306

Notes on some collections of from northern

Merlijn Jocque1,2,3*, Dan Slootmakers1, Siel Wellens1,3, Lily-Arison Rene De Roland4, John C. Mittermeier5 & Dale Wright6

1 Biodiversity Inventory for Conservation NPO (BINCO), Walmersumstraat 44, 3380 Glab­ beek, Belgium; [email protected] 2 Aquatic and Terrestrial Ecology (ATECO), Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences (RBINS), Vautierstraat 29, 1000 Brussels, Belgium 3 Operation Wallacea Ltd, Wallace House, Old Bolingbroke, Lincolnshire, PE23 4EX, UK 4 The Peregrine Fund Madagascar, PO Box 4113, Antananarivo, Madagascar 5 School of Geography and the Environment, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Ox- ford, OX1 3QY, UK 6 BirdLife South Africa, Centre for Biodiversity Conservation, Kirstenbosch Botanical Gar- dens, Cape Town, South Africa * Corresponding author

Abstract. The Madagascar fauna remains poorly documented. We list dragonfly observations from two Rapid Biodiversity Surveys in Province, northern Mada- gascar. Surveyed sites include a coastal area with several lakes close to Mariarano sampled in 2016 and a montane forested area with isolated forest patches in the Mahimoborondro and Bemanevika protected areas in north-central Madagascar close to Bealalana sampled in 2019. A total of 40 were collected with observations made on three species IUCN listed as data deficient:Tatocnemis sinuatipennis, Neodythemis cf. trinervulata, and Pseudagrion simile. Further key words. Dragonfly, , Anisoptera, Zygoptera, biodiversity, data deficient

Introduction Madagascar is known as a place of rich biodiversity and high endemism owing to its long geographic isolation, proximity to the African continent and large area supporting a wide variety of habitats (Goodman et al. 2003). While our knowledge of many taxa is good, large gaps remain, especially for several invertebrate groups. Madagascan dragonflies first received attention in the work ofRambur (1842) and major contributions later included works by Schmidt (1951), Fraser (1956) and more recently Dijkstra (2021) and Dijkstra & Cohen (2021). This last forthcom- ing publication provides a good overview of the history of odonatological studies in Madagascar and summarizes the information available. Several species complexes need further study and the information regarding regional distribution of species is limited, hindering the development of a reliable Red List as a tool to prioritize conservation actions for dragonflies. In a bid to help fill some gaps on the map we present here dragonfly observations from fieldwork in two distinct locations in .

Notulae odonatologicae 9(7)9(6) 2021:2020: 277-313306-313 – DOI:10.5281/zenodo.4746222 307

Material and methods Dragonflies in the wider Mariarano (Mahajanga District) area on the north-west side of Madagascar (Fig. 1, II) were surveyed in the dry period in the months July–August 2016. The landscape was mostly dry forest interspersed with lakes and minor wetlands. Odonates in the region north of () (Fig. 1, I) were surveyed in the rainy season from 29-i- till 14-ii-2019 in the for- ests of the Bemanevika and Mahimborondro Protected Areas in northern-central Madagascar. Dragonflies were collected on trips to the forest from camps from where the biodiversity surveys were organized. The landscape consisted of patches of montane forest in highland grasslands intersected by small rivers and isolated lakes in old volcanic craters. During both surveys dragonflies were collected on an opportunistic basis using nets. We sampled as wide a range of habitats as possible to obtain a good representation of the dragonflies that were active at the time of our surveys. Speci- mens were preserved in 70 % ethanol and subsequently identified by Rosser Garri- son from the California Department of Food & Ag­riculture (Plant Pest Diagnostics Branch) in Sacramento, California, USA. After identification, part of the material was deposited in the Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, and part of the material was deposited in the personal collection of R. Garrison.

List of localities with odonate records Indicated are (in that order) the localitity, administrative units on the level of re- gions and districts, geographic coordinates in decimal degrees, and altitude in me- ters above sea level.

(1) 16 km NNE Bamanevika, Sofia, Bealanana (-14.3163, 48.723), 1 586 m a.s.l. (2) 16 km NNE Bamanevika, Sofia, Bealanana (-14.3553, 48.6085), 1 642 m a.s.l. (3) 11 km NNE Bamanevika, Sofia, Bealanana (-14.3234, 48.6751), 1 831 m a.s.l. (4) 16 km NNE Bamanevika, Sofia, Bealanana (-14.3503, 48.6096), 1 644 m a.s.l. (5) 16 km NNE Bamanevika, Sofia, Bealanana (-14.3483, 48.579), 1 582 m a.s.l. (6) 16 km NNE Bamanevika, Sofia, Bealanana (-14.2991, 48.7519), 1 652 m a.s.l. (7) 16 km NNE Bamanevika, Sofia, Bealanana (-14.361, 48.59), 1 557 m a.s.l. (8) 16 km NNE Bamanevika, Sofia, Bealanana (-14.3585, 48.6028), 1604 m a.s.l. (9) 4 km N Bamanevika, Sofia, Bealanana (-14.332, 48.589), 1 600 m a.s.l. (10) Maria­rano, , Mahajanga II (-15.4993, 46.7104), 60 m. a.s.l. (11) Maria­ rano, Boeny, Mahajanga II (-15.4873, 46.6999) 42 m. a.s.l. (12) Matsedroy, Boeny, Mahajanga II (-15.488, 46.6502), 26 m a.s.l. (13) Matsedroy, Boeny, Mahajanga II (-15.4524, 46.661), 26 m a.s.l. (14) Matsedroy, Boeny, Mahajanga II (-15.4778, 46.6689), 14 m a.s.l. (15) Matsedroy, Boeny, Mahajanga II (-15.4931, 46.65), 23 m a.s.l. (16) Matsedroy, Boeny, Mahajanga II (-15.4575, 46.6535), 22 m a.s.l. (17) Matsedroy, Boeny, Mahajanga II (-15.4878, 46.6472), 20 m a.s.l. (18) Matse-

Notulae odonatologicae 9(7) 2021: 277-313 308 droy, Boeny, Mahajanga II (-15.4917, 46.6557), 35 m a.s.l (19) Matsedroy, Boeny, Mahajanga II (-15.4578, 46.6608), 18 m a.s.l. (20) Matsedroy, Boeny, Mahajanga II (-15.4816, 46.7412), 47 m a.s.l. (21) Matsedroy, Boeny, Mahajanga II (-15.4856, 46.6841) 11 m a.s.l. (22) Matsedroy, Boeny, Mahajanga II (-15.487, 46.6465), 35 m a.s.l. (23) Matsedroy, Boeny, Mahajanga II (-15.4653, 46.6452), 61 m a.s.l.

Fig. 1. Geographical positions of collecting sites in northern Madagascar: (I) Bealanana area, (II) Mahajanga area.

Notulae odonatologicae 9(7) 2021: 277-313 309

(24) Mariarano, Boeny, Mahajanga II (-15.455, 46.6912), 16 m a.s.l. (25) Maria­ rano, Boeny, Mahajanga II (-15.4929, 46.6958) 20 m a.s.l. (26) Matsedroy, Boeny, Mahajanga II (-15.4793, 46.6373), 91 m. a.s.l. (27) Antafianeva, Boeny, Mahajanga II (-15.468, 46.7485), 14 m a.s.l.

Results A total of 40 species were recorded from 27 sampling sites. All species were of ‘Least Concern’ (IUCN) except for three species currently classified as ‘Data Deficient’, viz. Tatocnemis sinuatipennis, Neodythemis cf. trinervulata, and Pseud­ agrion simile (cf. Schütte 2017a, 2017b, 2017c). Numbers in bold in parentheses correspond with the list of localities with odonate records.

List of species recorded

Lestidae 1. Lestes ochraceus unicolor McLachlan, 1895 (15) 2♂ (18) 1♂ 2. Lestes simulator McLachlan, 1895 (1) 7♂ (3) 1♂ (15) 2♂1♀ (16) 3♂1♀ (17) 1♂1♀ (18) 3♂1♀ (22) 4♂

Argiolestidae 3. martini Schmidt, 1951 (1) 6♂ (2) 1♂ (6) 1♂ (7) 2♂

Calopterygidae 4. Phaon rasoherinae Fraser, 1949 (10) 1♂ (11) 2♂1♀ (17) 1♂

Protolestidae 5. Protolestes fickei Förster, 1899 (8) 1♂ (6) 2♀

Tatocnemididae 6. Tatocnemis sinuatipennis (Selys, 1891) (8) 4♂6♀

Platycnemididae 7. Proplatycnemis alatipes (McLachlan, 1872) (1)1♂ (6) 1♂ (7) 2♂1♀ 8. Proplatycnemis malgassica (Schmidt, 1951) (14) 2♂2♀ (22) 1♂

Notulae odonatologicae 9(7) 2021: 277-313 310

Coenagrionidae 9. Africallagma rubristigma (Schmidt, 1951) (3) 1♂1♀ 10. Azuragrion kauderni (Sjöstedt, 1917) (1) 1♂ (7) 2♂ (12) 4♂1♀ (13) 1♂ (14) 3♂ (15) 22♂6♀ (16) 15♂3♀ (17) 30♂2♀ (18) 3♂ (19) 1♂ (22) 13♂ 11. Ceriagrion glabrum (Burmeister, 1839) (12) 4♂2♀ (13) 2♂5♀ (14) 2♂1♀ (15) 3♂3♀ (17) 7♂12♀ (18) 2♂4♀ (19) 2♂ (20) 1♂ (22) 5♂ 12. Ischnura senegalensis (Rambur, 1842) (15) 5♂15♀ (16) 1♀ (22) 2♂ 13. Pseudagrion punctum (Rambur, 1842) (14) 3♂ (18) 1♂ 14. Pseudagrion dispar Schmidt, 1951 (4) 1♂ 15. Pseudagrion malgassicum Schmidt, 1951 (14) 2♂ (16) 1♀ (21) 1♀ 16. Pseudagrion simile Schmidt, 1951 (4) 1♂ (6) 2♂ (8) 1♂ Aeshnidae 17. Anaciaeschna triangulifera McLachlan, 1896 Close to 18. Anax tumorifer McLachlan, 1885 (5) 2♂ Corduliidae 19. Hemicordulia similis (Rambur, 1842) (9) 1♂ 20. Acisoma attenboroughi Mens et al. 2016 (12) 1♂ (13) 1♂1♀ (17) 1♂ (19) 1♀ 21. Chalcostephia flavifrons Kirby, 1889 (23) 1♀ 22. Crocothemis erythraea (Brullé, 1832) (1) 2♀ (12) 2♂ (15) 1♂ (18) 1♂ 23. Diplacodes exilis Ris, 1911 (16) 1♂ (17) 1♂ 24. Diplacodes lefebvrii (Rambur, 1842) (12) 12♂7♀ (13) 3♂5♀ (14) 3♀ (15) 9♂8♀ (16) 13♂13♀ (17) 23♂36♀ (18) 7♂4♀ (19) 2♂5♀ (22) 8♂ (24) 1♂

Notulae odonatologicae 9(7) 2021: 277-313 311

25. Hemistigma affine (Rambur, 1842) (25) 1♀ (26) 1♂1♀ 26. Neodythemis hildebrandti Karsch, 1889 (1) 1♂ (7) 1♂1♀ 27. Neodythemis cf. trinervulata (Martin, 1902) (1) 1♂ 28. azureum (Rambur, 1842) (9) 1♂ 29. Orthetrum lemur Ris, 1909 (12) 2♀ (14) 1♂ (27) 1♂ 30. Orthetrum stemmale (Burmeister, 1839) (25) 2♂ 31. Orthetrum trinacria (Selys, 1841) (15) 1♂1♀ (18) 1♂1♀ (22) 1♂ 32. Palpopleura vestita Rambur, 1842 (1) 2♂ (9) 1♂ (27) 1♂ 33. Pantala flavescens (Fabricius, 1798) (22) 1♂ (24) 1♂ 34. Rhyothemis semihyalina (Desjardins, 1832) (12) 2♂ (16) 2♂ (17) 1♀ (22) 1♂ 35. Tetrathemis polleni (Selys, 1869) (14) 1♂ 36. Tholymis tillarga (Fabricius, 1798) (22) 1♂ 37. Tramea limbata (Desjardins, 1832) (12) 1♂ (14) 1♂ (15) 1♂ (16) 1♂ (22) 4♂ (24) 2♂ 38. Trithemis annulata (Palisot de Beauvois, 1807) (25) 1♀ (27) 1♂1♀ 39. Trithemis hecate Ris, 1912 (18) 1♂ 40. Trithemis selika Selys, 1869 (14) 1♂

Discussion The identification of Neodythemis species is complex and species identification is problematic (Dijkstra 2021). Neodythemis cf. trinervulata is only known from about four localities in central and south-eastern Madagascar. Two unpublished records of the same species are males from Fianarantsoa Region, Ranomafana Na- tional Park, Valbio (-21.2542, 47.4217), 13-i-2014 and a female from Toliara Re- gion, Zombitse-Vohibasia National Park (-22.8852, 44.6930), 18-i-2014 (R. Gar- rison pers. com.). The species might be negatively affected by forest degradation

Notulae odonatologicae 9(7) 2021: 277-313 312 and habitat loss and might have a limited distribution range on the island. More data are required on its , distribution range, population trends, habitat requirements, and threats to be able to adequately assess the conservation status of this species. Tatocnemis sinuatipennis is endemic to Madagascar where it is known from five localities, four in the north in Andampy ( National Park), , Nosy Be, and Nosy Komba islands, and one in the central-east in An- dranomay. The locality in Andranomay needs to be confirmed as it lies outside the expected distribution range. Our observation is remarkable in that it would signify a substantial elevational extension for the species. We collected a specimen at 1 604 m a.s.l. at a small river in a dense patch of intact forest. Pseudagrion simile is known from two localities in central Madagascar. Both sites, Analamazotra and Vohiparara are national parks. The species is believed to be widely distributed and is currently listed as ‘Data Deficient’. All three ‘Data Deficient’ species recorded here were observed in the higher eleva- tion study sites in Bemanevika and Mahimborondro. These species are sometimes described as ‘old endemics’ that belong to (near) endemic genera that are largely restricted to running waters in rainforest (Maiz-Tomé et al. 2018) and include the five damselfly radiations Nesolestes, Protolestes, Tatocnemis, Proplaty­cnemis, and Pseudagrion. Wilmé et al. (2006) hypothesize that Madagascar’s high levels of mi- cro-endemism are associated with speciation by isolation in lowland watersheds. This model may apply to Odonata with strong ties to forested streams.

Our observations of these poorly documented forest species confirm the need for more surveys in the difficult to reach montane forests, but also draws attention to the ongoing pressure on forests and the relatively few montane forest patches that remain.

Acknowledgements. Rosser Garrison helped with the identification of the material and made comments on an earlier version of the manuscript. In Mariarano, we thank the people living in and around the area for their collaboration and guidance on the numer- ous excursions in this region. DBCAM supported the expedition of Operation Wallacea in Maria­rano in 2016 and enthusiastic volunteers assisted with collections in the field. The material in Bealanana (2019) was collected under research permit 024/19/MEDD/ SG/DGF/DSAP/SCB.Re issued 30 January 2019 and exported under permit number 051N- EA04/MG19. The 2019 fieldwork was supported by BirdLife South Africa and the Bird Conservation Fund through the grant: Supporting avifaunal conservation in Madagascar. Special thanks go to The Peregrine Fund field team and expedition team including Eugene Ladoany, Berthin, Moise, Djaomizara, Aristide, Judicael, Andry, Michel Rakotoson, and Brett Gardner, and to the local people from Amberivery village. Steve Goodman offered valuable help and advice before and after the expedition. We are grateful to KD Dijkstra, Martijn Van Roie, Asmus Schröter, and Albert Orr for comments on an earlier version of the manuscript.

Notulae odonatologicae 9(7) 2021: 277-313 313

References

Dijkstra K.-D.B. 2021. In press. Odo- Schütte K. 2017b. Neodythemis tri­ nata, dragonflies, . In: Good- nervulata. The IUCN Red List of Threat­ man S.M. (ed.), The New Natural Histo- ened Species 2017: e.T88091221A88093 ry of Madagascar. Princeton University 276. Online on the in­ternet, URL (28- Press xi-2020): https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/ Dijkstra K.-D.B. & Cohen C. 2021. IUCN.UK.2017-2.RLTS.T88091221A8 In press. Dragonflies and damselflies 8093276.en. of Madagascar and the western Indian Schütte K. 2017c. Tatocnemis sinuati­ Ocean Islands. Associa­tion Vahatra, pennis. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Antananarivo Species 2017: e.T88092557A880933 71. Online on the in­ternet, URL (28- Fraser F.C. 1956. Insectes Odonates xi-2020): https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/ Anisoptères. Faune de Madagascar 1: IUCN.UK.2017-2.RLTS.T88092557A8 1-125 8093371.en. Goodman S.M. & Benstead J.P. (eds) 2003. The Natural History of Madagas- car. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, USA Máiz-Tomé L., Sayer C. & Darwall W. (eds) 2018. The status and distri- bution of freshwater biodiversity in Madagascar and the Indian Ocean is- lands hotspot. IUCN, Gland, Switzer- land Schmidt E. 1951. The Odonata of Madagascar, Zygoptera. Mémoires de l’Institut scientifique de Madagascar (A) 6: 116-283 Rambur P. 1842 Histoire naturelle des insectes. Névroptères. Roret, Paris Schütte K. 2017a. Pseudagrion simi­ le. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Spe­ cies 2017: e.T88090213A88093023. On- line on the in­ternet, URL (28-xi-2020): https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN. UK.2017-2.RLTS.T88090213A880930 23.en. Received 21st March 2021

Notulae odonatologicae 9(7) 2021: 277-313