326 ______Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 14, No. 2, June 2019______

A NEW SPECIES OF C. G. THOMSON, 1859 FROM TURKEY (CHRYSOMELIDAE: )

Didem Coral Şahin* and Hüseyin Özdikmen**

* Directorate of Plant Protection Central Research Institute, Ankara, TURKEY. E-mail: [email protected] ** Gazi University, Science Faculty, Department of Biology, 06500 Ankara, TURKEY. E- mails: [email protected]; [email protected]

[Coral Şahin, D. & Özdikmen, H. 2019. A new species of Hydrothassa C. G. Thomson, 1859 from Turkey (Chrysomelidae: Chrysomelinae). Munis Entomology & Zoology, 14 (1): 326-343]

ABSTRACT: A new species, Hydrothassa anatolica sp. nov., is described from Kayseri province in Turkey. For the time being, the species is endemic to the Turkey. Hydrothassa anatolica sp. nov., was compared to the related Palaearctic species in the subgenus Hydrothassa (Agrostithassa) Jakobson, 1921. It can be distinctively differentiated from these species based on body size, epipleural punctuation and aedeagal characters especially. In addition, the paper presents ultrastructures observed by SEM of aedeagus and spermatheca of Hydrothassa anatolica sp. nov. from Turkey for the first time. Photos of aedeagus and spermatheca in SEM as weel as in stereo microscope are given in the text. A short key of the species of subgenus Hydrothassa (Agrostithassa) Jakobson, 1921 is also given in the text.

KEY WORDS: Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae, Chrysomelinae, Hydrothassa, new species, SEM, ultrastructures, aedeagus, spermatheca, Turkey, Palearctic region

The genus Hydrothassa C. G. Thomson, 1859 (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae: Chrysomelinae) is distributed in the Holarctic region (Seeno & Wilcox, 1982). It numbers 12 species, which occur in the Palaearctic and Nearctic regions (Winkelman & Debreul, 2008). Hydrothassa C. G. Thomson, 1859 that was accepted as a subgenus of the genus Prasocuris Latreille, 1802, is represented by 8 species in the Palaearctic region (Kippenberg in Löbl & Smetana, 2010). Palaearctic species classified into two subgenera (Warchalowski, 2003, 2010). Hydrothassa bicolora Rapilly, 1981 occurs only in Iran and Hydrothassa oblongiuscula (Fairmaire, 1884) occurs only in North Africa (Algeria and Tunisia). The remaining six species as Hydrothassa fairmairei (Brisout de Barneville, 1866), Hydrothassa flavocincta (Brullé, 1832), (Herbst, 1783), (Fabricius, 1775), (innaeus, 1758) and Hydrothassa suffriani (Küster, 1852) are known from Europe (Warchalowski, 2003, 2010; Kippenberg in Löbl & Smetana, 2010). Two of them as Hydrothassa flavocincta (Brullé, 1832) and Hydrothassa glabra (Herbst, 1783) are distributed also in Turkey (Ekiz et al., 2013; Özdikmen, 2014). Many specimens of Hydrothassa was collected in Kayseri province, Turkey. They are described as a new species. The spermathecae and aedeagi were dissected from abdomen, remaining tissue were removed with fine tweezers. For light microscopic examination after cleaning, the samples were placed 70% ethanol and examined with Olympus SZX7 stereomicroscope. For scanning electron microscopy (SEM), cleaned samples were dehydrated using an ascending series of ethanol (70%, 80%, 90%, and 100%) and then air dried. After that the specimens were mounted onto SEM stubs using a double- sided adhesive tape, coated with gold using a Polaron SC 502

______Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 14, No. 2, June 2019______327

Sputter Coater, and examined with a JEOL JSM 6060 Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) at 10 kV.

Hydrothassa (Agrostithassa) anatolica sp. nov. (Figs. 1-26)

The new species Hydrothassa anatolica sp. nov., comes from central Anatolia of Turkey, Kayseri province (Fig. 1). Until now, it is a species endemic to Turkey, which was compared with closely related two Turkish and one North African species of Hydrothassa C. G. Thomson, 1859. It can be distinctively differentiated from these species based on its body size, epipleural punctuation and aedeagal characters especially.

HOLOTYPE: Male – Turkey, Kayseri province, Sarız, Çörekdere, 38°28’50’’ N 36°27’29’’E, 1637 m, 06.VI.2018, leg. D. Coral Şahin. The holotype is stored in Nazife Tuatay Plant Protection Museum (NTM) (Turkey, Ankara).

PARATYPES: Males – Turkey, Kayseri province, Sarız, Çörekdere, 38°28’50’’ N 36°27’29’’E, 1637 m, 06.VI.2018, leg. D. Coral Şahin, 32 specimens. Females – Turkey, Kayseri province, Sarız, Çörekdere, 38°28’50’’ N 36°27’29’’E, 1637 m, 06.VI.2018, leg. D. Coral Şahin. 26 specimens. The paratypes are stored in Nazife Tuatay Plant Protection Museum (NTM) (Turkey, Ankara).

Description of holotype. Length: 3.02 mm. Body: Almost completely black (except for reddish lateral stripes on elytra and partly brownish black labrum and mouthparts). Upper side almost completely glabrous (except for antennae). Underside and legs clothed with short, very sparsely, recumbent or semirecumbent, light hairs. Head: Almost completely black (except for partly brownish black labrum and mouthparts). Almost completely glabrous (with sparsely light hairs on mouthparts and apical margin of clypeus and labrum). Fronto-clypeal suture distinct and archwise. Frontal callus sometimes visible. Head with distinct, scattered and sparsely punctures (except for labrum). The area between punctures larger than diameter of punctures. Antennae entirely black and clothed with short, very sparsely, semirecumbent, light hairs. Pronotum: Completely black. Entirely glabrous. Pronotum with distinct, scattered and sparsely punctures (similar on the head). Pronotum clearly transverse and approximately as long as 3/5 its width. Scutellum: Triangular. Completely black. Entirely glabrous. With a few distinct, scattered and sparsely punctures. Elytra: In the most part black and with reddish lateral stripes. Entirely glabrous. Each elytron with 11 regular rows of punctures (9 rows on black part and 2 rows on reddish lateral stripe). Punctures larger than on head and pronotum. Epipleura reddish with more or less fine and scattered punctures. Legs: Completely black and clothed with short, very sparsely, recumbent or semirecumbent, light hairs. Underside: Completely black and abdomen clothed with short, very sparsely, recumbent or semirecumbent, light hairs. Aedeagus and spermatheca of Hydrothassa anatolica sp. nov. were studied with both stereo microscope and SEM. Obtaining observations on ultrastructures of them are presented as follows:

328 ______Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 14, No. 2, June 2019______

Aedeagus: In lateral view, median lobe distinctly curved median foramen to apex (almost semicircularly). Strongly sharpened towards to apex (Figs. 2, 6, 7, 10). In dorsal view, median lobe at the apex broadly rounded (Figs. 2, 13-14, 16-17). Upper and lateral margins of orifice rounded (Figs. 2, 13-14, 16-17). Dorsal plate distinct, large and entire (Figs. 2, 13-14, 16-17). Median lobe in lateral parts and fore part of orifice thickened. Thickening in lateral parts smaller than the fore part (Figs. 2, 16-17). Median lobe behind the dorsal plate flattened (Figs. 2, 6-8, 13-14, 16-17). Median lobe especially in anterior half with distinct, scattered, irregular and sparsely ultrastructural pits (Figs. 7-15, 18). The pits located only in lateral parts of terminal part of median lobe in dorsal view. The terminal area from upper margin of orifice to aedeagal apex almost without ultrastructural pits in dorsal view. Dorsal plate and the area behind it with ultrastructural pits in dorsal view (Figs. 8-9, 13-18).

Spermatheca: General view of spermatheca C-shaped (Figs. 3, 19-20). Nodulus almost equal width with cornu or slightly wider than apical part of cornu (Figs. 3, 19-20). Apex of cornu obtuse (Figs. 3, 19-20, 26). Collum + ramus distinct, clearly visible (Figs. 3, 19-23). Ductus spermatheca long and straight, but only broadly twisted, not spiral in streo microscope (not photographed). Ductus spermatheca ruptured in SEM (Figs. 19-23). Spermathecal gland long and straight (Figs. 19- 24). Nodulus, cornu, collum, ramus and spermathecal gland with scattered, irregular and sparsely ultrastructural pits (Figs. 21-24, 26).

Female: The same male. No sexual dimorphism, but body size larger than the males.

Variations: Body almost completely black, sometimes dark blue black or dark greenish black. Length of males 2.9-3.3 mm and females 3.3-3.7 mm.

Differential diagnosis. The new species Hydrothassa anatolica sp. nov., exerts considerable morphological features differentiation from other species of the subgenus and genus. First of all, pronotal punctuation and aedeagus are unique in the new species. The closest species to the new species with regard to pronotal punctuation and aedeagal form is Hydrothassa suffriani (Küster, 1852). Elytra are uniformly colored in Hydrothassa suffriani (Küster, 1852) while elytra have orange lateral stripes in the new species. Pronotal punctuation is relatively denser and fine in Hydrothassa flavocincta (Brullé, 1832) while pronotal punctuation is relatively sparser and fine in the new species. In addition, epipleura is impuntated in Hydrothassa flavocincta (Brullé, 1832) while epipleura is punctated in the new species. Anyway, a size of Hydrothassa flavocincta (Brullé, 1832) was given as 3.4-4.4 mm by Warchałowski (2003, 2010), but it is correct only for females. A size of males is 2.9-3.2 mm. Pronotal punctuation is relatively denser and larger in Hydrothassa glabra (Herbst, 1783) and Hydrothassa oblongiuscula Weise, 1900 while pronotal punctuation is relatively sparser and fine in the new species. Median lobe of aedeagus is longer, thiner and slightly curved ventrad in lateral view, apex of median lobe is slightly sharpened and more or less straight in lateral view, dorsal plate is smaller and shorter in dorsal view in Hydrothassa glabra (Herbst, 1783)

______Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 14, No. 2, June 2019______329 while median lobe of aedeagus is longer, thiner and strongly curved (almost semicircularly) ventrad in lateral view, apex of median lobe is sharpened and straight in lateral view, dorsal plate is larger and longer in dorsal view in the new species. Median lobe of aedeagus is shorter, thicker and slightly curved ventrad in lateral view, apex of median lobe is sharpened and also slightly curved ventrad in lateral view, dorsal plate is smaller and shorter in dorsal view in Hydrothassa oblongiuscula Weise, 1900 while median lobe of aedeagus is longer, thiner and strongly curved (almost semicircularly) ventrad in lateral view, apex of median lobe is sharpened and straight in lateral view, dorsal plate is larger and longer in dorsal view in the new species.

Distribution: The new species is known from Kayseri province (Sarız) in entral Anatolian region of Turkey. For the time being, the species is endemic to the Turkey. Hydrothassa flavocincta (Brullé, 1832) was firstly reported by Apfelbeck (1901, 1916) from Turkey. Then, Gruev (1992, 2004, 2005) recorded the species to Turkey. Also, it was mentioned by Warchalowski (2003, 2010) and Kippenberg in Löbl & Smetana (2010) for Turkey. Ekiz et al. (2013) and Özdikmen (2014) reported it only from İstanbul province in north-western part of Turkey for European Turkey (Thrace) and Asian Turkey (Anatolia) on the base of previously literatures. Later, the SE-European species Hydrothassa flavocincta (Brullé, 1832) was reported by Medvedev (2015) from Muş province (Varto) in Eastern Anatolian region of Turkey. He stated that “A size of this species was given as 3.4- 4.4 mm (Warchałowski, 2003), but it is correct only for females. A size of males is 2.8–3 mm”. Consequently, the record of Hydrothassa flavocincta (Brullé, 1832) in Medvedev (2015) should belongs to the new species Hydrothassa anatolica sp. nov.. On the other side, the Europeo-Mediterranean species Hydrothassa glabra (Herbst, 1783) was firstly recorded by Aslan et al. (2003) from Erzurum province in Eastern Anatolian region of Turkey. However, Warchalowski (2003, 2010) were never mentioned Hydrothassa glabra (Herbst, 1783) for Turkey while Kippenberg in Löbl & Smetana (2010) was reported the species for Asian Turkey (Anatolia). A single objective record from Turkey of Hydrothassa glabra (Herbst, 1783) in Aslan et al. (2003) was repeatedly given by Ekiz et al. (2013) and Özdikmen (2014). In this case, the record of Aslan et al. (2003) should be confirmed. It may also belongs to the new species Hydrothassa anatolica sp. nov..

Etymology: The specific name of the new species Hydrothassa anatolica sp. nov., is based on Anatolia, synonym of Asia Minor.

A short key of the Palaearctic species of subgenus Hydrothassa (Agrostithassa) Jakobson, 1921 (the key based on Warchalowski, 2010)

1. Elytra with orange lateral stripes……………………………………..………………………………………..2 -. Elytra uniformly blue black or greenish black; length 3.0-4.1 mm; distributed only in Sardinia and Corsica…………………………….………..Hydrothassa suffriani (Küster, 1852)

2. Epipleura not punctured; length 3.4-4.4 mm; distributed in Albania, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Greece, Hungary, Yugoslavia, European and Asian Turkey… …………………………………..……..……………………..Hydrothassa flavocincta (Brullé, 1832) -. Epipleura sometimes sparsely and unevenly, but distinctly punctured……….………………....3

330 ______Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 14, No. 2, June 2019______

3. Sides of elytra slightly rounded; aedeagus apically slightly narrowed; length 3.2-4.4 mm; distributed in almost all Europe, North Africa (Morocco) and Asian Turkey……………………… ……………………………….…………………….…………………Hydrothassa glabra (Herbst, 1783) -. Sides of elytra almost parallel; aedeagus apically rather broadly rounded…………………...…4

4. Pronotal punctuation denser; median lobe of aedeagus shorter, thicker and slightly curved ventrad in lateral view; apex of median lobe sharpened and also slightly curved ventrad in lateral view; dorsal plate smaller and shorter in dorsal view; distributed only in North Africa (Algeria and Tunisia)….…………Hydrothassa oblongiuscula Weise, 1900 -. Pronotal punctuation sparser; median lobe of aedeagus longer, thiner and strongly curved (almost semicircularly) ventrad in lateral view; apex of median lobe sharpened and straight in lateral view; dorsal plate larger and longer in dorsal view; length 2.93-3.68 mm; distributed only in Turkey……………….…………….…………Hydrothassa anatolica sp. nov.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We are sincerely grateful to Prof. Dr. Zekiye Suludere for SEM studies.

LITERATURE CITED

Apfelbeck, V. 1901. Bericht über eine entomologische Forschungsreise nach der Türkei und Griechenlande im Jahre 1900. Wissensch. Mitt. aus Bosn. und der Herz, 8: 447-469. Apfelbeck, V. 1916. Die Komponemten der Balkanfauna aus der Familie der Chrysomelidae (Col.). Wissensch. Mitt. aus Bosn. und der Herz, 13: 354-396. Aslan, İ., Gruev, B. A. & Özbek, H. 2003. A preliminary review of the Subfamily Chrysomelinae (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae) of Turkey. Linzer Biol Beitr., 35 (1): 581-605. Ekiz, A. N., Şen, İ., Aslan, E. G. & Gök, A. 2013. Checklist of leaf (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) of Turkey, excluding Bruchinae. Journal of Natural History, 47 (33-34): 2213-2287. Gruev, B. 1992. Geographical distribution of Lamprosomatinae, Eumolpinae, Chrysomelinae, Alticinae, Hispinae ve Cassidinae (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae) on the Balkan Peninsula. Plovdiv University Press. 512 pp. Gruev, B. 2004. The leaf beetles (Insecta: Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) of the Sredna Gora Mountains (Bulgaria), fauna and zoogeography. Trav. Sci. Univ. Plovdiv Animalia, 40 (6): 77-96. Gruev, B. 2005. A comparative list of the leaf beetles of the balkan countries (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Trav. Sci. Univ. Plovdiv Animalia, 41: 23-46. Kippenberg, H. 2010. Chrysomelinaeassidinae. Pp. 368-390. In Löbl, I. & Smetana A. (eds.). Catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera, Vol. 6. Chrysomeloidea. Stenstrup: Apollo Books, 924 pp. Medvedev, L. N. 2015. To the knowledge of leaf beetles (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) from Turkey. Caucasian Entomological Bull., 11 (2): 391-394. Özdikmen, H. 2014. Chorotype identification for Turkish Chrysomeloidea (Coleoptera) Part VII – Chrysomelidae: Chrysomelinae and Timarchinae. Munis Entomology & Zoology, 9 (1): 266-286. Seeno, T. N. & Wilcox, J. A. 1982. Leaf genera (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Entomography, 1: 1-221. Warchalowski, A. 2003. Chrysomelidae. The leaf-beetles of Europe and the Mediterranean area. Natura optima dux Foundation, Warszawa, 600 pp. Warchalowski, A. 2010. The Palaearctic Chrysomelidae. Identification keys. Vol. 1 & 2. Warszawa. 1212 pp. Winkelman, J. & Debreul, M. 2008. Les Chrysomelinae de France (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Rutilans, France. 188 pp.

Map 1. Estimated distribution pattern of Hydrothassa anatolica sp. nov. in Turkey (Kayseri, Muş and ?Erzurum provinces).

______Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 14, No. 2, June 2019______331

A B Figure 1. Habitus of holotype (male) of Hydrothassa anatolica sp. nov. A. Dorsal, B. Ventral.

A B Figure 2. Aedeagus of Hydrothassa anatolica sp. nov. in streo microscope. A. ateral view, B. Dorsal view.

332 ______Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 14, No. 2, June 2019______

Figure 3. Spermatheca of Hydrothassa anatolica sp. nov. in streo microscope, lateral view.

A B

C D

E Figure 4. Punctures on pronotum. A. Hydrothassa suffriani (Küster, 1852), B. Hydrothassa flavocincta (Brullé, 1832), C. Hydrothassa glabra (Herbst, 1783), D. Hydrothassa oblongiuscula Weise, 1900, E. Hydrothassa anatolica sp. nov.

______Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 14, No. 2, June 2019______333

Figure 5. Punctures on epipleura of Hydrothassa anatolica sp. nov.

Figure 6. Aedeagus, lateral view.

334 ______Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 14, No. 2, June 2019______

Figure 7. Aedeagus, pits on median lobe in latero-dorsal view.

Figure 8. Aedeagus, pits on terminal part of median lobe in latero-dorsal view.

______Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 14, No. 2, June 2019______335

Figure 9. Aedeagus, pits on terminal part of median lobe in latero-dorsal view.

Figure 10. Aedeagus, pits on median lobe in latero-ventral view.

336 ______Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 14, No. 2, June 2019______

Figure 11. Aedeagus, pits on anterior half of median lobe in latero-ventral view.

Figure 12. Aedeagus, pits on terminal part of median lobe in latero-ventral view.

______Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 14, No. 2, June 2019______337

Figure 13. Aedeagus, pits on median lobe in dorso-lateral view.

Figure 14. Aedeagus, pits on terminal part of median lobe in dorso-lateral view.

338 ______Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 14, No. 2, June 2019______

Figure 15. Aedeagus, pits on terminal part of median lobe in dorso-lateral view.

Figure 16. Aedeagus, pits on terminal part of median lobe in dorsal view.

______Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 14, No. 2, June 2019______339

Figure 17. Aedeagus, terminal part of median lobe in dorsal view.

Figure 18. Aedeagus, pits on terminal part of median lobe in dorsal view.

340 ______Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 14, No. 2, June 2019______

Figure 19. Spermatheca, lateral view.

Figure 20. Spermatheca, lateral view.

______Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 14, No. 2, June 2019______341

Figure 21. Spermatheca, nodulus, collum, ramus, spermathecal gland and ruptured ductus spermatheca.

Figure 22. Spermatheca, nodulus, collum, ramus, spermathecal gland and ruptured ductus spermatheca.

342 ______Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 14, No. 2, June 2019______

Figure 23. Spermatheca, ramus, spermathecal gland and ruptured ductus spermatheca.

Figure 24. Spermatheca, pits on spermathecal gland.

______Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 14, No. 2, June 2019______343

Figure 25. Spermatheca, cornu.

Figure 26. Spermatheca, pits on apical part of cornu.