FOLIA ENTOMOLOGICA HUNGARICA ROVARTANI KÖZLEMÉNYEK Volume 78 2017 pp. 111–255 Trichoptera endemic in the Carpathian Basin and the adjacent areas János Oláh H-4032 Debrecen, Tarján u. 28, Hungary. E-mail: [email protected] Abstract – Original text of taxonomic diagnosis and data of type specimens are collected and cited for each Trichoptera species endemic or subendemic in and around the Carpathian Basin, together with taxonomic history of relevant changes in nomeclature. Th e total number of the described cad- disfl y species endemic in or around the Carpathian Basin is 263. By describing 78 new incipient phylogenetic sibling species a surprisingly high ratio of unknown caddisfl y diversity were detected during only a few years and with only moderate collecting eff ort. Th is clearly indicates the highly depressed state of the western contemporary taxonomy. Th e recently diverged taxa are products of Pleistocene speciation process during isolated integration in crenon/epicrenon habitats on sky islands of high mountain ranges. Rhyacophila (32 species) and Drusus (62 species) genera and the Chaetopterygini (56 species) and Stenophylacini (42 species) tribes are the groups richest in en- demic species diverged in spring and spring stream habitats of high elevations. Key words – Balkan Peninsula, caddisfl ies, Carpathian Basin, taxonomic history INTRODUCTION During the last few years we have conducted studies on speciation proc- esses acquiring intuitive insight into the contemporary entity divergences simply by empirical detecting and describing over 120 young incipient new caddisfl y species in the European Trichoptera fauna (Oláh et al. 2012, 2013a, b, c, 2014, 2015a, b, 2017). Th is amount of new taxa, discovered easily with moderate eff ort in the so-called “intensively studied and well known” faunal region, clearly indi- cates that our knowledge is still far from complete. Our method is based on the adaptive speciation traits, integrated in sexual processes, and enabled us to delimit and delineate recently diverged or even con- temporary diverging phylogenetic species in sibling species complexes (Oláh et al. 2015a, 2017). Most of these young species are the product of the Pleistocene spe- ciation. Th is integrative process has been realised in isolated crenon/hypocrenon habitats of sky islands of high elevations and highly infl uenced by the complex- ity of European high mountain systems (Schmitt 2009). Just in and around the DOI: 10.17112/FoliaEntHung.2017.78.111 Folia ent. hung. 78, 2017 112 J. Oláh Carpathian Basin sensu lato we have collected and described 78 new endemic incip- ient phylogenetic species from the total of 263 endemic or subendemic Carpathian species. Th ey populate the spring habitats in sky islands of high mountain ranges. In order to distinguish these young sibling species applying the discovered sensitive speciation traits we had to examine old historical specimens of several unsettled taxa deposited and curated in various European and North American museums. Th e study on the taxonomic history of these old taxa has been resulted in this revision of the endemic caddisfl ies of the Carpathian Basin. Th e terri- tory under revision is the Carpathian Basin sensu lato. Endemic species under the present taxonomic revision are not restricted to the Carpathian caddisfl ies sensu stricto, i.e. to species inhabiting sorroundings of the Carpathian Mountains. Th e taxonomy of endemic or subendemic Trichoptera species having distribu- tion centre in Carpathian Basin or described from the Carpathian Basin and the adjoining Balkan and Alps territories are revised. In geographic terms the area of the Carpathian Basin sensu lato covers the Danube drainage basin from River Morva nearby the Dévény Gate where Danube River enters the Carpathian Basin to River Morava nearby the Iron Gate where Danube River leaves the Carpathian Basin. In ecological terms, taking into account the dispersion habitats and dis- tribution capacities of the most active caddisfl y species, the environmental ter- ritory of the Carpathian Basin under revision covers the entire drainage basin and extended to running waters fl owing to adjoining drainage basins possibly hundreds of kilometers over the watershed. In this revision of the endemic Trichoptera of the Carpathian Basin sensu lato I have collected data of the taxonomic history of listed species. Diagnosis (if available) together with the locality data of type specimens are given by citing the relevant information from the original publications in the original language of the descriptions. Species diagnoses, frequently hardly acces- sible, give a brief summary of specifi c character states or character combinations for both specialist and non-specialist readers, together with the close relatives or siblings of the species groups or species complexes. Th is essence of delineation or delimitation of the endemic species in the Carpathian Basin, accumulated in a single paper, may help scientists and conservationists directly by giving practical guidance in nature conservation practices. Th e taxonomic position of some Trichoptera subspecies is not studied yet. Reviewing the present taxonomic status of the Carpathian Trichoptera species we have accepted the subspecies status of the biological species concept. However, we believe that similarly to all of our previous systematic investigations on the fi ne structures of speciation traits, the search of initial split criteria in these sub- species reveals in most cases the natural status of incipient sibling species elabo- rated in the phylogenetic species concept. Folia ent. hung. 78, 2017 Trichoptera endemic in the Carpathian Basin and the adjacent areas 113 MATERIAL Th inking of population concept in the new taxonomy requires more elabo- rated fi eld collecting strategies. To collect many specimens from many popula- tions is the prime target of any research project aimed to fi nd the fi rst signs of reproductive isolation, to search species boundaries, to delimit closely related incipient taxa, and to recognise the young phylogenetic species. Biodiversity re- search and conservation are badly limited by the lack of population fi eld sam- pling, which is expensive. Staggering in the deprived discipline of taxonomy and suff ering the lack of adequate collecting we have been forced to outline the principles and practice of cooperation to put together what we have (Oláh et al. 2013c). Th ere are historical materials scattered in museums, universities and private collections. We have laboured an idea of cooperation how to realise com- prehensive studies when funding is removed from taxonomy to more modern regarded disciplines of genetics, ecology and conservartion and no resource re- mained available even for adequate population sampling (Oláh et al. 2015b). Th e examined freshly collected materials and the old historical type and non-type specimens are deposited and curated in the following natural history collections: BDOL = Biologiezentrum des Oberösterreichischen Landesmuseums, Linz, Austria; CCPC = Ciubuc Private Collection, Sinaia, Romania; CMZL = Cantonal Museum of Zoology Laussane, Switzerland; CNHM = Croatian Natural History Museum, Zagreb, Croatia; DBFMNSUP = Department of Biology, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, University of Prishtina, Prishtina, Kosovo; DEI = Senckenberg Deutsches Entomologisches Institut, Müncheberg, Germany; HNHM = Hungarian Natural History Museum, Budapest; MCSNBG = Museo Civico di Scienze Naturali “E. Caffi ”, Bergamo, Italy; MPC = Malicky Private Collection Lunz-am-See, Austria; MFN = Museum für Naturkunde der Humboldt Universität zu Berlin, Germany; MM = Mátra Museum of Hungarian Natural History Museum, Gyöngyös, Hungary; MP ISEZ = NHM-ISEA; NMPC = Th e National Museum (Natural History Department) in Prague, Czech Republic; NHMB = HNHM; NHM-ISEA = Natural History Museum of the Institute of Systematics and Evolution of Animals, Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, Poland; NMNHBAS – National Museum of Natural History, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofi a; NMP = Th e National Museum (Natural History Department) in Prague, Czech Republic; NMPC = NMP; Folia ent. hung. 78, 2017 114 J. Oláh NMW = Naturhistorisches Museum Wien, Austria; OPC = Oláh Private Collection, under national protection by the Hungarian Natural History Museum, Debrecen, Hungary; PMS = Slovenian Museum of Natural History, Ljubljana, Slovenia; SMNHL = National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, State Museum of Natural History, Lviv, Ukraine; WM = NMW Th e original texts are cited verbatim, but the original character formatting is not followed. TAXONOMY PHILOPOTAMIDAE Wormaldia McLahlan, 1865 Wormaldia albanica Oláh, 2010 Wormaldia albanica Oláh, 2010: 68–69: “Holotype, male, HNHM. Alba nia: Tepelenë county, Tepelenë, Uji i Ftohtë (Cold Water Spring), 165 m, N40°15.011’ E20°03.548’, 13.III.2008, leg. Sz. Czigány & D. Murányi.” Diagnosis – Oláh (2010: 68–69): “Th is new species belongs to the spe- cies complex described from the Balkan Mountains with enlarged endothecal microspine cluster and tapering harpagones: W. kimminsi Botoşăneanu , 1960; W. khourmai Schmid, 1959; W. balcanica Kumanski, 1979; W. bulgarica Novák, 1971. Most close to W. bulgarica described from Bulgaria but diff ers by having (1) conspicuous basolateral fl ange of sclerites present on Xth segment and well visible both in lateral and dorsal view; (2) in lateral view Xth segment has no dorsal excision and no any dorsal subapical hook, dent or elevation, both present