The larva of Drusus vinconi Sipahiler, 1992 (Trichoptera, Limnephilidae, Drusinae)

Abstract

This paper describes the previously unknown larva of Drusus vinconi Sipahiler, 1992. Information on the morphology of the 5th larval instar is given, and the most important diagnostic features are illustrated. In the context of existing identification keys the larva of Drusus vinconi keys together with Drusus annulatus (Stephens, 1837), Drusus biguttatus (Pictet, 1834), Drusus ingridae Sipahiler, 1993, Hadimina torosensis Sipahiler, 2002 and Leptodrusus budtzi (Ulmer, 1913). These species differ in the contours of the pronotum in lateral view, the presence/absence of the pronotal transverse groove, the shape of the median notch of the pronotum (in anterior view), pronotal sculpturing, presence/absence of the lateral carina of the head capsule, the number of proximo-dorsal setae on the mid-and hind femora, where the lateral fringe starts on the abdomen, and in geographic distribution. With respect to zoogeography, Drusus vinconi is a (micro-)endemic of the Western Pyrenees. The species prefers stony substratum in springs and springbrooks of the montane and subalpine region (Graf et al. 2008; Sipahiler 1992, 1993). As a grazer, the larvae of Drusus vinconi feed on biofilm and epilithic algae.

Larval description of Drusus bosnicus Klapálek 1899 (Trichoptera: Limnephilidae), with distributional, molecular and ecological features

“…The following features clearly distinguish larvae of D. bosnicus from other described Drusinae larave (Lepneva 1966; Hickin 1967; Decamps & Pujol 1975; Szczesny 1978; Sedlák 1980; Waringer 1987; Wallace et al 1990; Pitsch 1993; Urbanič et al 2003c; Graf et al 2005, 2009; Waringer & Graf 1997; Waringer et al 2000, 2007a, 2007b, 2008a, 2008b, 2010, 2013a, 2013b, 2015; Vieira-Lanero et al 2005; Kučinić et al 2008, 2010, 2011a, 2011b; Previšić et al 2014a):…”

A hairy case: The evolution of filtering carnivorous Drusinae (Limnephilidae, Trichoptera)

“…Taxonomic knowledge enabling larval identification were hitherto presented for 47 Drusinae species only (references in Previšić et al, 2014a; Waringer et al, 2013a, b). Larval stages of Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera and Trichoptera are crucial quality elements for contemporary biological water quality monitoring approaches (AQEM consortium, 2002; Barbour et al, 1999; Barbour and Yoder, 2000; Graf et al, 2002).…”

Genetic data support local persistence in multiple glacial refugia in the montane net‐winged midge Liponeura cinerascens cinerascens (diptera, blephariceridae)

“…All other Liponeura species known from the region reportedly have an inconspicuous, light pilosity on the ventral side of first body division (Zwick, 1992). While micro‐endemic species (Faille et al., 2007; Giudicelli and Lavandier 1974; Waringer et al., 2013) and cryptic lineages (Finn et al., 2013) are not uncommon in the Pyrenees, further sampling of larvae and adults in the Pyrenees and comparison of additional nuclear markers is necessary to better evaluate life‐stage associations or the presence of cryptic species in the Pyrenees. Although COI on its own is insufficient to draw phylogenetic conclusions, these results suggest that an in‐depth phylogenetic assessment of Liponeura cinerascens s.l.…”