” [handwritten on green paper]: “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; most of both antennae is lost. A © with labels: “Chilpancingo, Guerrero, 4600 ft. June. H.H. Smith.” [printed on white card]: “Thydrus mexicanus S et Pt” [handwritten on green paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with right forewing spread and other wings folded: most of both antennae and the right hind leg are missing. A © with labels: “Chilpancingo, Guerrero, 4600 ft., June. H.H. Smith.” [printed on white card]; “Thydrus mexicanus S et Pt” [handwritten on green paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; most of both antennae and the right middle leg are lost. The left middle leg has been glued to the end of the left hind femur, the left hind tibia being flexed against the femur. The left forewing is detached and secured on the original pin. There are further syntypes are in the BMNH (images on OSF). Box F24. A junior synonym Of Phlugis chrysopa Bolivar, 1888. monoceros Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 376, 378 [Copiophora!]. Guatemala, Teleman in Vera Paz (Champion). Unspecified number of ©. No specimens found in MHNG collections. There 1s a £ from the type series, referred to as the holotype on OSF, in the BMNH (images on OSF). Copiphora monoceros Saussure & Pictet, 1898. 378 J. HOLLIER montana Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 405-406, pl. 20, fig. 1 [Championica]. Panama, Volcan de Chiriqui 2500 to 4000 ft. (Champion). Unspecified number of 6. No specimens found in MHNG collections. There is a 4 from the type series, referred to as the holotype on OSF, in the BMNH (images on OSF). Championica montana Saussure & Pictet, 1898. montanus Pictet & Saussure, 1891: 302-303, fig. 5 [Pharmacus]. Nouvelle Zélande, Mt. Cook, 7000 ft. (Maoring). Unspecified number of &. Fragments of the 4 holotype on two pins. One with several antennal fragments glued to white card with the label: “Fühler Fragmente der Heuschrecke von Umgeb. des Mt. Cook, über 7000” die im Sammelglas herumlagen” [handwritten on white paper]. One with several leg fragments glued to white card and the label: “Pharmacus montanus, d Sss. et Pict.” [handwritten on lilac paper]. There is a label: “Révision: Dr. A. M. Richards, 1969 Typus” [typewritten on white card, with “Typus” printed on red card and glued on] pinned into the insect box. Some of the specimens that were used for the redescription of this species by Richards (1972) are deposited in the MHNG collection in alcohol. Box O7. Pharmacus montanus Pictet & Saussure, 1891. mortuifolia Pictet, 1888: 30-32, fig.13 [Mimetica]. Amérique centrale. More than one & and more than one © (size variations mentioned). One ? syntype with labels: “Guatemala, M Oltram., 603 51” [printed on white card]; “Mimetica mortuifolia, © Pict.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Pictet 1888. pl. I, fig. 13, Elytra gauche vu par Dessous.” [handwritten on white paper]; “M. Picteti, Kirby 1906, n.n.° [handwritten on whitish paper]; “Type” [printed on pink card with printed margin]: “Holotypus” [printed on red card]: “Syntype! Description mentions both sexes. Hollier 2010” [handwritten on red paper]. Specimen set with wings spread: the head, right front leg, both middle legs and the left hind leg are missing. The right hind leg is detached and secured on a separate pin. The prothorax is hollowed out, and has a hole left by a previous pin. Two other © placed in the collection under this name, collected by Biolley, could also be syntypes. One has labels: “Mimetica, San Jose 1161m, P. Biolley, 320” [handwritten on white paper, the final number being in a different handwriting and circled]; “Mimetica mortuifolia Pictet” [handwritten on green paper]: “Syntypus? Hollier 2010” [handwritten on red paper]. This specimen is set with the left forewing spread and the other wings folded; it lacks the abdomen and all legs except right front leg which is detached and secured on the original pin. The other has labels: “Mimetica, La Laguna 1000m, Camono del Carrillo, 321, P. Biolley” [handwritten on white paper, the final number being in a different handwriting and circled]; “Mimetica mortuifolia Pict.” [handwritten on green paper]: “16 (Vignon)” [handwritten on white paper]: “Syntypus? Hollier 2010” [handwritten on red paper]. This specimen has the left wings spread but the right wings and most of the thorax are missing: the middle and hind legs are missing and the abdomen and part of the thorax are detached and secured on a CATALOGUE OF A PICTET’S ORTHOPTERA 379 separate pin. The collection also contains a & with no locality label. Although Vignon (1931: 153) considered the first of these specimens to be the holotype, the original description indicates that Pictet studied both sexes and more than one ©. Images on OSF. Box E29b. Mimetica moruifolia Pictet, 1888. mucronatus Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 442, 443, pl. 21, fig. 15 [Scopiorus]. Costa Rica, Azhar de cartago (Biolley). Unspecified number of à. One 4 syntype with labels: “19, Azahar de Cartago, 1500m, Museo nacional” [handwritten in pencil on whitish paper]; “COSTA RICA” [printed on green paper]; “Scopiorus mucronatus S. et P.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Holotypus” [printed on red card]. Specimen set with right wings spread and left wings roughly folded; most of both antennae and the left hind leg are lost. Images on OSF. Box E27. Scopiorinus mucronatus (Saussure & Pictet, 1898). mutabilis Pictet & Saussure, 1891: 307-309, fig. 10 [Gryllacris]. Java. More than one d and unspecified number of $ (& colour variation mentioned). Four & and five ® syntypes. A 4 with labels: “Java, Fruhstorfer” [handwritten on white paper]; “G. mutabilis, Pict et Ss.” [handwritten on lined white paper]; “Gryllacris mutabilis, 4 P. et S.” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; most of the left antenna 1s missing, the right has been repaired with glue. A 4 with labels: “Java, Fruhstorfer” [handwritten on white paper]; “Gryllacris mutabilis, 4 P. et S.”’ [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded. À 4 with labels: “Java, Fruhstorfer” [handwritten on white paper]; “Gryllacris mutabilis, 4 P. et S.” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with right wings spread and left wings folded; the ends of the antennae are missing. À d with labels: “Java” [printed on ruled white card]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; most of both antennae is missing. A © with labels: “Java, Fruhstorfer” [handwritten on white paper]; “Gryllacris mutabilis, 9 P. et S.” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with left wings spread and right wings folded; most of the left antenna and the entire right antenna are missing. À ® with labels: “Java, Fruhstorfer” [handwritten on white paper]; “G. mutabilis, Pic et Ss.” [handwritten on lined white paper]; “Gryllacris mutabilis, ? P. et S.” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with left wings spread and right wings folded; the ends of the antennae are missing. À ® with labels: “Java, Fruhstorfer” [handwritten on white paper]; “Gryllacris mutabilis, £ P. et S.” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with right wings spread and left wings folded; the ends of the antennae are missing. A © with labels: “Java, Fruhstorfer” [printed on white card]; “d.” [handwritten on a square of white paper]; “Gryllacris mutabilis, ? P. et S.” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded; the tarsi of the left hind leg are missing. À ® with labels: “Java, Fruhstorfer” [printed on white card]; “Gryllacris mutabilis, © P. et S.” [handwritten on 380 J. HOLLIER yellow paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with wings folded. A further 4 specimen with labels “Java, Mr Wickler, 23.11.76” and “Gryllacris mutabilis P. et S., = podocausta” [both handwritten on yellow paper] may also be a syntype, but the name label on this specimen appears to have been written after the others. Box NI. Caustogryllacris podocausta mutabilis (Pictet & Saussure, 1891). mutabilis pallidior Pictet & Saussure, 1891: 307-309 [Gryllacris]. Java. Unspecified. One 4 and one © syntype. À & with labels: “Java, Fruhstorfer” [handwritten on white paper]; “Gryllacris mutabilis, 4 P. et S.” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with left wings spread and right wings folded; the ends of the antennae are missing. A ® with labels: “Java, Fruhstorfer” [handwritten on white paper]; “Gryllacris mutabilis, © P.et S.” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with left wings spread and right wings folded: the ends of the antennae are missing. Box N1. Caustogryllacris podocausta pallidior (Pictet & Saussure, 1891). myrtifolium Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 357, 359 [Microcentrum]. Brazil (Mus. Genavense). Unspecified number of & and 9. One 4 and one © syntype. À 4 with labels: “Brésil, 623. 19.” [handwritten on white paper]; “Microcentrum myrtifolia Sss.” [handwritten on green paper]: “Lectotypus, Microcentrum myrtifolium Ss., should be des.” [handwritten on red card with “Lectotypus” printed]. Specimen set with wings spread; the antennae, the tarsi of the right front leg, two tarsal segments of the left front leg, the right middle leg, the last tarsal segment of the left middle leg and two tarsal segments of both hind legs are lost. A © with labels: “Brésil, 623” [handwritten on white paper]; “Microcentrum myrtifolia Sss.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Geneva” [printed on a strip of yellow paper]; “Allotypoid, Microcentrum myrtifolium Ss., should be designated” [handwritten on red card with “Allotypoid” printed]. Specimen set with wings spread, the hind wings being rather ragged,; the ends of both antennae, two tarsal segments of the left hind leg and the last tarsal segment of the right hind leg are missing. Images on OSF. Box B36. Microcentrum myrtifolium Saussure & Pictet, 1898. nasicornis Pictet, 1888: 54-55, fig. 26 [Macroxiphus]. Java. Unspecified number of ©. | One ® syntype with labels: “Java, f5-* [handwritten on white paper]; “19” [handwritten on a square of white paper]; “nasicornis, ® Sss.” [handwritten on white paper]; “Macroxiphus sumatranus de Haan” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Holotype of Macroxiphus nasicornis PICTET 1888, det. S. Ingrisch, 1998” [printed on white card]. Specimen set with wings spread. The lectotype does not seem to have been formally designated. Images on OSF. Box F17. Macroxiphus nasicornis Pictet, 1888. nigrifrons Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 410-411 [Lichenochrus]. Mexico, Orizaba (Mus. Genavense). One 4 nymph. CATALOGUE OF A PICTET’S ORTHOPTERA 381 Holotype & with labels: “Orizaba, Sumichrast” [handwritten on white paper]; “Lichenochrus nigrifrons Sauss et P.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Holotypus” [printed on red card]. Immature specimen; most of both antennae and the tarsi of the left middle and hind legs are missing. The right front leg is detatched and secured through the femur on the original pin. Box El6. A junior synonym of Gongrocnemis munda Brunner von Wattenwyl, 1895. oceanica Pictet & Saussure, 1892: 20, fig. 12 [Tympanoptera]. Insulae Fidgii. Unspecified number of 4. One & syntype with labels: ‘“oceanica” [handwritten on white paper]; “ Aprion oceanicus P. & Sauss.” [handwritten on lilac paper]; “Holotypus” [printed on red card]. The species name label in the insect box has the locality “Ins. Viti” handwritten in the lower left corner. Specimen set with right wings spread and left wings folded; the antennae, left hind leg and the tarsi of the right hind leg are lost. The right middle leg is detached and glued to a piece of card on the original pin. Images on OSF. Box E&8. Acauloplacella oceanica (Pictet & Saussure, 1892). ochracea Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 450, pl. 22, fig. 2 [Tanusia]. Guatemala, San Juan in Vera Paz (Champion). Unspecified number of 4. No specimens found in MHNG collections. There is a 4 from the type series, referred to as the holotype on OSF, in the BMNH (images on OSF). Anommatoptera ochracea (Saussure & Pictet, 1898). ocularis Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 354-355 [Turpilia]. Mexico, Teapa in Tabasco (H. H. Smith). Unspecified number of 4. No specimens found in MHNG collections. There is a & from the type series, referred to as the holotype on OSF, in the BMNH (images on OSF). Montezumina ocularis (Saussure & Pictet, 1898). oculatum Pictet & Saussure, 1892: 21 [Aprion]. Ceylon (AI. Humbert). Unspecified number of & and ©. One & and one © syntype. À & with labels: “Trincom., Ceylan” [printed on white paper]; “oculatum” [handwritten on white paper]; “Aprion oculatus P. + Sauss.” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Aprion oculatum P. & Sauss.” and “LECTOTYPE by C. de Jong” [handwritten, apart from printed word “TYPE”, on white card, the two labels being glued together]; “Morsimus % [sic], oleifolius Fabr., det. C. de Jong 1938” [determination handwritten on printed white card]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with left wings spread and right wings folded; both antennae and all legs except the right front leg are missing. A © with labels: “Ceylan, Mr. H. Saussure” [handwritten on whitepaper]; “Aprion oculatum P. & Ss., Ceylan” [handwritten on white paper]; “Aprion oculatus P. + Sauss.” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Aprion oculatum P. & Sauss.” and “LECTOTYPE by C. de Jong” [handwritten, apart from printed word “TYPE”, on white card, the two labels being glued together]; “Morsimus ? ,oleifolius Fabr., det. C. de Jong 1938” [determination handwritten on printed white card]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen set with left wings spread and right 382 J. HOLLIER wings folded; the antennae and right front leg are lost, the left hind leg lacks the tarsi. No formal lectotype designation appears to have been published by de Jong. Images on OSF. Box ElI0. À junior synonym of Paramorsimus oleifolius (Fabricius, 1793). oridiops Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 354, 355 [Turpilia]. Mexico, Acapulco in Guerrero (H. H. Smith). Unspecified number of à. No specimens found in MHNG collections. There is a 4 from the type series, referred to as the holotype on OSF, in the BMNH (images on OSF). Montezumina oridiops (Saussure & Pictet, 1898). ovalifolia Saussure & Pictet, 1898: 368, 369 [Srilpnochlora]. Brazil (Mus. Genavense). Unspecified number of ©. Holotype ® with labels: “Brésil, 623. 19.” [handwritten on white card]; “Stilpnochlora ovalifolia, ? Sauss.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Identified as Type, Emsley 1969” [handwritten in pencil on white card]; “HoloTYPE ©, Stilpnochlora ovalifolia., Saussure & Pictet 1898.” [handwritten on red card with “TYPE” printed]. Specimen set with wings folded; the antennae, the tarsi of the right front leg and left middle leg, two tarsal segments of the right middle leg and two last tarsal segments of the left hind leg are lost. Images on OSF. Box B25. Stilpnochlora ovalifolia Saussure & Pictet, 1898. parvispina Pictet & Saussure, 1887: 344-345 [Elaeochlora]. Brésil. One 4 (hind legs do not belong to specimen). Holotype 4 with labels: “Brasil” [handwritten on a strip of white paper], “CSC 1135” [handwritten by Carbonell on a strip of white card]; “Elaeochlora parvispina Sss. et Pict.” [handwritten on green paper]; “Elaeochlora parvispina P.-S., Holotypus, CS Carbonell - 1966” [handwritten by Carbonell on red card]. Specimen lacks both antennae, the claw of the right front leg, the left middle leg, the tarsi of the right middle leg and both hind legs. À micro-tube containing dissected parts and a label “CSC 11357 is secured on the original pin. À pair of hind legs is secured on a separate pin with the label “These hind legs were pinned together with the type of Elaeochlora parvispina P.-S., and are the ones described by the authors as belonging to the insect. They are in- stead from a specimen of the genus Phaeoparia, probably Ph. lineaalba Linn. € S Carbonell, 1966.” Images on OSF. Box Z4. À junior synonym of Agriacris auripennis (Walker, 1870). patagona Pictet & Saussure, 1887: 355-356 [Clarazella]. République Argentine, Bahia Blanca sur les confins de la Patagonie (Claraz). Unspecified number of ©. One ? syntype with labels: “Bahia Blanca, envoi G. Claraz” [handwritten on white paper]; “Zoniopoda patagona Pict. et Sauss.” [handwritten on green paper]; “24 Gen. nov. divisionis II Stäl vic. Zoniopoda Stà I. (je posside la même genre mais l’esp. diff.) Brunn.” [handwritten on white paper]; “Clarazella patagona P.S., Holotypus, C S Carbonell - 1966” [handwritten by Carbonell on red card]. Specimen set with wings CATALOGUE OF A PICTET’S ORTHOPTERA 383 spread; both antennae and the tarsi of both hind legs are missing. Images on OSF. Box 29. Clarazella patagona Pictet & Saussure, 1887. peringueyi Pictet, 1888: 74-75, fig. 30 [Hemihetrodes|]. Afrique méridionale (Peringuey). Unspecifed number of %. Two $ syntypes. À ? with labels: “Hemihetrodes peringueyi, $ Pict., Cap.” [handwritten on white paper]; “620 74 Transvaal, Africa mer. Mr. Péringuey” [hand- written on ruled white card]; “Hemihetrodes peringuey1i Pictet” [handwritten on pink paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen lacks most of both antennae, the tibia and tarsi of the right front leg, the right middle leg and the last tarsal segment of the left middle and hind legs. À © with labels: “TRANSVAAL, Peringuey” [locality printed and name handwritten on white paper]; “620 74 Transvaal, Africa mer. Mr. Péringuey” [handwritten on ruled white card]; “Hemihetrodes peringueyi Pictet” [handwritten on pink paper]; “Syntypus” [printed on red paper]. Specimen lacks most of the right antenna and all of the left antenna, the last tarsal segment of the right front and left middle legs, two tarsal segments of the right middle and left hind legs, and the tarsi of the right hind leg. Box MI. A junior synonym of Hemihetrodes bachmanni (Karsch, 1887). peringueyi Pictet, 1888: 62-63, figs 16 & 21 [Thoracistus]. Transvaal (Peringuey). Unspecified number of & and 9. Lectotype 4 (designated by Rentz, 1988: 258) with labels: “Transvaal, Leyenb. Dist.” [printed on white card]; “Thoracistus peringuey1 Pict.” [handwritten on pink paper]; “LECTOTYPE, Thoracistus peringueyi Pictet, designated by Rentz 19857 [printed on white card coloured pink]. Specimen has lost both antennae and the left middle leg. À micro-tube containing dissected parts 1s secured on a separate pin with the label “LECTOTYPE, Thoracistus peringuey1 Pictet” [printed on white coloured pink], while a third pin has two card mounted dissected parts and the labels ““LEC- TOTYPE, Thoracistus peringuey1 Pictet, designated by Rentz 1985” [printed on white card coloured pink], “SEM # 13401-03, 13300, Det. D.C.F. Rentz 1985” [handwritten on white card with “Det. D.C.F. Rentz 19” printed] and “SCANNING ELECTRON PHOTOS MADE FROM THIS SPECIMEN” [printed on white card]. À © paralecto - type 1s also present. Images on OSEF. Box K10. Thoristicus peringueyi Pictet, 1888. personata Pictet, 1888: 17-18, fig. 6 [Cocconotus]. Locality unknown. Unspecified number of ®. One © syntype with labels: “Cocconotus personata Pict.” [handwritten on yellow paper]; “Genre Cocconotus St.” [handwritten on white card with “Genre” printed and “Paradryma” handwritten on the other side]; “Holotypus” [printed on red card]. The species name label in the insect box has the locality “?” handwritten in the lower left corner. The specimen has lost most of the right antenna and the left middle leg. The abdomen has shrunk and is somewhat distorted. The locality is given as “?” in the description, but the yellow name label