ArticlePDF Available

Freshwater Amphipod Species of Western Anatolia, Marmara and Turkish Thrace Regions

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

To determine the Amphipoda (Crustacea) fauna of the inland waters of Western Anatolia, Marmara and the Turkish Thrace Region, field studies were conducted between May 2014 and March 2019. Seven field studies were conducted. Samplings were conducted at 291 localities and amphipod specimens were found at 127 of them. As a result, 11 amphipod species (Echinogammarus stocki G. Karaman, 1970, Gammarus aequicauda (G. Karaman, 1970), Gammarus anatoliensis Schellenberg, 1937, Gammarus arduus G. Karaman, 1975, Gammarus balcanicus Schäferna, 1923, Gammarus dorsosetosus Mateus & Mateus, 1990, Gammarus gonensis Özbek, 2016, Gammarus komareki Schäferna, 1923, Gammarus lacustris G.O. Sars, 1863, Gammarus pulex pulex (Linnaeus, 1758), Gammarus uludagi G.S. Karaman, 1975) were determined. The new records can be listed as: E. stocki for Ekinanbarı, G. anatoliensis for Uşak, G. arduus for Bolu and Düzce, G. balcanicus for Kocaeli and Sakarya, G. dorsosetosus for Bolu, G. gonensis for Istanbul and Manisa, G. komareki for Düzce and Kocaeli, G. lacustris for Istanbul, G. pulex pulex for Bolu, Kırklareli, Kocaeli, Sakarya and Uşak, and G. uludagi for Aydın, Bilecik, Sakarya and Yalova provinces. The observed morphological features and the detailed drawings of the determined taxa are presented. Additionally, a map showing the distribution of the obtained species is also given.
Content may be subject to copyright.
74
EISSN 2602-473X
AQUATIC SCIENCES AND ENGINEERING
Aquat Sci Eng 2022; 37(2): 74-85 • DOI: https://doi.org/10.26650/ASE20211000523 Research Article
Freshwater Amphipod Species of Western Anatolia, Marmara and
Turkish Thrace Regions
Mehmet İpek1 , Murat Özbek2
Cite this article as: Ipek, M., & Ozbek, M. (2022). Freshwater amphipod species of western anatolia, marmara and turkish thrace regions. Aquatic
Sciences and Engineering, 37(2), 74-85.
ORCID IDs of the author:
M.İ. 0000-0002-7371-4587;
M.Ö. 0000-0003-4607-3507
1Eskişehir Osmangazi University, Faculty
of Science and Art, Eskişehir, Turkey
2Ege University, Faculty of Fisheries,
İzmir, Turkey
Submitted:
24.09.2021
Revision Requested:
17.11.2021
Last Revision Received:
18.11.2021
Accepted:
17.12.2021
Online Published:
26.01.2022
Correspondence:
Murat Özbek
E-mail:
ozbekm71@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
To determine the Amphipoda (Crustacea) fauna of the inland waters of Western Anatolia, Marmara
and the Turkish Thrace Region, field studies were conducted between May 2014 and March 2019.
Seven field studies were conducted. Samplings were conducted at 291 localities and amphipod
specimens were found at 127 of them. As a result, 11 amphipod species (Echinogammarus stocki
G. Karaman, 1970, Gammarus aequicauda (G. Karaman, 1970), Gammarus anatoliensis Schellen-
berg, 1937, Gammarus arduus G. Karaman, 1975, Gammarus balcanicus Schäferna, 1923, Gam-
marus dorsosetosus Mateus & Mateus, 1990, Gammarus gonensis Özbek, 2016, Gammarus
komareki Schäferna, 1923, Gammarus lacustris G.O. Sars, 1863, Gammarus pulex pulex (Linnaeus,
1758), Gammarus uludagi G.S. Karaman, 1975) were determined. The new records can be listed as:
E. stocki for Ekinanbarı, G. anatoliensis for Uşak, G. arduus for Bolu and Düzce, G. balcanicus for
Kocaeli and Sakarya, G. dorsosetosus for Bolu, G. gonensis for Istanbul and Manisa, G. komareki
for Düzce and Kocaeli, G. lacustris for Istanbul, G. pulex pulex for Bolu, Kırklareli, Kocaeli, Sakarya
and Uşak, and G. uludagi for Aydın, Bilecik, Sakarya and Yalova provinces. The observed morpho-
logical features and the detailed drawings of the determined taxa are presented. Additionally, a
map showing the distribution of the obtained species is also given.
Keywords: Inland-water, river, Peracarida, benthos, Malacostraca
INTRODUCTION
The order Amphipoda constitutes 30% of the
Malacostraca class, with more than 30,000 spe-
cies worldwide. The number of marine, fresh-
water, brackish and terrestrial species (except
Amphipoda with 22 species) is 10,247 world-
wide (Horton et al., 2021). The taxonomy of the
order Amphipoda has been finalized consisting
of six suborders by the study of Lowry and My-
ers (2017). All of the amphipod species report-
ed from the inland waters of Turkey belong to
the suborder Senticaudata.
The pioneering study on the freshwater amphi-
pod species of Turkey was reported by Vávra
(1905) who described Gammarus argeaus from
the Erciyes Mountains. After this initial study,
many studies have been reported. The last
study regarding the inland water amphipods of
Turkey was on the identification of Rhipidogam-
marus gordankaramani Özbek & Sket 2019
which was reported in Antalya.
In the present study, it is aimed to determine
the Amphipoda fauna of the inland waters of
Western Anatolia, Marmara and the Turkish
Thrace Region.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Seven field studies were conducted between
May 2014 and March 2019 at 291 localities and
amphipod specimens were found at 127 of
them (Figure 1).
Samples were fixed in 96% ethyl alcohol in the
field and then sorted in the laboratory using a
75
Aquat Sci Eng 2022; 37(2): 74-85
İpek and Özbek. Freshwater Amphipod Species of Western Anatolia, Marmara and Turkish Thrace Regions
Leica EZ4 stereomicroscope and then kept in 96% ethyl alcohol.
During the field study, altitudes, and geographical coordinates
of the sampling localities were also noted (Table 1). Temporary
slides of mature male specimens were prepared using pure
glycerol. The photographs of the extremities were taken with a
digital camera (Kameram21) attached to a microscope (Nikon
Eclipse 80i) and processed with image processing programs. A
digitizer board (Wacom CTE-440) connected to a PC and its
standard pen were used to draw illustrations on a transparent
layer of the original photo of each extremity. Coleman (2003,
2006, 2009) was followed while drawing illustrations. Scale bars
were marked using a micrometric slide for each magnification
ratio of the microscope.
Karaman and Pinkster (1977a, 1977b, 1987), Bellan-Santini et al.
(1982), Özbek (2011) and Pinkster (1993) were followed for the
taxonomic identification.
The collected samples are stored in the laboratory of the Facul-
ty of Science and Letters of Eskisehir Osmangazi University, Es-
kisehir, Turkey.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A total of 11 gammaridean taxa [Echinogammarus stocki G. Kara-
man, 1970, Gammarus aequicauda (G. Karaman, 1970), Gam-
marus anatoliensis Schellenberg, 1937, Gammarus arduus G.
Karaman, 1975, Gammarus balcanicus Schäferna, 1923, Gam-
marus dorsosetosus Mateus & Mateus, 1990, Gammarus gonen-
sis Özbek, 2016, Gammarus komareki Schäferna, 1923, Gam-
marus lacustris G.O. Sars, 1863, Gammarus pulex pulex (Linnaeus,
1758), Gammarus uludagi G.S. Karaman, 1975] were recorded.
G. arduus was the most common species and sampled at 33 lo-
calities. G. komareki, G. pulex pulex, and G. uludagi were ob-
served at 22, 21, and 18 localities, respectively. The distribution
of the determined taxa and the information of the stations are
presented (Figure 1, Table 2). The observed morphological fea-
tures of the determined taxa are as follows:
E. stocki: A small species. The maximum body length is about
11mm in adults. The antenna I reach half of the body and pedun-
cle segments bear long setae along the posterior margins; the
main and accessory flagellum consists of 20 and 4-5 segments,
respectively. The fourth and fifth peduncle segments of antenna
II bear 7-8 groups of long setae along the posterior margin, and
the length of these setae are more than twice as long as the di-
ameter of the segments on which they are implanted. Calceoli is
absent. The mandibular palp has the characteristic C-setae. En-
dopodite of uropod III elongated and prominently as long as 1/5
of the exopodite and its length is three times as long as the wide.
Exopodite with many plumose setae on both margins. Telson
lobes are deeply cleft and about twice as long as their width.
Examined material: St. 2: 2 ♀♀, 2 ♂♂, 17.v.2014; St. 3: 30 ♀♀, 30
♂♂, 17.v.2014.
G. aequicauda: The maximum body length is about 14-15 mm in
adults. The main and accessory flagellum of antenna I consist of
28 and 6 segments, respectively. The fourth and fifth peduncle
segments of antenna II bear many groups of long curled and sim-
ple setae on the posterior margins. Calceoli is absent. The third
segment of the mandibular palp bears 2 groups of A-setae, 1
group of B-setae, 26 D-setae, and 4 E-setae. Gnathopod I is
smaller than gnathopod II; propodus of the gnathopods I-II elon-
gated and pyriform with a flask-shaped medial palmar spine.
Pereiopods V-VII with long setae on the anterior margin. The ba-
sis of the pereiopod V-VI with 3-4 and 7-8 short setae on the pos-
tero-interior surface. Rami of the uropod III bears many plumose
and simple setae. Telson lobes are very deeply cleft and about
three times as long as their width. Each lobe with 2 groups of
spines and setae on the outer margin, and 3 spines and 6-7 long
setae on the terminal; setae longer than spines.
Examined material: St. 2: 43 ♀♀, 62 ♂♂, 17.v.2014; St. 3: 8 ♂♂,
17.v.2014; St. 125: 16 ♀♀, 12 ♂♂, 20.xii.2018; St. 126: 1 ♂♂,
20.xii.2018.
G. anatoliensis: The maximum body length is about 14-15mm in
adults. Within the Gammarus balcanicus-group, it can be easily
distinguished from the others by the elevated and crenulated
dorsoposterior margins of the metasomal segments. Addition-
Figure 1. Distribution of the determined amphipod species
species (Echinogammarus stocki, Gammarus
aequicauda, Gammarus anatoliensis, VGammarus
arduus, Gammarus balcanicus, pGammarus
dorsosetosus, Gammarus gonensis, Gammarus
komareki, Gammarus lacustris, Gammarus pulex
pulex, Gammarus uludagi).
76
Aquat Sci Eng 2022; 37(2): 74-85
İpek and Özbek. Freshwater Amphipod Species of Western Anatolia, Marmara and Turkish Thrace Regions
Table 1. Taxonomic status, abbreviations (Abbr.) and newly recorded provinces of the determined taxa.
Taxonomic status Abbr. Newly recorded locality
Gammaridae Leach, 1814
Genus: Echinogammarus Stebbing, 1899
E. stocki G. Karaman, 1970 E.s. Ekinanbarı
Genus: Gammarus Fabricius, 1775
G. aequicauda (Martynov, 1931) G.ae. --
G. anatoliensis Schellenberg, 1937 G.an. Uşak
G. arduus G. Karaman, 1975 G.ar. Bolu and Düzce
G. balcanicus Schäferna, 1923 G.b. Kocaeli and Sakarya
G. dorsosetosus Mateus & Mateus, 1990 G.d. Bolu
G. gonensis Özbek, 2016 G.g. Istanbul and Manisa
G. komareki Schäferna, 1923 G.k. Düzce and Kocaeli
G. lacustris G.O. Sars, 1863 G.l. Istanbul
G. pulex pulex (Linnaeus, 1758) G.p.p. Bolu, Kırklareli, Kocaeli, Sakarya and Uşak
G. uludagi G.S. Karaman, 1975 G.u. Aydın, Bilecik, Sakarya and Yalova
Table 2. The names, localities, sampling dates, geographical locations, and altitudes of the stations.
No Locality Date Latitude Longitude Taxon
1 Fountain (Paşa Valley) 12.05.2014 37°56’34.0”N 27°53’31.8”E G.u.
2 Ekinanbarı Spring 17.05.2014 37°14’42.58”N 27°41’9.09”E E.s., G.ae.
3 Bafa Lake 17.05.2014 37°28’37.13”N 27°29’8.28”E E.s., G.ae.
4 Hona Creek 23.05.2015 38°14’28.40”N 27°14’0.84”E G.u.
5 Karasu Spring 25.07.2015 39°50’28.90”N 29°58’38.73”E G.b.
6 Mezit Creek-1 25.07.2015 39°54’49.48”N 29°48’54.57”E G.b.
7 Mezit Creek-2 25.07.2015 39°54’55.71”N 29°49’7.25”E G.b.
8 Creek (Berçin) 25.07.2015 39°47’18.96”N 29°35’40.63”E G.b., G.p.p.
9 Sorkun Creek 26.07.2015 39°34’13.23”N 29°27’10.86”E G.p.p.
10 Creek (Harmancık) 26.07.2015 39°40’28.84”N 29° 9’0.70”E G.b., G.p.p.
11 Fountain 26.07.2015 39°35’26.64”N 27°29’25.22”E G.u.
12 Creek (Dereiçi) 27.07.2015 39°41’11.83”N 27°9’51.93”E G.u.
13 Creek (Hanlar) 27.07.2015 39°43’27.49”N 27°11’0.61”E G.u.
14 Fountain (Hanlar) 27.07.2015 39°43’9.95”N 27°10’60.00”E G.u.
15 Fountain (Huriyeoğulları) 27.07.2015 39°40’18.01”N 27°6’42.31”E G.u.
16 Fountain (Talimalanı) 27.07.2015 39°40’16.57”N 27°5’52.54”E G.u.
17 Hasanboğuldu Creek-1 27.07.2015 39°38’42.05”N 26°55’6.62”E G.u.
18 Hasanboğuldu Creek-2 27.07.2015 39°38’47.01”N 26°55’4.78”E G.u.
19 Pınarbaşı Creek 30.07.2015 39°37’15.10”N 26°52’49.86”E G.u.
20 Bıçkı Creek 30.07.2015 39°45’20.34”N 26°48’17.07”E G.u.
21 Ayazma Creek 30.07.2015 39°44’46.90”N 26°50’35.03”E G.u.
22 Kocaköy Creek 31.07.2015 39°56’17.26”N 27°13’54.72”E G.g.
23 Kaz Creek 31.07.2015 39°58’53.66”N 27°7’22.62”E G.u.
24 Fındıklı Creek-1 31.07.2015 40°24’29.76”N 26°34’6.56”E G.ar.
25 Fındıklı Creek-2 31.07.2015 40°25’6.98”N 26°33’46.82”E G.ar.
26 Burgaz Creek-1 1.08.2015 40°24’54.65”N 26°30’38.75”E G.ar.
27 Burgaz Creek-2 1.08.2015 40°24’55.05”N 26°30’39.28”E G.ar.
28 Gölcük Creek 1.08.2015 40°41’31.22”N 27°5’47.02”E G.ar.
29 Fountain (Hasan Engin) 2.08.2015 40°42’21.08”N 26°34’0.98”E G.ar.
30 Fountain (Erikli) 2.08.2015 40°38’17.99”N 26°27’24.08”E G.ar.
31 Babadere Creek 2.08.2015 40°39’25.52”N 26°32’57.66”E G.k.
32 Dere-1 (Hasköy) 2.08.2015 40°39’55.49”N 26°19’2.88”E G.ar.
33 Ova Creek 2.08.2015 40°40’25.32”N 26°11’16.75”E G.ar.
77
Aquat Sci Eng 2022; 37(2): 74-85
İpek and Özbek. Freshwater Amphipod Species of Western Anatolia, Marmara and Turkish Thrace Regions
Table 2. Continue.
No Locality Date Latitude Longitude Taxon
34 Fountain (Hacı Hüseyin) 3.08.2015 40°53’45.95”N 26°22’3.71”E G.ar.
35 Fountain (H. Seyit Kâhya) 3.08.2015 40°53’45.68”N 26°22’3.90”E G.ar.
36 Fountain (Sultan) 3.08.2015 41°1’43.83”N 26°26’56.51”E G.ar.
37 Balabancık Creek 3.08.2015 41°1’57.94”N 26°24’36.97”E G.ar.
38 Fountain (Uzunköprü) 3.08.2015 41°16’26.39”N 26°39’44.88”E G.ar.
39 Bölükler Creek 3.08.2015 41°10’29.46”N 26°40’3.40”E G.k.
40 Fountain 3.08.2015 41°17’52.27”N 26°57’7.73”E G.ar.
41 Fountain-1 (Danişment) 3.08.2015 41°18’14.14”N 26°54’2.21”E G.ar.
42 Fountain-2 (Danişment) 4.08.2015 41°18’25.93”N 26°54’9.89”E G.ar.
43 Fountain (Akarca) 4.08.2015 41°20’2.88”N 26°55’20.23”E G.ar.
44 Kaynarca Creek 4.08.2015 41°33’2.16”N 27°25’44.24”E G.ar.
45 Fountain (Sofuhalil) 4.08.2015 41°26’38.24”N 27°9’22.33”E G.ar.
46 Çilingir Creek-2 4.08.2015 41°26’39.95”N 27°9’16.44”E G.ar.
47 Fountain(Menekşesofular) 5.08.2015 41°45’42.36”N 26°38’37.00”E G.ar.
48 Sofular Creek 5.08.2015 41°45’43.03”N 26°38’35.86”E G.ar.
49 Sinanköy Creek 5.08.2015 41°44’16.29”N 26°39’52.99”E G.k.
50 Karayusuf Creek 5.08.2015 41°43’53.89”N 26°41’39.67”E G.ar.
51 Fountain (Demirhanlı) 5.08.2015 41°41’55.66”N 26°44’2.00”E G.k.
52 Fountain (Özmen Ailesi) 5.08.2015 41°43’58.18”N 26°50’52.46”E G.ar.
53 Fountain (Bostanlı) 5.08.2015 41°36’37.50”N 26°58’16.91”E G.ar.
54 Fountain (Hazinedar) 5.08.2015 41°33’45.41”N 27°0’22.42”E G.ar.
55 İnece Creek-2 5.08.2015 41°33’39.96”N 27°0’51.59”E G.k.
56 Fountain (Çaydere) 6.08.2015 41°42’6.52”N 27°30’41.63”E G.ar.
57 Fountain (Gendarmerie Tower) 6.08.2015 41°46’7.71”N 27°41’0.73”E G.k.
58 Velika Creek 6.08.2015 41°46’55.45”N 27°42’26.07”E G.p.p.
59 Asker Creek 6.08.2015 41°51’7.86”N 27°48’24.55”E G.k.
60 Değirmen Creek 6.08.2015 41°49’18.09”N 27°45’4.25”E G.p.p.
61 Fountain-2 (Sergen) 6.08.2015 41°41’19.10”N 27°42’33.41”E G.ar.
62 Fountain (Okçular) 7.08.2015 41°33’14.82”N 27°49’29.08”E G.ar.
63 Kazan Creek 7.08.2015 41°37’51.54”N 27°53’4.20”E G.ar., G.k.
64 Kömürköy Spring 7.08.2015 41°38’13.10”N 27°53’33.97”E G.k.
65 Pabuç Creek 7.08.2015 41°41’6.01”N 27°52’58.25”E G.k.
66 Dere (Kışlacık) 7.08.2015 41°40’50.65”N 27°57’17.80”E G.k.
67 Kızılcaali Creek 9.08.2015 41°13’58.72”N 28°33’19.17”E G.l.
68 Sofular Creek 9.08.2015 41°10’26.41”N 29°29’24.97”E G.k.
69 Dere (Kızılcaköy) 9.08.2015 41°9’16.14”N 29°32’37.80”E G.p.p.
70 Kızılca Spring 9.08.2015 41°9’15.66”N 29°32’37.77”E G.p.p.
71 Ballıkaya Creek 10.08.2015 40°50’21.70”N 29°31’2.21”E G.b.
72 Oruçoğlu Creek 11.08.2015 41°3’54.89”N 29°28’26.88”E G.k.
73 Übeyli Dere 11.08.2015 41°5’58.00”N 29°46’56.20”E G.g.
74 Taşlıgeçit Creek 11.08.2015 41°6’16.85”N 30°28’34.40”E G.p.p.
75 Kiraz Stream 12.08.2015 40°42’5.52”N 29°59’40.90”E G.p.p.
76 Kazan Dere 12.08.2015 40°38’22.03”N 29°57’37.37”E G.k.
77 Armutlu Creek-3 13.08.2015 40°32’44.61”N 28°50’30.68”E G.g.
78 Fountain (Selimiye) 13.08.2015 40°30’51.86”N 28°58’55.44”E G.g.
79 Soğukdere Creek-1 13.08.2015 40°31’17.71”N 28°59’11.82”E G.u.
80 Soğukdere Creek-2 13.08.2015 40°31’17.08”N 28°59’11.29”E G.p.p.
81 Boğaz Creek 14.08.2015 40°14’58.02”N 29°42’53.54”E G.p.p., G.d.
82 Papatya Creek (Göksu Stream) 14.08.2015 40°14’34.27”N 29°44’22.95”E G.p.p.
83 Fountain (Pelitözü) 14.08.2015 40°10’37.23”N 29°57’27.46”E G.p.p.
84 Hamsu Creek-1 (Çakırpınar) 14.08.2015 40°8’40.66”N 29°57’47.67”E G.p.p.
78
Aquat Sci Eng 2022; 37(2): 74-85
İpek and Özbek. Freshwater Amphipod Species of Western Anatolia, Marmara and Turkish Thrace Regions
ally, the basis of the pereiopod VII bears few setae on the pos-
teroventral side. The main and accessory flagellum of antenna I
consist of 21-25 and 3-4 segments, respectively. The flagellum
of antenna II consists of 11-13 segments; with few flag-like
brush setae on the posterior margins. Calceoli can be present
or absent. The third segment of the mandibular palp bears 1
group of A-setae, 1 group of B-setae, 23-25 D-setae, and 4-5
E-setae. C-setae is absent. Pereiopod III and IV have a weak se-
tation. Pereiopods V-VII bears the only spine on the anterior
margin in segments 3-6, the setae is usually absent, if there is
any, it is shorter than the spines. Rami of the uropod III is weak-
ly armed. Telson lobes are cleft and more than twice their width.
Each lobe has 2-3 spines and 4-5 setae on the terminal and usu-
ally 2 plumose setae on the lateral margin.
Table 2. Continue.
No Locality Date Latitude Longitude Taxon
85 Hamsu Creek-2 (Selöz) 15.08.2015 40°7’51.45”N 29°55’49.31”E G.p.p.
86 Hamsu Creek-3 (Ulupınar) 15.08.2015 40°7’15.06”N 29°53’15.29”E G.p.p.
87 Fountain (Ulupınar) 15.08.2015 40°6’39.34”N 29°52’59.33”E G.p.p.
88 Fountain (Karadede) 15.08.2015 40°5’12.68”N 29°50’49.86”E G.p.p.
89 Günyurdu Creek 15.08.2015 40°4’32.17”N 29°50’27.55”E G.p.p.
90 Fountain (Büyükelmalı) 15.08.2015 40° 3’9.11”N 29°48’25.90”E G.u.
91 Fountain (Küplü Bridge) 5.12.2015 40°00’36.118”N 30°39’54.38”E G.an.
92 Küplü Creek (Mayıslar) 5.12.2015 40°01’29.168”N 30°39’16.609”E G.an.
93 Sorgun Creek 5.12.2015 40°20’24.34”N 31°14’22.44”E G.p.p.
94 Mudurnu Stream-1 5.12.2015 40°31’26.641”N 31°14’33.935”E G.p.p.
95 Dere-1 (Uğurköy) 6.12.2015 40°44’3.294”N 31°12’51.735”E G.k.
96 Dere-2 (Uğurköy) 6.12.2015 40°44’16.807”N 31°12’28.224”E G.ar.
97 Creek (Gelenöz) 6.12.2015 40°55’57.80”N 31°19’38.43”E G.k.
98 Creek (Ahmetçiler) 6.12.2015 40°58’33.194”N 31°26’5.346”E G.k.
99 Creek (Tıraşlar) 6.12.2015 41°00’37.326”N 31°24’52.136”E G.k.
100 Edilli Creek 8.12.2015 41°4’15.00”N 31°4’18.05”E G.k.
101 Karaburun Creek 8.12.2015 41°4’12.32”N 31°1’0.14”E G.k.
102 Akçay Stream 8.12.2015 40°34’54.58”N 30°45’19.88”E G.u.
103 Fountain (Çamyurdu) 8.12.2015 40°35’32.50”N 30°56’16.35”E G.b.
104 Çağşak Creek 9.12.2015 40°33’2.03”N 31°0’17.27”E G.p.p.
105 Fountain (Tosunlar) 9.12.2015 40°33’1.99”N 31°0’17.74”E G.p.p.
106 Gök Dere-1 (Çavuşdere) 9.12.2015 40°30’7.26”N 31°2’45.90”E G.p.p.
107 Gök Dere-2 (Yeşilyazı) 9.12.2015 40°27’20.19”N 30°58’11.10”E G.ar.
108 Gök Dere-3 (Sünnet) 9.12.2015 40°26’31.63”N 30°57’38.21”E G.p.p.
109 Hebirler Creek 9.12.2015 40°18’49.69”N 30°51’22.56”E G.p.p.
110 Gelinkaya Creek 25.04.2016 39°18’56.44”N 29°58’39.10”E G.p.p.
111 Fountain (Yaylaköy) 25.04.2016 39°5’22.39”N 29°28’15.68”E G.u.
112 Fountain (Akçaalan) 25.04.2016 39°4’13.56”N 29°24’11.96”E G.u.
113 Fountain (Aşağıyoncaağaç) 25.04.2016 39°13’54.39”N 29°14’47.00”E G.u.
114 Creek (Emet) 25.04.2016 39°20’14.72”N 29°17’31.51”E G.g.
115 Fountain (Oysu) 26.04.2016 38°58’1.80”N 29°54’54.70”E G.g.
116 Fountain (Saraycık) 26.04.2016 38°59’4.10”N 29°50’53.30”E G.an.
117 Banaz Stream-1 27.04.2016 38°22’0.87”N 29°19’40.89”E G.an.
118 Creek (Kıranyer) 28.04.2016 37°48’19.30”N 28°48’37.80”E G.u.
119 Bozüyük Pınarbaşı Creek 29.04.2016 37°17’44.68”N 28°7’39.24”E G.b.
120 Banaz Stream-2 12.05.2016 38°32’58.12”N 29°37’26.00”E G.p.p.
121 Hamam Creek 12.05.2016 38°46’43.20”N 29°49’11.90”E G.p.p.
122 Dere (Zafertepeçalköy) 12.05.2016 38°56’46.60”N 30°5’20.30”E G.an.
123 Çitalan Creek 17.04.2018 39°24’5.30”N 27°36’26.20”E G.g.
124 Yağcılı Creek 18.04.2018 39°14’15.07”N 27°31’56.03”E G.g.
125 Karina Lagoon 20.12.2018 37°37’13.18”N 27°11’54.00”E G.ae.
126 Tuzburgazı Spring 20.12.2018 37°37’15.88”N 27°11’54.46”E G.ae.
127 Creek (Soğanlı) 16.03.2019 38°32’7.20”N 28°26’8.92”E G.p.p.
79
Aquat Sci Eng 2022; 37(2): 74-85
İpek and Özbek. Freshwater Amphipod Species of Western Anatolia, Marmara and Turkish Thrace Regions
Examined material: St. 91: 5 ♀♀, 10 ♂♂, 5.xii.2015; St. 92: 9 ♀♀, 18
♂♂, 5.xii.2015; St. 115: 28 ♀♀, 34 ♂♂, 26.iv.2016; St. 116: 6 ♀♀, 7
♂♂, 26.iv.2016; St. 117: 26 ♀♀, 40♂♂, 27.iv.2016 St. 121: 2 ♂♂,
12.v.2016; St. 122: 5 ♂♂, 12.v.2016.
G. arduus: The body length is 14-15 mm in adults. Within the
Gammarus pulex-group, it can be easily distinguished from the
others by the antenna II that has a slender flagellum, and the epi-
meral plate II bears densely setae on the outer surface and distal
margin, and especially basis of the pereiopod VI-VII bear setae
on the postero-ventral side. Sometimes segments of the
metasome II and III bear setae on the dorsal margin. Peduncles
of the antenna I have a weak setation like flagellum. The main
and accessory flagellum consists of 26-30 and 3-5 segments, re-
spectively. Calceoli is absent. The third segment of mandibular
palp bears 1 group of A-setae, 2 groups of B-setae, 25-27 D-se-
tae, and 4-6 E-setae. C-setae is absent. Pereiopod III and IV are
slender and have short dactylus. Epimeral plates I-III can be
slightly pointed on the posterodistal corner. Epimeral plate II
with numerous setae on the outer surface. The Rami of uropod III
has many simple and plumose setae. The telson lobes are deep-
ly cleft and about 3 times their width.
Examined material: St. 24: 28 ♀♀, 29 ♂♂, 31.vii.2015; St. 25: 52 ♀♀,
52 ♂♂, 31.vii.2015; St. 26: 49 ♀♀, 57 ♂♂, 1.viii.2015; St. 27: 29 ♀♀,
32 ♂♂, 1.viii.2015; St. 28: 37 ♀♀, 37 ♂♂, 1.viii.2015; St. 29: 21 ♀♀, 26
♂♂, 2.viii.2015; St. 30: 43 ♀♀, 84 ♂♂, 2.viii.2015; St. 32: 15 ♀♀, 21
♂♂, 2.viii.2015; St. 33: 44 ♀♀, 58 ♂♂, 2.viii.2015; St. 34: 29 ♀♀, 54
♂♂, 3.viii.2015; St. 35: 14 ♀♀, 35 ♂♂, 3.viii.2015; St. 36: 23 ♀♀, 66
♂♂, 3.viii.2015; St. 37: 82 ♀♀, 144 ♂♂, 3.viii.2015; St. 38: 5 ♀♀, 28
♂♂, 3.viii.2015; St. 40: 61 ♀♀, 68 ♂♂, 3.viii.2015; St. 41: 43 ♀♀, 68
♂♂, 3.vii.2015; St. 42: 46 ♀♀, 57 ♂♂, 4.viii.2015; St. 43: 21 ♀♀, 29
♂♂, 4.viii.2015; St. 44: 61 ♀♀, 64 ♂♂, 4.viii.2015; St. 45: 32 ♀♀, 65
♂♂, 4.viii.2015; St. 46: 60 ♀♀, 83 ♂♂, 4.viii.2015; St. 47: 10 ♀♀, 24
♂♂, 5.viii.2015; St. 48: 14 ♀♀, 11 ♂♂, 5.viii.2015; St. 50: 28 ♀♀, 124
♂♂, 5.viii.2015; St. 52: 23 ♀♀, 49 ♂♂, 5.viii.2015; St. 53: 1 ♀♀, 2 ♂♂,
5.viii.2015; St. 54: 18 ♀♀, 37 ♂♂, 5.viii.2015; St. 56: 20 ♀♀, 33 ♂♂,
6.viii.2015; St. 61: 18 ♀♀, 28 ♂♂, 6.viii.2015; St. 62: 13 ♀♀, 46 ♂♂,
7.viii.2015; St. 63: 12 ♂♂, 7.viii.2015; St. 96: 10 ♀♀, 55 ♂♂, 6.xii.2015;
St. 107: 6 ♀♀, 22 ♂♂, 9.xii.2015.
G. balcanicus: The maximum body length is about 12-13mm in
adults, a relatively small species. The antenna II is slender and
has fewer setae. The pereiopods III-IV bear a few short setae, the
pereiopods V-VII bear almost no seta, if any seta is present, it is
always shorter than the spines. Epimeral plates I-III can be slight-
ly pointed on the posterodistal corner and bear the only spine.
The antenna I has a weak setation; the main and accessory flagel-
lum consists of 21-25 and 3-4 segments, respectively. Antenna II
bears short and fewer setae. The flagellum consists of 10-14 seg-
ments; the length of the setae is shorter than the diameter of the
segments on which they are implanted. Calceoli can be present
or absent. The third segment of the mandibular palp bears 2
groups of A-setae, 1 group of B-setae, 22-26 D-setae, and 4-5
long E-setae. C-setae is absent. Gnathopod I and II bear a small
numerous of setae. The rami of uropod III bears only simple se-
tae on both margins; there are no plumose setae. The telson
lobes are deeply cleft and about 2 times their width.
Examined material: St. 5: 18 ♀♀, 47♂♂, 25.vii.2015; St. 6: 1 , 1 ,
25.vii.2015; St. 7: 10 ♀♀, 22 ♂♂, 25.vii.2015; St. 8: 21 ♀♀, 17 ♂♂,
25.vii.2015; St. 10: 20 ♀♀, 29 ♂♂, 26.vii.2015; St. 71: 36 ♀♀, 29 ♂♂,
10.viii.2015; St. 82: 10 ♀♀, 11 ♂♂, 14.viii.2015; St. 102: 6 ♂♂,
8.xii.2015; St. 103: 29 ♀♀, 42 ♂♂, 8.xii.2015; St. 119: 49 ♀♀, 62 ♂♂,
29.iv.2016.
G. dorsosetosus: The body is smooth and its length is up to 10-
11mm in adults. Within the Gammarus balcanicus-group, it can
be easily distinguished from the others by the presence of long
setae on the dorsoposterior margin of the metasome segments,
which is a distinguishing morphological character for these spe-
cies. The antenna I has a weak setation and the main and acces-
sory flagellum consists of 20-23 and 2 segments, respectively. An-
tenna II bears fewer setae. The flagellum consists of 11 seg-
ments. Calceoli is absent. The third segment of mandibular palp
bears one group of A-setae, one group of B-setae, 23-24 D-se-
tae, and 4-5 E-setae. C-setae is absent. The lengths of pereiopod
V-VII are almost the same, the length of the basis is 1.5 times their
width, but the pereiopod V is relatively quadrangular in form and
slightly longer than the width. The endopodite of the uropod III
is about as long as 3/5 of the exopodite; the rami bear some
plumose setae. The telson lobes are cleft and about 2.5 times
their width.
Examined material: St. 81: 5 ♀♀, 16 ♂♂, 14.viii.2015; St. 84 : 7 ♀♀,
18 ♂♂, 14.viii.2015; St. 85 : 10 ♀♀, 8 ♂♂, 15.viii.2015; St. 86 : 2 ♀♀,
11 ♂♂, 15.viii.2015; St. 93: 2 ♂♂, 5.xii.2015.
G. gonensis: The body is smooth, medium to large, and up to 13-
14 mm in adults. It belongs to the Gammarus pulex-group and is
similar to Gammarus uludagi except for bearing many setae
along the anterior margins of pereiopods 5-7, bearing less se-
tose on the peduncle segments of the antenna II, bearing more
setae on the propodus of the gnathopod II and having longer
antenna I. The main and accessory flagellum of antenna I consist
of 30 and 4 segments, respectively. Peduncles and flagellum
have a weak setation. The flagellum of antenna II consists of 11
slightly swollen segments. Calceoli present on the segments 1-7.
The third segment of the mandibular palp bears 1 group of A-se-
tae, 2 groups of B-setae, 29 D-setae, and 6 E-setae. C-setae is
absent. Endopodite of the uropod III is about as long as 3/4 of
the exopodite with numerous plumose setae on both margins.
The telson lobes are deeply cleft and about 2.5 times their width.
Examined material: St. 22: 28 ♀♀, 40♂♂, 31.vii.2015; St. 73: 13 ♀♀,
11 ♂♂, 11.viii.2015; St. 77 : 5 ♀♀, 13 ♂♂, 13.viii.2015; St. 78 : 6 ♀♀,
41 ♂♂, 13.viii.2015; St. 114: 24 ♀♀, 41 ♂♂, 25.iv.2016; St. 115: 5 ♀♀,
11 ♂♂, 26.iv.2016; St. 123: 18 ♀♀, 15 ♂♂, 17.iv.2018; St. 124: 19 ♀♀,
23 ♂♂, 18.iv.2018.
G. komareki: The body is smooth, medium to large, and up to
15mm in adults. It belongs to the Gammarus pulex-group and
the most distinguishing morphological character is that the pe-
duncles and flagellum of the antenna II have a very densely and
long setation. The antenna I has a weak setation. There is
Metasome III with some spinules on the dorsoposterior margin.
The antenna I is long and as long as 2/3 of the total body length.
Peduncles and flagellum have a weak setation. The main and ac-
80
Aquat Sci Eng 2022; 37(2): 74-85
İpek and Özbek. Freshwater Amphipod Species of Western Anatolia, Marmara and Turkish Thrace Regions
cessory flagellum consists of 35-38 and 4-5 segments, respective-
ly. The second and third peduncles and flagellum segments of
the antenna II have a very dense, long and curled setation. The
transverse rows of setae of the flagellum are 3 times the diame-
ter of the segment on which they are implanted. The flagellum
consists of 13 slightly swollen segments. Calceoli is absent. The
third segment of the mandibular palp bears 1 group of A-setae,
1-2 groups of B-setae, 35 D-setae, and 4-6 E-setae. C-setae is ab-
sent. The endopodite of the uropod III is about as long as 3/4 of
the exopodite; rami with some spines and numerous plumose
setae on both margins. The telson lobes are deeply cleft and
about as long as twice their width.
Examined material: St. 31: 37 ♀♀, 55 ♂♂, 2.viii.2015; St. 32: 47 ♀♀, 44
♂♂, 2.viii.2015; St. 35: 36 ♀♀, 33 ♂♂, 3.viii.2015; St. 39: 55 ♀♀, 46 ♂♂,
3.viii.2015; St. 49: 42 ♀♀, 70 ♂♂, 5.viii.2015; St. 51: 8 ♀♀, 18 ♂♂,
5.viii.2015; St. 55: 27 ♀♀, 49 ♂♂, 5.viii.2015; St. 57: 6 ♀♀, 9 ♂♂,
6.viii.2015; St. 59: 26 ♀♀, 12 ♂♂, 6.viii.2015; St. 63: 13 ♀♀, 7 ♂♂,
7.viii.2015; St. 64: 9 ♀♀, 49 ♂♂, 7.viii.2015; St. 65: 56 ♀♀, 58 ♂♂,
7.viii.2015; St. 66: 30 ♀♀, 85 ♂♂, 7.viii.2015; St. 68: 32 ♀♀, 84 ♂♂,
9.viii.2015; St. 72: 9 ♀♀, 54 ♂♂, 11.viii.2015; St. 76: 2 ♀♀, 2 ♂♂,
12.viii.2015; St. 95: 31 ♀♀, 63 ♂♂, 6.xii.2015; St. 97: 26 ♀♀, 34 ♂♂,
6.xii.2015; St. 98: 8 ♀♀, 40 ♂♂, 6.xii.2015 ;St. 99: 6 ♀♀, 6 ♂♂, 6.xii.2015;
St. 100: 13 ♀♀, 21 ♂♂, 8.xii.2015; St. 101: 3 ♀♀, 8 ♂♂, 8.xii.2015.
G. lacustris: The body is smooth and large and up to 24mm in
adults. It belongs to the Gammarus pulex-group and is similar to
Gammarus pulex pulex except for bearing not flag-like brush se-
tae, it has relatively short and slender antennae, has more sharp-
ly pointed Epimeral plates, and slender dactylus. Metasome II
and III with some spinules on the dorsoposterior margin. The an-
tenna I is relatively short and slightly exceeds 1/3 of the total
body length. The Peduncles and flagellum have a weak setation.
The main and accessory flagellum consists of 27 and 3-4 seg-
ments, respectively. The fourth and fifth peduncles of the anten-
na II are almost equal in length with few setae, implanted in 3-4
longitudinal rows. Calceoli is present. There is no calceoli in
some periods of the year as given information in the literature.
The third segment of the mandibular palp bears 1 group of A-se-
tae, 1 group of B-setae, 27 D-setae, and 4 E-setae. C-setae is ab-
sent. Endopodite of the uropod III reaches about 3/4 of the exo-
podite; rami with numerous plumose setae. The telson lobes are
cleft and about as long as three their width.
Examined material: St. 67: 40 ♀♀, 73 ♂♂, 9.viii.2015.
G. pulex pulex: The body is smooth and large and is up to 25-
30mm in adults. The Antenna II with a swollen compressed fla-
gellum bears flag-like brush setae on the posterior margin; the
swollen and compressed flagellum consists of 11-12 segments;
each segment bears a transverse row of setae; Peduncles and fla-
gellum of antenna I have a weak setation. The main and accesso-
ry flagellum consists of 25 and 5 segments, respectively. Calceoli
is absent or present. The third segment of the mandibular palp
bears 1 group of A-setae, 1 group of B-setae, 28 D-setae, and 5
E-setae. C-setae is absent. Pereiopods III-IV with long and curled
setae. Rami of uropod III has a dense setation. The telson lobes
are deeply cleft and about as long as three their width.
Examined material: St. 8: 21 ♀♀, 17 ♂♂, 25.vii.2015; St. 9: 15 ♀♀, 39 ♂♂,
26.vii.2015; St. 10: 9 ♀♀, 17 ♂♂, 26.vii.2015; St. 58 : 45 ♀♀, 50 ♂♂,
6.viii.2015; St. 60: 45 ♀♀, 67 ♂♂, 6.viii.2015; St. 69: 21 ♀♀, 43 ♂♂,
9.viii.2015; St. 70: 7 ♀♀, 22 ♂♂, 9.viii.2015; St. 74: 10 ♀♀, 30 ♂♂,
11.viii.2015; St. 75: 13 ♀♀, 28 ♂♂, 12.viii.2015; St. 80: 16 ♀♀, 20 ♂♂,
13.viii.2015; St. 81: 7 ♀♀, 4 ♂♂, 14.viii.2015; St. 83: 1 , 1 ♂♂, 14.viii.2015;
St. 84: 9 ♀♀, 8 ♂♂, 14.viii.2015; St. 85: 10 ♀♀, 25 ♂♂, 15.viii.2015; St. 86:
4 ♀♀, 27 ♂♂, 15.viii.2015; St. 87: 10 ♀♀, 27 ♂♂, 15.viii.2015; St. 88: 4 ♀♀,
6 ♂♂, 15.viii.2015; St. 89: 17 ♀♀, 29 ♂♂, 15.viii.2015; St. 93: 25 ♀♀, 35 ♂♂,
5.xii.2015; St. 94: 13 ♀♀, 14 ♂♂, 5.xii.2015; St. 104: 16 ♀♀, 37 ♂♂,
9.xii.2015; St. 105: 8 ♀♀, 23 ♂♂, 9.xii.2015; St. 106: 17 ♀♀, 40 ♂♂,
9.xii.2015; St. 108: 30 ♀♀, 55 ♂♂, 9.xii.2015; St. 109: 7 ♀♀, 11 ♂♂,
9.xii.2015; St. 110: 17 ♀♀, 23 ♂♂, 25.iv.2016; St. 116: 15 ♀♀, 17 ♂♂,
26.iv.2016; St. 120: 8 ♀♀, 30 ♂♂, 12.v.2016; St. 121: 17 ♀♀, 18 ♂♂,
12.v.2016; St. 122: 17 ♀♀, 23 ♂♂, 12.v.2016; St. 127: 3 ♀♀, 1 , 16.iii.2019.
G. uludagi: The body smooth and medium-large is 13mm in
adults. It is very similar to G. fossarum and G. gonensis at first
sight, but it has flag-like brush setae on the flagellum of the an-
tenna II and long setae on the peduncle segments. The fourth
and fifth peduncles are almost equal in length and bear 4-5
groups of long setae with transverse rows on the posterior mar-
gin and these setae are about as long as or longer than the diam-
eter of the segments on which are implanted. The swollen and
compressed flagellum of antenna II consists of 11-12 segments;
each segment bears a transverse row of setae. With a very char-
acteristic feature, the telson lobes are deeply cleft and longer
than twice their width. Each lobe has 2-3 groups of setae and 2
short plumose setae on the outer lateral margin, 2-3 groups of
setae on the inner lateral margin, and additionally to 1 spine and
4-5 setae on the terminal; these setae are about as long as or lon-
ger than the length of the lobes. Peduncles and flagellum of an-
tenna I have a weak setation. The main and accessory flagellum
consists of 32 and 6 segments, respectively. Calceoli is absent.
The third segment of the mandibular palp bears 1 group of A-se-
tae, 1 group of B-setae, 27 D-setae, and 6 E-setae. C-setae is ab-
sent. Endopodite of the uropod III is about as long as 3/5 of the
exopodite; The rami bear simple setae on both margins.
Examined material: St. 1: 18 ♀♀, 20 ♂♂, 12.v.2014; St. 4 : 27 ♀♀, 42
♂♂, 23.v.2015; St. 11: 26 ♀♀, 23 ♂♂, 26.vii.2015; St. 12: 19 ♀♀, 41
♂♂, 27.vii.2015; St. 13: 16 ♀♀, 71 ♂♂, 27.vii.2015; St. 14: 26 ♀♀, 42
♂♂, 27.vii.2015; St. 15: 21 ♀♀, 43 ♂♂, 27.vii.2015; St. 16: 7 ♀♀, 59
♂♂, 27.vii.2015; St. 17: 22 ♀♀, 20 ♂♂, 27.vii.2015; St. 18: 22 ♀♀, 11
♂♂, 27.vii.2015; St. 19: 55 ♀♀, 48 ♂♂, 30.vii.2015; St. 20: 26 ♀♀, 55
♂♂, 30.vii.2015; St. 21: 49 ♀♀, 53 ♂♂, 30.vii.2015; St. 23: 31 ♀♀, 51
♂♂, 31.vii.2015, St. 79: 6 ♀♀, 6 ♂♂, 13.viii.2015; St. 90: 5 ♀♀, 9 ♂♂,
15.viii.2015; St. 102: 3 ♀♀, 14 ♂♂, 8.xii.2015; St. 111: 13 ♀♀, 33 ♂♂,
25.iv.2016; St. 112: 14 ♀♀, 27 ♂♂, 25.iv.2016; St. 113: 13 ♀♀, 39 ♂♂,
25.iv.2016; St. 118 : 30 ♀♀, 40 ♂♂, 28.iv.2016.
Diagnostic key
1. a) Endopodite of the uropod III is less than 1/4 of the length
of the exopodite …..(Echinogammarus) ……..........................
....... Echinogammarus stocki G. Karaman, 1970
b) Endopodite of the uropod III is longer than 1/4 of the
length of the exopodite ……......…..(Gammarus) .…......…... 2
81
Aquat Sci Eng 2022; 37(2): 74-85
İpek and Özbek. Freshwater Amphipod Species of Western Anatolia, Marmara and Turkish Thrace Regions
2. a) Eyes elongated, kidney-shaped………….. Gammarus
aequicauda (Martynov, 1931)
b) The eyes are round or oval ................................................. 3
3. a) Posterior margins of the pereiopod III-IV poorly se-
tose….........(Gammarus balcanicus-group)............................4
b) Pereiopod III-IV with numerous long setae……... (Gam-
marus pulex-group) …… 6
4. a) Inner surface of basal segment of the pereiopod VII with
setae..…….…… Gammarus anatoliensis Schellenberg, 1937
b) Inner surface of basal segment of the pereiopod VII with
out setae .……........….…. 5
5. a) Metasome segments with a few long setae on dorsopos-
terior margins………..….....………………........…… Gam-
marus dorsosetosus Mateus & Mateus, 1990
b) Metasome segments without long setae on dorsoposteri-
or margins ………………..… ……….……………..………........
…...…..…….……. Gammarus balcanicus Schäferna, 1923
6. a) Inner surface of basal segment of the pereiopod VI-VII
with setae ………….………..
………………………………………………...…… Gammarus
arduus G. Karaman, 1975
b) Inner surface of basal segment of the pereiopod VI-VII
without setae ….....…….... 7
7. a) Peduncle and flagellum segments of antenna II densely
set with brushes of very long setae
…………....……………………….…..….……… Gammarus
komareki Schäferna, 1923
b) Peduncle and flagellum segments of antenna II with short-
er setae ……………..…. 8
8. a) Inner surface of palm of the gnathopod II with many long
curled setae …...…...…. 9
b) Inner surface of palm of the gnathopod II without curled
setae ……...………….... 10
9. a) Peduncles of the antenna II bear long setae (as long as or
longer than the diameter of the segments)
…………..…….……………...……… Gammarus uludagi G.S.
Karaman, 1975
b) Peduncles of the antenna II with short setae .…….. Gam-
marus gonensis Özbek, 2016
10. a) Flagellar segments of antenna II swollen bearing flag like
setae. Epimeral plate II-III with rectangular to weekly point-
ed ………..…….… Gammarus pulex pulex (Linnaeus, 1758)
b) Flagellar segments of antenna II without flag like setae.
Epimeral plate II-III with sharply pointed posteroinferior cor-
ners …....……...……. Gammarus lacustris G.O. Sars, 1863
E. stocki is one of the most difficult species to find because it in-
habits a very narrow zone on the verge of freshwater and brack-
ish or marine waters as stated in the literature (Pinkster, 1993).
The type locality of the species is a salt spring in Cres Island
(Karaman, 1970). In Turkey, it was firstly recorded from the Bafa
Lake by Karaman (1971). Then, several recordings were reported
from the lake (Geldiay et al., 1977; Kocataş & Katağan, 1978; Bel-
lan-Santini et al., 1982; Ustaoğlu et al., 1998; Sarı et al., 2001). In
this study, the species was reported from a spring in the Ekinan-
barı village for the first time. The species was previously confused
with E. acarinatus, then Karaman (1970) eliminated this confusion
when he revealed the presence of C-seta in the mandibular palp
which is an important character distinguishing it from the other
Echinogammarus species. Although it was stated that the sam-
ple from France has setae on the anterior margin of the epimeral
plate I and the ventral margins of the epimeral plates II-III (Pink-
ster, 1993), these setae were absent in our samples (Figure 2).
The type locality of G. aequicauda is Donuzlav Lake in Crimea. In
Turkey, it was firstly recorded from a brackish water pool in Mer-
sin province by Stock (1967). The species is abundant, especially
in Western Anatolia (from Çanakkale to Muğla provinces) and
there are several records from Mersin and Antalya in the Mediter-
ranean, Sinop and Samsun in the Black Sea, Çanakkale, Edirne
and Istanbul in Thrace region (Altınsaçlı et al., 2017; Akbulut et
al., 2002, 2009a, 2009b; Balık et al., 2006; Bat et al., 2000; Kara-
man, 2003, Kocataş & Katağan, 1978; Mateus & Mateus, 1990;
Özbek 2011; Özbek & Ustaoğlu, 1998, Özbek et al., 2015, 2016;
Sarı et al., 2001; Ustaoğlu et al., 1998, 2000). It was also reported
from the Gökçeada Island (Aegean Sea) (Özbek & Özkan, 2017).
Considering the morphological features of G. aequicauda given
in the literature, the brackish water forms reported from Crimea
and Mersin look similar, while the freshwater form from southern
France has weaker setation than the others (Stock, 1967). The
samples we studied are similar to those recorded from the Mer-
sin province in terms of the length of the base of pereiopods
V-VII. On the other hand, the present specimens differ from those
reported from southern France in terms of the length of the bas-
al segments of pereiopods V-VII and the setation of the anterior
margins of the mentioned segments (Figure 2).
The type locality of G. anatoliensis is a torrent in Akşehir, Konya
(Schellenberg, 1937). It is an endemic species of Turkey. G. ana-
toliensis is widespread in the Lake District Region of Turkey, but
it was also recorded from the Marmara, the Black Sea, the Aege-
an, and the Mediterranean regions of Turkey (Karaman & Pink-
ster, 1987, Özbek & Ustaoğlu, 2005, 2008, 2011; Özbek et al.,
2009; Ekinci & Miroğlu 2016; İpek et al., 2017). In the present
study, the species was recorded from the Uşak province for the
first time. G. anatoliensis was detected at 7 localities in our study.
The present specimens are almost identical with Karaman and
Pinkster’s (1987) description, but some variations were also ob-
served (such as the absence of calceoli).
The type locality of G. arduus is a fountain in Malkara, Tekirdağ
(Karaman 1975) in Turkey. The species was also recorded from
the Ordu and Samsun provinces in the Black Sea Region of Tur-
key (Chertoprud & Palatov, 2017; Gözal, 2004; Karaman & Pink-
ster, 1977; Mateus & Mateus, 1990; Karaman, 2003; Özbek et al.,
82
Aquat Sci Eng 2022; 37(2): 74-85
İpek and Özbek. Freshwater Amphipod Species of Western Anatolia, Marmara and Turkish Thrace Regions
2017; Özkan, 2009; Yeşilmen & Kırgız, 1996). In this study, the spe-
cies was reported from Bolu and Düzce provinces for the first
time. The specimens examined in this study have no calceoli.
The type locality of G. balcanicus is a spring in Kolašin, Montene-
gro (Schäferna, 1923). In Turkey, it was first recorded from the Er-
ciyes Mountain by S. Karaman (1934). Then, it was reported from
several localities from the Strandja Mountains in Thrace to Bay-
burt in the Black Sea region, from İzmir in the Aegean to Hatay
on the Mediterranean coast and to Van in eastern Anatolia (Akb-
ulut et al., 2009b; Akbaba & Boyacı, 2015; Aygen & Balık, 2005;
Balık et al., 2006; Baytaşoğlu & Gözler, 2018; Chertoprud & Pala-
tov, 2017; Ekinci & Miroğlu, 2016; İpek & Şirin, 2009; İpek et al.,
2017; Karaman, 2003, Karaman & Pinkster, 1987; Öntürk & İpek,
2018; Özbek & Ustaoğlu, 2005, 2008, 2011; Özbek et al., 2004,
2009; Ustaoğlu et al., 2004, 2008). In this study, the species was
recorded from the Kocaeli and Sakarya provinces for the first
time.
Karaman and Pinkster (1987) showed that the species has calceo-
li on the flagellum of the antenna II, but they mentioned that it is
a variable character. Calceoli is also absent in our samples. The
wide distribution of the species and its presence in various envi-
ronments indicate the high tolerance of the species, as men-
tioned by Karaman and Pinkster (1987).
The type locality of G. dorsosetosus is the Amanos Mountains,
Hatay province (Mateus & Mateus, 1990), and it is an endemic
species for Turkey. The species was also reported from the Bur-
dur and Karaman provinces (Özbek & Topkara, 2007). In this
study, the first record of the species from the Bolu province is
documented. The slightly elevated metasome segments and the
presence of long setae on the dorsoposterior margins are the
characteristic features of the species (Figure 2). Mateus and Ma-
teus (1990) did not provide detailed drawings of this species.
However, Özbek and Topkara (2007) gave detailed drawings of
the morphological characteristics of this species.
The type locality of Gammarus gonensis is the Gönen Stream in
Balıkesir (Özbek 2016). It was also recorded from Çanakkale, and
Tekirdağ (Özbek et al., 2017), Kütahya (İpek et al., 2017) provinc-
es. In this study, the species was firstly recorded from the Istanbul
(in Thrace), and Manisa provinces. G. gonensis is similar to the G.
uludagi however, it can be easily distinguished from G. uludagi
by the absence of long setae on the peduncle segments of an-
tenna II, and by the presence of densely and curved setae on the
inner surface of the propodus of the gnathopod II. In our study,
the species was determined as a result of sampling made among
the stones on the ground of streams with vegetation as Özbek
(2016) stated.
The type locality of G. komareki is in Belovo Village near Pazarzik,
Bulgaria (Schäferna, 1923). In Turkey, it was firstly recorded by
Karaman (1975) from a fountain in Malkara, Tekirdağ. Although it
is mostly located in Thrace in our country, it has records from the
Marmara and Black Sea regions in Anatolia (Akbulut et al., 2009b;
Aslan et al., 2018; Chertoprud & Palatov, 2017; Ekinci & Miroğlu,
2016; Gözal, 2004; Karaman, 1975, 2003; Mateus & Mateus, 1990;
Odabaşı et al., 2016; Özbek, 2008, 2011; Özbek & Özkan, 2017;
Özbek et al., 2017; Yeşilmen & Kırgız, 1996). By the present study,
the species was recorded for the first time from the Düzce and
Kocaeli provinces. In the samples we examined, the telson lobes
were wider and P5-7 were without long setae on the anterior
margins. We omitted it as it is a variation (Figure 2).
The type locality of G. lacustris is Scandinavia (Sars, 1863) was
firstly recorded in Turkey by Tareen (1974) from the Gölcük Lake
in İzmir. Despite the presence of several records of the species
from Anatolia (Karaman, 1975, 2003; Özbek & Ustaoğlu, 2005,
2011; Özbek & Ustaoğlu, 1998; Özbek et al., 2007), it was firstly
recorded from the Thrace Region of Turkey in the present study.
The samples we examined have setae on the telson lobes that
Figure 2. Some extremities (original) of E. stocki (A-E) (St.2),
G. aequicauda (F-I) (St.2), G. arduus (J-K) (St.62), G.
dorsosetosus (L-N) (St.93), G. komareki (O-S) (St.31),
G. lacustris (T) (St.67). Male. A: mandibular palp; A’:
inner surface of the third segment of mandibular
palp; B: epimeral plate I; C: epimeral plate II; D:
epimeral plate III; E: uropod III; F: antenna II; G:
pereiopod V; H: pereiopod VI; I: pereiopod VII; J:
antenna II; K: telson; L: metasoma somites I-III; M:
pereiopod V; N: uropod III; O: telson; P: pereiopod
V; R: pereiopod VI; S: pereiopod VII; T: telson.
83
Aquat Sci Eng 2022; 37(2): 74-85
İpek and Özbek. Freshwater Amphipod Species of Western Anatolia, Marmara and Turkish Thrace Regions
were absent in Karaman and Pinkster’s (1977a) report (Figure 2).
Considering the previous studies, the setation of the telson in
the samples in Lake Dimon and Venerocolo in Italy and especial-
ly in Lake Lame and the Lake District Region (Turkey) is similar to
our samples (Ruffo 1951; Özbek & Ustaoğlu, 2005).
The type locality of G. pulex pulex is in Öland Island, Sweden
(Linnaeus, 1758). G. pulex pulex, which gives its name to the G.
pulex-group and is a typical representative of the group, is one
of the members of the genus Gammarus with the greatest distri-
bution in the world. It has a wide distribution in Turkey (Karaman,
1975; Karaman & Pinkster, 1977; Bat et al., 2000; Akbulut et al.,
2002, 2009b; Ekinci & Miroğlu, 2016; Özbek & Ustaoğlu, 2005;
Özbek et al., 2017). In our study, it was identified from the prov-
inces of Kırklareli in Thrace, and Kocaeli, Sakarya, and Uşak in
Western Anatolia for the first time except for the regions previ-
ously identified.
The type locality of G. uludagi is the Uludağ Mountain in Bursa
(Karaman, 1975). It is an endemic species of Turkey. Also, several
records were given from the western parts of Anatolia, the island
of Lesbos on the Anatolian coast, and the Black Sea Region of
Turkey (Akbulut et al., 2009b; Karaman, 1975; Karaman & Pink-
ster, 1977; Özbek & Ustaoğlu, 1998; Özbek et al., 2015, 2017; Şi-
rin et al., 2009). In the present study, it was firstly recorded from a
fountain in the Pasha Plateau on the Aydın Mountains, and Bi-
lecik, and a stream in Sakarya.
CONCLUSION
In this study, in which amphipod species are distributed in Western
Anatolia, Marmara and Thrace regions of Turkey were investigat-
ed, a total of 11 species were determined. This study, which aims
to support the discovery of Turkish freshwater amphipod biodiver-
sity, can be a resource for native amphipod researchers. It is obvi-
ous that rivers and lakes are under adverse conditions due to hu-
man pressure and global climate change. Several species living in
Turkish rivers and lakes under the threat of pollution and frost are
adversely affected by these changes, and some of them are com-
pletely eliminated. Under these conditions, the detection of biodi-
versity and the protection of our biological richness are of great
importance. The authors believe that biodiversity studies should
be supported and their numbers should be increased. Afterwards,
sustainable management strategies can be developed.
Acknowledgements: The first author would like to thank his oth-
er co-advisor Prof. Dr. Özgür Emiroğlu for his help to finish the
PhD thesis.
REFERENCES
Akbaba, G. & Boyacı, Y. Ö. (2015). The seasonal change of macrobenthic
fauna in Işıklı Lake (Denizli). Journal of Egirdir Fisheries Faculty 11(2),
8–19. [in Turkish] [CrossRef]
Akbulut, M., Öztürk, M. & Öztürk, M. (2002). The benthic macroinvertebrate
fauna of Sarıkum lake and spring waters (Sinop). Turkish Journal of
Marine Sciences, 8, 103–119.
Akbulut, M., Çelik E. Ş., Odabaşı, D. A., Kaya, H., Selvi, K., Arslan, N. &
Sağır-Odabaşı, S. (2009a). Seasonal distribution and composition of
benthic Macroinvertebrate communities in Menderes Creek,
Çanakkale, Turkey. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 18(11a), 2136–
2145.
Akbulut, M., Ustaoğlu, M. R. & Çelik, E.Ş. (2009b). Freshwater and
brackishwater Malacostraca (Crustacea-Arthropoda) fauna of Sinop
and Samsun. Journal of the Black Sea/Mediterranean Environment,
15(1), 47–60.
Altınsaçlı, S., Yardımcı, C. H., Altınsaçlı, S. & Paçal, F.P. (2017). The species
list belonging to some benthic invertebrate groups in a coastal
lagoon: Kamil Abduş lagoon (İstanbul, Turkey). Journal of Entomology
and Zoology Studies, 5(6), 307–313.
Aslan, H., Gonulal, O., Can-Yilmaz, E., Elipek, B., Baytut, O., Tosunoglu, M.,
Karabacak, E. & Kurt, Y. (2018). Species diversity in lentic, lotic, marine
and terrestrial biotopes of Gokceada Salt Lake wetland (Canakkale,
Turkey). Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 27(5), 2853–2866.
Aygen, C. & Balık, S. (2005). Crustacea fauna of Işıklı Lake and springs
(Çivril, Denizli). –Ege Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 22(3-
4), 371–375. [in Turkish]
Balık, S., Ustaoğlu, M. R., Özbek, M., Yıldız, S., Taşdemir, A. & İlhan, A.
(2006). Determination of pollution at lower basin of Küçük Menderes
River (Selçuk, İzmir) by using macro benthic invertebrates. Ege
Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 23(1-2), 61–65 [in Turkish]
Bat, L., Akbulut, M., Çulha, M. & Sezgin, M. (2000). The macrobenthic
fauna of Sırakaraağaçlar Stream flowing into the Black Sea at Akliman,
Sinop. Turkish Journal Marine Sciences, 6(1), 71–86.
Baytaşoğlu, H. & Gözler, A. M. (2018). Seasonal changes of Malacostraca
Crustacea fauna of the upper Coruh River basin Bayburt province
Turkey and its ecological characteristics. Turkish Journal of Fisheries
and Aquatic Sciences, 18(3), 1–9. [CrossRef]
Bellan-Santini, D., Karaman, G., Krapp-Schickel, G., Ledoyer, M., Myers,
A.A., Ruffo, S. & Schiecke, U. (1982). Part I Gammaridea
(Acanthonotozomatidae to Gammaridae). In: S. Ruffo (Ed.), The
Amphipoda of Mediterranean (pp. 1–364). Memoires de l’Institut
Océanographique, Monaco.
Chertoprud, M.V. & Palatov, D. M. (2017). Stream macrozoobenthic
communities of the eastern Balkans. Inland Water Biology, 10(3),
286–295. [CrossRef]
Coleman, C. O. (2003). “Digital inking”: How to make perfect line
drawings on computers. Organisms Diversity and Evolution,
Electronic Supplement 14, 1–14. [CrossRef]
Coleman, C. O. (2006). Substituting time-consuming pencil drawings in
arthropod taxonomy using stacks of digital photographs. Zootaxa,
1360, 61–68. [CrossRef]
Coleman, C. O. (2009). Drawing setae the digital way. Zoosystematics
and Evolution, 85(2), 305–310. [CrossRef]
Ekinci, M. & Miroğlu, A. (2016). Study on freshwater Gammaridea
(Crustacea, Amphipoda) fauna of Ordu (Turkey). Ordu University
Journal of Science and Tecnology, 6(2), 158–169 [in Turkish].
Geldiay, D., Kocataş, A. & Katağan, T. (1977). The species of Peracarida
and Holocarida (Crustacea, Malacostraca) from Bafa Lake. Ege
University Journal of the Faculty of Science, Series B, 1(4), 311–318.
[in Turkish]
Gözal, S. (2004). Investigations on Gammaridae (Amphipoda) fauna of
some running waters in Thrace. MSc Thesis, Eskişehir Osmangazi
University, Turkey, 44 p. [in Turkish]
Horton, T., Lowry, J., De Broyer, C., Bellan-Santini, D., Coleman, C. O.,
Corbari, L., Costello, M. J., Daneliya, M., Dauvin, J.-C., Fišer, C.,
Gasca, R., Grabowski, M., Guerra-García, J. M., Hendrycks, E.,
Hughes, L., Jaume, D., Jazdzewski, K., Kim, Y.-H., King, R., . . . Zeidler,
W. (2021). World Amphipoda database. Available at: http://www.
marinespecies.org/amphipoda (accessed 10.20.21)
İpek, M., Özbek, M. & Şirin, Ü. (2017). A preliminary study on freshwater
Amphipods (Crustacea) of Kütahya province. In: 1st International
Symposium on Limnology and Freshwater Fisheries Symposium
(LIMNOFISH 2017) (pp. 155). Eğirdir, Isparta, Turkey.
84
Aquat Sci Eng 2022; 37(2): 74-85
İpek and Özbek. Freshwater Amphipod Species of Western Anatolia, Marmara and Turkish Thrace Regions
İpek, M. & Şirin, Ü. (2009). Gammaridea (Crustacea-Amphipoda) records
from Eskişehir province and it’s near around. Ege Journal of Fisheries
and Aquatic Sciences, 26(4), 241–246.
Karaman, G. S. (1970). XXV. prilog poznavanju Amphipoda Kriticka
zapazanja o vrstama Echinogammarus acarinatus (S. Kar. 1931) i
Echinogammarus stocki n. sp. Poljoprivreda I Sumarstvo, Titograd,
16(1-2), 193–214.
Karaman, G. S. (1971). XXX. Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Amphipoden, Uber
einigen Amphipoden aus Griechenland und Kleinasien. Acta Musei
Macedonici Scientiarum Naturalium, 12(2), 1–55.
Karaman, G. S. (1975). Gammarus species from Asia Minor (Fam.
Gammaridae), (56. Contribution to the knowledge of the Amphipoda).
Bolletino del Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di Verona, 1, 311–343.
Karaman, G. S. (2003). New data on some Gammaridean Amphipods
(Amphipoda, Gammaridea) from Palearctic (Contribution to the
knowledge of the Amphipoda 245). Podgorica, 15, 21–37.
Karaman, G. S. & Pinkster, S. (1977). Freshwater Gammarus species from
Europe, North Africa and adjacent regions of Asia (Crustecea -
Amphipoda), Part I Gammarus pulex Group and related species.
Bijdragen Tot De Dierkunde, 47(1), 1–164. [CrossRef]
Karaman, G. S. & Pinkster, S. (1987). Freshwater Gammarus species from
Europe, North Africa and adjacent regions of Asia (Crustecea -
Amphipoda), Part III Gammarus balcanicus Group and related
species. Bijdragen Tot De Dierkunde, 57(2), 207–260. [CrossRef]
Karaman, S. (1934). Über asiatische Süsswassergammariden. Zoologischer
Anzeiger, 106(5-6). 127–134.
Kocataş, A. & Katağan, T. (1978). Littoral benthic Amphipods on Turkish
seas and their distributions. Project No: TBAG-223. TÜBİTAK Research
Institute for Fundamental Sciences, Ankara, 63 pp. [in Turkish]
Linnaeus, C. (1758). Systema Naturae, per regna tria naturae, secundum
classes, ordines, genera, species, cum characteribus, differentiis,
synonymis, locis. Editio decima, reformata (10th revised edition).
Holmiae: Laurentius Salvius, 824 pp. [CrossRef]
Lowry, J. K. & Myers, A. A. (2017). A Phylogeny and classification of the
Amphipoda with the establishment of the new order Ingolfiellida
(Crustacea: Peracarida). Zootaxa, 4265, 1–89. [CrossRef]
Mateus, A. & Mateus, E. (1990). Etude d’une collection d’amphipodes,
specialement du sud-ouest asiatique, du Museum d’Historie
Naturelle de Vienne (Autriche). Annales des naturhistorischer
Museum Wien, 91B, 273–331.
Odabaşı, S., Odabaşı, D. A., Çakır, F. & Bal, D. (2016) A preliminary
investigation on the lipid content and fatty acid composition of
Gammarus komareki (Schaferna 1922), (Crustacea: Amphipoda).
Turkish Journal of Aquatic Sciences, 31(2), 59–67. [CrossRef]
Öntürk, T. & İpek, M. (2018). Investigations on the Eskisehir and its
surroundings Amphipoda fauna. International Journal of
Environmental Research and Technology, 1(1), 35–41.
Özbek, M. (2008). Malacostraca (Crustacea) fauna of some lakes in
western Black Sea region. Ege Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic
Sciences, 25(4), 311–314. [in Turkish] http://doi.org/10.12714/
egejfas.2008.25.4.5000156614
Özbek, M. (2011). An overview of the Gammarus Fabricus (Gammaridae:
Amphipoda) species of Turkey, with an updated checklist. Zoology in
the Middle East, 53, 71–78. [CrossRef]
Özbek, M. (2016). Epigean amphipod fauna of Gönen stream (western
Anatolia, Turkey), with the description of Gammarus gonensis sp.
nov. Turkish Journal of Zoology, 40, 336–344. [CrossRef]
Özbek, M., Balık, S. & Topkara, E. T. (2009). Contribution to the knowledge
on the distribution of Malacostraca (Crustacea) species of central
and southern Anatolia, with some ecological notes. Turkish Journal
of Zoology, 33, 47–55.
Özbek, M., Balık, S. & Ustaoğlu, M. R. (2004). Malacostraca (Crustacea)
fauna of Yuvarlak Stream (Köyceğiz- Muğla). Turkish Journal of
Zoology, 28, 321-327.
Özbek, M., Bakır, K. & Ustaoğlu, M. R. (2016). Malacostraca fauna of the
Karina Lagoon (Aydın). Ege Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences,
33(1), 13–19 [in Turkish]. [CrossRef]
Özbek, M. & Özkan, N. (2017). Amphipoda (Crustacea: Malacostraca)
fauna of the inland-waters of Gökçeada Island. Ege Journal of
Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 34(1), 63–67 [in Turkish]. [CrossRef]
Özbek, M., Özkan, N. & Çamur-Elipek, B. (2017). Freshwater and brackish
amphipods (Crustacea: Amphipoda) from Turkish Thrace region (including
Çanakkale province). Acta Zoologica Bulgarica, 69(4), 493–499.
Özbek, M., Öztürk, H. H. & Özkan, N. (2015). Gammaridae (Amphipoda)
fauna of the inland-waters of Marmara and Paşalimanı islands and
Kapıdağ peninsula. Ege Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences,
32(4), 213–216 [in Turkish]. [CrossRef]
Özbek, M. & Sket, B. (2019). A new Rhipidogammarus (Crustacea:
Amphipoda) species from Turkey: first record of the genus from the
Eastern Mediterranean Region, with an identification key for the
genus. Glasnik Odjeljenja prirodnih nauka, 23, 83–98.
Özbek, M., Topkara, E. T. (2007). Supplementary data on morphology,
distribution, and ecology of Gammarus dorsosetosus Mateus and
Mateus, 1990 (Amphipoda, Gammaridae). Crustaceana, 80, 641–653.
[CrossRef]
Özbek, M. & Ustaoğlu, M. R. (1998). The Amphipoda (Crustacea-
Arthropoda) fauna of İzmir and adjacent areas inland-waters. Ege
Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 15(3-4), 211–231. [in
Turkish]
Özbek, M. & Ustaoğlu, M. R. (2005). Taxonomical investigation of Lake
District inland waters Malacostraca (Crustacea-Arthropoda) fauna. Ege
Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 22(3-4), 357–362. [in Turkish].
Özkan, N. (2009). Chironomidae (Diptera) and Gammaridae (Amphipoda)
fauna in Dupnisa Cave (Sarpdere Village, Demirköy, Kırklareli). Ege
Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 26(1), 7–10.
Pinkster, S. (1993). A revision of the genus Echinogammarus Stebbing,
1899, with some notes on related genera (Crustacea, Amphipoda).
Memorie Del Museo Civico Di Storia Naturale, (ser 2) 10, 1–185.
Ruffo, S. (1951). Sulla presenza di Gammarus (Rivulogammarus) lacustris
G. O. Sars nell’Appennino ligure e nuovi reperti della specie per
laghi alpine. Doriana ,1(19), 1–8.
Sarı, H. M., Balık, S., Özbek, M. & Aygen, C. (2001). The macro and
meiobenthic invertebrate fauna of Lake Bafa. Anadolu University
Journal of Science and Technology, 2(2), 285–291. [in Turkish]
Sars, G. O. (1863). Beretning om en i Sommeren 1862 foretagen zoologisk
Reise i Christianias og Trondhjems Stifter. Nyt Magazin for
Naturvidenskaberne, 12, 193–252.
Schäferna, K. (1923). Amphipoda balcanica, spolu s poznámkami o jiných
sladkovodních Amphipodech. Mémoires de la Société Royale des
Sciences de Bohème Prague Annee 1921-1922, 12, 1–111.
Schellenberg, A. (1937). Kritische Bemerkungen zur Systematik der
Susswassergammariden. Zoologische Jahrbucher. Abteilung fur
Systematik, Okologie und Geographie der Tiere, 69, 469–516.
Stock, J. H. (1967) A revision of the European species of the Gammarus
locusta group (Crustacea, Amphipoda). Zoologische Verhandelingen,
90, 1–56.
Şirin, Ü., Çalışkan, H. & İpek, M. (2009). On the occurrence of Gammarus
uludagi G. Karaman, 1975 (Amphipoda, Gammaridae) in Kazdaglari.
Sakarya University The Journal of Arts and Science, 11(2), 29–34.
Tareen, I. U. (1974). Limnological investigations of Gölcük Lake (Ödemiş-
Turkey). PhD Thesis, Ege University, Turkey, 122 p. [in Turkish]
Ustaoğlu, M. R., Balık, S. & Özbek, M. (1998). Malacostraca (Arthropoda-
Crustacea) fauna of Bafa Lake. Ege Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic
Sciences 15(3-4). 263–267. [in Turkish]
Ustaoğlu, M. R., Balık, S. & Özbek, M. (2000). Malacostraca (Arthropoda-
Crustacea) fauna of Akgöl and Lake Gebekirse (Selçuk-İzmir). In: XV.
National Biology Congress (pp. 217–222). Ankara University, Turkey.
[in Turkish]
85
Aquat Sci Eng 2022; 37(2): 74-85
İpek and Özbek. Freshwater Amphipod Species of Western Anatolia, Marmara and Turkish Thrace Regions
Ustaoğlu, M. R., Balık, S. & Özbek, M. (2004). Contributions to the
knowledge of Malacostraca (Crustacea) fauna of the Taurus
Mountains district (Southern Anatolia). Turkish Journal of Zoology,
28, 91–94.
Ustaoğlu, M. R., Balık, S., Sarı, H. M., Özdemir Mis, D., Aygen, C.,
Özbek, M., İlhan, A., Taşdemir, A., Yıldız, S. & Topkara, E. T. (2008).
A faunal study of the glacier lakes and rivers on Uludağ (Bursa)
Mountain. Ege Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 25(4),
295–299. [in Turkish]
Vávra, V. (1905). Rotatorien und Crustaceen. Wien: Annalen des K. K.
Naturhistorischen Hofmuseums, 20, 106–113.
Yeşilmen, T. Ö., Kırgız, T. (1996). Freshwater Gammarus (Gammaridae)
species of Kırklareli province. Turkish Journal of Zoology,
20(Supplement), 315–318.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Article
Full-text available
A new species of the genus Rhipidogammarus Stock 1971 (Crustacea: Amphipoda) was identified from Turkey. Rhipidogammarus gordankaramani n. sp. is the newly identified species and the first representative of the genus, both for Turkey and for the Eastern Mediterranean area. Holotype male and allotype female specimens are morphologically described. The morphology of the new species is compared with its relatives and a map showing the distribution of the genus was presented. A diagnostic key for 8 valid species of the genus is provided.
Article
Full-text available
The Anatolian peninsula, which has a continental character with its unique characteristics, is home to a great variety of species. However, due to lack of sufficient researchers and resource constraints, a complete research has not been realized. Taking into consideration the previous studies in our region, it is thought that we will carry out future studies for our region in the direction of the findings obtained as a result of this study. As a result of the diagnoses made, 1 family and 4 species belonging to Amphipoda group were determined.
Article
Full-text available
This study was carried out to provide detailed information on species diversity and community structure of Gökçeada Salt Lake Wetland (brook feeding the lake, neighboring sea and terrestrial area around the wetland). Aquatic species diversity (algae, invertebrates, and fish) at 9 different stations in freshwater, brackish water and marine ecosystems , and terrestrial species diversity (plants, amphibians , reptiles, birds and mammals) in the surrounding wetland were studied seasonally in 2016. A total of 195 taxa of terrestrial vascular flora and 134 species of aquatic flora (97 species of phyto-plankton, 37 species of benthic algae); a total of 23 macrobenthic invertebrate taxa from the lake and 131 invertebrate species from the sea were identified. Also, 4 fish, 14 reptiles, 3 amphibians and 71 bird species were observed in the study area. While one species of phytoplankton was determined as a new record for the Turkish aquatic flora, a total of 71 marine invertebrate species were reported for the first time in the marine fauna of Gökçeada. The obtained data will not only provide a solid basis to expand the understanding of the island's ecosystem, but also will serve as an important tool in the action plans for wetland conservation.
Article
Full-text available
In order to determine the fresh and brackish water amphipod species of the Turkish Thrace Region, specimens were sampled from 68 localities in ?stanbul, Edirne, Tekirda?, K?rklareli and Çanakkale Provinces. Totally, 16 amphipod taxa were identified: Gammarus arduus G. Karaman, 1975, G. komareki Schäferna, 1922, G. pulex pulex (L., 1758), G. fossarum Koch, 1836, G. balcanicus Schäferna, 1922, G. aequicauda (Martynov, 1931), G. subtypicus Stock, 1966, G. uludagi Karaman, 1975, G. gonensis Özbek, 2016, G. kesanensis Özbek & Çamur-Elipek, 2010, Dikerogammarus istanbulensis Özbek & Özkan, 2011, Amathillina cristata Sars, 1894, Orchestia cavimana Heller, 1865, Synurella ambulans F. Müller, 1846, Pontogammarus robustoides Sars, 1894 and Niphargus sp. All the determined species were previously recorded from Turkey. This is the first record of Gammarus gonensis in Europe. Information about the sampling localities and a distribution map of the species are presented.
Article
Full-text available
A three samplings were carried out between September 2014 and August 2015, at twelve stations to determine the seasonal changes of species, relations with water quality parameters, and the Malacostraca fauna of the Upper Coruh River Basin. A hand net was used to collect the biological samples. Dissolved oxygen, temperature, pH, electrical conductivity, and total dissolved solids were measured using a portable water meter. Nitrite, ammonium, phosphate, and biochemical oxygen levels were also measured. Seven taxa were identified (five of them belong to Amphipoda, one to Isopoda, and one to Decapoda). Gammarus birsteini was the continuous, while G. kischineffensis and Asellus aquaticus are common. G. fossarum, G. balcanicus, Gammarus sp. and Potamon ibericum were rarely found. AF (Aydincik Foundation) and DF (Degirmencik Foundation) stations had first class water quality while other stations had second and third quality according to the Quality Criteria According to Classes of Inland Water Resources. © Published by Central Fisheries Research Institute (CFRI) Trabzon, Turkey.
Conference Paper
Full-text available
Objective: A preliminary study on freshwater amphipod species inhabited Kütahya province (Turkey) were studied. Methods: Specimens were collected from 10 different freshwater resources which are 5 running waters and 5 fountains between 25 July 2015 – 12 May 2016. A scoop net having 0.5 mm mesh size was used to sampling the benthic materials. Specimens were fixed in 96% ethyl alcohol in the field, then also kept in the same solution in laboratory. All examinations and photographing were made with the help of a monitoring system being from a dissection microscope (Olympus SZ61) and a compound digital camera. Karaman and Pinkster (1977, 1987) and Özbek and Balık (2009) were followed for the taxonomic identification. All specimens are deposited in the Entomology Laboratory of Biology Department, Faculty of Science and Art, Eskişehir Osmangazi University, Eskişehir, Turkey. Results and Discussion: As a result of the study, totally 454 specimens were investigated. There are seven amphipod species [Gammarus anatoliensis Schellenberg 1937, G. balcanicus Schäferna 1923, G. pulex pulex (L. 1758), G. gonensis Özbek 2016, G. uludagi G. Karaman 1975, G. katagani Özbek, 2012 and Niphargus sp.] inhabited the freshwaters of Kütahya province. G. pulex pulex is the most diverse species among the determined ones with 5 localities. Photos and short descriptions of the determined species are presented in addition to a key comprising the Amphipod species inhabited the freshwaters of Kütahya province.
Article
Full-text available
Macrozoobenthic communities are described and classified on the original data (166 stations) for the small rivers and streams of the mountains of Bulgaria (Balkan and Rhodope mountains) and European Turkey (Istranca range). Seventeen types of communities are described—their habitats, the total abundance of macrozoobenthos, gradation saprobity and complexes of the dominant species. A brief taxonomic review of the macrozoobenthos of the region is provided. Reasons for the variability of rheophilic macrozoobenthos communities and regional characteristics of the communities associated with the local landscape and fauna are discussed.
Article
Full-text available
A classification is proposed for the order Amphipoda. The Amphipoda includes six suborders, the Pseudingolfiellidea, Hyperiidea, Colomastigidea, Hyperiopsidea, Senticaudata (described in a previous contribution (Lowry & Myers 2013)) and Amphilochidea. The suborder Ingolfiellidea is raised to order status. A cladistic tree, based on morphology, is presented illustrating the relationships of the Amphipoda at parvorder level. A tree for the families of the Physomatidira and Physocephalatidira, a tree for the Maxillipiidira, Oedicerotidira, Eusiridira and Amphilochidira and a tree for the Synopiidira, Haustoriidira and Lysianassidira, are provided. Families are listed together with their included genera. New families are diagnosed.
Article
Within the genus Gammarus s.str., which is widely distributed throughout the northern hemisphere, more than 100 freshwater species can be distinguished.