BookPDF Available

Checklist and distribution of the Italian fauna: 10,000 terrestrial and inland water species

Authors:

Abstract

Italy has a very rich fauna, with more than 57,000 species recorded so far. This high biodiversity is a privilege, but also a responsibility: its protection is one of our challen- ges and is a goal that everybody should take aim at. In fact, Italy together with another 180 countries ratified the Rio de Janeiro Convention on Biodiversity, which in 1992 established at worldwide level the intrinsic value of biodiversity. Ten years later, in 2002, the World Conference for Sustainable Development in Johannesburg defined a precise target: to reduce the biodiversity loss by 2010, thus the countdown has already started. Conservation of biodiversity in general, and of animal biodiversity in particular, can not be obtained without a good knowledge of what we want to protect. For this purpose the Italian Ministry for the Environment and Territory and the Nature Protec- tion Division supported in the last years several projects aimed at the improvement of the scientific knowledge of the various components of biodiversity of Italy. Among them, the project “Checklist and distribution of the Italian fauna”, the results of which are presented and discussed in this volume, represents the most complete knowledge available on the fauna of a given country. The volume and the CD report more than 500,000 distribution data of about 10,000 terrestrial and freshwater species of the Ita- lian fauna. This huge amount of data is pride for Italy, but it is also an essential operati- ve tool to compile Red Lists, to create environmental quality models, and to contribute to implement the Habitat Directive and thus reduce biodiversity loss in Italy by the target year 2010. The Checklist is a knowledge tool of great relevance, which places Italy in first place worldwide for biodiversity conservation.
CHECKLIST AND DISTRIBUTION
OF THE ITALIAN FAUNA
10,000 terrestrial and inland water species
CHECKLIST AND DISTRIBUTION OF THE ITALIAN FAUNA
10,000 terrestrial and inland water species
Comitato Scientifico
per la Fauna d’Italia
Ministero dell’Ambiente
e della Tutela del Territorio e del Mare
ISBN 88-89230-09-6
ISBN 88 -89230- 09- 6
9 788889 2 30091
788889 2300919
© Copyright 2006 - Comune di Verona
ISSN 0392-0097
ISBN 88-89230-09-6
All rights reserved.
No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system,
or transmitted in any form or by any means,
without the prior permission in writing of the publishers and of the Authors.
Direttore Responsabile
Alessandra Aspes
C
H
CHECKLIST AND DISTRIBUTION
O
F
THE
ITALIAN FA
U
NA
10,000 terrestrial and inland water species10,000 terrestrial and inland water species
emorie del Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di Verona - 2. Seri
Sezione Scienze della Vita 17 - 2006
PROMOTING AGENCIES
Italian Ministry for Environment and Territory and Sea, Nature Protection Directorate
Civic Museum of Natural History of Verona
Scientifi c Committee for the Fauna of Italy
Calabria University, Department of Ecology
EDITORIAL BOARD
Aldo Cosentino
Alessandro La Posta
Augusto Vigna Taglianti
Alessandra Aspes
Leonardo Latella
SCIENTIFIC BOARD
Marco Bologna
Pietro Brandmayr
Eugenio Dupré
Alessandro La Posta
Leonardo Latella
Alessandro Minelli
Sandro Ruffo
Fabio Stoch
Augusto Vigna Taglianti
Marzio Zapparoli
EDITORS
Sandro Ruffo
Fabio Stoch
DESIGN
Riccardo Ricci
LAYOUT
Riccardo Ricci
Zeno Guarienti
EDITORIAL ASSISTANT
Elisa Giacometti
TRANSLATORS
Maria Cristina Bruno (1-72, 239-307)
Daniel Whitmore (73-238)
VOLUME CITATION:
Ruffo S., Stoch F. (eds.), 2006. Checklist and distribution of the Italian fauna. Memorie del Museo
Civico di Storia Naturale di Verona, 2.Serie, Sezione Scienze della Vita 17, with CD-ROM.
CHAPTER CITATION:
Minelli A., 2006. Annelida Hirudinea. In: Ruffo S., Stoch F. (eds.). Checklist and distribution
of the Italian fauna. Memorie del Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di Verona, 2.Serie, Sezione
Scienze della Vita 17: 77-78, with data on CD-ROM.
This volume was published with the fi nancial support of the Italian Ministry for Environment and
Territory and Sea, Nature Protection Directorate.
C
HE
C
KLI
S
T AND DI
S
TRIB
U
TI
ON
O
F
THE
IT
A
LI
A
N F
AU
N
A
10,000 terrestrial and inland water species10,000 terrestrial and inland water species
6
Introduction 13
The project CKmap (Checklist and distribution
of the Italian fauna): methods
and informatical techniques 15
The checklist of the Italian fauna 21
The chorotypes of the Italian fauna 25
Endemism in Italy 29
Analysis of the distribution in Italy
of species richness and rarity 33
The Italian faunal Provinces 37
Chronogeonemy analysis: some examples
regarding species of the Italian fauna 41
Distribution of Italian fauna species versus
Eunis, Corine and Natura 2000 habitat types 47
The exotic species of the Italian fauna 57
Criteria for the compilation of the fi rst
Red List of species of national and regional
interest 63
Strategies for the
conservation of Italian fauna 67
TAXONOMIC SECTION 71
Annelida Oligochaeta 73
Annelida Hirudinea 77
Mollusca Gastropoda Prosobranchia
and Heterobranchia Heterostropha 79
Mollusca Bivalvia 83
Crustacea Branchiopoda Anostraca,
Notostraca, Conchostraca 85
Crustacea Branchiopoda Cladocera 87
Crustacea Copepoda Calanoida 91
Crustacea Copepoda Cyclopoida 93
Crustacea Copepoda Harpacticoida 97
Crustacea Malacostraca
Bathynellacea 101
Crustacea Malacostraca
Thermosbaenacea 103
Crustacea Malacostraca Mysidacea
from groundwaters 105
Crustacea Malacostraca Isopoda 107
Crustacea Malacostraca Amphipoda 109
Crustacea Malacostraca Decapoda 113
Arachnida Pseudoscorpionida 115
Arachnida Araneae Salticidae 119
Arachnida Acari Actinedida
Hydrachnidia 121
Chilopoda 123
Insecta Ephemeroptera 127
Insecta Odonata 131
Insecta Blattaria 133
Insecta Mantodea 135
Insecta Orthoptera 137
Insecta Dermaptera 141
Insecta Plecoptera 143
Insecta Heteroptera Nepomorpha
and Gerromorpha 147
Insecta Heteroptera Leptopodidae,
Saldidae, Miridae (partim),
Tingidae 151
Insecta Homoptera Auchenorrhyncha
(partim) 155
Insecta Coleoptera Carabidae
(Carabini, Cychrini, Trechini, Abacetini,
Stomini, Pterostichini) 159
Insecta Coleoptera Hydroadephaga 165
INDEX
7
Insecta Coleoptera Hydrophiloidea 167
Insecta Coleoptera Hydraenidae 169
Insecta Coleoptera Georissidae 171
Insecta Coleoptera Histeridae 173
Insecta Coleoptera Cholevidae and
Platypsyllidae 177
Insecta Coleoptera Staphylinidae 181
Insecta Coleoptera Staphylinidae Pselaphinae 183
Insecta Coleoptera Staphylinidae
Omaliinae 185
Insecta Coleoptera Staphylinidae
Staphylininae 187
Insecta Coleoptera Staphylinidae
Aleocharinae
(genus Leptusa Kraatz, 1859) 189
Insecta Coleoptera Lucanidae 191
Insecta Coleoptera Scarabaeoidea 193
Insecta Coleoptera Dryopoidea 197
Insecta Coleoptera Elateridae 199
Insecta Coleoptera Buprestidae 203
Insecta Coleoptera Nitidulidae 205
Insecta Coleoptera Cucujidae 209
Insecta Coleoptera Cryptophagidae 213
Insecta Coleoptera Tenebrionidae 215
Insecta Coleoptera Cerambycidae 217
Insecta Coleoptera Chrysomelidae
Cryptocephalinae 221
Insecta Coleoptera Chrysomelidae
Alticinae 225
Insecta Coleoptera Curculionoidea 229
Insecta Neuroptera, Megaloptera
and Raphidioptera 233
Insecta Mecoptera 235
Insecta Diptera Tipulidae 237
Insecta Diptera Simuliidae 239
Insecta Diptera Stratiomyidae 241
Insecta Diptera Syrphidae
(Syrphinae, Syrphini) 243
Insecta Diptera Conopidae 245
Insecta Diptera Sciomyzidae 247
Insecta Trichoptera 249
Insecta Lepidoptera Hepialidae 253
Insecta Lepidoptera Zygaenoidea 255
Insecta Lepidoptera Papilionoidea
(Rhopalocera) 257
Insecta Lepidoptera Noctuidae
(Plusiinae, Noctuinae) 263
Insecta Hymenoptera Chrysididae 267
Insecta Hymenoptera Dryinidae
Embolemidae Sclerogibbidae 269
Insecta Hymenoptera Scolioidea
(Tiphiidae excluded) 271
Insecta Hymenoptera Aculeata
Apoidea (partim) 273
Agnatha Osteichthyes 277
Amphibia and Reptilia 281
Mammalia Insectivora 285
Mammalia Chiroptera 289
Mammalia Rodentia 293
AUTHORS LIST 297
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 303
Italy has a very rich fauna, with more than 57,000 species recorded so far. This high
biodiversity is a privilege, but also a responsibility: its protection is one of our challen-
ges and is a goal that everybody should take aim at. In fact, Italy together with another
180 countries ratifi ed the Rio de Janeiro Convention on Biodiversity, which in 1992
established at worldwide level the intrinsic value of biodiversity. Ten years later, in
2002, the World Conference for Sustainable Development in Johannesburg defi ned a
precise target: to reduce the biodiversity loss by 2010, thus the countdown has already
started. Conservation of biodiversity in general, and of animal biodiversity in particular,
can not be obtained without a good knowledge of what we want to protect. For this
purpose the Italian Ministry for the Environment and Territory and the Nature Protec-
tion Division supported in the last years several projects aimed at the improvement
of the scientifi c knowledge of the various components of biodiversity of Italy. Among
them, the project “Checklist and distribution of the Italian fauna”, the results of which
are presented and discussed in this volume, represents the most complete knowledge
available on the fauna of a given country. The volume and the CD report more than
500,000 distribution data of about 10,000 terrestrial and freshwater species of the Ita-
lian fauna. This huge amount of data is pride for Italy, but it is also an essential operati-
ve tool to compile Red Lists, to create environmental quality models, and to contribute
to implement the Habitat Directive and thus reduce biodiversity loss in Italy by the
target year 2010. The Checklist is a knowledge tool of great relevance, which places
Italy in fi rst place worldwide for biodiversity conservation.
Aldo Cosentino
General Director
Italian Ministry for the Environment and Territory and Sea
Nature Protection Directorate
9
10
It is with great pleasure that I present this volume, which represents the end point of a long and com-
plex journey in the study of Italian fauna, to which I was fortunate to be involved at different levels and
with different roles, and it is the starting point of a new phase, in which the knowledge we obtained
so far will be applied to the management and protection of the fauna. This volume represents the most
detailed study available on the fauna of a given country; it was the result of a long, painstaking work
which involved all the zoology specialists of our country for more than 10 years. It was the result of
the synergy between the Scientific Committee for Italian Fauna and the Italian Ministry for the Envi-
ronment and Territory.
The origin of this project can be found in the series “Fauna d’Italia”, created in 1952 under the auspi-
ces of the Italian National Academy of Entomology and the Italian Zoological Union, programmed
and realised by the Scientific Committee for Italian Fauna (formally established in 1989, with the two
promoting agencies represented with the same status), and published by the Calderini publishing
house. The first volume was issued in 1956, the 40th is in press in this moment, and several more are
in progress. This is a prestigious and long-term work, of great importance, which suffered several inter-
ruptions, and therefore it is still in progress.
The productive relationship developed during the last 15 years between the Scientific Committee for
Italian Fauna and the Italian Ministry for the Environment (now Italian Ministry for the Environment
and Territory) allowed to continue the publication of the monographic volumes, and to go one step
ahead in the knowledge of Italian fauna. In fact, in 1989-1991 a group of Italian zoologists founded
the Technical-Scientific Committee on Italian fauna of the Italian Ministry for the Environment, with
Sandro Ruffo as president, and Sandro La Posta as secretary. This Committee developed the project
“Checklist”. This project, which we called “the three Sandro’s project” from the names of the main
promoters (Ruffo, La Posta and Sandro Minelli, at the time president of the Scientific Committee for
Italian Fauna), realised the “Checklist of the species of the Italian fauna”, published in 1993-1995 by
Calderini, under the aegis of the Commission of the European Communities. The one hundred-ten
chapters of the checklist include all the 57,000 species of Italian fauna. This work, which resulted from
the efforts of hundreds of specialists and the cooperation of museums and scientific associations (most
conspicuously the Italian Entomological Society), filled the gaps of the “Fauna d’Italia”, and Italy is
today the only country in the world with a complete and updated inventory of its fauna.
The next step is represented by this volume, the “Checklist and distribution of the Italian fauna”, which
completes the project “CKmap”, developed in cooperation among the Italian Ministry for the Environ-
ment and Territory and Sea (Nature Protection Division), the Scientific Committee for Italian Fauna,
the Italian Zoological Union, the Civic Museum of Natural History of Verona, and the Ecology Depart-
ment of Calabria University, and was coordinated by Sandro Ruffo and Fabio Stoch. From the species
checklist a good number of taxa which represented good faunistic and biogeographic indicators (more
than 10,000 species) were selected to represent terrestrial and freshwater Italian fauna. Sixty-eight
zoologists collected the point distribution records of these taxa in a database. Every distribution datum
was georeferenced, and software which automatically analyzed the taxa distribution and produced
distribution and thematic maps were developed. The result is a detailed faunistic knowledge on about
one-fifth of the animal species present in Italy, which is a tool that transforms the presence-absence
data of the most significant taxa into their real distribution. The point distribution so obtained is carto-
graphable, and can be superimposed to the thematic maps, and can be used to evaluate and manage
local biodiversity, and to create ecological and environmental quality models.
The project “CKmap” therefore represents the logical continuation and development of the project
“Checklist”: the next steps will be its extension to other species of the Italian fauna, its application
to the “Natura 2000” network, and its use to check the lists of the Habitat Directive. The integration
of the “Fauna d’Italia” series with the “Cheklist” and with the project “CKmap” is now a reality, and
our country therefore is one of the most advanced in the world in regards to the knowledge of its
faunistic heritage.
Augusto Vigna Taglianti
President
Scientifi c Committee for the Italian Fauna
11
The Civic Museum of Natural History of Verona is proud to publish the “Checklist and distribution of
the Italian fauna” (CKmap) in its Memories.
This volume completes the project of the Italian Ministry for the Environment and Territory, aimed at
the informatization of the “Checklist and distribution of the Italian fauna” (1999-2002). The project
was coordinated by Sandro Ruffo, Fabio Stoch and Leonardo Latella. Thanks to these efforts, the Mu-
seum became the reference point for those numerous Italian zoologists who cooperated and shared
the need to continue the work developed with the 1993-1995 checklist. The result was a fundamental
tool which is manageable, updatable and accessible to the public, and thus needed to be published.
We thank the Scientific Committee for the Fauna of Italy, which involved us in this phase of the project,
which is represented by the complete publication of the electronic checklist with its georeferenced
database that included the distribution maps of more than 10,000 Italian species. This is a fundamental
tool for the knowledge of Italian fauna with a potential role in biodiversity conservation, and in EU
directives application. The natural history museums represent precious biodiversity archives, as shown
by the large number of museums visited by the specialists involved in this project in order to complete
the database.
The Civic Museum of Natural History of Verona has often promoted initiatives related to the know-
ledge and management of the territory. In fact, a good knowledge of the environment is the base
for its management and the natural history museums, because of their multidisciplinarity and their
tradition of research on the territory, are probably the best place to plan and coordinate these kinds
of research.
Alessandra Aspes
Director
Civic Museum of Natural History of Verona
Checklist and distribution of the italian fauna. 10,000 terrestrial and inland water species | Memorie del Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di Verona
13
Introduction
Sandro Ruffo, Fabio Stoch
With the publication of the Checklist of the Italian fauna
(Minelli et al., 1993-95), Italy was the fi rst country which
compiled a complete list of its fauna. 55,656 species
were recorded (protozoans excluded), 47,225 of which
(almost 85%) are terrestrial and freshwater taxa. The ani-
mal diversity of Italy is extraordinarily rich: the number
of species recorded lists Italy among the fi rst countries in
Europe, even after the completion of the checklist of the
European fauna (http://www.faunaeur.org), which fol-
lowed the same criteria of the Italian experience.
Several factors have changed from the publication of the
printed version of the Checklist (110 volumes). The devel-
opment of electronic databases and the resulting possibility
for spreading information on the World Wide Web, made
it necessary to transform the printed checklist in a search-
able database (Stoch, Minelli, 2004). This database had to
be updateable, publishable on the internet, and upgrade-
able. The creation of an electronic database represented
the fi rst part of the project described in this volume, and
was developed with a cooperative agreement between the
Nature Protection Directorate (formerly Nature Conserva-
tion Division) of the Italian Ministry for the Environment
and Territory and Sea and the Museum of Natural History
of Verona. The results was the on-line publication of the
Checklist (http://checklist.faunaitalia.it).
Once the species list was stored into a database, the fol-
lowing step was the realization of the project CKmap
(Stoch, 2004: the acronym is derived from “Checklist
mapping”) which lasted four years, and was carried out
by the Nature Protection Directorate, the Museum of
Natural History of Verona, and the Ecology Department
of the University of Calabria, under the high scientifi c pa-
tronage of the Scientifi c Committee for the Fauna of Italy.
More than 10,000 terrestrial and freshwater species were
selected from the checklist on the basis of their greatest
value as biodiversity indicators. Sixty-eight taxonomists
and numerous co-workers provided data on the distribu-
tion and ecology of each of these species, which were
entered in a database. The distribution data were geo-
referenced, and a user-friendly, interactive software for
the exploration of the data set and distributional maps
was developed (http://CKmap.faunaitalia.it).
The project CKmap included the following working
steps:
• defi nition of criteria, screening of the checklist and
subsequent selection of a proper number of bioindica-
tor taxa, which would provide a representative picture
of the Italian terrestrial and freshwater fauna; ten-thou-
sand taxa were thus selected among Annelids, Mol-
luscs, Arthropods, and Vertebrates (birds excluded)
• creation of the structure of the database which would
contain the information pertaining to nomenclature,
ecology, biogeography of the selected species, and
their georeferenced distribution data
involvement of taxonomists who compiled the da-
tabase using data from literature, from museum and
private collections, and from unpublished material
(in this case, if the material was provided by a third
party, the taxonomists validated it); the detailed dis-
tributional records assembled by the taxonomists
amount to about 548,000
creation of georeferencing tools, the most versatile
being the database of UTM coordinates (ED50 and
WGS84) of the 46,961 Italian toponyms included in
the Touring Club road atlases, with precision range
of one meter. A more accurate and sophisticated in-
strument was obtained storing in a single database
the toponyms of the Italian Military Geographic In-
stitute (scale 1:25,000 maps), for a total of 728,130
toponyms (this database is not yet public, and can be
used only by operators of the Italian Ministry for the
Environment and Territory)
creation of the GIS layer of the 3,556 cells of the
UTM 10x10 km grid which covers the whole Italian
territory (small islands included); this GIS layer was
used for distribution data mapping
accurate retrospective georeferencing of the distri-
butional data provided by the taxonomists; doubtful
or old data referred to wide areas were not georef-
erenced; they were not deleted from the database
where they are reported as “historical” data
creation of a software for the automatic exploration of
the geographical distribution of the species; creation of
distribution maps of species and subspecies of the Ital-
ian fauna for the future realization of thematic atlases,
with the option of exporting data into GIS software
production of maps of distribution over the Italian ter-
ritory of species richness, rarity, and endemism, and
of chorological types for the study taxa
Scope of this volume is to illustrate and make publicly
available this huge amount of data. The volume is di-
vided into two parts. The general section describes the
project structure and methods, analyses the distribution
patterns of species richness, rarity, endemism, and cho-
rological categories, and provides some examples of the
use of faunal data for the reconstruction of the evolution
Sandro Ruffo, Fabio Stoch
14
of areals through time (also known as chronogeonemy),
compilation of Red Lists, and identifi cation of alien spe-
cies. In the second section the taxonomists describe the
studied taxa according to the following scheme: gen-
eralities, materials and methods, biodiversity, ecology,
zoogeography, alien species, conservation. Each chapter
includes a map showing the Italian territory coverage for
that faunal group and the habitus of a representative spe-
cies. Finally, the volume includes a CD containing the
whole dataset and the software (named CKmap) needed
to explore the interactive maps and search the database;
an on-line help is provided as well.
The potential of this large data set goes beyond the pro-
duction of thematic atlases; the CKmap database is in
fact the most complete tool available in Europe to study
the fauna of a nation. This operative tool allows to:
identify the biodiversity, rarity, and endemism
hotspots on the Italian territory; as a consequence, it
will be possible to classify the UTM grid cells on the
basis of conservation priorities
identify vulnerable and endangered species, as well
as bioindicators, in the database, in order to generate
a list of species of priority interest at European, na-
tional, and regional level, and a provisional Red List
of Italian fauna
over-impose the distribution layers of the species with
the Nature 2000 sites, and with the thematic maps
produced by other Agreements, with the fi nal aim of
creating ecological and management models
identify the lesser-known areas from a faunal point of
view, with the purpose of fi lling the gaps with fi eld
research.
The inclusion of invertebrates in this study (they represent
more than 97% of the Italian fauna) will fi nally allow to
evaluate the representativeness of the Nature 2000 net-
work and its effi ciency in protecting the species which
are vulnerable, endangered or at risk of extinction, thus
helping to reach the goal of biodiversity management in
Italy: to halt, or at leats reduce, biodiversity loss by 2010,
as established in 2002 at the World Summit on Sustain-
able Develoment of Johannesburg.
But perhaps the use which the taxonomist who worked
at this project will prefer is to have available “at a mouse
click” all the faunal knowledge pertaining to the taxonom-
ic group of interest, and to pass it to the students, thus cre-
ating a new generation of taxonomists which Italy needs.
In fact, we know that to overcome the “taxonomic impedi-
ment” (i.e. the gaps of taxonomic knowledge) is one of the
challenges of the future, as stated in the Global Taxonomy
Initiative of the Rio de Janeiro Convention on Biological
Diversity. The Convention was already ratifi ed in 1994 by
Italy and 180 other nations. Under its umbrella, our coun-
try, with its high species richness and its old tradition in
taxonomic studies, has to use all its resources.
Literature
MINELLI A., RUFFO S., LA POSTA S. (Editors), 1993-95. Checklist delle specie della fauna italiana. Calderini, Bologna, fascicoli 1-110.
STOCH F., MINELLI A., 2004. Il progetto ‘Checklist delle specie della fauna italiana’. Atti Convegno “La conoscenza botanica e zoo-
logica in Italia: dagli inventari al monitoraggio”, Università di Roma “La Sapienza”, 14 dicembre 2001. Quaderni di Conservazione
della Natura, 18: 11-20.
STOCH F., 2004. Banche dati e distribuzione della fauna italiana: gli invertebrati. Atti Convegno “La conoscenza botanica e zoologica
in Italia: dagli inventari al monitoraggio”, Università di Roma “La Sapienza”, 14 dicembre 2001. Quaderni di Conservazione della
Natura, 18: 21-36.
Checklist and distribution of the italian fauna. 10,000 terrestrial and inland water species | Memorie del Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di Verona
15
The project CKmap
The assessment of Italian faunal resources was requested
by the Italian Ministry for the Environment and Territory
with the goal of identifying those areas essential for the
preservation of Italian fauna. The fi rst step of this work was
the publication of the Checklist of the species of the Ital-
ian fauna (Minelli et al., 1993-95), followed by the project
Checklist and distribution of the Italian fauna developed
by the Civic Museum of Natural History of Verona (by
Sandro Ruffo, Fabio Stoch, Leonardo Latella), which last-
ed three years (1999-2001) and included the convention
Completion of the knowledge (module C) with the Italian
Botanical Society, carried out by the Department of Ecol-
ogy of the University of Calabria (by Pietro Brandmayr),
which added the distribution of another 3,500 species of
vertebrates and invertebrates.
Species selection criteria
The group of species selected was represented, at the
end of the project, by more than 10,000 species of terres-
trial and inland water invertebrates, which were chosen
by screening the Checklist (Stoch, 2004). The following
criteria, following Pearson (1995), were adopted when
choosing the taxonomic groups:
groups studied by professional and experienced tax-
onomists;
groups which included species with well-known dis-
tribution over the entire country;
• groups which included both species with restricted
habitats and small areals, and species with wide dis-
tribution;
groups which included species with areals that do
not change with time;
groups with a well-established taxonomy, and few
synonymies.
On the basis of these criteria the taxonomic groups were
selected; for each of these groups a subgroup of species
was then chosen. One of the requisites for the realiza-
tion of the project was, when possible, the inclusion of
all the species belonging to the selected groups: in this
way any subjective choice which could have biased any
subsequent statistical analysis was avoided.
Specialists were chosen trying to use fi rst the authors of
the Checklist (MInelli et al., 1993-95) and, second, using
other specialists available. Each of them discussed the
choice of taxa and organised the data analysis with the
project coordinators.
The project CKmap (Checklist
and distribution of the Italian fauna):
methods and informatical techniques
Leonardo Latella, Sandro Ruffo, Fabio Stoch
Collection of ecological and distributional data
Data were obtained from literature, from museums and
private collections, and from direct observations. Sixty-
eight specialists were in charge of fi lling the data-fi les;
they in turn cooperated with other specialists, both pro-
fessionals and amateurs, in order to present the most
updated species distribution in Italy. The specialists’
data fi les were written in MS Access®, MS Excel®, or as
ASCII, for PC or Mac. All the specialists provided three
data tables: the Species table is a revision of the Check-
list of each given group (Minelli et al., 1993-95), includ-
ing code, scientifi c name, author, notes (for species new
for science and for Italy); data from the checklist were
completed with distributional and autoecological data
such as the chorotype (according to the classifi cation
by Vigna Taglianti et al., 1995, 1999), habitat, feeding
habits, conservation status according to simplifi ed IUCN
categories, and value as bioindicators. The Stations table
included, for each species, the list of collecting sites (re-
gion, province, general and detailed location, elevation)
and, for each location, the datum origin and the year of
the most recent collection. The Sources table includes
the literature that was analysed, or the collections that
were examined.
Database structure
The database was entered on PC with operative system
Windows 2000/XP and software MS Access® 2000. This
kind of database is useful for databases not larger than 2
Gb; the capacity is large enough even for a fauna as rich
as the Italian one. The database structure is very simple,
so to execute research queries quickly. For this reason,
the number of “key” tables is limited to the three tables
provided by the specialists (Species, Stations, Sources),
modifi ed as necessary. The species table includes genus,
species and subspecies, whereas the higher ranks (fam-
ily, order, class, phylum) are included in a separate ta-
ble (link based on the family code), in order to have a
clearer structure. The code is hierarchical (three-digit for
the phylum code, another three-digit for the class, and so
on for lower ranks), allowing to easily select the species
belonging to a higher taxon, and to reproduce the cor-
rect taxonomic sequence using a tree structure, which
is usually available in several Windows® programming
languages.
The distribution table includes, for each species, the
localities given by the specialists, with coordinates,
and a fi eld indicating the accuracy of the coordinates.
The localities are presented in two fi elds: the fi rst (gen-
eral locality) includes the toponyms of the Road Atlas
1:200,000 of the Touring Club Italiano which are closer
to the exact collecting site; the second (detailed local-
ity) includes the exact collecting site, as reported in lit-
erature or from the collection labels (when available).
The general locality is used for two main purposes: a)
easy identifi cation of the localities in a widely-used
commercial atlas; b) the possibility to attribute the co-
ordinates on the basis of the toponym, in case more
detailed information is not available.
The station table assembling the single fi les provided
by the numerous specialists which contributed to the
project includes about 548,000 records, but is continu-
ously expanding.
Leonardo Latella, Sandro Ruffo, Fabio Stoch
16
Taxa N° species N° records
Annelida Oligochaeta 196 5644
Annelida Hirudinea 24 1076
Mollusca Gastropoda, Bivalvia 127 21310
Branchiopoda Anostraca, Notostraca, Spinicaudata 24 148
Branchiopoda Cladocera 114 5272
Maxillopoda Copepoda 312 8034
Malacostraca Bathynellacea, Thermosbaenacea 11 15
Malacostraca Isopoda (freshwater) 51 1123
Malacostraca Amphipoda 113 4119
Malacostraca Mysidacea (subterranean) 3 41
Malacostraca Decapoda 12 816
Araneae Salticidae 127 2018
Pseudoscorpionida 217 3858
Acari (freshwater) 145 1867
Chilopoda 153 13780
Ephemeroptera 105 6057
Odonata 89 14564
Dermaptera 25 3170
Orthoptera, Mantodea, Phasmodea 364 23327
Blattaria 44 1986
Plecoptera 153 4697
Neuropteroidea, Mecoptera 194 4637
Heteroptera 301 13090
Homoptera 337 5933
Coleoptera Aphodiidae, Scarabeidae 176 8205
Coleoptera Bostrichidae 2 21
Coleoptera Buprestidae 212 10181
Coleoptera Carabidae 407 16243
Coleoptera Cerambycidae 276 17475
Coleoptera Cetoniidae 3 196
Coleoptera Cholevidae, Platypsillidae 251 6275
Coleoptera Chrysomelidae 460 16135
Coleoptera Cryptophagidae 134 3790
Coleoptera Cucujidae 35 739
Coleoptera Curculionoidea 689 13004
Data georeferencing
The Italian Touring Club (TCI) and the Military Geographic
Institute (IGM) provided the toponyms database of the at-
las (in .rtf format), and of the 1:25,000 scale maps (3,546
les in .dbf format), respectively. However, the struc-
ture of those data had several problems: the fi les of the
728,130 toponyms of the IGM maps, had coordinates er-
roneously converted from the Gauss-Boaga system to the
UTM ED50 system, which is the one used as the base for
the offi cial map of Italy. Other fi les had wrong latitudes,
almost all the small islands of the Tuscan Archipelago
had wrong coordinates, and the toponyms of the map
323II SE bis were missing. Besides the latter one, all the
remaining mistakes were corrected and all the toponyms
were merged into one table, in a MS Access 2000 data-
base. This database is protected by copyright and thus it
is not accessible by the public. The fi le containing the
46,957 TCI toponyms had several errors: some toponyms
were erroneously located, and some were missing; there
were several homonyms, some due to misspellings and
some due to the omission of phonetic accentuation. All
these problems were solved with a preliminary screening
and with the help of the specialists who used that fi le.
This fi le is available in MS Access or MS Excel format for
all the specialists on the CD-ROM.
The precise georeferencing of TCI toponyms was ob-
tained by queries and GIS techniques in Arcview®; all
the questionable records were validated by manual cross-
validation with the electronic IGM maps 1:100,000 and
with the printed TCI atlases. The cross-checks were car-
ried out with the aid of the Italian Toponyms fi le by IGM
(728,130 toponyms). This check led to deletion from
the TCI list of foreign toponyms and of those reported
twice. The 46,957 TCI toponyms were attributed to two
categories: A (correct georeferentiation) and G (georef-
erentiation based on the barycentre of wide toponyms,
such as lakes, mountains, rivers and streams, large cities,
natural reserves, exc.). In order not to loose the informa-
tion regarding the corrections, the letter F was given to
those toponyms within category A which did not cor-
respond univocally to those in the Italian Toponyms fi le
deducted from the 1:25,000 IGM maps. Moreover, the
CKmap project (Checklist and distribution of the Italian fauna): methods and informatical techniques
17
Coleoptera Dryopoidea 74 8693
Coleoptera Georissidae 5 268
Coleoptera Elateridae 241 14283
Coleoptera Histeridae 157 12956
Coleoptera Hydraenidae 157 5781
Coleoptera Hydroadephaga, Hydrophiloidea 379 36156
Coleoptera Lucanidae 9 1191
Coleoptera Nitidulidae 178 7645
Coleoptera Staphylinidae 704 25901
Coleoptera Tenebrionidae 89 3660
Trichoptera 430 13188
Lepidoptera Hepialidae, Noctuidae, Lasiocampidae,
Arctiidae, Sphingidae 176 11270
Lepidoptera Papilionoidea, Zygaenoidea 324 78615
Diptera Conopidae 63 1354
Diptera Simuliidae, Sciomyzidae 151 1836
Diptera Stratyomyidae 89 1434
Diptera Syrphidae 108 3719
Diptera Tipulidae 174 2945
Hymenoptera Apoidea 228 6623
Hymenoptera Chrysididae 231 5067
Hymenoptera Drynidae, Embolemidae, Sclerogibbidae 72 659
Hymenoptera Scolioidea 85 2546
Cyclostomata, Osteychthyes 76 16138
Amphibia, Reptilia 96 31920
Mammalia Chiroptera 34 4163
Mammalia Insectivora, Rodentia 47 12227
column “notes” lists the IGM toponyms which coincid-
ed with the TCI toponyms, but had different names, and
their corrected names or coordinates; most of the cor-
rections regarded misspellings, wrong TCI coordinates
in the indices, changes of I with l (L in lower case) and
vice versa.
The metric coordinates (10 m precision range) were cal-
culated for the TCI toponyms, following the system UTM
ED 50, fuse 32; the toponyms were mapped on the Ital-
ian map as a layer of Arcview, to further check them by
superimposing electronic maps. Finally, the toponyms
were electronically assigned to their province; for those
toponyms extending between more provinces (as it is
the case for mountains, rivers, exc.) the province cor-
responding to the barycentre of the toponym (as in the
IGM Italian toponyms) was used. Because this was obvi-
ously a simplifi cation, the distribution table may show a
different province, according to the mountain side or the
river bank where data were collected.
The georeferencing of data provided by the specialists
was a long and not error-free process, due mainly to
homonyms and orthography. Data were georeferenced
by query with TCI or IGM toponyms, and the coordinates
provided by the specialists were manually and electroni-
cally checked (correspondence of regions, provinces,
toponyms; correspondence of the cells of the UTM 10x10
Km grid with the list assembled for the entire Italian ter-
ritory). Routines in Visual Basic for Applications of MS
Access were run, in order to catch the georeferentiation
mistakes, eliminating all those bugs that could be detect-
ed electronically. The remaining work, referring to more
than 40,000 data, was done manually. The complexity
of the task and the large amount of georeferenced data
(more than 531,000 records) explains the possible per-
sistance of some mistakes, which will be detected when
specialists and users make use of the database, and will
communicate them to the editors.
The results of this work are the georeferentiation of the
sites with a degree of precision that varies according to
the following parameters:
• accuracy of the data recorded by collectors, which
were often transcribed from a museum collection la-
bel;
accuracy of the data recorded in taxonomic and fau-
nistic reports;
density of toponyms in a given geographic region (the
higher the density, the more precise the geographic
localization);
accuracy with which the specialists searched for the lo-
calities obtained by collection labels or by literature.
For those data which were univocally identifi able but did
not have enough details regarding the location, the preci-
sion obtained substituting the TCI toponyms to the station
name varies between 0 and 3 Km, with maximum values
of 5 Km in Calabria, a function of the distribution of the
toponyms on the Italian territory. It is therefore necessary
to distinguish the precision level of the georeferencing
(which represents the real data display) from the accuracy
of the data, which are at times so very detailed that they
will be precisely cartographed in the future, if needed. The
detailed position of a station, when available, is in the da-
tabase, so that in the future the most accurate georeferen-
tiation of sites of particular interest (i.e. EU interest sites,
area with high endemicity or rarity, area subject to envi-
ronmental impact assessment studies) will be possible.
In order to develop maps compatible with the European
Invertebrate Survey and with the territory infomatization
systems, the TCI toponyms were georeferenced using the
IGM toponyms lists and maps. The UTM international
ellipsoid coordinate system (ED 50), with alphanumeric
military coding (MGRS) was chosen. The barycentre of
each toponym was georeferenced with a 20 m range pre-
cision and the original data were transformed and fi led
again according to the following coordinates systems:
Gauss-Boaga system according to the E and W areas;
longitude and latitude ED 50 in decimal degrees;
• UTM ED50 system according to the 32, 33 and 34
zones;
UTM ED50 system according to only zone 32;
• WGS84 system according to the two previous mo-
dalities.
The latter value is presented to make the datum car-
tographable in the GIS Arcview layers available at the
Nature Protection Directorate.
Data mapping
A database of all the cells of the UTM 10x10 grid in-
cluded (even partially) in the Italian territory (including
even the smallest islands) was created, together with an
Arcview grid including all the 3,556 UTM cells. An MS
Access database was created. This database contained
the following information, deducted from vectorial fi les
and from DTM of 75 m resolution, available at the Na-
ture Protection Directorate:
• real area covered by the cell, which is less than 100
km2 when: a) the cell crosses the State border; b) the
cell crosses from land to sea and includes small islands;
c) the cell is in the area where two UTM zones join;
• the average elevation and its standard deviation;
minimum and maximum elevation, and elevation
range;
percentage of soil use categories (Corine Land Cover
IV level);
UTM coordinates and coordinates referred only to
zone 32 of the cell barycentre.
The vectorial boundaries of Italy deducted by IGM car-
tography, the main hydrological network, and the UTM
grid, were transferred in a base map to be used to build
thematic maps for the following uses:
data recheck and validation by specialists;
Leonardo Latella, Sandro Ruffo, Fabio Stoch
18
exploration of biogeographical patterns for each spe-
cies, and validation of the areals congruence;
creation of simple high-defi nition vectorial maps for
quick printing;
• creation of thematic atlases presenting the species
distribution according to the European Invertebrate
Survey standards.
The software that graphically explores the data was
called CKmap and lately the same name was given to
the entire project.
Software for automatic data exploration
The software CKmap (Stoch, 2004: acronym of “ChecKlist
mapping”) allows to visualise the distribution data of the
Italian fauna; the software is available on line at http://
CKmap.faunaitalia.it and the version 5.0 is in the CD in-
cluded in this volume. This is a data access software that
allows to correct, validate, visualise, and map the data.
Even if it is a simple software using small disk memory
when compared with other GIS softwares, CKmap is ex-
tremely versatile and powerful. It in fact allows for simple
and quick mapping with statistical options which has the
following distinctive features: a) a hierarchical taxonomic
tree is used to visualize and explore the checklist; b) an
immediate mapping of each taxon distribution on the
UTM grid of the Italian territory is possible; c) maps are
interactive. Data can be exported in other complex territo-
rial analysis softwares (such as ArcView® and MapInfo®);
data can thus be represented in a layer that can be super-
imposed over any alphanumeric or rastar map.
The software has the same base structure of the Checklist
of the Italian fauna from which it stemmed, and which
it perfectly interfaces. The software is a hierarchical sys-
tem which represents the taxonomic information of Ital-
ian fauna; it also allows the specialists to analyse data
distributions.
The software is designed for Windows 98/NT/2000/XP;
the best performance is obtained with the most recent
version of the operative system and a large RAM memo-
ry. The software runs without needing any other utility to
visualize the data.
Distribution data will be available at the CKmap website
in a MySQL database; in that way users will be able to
access updated data in real time.
Organization of the printed volume
The CD containing the data explained above is in-
cluded in this volume. We decided not to print all the
distribution maps and all data contained in the vari-
ous fi les included in the CD because of space con-
straints. The volume is divided into two sections. The
rst section includes general articles on Italian fauna,
on working methodologies, and on previous projects.
The second section includes the specialists’ fi les where
the authors briefl y explain the general characteristic,
the distribution, the data collection methodology and
the conservation status of each group. All the institu-
tions and people who cooperated with the authors to
write the texts and to collect data are acknowledged at
the end of the volume.
CKmap project (Checklist and distribution of the Italian fauna): methods and informatical techniques
Literature
MINELLI A., RUFFO S., LA POSTA S. (Editors), 1993-95. Checklist delle specie della fauna italiana. Edizioni Calderini, Bologna,
fascicoli 1-110.
PEARSON D.L., 1995. Selecting indicator taxa for the quantitative assessment of biodiversity. In: Hawksworth D.L. (Editor). Biodiver-
sity measurement and estimation. The Royal Society, Cambridge University Press: 75-79.
STOCH F., 2004. Banche dati e distribuzione della fauna italiana: gli invertebrati. Atti Convegno “La conoscenza botanica e zoologica
in Italia: dagli inventari al monitoraggio”, Università di Roma “La Sapienza”, 14 dicembre 2001. Quaderni di Conservazione della
Natura, 18: 21-36.
VIGNA TAGLIANTI A., AUDISIO P.A., BELFIORE C., BIONDI M., BOLOGNA M.A., CARPANETO G.M., DE BIASE A., DE FELICI S.,
PIATTELLA E., RACHELI T., ZAPPAROLI M., ZOIA S., 1992. Rifl essioni di gruppo sui corotipi fondamentali della fauna W-paleartica
ed in particolare italiana. Biogeographia, Lavori della Società italiana di Biogeografi a, 16: 159-179.
VIGNA TAGLIANTI A., AUDISIO P.A., BIONDI M., BOLOGNA M.A., CARPANETO G.M., DE BIASE A., FATTORINI S., PIATTELLA E.,
SINDACO R., VENCHI A., ZAPPAROLI M., 1999. A proposal for a chorotype classifi cation of the Near East fauna, in the framework
of the Western Palearctic region. Biogeographia, Lavori della Società italiana di Biogeografi a, (n.s.) 20: 31-59.
19
Checklist and distribution of the italian fauna. 10,000 terrestrial and inland water species | Memorie del Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di Verona
21
The checklist of the Italian fauna
Alessandro Minelli, Fabio Stoch
The checklist of Italian fauna (called Checklist in the text
below) (Minelli et al., 1993-95) lists all the species of
animals known at the time of its publication, and uni-
vocally identifi es them with codes. With the project
Checklist, Italy is the fi rst European country to have a
complete list of its fauna. The idea of compiling a check-
list was born in an informal meeting of a group of zoolo-
gists in the Entomology laboratory of the Civic Museum
of Natural History of Verona in 1991 (Minelli, 1996). A
project was developed in the following months, prima-
rily by Prof. Sandro Ruffo, at that time President of the
Fauna Committee of the Ministry of the Environment,
who obtained support and funding from the same Min-
istry. The checklist was then realized and published in
the following three years (Minelli et al., 1993-95). The
project was realized with an agreement between the
Nature Protection Directorate and the Scientifi c Com-
mittee for the Italian Fauna, a committee created by the
Italian Zoological Union and the National Academy of
Entomology, and involved 272 specialists from 15 dif-
ferent countries. The publication of the Checklist was
followed by the creation of its website in 2000 (Stoch,
2003-2004; Stoch, Minelli, 2004). Thus, the Checklist
became an essential tool for conservation, as stated by
Minelli (1995), and it allowed a simple but detailed
analysis of the abundance of Italian fauna (Minelli,
1996). When the Checklist was transformed into a da-
tabase, it was used for biogeographical and ecological
studies (Stoch, 2000), particularly of the endemic spe-
cies. At present the Checklist is available on the web
(Stoch, 2003-2004) at http://checklist.faunaitalia.it, and
it represents an operational tool for species distribution
mapping (Stoch, 2000). Recently, the publication and
informatization of the Checklist update began as well
(Minelli et al., 1999).
Checklist structure
The printed version of the Checklist includes 110 chap-
ters, where records are organized systematically at
least to the genus level. Each species included in the
Checklist is univocally identifi ed by a numeric code of
three three-digit numbers (one for the chapter, one for
the genus, one for the species). The genera and species
codes have an extension, which allows the insertion
of new species without changing the entire Checklist.
The Checklist has a simple format, and contains slim
amounts of information, and therefore possible to com-
plete (Minelli, 1996). In fact, similar checklists devel-
oped in other countries, and structured to contain more
information, where never concluded.
The information included in the Checklist for each spe-
cies are: a) distribution in 4 areas of the Italian territory
(North, South, Sicily, Sardinia) for terrestrial and fresh-
water faunas, and in 3 areas for marine fauna (Western
Basin, Northern and Central Adriatic, remaining basins);
b) status as endemic or endangered species; c) synthetic
indication of the hosts (for parasites) or nesting area (for
birds). Notes and synonymies are reduced to the mini-
mum necessary.
Criteria used to create the Checklist database
The Italian fauna checklist was recently transformed into a
hierarchical database (Stoch, 2000); all data provided for
each species were thus transformed into a user-friendly
format. In this way, we obtained two results: a) data were
organized in a scheme which strictly corresponds to the
taxa classifi cation used in the Checklist; b) the tree-struc-
ture developed is easy to use by non-experts, who can
nd the taxa listed in alphabetical order as well.
The creation of a hierarchical database required the use
of numerical codes of three three-digit numbers, which
were attributed to each taxon (phylum, class, order,
family, genus, species, subspecies). The database is very
simple and it includes two related tables: one with the
list of groups at taxonomic levels higher than genus, and
another one containing genera, species, and subspecies,
and the information on their distribution. To make con-
sultation as easy as possible, data on protozoans, inver-
tebrates and vertebrates were listed in separate tables.
The Checklist is available in a MS Access 2000 database,
and on-line (Stoch, 2003-2004). On the web, we chose
the database format MySQL, it was programmed using
PHP and Javascript; these formats allow a full compat-
ibility with any operative system. The present on-line
version (3.0), available at http://checklist. faunaitalia.it,
was completely reprogrammed as an updateable data-
base, and it includes all detailed information regarding
authors and the date of upgrading, and a versatile search
function.
Notes on the Checklist updates
A database such as the Checklist loses most of its value
if it is not updateable, and if is not available to the pub-
lic in the shortest time possible. For this reason, starting
in 1999, the Bulletin of the Italian Entomological Soci-
ety publishes the updates for arthropods (Minelli et al.,
21
Alessandro Minelli, Fabio Stoch
22
1999). This initiative was well-liked by the entomolo-
gists, and 18 updates have been published so far. Four
years later, the structure of the Checklist shows limita-
tions, due to the codes attributed to species (which are
not fl exible enough), and to the complexity of the rules
used to update the codes.
‘Protozoa’ 1812 Collembola 419
Dicyemida 13 Protura 31
Orthonectida 2 Microcoryphia 47
Porifera 477 Zygentoma 19
Cnidaria 461 Diplura 76
Ctenophora 32 Ephemeroptera 94
Platyhelminthes 1317 Odonata 88
Gnathostomulida 6 Blattaria 40
Nemertea 96 Mantodea 12
Gastrotricha 228 Isoptera 2
Rotifera 246 Orthoptera 333
Nematoda 1357 Phasmatodea 8
Nematomorpha 23 Dermaptera 22
Acanthocephala 27 Embioptera 5
Kinorhyncha 22 Plecoptera 144
Loricifera 4 Psocoptera 102
Priapulida 3 Mallophaga 243
Kamptozoa 16 Anoplura 24
Mollusca 2141 Thysanoptera 214
Annelida 1149 Heteroptera 1373
Pogonophora 1 Homoptera 2150
Echiura 5 Coleoptera 12005
Sipuncula 18 Megaloptera 4
Arthropoda 45888 Raphidioptera 20
Tardigrada 244 Planipennia 153
Phoronidea 3 Mecoptera 10
Bryozoa 305 Siphonaptera 81
Brachiopoda 12 Strepsiptera 21
Chaetognatha 18 Diptera 6601
Echinodermata 118 Trichoptera 367
Hemichordata 5 Lepidoptera 5086
Chordata 1419 Hymenoptera 7509
Tot. 57468 Tot. 37303
The availability of the Checklist on-line has the great-
est advantage to provide updated information in a very
short time. Some drastic decision had to be made (Stoch
et al., 2005): fi rst, availability of the codes to the public
was abolished. In fact, the function of the codes is not
to identify univocally a species (which is identifi ed by
the Linnean binomial), but to keep the records of the
Checklist in taxonomic order. Second, the updated for-
mat changed (Stoch et al., 2005): new records are sent
to the editor (by e-mail or through the webpage) in MS
Excel format (this program is widely used, and it is avail-
able for Windows and for Macintosh). Those researchers
who do not have computer access can still send a hard
copy, but formatted as a table and not as text.
Future developments of the Checklist
The Italian fauna website, mastered by the Scientifi c
Committee of the Italian Fauna and upon request of the
Scientifi c Committee of European Fauna (http://www.
faunaeur.org), will become the Committee focal point,
representing the web portal to the information on Eu-
ropean fauna. Therefore, the Italian Checklist might be
modifi ed in the future as follows:
1. Nomenclature will follow what was proposed for the
European fauna: Italian specialists of the different faunal
groups will be allowed to unify their nomenclature with
Tab. I – List of animal phyla (left) and of insect orders (right) with number of species recorded in the Checklist
The checklist of the Italian fauna
23
Literature
MINELLI A., 1995. La Checklist delle specie animali italiane. Atti dei Convegni Lincei, 118 (XII Giornata dell’Ambiente, convegno sul
tema “La fauna italiana”, Roma, 6 giugno 1994): 121-136.
MINELLI A., 1996. La Checklist delle specie della fauna italiana. Un bilancio del progetto. Bollettino del Museo Civico di Storia
Naturale di Verona, 20: 249-261.
MINELLI A., RUFFO S., LA POSTA S. (Editors), 1993-95. Checklist delle specie della fauna italiana. Calderini, Bologna, fascicoli 1-110.
MINELLI A., STOCH F., ZOIA S., 1999. Aggiornamenti alla checklist delle specie della fauna italiana. I Contributo. Bollettino della
Società Entomologica Italiana, 131(3): 269-278.
STOCH F., 2000. How many endemic species? Species richness assessment and conservation priorities in Italy. Belgian Journal of
Entomology, 2: 125-133.
STOCH F. (Editor), 2003-2004. Checklist of the species of the Italian fauna. On-line version 2.0. http://checklist.faunaitalia.it
STOCH F., MINELLI A., 2004. Il progetto ‘Checklist delle specie della fauna italiana’. Atti del Convegno “La conoscenza botanica e
zoologica in Italia: dagli inventari al monitoraggio”, Università di Roma “La Sapienza”, 14 dicembre 2001. Quaderni di Conservazi-
one della Natura, 18: 11-20.
STOCH F., MINELLI A., RUFFO S., LA POSTA A., VIGNA TAGLIANTI A., 2004. Aggiornamenti alla Checklist delle specie della fauna
italiana. Nuove norme. Bollettino della Società Entomologica Italiana, 136 (3): 251-256.
the proposed one and, if in disagreement, or in cases of
mistakes and omissions, they will be allowed to keep
the nomenclature used in the Italian Checklist, and the
European specialists will have to conform to it, and cor-
rect the omissions.
2. Widening of the geographic distribution: in order to
distinguish the Italian and European Checklists, for ter-
restrial and freshwater fauna authors will be allowed to
detail the species distribution as to administrative Region
(instead of North, South, Sicily, Sardinia). For the 12,000
taxa included in the project CKmap, that information
was automatically included in the website.
3. Future implementation of the Checklist website: each
species entry will be linked to its distribution map (CK-
map) and list of stations, if available. In a future implemen-
tation, dichotomic keys will be linked as well, integrating
the information from the projects Checklist, CKmap and
the contents of the monograph series “Fauna d’Italia”.
Checklist and distribution of the italian fauna. 10,000 terrestrial and inland water species | Memorie del Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di Verona
25
The chorotypes of the Italian fauna
Fabio Stoch, Augusto Vigna Taglianti
The geographic distribution of animals and plants can be
synthetically expressed by chorotypes. These are catego-
ries derived from a classifi cation based on distribution
models, which are deducted by the compared analysis
of species areas. Chorotypes have been widely used by
zoologists from the beginning of 1900, but not all the
authors agreed on the meaning of chorotypes and on the
relative terminology. The same chorological term was
used by different authors to indicate:
(1) a recurring model of geographical distribution;
(2) a group of species with certain ecological require-
ments within a selected geographical area;
(3) a group of species which presumably have a common
biogeographical history;
(4) a group of phylogenetically closely related species
with a common area of origin;
(5) a group of species living in a certain biogeographical
region, defi ned by climatic and phytogeographic criteria.
The scheme adopted herein corresponds to the fi rst of
the criteria listed above, as in Vigna Taglianti et al. (1993,
1999), and it is similar to the one used by La Greca
(1964, 1975), who underlined the importance of defi n-
ing chorotypes based on the similarity of distribution
models shared by a large group of species. This approach
is not meant to identify the historical factors that caused
the actual distribution of the species, but to describe the
distribution models. The similarity among species areas
can be related to different palaeogeographic and ecolog-
ical events, such as vicariance or dispersal phenomena.
Because the distribution areas of the species is the base
unity of biogeographical studies, a classifi cation based
on unambiguous and precise terminology is the refer-
ence point for any further comparative study. The new
classifi cation of chorotypes, as proposed by a group of
specialists of terrestrial and freshwater Palaearctic fauna
(Vigna Taglianti et al., 1993, 1999), is based on the fol-
lowing criteria:
(1) defi ne a reduced number of chorotypes that include
all the models of area distribution for the fauna under
account;
(2) eliminate all the ambiguous terminology;
(3) go beyond the “Eurocentric” terminology, and fo-
cus the attention on the geographic distribution of each
chorotype;
(4) attribute a numerical code and an acronym to each
chorotype which can be used for databases, and to cre-
ate easily understandable and comparable ranges of
chorotypes.
List and description
The main chorotypes of the W-Palaearctic fauna are list-
ed below divided in 5 groups. The Cosmopolite (0.01,
COS), Sub-cosmopolite (0.02, SCO), Endemic and Sub-
endemic (4-digit code) elements must be added, case by
case, to the main chorotypes on the basis of phylogenetic
affi nities. The W-Palaearctic chorotypes absent from the
Italian fauna are not included (such as the SW-Asiatic,
N-European, Saharan…), but some chorotypes present
only marginally are indeed included (Saharo-Sindian).
1. Chorotypes of species widely distributed in the Hol-
arctic region
1.01. OLA. Holarctic: species distributed in both the
Palearctic and Nearctic Regions.
1.02. PAL. Palearctic: species widely distributed in the
Palearctic Region (Eurasia, extending South to the Hima-
layan range, North to Africa and Macaronesia).
1.03. WPA. W-Palearctic: species widely distributed in
Europe to the Urals, SW Asia, N Africa and Macaronesia.
1.04. ASE. Asiatic-European: species widely distributed
in Eurasia, extending south to the Himalayan range.
1.05. SIE. Sibero-European: species distributed in Si-
beria and Europe (including the Boreoalpine disjunct
distribution).
1.06. CEM. Centralasiatic-European-Mediterranean:
species distributed from the Gobi desert to Europe and
N Africa.
1.07. CAE. Centralasiatic-European: as CEM, N Africa
excluded.
1.08. CAM. Centralasiatic -Mediterranean: as CEM,
Central Europe excluded.
1.09. TEM. Turano-Europeo-Mediterranean: species
distributed in Europe (mostly Central and Southern Eu-
rope), N Africa, Middle East, Anatolia, Iran, Caucasus
and Western Turkestan.
1.10. TUE. Turano-European: as TEM, N Africa excluded.
1.11. TUM. Turano-Mediterranean: as TEM, Central
Europe excluded.
1.12. EUM. Europeo-Mediterranean: species distrib-
uted in Central and Southern Europe and in the Mediter-
ranean basin.
2. Chorotypes of species widely distributed in Europe
2.01. EUR. European: species widely distributed in Eu-
rope, with possible extensions to Caucasus, Anatolia,
Maghreb and Macaronesia.
2.03. CEU. Centraleuropean: species distributed south
of Scandinavia to the Padana Plain, and from Rhine River
Fabio Stoch, Augusto Vigna Taglianti
26
to Ukraine, at times extending to parts of Southern Eu-
rope and Great Britain.
2.04. SEU. S-European: species distributed in Southern
Europe, extending North to Loire, Alps and Carpathians.
2.05. WEU. W-European: species distributed between
Scandinavia and the Iberic peninsula, extending east to
the Rhine and Rhône valleys, South to Tajo river.
2.06. EEU. E-European: species of the Sarmatic low-plain,
from the Vistula river and the Carpathians to the Urals.
3. Chorotypes of species widely distributed in the Medi-
terranean basin
3.01. MED. Mediterranean: species distributed in the
Mediterranean basin, sometimes extending to Macaron-
esia, Sahara and Iran.
3.02. WEU. W-Mediterranean: species distributed in
the Mediterranean basin, west of the Italian peninsula,
sometimes extending to the Atlantic or Saharan areas.
3.03. EEU. E-Mediterranean: species distributed in the
Mediterranean basin, east of the Italian peninsula, some-
times extending to the Black Sea and Iran.
3.04. NAF. N-African: species distributed in Africa north
of Sahara, with limited extensions to adjacent areas.
4. Chorotypes of Afrotropical and Eastern species present
in the Mediterranean area
4.01. AIM. Afrotropico-Indo-Mediterranean: species
distributed in the Afrotropical and Eastern regions and
present in the Mediterranean area as well.
4.02. AFM. Afrotropico-Mediterranean: species dis-
tributed in the Afrotropical region and present in the
Mediterranean area as well.
4.03. INM. Indian-Mediterranean: species distributed
in the Eastern region and present in the Mediterranean
area as well.
5. Chorotypes of widely distributed species, present only
in marginal areas of the Mediterranean basin
5.04. SAS. Saharo-Sindian: species distributed from Mau-
ritania to Sind, trough the Saharan and Arabic deserts.
6. Distribution areas of endemic and subendemic Italian
species.
In the original formulation (Vigna Taglianti et al., 1993),
adopted with few modifi cations in the present version
of CKmap, the distribution areas of endemic and suben-
demic species (category C) are the following:
1. C.01 - Alpine
2. C.02 - Alpine-Apenninic
3. C.03 - Apenninic
4. C.04 - Apenninic-Dinaric
5. C.05 - Tyrrhenic
6. C.06 - Sardinian-Corsican
7. C.07 - Sicilian
8. C.08 - Dinaric
9. C.09 - Alpine-Dinaric
In the following version (Vigna Taglianti et al., 1999) a
more detailed scheme, listed below, was adopted:
3900.01. ITAL - Endemic to Italy
3900.02. ALPS - S-Alpine Endemic (Italian Alps)
3900.03. ALPC - Central-S-Alpine Endemic (Central Alps)
3900.04. ALPW - W-Alpine Endemic (Western Alps)
3900.05. ALSW - SW-Alpine Endemic (South-western
Alps)
3900.06. ALPE - E-Alpine Endemic (Eastern Alps)
3900.07. ALPS - SE-Alpine Endemic (Southeastern Alps,
Karstic-Istrian elements)
3900.08. CADI - Karstic-Istrian-Dinaric Endemic
3900.09. PADA - Padanian Endemic
3900.10. ALAP - Alpino-Apenninic Endemic
3900.11. ALWA - W-Alpino-Apenninic Endemic
3900.12. AWNA - W-Alpino-N-Apenninic Endemic
3900.13. APPE - Apenninic Endemic
3900.14. APPN - N-Apenninic Endemic
3900.15. APPC - Central-Apenninic Endemic
3900.16. APPS - S-Apenninic Endemic
3900.17. APDI - Apennino-Dinaric Endemic (Transadri-
atic elements)
3900.18. TYRR - Tyrrhenian Endemic
3900.19. SACO - Sardo-Corsican Endemic
3900.20. SARD - Sardinian Endemic
3900.21. SICI - Sicilian Endemic
3900.22. SISC - Sicilo-S-Calabrian Endemic
3300.01. CORS - Corsican Endemic
This scheme has not yet been used in the recent version
of CKmap.
Chorotypes analysis
The chorotypes used here were originally defi ned on the
basis of distribution models of some taxonomic groups
such as Chilopoda, Ephemeroptera, Coleoptera (Carabi-
dae, Hydrenidae, Phalacridae, Nitidulidae, Cateretidae,
Scarabaeoidea, Meloidae, Oedemeridae, Tenebrionidae,
Chrysomelidae), Amphibia, and Reptilia. The use of such
a relevant number of distribution data, referring to more
than 10,000 species representative of the Italian fauna,
allows to analyse for the fi rst time the distribution pattern
of groups of chorotypes (expressed as percentages of the
total number of species recorded in a UTM cell) in the
Italian territory. The four synthetic maps presented in this
chapter show the distribution in Italy of the percentages
of species, respectively, widely distributed in the Holarc-
tic Region (Fig. 1), in Europe (Fig. 2), in the Mediterra-
nean basin (Fig. 3), and endemic sensu lato (Fig. 4). From
the analysis of the chorological spectrum (Fig. 5) of the
10,000 species considered (which represent 25% of ter-
restrial and freshwater Italian fauna), it appears that the
percentage of endemic or narrow-ranged species (not at-
tributed to any reference chorotype) is the highest (35%
of the total). In comparison with the data exposed in the
Legenda
Legenda
The chorotypes of the Italian fauna
27
following chapter (Minelli, Ruffo, Stoch, 1996), this high
value is due fi rst to the groups taken into account (which
are the most signifi cant and richest of endemics), and
second to the inclusion of elements not exclusively en-
demic to Italy (subendemic). The percentage of endemic
species sensu lato (Fig. 4) is particularly high in the pre-
Alpine area, in the western Alps and along the Apen-
nines. The percentages progressively increases towards
Calabria and the main islands, showing the importance
of geographic isolation in speciation processes. The low-
est percentage values of small-ranged species are those
at the highest altitudes of the Alps (as a consequence
of the impoverishment cased by quaternary glaciations),
and in the planitial areas. However, this pattern sum-
marizes several local cases which reveal processes typi-
cal of each species, each one with a different historical
background.
In the chorological spectrum (Fig. 5), the endemic spe-
cies are followed as importance by the group of species
widely distributed in the Holarctic Region (27% of the
total) which includes mesophile, hygrophile and step-
pic northern elements, that colonized Italy in the Qua-
ternary, particularly in the postglacial. The distribution
map of this group of chorotypes in Italy (Fig. 1) shows
the strong presence of those elements not only in the
Padana Plain and the main alluvial plains, but also val-
leys, along riverbeds, and relict wetlands, even on the
islands. The species widely distributed in Europe (Fig. 2,
about 22%) are homogenously distributed in continental
Italy and the peninsula, but decrease in number towards
the south and the islands. Their distribution, of northern
and Alpine origin, is infl uenced by the climate and by
the “peninsular effect”. The species widely distributed in
the Mediterranean basin (about 13%) have an opposite
trend (Fig. 3) with high number of species in the large
and small islands and along the coasts, where they fol-
low the Mediterranean bio-climatic region, but also with
localized distributions in Apenninic, Alpine and pre-
Alpine areas where they characterize the xerothermic
communities. The Afrotropical and Eastern chorotypes
(including the marginal ones) make together less than
1% of the total, whereas the cosmopolite and subcosmo-
polite (often of inter-tropical origin) elements represent a
low percentage (about 2%) of the Italian fauna, and their
dispersal is primarily due to anthropic activities.
Fig. 1 - Distribution of the percentage of species widely distri-
buted in the Holarctic area (category 1)
Fig. 2 - Distribution of the percentage of species widely distri-
buted in the European area (category 2)
Legenda Legenda
Fabio Stoch, Augusto Vigna Taglianti
28
Literature
LA GRECA M., 1964. Le categorie corologiche degli elementi faunistici italiani. Atti dell’Accademia Nazionale Italiana di Entomolo-
gia, Rendiconti, 11: 231-253.
LA GRECA M., 1975. La caratterizzazione degli elementi faunistici e le categorie corologiche nella ricerca zoogeografi ca. Animalia,
2: 101-129.
MINELLI A., RUFFO S., STOCH F., 2006. Endemism in Italy. In: Ruffo S., Stoch F. (Editors). Checklist and distribution of the Italian
fauna. Memorie del Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di Verona, 2. serie, Sezione Scienze della Vita 17: 29-31.
VIGNA TAGLIANTI A., AUDISIO P.A., BELFIORE C., BIONDI M., BOLOGNA M.A., CARPANETO G.M., DE BIASE A., DE FELICI S.,
PIATTELLA E., RACHELI T., ZAPPAROLI M., ZOIA S., 1993. Rifl essioni di gruppo sui corotipi fondamentali della fauna W-paleartica
ed in particolare italiana. Biogeographia, Lavori della Società Italiana di Biogeografi a, (n.s.), 16 (1992): 159-179.
VIGNA TAGLIANTI A., AUDISIO P.A., BIONDI M., BOLOGNA M.A., CARPANETO G.M., DE BIASE A., FATTORINI S., PIATTELLA E.,
SINDACO R., VENCHI A., ZAPPAROLI M., 1999. A proposal for a chorotype classifi cation of the Near East fauna, in the framework
of the Western Palearctic region. Biogeographia, Lavori della Società Italiana di Biogeografi a, (n.s.), 20: 31-59.
Fig. 3 - Distribution of the percentage of species widely distri-
buted in the Mediterranean basin (category 3) Fig. 4 - Distribution of the percentage of species with narrow
distribution (category C)
Fig. 5 - Chorological spectrum of the Italian fauna (based on
taxa listed in CKmap)
Holartic
European
Mediterranean
Afrotropical
Cosmopolitan or
subcosmopolitan
Narrow distribution
Checklist and distribution of the italian fauna. 10,000 terrestrial and inland water species | Memorie del Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di Verona
29
Endemism in Italy
Alessandro Minelli, Sandro Ruffo, Fabio Stoch
The endemic component of Italian fauna
A quick summary of the endemic species of Italian fauna
based on the data reported in the Checklist of the spe-
cies of the Italian fauna (Minelli et al., 1993-95) reported
4,777 Metazoan species (8.6% of the total) for the area
included inside the political borders of Italy. On the basis
of the cumulative curves of numbers of newly described
endemic Italian species, Stoch (2000) estimated a value
of 10% of the Italian fauna. This remarkable abundance is
due mainly to terrestrial and freshwater invertebrates; less
than 3% of the vertebrates, and 2% of the marine species,
are endemic. Numerous endemics are limited to Sardinia
(697, representing 6.68% of the 9,841 species recorded
in the Checklist for this island) or Sicily (776, represent-
ing 5.83% of the 12,988 species listed). Northern Italy
has particularly high biodiversity (33,414 species in the
Checklist), and the percentage of endemic species is 5.12
of the total (1,720 species), whereas peninsular Italy has
1,825 endemic species, representing 7.60% of the 24,297
total species. Within this global picture we can now ana-
lyse the endemic component of the groups considered in
this volume. In the following discussion, we will not use
statistical values, because numbers (especially when they
are low numbers referring to a single order or family) are
often proven wrong by two causes of errors: fi rst, faunal
knowledge is still incomplete, and for some groups the
classifi cation of a species as endemic can be temporary.
Second, species and subspecies ranks are often attributed
subjectively to a population or to a group of populations,
affecting the estimate of numbers of endemic species.
Particularly signifi cant from this point of view is the con-
sideration of Balletto et al. (2006), who state that some of
the 18 species of Rhopalocera (Pyrgus centralitaliae, P. pi-
cenus, Lycaena italica, Polyommatus virgilius, Hipparchia
neapolitana, H. blachieri, Coenonympha elbana) consid-
ered endemic over 279 Italian species, can be subjec-
tively considered “subspecies” of more widely distributed
species, decreasing the endemism rate to 3.9%. While
compiling the Checklist, a species was considered en-
demic only if its area did not trespass the Italian political
borders, thus excluding from the list of endemics several
taxa which were present outside Italy, only in restricted
areas of Southern France, Canton of Ticino in Switzer-
land, Austria, and Slovenia. For situations such as this
one, it should be proper to develop a less-formal analysis
of endemism, referring to more “natural” geographical
units. However, if it is necessary to reconsider the list of
endemic species adding those species which extend their
distribution slightly beyond the Italian borders, it is also
necessary to divide our country into subunits which are
more natural and homogeneous than the usual “North”
and “South” used in the Checklist. Whereas Sicily (small
circum-Sicilian islands included) represents a natural unit
to be used to compile lists of endemic species, Sardinia
is not, because it shares several endemic species with the
nearby Corsica (besides having some exclusive to Sar-
dinia itself). On the other hand, the complex geological
history of Sardinia is recognizable in the island lithology
and in its fauna: it would be useful to have separate lists
(of both total fauna, and mainly, endemic taxa) for each
of the structural sections which compose Sardinia.
Endemism trends in different taxonomic groups
It is possible to detect trends in endemism, for the groups
discussed in this volume, on the basis of the ecology of
each taxon. Endemism rate is signifi cant in soil fauna,
such as earthworms, Chilopoda, Carabidae and, prima-
rily, Pseudoscorpionida, Pselaphinae, and the genus Lep-
tusa among Staphylinidae (which has 116 Italian species,
almost all endemic in the Alps). Several endemic Chi-
lopoda, which often belong to the genus Lithobius, are
cavernicolous, whereas the Geophilomorpha Acantho-
geophilus dentifer is epigean, has a relict distribution (one
locality near La Spezia, one in Gargano), and the only
congeneric species is North African; this species is there-
fore very ancient. In Pseudoscorpionida the endemism
rate is very high (more than half of the Italian species) due
to their low vagility, and to their occurrence in hypogean
habitats, where most of the endemic Pseudoscorpionida
live, and were some ultra-specialized lineages developed
(for example, two species with Dinaric affi nity which are
present in the Trieste karst, Troglochthonius doratodacty-
lus <