Content uploaded by György Makranczy
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by György Makranczy on May 05, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
TWO INTERESTING THINOBIUS SPECIES COLLECTED AT THE
RIVER VIªEU IN MARAMUREª (ROMANIA) (COLEOPTERA:
STAPHYLINIDAE: OXYTELINAE)
GYÖRGY MAKRANCZY
Abstract. From Maramureº county (Romania) two little known and rare Thinobius species are recorded
and their taxonomy is discussed. Thinobius minor Mulsant & Rey, 1870 was previously known only
from the type locality, in Southern France, recognized from Italy and newly recorded from Bulgaria
and Romania. Another species collected with it, Thinobius gurzoeszterae sp. n. is described, based not
only on the specimen from Valea Viºeului, but a further one from Northern Italy. For their close
phylogenetic relatedness and century-old confusion around certain names, Thinobius delicatulus
Kraatz, 1957 and T. hummleri Bernhauer, 1940 are also given taxonomic treatment here. The following
new synonymies are found: Thinobius minor Mulsant & Rey, 1870 = T. thinophiloides Schülke, 2008,
syn. n., Thinobius delicatulus Kraatz, 1857 = T. bernhaueri Rambousek, 1910, syn. n., = T. helveticus
Scheerpeltz, 1966, syn. n. Lectotypes are designated for Thinobius minor Mulsant & Rey, 1870, T.
delicatulus Kraatz, 1857 and T. bernhaueri Rambousek, 1910. Information on the bionomics and
characteristics of the required habitats is presented.
Résumé. Deux espèces peu connues et rares de Thinobius ont été collectées dans le département
Maramureº (Roumanie) et leur taxonomie est discutée. Thinobius minor Mulsant & Rey, 1870 était
auparavant connu seulement de la localité typique, dans le sud de la France, reconnu d’Italie, et plus
récemment cité de Bulgarie et de Roumanie. Une autre espèce collectée simultanément, Thinobius
gurzoeszterae sp. n. est décrite, sur la base non seulement du spécimen de Valea Viºeului, mais aussi
d’un autre trouvé dans une localité éloignée du nord de l’Italie. En raison de leur étroite relation
phylogénétique et d’une confusion séculaire autour de certains noms, Thinobius delicatulus Kraatz,
1857 et T. hummleri Bernhauer, 1940 sont aussi inclus dans l’étude taxonomique. Les nouvelles
synonymies suivantes sont établies: Thinobius minor Mulsant & Rey, 1870 = T. thinophiloides
Schülke, 2008, syn. n., Thinobius delicatulus Kraatz, 1857 = T. bernhaueri Rambousek, 1910, syn. n.,
=T. helveticus Scheerpeltz, 1966, syn. n. Des lectotypes sont désignés pour Thinobius minor Mulsant
& Rey, 1870, T. delicatulus Kraatz, 1857 et T. bernhaueri Rambousek, 1910. Des informations sont
fournies sur la bionomique des espèces et les caractéristiques requises par leur habitat.
Key words: Coleoptera, Staphylinidae, Oxytelinae, Thinobius, new species, new synonyms.
INTRODUCTION
Five years ago an article on the more remarkable records of the genus
Thinobius Kiesenwetter, 1844 from Romania, Maramureº county (primarily the
Viºeu valley) was published (Makranczy, 2004). Collecting efforts continued and in
the years since a surprising amount of previously unrecorded species were found.
Not only the records are new for Maramureº county and for Romania, but in some
cases these are the first recent findings of these species, and the first observations of
their habitat requirements in the Carpathian Basin. The species detailed in this paper
are known from very distant areas so it is a natural conclusion that they are
widespread in Central Europe. It is also remarkable that these new findings are from
a locality intensively studied before (the river Viºeu before its confluence with
Tisa), warning of the great fluctuation in beetle populations of these very sensitive
habitats. Even then, the discovery of a new species is surprising, because it is a
Travaux du Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle
«Grigore Antipa» Vol. LII pp. 249–261 © Octobre
2009
widely distributed beetle with good flying ability, and also its difference from any
other congener is obvious at first sight. The last such still unnamed Central
European species were described 100 years ago.
MATERIAL AND METHOD
Types and non-type material deposited in the following collections were
examined:
– Deutsches Entomologisches Institut, Müncheberg, Germany (DEIC);
– Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, USA (FMNH);
– Hungarian Natural History Museum, Budapest, Hungary (HNHM);
– Museo Civico di Storia Naturale „Giacomo Doria“, Genova, Italy (MCSN;
R. Poggi);
– Muséum d’Histoire Naturelle, Lyon (MHNL; J. Clary);
– Národní Muzeum v Praze, Prague, Czech Republic (NMPC; M. Fikáèek);
– Naturhistorisches Museum, Vienna, Austria (NHMW; H. Schillhammer).
In order to establish a consistent and lasting usage of names, a primary type
has to be designated where previously there was no one. This is especially important
for closely related species where there were lots of confusing usages of names. In
the present article lectotypes are designated for three species.
For the illustrations permanent preparations were made in Euparal mounting
medium on plastic cards pinned with the specimens. Drawing was done with a
Jenalab (Carl Zeiss, Jena) compound microscope and drawing tube (camera lucida).
Descriptions and measurements were made with Leica MZ 125 stereoscopic
microscopes. The SEM images were taken of uncoated specimens with a Hitachi S-
2600 N scanning electron microscope.
Measurements: HW = head width with eyes; TW = head width at temples; PW
= maximum width of pronotum; SW = approximate width of shoulders; AW =
maximum width of abdomen; HL = head length from front margin of clypeus to the
beginning of neck; EL = length of eye; TL = length of temple; PL = length of
pronotum in the middle-line; SL = length of elytra from shoulder; SC = length of
elytra from hind apex of scutellum; FL (h+p+e) = combined length of head,
pronotum and elytra; BL = approximate body length. All measured from dorsal view.
RESULTS
New record, new species
1. Thinobius minor Mulsant & Rey, 1870
Thinobius minor Mulsant & Rey, 1870: 116.
Thinobius provincialis Scheerpeltz, in litt.
Thinobius thinophiloides Schülke, 2008: 24, syn. n.
(Fig. 1 A–B)
Studied material. Lectotype (%): “[FRANCE] 5. [=environs de Lyon],
Thinobius minor R. [curator label], Coll Rey, Mus. Lyon [curator label]” [MHNL].
Here designated. (note: Prior to the present examination the specimen was
remounted in the exact same style O. Scheerpeltz used for the extreme small and
very valuable Thinobius specimens in his collection - so most likely it was studied
250 GYÖRGY MAKRANCZY
by him.) Other specimens: “ROMANIA, jud. Maramureº, Valea Viºeului, [river]
Viºeu, 1.5 km S Tisa confluence, W bank, sandy shoal N hanging bridge, 360 m,
from gravelly spots in sandbank, after high water, flotation (305), 47°54’04“N,
24°09’33“E, 11.VI.2007, [leg.] Gy. Makranczy” (1 &, HNHM), “BULGARIA,
1928., Küstendil. Biró, (on the back) Ripa, Stagni, VIII. 27.” (1 %, HNHM),
„[ITALIA,] Emilia, [Bologna,] Reno, 16.VI.1901, A. Fiori“ (1 %, 2 ex MCSN, 2 %
HNHM).
This species was described from Southern France and Schülke (2008) reports
it from Italy (including Sicily) also. New record for Romania and Bulgaria.
Because the paper (Schülke, 2008) that names Thinobius thinophiloides (now
a synonym of T. minor) contains a very good description of the species and the male
sexual characters, these are not repeated here. However, the female characters of
Thinobius species are rarely mentioned and illustrated. Of the Thinobius pusillimus
species group, only T. flagellatus Lohse, 1984 has an illustration of the spermatheca
(Staniec, 2002), although the duct of the receptacle that often allows distinction on
the species level (see e.g. Makranczy, 2004) is not shown. The modified female
genital appendage and the spermatheca is depicted for both species, T. minor
(Fig. 1 A, B) and T. flagellatus (Fig. 1 C, D)*.
2. Thinobius gurzoeszterae sp. n.
Thinobius pauxillus Scheerpeltz, in litt.
(Figs 1 E–J, 2)
Type material. Holotype (&): “ROMANIA, jud. Maramureº, Valea Viºeului,
[river] Viºeu, 1.5 km S Tisa confluence, W bank, sandy shoal N hanging bridge, 360
m, from gravelly spots in sandbank, after high water, flotation (305), 47°54’04“N,
24°09’33“E, 11.VI.2007, [leg.] Gy. Makranczy”. Paratype (%, teneral): “[ITALY],
Emilia, Secchia [river], 24. VIII. [18]96, A. Fiori; ex coll. Klima; Gezeichnet!
2.V.1942. O. Scheerpeltz; Typus Thinobius pauxillus O. Scheerpeltz”. The holotype
is deposited in the Hungarian Natural History Museum, Budapest, the paratype in
the Naturhistorisches Museum, Vienna.
Description.
Measurements (in mm, n=2): HW = 0.205 (0.205–0.2005); TW = 0.215
(0.215–0.215); PW = 0.218 (0.215–0.220); SW = 0.208 (0.200–0.215); AW = 0.260
(0.260–0.260); HL = 0.215 (0.210–0.220); EL = 0.053 (0.055–0.050); TL = 0.105
(0.100–0.110); PL = 0.175 (0.170–0.180); SL = 0.263 (0.260–0.265); SC = 0.225
(0.220–0.230); BL = 1.31 (1.24–1.37); FL (head+pronotum+elytra) = 0.65
(0.62–0.67).
Body slightly to barely bicoloured. Head, pronotum and elytra light brown to
slightly reddish medium brown (depending on maturity of specimen). Abdomen
brownish black to medium brown (fully coloured mature specimens the darker).
Legs, mouthparts, antennae light to medium brown. All main body parts with very
fine coriaceous microreticulation, therefore rather dull. Pubescence is short and
medium dense on the forebody, on sides of head and pronotum it is directed anterio-
medially, in the posterior half of the disc of head it is directed medially. In the
* Specimens with data: Russia, Moscow reg., Ramenskoye distr., Bronnitsy and Plaskinino, river
bank, sand, V.I. Gusarov, 29.VI.1989. (2 %, 1 &, 5 ex, HNHM).
TWO INTERESTING THINOBIUS (STAPHYLINIDAE) IN MARAMUREª (ROMANIA) 251
anterior part of pronotum it is directed anteriorly. On the elytra the setation directed
more or less posteriorly. Setation of the abdomen dense and short, but near the
posterior edge of the segments a row of very long hairs dominate the appearance.
Antennae, legs and mouthparts with very short, not conspicuous setation, except for
the stiff mid-tibial setae and setae at the apices of femora. Sides of elytra also have
three pairs of such stiff setae nearly equally distributed on its length.
Head about as long as broad. Temples (Fig. 2 C) somewhat widening
posteriorly, weakly rounded on first 3/4, then strongly rounded in the last fourth but
not forming an angle. Frontoclypeal (= epistomal) sulcus is marked as a dark brown
groove. Infraocular tubercles weakly developed.
Antennae rather short (Fig. 2 B), segments 4-11 all more or less transverse,
antennomeres 4 and 6 less wide as the neighbouring ones, while antennomere 5
wider than the other mid-antennal segments. Mid-antennal segments 1.5-2x as broad
as long.
Pronotum weakly transverse, about 1.25x wider than long, and almost
exactly as wide as the head. Anterior edge almost straight, sides gently arched,
posterior edge more strongly arched. The anterior and posterior corners weakly
rounded but do not form angles. Except for one pair of darker, very short setae near
the anterior corners, pronotum without any conspicouos seta. No impressions of
any kind.
Elytra conspicuously short, flat and parallel-sided, very weakly dilating
posteriorly. Shoulders rather weakly developed. On apical edge appear serrate
(setation reaches somewhat beyond the posterior edge). Wings fully developed.
Legs relatively short. Tarsal segmentation 2-2-2. Tarsal lobes small, not
conspicuous. Tibiae rather fusiform, appear much wider in the middle than at the
ends.
Abdomen very weakly fusiform, sides more or less straight and parallel.
Widest in the middle and significantly wider than the elytra. Posterior margin of
tergite VII with distinct white fringe.
Male and female primary and secondary sexual features. The sexes do not
seem to differ externally. Posterior corners of tergite VIII (similar in both sexes) and
gently pulled out, posterior edge otherwise straight (Fig. 1 G). Aedeagus as on
figure 1 E, F. Posterior margin of male abdominal sternite VIII broadly emarginate,
middle of sternite without setation and pores (Fig. 1 H). Tergite IX similar to the
ones in related species, sternite IX as on figure 1 I. Spermatheca very distinctive
(Fig. 1 J), not similar to that of any other known Thinobius species. Because the
sexes externally do not seem to differ greatly and the freshly collected female
specimen was in so much better condition and fully coloured, exceptionally the
female was chosen as holotype.
Comparative notes.
Thinobius gurzoeszterae is related to T. delicatulus Kraatz, 1857 and T.
hummleri Bernhauer, 1940, these are the only known Central European
representatives of the T. delicatulus species group (sometimes referred to as
subgenus Oedarthrothinophilus Scheerpeltz, 1959, type: Thinobius nodicornis
Eppelsheim, 1884). This group can be differentiated mainly on the basis of genital
features: asymmetrical, highly modified aedeagus with visible duct and pump,
absence of either a paired coxite (part of hemisternite) or a modified female genital
appendage, absence of female ringstructure. This group is also notable for strange
antennal modifications (like in T. mundicornis Comellini, 1970 and T. nodicornis
252 GYÖRGY MAKRANCZY
TWO INTERESTING THINOBIUS (STAPHYLINIDAE) IN MARAMUREª (ROMANIA) 253
Fig. 1 – Thinobius minor Mulsant & Rey. A, female modified genital appendage; B, spermatheca.
Thinobius flagellatus Lohse. C, female modified genital appendage; D, spermatheca. Thinobius
gurzoeszterae sp. n. E, aedeagus frontal view; F, aedeagus lateral view; G, male tergite VIII; H, male
sternite VIII; I, male sternite IX; J, spermatheca. Scales (in mm): A–B, 0.045; C–D, J–I, 0.05; E–F,
0.02; G–H, 0.09.
254 GYÖRGY MAKRANCZY
Fig. 2 – Thinobius gurzoeszterae sp. n. A, habitus; B, antennomeres 2-7 (enlarged); C, side of head
(enlarged) (scanning electron micrographs, vacuum 25 Pa, voltage 25 kV, uncoated). Scales (in mm):
A, 0.25; B, 0.08; C, 0.06.
Eppelsheim, 1884). In general aspect the new species slightly resembles Thinobius
klimai Bernhauer, 1902, T. newberyi Scheerpeltz, 1925 and T. brevicornis
Bernhauer, 1905 in their short and flat elytra, relatively small, rather flat eyes, large
temples and pale coloured forebodies. From the two closest relatives (T. delicatulus
and T. hummleri) it can be easily differentiated by the slightly smaller size and the
very transversal mid-antennal segments.
Etymology. This new species is named after Eszter Gurzó, whom I met on a
train from Oradea to Gheorgheni on 24 July 2003, and with whom I corresponded
briefly a few months later. Being far from home and going through a very
depressing and unsuccessful period this contact brought an excitement that was at
that point essential for keeping up good spirit. It took not just anybody to change my
mood so that those months eventually passed very well and productively. The hereby
described species was collected and discovered on the same summer when by
chance I met her a second time.
Distribution and bionomics. Thinobius gurzoeszterae is definitely one of
those species that never show up in greater numbers. It is presumably very
widespread in Central Europe, but during the last 200 years of entomological
activities here, only these 2 specimens became available. At the moment, it is
recorded only from the locality of the holotype, from the Eastern Carpathians in
Romania and from Northern Italy. Of the Italian specimen not much is known. It is
rather weakly coloured and it was in the collection of Anton Klima, acquired by Otto
Scheerpeltz and labelled with a name „T. pauxillus“, but apparently never described.
On my inquiry it turned out that the collector, A. Fiori had a house near river
Secchia where he often collected (A. Zanetti, pers. comm.). The mountains
surrounding that river are predominantly volcanic mixed with limestone and other
sedimental rocks (the same is true for the other locality). The Romanian specimen
was found at the same spot where the author collected numerous times before,
always finding many (often hundreds of) Thinobius specimens belonging to a
variety of species. It is quite difficult to explain why this species was not found on
any other occasion. Due to the frequent storms and often rapidly changing water
level, the specimens may have been forced to flee from their original habitat or
carried with the storms from another location. The present species may also belong
to those that have a typical mid-summer (June-August) activity period.
3. Thinobius delicatulus Kraatz, 1857
Thinobius delicatulus Kraatz, 1857: 884 nota.
Thinobius delicatulus Rey, in litt.
Thinobius delicatulus var. bernhaueri Rambousek, 1910: 97, 98, syn. n.
Thinobius (Platyderothinophilus) helveticus Scheerpeltz, 1966: 250, syn. n.
(Fig. 3)
Studied type material. Lectotype of Thinobius delicatulus Kraatz (%):
“[FRANCE] Beaujolais; Rey; Holotypus [curator label]; delicatulus mihi [Kraatz’s
handwriting]; Gezeichnet! 17. IV. 1942 O. Scheerpeltz; Photographiert 18. IV.
1942. O. Scheerpeltz; Coll. Kraatz; det. Scheerpeltz [curator label]; Thinobius
(Platyderothinophilus) delicatulus Kraatz [Scheerpeltz’s handwriting]; coll. DEI
Eberswalde” (DEIC). Here designated. Lectotype of Thinobius delicatulus var.
bernhaueri Rambousek (%): “[BULGARIA] Rumel, Sejmen, Marica, 21.III.[19]09,
TWO INTERESTING THINOBIUS (STAPHYLINIDAE) IN MARAMUREª (ROMANIA) 255
256 GYÖRGY MAKRANCZY
Fig. 3 – Thinobius delicatulus Kraatz. A, aedeagus frontal view; B, aedeagus lateral view; C, male
sternite VIII; D, male tergite IX; E, male sternite IX; F, spermatheca. Scales (in mm): A–B, 0.1;
C, 0.16; D–E, 0.12; F, 0.06.
Rambousek; delicatulus Kr. det. Rambousek; var. Bernhaueri typ m. det.
Rambousek; Gezeichnet! 20. IV. 1942 O. Scheerpeltz; ex coll. Scheerpeltz; Cotypus
[printed] Thinobius (Platyderothinop.) Bernhaueri Rambousek [Scheerpeltz’s
handwriting]” (NHMW). Here designated. Paralectotypes (19, see note) with the
same collecting data (1 ex NHMW, 18 ex NMPC). For type material of T. helveticus
see Makranczy & Schülke, 2001. Other specimens: “[FRANCE] beige paper circle
[= Beaujolais]; Thinobius delicatulus R.; Coll Rey, Mus. Lyon” (1 %, 2 &, MHNL),
“[CZECH REP.] Bohemia, Reitter, D.E.I. coll. von Heyden” (2 %, DEIC),
“[FRANCE] Gien. coll. Stierlin, coll. DEI Eberswalde” (1 %, 1 &, DEIC).
The names in the (phylogenetic) neighbourhood of T. delicatulus were always
problematic, some taxa were not even clearly distinguishable, none got widely used.
First Thinobius helveticus Scheerpeltz was identified as being a problematic taxon,
but (at the time without the knowledge of the male genital features) considered as a
possible relative of Thinobius delicatulus Kraatz (Makranczy & Schülke, 2001). A
study of the type material of Thinobius bernhaueri (mainly in Prague and Vienna,
but more syntypical material may be found elswhere donated by Rambousek)
revealed that this taxon is conspecific with T. delicatulus (for which the type and
Rey’s original material from the type locality were examined). As the holotype of T.
helveticus Scheerpeltz (examined and treated in Makranczy & Schülke, 2001)
eventually turned out to belong to T. delicatulus, it must be said that the earlier
identified Romanian material (in Makranczy, 2004) of T. helveticus in fact belonged
to T. hummleri. After the examination of male and female specimens from the same
localities it is now clear that both T. hummleri and T. delicatulus are very variable
species, their colouration, head shape and surface sculpture provide little aid in the
identification of the species. Only the form of the aedeagus, the male secondary
sexual characters and the shape of the spermatheca distinguishes these species.
Since the distributions of the two species overlap greatly, the future finding of T.
delicatulus in Romanian materials is very likely.
The aedeagus (Fig. 3 A, B) is very characteristic with a less elongate apical
part of the median lobe and with a strong spine medially on the right-hand side,
sternite VIII with a large middle area without setation and pores and the apical edge
a little pulled out in the middle (Fig. 3 C), tergite IX with the 3 strong apical setae
nearly at equal distance from each other (Fig. 3 D), sternite IX as on figure 3 E and
the receptacle of the spermatheca nearly symmetrical bean-shaped (Fig. 3 F). It must
be noted that the spermatheca in these species is situated usually in the 7th segment,
not in the very tip of the abdomen (terminalia).
4. Thinobius hummleri Bernhauer, 1940
Thinobius hummleri Bernhauer, 1940: 628.
(Fig. 4)
Studied type material. Holotype of Thinobius hummleri Bernhauer (&):
“Bosnien Hochwasser Jlidze Paganetti; cap. opacis; Hummleri Brnh Typus unic.
[handwritten white]; Hummleri Brnh Typus unic. [handwritten red]; Gezeichnet!
18. IV. 1942 O. Scheerpeltz; Hummleri Bernh. det. O. Scheerpeltz, 1942; Thinobius
(Platyderothinophilus) Hummleri Bernh. [Scheerpeltz’s handwriting]; Chicago
NHMus M. Bernhauer Collection (FMNH). Other specimens: “ROMANIA, jud.
Maramureº, Petrova, confluence point of stream Frumuºeaua and river Viºeu, sunny
TWO INTERESTING THINOBIUS (STAPHYLINIDAE) IN MARAMUREª (ROMANIA) 257
258 GYÖRGY MAKRANCZY
Fig. 4 – Thinobius hummleri Bernhauer. A, aedeagus frontal view; B, aedeagus lateral view; C, male
sternite VIII; D, male tergite IX; E, male sternite IX; F, spermatheca. Scales (in mm): A–B, 0.09;
C, 0.13; D–E, 0.12; F, 0.06.
gravelbank, 380 m, from gravel at bottom of bank-wall + washed gravel shoal (90),
47°49’45“N, 24°13’32“E, 17.VII.2003, [leg.] Gy. Makranczy” (1 %, 1 &, HNHM),
“ROMANIA, jud. Maramureº, Valea Viºeului, Viºeu, 1.5 km S Tisa confluence, W
bank sandy shoal near hanging bridge, 360 m, from gravelly spots in sand, 2 m away
from water, flotation (93), 47°54’04“N, 24°09’33“E, 17.VII.2003, Gy. Makranczy.”
(1%, 1&, HNHM).
The finding of material of a species obviously different from T. delicatulus
made it clear that two sibling species occur across Central Europe (erroneously
assigned to T. helveticus in Makranczy, 2004). After the study of all primary type
specimens of the related taxa only the original material of T. hummleri was found to
belong to this second species. There are two specimens in the Bernhauer collection
with collecting data nearly identical. The description says explicitly that the name is
based on a single specimen, therefore it is considered the holotype. The label of the
holotype mentions no Miljaæka Hoher (mentioned in the description), while the
label of a second specimen with the same printing has Miljacka Hoher handwritten
by Bernhauer on the identification label. This is supposed to a second specimen
acquired after the description of T. hummleri was published. The external
morphological variability of T. hummleri is so great that it is not at all surprising that
the species was previously confused with T. delicatulus (and its synonyms). For the
same reasons it is also very difficult to say anything about the precise distribution of
the two species, but both occur very widely in Central and Southeast Europe.
The aedeagus (Fig. 4 A, B) is very characteristic with a much more elongate
apical part of the median lobe and lacking the spine medially on the right-hand side,
sternite VIII with continuous setation/porousness in the middle, edge not pulled out
in the middle of apex (Fig. 4 C), on tergite IX two of the three strong apical setae are
very close while the third (proximal) is at least twice as distant (Fig. 4 D), sternite IX
as on figure 4 E and the receptacle of the spermatheca rather asymmetrical, much
more bulbous on one side than on the other (Fig. 4 F).
DISCUSSION
Thinobius species were once very widespread and common. Nowadays they
are rare everywhere, and even those that do occur sometimes in larger numbers, very
local. There are Thinobius species that occur at streambanks of fast running
mountain streams. These are still rare, but almost every mountain range has streams
that are still clean enough for these species to live there. The occurence and finding
of species that do not prefer the mountain streams, but lowland riverbanks are much
more sensational these days. Prinicipally because such places do not exist anymore
or not clean enough to be inhabited by their original fauna. For these reasons the last
section of the Viºeu river deserves special attention. Several Thinobius were not
found anywhere else in Romania, the total amount of Thinobius species collected at
that same spot (20 m2) is now above 10 and even more could be found. The species
tend to occur in assemblages, so the finding of one species gives a clue about the
other species that may live there. These assemblages are not only spatial
(stream/river banks with different characteristics, flow speed, deposit size and
thickness), but also seasonal. It was noted that there was a very different set of
species that prefer the part of the year when the source of the surface waters is
primarily the melting snow and therefore the water is relatively clean. Another
group prefers the mid-summer, when most snow on the mountains is already gone
and the source of the water is primarily the rainfall, consequently contains more soil
TWO INTERESTING THINOBIUS (STAPHYLINIDAE) IN MARAMUREª (ROMANIA) 259
particles and plant debris. Another important observation is that most species prefer
places where the more gravelly-stony and the more sandy areas meet. If such a spot
is near where the waterflow is strong enough and provides enough oxygen (air
bubbles) - usually at tips of gravel-islands or at confluences of streams - there is a
high likelihood of a rich Thinobius fauna there.
As a final note, now it became clear that in the taxonomy of European
Thinobius there are still necessary changes to make. The present paper brought
along only the first part of them, but in order to create a stable nomenclatural
system, several more synonymies must be established. The more recent species
descriptions were generally better made and consequently those names got wider
use. In spite of this, the oldest (not forgotten) names have to take priority even if
those descriptions were poorly made and resulted in hardly applicable names.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I am greatly indebted to the curators of the institutions from where the material was borrowed.
Their contribution (much beyond their obligations) to this project is great. I would also like to thank
Adriano Zanetti (Verona, Italy) and Marc Tronquet (Molitg-le-Bains, France) for providing help and
informations and Melanya Stan (Bucharest, Romania) for arranging me a collecting permit for
Romania.
DOUÃ SPECII INTERESANTE ALE GENULUI THINOBIUS COLECTATE PE
VALEA RÂULUI VIªEU DIN MARAMUREª (ROMÂNIA) (COLEOPTERA:
STAPHYLINIDAE: OXYTELINAE)
REZUMAT
Sunt semnalate din Maramureº douã specii rare ºi puþin cunoscute ale genului Thinobius a
cãror taxonomie este, de asemenea, discutatã. Thinobius minor Mulsant & Rey, 1870 era cunoscutã
numai din localitatea tip, din sudul Franþei; a fost semnalatã apoi din Italia, iar, de curând, din
Bulgaria ºi România. Este descrisã ºi o altã specie colectatã împreunã cu aceasta, Thinobius
gurzoeszterae, sp. n., pe baza unui exemplar gãsit pe Valea Viºeului ºi a unui exemplar colectat din
nordul Italiei. Datoritã apropiatei înrudiri filogenetice ºi a confuziei create de anumite denumiri de-a
lungul timpului, pentru Thinobius delicatulus Kraatz, 1957 ºi T. hummleri Bernhauer, 1940 se face ºi
o prezentare taxonomicã. Sunt stabilite urmãtoarele noi sinonimii: Thinobius minor Mulsant & Rey,
1870 = T. thinophiloides Schülke, 2008, syn. n.; Thinobius delicatulus Kraatz, 1857 = T. bernhaueri
Rambousek, 1910, syn. n., = T. helveticus Scheerpeltz, 1966, syn. n. Pentru speciile Thinobius minor
Mulsant & Rey, 1870, T. delicatulus Kraatz, 1857 ºi T. bernhaueri Rambousek, 1910 au fost stabiliþi
lectotipii. Sunt prezentate informaþii asupra ecologiei ºi caracteristicilor habitatelor preferate.
LITERATURE CITED
BERNHAUER, M., 1940 – Neuheiten der paläarktischen Staphylinidenfauna (Col. Staph.).
Mitteilungen der Münchner Entomologischen Gesellschaft, 30 (2): 622–642.
KRAATZ, G., 1857 – Naturgeschichte der Insecten Deutschlands. Erste Abteilung Coleoptera.
Zweiter Band. Lieferung 5-6, pp. 769–1080. Nicolai, Berlin.
MAKRANCZY, GY., 2004 – Thinobius (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae: Oxytelinae) collected at or near
the river Viºeu (Maramureº, România), with the male and female characters of five
closely allied species. Travaux du Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle „Grigore
Antipa“, 47: 139–150.
MAKRANCZY, GY., M. SCHÜLKE, 2001 – Typenstudien an den mitteleuropäischen Vertretern der
Artengruppe des Thinobius linearis Kraatz, 1857 (Coleoptera, Staphylinidae,
Oxytelinae). Entomologische Blätter, 97 (2): 185–193.
MULSANT, E., C. REY, 1870 – Description de diverses espèces nouvelles de coléoptères. Opuscules
Entomologiques, 14: 105–122.
RAMBOUSEK, F. J., 1910 – Pøispìvek k poznání rodu Thinobius Kiesw. Èasopis Èeské Spoleènosti
Entomologické, 7: 97–99. (in Czech)
260 GYÖRGY MAKRANCZY
SCHEERPELTZ, O., 1966 – Die von Herrn A. Linder auf dem Gebiete der Schweiz entdeckten neuen
Arten von Staphyliniden (Coleoptera). Mitteilungen der Schweizerischen
Entomologischen Gesellschaft, 38: 247–288.
SCHÜLKE, M., 2008 – Revision der pusillimus-Gruppe der Gattung Thinobius Kiesenwetter mit
Beschreibung von fünf neuen Arten (Staphylinidae, Oxytelini, Thinobiini).
Entomologische Blätter, 103/104: 11–42.
STANIEC, B., 2002 – Thinobius flagellatus Lohse, 1984 (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae) - gatunek nowy
dla fauny Polski [Thinobius flagellatus Lohse, 1984 (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae) - a
beetle new to the fauna of Poland]. Wiadomoœci Entomologiczne, 21 (3): 133–136.
(in Polish)
Received: February 9, 2009 Hungarian Natural History Museum
Accepted: May 5, 2009 Baross u. 13, H-1088 Budapest, Hungary
e-mail: makranczy@nhmus.hu
TWO INTERESTING THINOBIUS (STAPHYLINIDAE) IN MARAMUREª (ROMANIA) 261