Latvijas Entomologs 2012, 51: 91-149. 91

Dragonflies () in Latvia – history of research, bibliography and distribution from 18th century until 2010

Mārtiņš Kalniņš 1, 2

1 – Nature Conservation Agency, Baznīcas iela 7, Sigulda, Siguldas novads, LV-2150, Latvia 2 – The Entomological Society of Latvia, Kronvalda bulvaris 4, LV-1586, Rīga, Latvia; e-mail: [email protected]

KALNIŅŠ M. 2012. (Odonata) in Latvia – history of research, bibliography and distribution from 18th century until 2010. – Latvijas Entomologs 51: 91-149.

Abstract: This work is to summarize large number of the available unpublished data and to make - distribution maps and to present the results in an article. The existing faunistic data were presented in 82 publications up to the end of 2010. Distribution maps were developed for 59 species. For several species of dragonflies were found notable changes in the distribution.

Key words: Dragonflies, Odonata, bibliography, distribution maps, Latvia.

Introduction 1956) synthesizing knowledge of the dragonflies’ distribution and Collection and analysis of occupancy in Latvia can be found. historical data and literature are used in Therefore, the distribution of investigation of various invertebrates. dragonflies in Latvia has never been Frequently the amount and quality critically analysed and synthesized of the historical data allows to draw recently, apart from works on several conclusions about the changes in separate species published recently species composition, number and (cf. Kalniņš et al. 2011). Data other changes in a longer period of sparseness in numerous publications time. The first localizable information makes their use very difficult. Many on the occurrence of dragonflies in publications were written in Latvian Latvia dates from the second half of and Russian languages. This is an the 18th century (Fischer 1778). Until additional problem for studies carried now only one publication (Спурис out by foreign specialists. During 92 Dragonflies (Odonata) in Latvia – history of research, bibliography and ...

the last 20 years the number of nature of Livland has mentioned different nature research projects has 5 species. Two of them, increased, where a part of the gathered grandis (Linnaeus) and information has been included in Coenagrion puella (Linnaeus), project and study reports, but has not judging from the description have been published. These data are not been indentified incorrectly. Several published, they have been available years later, the author has mentioned and usable only for their authors or five more species (Fischer 1784). the organizations they represent. No In the second reviewed edition unified species’ distribution maps of this book (Fischer 1791) only have been developed to date in Latvia. the previous information has been Distribution maps of specific species repeated. Thus, at the end of the has been represented based on various 18th century there were mentioned 8 outlines of Latvia (depending on the species of dragonflies to be identified sources available to the authors), with certainty and they are as follows: freely distributing dots. There are no Calopteryx splendens (Harris), larger works encompassing systematic Gomphus vulgatissimus (Linnaeus), units, such as families or orders, Cordulia aenea (Linnaeus), regarding species’ distribution, as can Orthetrum cancellatum (Linnaeus), be found, for example, on dragonflies Libellula depressa Linnaeus, in Estonia (Martin et al. 2008) and Libellula quadrimaculata Linnaeus, in Poland (Bernard et al. 2009). The Sympetrum flaveolum (Linnaeus), following objectives were selected Leucorrhinia rubicunda (Linnaeus). for this work: to summarize large Fisher has not mentioned in his number of the available unpublished publications where the dragonflies data and to make distribution maps were found and, thus, a question may and to present the results in an article. arise, whether the mentioned species were really observed in Latvia, as the territory, called Livland, included The dragonfly fauna and not only Vidzeme, but also a part of distribution research in the the contemporary Estonia (therefore territory of Latvia Livland should not be interpreted as Vidzeme). However, it is known Dagonflies have been first that Fisher has lived in Riga and mentioned in the second half of 18th supposedly investigated the fauna century in Latvia. Jacob Benjamin of Riga vicinity (Gebhardt 2006). Fischer (1778) in his book about Based on that, it can be assumed that Latvijas Entomologs 2012, 51: 91-149. 93

the dragonfly species, mentioned by of dragonflies have been listed for Fisher, were really found in Latvia. Latvian territory. John Heinrich Karl Kawall First data on dragonflies in the (1864) has published a list of publications of 20th century appear by dragonflies found in Kurzeme. In Guido Schneider as a brief description the vicinity of Puze (Pussen) he has of a mass flight of Sympetrum danae observed 18 species, one of which (Sulzer) (Schneider 1910). The Agrion elegantulum Zetterstedt same observation is later described cannot be deciphered (probably by Edgars Ozols (1936) where Coenagrion pulchellum (Vander the northern species Leucorrhinia Linden) (Steinmann 1997)). albifrons (Burmeister) was firstly Additionally, with reference to mentioned for Latvia. Information the information given by Eduard about dragonflies can be also found Lindemann, he has listed 10 species in work by Ferdinand Erdmann Stoll in Jelgava (Mitau). Later Kawall (1930), where mass death of Libellula published phenological observations, quadrimaculata is mentioned and mentioning 5 species of dragonflies picturesque description of Aeshna (Lestes sponsa (Hansemann), cyanea (O.F.Müller) feeding habitats. Calopteryx virgo (Linnaeus), Slightly later H. Stoll’s description Gomphus vulgatissimus (Linnaeus), (with comment by Nikolai Heinrich Libellula depressa Linnaeus un fon Transehe) of a mass flight of Libellula quadrimaculata (Linnaeus), dragonflies has been published (Stoll however, without any details 1934). But John Cowley (1937) has regarding the place of observation published information about 21 (Kawall 1865, 1866), perhaps in the species, collected by Felix Brandt vicinity of Puze, where he lived. near River Amata. Also Andre Bruttan (1878, 1881) More focused and extensive has published information about research of Latvian dragonfly fauna is dragonflies in Latvia. Dragonflies presented by Bruno Bērziņš. A short were investigated near Daugavpils, in paper on mass flights of Libellula the region of Krustpils (Kreutzburg) – quadrimaculata Linnaeus and from Līvāni (Liewenhof) to Stukmaņi Leucorrhinia rubicunda (Linnaeus) (Stockmannshof). Near this stretch was published (Bērziņš 1934). In 1938 along the River Daugava, 24 species he started a more extensive research were observed. Totally in all the by observing dragonflies in south mentioned publications from second Latgale, in area of Sīvers and Drīdzis half of the 18th century, 27 species Lakes and in the same year reported 94 Dragonflies (Odonata) in Latvia – history of research, bibliography and ...

17 species (Bērziņš 1938). After species were listed. The catalogue four of years an overview of Latvian was based on the faunistic literature dragonfly fauna followed (Bērziņš available at that time. Additionally 1942). It is based on comparatively the information from the publications extensive materials and encompassed on hydrobiology was included, 47 species. The overview was later as the authors, when describing extended to include Coenagrion macrozoobenthos or feeding of the armatum (Charpentier), found in fish, have also mentioned dragonflies. 1944 near Sloka by Bērziņš (Bērziņš However, this information has 1950). In 1942 Aleksander Grosse been used rather carefully, as the reported about observation of identification of dragonfly larvae in Sympetrum striolatum (Charpentier) the publications of hydrobiologists in Latvia (Grosse 1942). has been doubted by Z. Spuris. The Zandis Spuris systematically three main reasons for that were as studied dragonflies in 1940 in follows: Jēkabnieki rural municipality. His • very often in the hydrobiology observations on the dragonfly local papers the species of dragonflies have fauna were published in 1943 (Spuris not been identified; 1943). 35 species were observed, • in general in publications on including Lestes virens (Charentier), macrozoomacrobenthos, some large which was found in Latvia for the species have been identified, while first time. In the overview monograph others, equally large, have not; (Спурис 1956) already 53 species • hydrobiologists make many were mentioned, including Sympetrum mistakes in a species’ identification. fonscolombii Sélys, which have After the publishing of the appeared in Latvia in 1938. Much new aforementioned catalogue, several information on dragonfly distribution papers by Spuris and other authors was published in 1963 (Spuris 1963a). followed on dragonflies in central With finding Coenagrion johanssoni Latvia (Spuris 1968, 1974, 1990, (Wallengren) (Спурис 1964), the 1992) and in other places in Latvia number of dragonfly species in Latvia (Spuris 1950, 1952, 1997, 1996, reaches 54. The author explains 1998, Liepa 1963, Спурис 1951, that this includes 53 local species 1954, 1966). In 1993 an identification (that breeds in Latvia) and one that book (Spuris 1993) is published, have strayed in. In 1980 a dragonfly in which 53 dragonfly species are catalogue was published (Spuris listed for Latvian fauna, as well as 1980), in which 54 Latvian dragonfly seven potential species. It is also Latvijas Entomologs 2012, 51: 91-149. 95

important to note reviews (not inhabited substrates. publications) of several investigations Information about dragonflies by three foreign researchers - can also be found in the partially Mogens Holmen, Joachim Matthes published studies carried out by and Hinrich Matthes, in which the Laboratory of Hydrobiology of information on rare species (Ischnura the Institute of Biology (BI) of the pumilio (Charpentier), Coenagrion University of Latvia (LU) (earlier johanssoni (Wallengren)) and Latvian Academy of Sciences) species with unclear status (Aeshna (Балоде и др. 1981, Качалова, caerulea (Ström), Sympetrum Пареле 1987, Цимдинь и др. fonscolumbii Sélys) is presented. In 1989, Kačalova, Parele 1987, Parele 1995 in Pape Ornithological station 2001, 2003, 2007a, 2007b, 2008, (south-west Latvia) Thomas von Volskis 1999, Druvietis et al. 2010). Rintelen (1997) observed a new Unfortunately not all the results of dragonfly species in Latvia – Anax the LU BI researches are published ephippiger (Burmeister). Brief and accessible. These results include information may be found also in hydrobiological monitoring data a letter written by Kārlis Grigulis, (zoobenthos data) from various which is included in the materials of territories and various years: Natural History Museum of Latvia. • Monitoring of the water Separate research was done bodies of Teiči strict nature reserve – on the changes of dragonfly wing 1994, 1998, 2001, 2002; enervation (Spuris 1960; Спурис • Monitoring of Engure lake 1958, 1962) and dragonfly mass specially protected natural area (the flights (Spuris 1963b). Information status of the territory has changed about dragonflies may be also frequently) – 1995-2002; found in publications on topics of • Monitoring of Salaca river hydrobiology – macrozoobenthos or basin – 1995-2001; the feeding of the fish (Spuris 1953, • Monitoring of limnic systems 1958, Kačalova et al. 1962, Качалова of North-Vidzeme mires (swamp 1959, 1960, 1962, 1966, 1972). lakes that are currently part of nature Usually in such works the species are reserve ‘Ziemeļu purvi’) – 1997- not identified and only higher taxa are 2002. mentioned; nevertheless, it is possible The above mentioned to find information about quantitative publications and reports often include data of dragonflies, for example, taxa, without species’ identification, density of population, biomass or or the species are listed for the water 96 Dragonflies (Odonata) in Latvia – history of research, bibliography and ...

bodies at full length or area (the River time (from 1992 to 2010). It could Venta, the River Daugava), which encompass more years, as only part prevents precise identification of the of the research reports are currently place where the species has been available to general public. collected. Similar issues are related Several works on observation of to the investigations of the lakes rare (Bernard 2002, 2005, Bernard, of Ķemeri National Park, carried Wildermuth 2005, Kalniņš 2008a) and out by Latvian Environmental Data new dragonfly species in Latvia have Centre (later – Latvian Environment been published in the last decade: Agency) from 1995 to 1999 and the Sympetrum pedemontanum (Allioni) Institute of Biology of the University (Kalniņš 2002), Aeshna crenata of Latvia in 2001. During the Hagen (Bernard 2003), Orthetrum project ‘Identification of long-term brunneum (Fonscolombe) (Kalniņš pollution in river Gauja’, carried 2007c) and Anax parthenope (Sélys) out by Young Nature Lovers centre (Kalniņš 2009). A book on fauna, ‘Rīgas Dabaszinību skola’ in 1998, flora and vegetation of Silene Natural rather comprehensive information Park with list of dragonfly species about water invertebrates, including was also published (Barševskis et al. dragonflies in Gauja was obtained. 2002), as well as a book on biological The original data were included in diversity in Gauja National park with a database. Part of the results was chapter on invertebrates, including published (Kalniņš 2000, 2006a, dragonflies (Kalniņš et al. 2007) in 2006b, Kalniņš, Poppels 2000). this period. Lately several papers Information about specific dragonfly were also published on distribution species can also be found in the surface of species and ecology (Kalniņš, water (small lakes and rivers) quality Inberga-Petrovska 2005, Kalniņš monitoring research, performed 2006a, 2006b, 2007b, 2011a, 2011c), by the Environment, Geology and as well as phenology and the relation Meteorology Centre of Latvia of species to habitats (Inberga- (earlier – State Hydrometeorological Petrovska 2003, Kalniņš 2006c, Administration, Environment, 2007a, Kalniņš, Medne 2007). Also Geology and Meteorology Agency). the distribution of southern dragonfly The biological quality of the small species in Latvia and adjacent streams (rivers) was assessed by the territories has been described recently saprobity index of macrozoobenthos. (Kalniņš 2008b, 2011b). Totally in The research encompasses the above-mentioned publications 59 comparatively extensive period of dragonfly species have been described Latvijas Entomologs 2012, 51: 91-149. 97 for Latvia. 6. data (including digital photographs), available in websites (www.dabasdati.lv, www.fotki.lv Methods etc.) and from different people (non entomologists). The dragonfly geodatabase A more detailed list of sources is was developed in Microsoft (MS) included in the chapter ‘References Office Access in order to aggregate used in preparation of maps’ at the information about the distribution of end of this paper. Most of author’s dragonflies. The basic unit of a record data obtained from 2005 till 2010. is an observation of a species in one They constitute almost 29 % of all location in one day. The geodatabase data included in MS Access database. includes: According to Geospatial 1. all published data; Information Law (2010) the geodetic 2. author’s own unpublished data co-ordinate system of Latvia (1992), collected between 1991 and 2010; the topographic map system (1993) 3. unpublished data collected by and the normal heights system of the Latvian entomologists before 2011; Baltic States (1977) shall be used 4. the materials found in in the acquisition, preparation and enthomological collections of various maintenance of the basic data of institutions – Natural History Museum geodetic information. Distribution of Latvia (Rīga), Museum of Zoology of dragonflies was mapped using a of the University of Latvia (Rīga), basic grid of 5x5 km squares in the Local History Museum of Naujene, Baltic grid system on a Transverse Culture board of Daugavpils District Mercator projection (TM-1993) of (Naujene), Institute of Biology of Latvia. Current map is based on the University of Latvia (Salaspils), 1:50 000 scale maps available for Department of Zoology and Latvia. These maps are graduated Ecology of the Faculty of Biology of at 1x1 km (=1 km2) squares and the the University of Latvia (Rīga); border of 5x5 km squares coincide 5. the materials included with the every fifth km line. The in various research and nature total terrestrial territory of Latvia is management plans, including nature divided into 2791 5x5 km squares management plans of specially (part of the squares are not complete protected natural areas (http://www. due to country border configuration). daba.gov.lv, http://www.lva.gov.lv/ In this paper, a division between two monitor/monitorings.htm); periods is used: historical, between 98 Dragonflies (Odonata) in Latvia – history of research, bibliography and ...

the years 1778 and 1990, and current or the location is unidentified. In case – from 1991 to 2010. of 5 historic entries, the names of The occupancy is given with the species cannot be deciphered in the use of descriptive categories. line with the modern . The The species are classified into the data was collected from 839 squares category on the basis of frequency that constitute 30 % of all squares of recorded squares occupied by the covering Latvia. Besides, many areas species within all studied squares: well-covered by the studied squares 1. very common – frequency of and some areas covered to a small occupied squares >25.1 %, extent are recognizable on the map 2. common – frequency of (Fig. 1). occupied squares 15.1-25 %, The quality of the data is not 3. moderately represented – uniform. This is reflected in the frequency of occupied squares 5.1- number of species recorded within 15 %, one grid square (Fig. 2). For 53 % 4. localized (rare) – frequency of of the studied squares the quality of occupied squares 1.1-5 %, data is low as the number of recorded 5. sporadic (accidental) – species does not exceed 5. The data is frequency of occupied squares 0.1- qualitatively moderate (6-10 species / 1 %. square) for 22 % of studied squares, good (11-20 species / square) for 19 %, and very good (>20 species Results / square) for 6 % of the units. The maximal value is 39 species per one At present, 12065 entries square. (rows) are included in the database, Historical data was collected comprising the data collected for 369 squares (13 % of all squares between 1778 and 2010. In case of covering Latvia), and current data for 48 entries, a specific location cannot 655 squares (23 %). This difference be deciphered – either a vast territory reflects a significant intensification (Curonia) or water body (River of odonatological exploration in the Daugava, River Venta) is indicated, last 10 years in comparison to the also, some location cannot be preceding 160 years. In the current correctly found in maps (Lake Tabora, period, studies have been expanded Lake Zubru), different locations with into many previously unexplored identical names are given (Lake territories. Only part of the areas Lukno, Lake Lukņu, Lake Luknas) of historical exploration has also Latvijas Entomologs 2012, 51: 91-149. 99

Figure 1. Coverage of squares with data collected in the historical and current period.

Figure 2. Coverage of squares, expressed as the number of species recorded in a grid square. 100 Dragonflies (Odonata) in Latvia – history of research, bibliography and ...

studies in the current period. Despite and distribution may occur due to the presence of still unexplored or climate changes (Ott 2001; Corbet inadequately surveyed areas, the 1999; Termaat et al. 2010) and habitat coverage of the country by the data and (including anthropogenic) changes their quality are certainly sufficient to (Kalkman et al. 2010). It seemed analyse the species’ occurrences on interesting to analyse discovery of a national scale and to synthesize a new species for fauna of Latvia over reliable picture of their extent. time. The trend on figure 3 shows that the discovery of new species for fauna of Latvia has three exponential Discussion growth phases. The first two phases (1860-1880 and 1930-1950) are Altogether 59 dragonfly species most likely related to more intensive have been recorded in the fauna research during the corresponding of Latvia until 2010. However, period and less intensive research the formation and transformation beforehand. The third phase (since of faunas is a continuous process 2000) is most likely connected to the (Peters, Lovejoy 1992; Gates 1993). aforementioned climate change. The changes in the dragonfly fauna There has been a recent discussion

Figure 3. Discovery of Latvia’s dragonfly species (y axis) based on decades of their first finding (x axis). Latvijas Entomologs 2012, 51: 91-149. 101

on the changes of the dragonfly fauna main distribution area of A. serrata in Latvia and adjacent territories is located in Central Asia, a separate during last 20 years, in the course of part of the population is situated which prognosis for future changes at the to the North of were provided (Kalniņš 2011b). As Latvia – in Estonia, Finland, and a result of the study, 19 species were Sweden (Dijkstra 2006) and one identified in case of which the borders locality is also known in the eastern of the distribution areas or separate part of Turkey (Boudot et al. 2009). localities are relatively close to the A. serrata has a stable population territory of Latvia (neighbouring in Estonia. Nevertheless, the status countries or their closest regions and of the species is not clear. Aeshna Poland) or which are known as species osiliensis (Mierzejewski 1913), as that rapidly distribute to the northern described in Estonia, forms local direction. Seven species from these populations at the Baltic Sea to are mentioned in the literature as the north of Latvia – in Estonia, probable for Latvia (Spuris 1993). Finland and Sweden. Some authors At the same time 5 species that are (Dijkstra 2006) regard this species as included in this list were recorded synonymous to A. serrata, pointing for the first time in Latvia during the out that differences are insignificant. last 20 years. The list of the potential The only thing that testifies in favour species for the fauna of Latvia is of the status of a separate species is given (Table 1). The Sympetrum the geographical argument. At the eroticum (Sélys, 1883) that has been same time, other authors (Sahlen et mentioned previously (Spuris 1993) al. 2004) acknowledge that the status as a potential species for the fauna of of A. osiliensis is not strictly fixed, Latvia, is excluded from this list as although recently this taxon is used it is not reliable possibility, because as a separate species. The potential species spread in China, Japan, finding of the species in Latvia is Korea, the Far East of Russia (Wilson very credible, because the distance 2009). The identification accuracy between the localities of the species of specimens founded in in Estonia and Latvia is insignificant. is unlikely (P. Ivinskis, personal When comparing the distribution communication). of Calopteryx splendens and The status of Aeshna serrata Calopteryx virgo in the historic and should be discussed. A. serrata was current period, it is clear that in the mentioned as a probable species for current period and in both, current Latvia by Spuris (Spuris 1993). The and historical, periods the number 102 Dragonflies (Odonata) in Latvia – history of research, bibliography and ...

of squares inhibited by Calopteryx however, today the species has been virgo has grown. At the same time, recorded in three locations in the north the number of cases when Calopteryx (Kalniņš 2011b). The higher number splendens has been observed is of new localities for several species greater. in the current period can be explain For Lestes genus, the main by increase of casual data, including changes were found for Lestes dryas collecting photographs, have an (decreased distribution) and Lestes impact on the localities of the number virens (increased distribution). The of common species (e.g. Coenagrion causes for the decrease of Lestes puella, Coenagrion pulchellum and dryas distribution are not clear. The Pyrrhosoma nymphula as an visual increase of Lestes virens distribution attractive species). The diminishing might be connected to the climate of the Coenagrion armatum and change, as in the historic period the Coenagrion johanssoni localities in species was mentioned as a southern the current period may be due to the element of Latvian fauna (Спурис lack of targeted research, as well as 1951) and was found mainly in the the fact that the current studies mainly western and southern part of Latvia. concentrate on the areas previously In the modern period new species’ unexplored. The areas that have data localities have been found in the from the historic period are surveyed central and northern part of Latvia. less frequently. For the Nehalennia The localities of Sympecma speciosa some regional differences in paedisca in the historic period were habitat selection and, accordingly, the mostly concentrated around the distribution are established (Kalniņš areas of Rīga and Jelgava, while et al. 2011). the modern period localities can be For several species of found throughout the territory of family notable changes in the Latvia. This is most likely related distribution where found, while to the increase of the mobility of some species are new for Latvia or researchers, especially the studies their status is unclear. The status of of protected nature territories and Aeshna caerulea is still disputable. targeted search for the species. There are three records of the For Coenagrionidae family, the species in Latvia. The first specimen main changes were found for several was a male, which was captured species. Ischnura pumilio was a 04.06.1929, in Bauņi, former southern element in the dragonfly Valmiera district (Bērziņš 1942). The fauna of Latvia (Спурис 1951); specimen was not preserved. The Latvijas Entomologs 2012, 51: 91-149. 103

second one was captured 09.08.1999, new species in Latvian fauna. Aeshna near the Lake Plaužu, former Cēsis crenata in Latvia was found in 2002 district (S. Inberga pers. com.). (Bernard 2003), Anax ephippiger – The specimen was not preserved. in 1995 (Rintelen 1996) and Anax The third specimen was observed parthenope in 2008-2009 (Kalniņš 20.08.1997, in the Lake Liepsalas, 2009). As in Aeshna crenata locality Teiči nature reserve, former Jēkabpils several individuals and larvae were district (investigation by Joachim found and Anax parthenope has Matthes and Hinrich Matthes in 1997, been found two years in a row in unpublished data). According to the various localities, these species can literature data, the species belongs be considered resident in Latvia. to boreo-mountain species and are For Anax parthenope it is due to most common above the treeline. The the expansion of the species area in typical habitat is small water bodies northern direction and, if the current in mountain peat bogs and moors, tendencies of the climate change heaths and tundras. Its flight season remain, the number of localities is from mid-July to mid-September may grow considerably. The climate in most of the Europe; however, change may explain also the growth in Scotland the first imagines are of number of Aeshna isoceles, Anax observed in May (Dijkstra 2006; imperator localities and identification Bernard et al. 2009). The nearest of new Aeshna mixta localities in reliable localities are in Estonia, north the northern part of Latvia (Kalniņš from Latvia (Martin et al. 2008). The 2011b). The higher number of new first and second observation was localities for Aeshna cyanea and made outside of typical habitats and Aeshna grandis in the current period the first record can be regarded as a partly can be explained by increase very early observation as well. The of casual data, including collecting last observation was made in a typical photographs, have an impact on the habitat and season for the species; localities of the number of common however, the observers stressed that species. The second reason for the the observation is not totally reliable. growth of number of the localities To approve the status of A. caerulea of these two species is the changes in Latvia, the focused search for this in the research methodology – active species in future should be carried collecting and identification of out. exuviae (since 2005). Perhaps the Aeshna crenata, Anax ephippiger number of species’ localities was and Anax parthenope are relatively influenced also by the growing number 104 Dragonflies (Odonata) in Latvia – history of research, bibliography and ...

of household and garden ponds in the the south-western and south eastern last 10-15 years (unpublished data by part, where specially protected nature the State Environmental Service). For areas with suitable habitats are and the Aeshna subarctica, some regional where focused searches have been differences in habitat selection carried out. However, the history of and, accordingly, the distribution is decline has been noticed in many established (Kalniņš 2011b). When areas in Europe (Dijkstra 2006). The comparing the historical and current low number of localities of Gomphus period in case of Aeshna viridis, it flavipesfound both in the historic and is clear that the number of species’ current period may be due to the lack localities has grown only a little. of species-oriented research. At the However, almost half of the current same time in rivers (Salaca, Gauja, localities form a group of localities. partially Venta), where there has been This may be explained by the suitable a targeted research of Gomphidae habitats – oxbows, ponds with species, Gomphus vulgatissimus and Stratiotes aloides – found along the Onychogomphus forcipatus have River Gauja, as well as the intensive been found in almost all places suited research of the water bodies of the for the species. River Gauja basin (Kalniņš, Inberga- One of the increases of Petrovska 2005; Kalniņš et al. 2007). Cordulegaster boltonii localities in For the species of Gomphidae the current period is related to the family, comparing the historic and more intensive research of small current period, the main changes were rivers and streams – both surveying found for Ophiogomphus cecilia. this particular species and researching O. cecilia is included in the EU other water invertebrates. Habitat directive (Council… 1992) The higher number of new as well as a focused search for this localities for Corduliidae, except species has been carried out in Latvia. Somatochlora arctica, in the current Noticeably more new localities have period can be explained by new and been found in the current period improved methods – exuviae search, compared to the historical period. especially for Epitheca bimaculata However, almost all localities were localities). The higher number of new found in Vidzeme. Partly it can be localities for Somatochlora arctica is explained by the intensive studies of the result of more intensive raised bog the River Gauja invertebrates, carried studies. The larger number of new out by the author. But this does not Cordulia aenea and Somatochlora explain the absence of the species in metallica localities may be explained Latvijas Entomologs 2012, 51: 91-149. 105

by more intensive dragonfly research of Latvia has grown, which may be in specially protected nature related to the expansion of the species territories, for example, the Protected area in the northern direction and, if Landscape Area Ziemeļgauja, the current climate change tendencies restricted natural areas near Lake remain, the number of species’ Burtnieks, Gauja National Park and localities will grow. elsewhere. Orthetrum brunneum is In case of Libellulidae family, considered a new species in Latvia, for some species substantial changes found once, in one locality in the in the distribution were found, while northern part of Kurzeme (Kalniņš some species are new for Latvia or 2007c). However, in the later years their status is unknown. The number the locality has not been surveyed and of Libellula depressa localities was there have been almost no targeted influenced by the growing number surveys of the habitats suitable for of household and garden ponds in the species – small, warm, shallow the last 10-15 years (unpublished streams, running ditches and seepages data by the State Environmental with poor vegetation in places with Service). This is reflected also in the early stages of succession, such as casual data – in photographs (it is a freshly cleaned ditches etc. (Dijkstra visually attractive, comparatively 2006; Bernard et al. 2009). Also easy to photograph species, which Sympetrum pedemontanum is a found in anthropogenic habitats). The relatively new species for Latvia second reason is that the increase of fauna (Kalniņš 2002). Also the first casual data, mainly photographs, locality of this species has not been has an impact on the localities of a subsequently surveyed; however, number of common species. These the finding of the species in 2010, as two reasons are partially referable well as the expansion of the species also to the number of Libellula in northern direction (Kalniņš 2011b) quadrimaculata localities. Another means that the number of species’ reason for the increase of the number localities may grow. of L. quadrimaculata localities is The species with disputable more intensive surveys of specially status long time was Sympetrum protected nature areas. For Libellula fonscolombii. Two localities of fulva no significant differences for S. fonscolombii have been mentioned historic and current period were in literature until 2010. One specimen found; however, the number of was caught on 10.08.1938 at the Lake species’ localities in the northern part Sīvers in Krāslava district in the south- 106 Dragonflies (Odonata) in Latvia – history of research, bibliography and ...

eastern part of Latvia (Bērziņš 1938). a shallow pond on 28.06.2009 (Photo The other was caught on 3.09.1997 by A. Klepers, www.dabasdati.lv in Teiči Strict Reserve located in 2011). The species was identified the Jēkabpils district in the south- after photographs as S. fonscolombii eastern part of Latvia. Nevertheless, (det. M. Kalniņš, R. Bernard). the observers mention that this 2. One specimen was observation is not reliable because photographed over a ditch in Kaltenes the caught specimen fled away before Kalvas (the south-western part all the characteristic features of the of Latvia) by patrolling along the species were determined (Matthes, forest edge on 25.07.2010 (Photo by Matthes 1997). Spuris regards A. Klepers, www.dabasdati.lv 2011). S. fonscolombii as a species that has The species was identified after casually wandered into Latvia and photographs as S. fonscolombii (det. therefore cannot be included in the M. Kalniņš). fauna of Latvia (Spuris 1993, 1996). 3. Three males of S. fonscolombii The northern border of its distribution (from several tens of Sympetrum area reaches the north-eastern dragonflies) were caught in Embūte part of Poland. S. fonscolombii is (the south-western part of Latvia) on regarded as a pronounced migrant 10.09.2009 (M. Kalniņš, unpublished that can suddenly form colonies in data). It is possible that the species places where it has not previously was present in larger numbers but the been recorded (Dijkstra 2006). The recording was hindered by the lack of typical habitats of the species are the catching equipment (the caught warm, standing, more often open specimens were caught by hands). and shallow waters – quarries, newly Now, the species occasional made ponds, coastal lagoons. As the presence in Latvia is confirmed; life cycle of the species differs from however, the larval development has the other representatives of the genus not been established. Sympetrum, adult specimens can be The number of Sympetrum danae, found from the end of May to October Sympetrum flaveolum, Sympetrum (Dijkstra 2006). Several observations sanguineum and Sympetrum vulgatum of the species have been recorded: localities was influenced by the 1. At least 2 specimens of growing number of two, correlative Sympetrum were observed and one reasons – increase household and photographed 5 km to the south-west garden ponds in the last 10-15 years of Dobele in racetrack ‘Ceļa Ēzelis’ (unpublished data by the State (the central-southern part of Latvia) at Environmental Service) and increase Latvijas Entomologs 2012, 51: 91-149. 107

of casual data, mainly photographs, Acknowledgements have an impact on the localities of the number of common species. The This work partly has been higher number of new localities for supported by the European Social S. danae partly is a result of more Fund within the project ‘Support for intensive raised bog studies as well. Doctoral Studies at University of Some other peculiarities on Latvia’. Leucorrhinia should be noted. In I am greatly indebted to Dr. Latvia, the Leucorrhinia albifrons, Rafał Bernard (Department of L. caudalis and L. pectoralis can be General Zoology, Adam Mickiewicz found in the whole territory of Latvia. University, Poznań, Poland), Dr. The comparison of the historical Paweł Buczyński (Department of and current species’ distribution Zoology, Maria Curie-Skłodowska data reveals that the number of University, Lublin, Poland), Dr. L. pectoralis and L. albifrons Grzegorz Tończyk (Department localities has grown considerably. of Invertebrate Zoology and However, this mainly can be attributed Hydrobiology, Łódź, Poland) and to specific, targeted search for M.Sc. Jacek Wendzonka (Gostyń, L. pectoralis, which is included in EU Poland) for ideas and examples from Habitats Directive (Council… 1992), ‘A distribution atlas of dragonflies during the development of specially (Odonata) in Poland’ to this work! protected territories (2001-2004), as Special thanks to Dr. Dmitry well as during the drawing of further Telnov (The Entomological Society of environment management plans for Latvia, Rīga, Latvia) for consulative specially protected territories. In the and disscussions in scientific field course of these studies, other protected and practical and moral support and species have been registered. On the to Oskars Beikulis (Rīga, Latvija) for other hand, the number of L. caudalis support in work with GIS! observations has diminished, which I am very grateful to all Data may point to the diminishing of the Authors who delivered their data population of the species in Latvia. for this work. I am very grateful to The population trends of all species in Zane Pīpkalēja (Sigulda, Latvia), Dr. Europe (Kalkman et al. 2010) show Voldemārs Spuņģis (Entomological that the numbers of L. pectoralis are Society of Latvia; Faculty of Biology, growing smaller, while L. albifrons University of Latvia, Rīga, Latvia), and L. caudalis populations remain Arkādijs Poppels (Riga ZOO, Rīga, stable. Latvija) and to Dr. Ivars Druvietis 108 Dragonflies (Odonata) in Latvia – history of research, bibliography and ...

(Faculty of Biology, University of concerning the species occurrence Latvia, Rīga, Latvia), for various that are sufficiently precise to be assistance and valuable suggestions localized in the squares of the grid; useful in the preparation of the final the original data using more general version of the article! localizations which could be used I am very grateful to Dr. Vincent in interpretation maps; the data J. Kalkmann (Netherlands Centre for describing the habitats, populations, Biodiversity, Leiden, the Netherlands), conservation status and threats to Dr. Andrius Petrašiūnas (Vilnius particular species in national scale. University, Vilnius, Lithuania), Dr. The titles of publications are given in Povilas Ivinskis (Institute of Ecology, original language their are published. Vilnius, Lithuania), Dr. Jolanta In square brackets [ ], English Rimšaitė (Institute of Ecology, translation of each title is given. Vilnius, Lithuania), Dr. Eduardas Budrys (Institute of Ecology, Vilnius, Barševskis A., Savenkovs N., Evarts- Lithuania), Dr. Giedrė Višinskienė Bunders P., Daniele I., Pētersons (Institute of Ecology, Vilnius, G., Pilāts V., Zviedre E., Pilāte D., Lithuania), Dr. Rasa Bernotienė Kalniņš M., Vilks K., Poppels A. (Institute of Ecology, Vilnius, 2002. Silenes dabas parka fauna, Lithuania), Dr. Dalius Dapkus (Vilnius flora un veģetācija [Fauna, flora Pedagogical University, Vilnius, and vegetation of the Silene Lithuania), Dr. Vytautas Tamutis Nature Park]. Daugavpils, (Kaunas T. Ivanauskas Zoological Baltijas Koleopteroloģijas Museum, Kaunas, Lithuania) un Dr. institūts: 107 pp. Mati Martin (University of Tartu, Bernard R. 2002. Coenagrion Tartu, Estonia) on providing scientific johanssoni (Wallengren) literature! in Lithuania (Zygoptera: Coenagrionidae). – Notulae odonatologicae 5, No. 10: 117- References 120. Bernard R. 2003. Aeshna crenata Hag., References used in preparation of a new species for the fauna of maps Latvia (Anisoptera: Aeshnidae). Below are listed publications – Notulae odonatologicae 6, No. which include the following 1: 8-10. information, concerning dragonfly Bernard R. 2005. First record of species in Latvia – the original data Aeshna affinis Vander Linden, Latvijas Entomologs 2012, 51: 91-149. 109

1820 in Lithuania (Anisoptera: der Universität Dorpat 5, No. 1: Aeshnidae) and corrective 114-115. notes on the Lithuanian Cowley J. 1937. Some Odonata Odonata checklist. – Notulae from Livonia (Latvia). – The odonatologicae 6, No. 6: 53-55. Entomologist 70: 61-63. Bernard R., Wildermuth H. Druvietis I., Spriņģe G., Briede A., 2005. Nehalennia speciosa Kokorīte I., Parele E. 2010. A (Charpentier, 1840) in Europe: Comparative Assessment of the A case of a vanishing relict Bog Aquatic Environment of (Zygoptera: Coenagrionidae). – the Ramsar Site of Teiči Nature Odonatologica 34, No. 4: 335- Reserve and North Vidzeme 378. Biosphere Reserve, Latvia. In: Bērziņš B. 1934. Insektu masu Kļaviņš M. (ed.). Mires and peat. parādības [The phenomen of Riga, University of Latvia Press: mass in ]. – Daba un 19-40. Zinātne 1, No. 5: 157. Fischer J.B. 1778. Versuch einer Bērziņš B. 1938. Piezīmes par spārēm Naturgeschichte von Livland. (Odonata) [Notes on dragonflies Erste Auflage. Leipzig: 155-156. (Odonata)]. – Daba un Zinātne 5, Fischer J.B. 1784. Zusätze zu No. 6: 186. ‘Versuch einer Naturgeschichte Bērziņš B. 1942. Beitrag zur Kenntnis von Livland’. Im Buche der Odonatenfauna Lettlands. – ‘J.J.Ferbers Anmerkungen zur Folia Zoolgica et Hydrobiologica physischen Erdbeschreibung 11, No. 2: 329-350. von Kurland, nebst J.B. Fischers Bērziņš B. 1950. Eine für Lettlands Zusätzen zu seinem Versuch einer Fauna neue Libellen-Art. – Naturgeschichte von Livland’. Opuscula entomologica 15, No. Riga: 84-85. 2: 134. Fischer J.B. 1791. Versuch einer Bruttan A. 1878. Die Odonaten Liv- Naturgeschichte von Livland. und Estlands. – Sitzungsberichte Zweite Auflage. Köningsberg, der Naturforscher-Gesellschaft XXIV: 335-337. bei der Universität Dorpat 4, No. Grosse A. 1942. [Einige 3: 420-426. phänologische Mitteilungen aus Bruttan A. 1881. [Nachtrag über dem laufenden Jahr (1938).] Odonaten Liv- und Estlands]. – Korrespondenzblatt des – Sitzungsberichte der Naturforschenden Vereins zu Naturforscher-Gesellschaft bei Riga 64: 29-30. 110 Dragonflies (Odonata) in Latvia – history of research, bibliography and ...

Inberga-Petrovska S. 2003. Spāru 3rd International Conference faunas un ekoloģijas pētījumi ‘Research and Conservation of Engures ezera dabas parkā biological diversity in Baltic [Research on fauna and ecology region’. Book of abstracts. of dragonflies in Engure Lake Daugavpils University. Nature Park.] – Daba un Muzejs Daugavpils, Latvia, 20-22 April: 8: 59-67. 68-69. Kačalova O., Parele E. 1987. Slīteres Kalniņš M. 2006a. Upjuspāru Valsts rezervāta upju zoobentoss (Odonata: Gomphidae) izplatība [Zoobenthos of the Slītere Nature un sastopamības biežums Gaujā reserve rivers]. – Mežsaimniecība [The distribution and occurence un mežrūpniecība 3, No. 119: 35- frequency of Gomphidae 37. (Odonata: Gomphidae) in river Kačalova O., Kumsāre A., Kundziņš Gauja]. Latvijas Universitātes M. 1962. Lielie ezeri Rīgas 64. zinātniskā konference. apkārtnē [Large lakes in Riga Ģeogrāfija. Ģeoloģija. Vides surrounding]. Rīga, Latvijas zinātne: Referātu tēzes. Rīga, PSR Zinātņu Akadēmijas Latvijas Universitāte: 298-301. izdevniecība: 67 pp. Kalniņš M. 2006b. The distribution Kalniņš M. 2000. Gaujas ūdens and occurence frequency kukaiņu fauna [Fauna of aquatic of Gomphidae (Odonata: insects of the River Gauja]. Gomphidae) in river Gauja. – DPU 8. ikgadējās zinātniskās Acta Universitatis latviensis 710, konferences rakstu krājums A11. Biology: 17-28. DPU Saule: 26-28. Kalniņš M. 2006c. An investigation Kalniņš M. 2002. Banded Darter of dragonfly (Odonata) ecology Sympetrum pedemontanum at the Tītmaņu oxbow, Gauja (Allioni, 1766) (Odonata, National park, Latvia. – Libellulidae) a new dragonfly Acta biologica Universitatis species in the fauna of Latvia. – daugavpiliensis 6, No. 1-2: 103- Latvijas Entomologs 39: 44-45. 108. Kalniņš M., Inberga-Petrovska Kalniņš M., Medne M. 2007. The S. 2005. Distribution and spatial allocation of dragonflies ecology of dragonflies Aeshna (Odonata) communities in raised viridis (Eversmann, 1835) bogs of Latvia. 4th International and Ophiogomphus cecilia Conference ‘Research and (Fourcroy, 1785) in Latvia. Conservation of biological Latvijas Entomologs 2012, 51: 91-149. 111

diversity in Baltic region’. 1840) (Odonata: Libellulidae). – Daugavpils, 25-27 April. Book of Latvijas Entomologs 45: 5-13. abstracts. Daugavpils University Kalniņš M. 2009. Lesser Emperor Academic Press ‘Saule’: 50. Anax parthenope (Selys, 1839) Kalniņš M. 2007a. Spāru (Odonata) (Odonata: Aeshnidae) – a new izlidošanas laika izmaiņas dragonfly species in Latvia. – Latvijā [Changes in dragonfly Latvijas Entomologs 47: 16-20. (Odonata) emerging time in Kalniņš M. 2011a. The distribution Latvia]. Latvijas Universitātes mapping of dragonflies (Odonata) 65. zinātniskā konference. in Latvia. 6th International Ģeogrāfija. Ģeoloģija. Vides Conference ‘Research and zinātne: Referātu tēzes. Rīga, Conservation of biological Latvijas Universitāte: 88-290. diversity in Baltic region’. Kalniņš M. 2007b. Protected Aquatic Daugavpils, 28-29 April. Book of Insects of Latvia – Leucorrhinia abstracts. Daugavpils University pectoralis (Charpentier, 1825) Academic Press ‘Saule’: 61. (Odonata: Libellulidae). – Kalniņš M. 2011b. The distribution Latvijas Entomologs 44: 24-30. of southern dragonfly (Odonata) Kalniņš M. 2007c. Brown species in Latvia and adjacent Orthetrum Orthetrum brunneum territories. – Environmental and (Fonscolumbe, 1837) (Odonata, Experimental Biology 9: 43-52. Libelullidae) a new dragonfly Kalniņš M., Bernard R., Miķelsone I. species in Latvia. – Acta Biologica 2011. Protected Aquatic Insects Universitatis Daugavpiliensis 7, of Latvia – Nehalennia speciosa No. 1/2: 109-111. (Charpentier, 1840) (Odonata: Kalniņš M., Juceviča E., Karpa A., Coenagrionidae). – Latvijas Salmane I., Poppels A., Teļnovs Entomologs 50: 41-54. D. 2007. Bezmugurkaulnieki. Kalniņš M. 2012. The ecology and [Invertebrates]. In: Pilāts V. conservation of the Bog Hawker (ed.) Bioloģiskā daudzveidība Aeshna subarctica Walker, 1908 Gaujas Nacionālajā parkā. (Odonata: Aeshnidae) in Latvia. Sigulda, Gaujas Nacionālā parka – Latvijas Entomologs 51: 40-57. administrācija: 106-149. Kawall J.H. 1864. Die Orthopteren Kalniņš M. 2008a. Protected Aquatic un Neuropteren Kurlands. Insects of Latvia – Leucorrhinia – Correspondenzblatt des albifrons (Burmeister, 1839) Naturforschenden Vereins zu and L. caudalis (Charpentier, Riga 14: 155-168. 112 Dragonflies (Odonata) in Latvia – history of research, bibliography and ...

Kawall J.H. 1865. Chronik Parele E. 2007a. Ilggadīgo zoobentosa phänologischer Beobachtungen organismu sastāva novērojumu in Kurland. – Correspondenzblatt analīze Engures ezerā [Long- des Naturforschenden Vereins zu term observations of zoobenthic Riga 15, No. 4/5: 47-67. organisms composition in Lake Kawall J.H. 1866. Phänologische Engure]. Latvijas Universitātes Beobachtungen (Fortsetzung). 65. zinātniskā konference. – Correspondenzblatt des Ģeogrāfija. Ģeoloģija. Vides Naturforschenden Vereins zu zinātne: Referātu tēzes. Rīga, Riga 15, No. 10/11: 146-165. Latvijas Universitāte: 309-319. Liepa V. 1963. Spāre Aeschna isosceles Parele E. 2007b. Ādažu poligona Müll. Zemgales līdzenumā [The ūdenstilpju zoobentosa sabiedrību dragonfly Aeschna isosceles struktūra un faunistiskais sastāvs Müll. in Zemgale plain]. – [Structure of zoobenthos societies Latvijas Entomologs 7: 20. and faunistic composition of Ozols E. 1936. Latvijas kukaiņi. waterbodies in Ādaži firing- [Insects of Latvia]. – In: Latvijas ground]. Latvijas Universitātes zeme, daba, tauta. 2. sējums. 65. zinātniskā konference. Rīga, Valters un Rapa: 520-576. Ģeogrāfija. Ģeoloģija. Vides Parele E. 2001. Daugavas zoobentosa zinātne: Referātu tēzes. Rīga, fauna posmā Līvāni-Pļaviņas Latvijas Universitāte: 302-309. [Fauna of zoobenthic fauna of Parele E. 2008. Ventas upes River Daugava’s section from makrozoobentosa biocenotiskā Līvāni to Pļaviņas]. Latvijas struktūra un tās faunistiskais Universitātes 59. zinātniskā sastāvs no 1963. līdz 1999. gadam konference. Ģeogrāfija, [Biocenotical structure and ģeoloģija, vides zinātne. Referātu faunistic composition of tēzes. Rīga, Latvijas Universitāte: macrozoobenhos in River Venta 128-131. from 1963 to 1999]. In: Plikša I. Parele E. 2003. Kaņiera ezera (ed.) Klimata mainība un ūdeņi. zoobentoss. [The zoobenthos Rakstu krājums. Rīga, Latvijas of the Lake Kaņieris]. Latvijas Universitāte: 92-103. Universitātes 61. zinātniskā Rintelen T. von 1997. Eine Vogelreuse konference. Ģeogrāfija, als Libellenfalle: Beobachtungen ģeoloģija, vides zinātne. Referātu in der Vogelwarte Pape, Lettland. tēzes. Rīga, Latvijas Universitāte: – Libellula 16, No. 1/2: 61-64. 254-256. Schneider G. 1910. Libellenzug. Latvijas Entomologs 2012, 51: 91-149. 113

– Korrespondenzblatt des venation of the dragonflies of Naturforschenden Vereins zu the genus Leucorrhinia Britt]. – Riga 53: 110. Latvijas Entomologs 1: 53-59. Spuris Z. 1943. Quelques Spuris Z. 1963a. Jaunas ziņas par données nouvelles sur la spāru izplati Latvijā [New data faune odonatologique de la on distribution of dragonflies in Lettonie. – Folia Zoologica et Latvia]. – Latvijas Entomologs 7: Hydrobiologica 12, No. 1: 87-91. 21-40. Spuris Z. 1950. Materiali par Latvijas Spuris Z. 1963b. Spāru masu lidojumi blakšu (Heteroptera) faunu. I [The mass flight of dragonflies]. [Materials on fauna of bugs – Dabas un vēstures kalendārs (Heteroptera) in Latvia. I]. – 1964. Rīga, Latvijas PSR Zinātņu Latvijas PSR Zinātņu Akadēmijas Akadēmijas izdevniecība: 73-75. Vēstis 8, No. 37: 83-94. Spuris Z. 1968. Pētījumi par ūdens Spuris Z. 1952. Jaunas ziņas par kukaiņiem Gaujas senlejā pie Latvijas PSR spāru (Odonata) Siguldas. [Studies on aquatic faunu [New data on fauna of insects in ancient valley of River dragonflies (Odonata) of the Gauja near Sigulda]. – Latvijas Latvian SSR]. – Latvijas PSR PSR Zinātņu Akadēmijas Vēstis Zinātņu Akadēmijas Vēstis 6, No. 12, No. 257: 137-139. 59: 160-161. Spuris Z. 1974. Spāres Gaujas senlejā Spuris Z. 1953. Par Latvijas PSR pie Siguldas. [Dragonflies in ezeru pamatbiotopu svarīgākām ancient valley of River Gauja near dzīvnieku sugām un to izplati Sigulda]. – Latvijas Entomologs [On important species of 16: 33-46. and their distribution in basic Spuris Z. 1980. Latvijas kukaiņu habitats in lakes in the Latvian katalogs. 1. Spāres (Odonata) SSR]. – Latvijas PSR Zinātņu [Catalogue of insects of Latvia. Akadēmijas Vēstis 9, No. 74: 67- 1. Dragonflies (Odonata)]. – 82. Latvijas Entomologs 23: 5-19. Spuris Z. 1958. Mūsu ezeru bioloģija. Spuris Z. 1990. Jaunas ziņas par [The biology of our lakes]. Rīga, spārēm Latvijas centrālajā daļā Latvijas valsts izdevniecība: 100 [New data on dragonflies in the pp. (Odonata: 46-59). central part of Latvia]. – Latvijas Spuris Z. 1960. Spārnu dzīslojuma Entomologs 33: 81-89. mainība spāru ģintī Leucorrhinia Spuris Z. 1992. Jaunas ziņas par Britt. [Variations in wing spāru (Odonata) izplati Latvijas 114 Dragonflies (Odonata) in Latvia – history of research, bibliography and ...

centrālajā daļā [New data on Vilnius, Institute of Ecology: 397 the distribution of dragonflies pp. (Odonata) in the Central Latvia]. Балоде М., Гаиле М., Зандмане – Acta Hydroentomologica А., Звайгзне М., Звайгзне Latvica 2: 61-73. М., Зембаха Р., Качалова Spuris Z. 1996. Latvijas kukaiņu О., Кумсаре А., Лиепа Р., katalogs. 12. Spāres (Odonata), Матисоне М., Мелберга papildinājums [Catalogue of А., Пареле Е., Родинов В., insects of Latvia. 12. Dragonflies Цимдинь П., Цукурс Т. (Odonata), supplement]. – Acta 1981. Гидробиологический Hydroentomologica Latvica 3: режим малых рек в условиях 30-36. антропогенного воздействия. Spuris Z. 1997. Daži novērojumi par [Hidrobiological regime of small ūdenskukaiņu faunu 1996. gadā rivers under antropogenical Latvijā [Some observations on impact]. Рига, Зинатне: 167 pp. the water fauna in Latvia Качалова О.Л. 1960. Донная 1996]. – Acta Hydroentomologica фауна озера Резнас и ее Latvica 4: 21-28. распредепение по биотопам Spuris Z. (ed.) 1998. Latvijas Sarkanā [Benthic fauna of Lake Reznas grāmata. Retās un apdraudētās and its assignement by habitats]. – augu un dzīvnieku sugas. 4. Рыбное хозяйство внутренних sējums. Bezmugurkaulnieki. водоемов Латвийской ССР 5: [Red Data Book of Latvia. 103-122. Rare and threatened species Качалова О.Л. 1962. of plants and animals. Volume Местонахождение поденки 4. Invertebrates]. Rīga, LU Prosopistoma foliaceum Fourc. Bioloģijas institūts: 388 pp. в реке Даугава [Locality of Stoll F.E. 1930. Tier- un Pflanzenleben mayflay Prosopistoma foliaceum am Rigaschen Strande. Riga, Fourc. in the River Daugava]. – Valters un Rapa: 21, 94. Latvijas Entomologs 6: 44-46. Stoll H. 1934. Libellenzüge. Качалова О.Л. 1966. Ручейники в – Korrespondenzblatt des составе зообентоса реки Венты Naturforschenden Vereins zu в пределах Латвии [Caddisflies Riga 61: 125-126. in zoobenthic constitution of Volskis R. (ed.) 1999. Hydrobiological River Venta in Latvia]. – Latvijas research in the Baltic Countries. Entomologs 11: 59-76. Part I. The Rivers and the Lakes. Качалова О.Л. 1972. Ручейники рек Latvijas Entomologs 2012, 51: 91-149. 115

Латвии. [Caddisflies of Latvian ССР 11, No. 136: 109-114. rivers]. Рига, Зинатне: 216 pp. Спурис З.Д. 1960. Лимнологическая Качалова О.Л., Пареле Е.А. 1987. характеристика озера Энгурес Формирование структуры [Limnological characteristics донной фауны [Formation of Lake Engure]. – Рыбное of structure of benthic fauna]. хозяйство внутренних In: Andrušaitis G. (ed.) водоемов Латвийской ССР 5. Евтрофирование малых озер Труды 17. Рига: 167-198. Латвии. Рига, Зинатне: 151- Спурис З.Д. 1962. Жилкование 181. крыльев стрекозы Aeschna Спурис З.Д. 1951. Южные grandis L. из Латвийской ССР элементы в фауне стрекоз [Wing venation of dragonfly (Odonata) Латвийской ССР Aeschna grandis L. from Latvian [Southern elements in fauna of SSR]. – Latvijas Entomologs 5: dragonflies (Odonata) of Latvian 41-46. SSR]. – Энтомологическое Спурис З. 1964. Стрекоза обозрение 3-4: 500-503. Coenagrion concinnum Joh. в Спурис З.Д. 1954. Некоторые Латвийской ССР [Dragonfly особености фауны озер юго- Coenagrion concinnum Joh. восточной Латвии [Some in Latvian SSR]. – Latvijas individualities in lakes fauna Entomologs 9: 77-86. of south-eastren Latvia.] – Спурис З. 1966. Шесть новых Известия Академии Наук и несколько редких видов Латвийской ССР 3, No. 80: 79- ручейников для фауны Латвии 84. [Six new and several rare Спурис З.Д. 1956. Стрекозы caddisfly species in the fauna of Латвийской ССР [Dragonflies Latvia]. – Latvijas Entomologs of Latvian SSR]. Рига, 11: 85-97. Издательство Академии наук Латвийской ССР: 96 pp. Other references Спурис З.Д. 1958. Изменчивость стрекозы Libellula The ‘References’ chapter quadrimaculata L. в Латвийской include publications which are ССР. [Variability of dragonfly used for material and method Libellula quadrimaculata L. descriptions etc. This subchapter in Latvian SSR]. – Известия NOT includes publications which Академии наук Латвийской include information about dragonflies 116 Dragonflies (Odonata) in Latvia – history of research, bibliography and ...

in Latvia. The titles of publications 6: 69-72. are given in original language their Buczyński P., Dijkstra K.-D.B., are published. In square brackets [ Mauersberger R., Moroz M. ], English translation of each title is 2006. Review of the Odonata given. of Belarus. – Odonatologica 35, No. 1: 1-13. Bernard R., Buczyński P., Tończyk Corbet, P.S. 1999. Dragonflies – G., Wendzonka J. 2009. A Behaviour and Ecology of distribution atlas of dragonflies Odonata. Colchester, Harley (Odonata) in Poland. Poznań, Books: 829 pp. Bogucki Wydawnictwo Council Directive 92/43EEC of 21 Naukowe: 1-256. May 1992 on the Conservation Boudot J.-P., Kalkman V.J., of Natural Habitats and of Wild Azpilicueta Amorín M., Fauna and Flora. Bogdanović T., Cordero Rivera Dijkstra K.-D.B. 2006. Field Guide A., Degabriele G., Dommanget to the Dragonflies of Britain and J.-L., Ferreira S., Garrigós B., Europe. Dorset, British Wildlife Jović M., Kotarac M., Lopau Publishing: 320 pp. W., Marinov M., Mihoković Gates D.M. 1993. Climate Change N., Riservato E., Samraoui B., and its Biological Conequences. Schneider W. 2009. Atlas of the Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Odonata of the Mediterranean Massachusetts: 280 pp. and North Africa. – Libellula, Gebhardt L. 2006. Fischer Jakob Supplement 9: 1-256. Benjamin. - Die Ornithologen Briliūtė A., Budrys E. 2007. New Mitteleuropas. Teil 1. record of damselfly Lestes Wiebelsheim, Aula-Verlag: 44. barbarus in the South of Geospatial Information law. 2010. Lithuania (Odonata: Lestidae). http://www.likumi.lv/doc. – New and Rare for Lithuania php?id=202999 [last accessed Insect Species 19: 10-12. 13.07.2011]. Buczyński P., Pakulnicka J. 2000. Junevičienė I., Stankevičiūtė J., Odonate larvae of gravel and Bartkevičienė G., Raudonikis L. clay pits in the Mazurian Lake 2007. Pajūrio regioninio parko District (NE Poland), with notes dalies (Nemirsetos smiltpievių on extremely northern localities ir Pajūrio kopų) gamtotvarkos of some Mediterranean species. planas [ – Notulae Odonatologicae 5, No. ( meadows and Latvijas Entomologs 2012, 51: 91-149. 117

coastal dunes) management Yale University Press: 505 pp. plan]. Vilnius: 1-65 http:// Prüffer J. 1952. Uwagi o ważkach www.zvejone.lt/life/gallery/ Wileńszczyzny [Notes of the File/Pajuris_planas_20070821_ Dragon-Flies of the Wilno pataisytas.pdf [last accessed: District]. – Sprawozdania 20.09.2011]. Towarzystwa Naukowego w Kalkman V.J., Dijkstra K.-D.B. Toruniu 4: 105. 2000. The dragonflies of the Skvortsov V.E. 2010. The dragonflies Bialowieza area, Poland and of Eastern Europe and Caucasus: Belarus (Odonata). – Opuscula an illustrated guide. Moscow, zoologica fluminensia 185: 1-19. KMK Scientific Press: 623 pp. Kalkman V.J., Boudot J.-P., Bernard Spuris Z. 1993. Latvijas spāru R., Conze K.-J., De Knijf G., (Odonata) noteicējs Dyatlova E., Ferreira S., Jović [Identification key to the M., Ott J., Riservato E., Sahlén dragonflies (Odonata) of Latvia]. G. 2010. European Red List of Rīga, Zinātne: 67 pp. dragonflies. Luxembourg, IUCN Stanionytė A. 1963. Некоторые & Publications Office of the данные о стрекозах Odonata European Union: 28 pp. Литовской ССР [Some data on Martin M., Luig J., Ruusmaa J., dragonflies of Lithuanian SSR]. – Heidemaa M. 2008. Distribution Lietuvos TSR Mokslų akademijos maps of Estonian insects, 3. darbai Serija C, 1, No. 30: 51-62. Odonata, maps 166-219. Eesti Stanionytė A. 1991. Orthetrum Loodusfoto, Tartu: 68 pp. coerulescens Fabr. – новый для Ott J. 2001. Expansion of Литвы вид стрекоз (Odonata), Mediterranean Odonata обнаруженный в 1990 г. in Germany and Europe – [Orthetrum coerulescens Fabr. – cosequences of climatic changes. new to Lithuania Odonata species In: Walther G.-R., Burga C.A., found in 1990]. – New and rare Edwards P.J. (eds) ‘Fingerprints’ for Lithiuania insect species. of Climate Change. Adapted Records and descriptions of 1991. Behaviour and Shifting Species Vilnius, Institute of Zoology Ranges. New York, Kluwer and Parasitology Academy of Academic Publishers: 89-111. Science of Lithuanian SSR: 9-11. Peters R.L., Lovejoy T.E. (eds.) 1992. Stanionytė A. 1993. The check-list Global Warming and Biological of dragonflies (Odonata) of Diversity. New Haven & London, Lithuania. – New and rare for 118 Dragonflies (Odonata) in Latvia – history of research, bibliography and ...

Lithiuania insect species. Records Scientific Conference, September and descriptions of 1993. Vilnius, 20-25, 1999. Minsk - Naroch. Institute of Ecology: 50-60. Minsk, Belarussian State Steinmann H. 1997. World catalogue University: 448-458. of Odonata. Volume I. Zygoptera. Wilson, K. D. P. 2009. Sympetrum Berlin, New York, De Gruyter: eroticum. In: IUCN 2011. IUCN 476 pp. Red List of Threatened Species. Termaat T., Kalkman V.J., Bouwman Version 2011.1. http://www. H.J. 2010. Change in the iucnredlist.org [last accsessed: range of dragonflies in the 20.09.2011]. Netherlands and the possible Шешурак П.Н. 1999. К изучению role of temperature change. In: энтомофауны национального Ott J. (eds) Monitoring Climatic парка Припятский. Стрекозы Change with Dragonflies. (Odonatoptera) [To the BioRisk 5: 155-173. knowledge of the insect fauna Tishchikov G.M., Tishchikov of the Prypyatskiy national Park. I.G. 2000. Faunističeskij Dragonflies (Odonatoptera)]. In: sostav donnyh Биологическое разнообразие makrozoobezpozvonočnych Национального парка vodostokov besseina ozera Припятский и других особо Naroč [Faunal composition of охраняемых природных benthic macrozooinvertebrates территорий. Туров- of rivers in Lake Naroch basin]. Мозырь, Национальный парк In: Lake ecosystems: Biological Припятский: 217-221. processes, anthropogenic transformation, water quality. Materials of the International Received: December 28, 2011. Latvijas Entomologs 2012, 51: 91-149. 119

Table 1. Potential species of dragonflies (Odonata) for the fauna of Latvia. For each species the approximate distance (D) in kilometres to the nearest foreign locality and the source of this record is given. The presence of each species is indicated for the adjacent countries – Estonia (EE), European part or Russia (RU), Belarus (BY), Lithuania (LT) and Poland (PL) (modified after Kalniņš 2011b).

Species D Source EE RU BY LT PL

1. Lestes barbarus (Fabricius, 130 Prüffer 1952 - + + + + 1798) (historical data); 230 Briliūtė, Budrys 2007 (contemporary data) 2. Lestes viridis (Vander 130 Stanionytė 1993 - - + + + Linden, 1825) 3. Sympecma fusca (Vander 30 Junevičienė et al. - + + + + Linden, 1820) 2007; Bernard et al. 230 2009 4. Coenagrion ornatum 180 ? Buczyński et al. 2006; - + + - + (Sélys, 1850) ~400 Шешурак 1999 5. Erythromma viridulum ~100 Tishchikov, - + + + + (Charpentier, 1840) Tishchikov 2000 6. Aeshna affinis Vander 60 Bernard 2005 - + + + + Linden, 1820 7. Aeshna serrata Hagen, 50 Martin et al. 2008 + + - - - 1856 8. Orthetrum albistylum 250 Buczyński, Pakulnicka - + + - + (Sélys, 1848) 2000 9. Orthetrum coerulescens 60 Stanionytė 1993; + + - + + (Fabricius, 1798) Martin et al. 2008 10. Sympetrum depressiusculum 10 Stanionytė 1963, 1991 - + + + + (Sélys, 1841) 11. Sympetrum meridionale 300 Bernard et al. 2009; - + + - + (Sélys, 1841) Skvortsov 2010 12. Crocothemis erythraea 350 Kalkman, Dijkstra - +? - - + (Brullé, 1832) 2000 120 Dragonflies (Odonata) in Latvia – history of research, bibliography and ...

Distribution maps Latvijas Entomologs 2012, 51: 91-149. 121 122 Dragonflies (Odonata) in Latvia – history of research, bibliography and ... Latvijas Entomologs 2012, 51: 91-149. 123 124 Dragonflies (Odonata) in Latvia – history of research, bibliography and ... Latvijas Entomologs 2012, 51: 91-149. 125 126 Dragonflies (Odonata) in Latvia – history of research, bibliography and ... Latvijas Entomologs 2012, 51: 91-149. 127 128 Dragonflies (Odonata) in Latvia – history of research, bibliography and ... Latvijas Entomologs 2012, 51: 91-149. 129 130 Dragonflies (Odonata) in Latvia – history of research, bibliography and ... Latvijas Entomologs 2012, 51: 91-149. 131 132 Dragonflies (Odonata) in Latvia – history of research, bibliography and ... Latvijas Entomologs 2012, 51: 91-149. 133 134 Dragonflies (Odonata) in Latvia – history of research, bibliography and ... Latvijas Entomologs 2012, 51: 91-149. 135 136 Dragonflies (Odonata) in Latvia – history of research, bibliography and ... Latvijas Entomologs 2012, 51: 91-149. 137 138 Dragonflies (Odonata) in Latvia – history of research, bibliography and ... Latvijas Entomologs 2012, 51: 91-149. 139 140 Dragonflies (Odonata) in Latvia – history of research, bibliography and ... Latvijas Entomologs 2012, 51: 91-149. 141 142 Dragonflies (Odonata) in Latvia – history of research, bibliography and ... Latvijas Entomologs 2012, 51: 91-149. 143 144 Dragonflies (Odonata) in Latvia – history of research, bibliography and ... Latvijas Entomologs 2012, 51: 91-149. 145 146 Dragonflies (Odonata) in Latvia – history of research, bibliography and ... Latvijas Entomologs 2012, 51: 91-149. 147 148 Dragonflies (Odonata) in Latvia – history of research, bibliography and ... Latvijas Entomologs 2012, 51: 91-149. 149