Heinzia caucasica Gusarov & Koval

Gusarov, Vladimir I. & Koval, Alexander G., 2002, A revision of the genus Heinzia Korge, 1971 (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae: Quediina), with description of a new species and its probable larva, Zootaxa 69, pp. 1-19 : 5-11

1. Heinzia caucasica Gusarov & Koval , sp. nov. ( Figs. 1­8, 10, 12­14, 16, 18 , 20­21 , 24­ 25 , 28­31 , 33, 35 )

Heinzia variabilis: Solodovnikov, 1998: 16 (misidentification).

Type material. Holotype: Russia: Krasnodar Terr.:, Sochi, Alek Mountain Ridge, Baribana Cave, 740 m (A.G.Koval) 22.viii.1996 ( ZINAS).

Paratypes: Russia: Krasnodar Terr.: 3, 5, 1 specimen (with missing abdomen), Sochi, Alek Mountain Ridge, Baribana Cave, traps, 740 m (A.G.Koval), 4.vi.1995 ­ 7.v.1996 ( AKCS, ASCC, SPSU); 2, 5, ditto but 19.viii.1997 ­ 9.v.1998 ( SPSU);,, ditto but 19.viii.1998 ­ 18.viii.1999 ( SPSU); 3, ditto but 21.viii.2000 ­ 16.viii.2001 ( AKCS, SPSU);, ditto but (I.A.Solodovnikov), 16­27.vi.1999 ( ASCC);, Sochi, Alek Mountain Ridge, Sokolova (=Atsinskaya) Cave, traps, 300 m (A.G.Koval), 11.v­ 21.viii.1998 ( SPSU); 2,, ditto but 21.viii.1998 ( SPSU);,, 1 specimen (with missing apex of abdomen), Sochi, Dolgaya Cave, traps, 720 m (A.G.Koval), 3.v­19.viii.1998 ( SPSU); 11, 40, ditto but 19.viii.1998 ­ 11.vi.1999 ( AKCS, ASCO, KSEM, SPSU, ZINAS);, ditto but 11.vi­16.viii.1999 ( SPSU); 3, Sochi, Vorontsovskaya Cave Complex, Labirintovaya Cave, traps, 550 m (A.G.Koval), 13.viii.1994 ­ 20.v.1995 ( SPSU);, 5, 1 specimen (without mesometathorax and abdomen), ditto but 20.viii.1996 ­ 17.viii.1997 ( SPSU); 4, ditto but 17.viii.1997 ­ 2.v.1998 ( SPSU);, Mezmay (E.A.Khachikov), vii.1991 ( SPSU);, SE Krasnaya Polyana, Western portion of A9bga Mountain Ridge, 1400­1800 m (V.Savitsky) 23.viii.1995 ( ASCC); Daghestan:, SSW Akhty, W of Shalbuzdaghm (V. & M.Savitsky), 3­4.vii.1994 ( ASCC); Georgia:, Lagodekhi Nature Reserve, 800 m (M.Kozlov), 1.viii.1989 ( SPSU).

Diagnosis. In comparison with H. variabilis , in H. caucasica the disc of pronotum has denser punctation and no extensive impunctate areas ( Figs. 10, 11 ); on head impunctate area is restricted to anterior margin of the disc ( Fig. 8 ) and does not extend posteriorly to the center of the disc as in H. variabilis ( Fig. 9 ). Additionally, H. caucasica differs from H. variabilis in having more obtuse subapical tooth of median lobe of aedeagus ( Figs. 28­ 31, 32 ) and shorter medial process of female tergum 10 ( Figs. 33, 34 ).

Description. Length 8.5­11.5 mm. Body from brownish black to black, legs brown with lighter tarsi and black inner surface of tibia, mouthparts and bases of antennal segments brown to brownish red.

Head as long as wide; on disc with dense punctation except impunctate area near anterior margin ( Fig. 8 ); with microsculpture consisting of strongly transverse meshes, medially meshes weakly transverse or isodiametric. Posterior frontal puncture closer to posterior margin of eye than to posterior margin of head. Temples 1.1­1.2 times longer than eyes (in dorsal view). All antennal articles longer than wide, first article shorter than second and third combined, second twice as long as wide, third 2.8 times, 4th­6th 1.9­2.0, 7th 1.7, 8th­9th 1.4, 10th 1.3, last article 1.8 times as long as wide ( Fig. 12 ).

Pronotum 1.1 times as wide as long; on disc with dense scattered punctation without extensive impunctate areas (cf. Figs. 10 and 11 ); dorsal rows with 3 (in some specimens 2 or 4) punctures; punctures of sublateral rows indistinguishable from scattered punctures; microsculpture consists of isodiametric or slightly transverse meshes. Elytra (measured from humeral angle) 1.4 times as long as pronotum, 1.1 times as long as wide; punctation as on pronotum, distance between punctures equal to their diameter; without visible microsculpture (at 70x). Wings fully developed.

Abdominal terga covered with black semierect microsetae; with very fine microsculpture consisting of transverse waves; punctation finer than on elytra, distance between punctures equals 1­3 times their diameter. Abdominal tergum 7 with wide white palisade fringe. Posterior margin of male sternum 7 concave. Male sternum 8 with medial emargination ( Figs. 14, 16 ). Female tergum 10 split into two broad lateral lobes ( Fig. 33 ), the lobes poorly sclerotized and devoid of setae. Long, sclerotized and setose medial process attached at basis of tergum where the lobes meet, and extends posteriad beyond margin of the lobes ( Fig. 33 ).

Median lobe of aedeagus with single subapical tooth on ventral surface ( Figs. 21 , 24 , 28­31 ). Paramere with 15­20 peg­like setae ( Fig. 25 ). Internal sac with single basal diverticulum ( Fig. 21 ).

Discussion. In most groups of staphylinids the characters of genitalia are more useful for distinguishing close species than external characters. Our examination of available series of H. caucasica demonstrated that in this species the aedeagus is subject to significant variation. The shape of paramere, the arrangement of peg­like setae and the distance between the apex of median lobe and the subapical tooth (see Figs. 28­31 ) vary, like in some species of the genus Quedius Stephens, 1829 . The only difference in male genitalia between the two species of Heinzia , that we were able to find, is somewhat sharper subapical tooth of median lobe of aedeagus in H. variabilis . On the other hand, the density of punctation of the head and pronotum displays relatively little variation and allows to distinguish between H. caucasica and H. variabilis . The presence of the clear gap in punctation between the beetles from the Caucasus and Turkey implies that these allopatric populations represent different species.

Distribution. Heinzia caucasica is known from the Caucasus (Main Caucasian Ridge (Glavnyy Kavkazskiy Ridge) from Krasnodar Territory in the West to Daghestan in the East; altitudes 300­1800 m) ( Fig. 48 ).

Natural History. Big series of H. caucasica were collected in caves by the second author who used pitfall traps, as described by Barber (1931), but with some modifications. The traps were filled with 1:1 solution of ethylene­glycol and beer, and baited with old cheese and sausage suspended above the liquid.

As a cave dweller, H. caucasica apparently belongs to the group of troglophiles, defined by Racovitza (1907) as inhabitants of caves and different kinds of large and small subterranean caverns, including hollows under big boulders. Unlike troglobiontic species, the troglophiles occasionally occur outside.

The four caves where the specimens of H. caucasica were collected are situated in the Sochi area of the Western Caucasus and have plenty of water. Three caves (Sokolova, Dolgaya and Labirintovaya Caves) are remarkable for having subterranean brooks or even a river (Sokolova Cave). Baribana Cave has no brooks but it is still very moist and has many pools as a result of water dripping from the ceiling and trickling down the walls and the floor. It is in the wettest parts of the caves that the specimens of H. caucasica were collected. The air temperature in the four caves is similar and fluctuates annually between 8.0 and 11.5 °C.

Despite intensive sampling no specimens of H. caucasica were collected in other visited caves of the Sochi area (Partizanskaya, Muzeynaya, Kolokolnaya and Beloskalskaya Caves). These caves are relatively dry, have no subterranean brooks or strong drippings, and apparently do not provide suitable habitats for hygrophilous H. caucasica .

Outside caves the beetles were collected only occasionally (single specimens). It is possible that outside H. caucasica inhabits the caverns between stones in deeper layers of talus­like creek banks, the typical habitat of Beeria ( Smetana 1977) .

Figures

FIGURE 48. Geographical distribution of Heinzia Korge. Solid circles – H. caucasica Gusarov & Koval, sp. nov.; open circles – H. variabilis Korge.

FIGURES 1 ­ 7. Mouthparts of Heinzia caucasica Gusarov & Koval, sp. nov. (paratype from Baribana cave). 1 – epipharynx; 2 – labrum; 3 – left mandible, dorsal view; 4 – right maxilla, ventral view; 5 – prementum; 6 – hypopharynx, left portion not shown; 7 – mentum. Scale bar 0.4 mm (1 ­ 5), 0.2 mm (6 ­ 7).

FIGURES 8 ­ 13. Details of Heinzia caucasica Gusarov & Koval, sp. nov. (8, 10, holotype; 12 ­ 13, paratype from Baribana cave) and H. variabilis Korge (9, Kalkanl Da {lar; 11, holotype). 8 ­ 9 – head; 10 ­ 11 – pronotum; 12 – left antenna; 13 – right metatarsus. Scale bar 1 mm (8 ­ 12), 0.4 mm (13).

FIGURES 14 ­ 19. Details of Heinzia caucasica Gusarov & Koval, sp. nov. (14, 16, 18, paratype from Dolgaya cave) and H. variabilis Korge (15, 17, 19, Kalkanl Da {lar). 14 ­ 15 – male sternum 8; 16 ­ 17 – apex of mail sternum 8; 18 ­ 19 – male sternum 9. Scale bar 1 mm (14 ­ 15), 0.5 mm (16 ­ 19).

FIGURES 20 ­ 23. Aedeagus of Heinzia caucasica Gusarov & Koval, sp. nov. (20 ­ 21, paratype from Mezmay) and H. variabilis Korge (22 ­ 23, Kalkanl Da {lar). 20, 22 – ventral view; 21, 23, lateral view. Scale bar 0.4 mm.

FIGURES 24 ­ 27. Details of aedeagus of Heinzia caucasica Gusarov & Koval, sp. nov. (24 ­ 25, holotype) and H. variabilis Korge (26 ­ 27, holotype). 24, 26 – median lobe, ventral view; 25, 27, paramere. Scale bar 0.2 mm.

FIGURES 28 ­ 32. Apex of median lobe of aedeagus (lateral view) of Heinzia caucasica Gusarov & Koval, sp. nov. (28, paratypes from Mezmay; 29 ­ 30, Baribana cave; 31, Akhty) and H. variabilis Korge (32, Kalkanl Da {lar). Scale bar 0.2 mm.

FIGURES 33 ­ 35. Details of female tergum 10 of Heinzia caucasica Gusarov & Koval, sp. nov. (33, 35, Baribana cave) and H. variabilis Korge (34, paratype). 33 ­ 34 – dorsal view; 35 – lateral view; LL – lateral lobe of female tergum 10; MP – medial process of female tergum 10. Scale bar 0.3 mm.