Skip to main content
NCBI home page
ZooKeys logoLink to ZooKeys
. 2021 Oct 20;1063:121–137. doi: 10.3897/zookeys.1063.73094

A new species of Pseudosinella Schäffer, 1897 (Collembola, Entomobryidae) from Hungary and Romania, with redescription of the related species Pseudosinellahuetheri Stomp, 1971

Daniel Winkler 1,✉, Márton Tamás Németh 2, Cristina Fiera 3
PMCID: PMC8551137  PMID: 34744473

Abstract

A new species of the genus Pseudosinella Schäffer, 1897 from Hungary and Romania is described and illustrated. Pseudosinellahartneraesp. nov. belongs to the group with 5+5 eyes, and can be identified by its unique labial chaetotaxy (M1m2rel1L2) within this group. Pseudosinellahuetheri Stomp, 1971, the closest related species sharing the same dorsal macrochaetae formula (R0R1R2001/00/0101+2), is also redescribed here based on the holotype. Comparative analysis between the two species and among other related species is provided.

Keywords: Chaetotaxy, Pseudosinellahartnerae sp. nov., springtails, taxonomy

Introduction

Pseudosinella Schäffer, 1897 is the largest collembolan genus, represented by 382 described species worldwide (Bellinger et al. 2021), inhabiting a wide range of habitats from xerophilic areas (e.g., Traser et al. 2006) through caves (e.g., Gisin and Gama 1969; Cipola et al. 2020) to wetlands like alluvial forests (e.g., Buşmachiu et al. 2017; Winkler and Mateos 2018).

As a part of soil biodiversity surveys in Hungary, the Bátorliget Pasture Nature Conservation Area was revisited in 2017. Among the collected Collembola material, a new species of Pseudosinella Schäffer, 1897 was discovered and is described in the present paper. Around the same time, Collembola samplings were carried out in Romania Mohoş Nature Reserve, from where the same Pseudosinella species was also found. The genus was previously represented by 17 species in Hungary (Dányi and Traser 2008; Winkler and Mateos 2018) and 24 species in Romania (Fiera 2013). However, its richness is probably underestimated and doubtless destined to increase with further taxonomic efforts in both countries.

The new species belongs to the group of species with 5+5 eyes. With the help of the computer assisted Delta identification key using the combination of chaetotaxic and other characters, originally designed by Christiansen et al. (1990) and regularly updated by Jordana et al. (2021), Pseudosinellahuetheri Stomp, 1971 was found to be its closest related species. Therefore, on this occasion, Pseudosinellahuetheri was also examined and redescribed from the holotype preserved in the Natural History Museum of Geneva (Switzerland).

Material and methods

In October 2017, soil samplings were carried out in the Bátorliget Pasture Nature Conservation Area (East Hungary). A month later, soil mesofauna samplings were carried out also in Romania, around St. Ana Lake (Mohoş Nature Reserve). Springtails were extracted from the hand collected litter and soil samples within 14 days using a modified Berlese–Tullgren apparatus (without light or heating devices). The specimens were cleared using Nesbitt fluid and then mounted on permanent slides in Hoyer’s medium. The slides were examined under a Leica DM2500 LED microscope with conventional bright light and phase contrast.

Abbreviations used in text and figures are:

Abd abdominal tergite;

accp accessorial p–sensilla;

Ant antennal segment;

a.s.l. above sea level;

HNHMHungarian Natural History Museum, Budapest;

IBBInstitute of Biology Bucharest, Romanian Academy;

NHMG Natural History Museum of Geneva;

Mac macrochaeta;

mic microchaeta;

psp pseudopore;

Th thoracic tergite.

Symbols used in figures:

open circleMac;

black dotsmic;

x trichobotria.

Terminology

Dorsal head chaetotaxy follows Gisin (1967), Jordana and Baquero (2007) and also the “AMS” nomenclature of Soto-Adames (2010). Clypeal chaetotaxy follows Yoshii and Suhardjono (1992). For the labial palp, the notation of Fjellberg (1999) was used. For labial chaetotaxy, Gisin’s nomenclature (1964) was applied, while for postlabial chaetotaxy, the notations of Chen and Christiansen (1993) and Cipola et al. (2018) were used. Dorsal chaetotaxy schemes of thoracic and abdominal segments follow Gisin (1967) and Szeptycki (1972, 1979), except for chaeta m7a on Abd III (following Wang et al. 2003) and chaeta p8p on Abd III (following Mateos 2008). The tergal specialized chaetae (S–chaetae) pattern follows Zhang and Deharveng (2015).

Taxonomy

Class Collembola Lubbock, 1873

Order Entomobryomorpha Börner, 1913

Family Entomobryidae Schäffer, 1896

Subfamily Lepidocyrtinae Wahlgren, 1906

Genus Pseudosinella Schäffer, 1897

Pseudosinella hartnerae

Winkler & Fiera sp. nov.

D61A6B94-1D17-5392-93A7-3C5A1E54792C

http://zoobank.org/EC5FA909-3CA5-4164-AAB2-E0AAFC5D989C

Figures 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Open in a new tab

Pseudosinellahartnerae sp. nov. Habitus. Scale bar: 0.5 mm.

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Open in a new tab

Pseudosinellahartnerae sp. nov. A head, dorsal chaetotaxy (left side) B antennae, Ant III with sensillar organ C clypeus, clypeal chaetae D labrum E labial papilla E with lateral process F labial triangle (right side) and ventral cephalic groove with labial and postlabial chaetotaxy. Scale bars: 0.05 mm (A); 0.03 mm (B–D, F); 0.01 mm (E).

Figure 3.

Figure 3.

Open in a new tab

Pseudosinellahartnerae sp. nov. Abdomen dorsal chaetotaxy: AAbd II (left side) BAbd III (left side). Scale bar: 0.03 mm (A, B).

Figure 4.

Figure 4.

Open in a new tab

Pseudosinellahartnerae sp. nov. Abdomen dorsal chaetotaxy: AAbd IV (left side) BAbd IV trichobothrial complex (left side) CAbd V. Scale bars: 0.05 mm (A); 0.02 mm (B); 0.03 mm (C).

Figure 5.

Figure 5.

Open in a new tab

Pseudosinellahartnerae sp. nov. A trochanteral organ B leg III unguis and unguiculus C ventral tube anterior view (right side) and posterior view (left side) D manubrial plate E mucro and apical part of dens. Scale bars: 0.02 mm (A, B, D, E); 0.03 mm (C).

Type material.

Holotype: Hungary. ♀ on slide (Nr. HNHM collpr-896), Bátorliget, Szabolcs–Szatmár–Bereg county, 161 m a.s.l., 47°46'11"N, 22°16'19"E, from litter, hand collecting, 8 Oct. 2017, leg. D. Winkler. Paratypes: Two ♀ and one ♂ on slide (Nr. HNHM collpr-896); two ♀ and one specimen with sex not visible (Nr.: HNHM collpr-897); two ♀ (Nr. WD–coll–113 and WD–coll–114); same data as holotype. The holotype and four paratypes are deposited in the Hungarian Natural History Museum (HNHM), Budapest. Two paratypes are preserved in the first author’s collection at the University of Sopron, Faculty of Forestry, Sopron, Hungary; one paratype is kept in C. Fiera’s collection (IBB).

Other material.

Romania. Seven specimens (one ♂ on slide, Nr.: IBB Coll-12544; and six specimens of sex not determined in ethyl alcohol, vial Nr. IBB–26), Lake Saint Ana, Harghita County, Romania, 984 m a.s.l., 46°7'33"N, 25°53'28"E, 2 Nov. 2017, mixed forest with beech and fir, from litter, hand collecting, leg. C. Fiera.; 4 specimens (one ♀ on slide, Nr. IBB Coll–12545; and three specimens of sex not determined in ethyl alcohol, vial Nr. IBB–26), Mohoş peat bog, 1050 m a.s.l., 46°8'6"N, 25°53'59"E, 2 Nov. 2017, Scots pine forest, from peat moss Sphagnum, hand collecting, leg. C. Fiera. Preserved in the last author’s collection (IBB).

Diagnosis.

5+5 ocelli. Colour bluish-grey. Labial chaetotaxy M1m2rel1L2, r vestigial. Dorsal macrochaetae formula R0R1R2001/00/0101+2. Abd II chaetotaxy: paBq1q2.Abd IV accessory chaeta s, anteriorly to trichobothrial complex, absent. Antennae and legs without scales. Unguis inner side with two paired basal teeth and one unpaired tooth. Unguiculus outer lamella smooth.

Description.

Habitus (Fig. 1). Body length (without head and furca) 1.01–1.27 mm (holotype: 1.08 mm). Colour: Head, antennae, trunk and legs bluish-grey, blue shades also on manubrium and ventral tube. Eye patches dark blue.

Head. With 5+5 eyes (ABCDH, with H only slightly smaller). Dorsal cephalic main macrochaetae formula R0R1R2P (according to AMS notation A0, A2, A3 and Pa5) (Fig. 2A). Maximum number of macrochaetae “An” on head 9+9. Antennal length to head diagonal length (measured from cervical edge to apex of labrum) ratio 1.2–1.4 (holotype: 1.3). Relation of antennal segments I–IV as 1 : 1.7 : 1.5 : 2.9 (holotype). Ant III sensillary organ composed of two rod-like sensilla partially behind a cuticular fold, guarded by three sensilla, one of them short, with spiny morphology (Fig. 2B). Ant IV without apical bulb. Clypeus with eleven subequal ciliated chaetae (three in row pf, four in row ft, two in row l1 and two in row l2) (Fig. 2C). Arrangement of chaetae on labrum 4/554, prelabral chaetae smooth; first (p), second (m) and apical (a) rows of labral chaetae also smooth, chaetae of p and m series about the same in size, not enlarged, a1–a2 thicker but not enlarged; labral edge with no differentiated papillae (Fig. 2D). Outer maxillary palp with two smooth chaetae and three smooth main sublobal hairs. Lateral process (sensuFjellberg 1999) on papilla E finger-shaped, barely reaching the top of papilla (Fig. 2E). Labial anterior row with five smooth chaetae (a1–a5); formula of basal row M1m2rel1L2 with M1 and L2 ciliated and all other chaetae smooth (Fig. 2F). Chaeta r short (ratio of r/m2 0.2–0.3). Ventral chaetotaxy with about 15 ciliate chaetae, postlabial formula 4 (G1–4), 2 (X, X4), 4 (H1–4), and 2 (J1–2) chaetae; b.c. present (Fig. 2F).

Body. Body dorsal macrochaetae from Th II to Abd IV 00/0101+2. Mesothorax without macrochaetae. Two anterolateral S-chaetae (al and ms) present. Th III without Mac, anterolateral sensillum al present. Abd I with lateral S-microchaeta (ms). Chaetotaxy of Abd II–III as in Fig. 3A, B. Abd II chaetotaxy between two dorso-medial trichobothria paBq1q2 using Gisin’s symbols (Gisin 1967); following Szeptycki’s (1979) notation p=a2p, a=a2, B=m3, q1=m3e and q2=p4. Chaeta a as ciliated mic. Abd III chaeta d3 present. Chaetotaxy and trichobothrial complex on Abd IV as in Fig. 4A, B. Mac B5, B6, C1, E2, E3, F1 and F2 broader with broad sockets, D2, D3, De3, E4, E4p, E4p2, F3, F3p, Fe4, Fe5, T6 and T7 thinner with smaller sockets. Abd IV with five fan-shaped chaetae (D1, a, m, pe and pi) associated with two trichobothria. Accessory chaeta s, associated with trichobotrium T2, absent. Nine S-chaetae (as, ps, and seven long dorsal S-chaetae) present. Dorsal chaetotaxy of Abd V as in Fig. 4C. Three S-chaetae (as, acc.p4 and acc.p5) typical for Pseudosinella present. Legs without scales. Trochanteral organ with up to 12 smooth spiny chaetae forming a V-shaped pattern (Fig. 5A). Unguis and unguiculus as in Fig. 5B. Unguis with subequal paired basal teeth at 35% from inner edge, and with a median unpaired inner tooth at 60% from inner edge, apical tooth absent. Outer side with paired lateral teeth and a short external tooth. Unguiculus lanceolate, external lamella smooth. Tibiotarsal tenent hair clavate, supraempodial chaeta on tibiotarsus III smooth and acuminate. Ratio of supraempodial chaeta / unguiculus around 0.9. Ventral tube without scales; with 6+6 subequal ciliated chaetae on anterior side and 4+4 subequal ciliated chaetae on posterior side; lateral flap with 1 ciliated and a maximum of 6 smooth chaetae (Fig. 5C). Manubrium ventrally with scales and 2+2 terminal ciliated chaetae. Manubrial plate with 2 larger inner chaetae and 2 chaetae external to the 2 pseudopores (Fig. 5D). Length of not ringed terminal dens about 4 times the length of mucro. Mucro with distal tooth equal to anteapical one; basal spine reaching tip of anteapical tooth (Fig. 5E). Ratio manubrium/dens/mucro as 16:15:1.

Ecology and distribution.

The type locality (Bátorliget Pasture Nature Conservation Area, Szabolcs–Szatmár–Bereg county, Hungary) of Pseudosinellahartnerae sp. nov. is a special relict mire and forest area with high biodiversity. The new species was collected from the upper layer and litter of a forest clearing with pioneer vegetation including silver birch (Betulapendula) trees. Specimens in Romania were collected from litter in the surrounding forest of the volcanic lake Saint Ana, and from peat mosses in the nearby Mohoș bog. Both Romanian sites are located in the Mohoş Nature Reserve, Harghita County. This new Pseudosinella is a phytodetriticolous, bryophilous and hygrophilous species.

Etymology.

The name of the new species is dedicated to former zoologist colleague and friend Dr. Anna Fenyősiné Hartner (1965–2006), an excellent specialist in myrmecology.

Pseudosinella huetheri

Stomp, 1971

C4A7CD6B-7FCB-5B01-A19B-B68E266C10A4

Figures 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10

Figure 6.

Figure 6.

Open in a new tab

Pseudosinellahuetheri Stomp, 1971. A Photograph of the slide of the holotype from the NHMG Switzerland) B Habitus, holotype. Scale bar: 0.05 mm (B).

Figure 7.

Figure 7.

Open in a new tab

Pseudosinellahuetheri Stomp, 1971 A head, dorsal chaetotaxy (left side) B antennae, apex of Ant III with sensillar organ C labial triangle (right side) and ventral cephalic groove with labial and postlabial chaetotaxy. Scale bars: 0.05 mm (A); 0.03 mm (B, C).

Figure 8.

Figure 8.

Open in a new tab

Pseudosinellahuetheri Stomp, 1971. Abdomen dorsal chaetotaxy: AAbd II (left side) BAbd III (left side). ? indicates the estimated position of chaetae that were not observed in the holotype due to the condition of the slide, but their presence is assumed. Scale bar: 0.05 mm (A, B).

Figure 9.

Figure 9.

Open in a new tab

Pseudosinellahuetheri Stomp, 1971. Abdomen dorsal chaetotaxy: AAbd IV (left side) BAbd V. ? indicates the estimated position of chaetae that were not observed in the holotype due to the condition of the slide, but their presence is assumed. Scale bars: 0.05 mm (A, B).

Figure 10.

Figure 10.

Open in a new tab

Pseudosinellahuetheri Stomp, 1971. A trochanteral organ B ventral tube anterior view (right side) and posterior view (left side). Scale bars: 0.03 mm (A, B).

Material examined.

Holotype: Luxembourg. sex not visible, on slide, preserved in NHMG (Fig. 6A), Berdorf, “Zigzagschloeff” rocks, 357 m a.s.l., 49°49'33"N, 6°20'21"E, beech forest (Fagetum), from litter, 11.Aug.1965, leg. N. Stomp.

Diagnosis.

5+5 ocelli. Colour yellowish white. Labial chaetotaxy M1m2Rel1L2, R ~ 0.5 of M. Dorsal macrochaetae formula R0R1R2001/00/0101+2. Abdominal tergite II chaetotaxy: –aBq1q2.Abd IV accessory chaeta s, anteriorly to trichobothrial complex, absent. Antennae and legs without scales. Unguis inner side with two paired basal teeth and one unpaired tooth, unguiculus outer lamella smooth.

Redescription.

Habitus (Fig. 6B). Body length (without head and furca) 1.2–1.5 mm (Stomp 1971), holotype length 1.46 mm. Colour (after Stomp 1971): yellowish white, without any trace of pigment, neither on tergites and coxae nor on antennae. A few spots of blue pigment distributed in small dots around eyes. Eye patches blue.

Head. With 5+5 eyes (ABCDH, with H only slightly smaller) (Fig. 7A; see also fig. 2 in Stomp 1971). Dorsal cephalic main macrochaetae formula R0R1R2P (according to AMS notation A0, A2, A3 and Pa5). Number of macrochaetae “An” on head 10+10 (Fig. 7A). Antennal length to head diagonal length ratio 1.4 (head diagonal measured from cervical edge to apex of labrum). Relation of antennal segments I–IV as 1 : 1.7 : 1.5 : 3.0. Ant III sensillary organ composed of two rod-like sensilla partially behind a cuticular fold, guarded by three sensilla, one of them shorter, spine-like (Fig. B). Ant IV without apical bulb. Arrangement of chaetae on labrum 4/554; prelabral chaetae smooth, first (p), second (m) and apical (a) rows of labral chaetae also smooth, chaetae of p and m series about the same in size, not enlarged, a1–a2 thicker but not enlarged; labral edge with no differentiated papillae (as in Fig. 2D). Outer maxillary palp with two smooth chaetae and three smooth main sublobal hairs. Lateral process (sensuFjellberg 1999) on papilla E finger-shaped, barely reaching the top of papilla (see Fig. 2E). Labial anterior row formed by 5 smooth chaetae (a1–a5); formula of basal row M1m2Rel1L2 with M1, R and L2 ciliated and all other chaetae smooth (Fig. 7C). Chaeta R reduced (ratio of R/m2 0.5). Ventral postlabial chaetotaxy with about 18 ciliate chaetae, postlabial formula 4 (G1–4), 2 (X, X4), 4 (H1–4), and 2 (J1–2) chaetae; b.c. present (Fig. 7C).

Body. Body dorsal macrochaetae from Th II to Abd IV 00/0101+2. Mesothorax without Mac. Two anterolateral S-chaetae (al and ms) present. Th III without Mac, anterolateral sensillum al present. Abd I with lateral S-microchaeta (ms). Chaetotaxy of Abd II–III as in Fig. 8A, B. Abd II chaetotaxy between two dorso-medial trichobothria –aBq1q2 using Gisin’s symbols (Gisin 1967); following Szeptycki’s (1979) notation a=a2, B=m3, q1=m3e and q2=p4. Chaeta a as ciliated mic. Abd IV chaetotaxy as in Fig. 9A. Mac B5, B6, C1, D3, E2, E3, F1, F2 and F3 broader with broad sockets, D2, De3, E4, E4p, E4p2, F3p, Fe4, Fe5, T6 and T7 thinner with smaller sockets. Chaeta E1 not visible, its morphology unknown. Abd IV chaetae associated with the two trichobotria (m, pe and pi) fan-shaped (chaeta a not visible, but with great certainty also fan-shaped) (see also Hüther 1969). Accessory chaeta s, associated with trichobotrium T2, absent. Five S-chaetae (as, ps, and three long dorsal S-chaetae) present. Dorsal chaetotaxy of Abd V as in Fig. 9B. Three S-chaetae (as, acc.p4 and acc.p5) typical for the genus present. Legs without scales. Trochanteral organ with 14 smooth spiny chaetae forming a V-shaped pattern (Fig. 10A). Unguis and unguiculus as in fig. 3 in Stomp (1971). Unguis with subequal paired basal teeth at 45% from inner edge, and with a median unpaired inner tooth at 65% from inner edge, apical tooth absent. A short external tooth also present. Unguiculus lanceolate, external lamella smooth. Tibiotarsal tenent hair spatulate, supraempodial chaeta on tibiotarsus III smooth and acuminate. Ratio of supraempodial chaeta / unguiculus ~0.9. Ventral tube without scales; with 8+8 subequal ciliated chaetae on anterior side and 5+5 subequal ciliated chaetae on posterior side (Fig. 10B); lateral flap with 4 ciliated and 7 smooth chaetae. Manubrium ventrally with scales and 2+2 terminal ciliated chaetae. Manubrial plate with 2 inner chaetae and 2 chaetae external to the 2 pseudopores (as in Fig. 5D). Length of not ringed terminal dens about 4 times the length of mucro. Mucro with distal tooth equal to anteapical one; basal spine reaching tip of anteapical tooth (as in Fig. 5E). Ratio manubrium/dens/mucro as 12:13:1.

Ecology and distribution.

Pseudosinellahuetheri was described from Luxembourg, from a beech forest near Berdorf (Stomp 1971). The original description reported the species also from Germany and Switzerland. Later, the species was found in Austria (Bretschko and Christian 1989), France (Ponge 2004) and Slovakia (Raschmanová et al. 2008). Dányi et al. (2006) collected a species close to P.huetheri in Romania, listed as “Pseudosinellacf.huetheri”, but without any differential character being mentioned.

Discussion

Considering the number of eyes (5+5) and the similar dorsal main macrochaetae distribution (R000/00/0101+2 or R001/00/0101+2), Pseudosinellahartnerae sp. nov. is close to P.altamirensis Baquero, Jordana, Labrada & Luque, 2020; P.horaki Rusek, 1985; P.huetheri; P.mauli Stomp, 1972; P.mucronata Gouze & Deharveng, 1987; and P.sandelsorum Gruia, 1977 (Table 1). The new species is, however, characterized by a unique basal labial chaetotaxy. While P.horaki, P.mauli and P.sandelsorum have M1, M2, E, L1 and L2 as ciliated chaetae, in P.hartnerae sp. nov. only M1 and L2 are ciliated, and m2, r, e, and l1 are smooth. Pseudosinellaaltamirensis bears two ciliated labial chaetae (M1 and R), and P.mucronata has R and occasionally also M1 as ciliated chaetae, while all other chaetae are smooth. Only P.huetheri shows a similar morphology of labial chaetae, with the exception of chaeta R present as a fairly developed ciliated chaeta (r smooth and reduced in P.hartnerae sp. nov). The new species differs from P.huetheri also by the colour pattern and by the presence of Abd II chaeta p (a2p). The new species differs from P.altamirensis and P.mucronata also by the presence of subocular cephalic marcrochaeta Pa5. The new species differs from P.altamirensis and P.mauli by the absence of accessory chaeta s on Abd IV. Besides, the new species differs from P.sandelsorum by the number of teeth of the inner unguis. Pseudosinellahartnerae sp. nov. and P.huetheri share the number of chaetae (2) external to the pseudopores on the manubrial plate, which is greater for P.altamirensis (7–12), P.mauli (3) and P.sandelsorum (4–10).

Table 1.

Comparison of P.hartnerae sp. nov. with related species with 5+5 eyes and similar dorsal macrochaetae distribution.

Species Ch1 Ch2 Ch3 Ch4 Ch5 Ch6 Ch7 Ch8 Ch9 Ch10 Ch11 Ch12
P.altamirensis pale with blue pigmentation M1m2Rel1l2 R000/00/0101+2 1.6–2.2 – + 3 35% 40% 1 2+7–12 2
P.horaki pale greyish blue M1M2REL1L2 R001/00/0101+2 1.6 + – 3 50% 75% 2 U 1
P.huetheri yellowish white M1m2Rel1L2 R001/00/0101+2 1.4 – – 3 45% 65% 2 2+2 1
P.mauli bluish black M1M2rEL1L2 R001/00/0101+2 1.3 + + 3 ~45% 65% 2 2+3 1
P.mucronata diffuse pigmentation m1(M1)m2Rel1l2 R000/00/0101+2 1.8–2.0 – – 3 ~45% 60% 1 U 2
P.sandelsorum dark blue pigment on Ant and legs M1M2REL1L2 R001/00/0101+2 1.3 + – 4 ~50% 70% 2 2+4–10 1
P.hartnerae sp. nov bluish-grey M1m2rel1L2 R001/00/0101+2 1.2–1.4 + – 3 35% 60% 2 2+2 1
Open in a new tab

Legend. Ch1: body colour. Ch2: basal labial chaetotaxy formula. Ch3: body dorsal macrochaetae formula. Ch4: antennal length to head diagonal length ratio. Ch5: Abd II chaeta p: (+) present or (–) absent. Ch6: Abd IV supplementary chaeta s: (+) present or (–) absent. Ch7: number of teeth of inner unguis. Ch8: distance of distal paired claw tooth from the base as a % of total claw length. Ch9: distance of distal unpaired claw tooth from the base as a % of total claw length. Ch10: tenent hair shape: (1) acuminate, (2) clavate. Ch11: number of inner and outer chaetae on manubrial plate. Ch12: habitat: (1) surface, (2) cave. “U”, unknown.

Supplementary Material

XML Treatment for Pseudosinella hartnerae
zookeys.1063.73094-treatment1.xml (25.4KB, xml)
XML Treatment for Pseudosinella huetheri
zookeys.1063.73094-treatment2.xml (29.2KB, xml)

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Edit Horváth (HNHM) for his assistance with the deposition of the type material of the new species; Peter Schwendinger and Lionel Monod for providing the holotype of Pseudosinellahuetheri from the NHMG. We are greatly indebted to editor Louis Deharveng and two anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions improving the manuscript. C. Fiera acknowledges the support by a grant of the Ministry of Research, Innovation and Digitization, CNCS/CCCDI – UEFISCDI, project number PN-III-P1-1.1-TE-2019-0358, within PNCDI III”.

Citation

Winkler D, Németh MT, Fiera C (2021) A new species of Pseudosinella Schäffer, 1897 (Collembola, Entomobryidae) from Hungary and Romania, with redescription of the related species Pseudosinella huetheri Stomp, 1971. ZooKeys 1063: 121–137. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.1063.73094

Funding Statement

Ministry of Research, Innovation and Digitization, CNCS/CCCDI – UEFISCDI, project number PN-III-P1-1.1-TE-2019-0358, within PNCDI III”

References

  1. Baquero E, Jordana R, Labrada L, Luque CG. (2020) A new species of Pseudosinella Schäffer, 1897 (Collembola, Entomobryidae) from Altamira Caves (Cantabria, Spain). ZooKeys 989: 39–54. 10.3897/zookeys.989.52361 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bellinger PF, Christiansen KA, Janssens F. (2021) Checklist of the Collembola of the World. http://www.collembola.org [Accessed on: 11.09.2021]
  3. Börner C. (1913) Die Familien der Collembolen. Zoologischer Anzeiger 41: 315–322. [Google Scholar]
  4. Bretschko G, Christian E. (1989) Collembola in the bed sediments of an Alpine gravel stream (RITRODAT-Lunz Study Area, Austria). Internationale Revue der gesamten Hydrobiologie und Hydrographie 74(5): 491–498. 10.1002/iroh.19890740504 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  5. Buşmachiu G, Kováč Ľ, Miklisová D, Weiner WM. (2017) Riparian Collembola (Hexapoda) communities of northern Moldova, Eastern Europe. ZooKeys 724: 119–134. 10.3897/zookeys.724.12478 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Chen J-X, Christiansen KA. (1993) The genus Sinella with special reference to Sinella s. s. (Collembola: Entomobryidae) of China. Oriental Insects 1993, 27(1): 1–54. 10.1080/00305316.1993.10432236 [DOI]
  7. Christiansen K, Bellinger P, Gama MM da. (1990) Computer Assisted Identification of Specimens of Pseudosinella (Collembola: Entomobryidae). Revue d’Écologie et de Biologie du Sol 27(2): 231–246. [Google Scholar]
  8. Cipola NG, Arbea J, Baquero E, Jordana R, Morais JW, Bellini BC. (2018) The survey Seira Lubbock, 1870 (Collembola, Entomobryidae, Seirinae) from Iberian Peninsula and Canary Islands, including three new species. Zootaxa 4458: 1–66. 10.11646/zootaxa.4458.1.1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Cipola NG, Oliveira JVLC, Bellini BC, Ferreira AS, Lima ECA, Brito RA, Stievano LC, Souza PGC, Zeppelini D. (2020) Review of Eyeless Pseudosinella Schäffer (Collembola, Entomobryidae, and Lepidocyrtinae) from Brazilian Caves. Insects 11(3): e194. [141 pp.] 10.3390/insects11030194 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  10. Dányi L, Traser G. (2008) An annotated checklist of the springtail fauna of Hungary (Hexapoda: Collembola). Opuscula Zoologica 38: 3–82. [Google Scholar]
  11. Dányi L, Traser G, Fiera C, Radwanski JM. (2006) Preliminary data on the Collembola fauna of the Maramureş (Romania). Studia Universitatis Vasile Goldis Arad, Seria Stiintele Vietii 17: 47–51. [Google Scholar]
  12. Fiera C. (2013) Species of the genus Pseudosinella (Collembola: Entomobryidae) in Romanian fauna. Acta Oecologica Carpatica 6: 53–66. [Google Scholar]
  13. Fjellberg A. (1999) The labial palp in Collembola. Zoologischer Anzeiger 237: 309–330. [Google Scholar]
  14. Gisin H. (1964) Collemboles d’Europe VII. Revue Suisse de Zoologie 71(4): 649–678. 10.5962/bhl.part.75615 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  15. Gisin H. (1967) Espèces nouvelles et lignées évolutives de Pseudosinella endogés (Collembola). Memórias e Estudos do Museu Zoologico da Universidade de Coimbra 301: 1–25. [Google Scholar]
  16. Gisin H, Gama MM da. (1969) Espèces nouvelles de Pseudosinella cavernicoles (Insecta, Collembola). Revue suisse de Zoologie 76(6): 143–181. 10.5962/bhl.part.146030 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Gouze A, Deharveng L. (1987) Deux espèces nouvelles de Pseudosinella cavernicoles du Var (Coll.). Bulletin de la Société Entomologique de France 91(3–4): 65–68. [Google Scholar]
  18. Gruia M. (1977) Collemboles euédaphiques de la Vallé Motru Sec. Travaux de l’Institut de Spéologie ”Émile Racovitza” 16: 77–84. [Google Scholar]
  19. Hüther W. (1969) Über einige bemerkenswerte Ur-Insekten aus der Pfalz und benachbarter Gebiete (Protura, Diplura, Collembola). Mitteilungen der Pollichia des Pfälzischen Vereins für Naturkunde und Naturschutz 16: 135–148. [Google Scholar]
  20. Jordana R, Baquero E. (2007) New species of Pseudosinella Schäffer, 1897 (Collembola, Entomobryidae) from Spain. Zootaxa 1465: 1–14. 10.11646/zootaxa.1465.1.1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Jordana R, Baquero E, Ariño AH. (2021) Continuously updated: Collembola DELTA database. University of Navarra. http://www.unav.es/unzyec/collembola/ [Accessed on 14.02.2021]
  22. Lubbock J. (1873) Monograph of the Collembola and Thysanura. Ray Society, London, 276 pp. 10.5962/bhl.title.11583 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  23. Mateos E. (2008) The European Lepidocyrtus Bourlet, 1839 (Collembola: Entomobryidae). Zootaxa 1769: 35–59. 10.11646/zootaxa.1769.1.2 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  24. Ponge JF. (2004) Effets des composés organiques sur la faune du sol: perturbation des communautés et recolonisation des substrats pollués. Technial report. Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, CNRS UMR 7179, 42 pp. [Google Scholar]
  25. Raschmanová N, Kováč L, Miklisova D. (2008) The effect of mesoclimate on Collembola diversity in the Zádiel Valley, Slovak Karst (Slovakia). European Journal of Soil Biology 44: 463–472. 10.1016/j.ejsobi.2008.07.005 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  26. Rusek J. (1985) New Palearctic Lepidocyrtus and Pseudosinella species (Collembola: Entomobryidae). Vestnik Ceskoslovenske Spolecnosti Zoologicke 49: 132–146. [Google Scholar]
  27. Schäffer C. (1896) Die Collembolen der Umgebung von Hamburg und benachbarter Gebiete. Mitteilungen aus dem Naturhistorischen Museum Hamburg 13: 149–216. [Google Scholar]
  28. Schäffer C. (1897) Apterygoten. Hamburger Magalhaensische Sammelreise Apterygoten 8: 1–48. [Google Scholar]
  29. Soto-Adames FN. (2010) Two new species and descriptive notes for five Pseudosinella species (Hexapoda: Collembola: Entomobryidae) from West Virginian (USA) Caves. Zootaxa 2331: 1–34. [Google Scholar]
  30. Stomp N. (1971) Contribution à l’étude des Pseudosinella endogés. Espèces européennes de Pseudosinella à 5+5 yeux. Revue d’écologie et de biologie du sol 8: 173–184. [Google Scholar]
  31. Stomp N. (1972) Deux nouvelles espèces de Pseudosinella endogés d’Europe (Collemboles, Entomobryides). Revue Suisse de Zoologie 79: 279–286. 10.5962/bhl.part.97128 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  32. Szeptycki A. (1972) Morpho-systematic studies on Collembola III. Body chaetotaxy in the first instars of several genera of the Entomobryomorpha. Acta Zoologica Cracoviensia 17: 341–372. [Google Scholar]
  33. Szeptycki A. (1979) Morpho-systematic studies of Collembola. IV. Chaetotaxy of the Entomobryidae and its phylogenetical significance. Polska Akademia Nauk, Zakład Zoologii Systematycznej i Doświadczalnej, Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe, Warszawa and Kraków, 218 pp. [Google Scholar]
  34. Traser G, Szűcs P, Winkler D. (2006) : Collembola diversity of moss habitats in the Sopron Region, NW-Hungary. Acta Silvatica et Lignaria Hungarica 2: 69–80. [Google Scholar]
  35. Wahlgren E. (1906) Apterygoten aus Ägypten und dem Sudan nebst Bemerkungen zur Verbreitung und Systematik der Collembolen. Results of the Swedish Zoological Expedition to Egypt and the White Nile 1901 under the Direction of L.A. Jägerskiöld, Uppsala, 72 pp. [Google Scholar]
  36. Wang F, Chen J-X, Christiansen K. (2003) Taxonomy of the genus Lepidocyrtus s.l. (Collembola: Entomobryidae) in East and Southeast Asia and Malaysia, with description of a new species from the People’s Republic of China. The Canadian Entomologist 135: 823–837. 10.4039/n02-106 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  37. Winkler D, Mateos E. (2018) New species of Pseudosinella Schäffer, 1897 (Collembola, Entomobryidae) from Hungary. Zootaxa 4382(2): 347–366. 10.11646/zootaxa.4382.2.7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Yoshii R, Suhardjono YR. (1992) Collembolan fauna of Indonesia and its affinities III: Collembola of Timor Island. AZAO 1992, 2: 75–96.
  39. Zhang F, Deharveng L. (2015) Systematic revision of Entomobryidae (Collembola) by integrating molecular and new morphological evidence. Zoologica Scripta 44(3): 298–311. 10.1111/zsc.12100 [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 Pseudosinella hartnerae
zookeys.1063.73094-treatment1.xml (25.4KB, xml)
XML Treatment for Pseudosinella huetheri
zookeys.1063.73094-treatment2.xml (29.2KB, xml)

Articles from ZooKeys are provided here courtesy of Pensoft Publishers

RESOURCES