Skip to main content
NCBI home page
ZooKeys logoLink to ZooKeys
. 2013 Jul 31;(320):1–28. doi: 10.3897/zookeys.320.4565

Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n., a new species from the Chaetopteryx rugulosa group from Croatia (Insecta, Trichoptera, Limnephilidae) with molecular, taxonomic and ecological notes on the group

Mladen Kučinić 1, Ildikó Szivák 2, Steffen U Pauls 3, Miklós Bálint 3, Antun Delić 4, Ivan Vučković 5
PMCID: PMC3744148  PMID: 23950680

Abstract Abstract

We describe a new autumnal caddisfly species Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n. from 8 localities in the Banovina region of Croatia. We also present molecular, taxonomic and ecological notes (emergence, sex ratio and seasonal dynamics) on the new species and discuss the distribution of Chaetopteryx species in general and the Chaetopteryx rugulosa group in particular. Based on Bayesian phylogenetic analysis Chaetopteryx rugulosa schmidi was separated from the clade containing the other subspecies of Chaetopteryx rugulosa. Thus the subspecies Chaetopteryx rugulosa schmidi is here raised to species level, Chaetopteryx schmidi, as it was described originally. We further present distribution data on rare species in the genus Chaetopteryx in Croatia.

Keywords: Chaetopteryx, aquatic insects, new species, distribution, Croatia

Introduction

The genus Chaetopteryx belongs to a small number of caddisfly genera with adults that are adapted to low air temperatures and emerge in autumn or winter, mostly from October-January. The larvae of most species live in small headwater streams and springs. This genus is distributed in Europe and parts of Asia (e.g., Asia Minor, Iran) (Malicky 2004, Lodovici and Valle 2007, Sipahiler 2010). In Europe, Chaetopteryx comprises 25 species (Malicky 2004, Lodovici and Valle 2007, Oláh 2011a, 2011b). A particularly interesting species group in the genus is the Chaetopteryx rugulosa group. This radiation consists of 6 species and 3 subspecies: Chaetopteryx rugulosa rugulosa Kolenati, 1848; Chaetopteryx rugulosa mecsekensis Nógrádi, 1986; Chaetopteryx rugulosa noricum Malicky, 1976; Chaetopteryx rugulosa schmidi Botosaneanu, 1957; Chaetopteryx clara McLachlan, 1876; Chaetopteryx euganea Moretti & Malicky, 1986; Chaetopteryx goricensis Malicky & Krušnik, 1986; Chaetopteryx irenae Krušnik & Malicky, 1986 and Chaetopteryx marinkovicae Malicky and Krušnik, 1988 (Malicky 2004).

Four years ago we started systematically collecting adults of the genus Chaetopteryx, including members of the Chaetopteryx rugulosa group in Croatia. This paper has 2 main objectives, first to present and describe a new species from the Chaetopteryx rugulosa group found in Croatia, and second to present new molecular, taxonomic, distributional, and ecological information on the Chaetopteryx rugulosa group.

Material and methods

Fieldwork. We collected specimens of Chaetopteryx including Chaetopteryx rugulosa group species in the continental (central Croatia, Banovina, Hrvatsko zagorje, Kordun, Slavonia), mountain (Gorski kotar, Lika regions) and Mediterranean (Istria and Dalmatia) regions of Croatia. Collecting methods included the use of entomological nets and handpicking specimens from walls of small buildings or wells, or from the riparian vegetation near springs and headwater streams. In one spring (Pecki spring, Banovina region) (Table 1) we installed 5 pyramid-type emergence traps in 2010 and 2011 to investigate the emergence dynamics of caddisflies (Figure 1). This investigation is part of a multi-year study on emergence dynamics of aquatic insects in springs and other aquatic habitats in Croatia and the Dinaric karst of the Balkan Peninsula (Bosnia and Herzegovina) (Kučinić 2002, Previšić et al. 2007, Ivković et al. 2011, Semnički et al. 2011, 2012, M. Kučinić unpublished data). The emergence trapping methodology was presented in detail by Kučinić (2002) and Previšić et al. (2007).

Table 1.

Localities where Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n., was collected, including habitat type, elevation (m a.s.l.), and geographic coordinates.

Location Character of location Altitude (m) Geographic coordinates
Bijele stijene wellspring and stream 144 45°25'23"N, 16°13'23"E
Gore wellspring 165 45°24'21"N, 16°14'22"E
Hrvatski Čuntić stream 159 45°21'28"N, 16°17'04"E
Marića točak wellspring 163 45°21'29"N, 16°17'03"E
Pašino vrelo spring 185 45°17'16"N, 16°25'13"E
Pecki spring 161 45°23'50"N, 16°14'40"E
Slabinja wellspring 104 45°13'05"N, 16°37'52"E
Varoški bunar wellspring 130 45°13'34"N, 16°33'12"E
Open in a new tab

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Open in a new tab

Type locality of Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n., showing pyramid-type emergence traps, Pecki spring, Croatia.

In pyramid-type emergence traps caddisflies were collected in 1% formaldehyde and thereafter stored in 80% alcohol. All other collected specimens were stored directly in 80% or 96% alcohol. All specimens were deposited in the collections of the first and second authors. The holotype is deposited in the Croatian Natural History Museum in Zagreb.

Laboratory work. For the phylogenetic analysis we compiled mtCOI DNA sequence data for 103 specimens from the Chaetopteryx rugulosa group (Table 2). We also sequenced several outgroup taxa of varying putative phylogenetic depths including congeneric species (e.g., Chaetopteryx gessneri McLachlan, 1876, Chaetopteryx fusca Brauer, 1857, Chaetopteryx major McLachalan, 1876, Chaetopteryx villosa (Fabricius, 1798)), other members of the tribe Chaetopterygini (Chaetopterygopsis maclachlani (Stein, 1874)), other members of the subfamily Limnephilinae (Limnephilus centralis Curtis, 1834), and members of a different subfamily of Limnephilidae (e.g. Metanoea rhaetica Schmid, 1955, Drusus alpinus (Meyer-Dür, 1875), Drusus rectus McLachlan, 1868).

Table 2.

List of species included in the DNA analysis (mtCOI sequences). Localities are given with country code, locality/specimen data, and collection date.

Species name Locality Specimen ID Accession number Collectors/Source
Chaetopteryx aproka ROU, Ignis Mts., springs near Desesti-Statiunea Izvoare, 21.10.2010 CAxJC0101 HE858253 Ecsedi, Olah & Szivak
Chaetopteryx aproka ROU, Ignis Mts., springs near Desesti-Statiunea Izvoare, 21.10.2010 CAxJC0102 HE858254 Ecsedi, Olah & Szivak
Chaetopteryx aproka ROU, Ignis Mts., springs near Desesti-Statiunea Izvoare, 21.10.2010 CAxJC0103 HE858255 Ecsedi, Olah & Szivak
Chaetopteryx bosniaca BIH, Livno, Sturba river, 08.11.2009 CBxED0101 Kučinić, Delić & Mihoci
Chaetopteryx bosniaca BIH, Livno, Sturba river, 08.11.2009 CBxED0102 Kučinić, Delić & Mihoci
Chaetopteryx bosniaca BIH, Livno, Sturba river, 08.11.2009 CBxED0103 Kučinić, Delić & Mihoci
Chaetopteryx bosniaca BIH, Livno, Sturba river, 08.11.2009 CBxED0104 Kučinić, Delić & Mihoci
Chaetopteryx bosniaca BIH, Livno, Sturba river, 08.11.2009 CBxED0105 Kučinić, Delić & Mihoci
Chaetopteryx clara SLO, Ljubljana, Mostec park, Przanec stream, 06.12.2009 CCxEA0101 JF891164 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx clara SLO, Ljubljana, Mostec park, Przanec stream, 06.12.2009 CCxEA0102 JF891165 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx clara SLO, Ljubljana, Mostec park, Przanec stream, 06.12.2009 CCxEA0103 JF891166 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx clara SLO, Ljubljana, Mostec park, Przanec stream, 06.12.2009 CCxEA0104 JF891167 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx clara SLO, Ljubljana, Mostec park, Przanec stream, 06.12.2009 CCxEA0105 JF891168 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx goricensis SLO, spring of Lokavscek stream near Predmeja, 06.12.2009 CGREG0101 JF891159 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx goricensis SLO, spring of Lokavscek stream near Predmeja, 06.12.2009 CGREG0102 JF891160 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx goricensis SLO, spring of Lokavscek stream near Predmeja, 06.12.2009 CGREG0103 JF891161 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx goricensis SLO, spring of Lokavscek stream near Predmeja, 06.12.2009 CGREG0104 JF891162 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx goricensis SLO, spring of Lokavscek stream near Predmeja, 06.12.2009 CGREG0105 JF891163 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx goricensis SLO, spring near Čekovnik (Hlevise), 05.12.2009 CGREG0201 JF891154 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx goricensis SLO, spring near Čekovnik (Blask), 05.12.2009 CGREG0301 JF891155 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx goricensis SLO, spring near Čekovnik (Blask), 05.12.2009 CGREG0302 JF891156 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx goricensis SLO, spring near Čekovnik (Blask), 05.12.2009 CGREG0303 JF891157 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx goricensis SLO, spring near Čekovnik (Blask), 05.12.2009 CGREG0304 JF891158 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx irenae SLO, Susica stream near Misliče, 06.12.2009 CIxEI0101 JF891169 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx irenae SLO, Susica stream near Misliče, 06.12.2009 CIxEI0102 JF891170 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx irenae SLO, Misliče, Susica stream, 06.12.2009 CIxEI0103 JF891171 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx irenae SLO, Misliče, Susica stream, 06.12.2009 CIxEI0104 JF891172 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx irenae SLO, Misliče, Susica stream, 06.12.2009 CIxEI0105 JF891173 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx major HUN, Mecsek Mts., Vár valley, Pásztor spring 05.11.2010 CMJKB0101 JF891233 Olah, Szivak & Uherkovich
Chaetopteryx major HUN, Mecsek Mts., Vár valley, Pásztor spring 05.11.2010 CMJKB0102 HE858256 Olah, Szivak & Uherkovich
Chaetopteryx major HUN, Mecsek Mts., Vár valley, Pásztor spring 05.11.2010 CMJKB0103 HE858257 Olah, Szivak & Uherkovich
Chaetopteryx major HUN, Mecsek Mts., Vár valley, Pásztor spring 05.11.2010 CMJKB0104 HE858258 Olah, Szivak & Uherkovich
Chaetopteryx major AUT, valley Hottmannsgraben, Unteraspang (Aspang Markt) 19.11.2009 CMJDJ0101 JF891234 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx marinkovicae CRO, Kompanj, 14.11.2009 CMREI0101 JF891174 Kučinić & Vučković
Chaetopteryx marinkovicae CRO, Kompanj, 14.11.2009 CMREI0102 JF891175 Kučinić & Vučković
Chaetopteryx marinkovicae CRO, Kompanj, 14.11.2009 CMREI0103 JF891176 Kučinić & Vučković
Chaetopteryx marinkovicae CRO, Kompanj, 14.11.2009 CMREI0104 JF891177 Kučinić & Vučković
Chaetopteryx marinkovicae CRO, Kompanj, 14.11.2009 CMREI0105 JF891178 Kučinić & Vučković
Chaetopteryx rugulosa mecsekensis HUN, Mecsek Mts., Nagy-Mély valley, Kánya spring, 14.11.2009 CRMKB0101 JF891179 Szivak
Chaetopteryx rugulosa mecsekensis HUN, Mecsek Mts., Vár valley, Pásztor spring, 06.11.2009 CRMKB0201 JF891180 Szivak & Uherkovich
Chaetopteryx rugulosa mecsekensis HUN, Mecsek Mts., Melegmányi valley, Mésztufa spring, 14.11.2009 CRMKB0301 JF891203 Szivak
Chaetopteryx rugulosa mecsekensis HUN, Mecsek Mts., Vár valley, Iharos spring, 06.11.2009 CRMKB0401 JF891204 Szivak
Chaetopteryx rugulosa noricum AUT, Saualpe, Klieningbach stream near Kliening, 21.11.2009 CRNDI0101 JF891187 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx rugulosa noricum AUT, Saualpe, springs of the Klippitzbach stream near Klippitztörl 21.11.2009 CRNDI0201 JF891188 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx rugulosa noricum AUT, Saualpe, springs of the Klippitzbach stream near Klippitztörl 21.11.2009 CRNDI0202 JF891189 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx rugulosa noricum AUT, Saualpe, springs of the Klippitzbach stream near Klippitztörl 21.11.2009 CRNDI0203 JF891219 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx rugulosa noricum AUT, Saualpe, springs of the Klippitzbach stream near Klippitztörl 21.11.2009 CRNDI0204 JF891220 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx rugulosa noricum AUT, Saulape, spring of the Löllingbach stream near Stranach, 21.11.2009 CRNDI0301 JF891190 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx rugulosa noricum AUT, Saulape, spring of the Löllingbach stream near Stranach, 21.11.2009 CRNDI0302 JF891191 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx rugulosa noricum AUT, Saulape, spring of the Löllingbach stream near Stranach, 21.11.2009 CRNDI0303 JF891217 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx rugulosa noricum AUT, Saulape, spring of the Löllingbach stream near Stranach, 21.11.2009 CRNDI0304 JF891218 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx rugulosa rugulosa HUN, Kőszegi Mts., Hörmann spring near Velem, 18.11.2009 CRRDJ0101 Szivak
Chaetopteryx rugulosa rugulosa HUN, Kőszegi Mts., Hörmann spring near Velem, 18.11.2009 CRRDJ0102 Szivak
Chaetopteryx rugulosa rugulosa AUT, Mitterneuwald, Hermann spring, 19.11.2009 CRRDJ0201 JF891184 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx rugulosa rugulosa AUT, Sommeralm, Mixnitzbach stream, 20.11.2009 CRRDJ0301 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx rugulosa rugulosa AUT, Sommeralm, Mixnitzbach stream, 20.11.2009 CRRDJ0302 JF891214 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx rugulosa rugulosa AUT, Hochegg bei Grimmenstein, spring and its outlet, 19.11.2009 CRRDJ0401 JF891205 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx rugulosa rugulosa AUT, Hochegg bei Grimmenstein, spring and its outlet, 19.11.2009 CRRDJ0402 JF891206 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx rugulosa rugulosa AUT, Hochegg bei Grimmenstein, spring and its outlet, 19.11.2009 CRRDJ0403 JF891207 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx rugulosa rugulosa AUT, Ausserneuwald, spring, 19.11.2009 CRRDJ0501 JF891208 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx rugulosa rugulosa AUT, Ausserneuwald, spring, 19.11.2009 CRRDJ0502 JF891209 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx rugulosa rugulosa AUT, Plenzengreith, upper reach of stream Schöcklbach, 20.11.2009 CRRDJ0601 JF891230 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx rugulosa rugulosa AUT, Plenzengreith, upper reach of stream Schöcklbach, 20.11.2009 CRRDJ0602 JF891231 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx rugulosa rugulosa AUT, Plenzengreith, upper reach of stream Schöcklbach, 20.11.2009 CRRDJ0603 JF891232 Dery & Szivak
Chaetopteryx rugulosa rugulosa SLO, Pohorje Mts., Osankarica (Lukanja), 10.11.2008 CRRDG0101 JF891186 Popijač
Chaetopteryx rugulosa rugulosa SLO, Pohorje Mts., Osankarica (Lukanja), 10.11.2008 CRRDG0102 JF891215 Popijač
Chaetopteryx rugulosa rugulosa SLO, Pohorje Mts., Osankarica (Lukanja), 10.11.2008 CRRDG0103 JF891216 Popijač
Chaetopteryx rugulosa rugulosa CRO, Medvednica Mts., Mrzlak spring near Sljeme, 18.11.2006 CRREE0101 JF891185 Popijač
Chaetopteryx rugulosa rugulosa CRO, Medvednica Mts., Mrzlak spring near Sljeme, 18.11.2006 CRREE0102 JF891213 Popijač
Chaetopteryx rugulosa rugulosa CRO, Medvednica Mts., Kraljičin Zdenac spring, Kraljičin Zdenac, 19.11.2009 CRREE0201 JF891210 Kučinić & Vučković
Chaetopteryx rugulosa rugulosa CRO, Medvednica Mts., Bliznec stream, Podsljeme (Pilana), 09.12.2009 CRREE0301 JF891211 Kučinić & Vučković
Chaetopteryx rugulosa rugulosa CRO, Žumberak Mts., Slapnica stream, Ribička kuća, 28.10.2009 CRREF0101 JF891212 Kučinić & Vučković
Chaetopteryx schmidi ROU, spring brook in Cerna valley near Tatu, 13.11.2010 CRSJF0101 HE858259 Ecsedi & Szivak
Chaetopteryx schmidi ROU, spring brook in Cerna valley near Tatu, 13.11.2010 CRSJF0102 HE858260 Ecsedi & Szivak
Chaetopteryx schmidi ROU, spring brook in Cerna valley near Tatu, 13.11.2010 CRSJF0103 HE858261 Ecsedi & Szivak
Chaetopteryx schmidi SRB, Derdap Mts., stream valley N of Golubinje, 13.10.2006 CRSGE0101 JF891182 Danyi, Kontschan & Muranyi
Chaetopteryx schmidi SRB, Derdap Mts., stream valley N of Golubinje, 13.10.2006 CRSGE0102 JF891201 Danyi, Kontschan & Muranyi
Chaetopteryx schmidi SRB, Derdap Mts.,Grgeci spring, Donji Milankovac, 13.10.2006 CRSGE0201 JF891183 Danyi, Kontschan & Muranyi
Chaetopteryx schmidi SRB, Derdap Mts.,Grgeci spring, Donji Milankovac, 13.10.2006 CRSGE0203 JF891202 Danyi, Kontschan & Muranyi
Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n. CRO, Kriz spring near Petrinja, 08.12.2009 CxxEC0101 JF891192 Kučinić, Delić & Bučar
Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n. CRO, Kriz spring near Petrinja, 07.11.2009 CxxEC0102 JF891222 Kučinić, Delić & Bučar
Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n. CRO, Kriz spring near Petrinja, 07.11.2009 CxxEC0103 JF891223 Kučinić, Delić & Bučar
Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n. CRO, Kriz spring near Petrinja, 04.11.2009 CxxEC0104 JF891224 Bučar
Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n. CRO, Kriz spring near Petrinja, 08.12.2009 CxxEC0105 JF891225 Kučinić, Delić, Bučar & Vučković
Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n. CRO, Hrvatski Cuntic, Marića točak spring, 22.11.2009 CxxEC0201 JF891193 Kučinić, Delić & Bučar
Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n. CRO, Hrvatski Cuntic, Marića točak spring, 21.11.2009 CxxEC0202 JF891221 Kučinić, Delić & Bučar
Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n. CRO, Hrvatska Kostajnica, Varoški bunar spring, 06.12.2009 CxxEC0301 Kučinić, Delić & Bučar
Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n. CRO, Šuplji Kamen, Slabinja spring, 29.11.2009 CxxEC0401 JF891194 Kučinić, Delić & Bučar
Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n. CRO, Banovina region, Pecki spring, 15.12.2009 CxxEC0501 JF891195 Kučinić, Delić & Bučar
Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n. CRO, Banovina region, Pecki spring, 21.11.2009 CxxEC0502 JF891228 Kučinić, Delić & Bučar
Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n. CRO, Banovina region, Pecki spring, 21.11.2009 CxxEC0503 JF891229 Kučinić, Delić & Bučar
Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n. CRO, Banovina region, Gora spring, 10.12.2009 CxxEC0601 JF891226 Bučar
Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n. CRO, Mečenčani, Pašino vrelo, 29.11.2009 CxxEC0701 JF891227 Kučinić, Delić & Bučar
Chaetopterygopsis maclachlani AUT, Lower Austria, Rohrwiesteich, 20.10.2004 08HMCAD-331* HMTRI331-09* Malicky
Chaetopteryx fusca AUT, Lower Austria, Rohrwiesteich, 20.10.2004 08HMCAD-333* HMTRI333-09* Malicky
Chaetopteryx gessneri ITA, Umbria, Perugia, Fium Nera above Visso,11.12.2005 07HMCAD-0177* HMCAD177-08* Malicky
Chaetopteryx moretti ITA, Belluno, Val Canzoi, Veneto, 31.10.2003 HM09Cm7* HMTRI421-09* Malicky
Chaetopteryx villosa AUT, Lower Austria, Sarleinsbach, 27.06.2005 07HMCAD-0134* HMCAD134-08* Malicky
Drusus alpinus IT, Valprato Soana, Ronchietto, 10.07.2004 HM09Dalp8* HMTRI456-09* Delmaistro
Drusus discolor SK, Lower Tatra, Stream above Partizanska L'upča, 09.06.2008 ESCAD909-17* KKCAD497-09* Bonada
Drusus rectus ES, Camprodon/Setcases Alta Val de Ter, 27.07.2004 HM09Drec8* HMTRI423-09* Aistleitner
Metanoea rhaetica AUT, Carinthia, Valentinbach, Plockenstrasse, 08.07.2007 08HMCAD-020* HMTRI020-08* Malicky
Limnephilus centralis NORWAY NHRS:FI9 FN601020 Malm & Johanson 2011
Open in a new tab

Systematic presentation follows Morse (2013). The terminology and morphological assessment of the Chaetopteryx rugulosa group follows Malicky et al. (1986), Malicky and Krušnik (1988), Urbanič and Krušnik (2003), Botosaneanu and Giudicelli (2004), Holzenthal et al. (2007), Oláh (2011a), and Vučković et al. (2011). Comparative assessments of morphological features of Chaetopteryx bucari were based on the other specimens collected in Croatia (Chaetopteryx rugulosa rugulosa, Chaetopteryx marinkovicae) or based on literature (e.g., Chaetopteryx rugulosa schmidi, Chaetopteryx rugulosa mecsekensis, Malicky et al. 1986, Malicky 2004). Morphological features of genitalia of Chaetopteryx bucari were analysed from 84 specimens (40 males and 44 females).

The mitochondrial COI barcodes were generated at the Canadian Centre for DNA Barcoding, University of Guelph, Canada. Standard barcoding protocols for DNA extraction (Ivanova et al. 2006), PCR amplification and COI sequencing (Hajibabaei et al. 2005, de Waard et al. 2008) were used. Full-length COI-5P DNA barcodes were amplified using C_LepFolF/C_LepFolR (Folmer et al. 1994, Hajibabaei et al. 2006) and LCO1490/HCO2198 (Folmer et al. 1994) primer sets. COI barcodes and detailed specimen information can be found in the Barcode of Life Data Systems (BOLD; http://www.boldsystems.org/) (Ratnasingham and Hebert 2007) within the project “Chaetopteryx of Europe.” Unpublished COI barcodes of additional Chaetopteryx outgroups were provided by Karl Kjer, Rutgers University, USA (Table 2). The sequence of Limnephilus centralis Curtis, 1834 was taken from Malm and Johanson (2011) (Table 2).

Phylogenetic analysis. Sequences were edited manually and aligned using the program Geneious 5.4 (Drummond et al. 2011). The final alignment was 617 base pairs (bp) long. Bayesian phylogenetic analyses were performed using the Markov chain Monte Carlo method (B/MCMC) using MrBayes 3.2 (Buckley et al. 2002, Ronquist and Huelsenbeck 2003). We selected the best-fitting models of DNA substitution using Akaike information criterion (AIC) implemented in jModelTest 0.1.1 (Guindon and Gascuel 2003, Posada 2008). jModelTest indicated a general time reversible model (Rodríguez et al. 1990) with a significant proportion of invariant sites (I=0.607) and with gamma-distributed rate heterogeneity (α=1.049) (GTR+I+G). We conducted Bayesian tree construction with 6 chains, 2 independent runs and 8 million generations. Trees were sampled every 1000th generation. The first 9000 generations were discarded as burn-in. We plotted the log-likelihood scores of sample points against generation time using Tracer 1.5 (Rambaut and Drummond 2009) to ensure that stationary was achieved after the first 9000 generations by checking whether the log-likelihood values of the sample points reached a stable equilibrium plateau. We used the remaining trees with average branch lengths to create a 50% majority-rule consensus tree with the sumt option of MrBayes. Posterior probabilities (pp) were obtained for each clade, whereby pp≥0.95 indicated significant support for clades. Finally, we also calculated the uncorrected pairwise distances between individuals based on mtCOI sequences using MEGA 5.1 (Tamura et al. 2011).

Microphotography and measuring. Microphotographic images of genitalia and forewing measurements were taken using a Leica Wild MZ8 stereomicroscope and Olympus SP-500 UZ digital camera. The photographs were processed with the Olympus Quick Photo Camera 2.2. software package. Geographic coordinates and altitudes of sampling localities were recorded with a Garmin ‘Oregon 450' GPS device.

Results

Phylogenetic analyses. In the Bayesian phylogenetic tree based on mtCOI sequences the Chaetopteryx rugulosa group species clustered into 4 strongly supported clades (Figure 2). Chaetopteryx marinkovicae was basal within the species group. The remaining species fell into 3 clades: a basal clade with Chaetopteryx rugulosa schmidi, Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n., and 2 derived sister clades comprising Chaetopteryx clara, Chaetopteryx goricensis, Chaetopteryx irenae, and Chaetopteryx rugulosa rugulosa, Chaetopteryx rugulosa noricum, Chaetopteryx rugulosa mecsekensis. Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n. is sister to the highly supported Chaetopteryx rugulosa schmidi. The mean value of the uncorrected pairwise distance (p distance) was 2.02% between them (Table 3). The p distance did not reach 1% within the 2 clades (Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n.: 0.17%; Chaetopteryx rugulosa schmidi: 0.75%). The relationship of the nominal species of the group Chaetopteryx rugulosa rugulosa and Chaetopteryx rugulosa noricum was not resolved, as the 4 subclades formed a polytomy. In the phylogenetic tree Chaetopteryx rugulosa schmidi was clearly separated from the clade containing the subspecies of Chaetopteryx rugulosa (Figure 2). The mean values of p distance between the 3 subspecies of Chaetopteryx rugulosa ranged between 1.61–3.02 %, while the mean values between the Chaetopteryx rugulosa schmidi and the other subspecies of Chaetopteryx rugulosa were distinctly higher (4.66 – 5.85%) (Table 3).

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Open in a new tab

Bayesian tree for members of the Chaetopteryx rugulosa species group based on mitochondrial COI sequence. Black circles on nodes mark Bayesian posterior probabilities pp>0.95.

Table 3.

Estimates of evolutionary divergence over sequence pairs within and between phylogenetically defined species and subspecies based on mtCOI sequence data. Distance matrix is shown with the mean ± SD values of the intraspecific and interspecific pairwise genetic distances for the all Chaetopterygini species included in the analysis. Abbrev.: CRR – Chaetopteryx rugulosa rugulosa, CRN – Chaetopteryx rugulosa noricum, CRM – Chaetopteryx rugulosa mecsekensis, CCX – Chaetopteryx clara, CGR – Chaetopteryx goricensis, CIX – Chaetopteryx irenae, CBU – Chaetopteryx bucari sp.n., CRS – Chaetopteryx schmidi, CMR – Chaetopteryx marinkovicae, CBA – Chaetopteryx bosniaca, CMO – Chaetopteryx morettii, CFU – Chaetopteryx fusca, CVI – C. villosa, CGE – Chaetopteryx gessneri, CAX – Chaetopteryx aproka, CMA – Chaetopterygopsis maclachlani, CMJ – Chaetopteryx major.

CRR CRN CRM CCX CGR CIX CBU CRS CMR CBO CMO CFU CVI CGE CAX CMA CMJ
CRR 1.05±0.97 1.61±0.49 3.02±0.17 4.87±0.24 4.55±0.24 4.79±0.27 4.63±0.30 5.44±0.39 9.24±0.46 12.64±0.15 12.85±0.33 12.69±0.20 12.69±0.20 14.03±0.20 12.00±0.39 12.32±0.20 14.17±0.16
CRN 1.20±0.89 2.83±0.31 5.06±0.23 4.74±0.24 5.26±0.20 5.17±0.18 5.85±0.11 9.45±0.27 12.85±0.08 12.66±0.12 12.83±0.12 12.83±0.12 14.06±0.12 12.18±0.14 11.98±0.24 14.14±0.39
CRM 0.17±0.11 4.79±0.09 4.47±0.10 4.69±0.12 4.38±0.11 4.66±0.13 8.87±0.07 11.89±0.07 11.97±0.08 11.76±0.14 11.76±0.14 12.44±0.14 11.60±0.12 11.47±0.08 13.78±0.00
CCx 0.00±0.00 0.37±0.07 3.80±0.08 5.86±0.14 5.69±0.06 9.92±0.00 12.61±0.00 12.61±0.00 12.77±0.00 12.77±0.00 13.61±0.00 12.77±0.00 12.61±0.00 14.49±0.07
CGR 0.03±0.07 3.48±0.10 5.54±0.15 5.37±0.08 9.93±0.05 12.62±0.05 12.62±0.05 12.79±0.05 12.79±0.05 13.63±0.05 12.78±0.05 12.62±0.05 14.17±0.08
CIX 0.10±0.09 4.41±0.16 5.11±0.18 10.15±0.08 12.67±0.08 13.21±0.09 12.54±0.09 12.54±0.09 13.04±0.09 13.38±0.09 13.55±0.09 15.39±0.11
CBa 0.17±0.13 2.02±0.20 8.79±0.13 12.48±0.13 12.65±0.14 12.48±0.14 12.48±0.14 12.65±0.14 11.21±0.08 12.89±0.08 14.00±0.16
CRS 0.75±0.57 8.72±0.06 12.24±0.06 13.04±0.13 12.05±0.21 12.05±0.21 12.67±0.23 11.56±0.22 13.93±0.06 14.44±0.15
CMR 0.00±0.00 11.60±0.00 11.60±0.00 11.93±0.00 11.93±0.00 13.11±0.00 11.76±0.00 12.94±0.00 12.77±0.18
CBO 0.00±0.00 2.69±0.00 4.87±0.00 4.87±0.00 6.05±0.00 12.61±0.00 12.61±0.00 15.26±0.17
CMO 0.00±0.00 5.55±0.00 5.55±0.00 6.55±0.00 12.94±0.00 11.76±0.00 14.82±0.08
CFU 0.00±0.00 0.00±0.00 5.88±0.00 13.05±0.19 12.94±0.00 15.83±0.08
CVI 0.00±0.00 5.88±0.00 13.05±0.19 12.94±0.00 15.83±0.08
CGE 0.00±0.00 13.45±0.00 13.44±0.00 15.87±0.09
CAX 0.35±0.00 11.71±0.19 13.44±0.11
CMA 0.00±0.00 13.04±0.15
CMJ 0.47±0.51
Open in a new tab

Chaetopteryx bucari

Kučinić, Szivák & Delić sp. n.

href="http://zoobank.org/E775EC69-0E8A-4AF0-A027-F290BB31E76E

http://species-id.net/wiki/Chaetopteryx_bucari

Figures 3 –16

Figure 3.

Figure 3.

Open in a new tab

Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n., adults at type locality, Pecki spring, Croatia.

Figure 16.

Figure 16.

Open in a new tab

Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n., female genitaliaa–d vulvar scale and median lobe of vulvar scale, ventral view.

Type material.

Holotype male: CROATIA, Pecki spring, 45°23'50"N, 16°14'40"E, 161 m a.s.l., 15 December 2009, leg. Bučar, Delić, Kučinić, dry specimen, DNA Barcode ID: HGCAD046-10, deposited in the Croatian Natural History Museum in Zagreb.

Paratype: CROATIA, ♂ and ♀ (n=49): 1 female, Pecki spring, 21 November 2009, leg. Bučar, Delić, Kučinić, dry specimen, DNA Barcode ID: HGCAD087-10; 14 males, Pecki spring, 31 October 2011; 9 females, Pecki spring, 31 October 2010; 20 females, Pecki spring, 30 November 2011; 2 males and 2 females, Hrvatski Čuntić stream, 45°21'28"N, 16°17'04"E, 159 m a.s.l., 22 October 2010; 1 male, Marića točak, 45°21'29"N, 16°17'03"E, 163 m a.s.l., 23 November 2012, leg. Bučar, Delić, Kučinić (all specimens in alcohol).

Diagnosis.

Male of Chaetopteryx bucari is most similar to Chaetopteryx rugulosa mecsekensis and Chaetopteryx rugulosa schmidi but differs in the following features: 1. In lateral view the inferior appendages in Chaetopteryx bucari are always with a pointed apex on the dorsal side, not rounded as in Chaetopteryx rugulosa mecsekensis; 2. Bristles in Chaetopteryx bucari are set more distally from the membranous part of the aedeagus than in Chaetopteryx rugulosa mecsekensis and Chaetopteryx rugulosa schmidi and never reach (touch) the lateral membranous finger, as in Chaetopteryx rugulosa mecsekensis. Female of Chaetopteryx bucari is clearly different from other species in the Chaetopteryx rugulosa group (e.g., form of the visible finger on lateral side, form of the anal tube, form of the supragenital plate of segment X in lateral and ventral views, form of the median lobe of the vulvar scale in ventral view). We did not find strong morphological variability among the females of the new species (except the median lobe of the vulvar scale). Females of Chaetopteryx bucari have in lateral, ventral and dorsal views very visible finger-shaped proturbances (ventral lobes of tergite IX) on the anal tube which is lacking in Chaetopteryx rugulosa mecsekensis and Chaetopteryx rugulosa schmidi. In lateral view the excision of the anal tube in Chaetopteryx rugulosa rugulosa is more pronounced than in Chaetopteryx bucari. The median lobe of the vulvar scale in Chaetopteryx rugulosa mecsekensis, Chaetopteryx rugulosa rugulosa and Chaetopteryx rugulosa schmidi is longer and more visible than in Chaetopteryx bucari.

Description.

Wings and legs yellow to yellowish-brown; veins darker in both sexes (Figure 3). Antennae long, grey to fuscous. Scapus yellow to yellowish-brown, thorax and abdomen yellow. Spur formula male 0,3,3, female 1,3,3. Ocelli present. Forewing with round apex; length 7.7–9.9 mm in males, 7.2–10.1 mm in females.

Male genitalia (Figures 4–11). In dorsal view, spinulose zone of tergite VIII well developed with yellow setae. Segment IX ventrally broad, dorsally narrow in lateral view (Figures 4–5). Superior appendages with small yellow setae, shape of superior appendages variable (Figures 4–7b–d), usually in one of two forms (Figures 4–6). In lateral view, 1st form with posterior edge slightly rounded apically, concave at middle (Figure 5); in 2nd form, dorsal side more protuberant with round or irregular apex (Figures 4, 7b). In some specimens triangular or rectangular intermediate forms are found (Figure 7c-d). Inferior appendages in lateral view rectangular, anterior part broad, posterior part narrow (Figures 4–7a). Apical flap of inferior appendage developed, in lateral view with pointed apex (tip) and ventral side slightly rounded; or with apex forked, long setae present on ventral side (Figures 4–7a). Intermediate appendages (paraproctal complex) elongated in lateral view with long, connecting middle section, apical hook narrowing with upward–curving apex (Figures 4–5), basal triangular part of paraproct relatively large in caudal view (Figures 8–9). Phallic organ (phallus) a single tube consisting of phallic apodeme, phallobase, aedeagus and parameres. Aedeagus relatively long, sclerotized, in posterior part with membranous lobes, lateral lobes membranous finger-like proturbances (endophallus) (Figures 10a–d). Two relatively short parameres set very distant from posterior membranous part of aedeagus (Figures 10a–b, 10d); parameres with sclerotized, straight, stout, brown bristles (Figures 10a–b, 10d, 11a–f). Bristles vary in width and length (Figure 11a–f); lateral bristles shorter; bristles arranged in 1 fan-like row (Figure 11a–f); in specimens with more bristles, some form 2nd row; bristles vary from 5-10.

Figure 4.

Figure 4.

Open in a new tab

Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n., male genitalia, lateral view.

Figure 11.

Figure 11.

Open in a new tab

Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n., male genitalia a-f parameres with sclerotized bristles.

Figure 5.

Figure 5.

Open in a new tab

Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n., male genitalia, lateral view.

Figure 7.

Figure 7.

Open in a new tab

Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n., male genitalia, lateral view a inferior appendages b–d superior appendages.

Figure 6.

Figure 6.

Open in a new tab

Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n., male genitalia, lateral view.

Figure 8.

Figure 8.

Open in a new tab

Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n., male genitalia, caudal view.

Figure 9.

Figure 9.

Open in a new tab

Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n., male genitalia, intermediate appendages (paraproctal complex), caudal view.

Figure 10.

Figure 10.

Open in a new tab

Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n., male genitalia, phallic organ (phallus): a dorsal view b ventral view c posterior membranous part of aedeagus d lateral view.

Female genitalia (Figures 12–16). Anal tube (fusion of tergites IX and X) in lateral view broad, relatively elongated with one excision and very distinct finger-shaped proturbance (lobes of tergite IX) on ventral side (Figures 12–13). Apex of proturbance rounded or slightly pointed with small yellow setae (Figures 12–15). In 2/3rds of specimens examined ventral and dorsal lips of anal tube equal in length, in 1/3rd ventral lip longer. In dorsal view anal tube thickened with digitate proturbance on lateral side and small excision (recess) in middle (Figure 14). In ventral view anal tube broad with larger excision (recess) in middle than in dorsal side (Figure 15). Supragenital plate of segment X well-developed, triangular in shape in lateral and ventral views (Figures 12, 15). Lateral segment of vulvar scale relatively short in ventral view, with flat or slightly rounded apex (Figure 16a–c). Median lobe of vulvar scale (lower vulvar lip) with very small rounded or pointed apex (Figure 16b–d). In ca. 1/3rd of specimens' median lobe of vulvar scale not visible (Figure 16a).

Figure 12.

Figure 12.

Open in a new tab

Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n., female genitalia, lateral view.

Figure 13.

Figure 13.

Open in a new tab

Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n., female genitalia, dorso-lateral view.

Figure 15.

Figure 15.

Open in a new tab

Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n., female genitalia, ventral view.

Figure 14.

Figure 14.

Open in a new tab

Chaetopteryx bucari sp. n., female genitalia, dorsal view.

Etymology.

The species is dedicated to Professor Matija Bučar from the Faculty of Education, Department in Petrinja, University of Zagreb.

Ecological notes and distribution.

During our recent faunal surveys in Croatia and the Western Dinaric Balkan Chaetopteryx bucari was found only at 8 localities in the Banovina region (Table 1). The most distant sampling sites are 40 km apart (Slabinja and Gore). We collected Chaetopteryx bucari from 2 springs, 5 wellsprings and 1 location in the stream (Table 1). In total, we collected more than 580 specimens of Chaetopteryx bucari (85% were collected in pyramid-type emergence traps). The most abundant populations were found at Pecki spring and a headwater stream in Hrvatski Ćuntić. Over 150 specimens of Chaetopteryx bucari were observed on the night of October 14, 2010 on the walls of a small building next to the stream in Hrvatski Čuntić. In Pecki spring more than 50 specimens were observed on the night of October 31, 2010. Chaetopteryx bucari was recorded at low altitudes between 104–185 m a.s.l. (Table 1).

Chaetopteryx bucari was collected in pyramid-type emergence traps from the end of September-December. The highest number of specimens was collected in October and November in both years. The sex ratio in both years was biased toward males, 1:1.37 (♀♀: ♂♂) in 2010, and 1:1.40 (♀♀:♂♂) in 2011. Besides Chaetopteryx bucari, Chaetopteryx gonospina Marinković-Gospodnetić, 1966 and 2 additional caddisfly species (Limnephilus rhombicus (Linnaeus, 1758), Potamophylax pallidus Klapálek, 1898) were recorded in the emergence traps.

In addition to Chaetopteryx bucari 2 other species of the Chaetopteryx rugulosa group were collected in Croatia during our recent surveys. Chaetopteryx marinkovicae was collected from its type locality on the stream and spring in Kompanj village (Istria region); Chaetopteryx rugulosa rugulosa was caught on Mt. Žumberak and Mt. Medvednica (northeast and central Croatia). Other species of Chaetopteryx found during this investigation were Chaetopteryx bosniaca Marinković-Gospodnetić, 1959 (Lika region), Chaetopteryx gonospina Marinković-Gospodnetić, 1966 (Banovina region), Chaetopteryx fusca (central Croatia, Dalmatia and Lika regions), and Chaetopteryx major (central Croatia).

Discussion

Systematic and taxonomic implications. Based on molecular evidence, we could confirm the hypothesis that Chaetopteryx bucari is a distinct species. Although Chaetopteryx bucari does not have a pp>0.95, it represents the sister taxon (pp>0.95) to the highly supported Chaetopteryx rugulosa schmidi. Furthermore, the mean genetic distance (2.02%) between Chaetopteryx bucari and Chaetopteryx rugulosa schmidi barely reached the 2-3% divergence observed as an interspecific genetic divergence in mtCOI sequences among some well-defined caddisfly species (Bálint et al. 2009, Pauls et al. 2009, Kučinić et al. 2011). However, among other well-defined caddisfly species this value can reach much higher levels (e.g., Zhou et al. 2007, Pauls et al. 2010), but also much lower values (e.g., Waringer et al. 2007). Thus reliance on distance methods alone for defining species boundaries is not advisable and species boundaries should be supported by additional lines of evidence such as additional, independent genes, morphology, or other independent characteristics (Zhou et al. 2007), particularly in taxa where hybridization is possible as is the case in Chaetopteryx (Malicky et al. 1986, Malicky and Pauls 2012). In the present study the genetic distinctiveness of Chaetopteryx bucari in combination with differences in morphological characters compared to its congeners, provide strong evidence to justify describing itas a new species.

In both sexes, especially in the adult female, Chaetopteryx bucari is relatively easily distinguishable from other taxa of the Chaetopteryx rugulosa group. The genetic data also show that specimens from 7 populations across the known range of the species from a clearly distinct clade from all other analysed Chaetopteryx. It is interesting that the female of Chaetopteryx bucari is particularly informative in diagnosing the species. In caddisflies this is quite unusual as males are generally more easily distinguished and females are often very difficult to differentiate from one another.

Based on the phylogenetic position of Chaetopteryx rugulosa schmidi in relation to Chaetopteryx rugulosa rugulosa and the other Chaetopteryx rugulosa subspecies, Chaetopteryx rugulosa schmidi is well-defined and quite divergent from other members of the Chaetopteryx rugulosa clade based on molecular data. Thus, the subspecies Chaetopteryx rugulosa schmidi is here re-established as a distinct species, Chaetopteryx schmidi, as it was described originally by Botosaneanu (1957) (Table 2) and not recognized as a subspecies of Chaetopteryx rugulosa as proposed by Malicky (2004, 2005).

Ecology. The emergence pattern of Chaetopteryx bucari corresponds with the general autumnal emergence patterns of the genus, usually from September-December, though emergence can be prolonged through January for some Chaetopteryx species (Kučinić 2002), including Chaetopteryx bucari (some specimens were collected by handpicking during January 2011). The emergence data from 2 years revealed that the sex ratio of Chaetopteryx bucari at the spring of Pecki stream is not exactly 1:1, but biased towards a surplus of males. In other studies applying the same methodology only a few species had 1:1 sex ratios (Kučinić 2002). In some species the sex ratio was 1:6 in favour of females (Previšić et al. 2007) and in other species males were dominant (Kučinić 2002, Semnički et al. 2011). These results are influenced by biological features of the species (e.g., emergence, oviposition behaviour of females), but may also be affected by trapping method (e.g., types of emergence pyramid-traps) (Malicky 2002).

Research on the diversity of large karst springs on the Balkan Peninsula has revealed high levels of caddisfly diversity. In some cases more than 20 species were collected from a single spring (Marinković-Gospodnetić 1979, Kučinić et al. 2008). This high alpha diversity of large karst springs does not, however, diminish the faunal significance of smaller springs. These are usually characterized by a small number of species, but often these species are highly specialized or local endemic species, such as Chaetopteryx bucari at the Pecki spring.

Distribution of Chaetopteryx rugulosa group in Croatia. At present, the genus Chaetopteryx is represented by 9 taxa in Croatia (Marinković-Gospodnetić 1979, Malicky and Krušnik 1988, Malicky 1996, 2004, Kučinić 2002, Kučinić et al. 2010, Previšić and Popijač 2010, Oláh 2010, 2011a). Including the new species Chaetopteryx bucari, 4 species from the Chaetopteryx rugulosa group (Malicky and Krušnik 1988, Malicky 1996, 2004, Oláh 2010) are now known from Croatia (Figure 17). Rare species from the genus Chaetopteryx are Chaetopteryx uherkovichi Oláh, 2011 distributed in eastern Croatia (Slavonia region) so far recorded only at the type locality (Oláh 2011a), Chaetopteryx rugulosa mecsekensis known from only 1 locality in Croatia (Malicky 1996, 2004, Oláh 2010), but also distributed in Hungary (Malicky et al. 1986, Malicky 2004) and Serbia (Oláh 2010), and Chaetopteryx marinkovicae established in 3 localities in Istria (Malicky and Krušnik 1988). Our research did not confirm the presence of the latter species in 2 of these localities (Malicky and Krušnik 1988), but found specimens at the type locality in Kompanj village. Chaetopteryx marinkovicae is also known from Slovenia (Urbanič 2004).

Figure 17.

Figure 17.

Open in a new tab

Distribution of Chaetopteryx rugulosa group in Croatia.

Until now, the new species Chaetopteryx bucari was found only in the Banovina region, which is situated between rivers Sava and Kupa to the north and the state border with Bosnia and Herzegovina to the south and east (Figure 17). The Banovina region is characterised by rolling hills up to 600 m a.s.l. There are many small springs and streams in the region, and 3 large rivers, Una, Kupa and Sava, that form the border of the region. It is possible that Chaetopteryx bucari is also distributed in some other parts of continental Croatia or in Bosnia and Herzegovina, because we found this species in the valley of the Una River (Slabinja spring, Varoški bunar spring), which forms the border between these 2 countries.

According to the current findings, Chaetopteryx bucari is not rare in the Croatian fauna. In fact, it is one of the most dominant caddisflies in the Banovina region. Along with Chaetopteryx fusca (Kučinić 2002, Semnički et al. 2011, Cerjanec 2012, M. Kučinić unpublished data) it is one of the most frequently found species from genus Chaetopteryx in Croatia. Chaetopteryx bucari inhabits springs and headwaters of small streams. The only known larger limnocrene spring that Chaetopteryx bucari inhabits is the Pašino vrelo spring.

Taxa from the Chaetopteryx rugulosa group have allopatric distributions in Croatia (Figure 17): Chaetopteryx bucari is distributed in the Banovina region, Chaetopteryx rugulosa rugulosa in northern Croatia on Mt. Medvednica and Mt. Žumberak, Chaetopteryx rugulosa mecsekensis in eastern Croatia on Mt. Papuk and Chaetopteryx marinkovicae in the sub-Mediterranean part of Croatia in Istria (Malicky and Krušnik 1988, Malicky 1996, 2004, Oláh 2010). Systematic research in mountain areas in Lika and Gorski kotar (Kučinić 2002, Kučinić et al. 2008, Previšić and Popijač 2010, Cerjanec 2012, Semnički et al. 2011, 2012) and the Mediterranean part of Croatia (Dalmatia region) (Graf et al. 2008, Waringer et al. 2009, Vučković 2011, Vučković et al. 2011, M. Kučinić unpublished data) did not result in collections of Chaetopteryx rugulosa group species in these areas.

Many members of the genus Chaetopteryx are either small-scale endemics or species with a low number of disjunct populations. This makes the group very interesting for biogeographic studies. There are several reasons that could explain the observed pattern of distribution: small populations, poor mobility of the winter emerging adults, and distribution in springs and in headwater reaches of small streams. Besides naturally isolating individual populations from one another, these aspects can also cause difficulties for investigating the genus, as it is hard to access many of the sites, especially in winter. Future investigations of this genus will be focused on poorly researched areas in Croatia and the western Balkans to gain a better understanding of the distribution and biogeography of Chaetopteryx in the region.

Supplementary Material

XML Treatment for Chaetopteryx bucari
zookeys.320.4565-treatment1.xml (23.3KB, xml)

Acknowledgements

We express our gratitude to Xin Zhou for handling the mitochondrial barcoding of our specimens within the Barcoding of Life initiative. We thank Karl Kjer for sharing the previously unpublished “outgroup” data from BOLD. We thank two anonymous reviewers and Ralph Holzenthal for their valuable comments that helped improve the manuscript. For technical help we acknowledge senior curator Iva Mihoci, PhD, from the Croatian Natural Museum in Zagreb, Nediljko Landeka form the Institute of Public Health in Pula, and Milivoj Franjević from the Foresty Faculty, University of Zagreb. ISz was partially funded through an incoming research grant of the Biodiversity and Climate Research Centre in the frame of the research funding program Landes-Offensive zur Entwicklung Wissenschaftlich-ökonomischer Exzellenz (LOEWE) of Hesse's Ministry of Higher Education, Research, and the Arts, Germany. SUP and MB acknowledge financial support from the research fundprogram “LOEWE – Landes-Offensive zur Entwicklung Wissenschaftlich-ökonomischer Exzellenz” of Hesse's Ministry of Higher Education, Research, and the Arts. This research was supported by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) as a part of Project P 23687-B17 and Croatian Ministry of Science, Education and Sports as a part of Project No. 119–1193080–1206.

References

  1. Bálint M, Botosaneanu L, Ujvárosi L, Popescu O. (2009) Taxonomic revision of Rhyacophila aquitanica (Trichoptera: Rhyacophilidae) based on molecular and morphological evidence and change of taxon status of Rhyacophila aquitanica ssp. carpathica to Rhyacophila carpathica sp. n. Zootaxa 2148: 39-48. [Google Scholar]
  2. Botosaneanu L. (1957) Quelques Trichopteres nouveaux de Roumanie. Tijdschrift voor entomologie 100: 179-194. [Google Scholar]
  3. Botosaneanu L, Giudicelli J. (2004) Contributions to the knowledge of the fauna of caddisflies (Insecta: Trichoptera) from south-east France, with description of new taxa. Annales de Limnologie - International Journal of Limnology 40: 15-32. doi: 10.1051/limn/2004002 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  4. Buckley T–R, Arensburger P, Simon C, Chambers G. (2002) Combined data, Bayesian phylogenetics, and the origin of the New Zealand Cicada genera. Systematic Biology 51: 4-18. doi: 10.1080/106351502753475844 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Cerjanec D. (2012) Ecological and biogeographical features of caddisflies (Insecta: Trichoptera) in different types of habitats in drainage of the Dobra River. PhD thesis (on Croatian), Zagreb, Croatia: University of Zagreb.
  6. de Waard JR, Ivanova NV, Hajibabaei M, Hebert PDN. (2008) Assembling DNA barcodes: analytical protocols. In: Martin CC. (Ed) Environmental Genomics, Methods in Molecular Biology. Volume 410. Humana Press, Totowa, New Jersey, 275–283. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Drummond AJ, Ashton B, Buxton S, Cheung M, Cooper A, Duran C, Field M, Heled J, Kearse M, Markowitz S, Moir R, Stones-Havas S, Sturrock S, Thierer T, Wilson A. (2011) Geneious v5.4, http://www.geneious.com/
  8. Folmer O, Black M, Hoeh W, Lutz R, Vrijenhoek R. (1994) DNA primers for amplification of mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I from diverse metazoan invertebrates. Molecular Marine Biology and Biotechnology 3: 294-299. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Graf W, Kučinić M, Previšić A, Vučković I, Waringer J. (2008) The larva, ecology and distribution of Tinodes braueri McLachlan, 1878 (Trichoptera: Psychomyiidae). Aquatic Insects 30 (4): 295-299. doi: 10.1080/01650420802331158 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Guindon S, Gascuel O. (2003) A simple, fast and accurate method to estimate large phylogenies by maximum-likelihood. Systematic Biology 52: 696-704. doi: 10.1080/10635150390235520 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Hajibabaei M, Dewaard JR, Ivanova NV, Ratnasingham S, Dooh RT, Kirk SL, Macki PM, Hebert PDN. (2005) Critical factors for assembling a high volume of DNA barcodes. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B: Biological Sciences 360: 1959-1967. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2005.1727 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Hajibabaei M, Janzen DH, Burns JM, Hallwachs W, Hebert PDN. (2006) DNA barcodes distinguish species of tropical Lepidoptera. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 103: 968-971. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0510466103 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Holzenthal RW, Blahnik RJ, Prather AL, Kjer KM. (2007) Order Trichoptera Kirby, 1813 (Insecta), Caddisflies. Zootaxa 1668: 639-698. [Google Scholar]
  14. Ivanova NV, Dewaard JR, Hebert PDN. (2006) An inexpensive, automation-friendly protocol for recovering high-quality DNA. Molecular Ecology Notes 6: 998-1002. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-8286.2006.01428.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  15. Ivković M, Mičetić Stanković V, Mihaljević Z. (2011) Emergence patterns and microhabitat preference of aquatic dance flies (Empididae; Clinocerinae and Hemerodromiinae) on a longitudinal gradient of barrage lake system. Limnologica 42 (1): 43-49. doi: 10.1016/j.limno.2011.07.003 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  16. Kučinić M. (2002) Diversity and distribution of caddisflies in Plitvička Lakes. PhD thesis (on Croatian), Zagreb, Croatia: University of Zagreb.
  17. Kučinić M, Bučar M, Delić A. (2010) Prvi prilog poznavanju faune tulara (Insecta, Trichoptera) na području Banovine. In: Bučar M. (Ed). Zbornik radova: Zrinska gora: regionalni park prirode. Matica hrvatska: 226-235.
  18. Kučinić M, Previšić A, Gottstein A, Hrašovec B, Stanić-Koštroman S, Pernek M, Delić A. (2008) Description of the larvae of Drusus radovanovici septentrionis Marinković-Gospodnetić, 1976 and Drusus croaticus Marinković-Gospodnetić, 1971 (Trichoptera: Limnephilidae) from Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia. Zootaxa 1783: 1-17. [Google Scholar]
  19. Kučinić M, Previšić A, Graf W, Jelaska L S, Stanić-Koštroman S, Waringer J. (2011) Larval description, genetic and ecological features of Drusus radovanovici radovanovici Marinković-Gospodnetić, 1971 (Trichoptera, Limnephilidae) with some phylogenetic and taxonomic data on the bosnicus group in the Balkan Peninsula. Deutsche Entomologische Zeitschrift 58 (1): 135-153. doi: 10.1002/mmnd.201100010 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  20. Lodovici O, Valle M. (2007) New data on the genus Chaetopteryx in Northern Italy and a description of C. morettii sp.n. Braueria 34: 15-16. [Google Scholar]
  21. Malm T, Johanson KA. (2011) A new classification of the long-horned caddisflies (Trichoptera: Leptoceridae) based on molecular data. BMC Evolutionary Biology 11: 10. doi: 10.1186/1471-2148-11-10 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Malicky H. (1996) Das Problem der allopatrischen Arten bei europäischen Köcherfliegen (Insecta: Trichoptera). Natura Croatica 5 (1): 11-23. [Google Scholar]
  23. Malicky H. (2002) A quantitative field comparasion of different types of emergence traps in a stream: general, Trichoptera, Diptera (Lemoniidae and Empididae). Annales de Limnologie – International Journal of Limnology 38: 133-149. doi: 10.1051/limn/2002011 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  24. Malicky H. (2004) Atlas of European Trichoptera. Springer, Dordrecht, 359 pp. [Google Scholar]
  25. Malicky H. (2005) Ein kommentiertes Verzeichnis der Köcherfliegen (Trichoptera) Europas und des Mediterrangebietes. Linzer biologische Beiträge 37 (1): 533-596. [Google Scholar]
  26. Malicky H, Krušnik C. (1988) Chaetopteryx marinkovicae sp.n. (Trichoptera, Limnephilidae) from Istria, Yugoslavia. Aquatic Insects 11 (3): 180. doi: 10.1080/01650428909361366 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  27. Malicky H, Krušnik C, Moretti G, Nógrádi S. (1986) Ein Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Chaetopteryx rugulosa Kolenati, 1848 - Gruppe (Trichoptera, Limnephilidae). Entomofauna 7 (1): 1-27. [Google Scholar]
  28. Malicky H, Pauls SU. (2012) Cross-breeding of Chaetopteryx morettii and related species, with molecular and eidonomical results (Trichoptera, Limnephilidae). Annales de Limnologie - International Journal of Limnology 48: 13-19. doi: 10.1051/limn/2011054 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  29. Marinković-Gospodnetić M. (1979) Trichoptera (Insecta) velikih karstnih izvora u Dinaridima. In: Rauš (Ed). Drugi kongres Ekologa Jugoslavije (Second Congress of Ecologists of Yugoslavia). Savez društava ekologa Jugoslavije, Zagreb: 1837-1849.
  30. Morse JC. (Ed) (2013) Trichoptera World Checklist. http://entweb.clemson.edu/database/trichopt/index.htm [accessed 26 May 2013]
  31. Oláh J. (2010) New species and new records of Palearctic Trichoptera in the material of the Hungarian Natural History Museum. Annales Historico-Naturales Musei Nationalis Hungarici 102: 65-117. [Google Scholar]
  32. Oláh J. (2011a) New species and records of Balkan Trichoptera. Folia Historico Naturalia Musei Matraensis 35: 111-121. [Google Scholar]
  33. Oláh J. (2011b) A new species of Chaetopteryx (Trichoptera, Limnephilidae) from the Northeast Carpathians. Braueria 38: 9-10. [Google Scholar]
  34. Pauls SU, Blahnik RJ, Zhou X, Wardwell TC, Holzenthal RW. (2010) DNA barcode data confirm new species and reveal cryptic diversity in Chilean Smicridea (Smicridea) (Trichoptera: Hydropsychidae). Journal of the North American Benthological Society 29: 1058-1074. doi: 10.1899/09-108.1 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  35. Pauls SU, Theissinger K, Ujvarosi L, Balint, M., Haase P. (2009) Patterns of population structure in two closely related, partially sympatric caddisflies in Eastern Europe: historic introgression, limited dispersal, and cryptic diversity. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 28: 517-36. doi: 10.1899/08-100.1 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  36. Posada D. (2008) jModelTest: Phylogenetic Model Averaging. Molecular Biology and Evolution 25: 1253-1256. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msn083 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Previšić A, Kerovec M, Kučinić M. (2007) Emergence and Composition of Trichoptera from Karst Habitans, Plitvice lakes Region, Croatia. International Review of Hydrobiology 92 (1): 61-83. doi: 10.1002/iroh.200510921 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  38. Previšić A, Popijač A. (2010) Caddisfly (Insecta: Trichoptera) fauna of Kupa and Čabranka rivers and their tributaries, Gorski kotar, W Croatia. Natura Croatia 19 (2): 357-368. [Google Scholar]
  39. Rambaut A, Drummond AJ. (2009) Tracer Version 1.5, http://beast.bio.edsac.uk/Tracer.
  40. Ratnasingham S, Hebert PDN. (2007) BOLD: the Barcode of Life Data System (www.barcodinglife.org). Molecular Ecology Notes 7: 355-364. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-8286.2007.01678.x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Rodríguez F, Oliver JL, Marin A, Medina JR. (1990) The general stochastic model of nucleotide substitution. Journal of Theoretical Biology 142 (4): 484-501. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5193(05)80104-3 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Ronquist F, Huelsenbeck JP. (2003) MrBayes 3: Bayesian phylogenetic inference under mixed models. Bioinformatics 19: 1572-1574. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btg180 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Semnički P, Previšić A, Ivković M, Čmrlec K, Mihaljević Z. (2011) Emergence of caddisfly (Trichoptera, Insecta) at tufa barriers in Plitvice Lakes National Park. Entomologia Croatica 115(1–4): 145-161. doi: 10.1002/iroh.201101500 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  44. Semnički P, Previšić A, Ivković M, Čmrlec K, Mihaljević Z. (2012) Tufa Barriers from a Caddisfly's Point of View: Streams or Lake Outlets? International Review of Hydrobiology 97 (6): 465–484. [Google Scholar]
  45. Sipahiler F. (2010) Two New Species of Chaetopteryx Stephens, 1837 from Turkey with a Description of the Unknown Female of C. bektasensis Sipahiler, 2008 (Trichoptera, Limnephilidae: Limnephilinae: Chaetopterygini). Psyche: A Journal of Entomology. doi: 10.1155/2010/180671 [DOI]
  46. Tamura K, Peterson D, Peterson N, Stecher G, Nei M, Kumar S. (2011) MEGA5: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis using Maximum Likelihood, Evolutionary Distance, and Maximum Parsimony Methods. Molecular Biology and Evolution 28: 2731-2739. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msr121 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Urbanič G. (2004) Ecology and distribution of caddisflies (Insecta: Trichoptera) in some watercourses in Slovenia. PhD thesis (on Slovenian), Ljubljana, Slovenia: University of Ljubljana.
  48. Urbanič G, Krušnik C. (2003) The female of Chaetopteryx irenae Krušnik & Malicky 1986. Acta Entomologica Slovenica 10 (1): 21-24. [Google Scholar]
  49. Vučković I. (2011) Faunal, taxonomical and ecological characters of caddisflies (Insecta, Trichoptera) drainage of the River Cetina. PhD thesis (on Croatian), Zagreb, Croatia: University of Zagreb. doi: 10.1080/01650424.2011.641181 [DOI]
  50. Vučković I, Previšić A, Graf W, Kučinić M. (2011) Description of the female and distribution of Annitella apfelbecki Klapálek, 1899 (Insecta: Trichoptera). Aquatic Insects 33 (4): 381–389. [Google Scholar]
  51. Waringer J, Graf W, Kučinić M, Previšić A, Vučković A. (2009) The Larva and life cycle of Annitella apfelbecki Klápalek, 1899, including a re-description of Melampophylax nepos McLachlan, 1880 (Trichoptera: Limnephilidae). Aquatic Insects 31 (1): 71-80. doi: 10.1080/01650420802616327 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Waringer J, Graf W, Pauls S, Lubini V. (2007) The Larva of Drusus nigrescens Meyer-Dur, 1875 (Trichoptera: Limnephilidae: Drusinae) with notes on its ecology, genetic differentiation and systematic position. Annales de Limnologie - International Journal of Limnology 43: 161–166. doi: 10.1051/limn:2007010 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Zhou X, Kjer KM, Morse JC. (2007) Associating larvae and adults of Chinese Hydropsychidae caddisflies (Insecta: Trichoptera) using DNA sequences. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 26: 719-742. doi: 10.1899/06-089.1 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

XML Treatment for Chaetopteryx bucari
zookeys.320.4565-treatment1.xml (23.3KB, xml)

Articles from ZooKeys are provided here courtesy of Pensoft Publishers

RESOURCES